TriboTech ApS
Expert Tribology Consultancy
Loading...
Loading...
The diagnostic tools on this site are implementations of published methods, and an implementation can be corrected. When a correction changes the result a tool gives for the same input, the tool says so with a version. This page lists the current version of each method implementation and when it last changed.
A new version does not recalculate anything you saved earlier. If a saved result matters, re-run it.
Versioning starts on 30-08-2026. A result produced before that date carries no version at all, and there is no way to tell from the result itself which implementation produced it — treat such a result as unknown rather than as version 1.0.
Last changed: Geometry hygiene (#614): Triangle 2’s X3 polygon no longer carries a duplicate zero-area vertex at (77, 23, 0) — a corner of X1/T2 that lay 15 percentage points outside X3’s own %C₂H₂ = 15 boundary (Duval 2008 Table 2, p. 24; IEEE C57.139-2015 Table D.2, p. 37). Every diagnosis and confidence value is unchanged; only the drawn X3 outline loses one redundant path command. Fault-coded Triangle 2 results now carry the per-LTC-model caveat (Duval 2008 p. 23; IEEE C57.139-2015 Cl. D.4 p. 36).
Last changed: Duval Pentagon 3 now names its published source correctly (#649). The API reported `methodology.standard` as “IEC 62770, IEEE C57.104-2019”, and neither document publishes Pentagon 3: IEEE C57.104-2019 is mineral-oil scoped (Cl. 1.3, printed p. 14) and prints Pentagons 1 and 2 only (Annex D.3 p. 62, D.5 p. 67), while IEC 62770:2024 and IEC 61099:2010 are unused-fluid acceptance specifications containing no DGA zone at all. The method is published in Duval & Lamarre, 2017 IEEE Electrical Insulation Conference (Baltimore), Figures 3–6 — which Pentagon 4 and 4b already reported, so Pentagon 3 was the lone outlier in its own family. The zone geometry, the diagnosis and every value are unchanged: only the citation a reader would follow to check the method has moved.
Last changed: Wording only (#617): the six IEC 60599 zone characteristics and temperature ranges are now bilingual and read as the standard prints them — Table 1 row labels (t < 300 °C, 300 °C < t < 700 °C, t > 700 °C), Table A.1 examples quoted verbatim, and NS explained as 'non-significant whatever the value'. No ratio, zone, limit or classification changed.
Last changed: Baseline — method-implementation versioning starts here (#516). Results produced before this date carry no version.
Last changed: Baseline — method-implementation versioning starts here (#516). Results produced before this date carry no version.
Last changed: Citation wording only (#622): the analytical-uncertainty figures behind the accuracy minimum are now attributed to IEC 60599:2022 § 6.2 (p. 17) and IEC 60567:2023 § 10.3.2 (p. 50), with CIGRE TB 771:2019 § 2.2 (p. 13) as the secondary restatement in flat ppm. No threshold, gate or verdict changed.
Last changed: New method family (#463). Two separate verdicts over a sample series: the absolute change between the two latest laboratory samples against IEEE C57.104-2019 Table 3, and a 3–6-point least-squares rate in µL/L/year against Table 4 for the period bin and O2/N2 class the series falls in. A two-point rate, an on-line-monitor series, an ester fluid or a span outside the printed period bins is computed and shown but never graded, with the citation that establishes why. Nothing existed before this version.
Last changed: New method family (#555). The IEEE C57.104-2019 §6.1.1 procedure (printed pp. 35–36) over a sample series: Table 1/Table 2 gas levels (column from the O2/N2 ratio and the transformer age, Step 3), Table 3 successive-sample deltas and Table 4 multi-point rates combined as Steps 4–6 print them — Status 1, 2 or 3 for the values entered, a Step 4b confirmation-sample indication with no status, or a named gap. Withheld for any liquid other than mineral oil, for an OLTC compartment, for an on-line-monitor series and for an undeclared sampling form (§1.3, printed p. 14; Tables 3/4 are laboratory populations). Status 1 is stated as a lack of DGA evidence of abnormality (§6.1.2.5, printed p. 37), never as normal. Nothing existed before this version.
Last changed: New method family (#467). A single mineral-oil sample read against the CO/CO2 paper-involvement criteria of IEC 60599:2022 §5.5 (printed p. 15), IEEE C57.104-2019 Annex D.8 (printed p. 69) and CIGRE TB 771 (2019) App. E.2 (printed p. 58), shown side by side with no verdict: each row states its own bounds, whether the sample meets each of them, and the source’s own conclusion sentence. The three disagree on the ratio bound (10 vs 20), on the CO2 bound (10 000 vs 15 000 cumulative), on how many conditions there are, and on what a ratio below 3 means, and the disagreement is the output. CO2/CO is withheld when CO is zero or not reported, IEEE D.8 c) can never read as met without a furan value, TB 771’s cumulative CO2 is never formed from a spot value without a declared degassing history, and any fluid other than mineral oil is a named gap. Nothing existed before this version.
