RESULTS FROM EXPERIENCES OF PERFORMING DYNAMIC RESISTANCE

MEASUREMENTS ON RESISTANCE AND REACTANCE LTC TYPES

Kellie Robinson
Bonneville Power Administration

Steve Larson
Snohomish County Public Utility District

ABSTRACT
Dynamic Resistance Measurement (DRM) testing is an off-line, non-destructive test in which a DC
current is injected and measured through a tap changer as it moves through all of its positions. Results
from the current signatures are examined and compared against previous or similar units in order to
detect problems such as slow transition time, contacts not making proper connection and open circuits.
This technique has already been adopted by many countries around the world; however it is a fairly
new technique in the United States. Many papers have already been written covering the principles
behind DRM testing methods. This paper highlights the experiences of using the technique at two
Northwest utilities.

INTRODUCTION
Since its introduction in 1994 and first practical application in 2000 [1] [2] [3], the use of Dynamic
Resistance Measurement (DRM) methods for OLTC condition assessment has been accepted by
utilities around the world. Only recently have utilities in the USA begun to explore DRM test methods
for use as a diagnostic and maintenance scheduling tool.

The DRM tests on the LTCs described in this paper were performed in two parts:

1) Static measurements are resistance measurements performed on every tap position while the
contacts are stationary. A “step-by-step” recording records transition from one tap position to
the next after the current has reached stabilization.
2) Dynamic or “Continuous Recording” is a measurement of injected DC current through the tap
changer while the tap changer contacts are moving from one position to the next.[4] Tap
changer motor current is also monitored and may provide additional information.

DRM testing has been proven to be useful in the early detection of tap changer problems such as
contact wear, open contacts, and timing problems. [4][5] It will also serve as a diagnostic tool to assist
the equipment owner in making an informed decision regarding maintenance, for example; whether to
perform a tap changer overhaul right away or push the maintenance requirement out another year or
two. Both the static and dynamic measurements are made with the transformer off-line.

This paper will present several case studies of DRM testing performed on transformer tap changers at
two Northwest Utilities: Snohomish County Public Utility District (SnoPUD), and Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA). The type of Dynamic Resistance test equipment used in these case studies came
from DV Power. The DV power test equipment records the current required to excite the transformer
winding as a function of time. Because the test voltage remains approximately constant during the
testing, the resistance would be inversely proportional to the current.

The DRM test equipment used is shown in figure # _ below. Two current leads are placed on the
winding under test (example, X2 and X0) and two voltage leads measure the voltage. The DRM
instrument is connected to a laptop computer which runs software that captures the testing results. The
test equipment is small enough to conveniently bring it close to the transformer under test. Power is
provided from an external 120 volt source.

Figure # _ - DRM test equipment

(on right) and laptop used to
collect results.

INTERPRETING RESULTS FROM DYNAMIC RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS (DRM)

Static resistance measurement has been used for many years to diagnose potential problems in a
transformer or tap changer. Because DRM testing is used to analyze load tap changers (LTC)
performance, this testing would be performed on the winding with the LTC – on the H terminals for
high-side LTC, and on the X terminals for low-side LTC. The Dynamic Resistance Measurement for
analyzing LTC provides a graph rather than individual readings, much like a coil current monitor does
for circuit breakers, or the SFRA does for transformer winding circuits. Therefore, an understanding of
what you are measuring is necessary because there are no PASS/FAIL criteria. Human judgment is
necessary to interpret these results, similar to the SFRA. Testing results produce a “squiggly line” that
would be compared to either a previous test result, or testing on a similar transformer and LTC (“sister
unit”). Comparisons to similar units or previous results greatly improve the diagnostic capability of
DRM testing.

Because the resistance can vary over a large range during a tap change (the dynamic part), it is easier to
evaluate the current, rather than the resistance, on a plot. The test voltage is kept nearly constant
during testing, so the resistance would be inversely proportional to current. When a tap change occurs,
the resistance would increase during the transition period between steps. The increased resistance
would be noticed as a dip in the current plot. Figure # _ shows a plot of current versus time for a high-
side resistive type of LTC going through three steps, from 12 raise through 9 raise.

Notice that as the tap changer goes from 12R to 9R, the resistance increases and the current is lower at
the stable point of position 9R than it was at position 12R. Because this is a high-side tap changer,
there are more turns on the high-side in position 9R than there are in position 12R. More turns equals
more resistance, resulting in less current. The DRM also captures a reading of the current and
resistance at the stable point of each tap position, which can be displayed in a table of results similar to
a typical static winding resistance test.
 When the
12R current drops
immediately
11R after a tap
10R change, it
9R builds up again
slower than it
dropped off.

