Anda di halaman 1dari 2

Failure Analysis

MANAGEMENT:
INDUSTRIAL SERVICES

LEVEL N3

NUMBER PRAMAN01017-01

DATE 02/18/09

SECTOR- DEPARTM.
ELECTRICAL ENERGY

EQUIPMENT AFECCTED:
FURNACE 6 AC 200 MT 212630

INTERRUPTION:
0.47 hours

DATE: date of event 02/13/2009

TECHNICAL LOCATION: code and description # NOTICE M2 REPORTED IN SAP SEE-SR8-A200-HOR6 FROM: Event start date TO: Event end date TM RISPONSABLE: code SAP and description 10/13/2009 SEA-GT ACERIAS E.E. PERSONS INVOLVED IN THE FAILURE: Edgar Rosales, Juan Guillen, Ronald Rojas, Arlenis Guatarama, Luis Quijada,German Quintana, Manuel Boulanger, Miguel Bernald, Angel Bolivar. WHAT HAPPEN? (relate the point happened): At 6:30 am shutdown by Bulchhotz the furnace 6 transformer of large plates steel plant. WHY HAPPENED? (Event Technical cause and Non-technical cause): For now there is evidence that the fault lies in the nucleus, is expected to disassemble the transformer and the technical inspection from Taminis technician in order to conclude about the true cause of the failure Background of the event? (Make evident if this failure had it before and tell as it happened): Not it have a background of this type of failure in this transformer What was done? (activities or steps that were made immediately to correct the fault): After Buchholz shutdown a transformer oil sample was took and was observed a high concentration of gases. Due to it is the first time that fails a 130 MVA transformer, it was decided inform to Tamimi staff about the shutdown occurred. The staff immediately suggested to perform the following tests: 1. Current excitation test 2. TTR (Transformation Turns Ratio) 3. Transformer primary Megger Test 4. Transformer secondary Megger Test 5. Primary and secondary Megger Test 6. Core Megger Test 7. Booster Megger Test During TTR testing was observed a difference of 1.95 in Tap 6, exceeding the limit according to the standards, so it immediately decides to make an inspection to drive of tap. Firstly it reviews the breaker. In the breaker inspection it was observed that the phase 2 wires were broken, so the possibility is concluded that the variator has changed with load and generated an arc within the transformer. We proceed to lower the oil level of tank variator to inspect. No find it abnormalities in the tank variator. Continuing with the tests suggested by Tamimi is detected that the core megger test did not given positive results, always shows 0 M. Are unable to locate with EDELCA staff a videoscope to perform an internal inspection to the transformer. Through the camera it can observe a certain area of the nucleus that the sheets are detached and are doing the same contact with the casing. That is why it is generating in the measurement of insulation, that is to say 0 M. Once this is determined, it take the decision to lower the transformer MAINTENANCE PLAN (Evidencing the number of SAP plan or order and date of last compliance): ACTION PLAN AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES (Evidencing the number of SAP plan or order and date of last compliance): Elaborated: Arlenis Guatarama Approbed: Manuel Boulanger

Failure Analysis
MANAGEMENT: EQUIPMENT AFECCTED:

LEVEL

NUMBER

DATE

SECTOR- DEPARTM. INTERRUPTION:

N3

PRAMAN01017-01

02/18/09

DATE: date of event

ANNEX (Place at this point, a plane, photo, picture or any details that need to be added to clarify the failure): Annex #1: Phase 2 of the breaker with the wires detached. Annex #2: Core sheets making contact with Casing, are observed open sheets Annex #3: Oil analysis results by EDELCA