This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics
Online Sensitive Turn-to-Turn Fault Detection
in Power Transformers
Seyed-Alireza Ahmadi, Majid Sanaye-Pasand, Senior Member, IEEE, Moein Abedini, and Mohammad
Hamed Samimi
Abstract—Power transformers are of the most critical and
expensive equipment in the power system industry.
Meanwhile, they are exposed to a variety of faulty and
abnormal operating conditions. Therefore, to prevent
extension of these events they are protected by different
protective schemes. Among the various types of the
transformer faults, detecting turn-to-turn faults is the most
challenging one for the protection systems. Industrial
experiences and standard documents reveal that the
existing protection systems include severe shortcomings,
and still more efforts are required to offer a reliable
method for detecting such faults. To this end, this paper
puts forward the proposal of a novel turn-to-turn fault
detection method to satisfy the basic protection
requirements of dependability, security, and speed. This
method properly detects the low-level turn-to-turn faults
while is stable during system transients and external
faults. Performance of the proposed method is evaluated
through various experimental and simulation studies. The
obtained results verify superior operation of the proposed
method under different faults and conditions.
Index Terms— Incipient winding faults, power
transformer protection, turn-to-turn fault detection.
I. INTRODUCTION
P OWER transformer outage is typically considered as a
severe disturbance because when a transformer goes out of
service, proper operation of the associated part of the power
grid is interrupted [1-2]. Therefore, to obtain the ultimate goal
of consistent network operation, i.e. the continuity of
providing safe electric energy, more trustworthy transformers
are needed [3-4]. However, due to the economic
considerations, it is not possible to design and construct a
fully safe and dependable transformer. By passing of time and
occurring different unwanted events in the network, large
numbers of tensions are imposed on the transformer, which
endanger safety of equipment and may result in a variety of
failures [5-6].
Among different power transformer faults, turn-to-turn
faults have a high incident rate [7]. These faults are mainly
due to the gradual destruction of the winding insulation, as
well as partial discharge activities when the insulation system
of winding turns is subjected to moisture, bubbles, or high
temperatures. These faults typically start with a very small
percentage of the involved turns, and gradually their severity
will be intensified [8]. Therefore, if these faults are detected in
the early stages and the faulted transformer is disconnected
from the grid soon, their extension is prevented. Doing so, the
transformer can be repaired and returned back to the service
with less cost and outage time [9]. This indicates the necessity
of demanding a sensitive and fast protection scheme that can
detect incipient turn-to-turn faults.
The authors are with the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran 1439957131 Iran (e-
mail: s.alireza.ahmadi@ut.ac.ir; msanaye@ut.ac.ir; m.abedini@ut.ac.ir).
1
0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Among the existing protection schemes, differential relay
as the main protection of power transformer is not sensitive
enough to detect these faults in their early stages. For proper
operation of this relay and to observe a detectable variation in
the terminal currents, at least 10 % of the winding should be
involved in this fault [10]. Therefore, incipient turn-to-turn
fault detection is still a big challenge in the transformer
protection studies [11-13].
Recently, the negative-sequence based (NSB) methods are
implemented in industrial relays [14-15]. These methods rely
on the fact that turn-to-turn faults are inherently asymmetrical
faults. Therefore, they could be detected by monitoring the
negative-sequence component of the current signal [12]. The
capabilities of these methods for detecting turn-to-turn faults
are investigated in several reports and scientific studies and
some good results are reported [12-13], [16-17].
In addition to the NSB methods, other ones adopt the
wavelet transform [18-20]. Among them, [18] provides better
results which uses the boundary wavelet coefficient energy of
the differential and restraining currents to detect the faulty
conditions. The use of artificial intelligence in power
transformer protection is another emerging solution proposed
in some researches [21-23]. In [21] support vector machine
has been used to detect transformer internal faults. In [22] a
classifier based on the probabilistic neural network has been
proposed to discriminate between internal fault and the other
conditions.
Some other researches use the transformer electric model to
decide about its condition [24-26]. For example, in [24] using
a healthy transformer model, an indicator value is estimated.
Then it is compared with the actual value obtained through the
terminal measurements to detect the presence of a turn-to-turn
fault. In [25] by ignoring the mutual flux linkage in the
transformer loop equation, a two-terminal network model is
developed. Then based on the consumed active power in the
network the turn-to-turn fault condition is detected.
The other category of researches uses the impedance
analysis to detect the transformer faults [27-29]. When a fault
occurs inside the transformer, its calculated impedance will
change. This could be a good indication for the protection
algorithm. For example, in [27] the transformer input
impedances during both the healthy and faulty conditions are
calculated. Then by comparing the calculated impedances,
internal faults are detected. In [28] and [29], the voltage-
current locus is used to discriminate different transformer
conditions as well as detecting the internal winding faults.
These methods rely on the fact that after the internal events,
the impedance of transformer is changed and this alters the
voltage-current locus. Overall, it might be concluded that the