Current drops during a tap

change during the transition
between steps.

Figure # _ - Plot of current (amps) versus time (seconds) during a tap change

The results from a typical low-side, reactive LTC test are shown in figure # _. Notice that the current
increases slightly when it stabilizes at each step. Because a low-side LTC with a reversing switch has
more of the regulating winding in the circuit at higher numbered tap positions, the winding resistance is
greater at positions 16R and 16L than the resistance at positions 1R and 1L. The winding resistance
will be at its minimum when the LTC is on neutral.

14R 13R 12R 11R A reactive LTC

16R 15R
will display
lower current
and higher
current as it
goes through
one complete
tap change.

Figure # _ - Plot of current (amps) versus time (seconds) during a tap change
SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUD DRM TESTING EXPERIENCES

1. Reactance Transfer Switch LTC Types

Snohomish Public Utility District, assisted by Marcos Ferriera from Reinhausen, performed the DRM
testing on three transformers. Results from two of these transformers are discussed in this paper to
illustrate testing various types of LTC using the DRM method.

The first transformer tested was a 115/13.09 kV, 28 MVA unit manufactured by North American
Transformer. This transformer has a low-side tap changer, Federal Pacific model TC-525, with 16 raise
& lower steps of 5/8% in each step. This LTC is a transfer switch reactive type LTC, and has an oil
filtration unit installed on it. A diagram of the transformer winding under test is shown in figure # _.
The DRM equipment is connected between winding X1 and X0 in figure #_. A picture of this LTC is
shown in figure #_ with the components identified.

Figure #_ - Diagram of
a reactive type LTC with
transfer switches.

TRANSFER (ARCING) SWITCHES

REVERSING SWITCH

COLLECTOR RING

STATIONARY CONTACTS

Figure #_ - Federal Pacific TC-525 tap changer

During a tap change, the transfer or arcing switches will open and close, the movable contacts will
rotate across the stationary contacts, and the collector ring contacts will rotate. The DRM test is more
likely to identify problems which occur during a tap change, while the TTR or static winding resistance
tests can only identify problems that occur after the tap change has occurred. An illustration of the four
positions which a transfer-switch reactive LTC goes through when making one tap change from an
even step to an odd step is provided in figure #_.
B. The transfer
A. The LTC starts switch opens, which
in the non- removes current
bridging position from one movable
(an even step)
contact.
with both transfer
switches closed.

D. The transfer
C. The movable switch closes and the
contact moves to LTC ends up in the
the next bridging position (an
stationary contact odd step).
while the transfer
switch is open.

Figure #_ - The four positions that an arcing-switch reactive LTC goes through in one step.

Tabular results from the testing are provided in Table #_ below. These results would be considered as
normal because the step transition times are fairly consistent, and the winding resistance changes
between steps follow a steady pattern.

Position Change Resistance (mΩ) I (A) V1 (mV) Ripple (%) Transition Time (ms)
16L-15L 14.03 10.2 143 8.8 4288
15L-14L 12.74 10.4 133 4.6 3398.4
14L-13L 11.93 10.5 125 8.4 4300.1
13L-12L 11.22 10.6 118 3.7 4288.1
12L-11L 10.41 10.7 111 8.7 4288
11L-10L 9.925 10.7 106 3.6 4292
10L-9L 9.522 10.7 102 8.8 4299
9L-8L 9.258 10.7 99.4 3.3 4305.8
8L-7L 8.966 10.8 96.4 8.8 4287.8
7L-6L 9.07 10.8 97.5 3.3 4278.1
6L-5L 8.827 10.8 95.6 8 4296.4
5L-4L 8.82 10.9 95.9 3.2 4291.6
4L-3L 8.543 10.9 93.4 7.8 4284.2
3L-2L 8.731 10.9 95.3 3.4 4287.4
2L-1L 8.379 11 91.9 7.6 4269.4
1L-N 8.071 11 88.6 3.1 4293.3
N-1R 7.426 11.1 82.2 6.5 4288.7

Table #_ - Tabular results from dynamic resistance testing for the TC-525 tap changer
The complete graphical results from testing the X1-X0 winding through 33 steps, from 16R to 16L, is
shown in figure #_. Notice that the current is higher (signifying lower resistance) in the middle of this
graph, which is near the neutral position. This result is expected, since less of the regulating winding is
in the circuit closer to the neutral position. An unexpected result was that the current dips lower
(signifying greater resistance) during the transition from an even to odd step than the odd to even step
transition. Since we are new to the DRM testing, there are no previous results to compare with.
Because the same pattern was found on all three phases, our conclusion was that the greater resistance
during even-odd transitions is normal. Notice that the entire test took about 300 seconds (5 min) for all
33 positions of the LTC on one winding.

