1. Two Types of Transformers
2. Cooling and insulating system
4. Operating Life of Transformer
7. Core/Coil Reclamation and Recycling
8. Operating Sound Level and Noise Pollution
Two Types of Transformers
Information on the pros and cons of the available types of transformers frequently varies depending upon what information is made available by the manufacturer. Nevertheless, there are certain performance and application characteristics that are almost universally accepted.
Basically, there are two distinct types of transformers: Liquid insulated and cooled (liquid-filled type) and non liquid insulated, air or air/gas cooled (dry type). Also, there are subcategories of each main type.
For liquid-filled transformers, the cooling medium can be conventional mineral oil. There are also wettype transformers using less flammable liquids, such as high fire point hydrocarbons and silicones.
There are some drawbacks, however.
For example, fire prevention is more important with liquid-type units because of the use of a liquid cooling medium that may catch fire. (Dry-type transformers can catch fire, too.) It’s even possible for an improperly protected wet-type transformer to explode.
And, depending on the application, liquid-filled transformers may require a containment trough for protection against possible leaks of the fluid.
Arguably, when choosing transformers, the changeover point between dry-types and wet-types is between 500kVA to about 2.5MVA, with dry-types used for the lower ratings and wet-types for the higher ratings.
Important factors when choosing what type to use include where the transformer will be installed, such as inside an office building or outside, servicing an industrial load.
Dry-type transformers with ratings exceeding 5MVA are available, but the vast majority of the higher-capacity transformers are liquid-filled. For outdoor applications, wet-type transformers are the predominate choice.
The flowing Table shows losses in dry type and oil filled type transformers:
Table: Comparison of Losses: Oil type and dry type
|(Oil Transformer) Losses||Dry Type Transformer Losses|
|KVA||Half Load (W)||Full Load (W)||KVA||Half Load (W)||Full Load (W)|
Purchases of transformers are often based on the first cost (without any consideration of long-term economics) when transformer evaluation and purchase decisions are not made by the end-user.
This is particularly true when agents or electrical contractors make purchase decisions on the basis of temperature rise and low first cost for commercial and industrial end-users buying dry-type, pad-mounted transformers.
These agents or contractors may have little incentive to take into consideration any economic factors other than the transformer’s first cost. End-user concerns about higher first costs discourage OEMs and contractors from offering or recommending the more expensive, efficient options to customer who do not specifically request them.
Cooling and insulating system
Because air is the basic cooling and insulating system for dry-type transformers, all dry-type transformers will be larger than liquid-immersed units for the same voltage and capacity (kilovolt/kilovolt-ampere) rating.
When operating at the same flux and current density, more material for core and coil implies higher losses and higher costs.
These trade-offs are inherent in the design of dry-type units, but dry-type transformers have traditionally offered certain fire-resistant, environmental, and application advantages for industrial and commercial situations.
Recent advances in liquid-filled units are reducing some of these (dry-type) advantages.
When purchased on the basis of lowest first cost, dry type transformers typically have significantly higher operating losses than the more efficient liquid filled transformers.
For this reason the major utilities seldom purchase dry type transformers. Because dry-type insulation systems lack the additional cooling and insulating properties of the oil-paper systems, for the same rating the dry-type transformers tend to be more costly, larger, and have greater losses than a corresponding liquid-immersed unit.
Combined Losses at 100% Loading
Above graphic shows combined losses at 100% loading based on:
|Load Losses (kW)||16.38||21.00||18.52|
|No Load Losses (kW)||2.66||7.00||7.55|
|Total Losses (kW)||19.04||26.07||28.00|
Above values are typical.
At 50% loading, the no-load loss remains the same, and load loss is reduced by the inverse square:
|Load Losses (kW)||4.10||4.63||5.25|
|No Load Losses (kW)||2.66||7.00||7.55|
|Total Losses (kW)||6.76||12.18||12.25|
Costs Of Transformer Losses
Costs Of Transformer Losses – Transformer Energy Consumption:
Energy Costs = $0.06/kWh (Conservative Value)
8760 hours = 24hrs/day * 365 days per year
|Total Losses (kW)||6.76||12.18||12.25|
|KWH Billing Rate:||x||$0.06||$0.06||$0.06|
|Annual Cost of Energy due to|
Losses @ 50% Load:
|Excess Annual Energy Costs:||Base||$2,849||$2,886|
|10-Yr* Excess Energy Costs:||Base||$28,490||$28,860|
*Simple costs, assumes no interest rate or escalating energy costs
Additional Cost Of Transformer Losses
Additional Cost Of Transformer Losses – Air Conditioning Energy Consumption:
Energy consumption by the transformer is not the only energy factor. Transformer losses are dissipated as heat, which must be removed from a controlled temperature environment by air conditioning.