impedance-based methods are not sensitive enough to detect
low-level turn-to-turn faults.
In the above-reviewed methods, extra equipment or
additional measurements are not required. However, there are
some promising methods capable of detecting low-level turn-
to-turn faults that need to provide more facilities [9], [30].
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Among them, the ones that require installation of a search coil
offer better results [30].
Overall, from all of the mentioned methods, only the NSB
ones have been implemented in the industrial relays.
However, according to the experiments performed in [7] and
[12], these methods are not sensitive enough for detecting
faults including lower percentages of involved turns. Besides,
their performance is highly dependent on the transformer
operating condition before the fault incident. Therefore,
despite the merits founded in the above researches, more
efforts are still needed to propose a practical method. This
should be capable of implementing it in an industrial relay and
sensitive enough to detect low-level turn-to-turn faults.
This way, in this paper, a novel method based on the
analytical equations obtained from the magnetic equivalent
circuit of the faulty transformer is proposed, which is able to
detect even low severity turn-to-turn faults. Since this method
relies on the physical laws governing the transformer, it is
stable during the external events. Besides, as the proposed
method only uses the current signals, no additional
measurement is required for its implementation. These
promising features are validated through various experimental
tests conducted on a specially-designed transformer having
the capability of applying internal turn-to-turn faults. To offer
real-world operating conditions, the facilities and equipment
of a physical power system model is used. Eventually, the
performed simulation and practical test results verify the
potential of proposed method for successful practical
implementation.
(a)
RYa RYc
RLa RLb
Nsaisa Nsbisb Nscisc
Rlsa Rlsb
Rma Rmb
Npaipa Rlpa Npbipb Rlpb Npcipc
(b)
Fig. 1. a) Mean paths of fluxes in a three-leg power transformer, b)
magnetic equivalent circuit
II. PROPOSED METHOD: FORMULATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION
A. Formulation Development
Fig. 1 (a) shows the mean paths of fluxes (dotted lines) in a
typical three-leg power transformer including its core,
windings, and tank. For this transformer, the magnetic
equivalent circuit in which the magnetic fields are
demonstrated in a circuit of lumped reluctances is depicted in
Fig. 1 (b) [31]. In this circuit for phase a, Npa and Nsa are the
number of primary and secondary windings turns,
respectively. ipa and isa are the currents flowing through the
primary and secondary windings, respectively. RLa and RYa
represent the limbs and yokes' reluctances, respectively. Rma
0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Transactions on Industrial Electronics
represents the reluctance of the path between top and bottom
of the transformer core associated with the core flux passing
through the parallel air and tank. Rlpa and Rlsa represent the
leakage reluctances of primary and secondary windings,
respectively. For the other phases, the same notations are used
but with ending suffices of b and c.
Since the goal of this paper is to offer an approach to detect
turn-to-turn faults, without losing generality and just for
simplicity, the equivalent circuit of Fig. 1 (b) can be
simplified using the following valid assumptions:
1) Since the leakage reluctances make their paths through
the air, they have much higher values in comparison with the
reluctances making their paths through the iron, i.e., limbs and
yokes reluctances, RL and RY. Therefore, these parallel
reluctances are ignored in the simplified equivalent circuit.
Rlpa = Rlsa = , Rlpb = Rlsb = , Rlpc = Rlsc =  (1)
2) For the same above reason, the reluctances of the paths
between the top and bottom of the transformer core are also
ignored.
Rma = , Rmb = , Rmc =  (2)
The simplified equivalent circuit is depicted in Fig. 2 (a). In
this circuit Ra=RLa+RYa, Rb=RLb, and Rc=RLc+RYc. The absolute
permeability of iron core (μ) can be considered to be constant
during regular operation of the transformer in its linear region.
Therefore, each of the reluctances in the equivalent circuit can
be calculated according to the well-known equation of
R=l/µS, where, l and S are the mean length and net cross-
sectional area of the section.
Ra Rb Rc
Ra Rb Rc
Nf if
Nsbisb Nscisc
Nsaisa Nsbisb Nscisc
Nsaisa
Npbipb Npcipc
Npaipa Npbipb Npcipc N´paipa
(a) (b)
Fig. 2. Simplified magnetic equivalent circuit of a) healthy and b) faulty
transformer
The simplified equivalent circuit of Fig. 2 (a) is for the
healthy condition of transformer. Now consider a turn-to-turn
RLc
fault that occurs either on the primary or secondary winding
of phase a. This condition resembles an autotransformer with
Rlsc
Rmc the shortened secondary winding. Since the number of
Rlpc
shortened turns (Nf) is much lower than that of the remaining
healthy turns of the primary winding, the induced current in
the shortened turns (if) is high. Indeed, this current generates a
magneto-motive force (MMF) to oppose the generated MMF
by the healthy winding [32-34].
The main challenge of transformer protection system in
detecting turn-to-turn faults is for low-level ones with few
shortened turns. Shortening few turns of a transformer
winding causes little change in the operating voltage of each
phase, which does not effectively change the operating point
of the transformer. Therefore, the existing reluctances on the
simplified circuit of Fig. 2 (a) can be used for a transformer
with a turn-to-turn fault as well.
Based on the above discussion, the simplified magnetic
equivalent circuit of the turn-to-turn faulty transformer can be
considered as Fig. 2 (b). Similar equivalent circuit is also used
in [9] which verifies the conducted analysis. Let φa, φb, and φc
be the linkage fluxes for each phase. Then, using Fig. 2 (b)
and based on the analogy between the magnetic and electric
2
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics

circuits, the following equations are derived in the time measured quantities each of which is extended as follows:
domain:  a cos a 
 ipa + Nsa isa + Nf if + Ra a − Rbb − Nsb isb + N pb ipb = 0
− N pa (3)  a sin a 

 ipa + Nsa isa + Raa + Nf if − Rcc − Nsc isc + N pc ipc = 0
− N pa  cos  b 
(4) X = b (16)
 b sin  b 
a +  b + c = 0 (5)  N f I f cos f 
where, Nꞌpa is the number of primary winding turns after the  N I sin  
 f f f 
fault incident and is equal to Npa-Nf. The above equations are
valid for the simplified equivalent circuit of the faulty  N p ipa (t1 ) − ipb (t1 ) − Ns isa (t1 ) − isb (t1 ) 
   
 N p i pa (t1 ) − ipc (t1 ) − Ns isa (t1 ) − isc (t1 ) 
transformer depicted in Fig. 2 (b). However, when the 
transformer is healthy, the following conditions are met in (3)  
and (4):  
 = N pa , N f if = 0
N pa (6)  N p ipa (t j ) − ipb (t j ) − Ns isa (t j ) − isb (t j ) 
B=      (17)
The only condition in which the term Nf if is non-zero is  N p ipa (t j ) − ipc (t j ) − Ns isa (t j ) − isc (t j ) 
when a turn-to-turn fault occurs. In the early stage of the fault  
incident where very few turns are involved, it can be  
considered that Nꞌpa ≈ Npa. Now considering the equal number  N p ipa (tn ) − ipb (tn ) − Ns isa (tn ) − isb (tn )
 
of turns for each phase at the primary and secondary sides,  N p ipa (tn ) − ipc (tn ) − Ns isa (tn ) − isc (tn ) 
i.e., Npa=Npb=Npc=Np and Nsa=Nsb=Nsc=Ns, and also using (5),
equations (3)-(4) can be modified and rearranged as follows: To find the vector of unknowns, the least error square (LES)
Raa − Rbb + N f if = N p (ipa − ipb ) − Ns (isa − isb ) (7) technique [35] is used as follows:

( Ra + Rc )a + Rcb + Nf if = N p (ipa − ipc ) − Ns (isa − isc )
The left-side of the above time-domain equations can be
extended using the following equalities:
a (t ) = a sin(t +  a ) = a [sin t cos  a + cos  t sin  a ] (9)
b (t ) = b sin(t +  b ) = b [sin  t cos  b + cos  t sin  b ] (10)
if (t ) = I f sin(t + f ) = I f [sin t cos  f + cos t sin  f ] (11)
Putting (9)-(11) into (7)-(8), equations (12)-(13) are
obtained. In these developed equations, there are six unknown
variables, i.e., a , θa,  b , θb, Nf If, and θf. This makes the
system underdetermined and for obtaining the unknown
variables more equations are required. To obtain them, (12)
and (13) can be re-written for different time samples. If the
number of developed equations and thus observations
becomes more than that of unknown variables, the system will
be overdetermined where the unknowns can be found through
an estimation process. Doing so, the following matrix can be
achieved:
AX = B (14)
where, A is the coefficient matrix and given in (15). In this
equation j is the sample number, n is the total number of
samples in the moving data window, Δt is the time difference
between two consecutive samples, and t1=-(n-1)Δt, ti=-(n-j)Δt,
tn=0. X is the vector of unknowns, and B is the time-varying
( )
−1
(8) X = AT A AT B (18)
Using the obtained results from the LES algorithm, the
unknown variables are obtained. Nf If is the product of the
number of faulted turns multiplied by the magnitude of the
fault current. Since this parameter is non-zero when a turn-to-
turn fault occurs, its value could be a good indicator for a
turn-to-turn fault incident. Therefore, it is defined as the fault
detection index (FDI) in this paper and is calculated as
follows:
FDI = ( N f I f cos f ) 2 + ( N f I f sin f ) 2 = N f I f (19)
The two expressions in parentheses are obtained in vector X
after performing the LES procedure. In the above equation the
well-known equality of cos  + sin  = 1 is used. For ease of
2 2
understanding the proposed method, the procedure to reach
the proposed index is summarized in Fig. 3.
The value of FDI is not considerable during normal
operation, external faults, and unbalanced conditions.
However, its value dramatically increases when a fault occurs.
Therefore, a turn-to-turn fault is detected when the following
condition is met:
FDI   (20)
where, Δ is the fault detection threshold. The FDI value does

Ra sin t  a cos a + Ra cos t  a sin a − Rb sin t  b cos  b − Rb cos t  b sin  b + sin t  Nf I f cos f + cos t  Nf I f sin f
(12)
= N p ipa (t ) − ipb (t )  − Ns isa (t ) − isb (t ) 
( Ra + Rc )sin t  a cos a + ( Ra + Rc ) cos t  a sin a + Rc sin t  b cos b + Rc cos t  b sin b + sin t  Nf If cos f + cos t  Nf If sin f
(13)
= N p ipa (t ) − ipc (t )  − Ns isa (t ) − isc (t ) 

Ra sin(t1 ) Ra cos(t1 ) − Rb sin(t1 )

− Rb cos(t1 ) sin(t1 ) cos(t1 ) 
( R +R )sin(t ) ( Ra + Rc )cos(t1 ) Rc sin(t1 )
Rc cos(t1 ) sin(t1 ) cos(t1 ) 
 a c 1

 
Ra sin(tj ) Ra cos(tj ) − Rb sin(tj ) − Rb cos(tj ) sin(tj ) cos(tj ) 
A=   (15)
( Ra +Rc )sin(tj ) ( Ra + Rc )cos(tj ) Rc sin(tj ) Rc cos(tj ) sin(tj ) cos(tj ) 
 