Figure #_ - DRM testing results on the FPE type TC-525 tap changer

The software has zooming capability, so that feature was used to investigate the currents during
transitions in greater detail. An example of the zoom feature is shown in figure #_ below.

Figure #_ -
Zoomed detail
of
transition
between
steps
2. Resistance LTC Types on High Side Winding
Although most of our transformers have reactance-type LTC’s applied in the low voltage winding,
Snohomish Public Utility District has some transformers with the LTC on the high-voltage winding.
These transformers with the high-side LTC are all resistance-type tap changers, and they do not have a
reversing switch. Instead, these transformers have a coarse winding which serves the same purpose as
a reversing switch. The coarse winding has the same number of turns as the regulating winding, but
only two positions. The Coarse-In position is used when the transformer is in the lower mode, and the
Coarse-Out is in the raise mode. At the neutral position, the LTC transitions from Coarse-In with no
regulating winding to Coarse-Out with full regulating winding. A diagram of a transformer with the
high-side coarse winding and resistive LTC is shown in figure #_.

Figure #_
High-side LTC
Resistive

For a transformer with this design, the resistance values would be lowest at the extreme raise position,
where the coarse winding is out (bypassed) and the regulating winding is all out. Resistance
measurements would be greatest at the extreme lower position. You would expect to see some
interesting results around neutral when the coarse winding is switched in or out.

The transformer that was tested was a 28 MVA, 112/13.09 kV transformer manufactured by National
Industrie. This transformer has a Reinhausen type MS III-Y300 tap changer on the high voltage
winding, with a coarse winding and 12 regulation steps of 1.25% each (for ±15% total range.) This
LTC has an oil filtration unit on it.

Figure #_
National
Industrie
transformer
for DRM
test

Figure #_
Marcos
operating
the DRM
Table #_ below gives the resistance values at each of the LTC positions. These results are interpreted
as normal because the three phases were in agreement, the transition times are consistent, and the
resistance values have a consistent pattern.

Resistance (mΩ) Current Test Voltage (V) Transition Time

Transition Step Ripple (%)
(A) (Msec)
12L 1,502 8.44 12.7 13.1 40.7
11L 1,473 8.59 12.7 13.7 40.6
10L 1,444 8.73 12.6 14.2 40.5
9L 1,415 8.89 12.6 14.7 40.1
8L 1,386 9.02 12.5 14.9 40.3
7L 1,357 9.19 12.5 15.4 40.2
6L 1,328 9.37 12.4 15.7 40.5
5L 1,299 9.52 12.4 16.4 40.6
4L 1,270 9.7 12.3 16.5 40.3
3L 1241 9.85 12.2 17.1 40.4
2L 1213 10 12.2 17.4 40.6
1L 1184 10.3 12.2 18.3 40.6
N 1,150 10.6 12.1 20.1 40.5
1R 1,266 9.75 12.3 20.4 40.4
2R 1,237 9.96 12.3 17.7 40.6
3R 1,208 10.1 12.3 18.5 40.9
4R 1,179 10.4 12.2 18.8 40.6
5R 1151 10.6 12.2 19.6 40.3
6R 1121 10.8 12.1 19.8 40.3
7R 1092 11 12 20.7 40.7
8R 1,064 11.2 12 21.2 40.4
9R 1,034 11.5 11.9 21.8 40.2
10R 1,006 11.8 11.9 22.5 40.4
11R 976.9 12.1 11.8 23.3 40.6
12R 943.9 12.4 11.7 23.9 40.8

Figure #_

DRM testing
results on
the
Reinhausen
LTC
Figure #_ provides the DRM test results in graphical form as the LTC is operated from position 12L to
12R. The DRM test results also indicated that the LTC was operating properly. In the extreme lower
positions, the resistance is highest, so the current values are lowest. At the extreme raise position,
resistance is lowest and current values are highest. Between the neutral and 1R position, the coarse
winding is removed from the circuit, but the full regulating winding is inserted. The net impact is to
add resistance to the circuit. Since resistance is inversely proportional to current, the current drops
between neutral and 1R positions. This is why a

The DRM results were consistent between the three phases. If a transition takes longer than expected,
the graph can be zoomed to find out what happened. See figure _ for an example of two steps zoomed
in for a detailed examination.