Illustrated below are calculations to convert transformer losses into increased air conditioning energy consumption.
1kW = 3415BTU/Hr
1Ton Air Conditioning = 12000BTU/Hour
1Ton Air Conditioning = 1.7kW power use
|Total Losses (kW)||6.76||12.18||12.25|
|BTU/HR per ton A/C:|
|kW power usage per ton A/C:||x||1.7||1.7||1.7|
|Annual Hours of Operation (h):||x||8760||8760||8760|
|Annual energy usage (kWh):||=||28649||51619||51916|
|kWH billing rate:||x||$0.06||$0.06||$0.06|
|Annual Cooling Costs:||=||$1,718.94||$3,097||$3,115|
|Excess Annual Cooling Costs:||base||$1,378||$1,396|
|10-Yr Excess Energy Costs:||base||$13,782||$13,960|
Operating Life of Transformer
Typical dry-type lifespan: 15-25 Years
Typical liquid-filled lifespan: 25-35 Years
The retirement age of transformers removed from service for a variety of reasons ranges from 14 to 35 years; the average is 25 years. However, the average life of liquidimmersed transformers that remain in service is 30 years or more.
Because liquid-filled transformers last longer than dry-type, they save on material, labor to replace, and operational impact due to outage to replace.
Recommended annual maintenance for a typical dry-type transformer consists of inspection, infrared examination of bolted connections, and vacuuming of grills and coils to maintain adequate cooling and prevent buildup of flammable material.
Cleaning of the grill and coils may require the undesirable requirement of de-energizing the transformer, often leading to no cleaning. Omitting the cleaning decreases the transformer efficiency due to decreased airflow and creates a fire hazard.
Preventive maintenance for a liquid-filled transformer may consist of drawing and analyzing an oil sample. The oil analysis provides a very accurate assessment of the transformer condition – something not possible with dry-type transformers. Omitting the preventive maintenance does not decrease transformer efficiency or create a potential fire hazard.
Less-flammable liquid-filled transformers provide the best opportunity to enable maximum efficiency with the least maintenance, and provide the best diagnostics for repair/re-use rather than unforeseen failure/disposal.
“Coils in liquid-type units are much easier to repair than coils in dry-type transformers. Cast coils are not repairable; they must be replaced.” – Moran, Robert B. Guidelines for transformer application designs. Electrical Construction and Maintenance, May 1996.
When a transformer fails, a decision to repair or replace the transformer must be made. Liquid-filled transformers, in most situations, can be economically repaired at local independent service repair facilities.
Example: 2500kVA Transformer – Purchase and Maintenance
|Operating Life (years):||35||30||25|
|Annual Maintenance:||none||6 hours||6 hours|
|Outage Required for Maintenance:||N/A||Yes||Yes|
|Fire Hazard if not Maintained:||No||Yes||Yes|
|Annual cost to purchase and maintain:||$902||$1,693||$1,376|
Core/Coil Reclamation and Recycling
Feature: Liquid filled transformers allow easier core/coil reclamation
Materials & Resources Benefit: Easier to recycle
Utility companies who use most of the liquid-filled transformers typically replace the coils on old transformers and continue to use them for a large percentage of their old substation transformers. The small distribution transformers are disposed/recycled when they reach an end of life.
When it comes time to decommission a transformer, recycling offsets the need for new material and provides a positive cash flow. Most components of liquid-filled and dry-type transformers can be recycled. Cast resin type transformers are an exception. Because of their construction, the materials in cast resin type transformers can be difficult and uneconomical to recycle. When a cast coil fails, the entire winding, encapsulated in epoxy resin, is rendered useless and typically ends up in a landfill.
This wastes the resource and creates additional costs for disposal, plus long-term liability exposure to the original owner.
In contrast, liquid-filled transformers can be easily recycled after their useful life. The transformer fluid can be reconditioned and used again, and the steel, copper, and aluminum can be completely and economically recycled, providing a positive cash flow.
The scrap values and disposal costs for a 2500 kVA transformer are shown below. Positive cash flows are shown in parentheses.
|Dry Type||Cast Resin||Liquid Filled|
|Core and Coil||$1100||$100||$1200|
|Tank and Fitting||$400||$100||$400|
|Total Costs (or Savings)||$1500||$200||$2100|
Operating Sound Level and Noise Pollution
Feature: Liquid filled transformers have a lower operating sound level
Indoor Environmental Quality Benefit: Less noise pollution
Decibels is a logarithmic function, and sound pressure doubles for every three decibel increase. Research shows that decibel levels over 60 can reduce a person’s attention span.