Last changed: New method family (#468). The auxiliary ratios beside the fault figures, each as its own screen with its own published bound: O2/N2 against the 0.2 population break point (IEEE C57.104-2019 §5.4 NOTE 2, printed p. 31; CIGRE TB 771:2019 App. F.1, printed p. 59), O2/N2 against air equilibrium and the excessive-oxygen-consumption reading (IEC 60599:2022 §5.6, printed pp. 15–16, gated on a declared preservation system), the direction of change over the series (IEEE C57.104-2019 Annex D.9.1, printed p. 69), the qualitative ester sealed-unit sample-quality screen (IEEE C57.155-2014 §6.3.1, printed p. 10 — no number is published and none is shown), C2H2/H2 against three separately published bounds (IEC 60599:2022 §5.7, printed p. 16; IEEE C57.104-2019 Annex D.9.2, printed p. 69; IEC 60599:2022 Table A.10 NOTE 1, printed p. 32, bushings only) and H2/ΣCnHm (IEC 60599:2022 Table A.10 NOTE 2, printed p. 32, bushings only). No screen is combined with another, no score is formed, and a screen that cannot be applied is shown with the reason instead of omitted. Nothing existed before this version.
Last changed: New method family (#469). The single-sample method-agreement comparator. It computes NO diagnosis of its own — every zone comes from the Duval and IEC engines already versioned above — and adds two things that can move for identical input: the published-sequence status of each figure (primary, secondary licensed by the Triangle 1 result, shown outside the published sequence under the near-boundary D+T extension, or not applied with a named reason), and the agreement statement over the CIGRE TB 771:2019 App. H.6 comparison set — Triangles 1, 4, 5 and Pentagons 1, 2. No aggregated verdict, majority vote or cross-method confidence figure is formed, because none is published. Reference-tier methods (Rogers, Doernenburg, Key Gas) are not in the comparison. Nothing existed before this version.
Last changed: New method family (#531). The Ostwald headspace-partition solver behind the headspace-loss and sampling-drift tools, together with the solubility data they read: the coefficients a_i at 25 °C for mineral oils, natural esters, synthetic esters and silicone oils (IEC 60567:2023 Annex A Table A.1, printed p. 53), the air-saturation rows and their published spread (Annex C Table C.1, printed p. 57), the temperature variation of O2 and N2 in mineral oil (Annex C Table C.2, printed p. 57) and the IEEE set kept only to state the divergence (IEEE C57.104-2019 Table G.1, printed p. 86). One correction reached these numbers BEFORE any version existed to record it: the nitrogen coefficient was 0.091 as an inline literal in the two calculators and became 0.0907 — the value Table A.1 prints — when the shared data file was introduced (#430, merged as PR #525, 30-08-2026). Version 1.0 is therefore the state AFTER that correction; a result produced before it carries no version and used the higher nitrogen figure. The partition equation itself is unchanged: f_oil = (a_i·V_L)/(a_i·V_L + V_G), the form algebraically equivalent to the extraction efficiency of IEC 60567:2023 Annex A.
Last changed: New method family (#429). The analytical-uncertainty envelope drawn around a single DGA point on a triangle or a pentagon, and the list of zones it reaches. The perturbation convention is TriboTech’s, after CIGRE ICTRAM06-2023 §VIII: per gas Δ = max(X % × C, LDL) with X settable over the published 5–15 % interval and defaulting to 15 %, the LDL values the clause prints, all 3³ (triangles) or 3⁵ (pentagons) combinations, solutions with a negative concentration rejected, and the envelope taken as the convex hull by Graham scan. Two things are stated rather than absorbed: §VIII is written about on-line monitor accuracy at initial calibration, so applying it to a laboratory result is TriboTech’s adoption, and X is published as an interval, not a number. The IEC 60599:2022 §6.2 and CIGRE TB 771 (2019) §2.2 conventions are shown beside it as disagreement and are never combined with it or with each other. Zones are reported either from an exact hull-versus-zone-polygon intersection or, where the figure’s zones are nested, from classifying every perturbed point through that figure’s own calculator — the output says which. This family adds an output; it changes no existing verdict, and every other family’s goldens are unchanged. Nothing existed before this version.