Figure #_

High-side resistive
LTC, zoomed in
for detail of two steps.

3. Conclusions:
Because there are many moving parts in a LTC, it’s useful to analyze the LTC in a dynamic mode. The
existing electrical tests used to diagnose LTC condition, such as TTR, winding resistance, and
excitation current are only useful to evaluate the static condition. The DRM (dynamic resistance
measurement) testing is a new and promising method to analyze LTC operation.

The difficult part of DRM testing is analyzing results. There are no pass/fail criteria, and judgment
must be applied to evaluate the results. Because there are many different types of LTC, it’s very
important to understand how each individual LTC operates when evaluating the DRM results.
BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION DRM TESTING EXPERIENCES
Resistance Type LTCs Before and After Maintenance

The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) predominantly has resistance type tap changers. These tap
changers are located on the high voltage side of the transformer and are operated relatively
infrequently. The following case studies highlight BPA's experiences performing DRM testing before
and after a routine tap changer overhaul.

BPA Case 1.
The first case study involves the DRM testing of a 230/115/13.8-kV three-phase autotransformer. The
transformer and LTC parameters are summarized in table 1 below.

Table 1. Case Study 1 Transformer and LTC Parameters

Transformer Voltage OLTC Type Motor Tap Additional Notes
Manufacturer Rating (kV) Drive Positions
LTC Filtration system is installed
Trafo Union 230/115/13.8 MR 3x M I MA-7 9 on this unit to extend the
maintenance interval.

Static Resistance values were recorded in every position. The plots presented in figures 1 and 2 show
the contact resistance values before and after the tap changer overhaul.

Figure 1. Case 1 Resistance Values

Prior to Overhaul
Resistance (mΩ)

Tap Position

Figure 2. Case 1 Resistance

Values After Overhaul
Resistance (mΩ)

Tap Position
A typical tap changer overhaul consists of dissembling the tap changer, inspecting contacts, resistors,
springs, and replacement of any deteriorated parts. Table 2 shows that the contact resistance values
were improved by around 2 mΩ after the tap changer overhaul. A phase-to-phase resistance comparison
between figures 1 and 2 above shows a larger spread between the resistance plots prior to the overhaul.
After the overhaul there is a much smaller spread between the phase-to-phase resistance plots.

Table 2. Contact Resistance Results Before and After Tap Changer Overhaul
Tap Resistance (mΩ) Before Resistance (mΩ) After Difference
Position H1-H0X0 H2-H0X0 H3-H0X0 H1-H0X0 H2-H0X0 H3-H0X0 H1-H0X0 H2-H0X0 H3-H0X0
1 69.68 69.33 69.25 67.22 67.59 67.05 2.46 1.73 2.19
2 70.93 70.42 69.74 68.26 68.73 68.18 2.67 1.68 1.56
3 72.06 71.77 70.74 69.40 69.82 69.18 2.66 1.94 1.56
4 73.35 72.83 72.15 70.48 70.87 70.33 2.87 1.95 1.82
5 74.12 73.95 73.09 71.49 72.10 71.41 2.63 1.85 1.67
6 75.35 75.45 74.11 72.63 73.04 72.48 2.71 2.41 1.62
7 76.40 76.36 75.03 73.64 74.19 73.37 2.77 2.17 1.66
8 77.67 76.84 75.68 74.61 75.15 74.40 3.06 1.68 1.28
9 78.73 78.16 77.16 75.70 76.19 75.61 3.02 1.97 1.56

The “step-by-step” graph is displayed in figure 3. Zooming in on the graph, as in figure 4, allows for
the measurement of the transition time between tap positions.

Figure 3. Step-by-Step Graph for H1-H0X0

 Figure 4. Zooming in to Transition (45.8 milliseconds)

The transition time shown above was measured during the testing prior to the tap changer overhaul.
The transition time measured after the overhaul did not show any appreciable difference.

Figure 5. Motor Current Plot

The Motor current displayed at the bottom of the step-by-Step graph in figure 5 does not show any
abnormalities.