A study by the American Society of Interior Designers showed that office productivity would increase if workspaces were less noisy.
Feature: Liquid filled transformers have a smaller footprint
Materials and Resources Benefit: Smaller equipment reduces building size demand
Typical cost per square foot: $25/SF
|750kVA||Depth:||4.6 ft||5.5 ft|
|Width:||4.6 ft||8.0 ft|
|Sq Ft:||21 ft2||44 ft2||23 ft2||$575|
|1000kVA||Depth:||5.2 ft||5.5 ft|
|Width:||4.8 ft||8.0 ft|
|Sq Ft:||25 ft2||44 ft2||19 ft2||$475|
|1500kVA||Depth:||6.3 ft||5.5 ft|
|Width:||4.4 ft||8.0 ft|
|Sq Ft:||28 ft2||44 ft2||16 ft2||$400|
A smaller building also has the benefit of requiring less lighting and ventilation.
Use of liquid-filled transformer(s) for commercial and industrial facilities is an innovative design practice. A dry-type transformer is the standard solution for providing power in this type of design.
A total owning cost evaluation of both dry-type and liquid-filled transformers will show the lowest total owning cost choice is the installation of less-flammable liquid filled transformers.
Resources: Best Practice Manual for transformers – Devki Energy Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.; Application for LEED Innovation & Design Points – Transformer Technology: Liquid-Filled vs. Dry-Type
I am working in power plant we have faced a problem in dry type TRAFO Could you support us if you don’t mind send your email to gave you all the details.
Hi, I’m a solar farm technician in England I mainly work on a 25MW facility on which we have 13 1250KVA resin core 380V / 33KV transformers, they are noisy and unreliable what are my options and how can I sell them to my company.
i want check Dry type transformer with you ,could you write email back to me?
Thank u for the article, could u please advise whats the case for 22KV /3.3 KV 15 MVA transformer. it will be used for operating a district cooling plant
Are Above shown advantages applicable in the case of rectifiers too ?? I have to take decision of purchasing rectifiers for my plant and have to choose between oil cooled and air cooled. ..
Thank you for your informative article. However, referring to your article on the preventive maintenance of a liquid type transformer,
“…Preventive maintenance for a liquid-filled transformer may consist of drawing and analyzing an oil sample. The oil analysis provides a very accurate assessment of the transformer condition – something not possible with dry-type transformers. Omitting the preventive maintenance does not decrease transformer efficiency or create a potential fire hazard….”
I thought the oil analysis of a transformer is to determine the insulation of transformer coil condition..?which in return causes temperature rise in the coil? Doesn’t that affect the transformer efficacy? Also wouldn’t the temperature rise in the coil create potential fire hazard?
Please enlighten me.
Thank you. Regards.
hats off for the site
Use of oil type transformers is banned if to be installed within building under statutory regulation in India. In view of emergence of K3 class insulating liquids there could be a change. In this regard would like to know international scene… Standards / Norms / Regulations.
Useful article.While comparing the costs between the three type,the cost of connection is also to be considered like HT line material and structure cost etc.
Very useful article.While comparing the cost,difference in expenses that occur during connection of transformer is also to be considered like HT line materials & cost of structure ete.
Excellent article and I agree with llian ice . To solve the Some site constraints in design dry type transformer is more suitable than oil filled transformer for smaller rating. Higher size oil filled transformer is the best option.
What is the price of a dry type transformer with 1000 kVA?
Hi, just been looking through your interesting article, we noticed the dry type disc wound coil, please can you let us know where this photo came from has we are sure it is from within our factory winding shop ?
Very useful and interesting article. But I don’t agree with the conclusion at 100%. And the last piont – the FOOTPRINT. If you compare one oil imersed (with conservator, TUNORMA) and one cast resin (GEAFOL) SIEMENS transformer you’ll see that oil immeresed one is longer and higher with at least one meter than cast resin one, witch causes bigger room – more expenses from designing to execution. But not that is the major inconvenience. The oil immersed transformer has …oil, whitch is flamable. That makes these transformers unsuitable for some facilities even though all other economical factors shows the opposite. The presense of oil has one major disadvantage – the need of OIL SOAK PIT. That detail i couldn’t find in the article. This totally ruins the theory for smaller room and cheaper building. It’s totally the opposite – bigger room and more expensive building. Anyway…all type of transformers have their advantages and disadvantages and are useful according specific site requirements. Then comes the economic calculations.