 
Ra sin(tn ) Ra cos(tn ) − Rb sin(tn ) − Rb cos(tn ) sin(tn ) cos(tn )
( Ra +Rc )sin(tn ) ( Ra + Rc )cos(tn ) Rc sin(tn ) Rc cos(tn ) sin(tn ) cos(tn )

0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics
Organizing the equation into the form of
Forming the
AX = B (14)-(17)
equation
A: known coefficients
Σ NI = Σ Rφ
X: vector of unknowns
(12)-(13)
B: measurements
Estimating X
Calculating FDI
using LES
T -1 T FDI = ( Nf I f cosf )2 + ( Nf I f sin f )2 = Nf I f
X = (A A) A B
(19)
(18)
Fig. 3. Summary of the procedure to reach FDI
not meaningfully change during load variations and abnormal
operating conditions originated from outside of the
transformer. Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed
method offers a secure protection scheme while keeping its
sensitivity and dependability for low-level turn-to-turn faults.
B. Implementation
Implementation of the proposed method is not complicated
and does not require installation of any sensor or new
equipment. The only data that needs to be measured from the
operating transformer are both the primary and secondary
currents, which could be easily obtained through the already
installed current transformers (CTs). Besides, for conducting
the required calculations, some easily available transformer
parameters containing the winding configuration vector group,
number of windings turns (Np and Ns), and sections
reluctances (Ra, Rb, and Rc) should be determined. In addition
to the mentioned parameters, the setting threshold of Δ, which
determines the sensitivity of proposed method in detecting
turn-to-turn faults should be adjusted by the user.
To execute the proposed method program, at the first stage
the effects of CT ratio and transformer vector group are
compensated using the method in [15]. In practical
applications, calculating the inverse operation in (18) is time-
consuming and imposes hardware complexity on the
estimation procedure [36]. However, formulation
development for the proposed method is in such a way that the
elements of matrix A are pre-determined and thus there is no
need to update them for every new sample. Therefore, the
term (ATA)-1AT can be calculated just once at the beginning
and is used for the entire estimation procedure. After that, the
required calculations for estimating FDI value is performed
very fast without imposing extra facilities overhead. Finally,
the turn-to-turn fault is detected when the condition in (20) is
met and confirmed by some samples.
In (20) adjusting the FDI threshold is important. Similar to
the other current-based methods, Δ threshold is chosen as a
percentage of the transformer rated current. The preferred
setting for most of the applications is 4 %. The factors
influencing this setting include the transformer nominal
parameters.
The developed formulations that led to estimation of the
FDI value are based on occurrence of a turn-to-turn fault on
the windings of phase a located on the left side leg of the
transformer shown in Fig. 1. Consequently, six independent
modules seems to be required each of which is formulated
based on the presence of a turn-to-turn fault on the windings
of related phase installed on each leg. However, it can be
easily shown that the primary or secondary location of the
fault has no effect on the formulation of the proposed method.
0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Therefore, just three independent modules are needed to
protect power transformer against turn-to-turn faults. In the
next section, various evaluation studies are performed to test
the performance of the proposed method.
Transformer
If Transmission
Source Turn-to-Turn Line Load
Fault
VAN Ipa Isa
Zs ZTL Za
VBN
Ipb Isb
Zs ZTL Zb
VCN
Ipc Isc
Zs ZTL Zc
Fig. 4. Circuit diagram of the provided experimental setup
III. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP PREPARATION
For experimental studies, using an actual power system
model, an appropriate setup with the given circuit diagram of
Fig. 4 is developed. Different aspects of a real power system,
including generators, substations, transmission lines, loads,
instrument transformers, and protection relays are taken into
account in the model. Further information about each part of
this laboratory model is given in [37].
The provided experimental setup is shown in Fig. 5 (a). It
consists of a custom-built 15 kVA transformer depicted in
Figs. 5 (b) and (c) with the capability of accessing its different
winding parts. The provided setup provides the opportunity of
conducting both internal and external faults under challenging
conditions. To obtain the currents flowing through the
transformer phases on both the primary and secondary sides,
proper CTs are selected and their outputs are transferred to a
personal computer (PC) using an analogue to digital converter
(A/D). To process the digital signals and execute the proposed
method program, proper software is developed. The sampling
frequency is set to 1 kHz, which means providing 20 samples
per cycle of 50 Hz network frequency.
IV. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Performance of the proposed method is evaluated through
both experimental and simulation studies each of which is
described in the resume.
A. Tests with Experimental Setup
In this subsection, different scenarios under challenging
conditions are considered using the described experimental
setup. In all of them, for applying a turn-to-turn fault, based
on the available inner turns of the transformer windings
depicted in Fig. 5 (c), output junctions 2 and 3 on phase a are
connected together which involves 3 of the overall 140 turns
of that winding (2.14 % of the turns). This is the minimum
number of turns available using the custom-built transformer.
The length of the data window for the proposed and the other
modeled methods is considered one cycle.
To compare performance of the proposed method with that
of the existing ones, the results of NSB method used in [12]
are also provided. In this method, the amplitudes of the
differential currents negative-sequence components are used
to detect the turn-to-turn fault incident. In digital protection
relays, the NSB method is implemented using two differential
[13-14], and directional [15-16] approaches. In the differential
one, the focus is on the amplitudes of negative-sequence
currents, and in the directional one, it is on the angle
differences.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics

(b)

(a) (c)
Fig. 5. Experimental studies: a) provided setup, b) designed transformer with capability of accessing internal windings for applying fault, and c) its
winding output junctions configuration

Case 1: Transformer no-load condition

In [12] performances of these two approaches are compared
and the obtained results verify that the differential one has
better results overall. Therefore, in the comparison tables, its
results are considered as the NSB method. The common range
for setting the minimum threshold of negative-sequence
differential current is within 1-20 % of the base current (Ib)
and its default typical value in some industrial relay is 4 %
[15]. However, as shown in the resume, only by adjusting the
threshold to 1 %, the NSB method can detect the faults.
Therefore, the provided results of NSB method in the
comparison tables are for setting threshold of 1 %, while for
the proposed method they are for the threshold of 4 %.
Fig. 6. Transformer no-load experiment: a) primary currents, b)
positive and negative sequence differential currents, and c) FDI value.
This scenario is designed to test performance of the
proposed turn-to-turn fault detection method under the
transformer no-load condition. Doing so, the transformer is
configured in Y-Y type and the secondary side is left open
without connecting it to the load. Although the Y-Y
connection is seldomly used in the industry, but to show the
independency of the proposed method to transformer winding
configuration, this connection type is used for the study of this
scenario. The turn-to-turn fault is applied at t=77 ms. Fig. 6
(a) shows the recorded primary currents for the transformer
no-load condition. Since there is no secondary current, the
differential currents are equal to the primary ones. The
positive and negative-sequence differential currents are
depicted in Fig. 6 (b).
For the negative-sequence differential methods [13-14], the
value of INS rises upper than 4 % at t=79 ms and after five
consecutive samples the trip command is issued at t=84 ms.
Therefore, the turn-to-turn fault detection delay in this method
is 7 ms. However, since the negative-sequence directional
algorithms [15-16] decide about the transformer condition
based on the phase angle differences between the primary and
secondary negative-sequence currents, they are unable to
detect the turn-to-turn fault under the transformer no-load
condition. This is because for the correct calculation of the
phase angle it is required to have flowing current at both
sides. When the transformer is under the no-load condition,
the secondary side current is theoretically zero, hence
calculating its phase angle is not possible. Fig. 6 (c) shows the
FDI value of the proposed method. The FDI rises to more
than 4 % at t=78 ms and after five consecutive samples the
trip command is issued at t=83 ms. Therefore, the method
properly detects the transformer turn-to-turn fault 6 ms after
the fault incident.