Figure 6 shows a continuous recording graph collected after the overhaul. The current was recorded
from H1-H0X0 as the tap changer moved from position 9 to 1, then back to 9. This phase as well as
the other two phases showed consistent patterns and transition times between phases and in comparison
to recordings prior to the overhaul.
 Figure 6. Continuous Recording on H1-H0X0 in Tap Positions 9-1-9

The DRM testing performed on this particular tap changer did not uncover any significant problems.
Only a little wear on the contacts as was confirmed during the overhaul. Figures 7 and 8 show the close
up view of the tap changer contacts during disassembly.

Figure 7. Fixed Contacts Figure 8. Moving Contacts (Diverter)

BPA Case 2.
The second case study also happens to be a sister unit to the transformer tested in the first case study.
Table 3. Case Study 2 Transformer and LTC Parameters
Transformer Voltage OLTC Type Motor Tap Additional Notes
Manufacturer Rating (kV) Drive Positions
LTC Filtration system is installed
Trafo Union 230/115/13.8 MR 3x M I MA-7 9 on this unit to extend the
maintenance interval.

In this case, there was not enough time to collect resistance measurements prior to the overhaul.
Resistance values were only recorded afterward. Results of the resistance measurements are shown in
table 4.
Table 4. Case 2 Resistance Values After Overhaul
Tap Resistance (mΩ) After
Position H1-H0X0 H2-H0X0 H3-H0X0
1 69.68 69.33 69.25
2 70.93 70.42 69.74
3 72.06 71.77 70.74
4 73.35 72.83 72.15
5 74.12 73.95 73.09
6 75.35 75.45 74.11
7 76.40 76.36 75.03
8 77.67 76.84 75.68
9 78.73 78.16 77.16

The resistance values are consistent across phases and compare favorably with the values measured on
its sister unit in case study 1.

The “step-by-step” graph is displayed in figure 9. Zooming in on the graph, as in figure 10, allows for
the measurement of the transition time between tap positions.

Figure 9. Step-by-Step Graph for H1-H0X0

 Figure 10. Zooming in to Transition (40.5 milliseconds)

The transition time shown above was measured during the testing prior to the tap changer overhaul.
The transition time measured after the overhaul did not show any appreciable difference.

Figure 11. Motor Current Plot

The Motor current displayed at the bottom of the step-by-Step graph in figure 11 shows normal
operation with steady current of about 2A and start-up peaks up to 15A.
Figure 12 shows a continuous recording graph collected after the overhaul. The current was recorded
from H1-H0X0 as the tap changer moved from position 9 to 1, then back to 9. This phase as well as
the other two phases showed consistent patterns and transition times between phases and in comparison
to recordings prior to the overhaul.

Figure 12. Continuous Recording on H1-H0X0 in Tap Positions 9-1-9 together with the motor
current trace after the overhaul

The DRM testing performed on this particular tap changer did not uncover any significant problems,
however a wear of the contacts is indicated on the BEFORE graph (Fig 13.) by the wavering trace of
the current during the DRM test.

Figure 13. DRM before the overhaul - Wavering current trace indicates poor contact due to
contact wear
CONCLUSIONS
Although no major problems were uncovered during testing, it is apparent that there is value in using
this test method as evidence to extend the required maintenance. Results from both case studies were
confirmed during the disassembly and inspection of the tap changers, no major problems were
discovered. In the future, similar test results on other tap changers might allow for an extension of a
year or two before the next overhaul in order to better allocate resources.

REFERENCES

[1] H.F.A. Verhaart, KEMA. “Tussenrapport over faaloorzaken von distributie-en

koppeltransformatoren op basis van de onvoorziene nietbeschikbaarheid.”, rapport 43613
T&D94-102278, 1994.

[2] A.E. Lux, H.F.A. Verhaart, KEMA. “A Diagnostic to Determine the Condition of the Contacts of
Load Tap Changers in a Power Transformer.”, Doble, 2004.

[3] B. Diggin, H. Malan, ESB International. “Condition Assessment of On Load Tap Changers Using
Static and Dynamic Contact Resistance.”, Doble, 2004.

[4] R. Levi, M. Ferreira, “Dynamic Resistance Measurement Applied to On Load Tap Changers.”,
2011.

[5] E. Back, PG&E. “Dynamic Resistance Testing of OLTC, TDA- Tap Changer Dual Assessment.”,
Finepoint, 2011.