0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics

In Table I, the results of the proposed and NSB method are

provided for different conditions. For the scenarios where the
method fails to detect the fault, the dash sign ("-") is used.
Since by setting the operating threshold of NSB method to
4 %, none of the faults in the studied scenarios is detected,
this threshold is reduced to 1 %. However, there are always
some factors such as CT error, noise uncertainties,
transformer design unbalance error, transmission line
unbalanced operation due to non-transposition, etc., which
cause the flow of fake negative sequence current. Therefore, if
the operating threshold is set to 1 %, security of the protection
system is threatened. This prevents the protection engineers to
use low setting of this threshold. As can be observed, the
proposed method better detects the turn-to-turn faults for the
conducted studies.
TABLE I
RESULTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE STUDIES IN CASE 2
Detection time (ms)
Connection Fault
type location Proposed
NSB method
method
Primary 17 23
Y-Y
Secondary 19 -
Primary 18 24
Yn-Yn
Secondary 19 -
Primary 14 16
D-Yn
Secondary 18 -
Primary 18 23
Yn-D
Secondary 14 16
Primary 15 18
D-D
Fig. 7. Transformer loaded experiment: a) primary currents, b) Secondary 14 16
secondary currents, c) positive sequence differential current, d)
negative sequence differential current, e) its phase angle, and f) FDI
value. Case 3: Turn-to-turn fault after asymmetrical external faults
Case 2: Transformer loaded condition with different winding One of the main reasons for the turn-to-turn fault
configurations occurrence is the exposure of transformer to the stresses
originated from the flowing of a high current external fault.
In this subsection, several experiments using various
Under such a tension, the poor insulation between several
winding connection types (Y, Yn, D) are conducted. In all the
turns of transformer fails and a turn-to-turn fault occurs.
experiments, a three-phase purely resistive load about 20 % of
Therefore, appropriate operation of the protection system for
the rated load is connected to the secondary winding.
this condition helps a lot in preventing the fault extension,
The turn-to-turn fault is applied on both the primary and
which reduces the cost of transformer repair.
secondary windings. Table I provides the results of this study.
Fig. 8 shows the obtained results of an experiment
As can be observed, the proposed method can properly detect
performed on a D-yn transformer. In this experiment, an
the fault incident in less than one cycle time (20 ms). To better
external phase a to phase b to ground fault occurs at t=75 ms
illustrate performance of the proposed method, consider the
and after that, a turn-to-turn fault is initiated at t=164 ms. The
turn-to-turn fault on the primary winding of a D-yn
source equivalent Thevenin impedance of the experimental
transformer. Fig. 7 shows the obtained results of this scenario.
setup is a high value. Therefore, in this weak network, the
As can be observed, after the fault incident at t=84 ms, the
external fault current is not increased so much.
FDI value rises considerably in such a way that makes the
As can be observed, after the external fault incident both
turn-to-turn fault detection simple. The proposed method
the positive and negative-sequence components are stable.
detects this fault at t=93 ms and issues the trip command after
Similarly, in the proposed method since the magnetic
5 consecutive samples with the overall delay of 14 ms.
equivalent circuit of transformer is used to form the fault
For the negative-sequence differential methods, the INS
detection method, the external fault does not affect the
value never rises higher than 4 %. However, if the fault
method's performance. This could be also observed in the FDI
detection threshold can be adjusted to 1 %, the fault would be
value depicted in Fig. 8 (f). As observed, after the external
detected at t= 95 ms and the trip command is issued after 16
fault incident the FDI value is steady. However, when the
ms delay. For the directional methods, the phase angles
turn-to-turn fault occurs, the FDI value increases considerably
difference becomes lower than the threshold (60 degrees)
and is stabilized on a high value such that its detection
slightly earlier than the directional method. However, since in
becomes easily possible. The turn-to-turn fault in this example
the directional methods, the amplitude of negative-sequence
is detected after 9 ms using both the proposed and NSB
component must be higher than a pre-defined threshold as a
differential methods. Therefore, the trip command is issued
prerequisite, the detection time of this method is the same as
after 5 consecutive samples with overall of 14 ms delay.
the differential one.

0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics

Similar to the previous case study, the NSB method cannot

detect any of the turn-to-turn fault scenarios using the setting
threshold of 4 %. Therefore, the results are given for the
setting of 1 % and the previous mentioned drawbacks for low
setting exist in this study as well. As can be observed, for all
of the tests the proposed method detects the turn-to-turn fault
in less than one cycle time, while the NSB method fails in
some scenarios.
TABLE II
RESULTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE STUDIES IN CASE 3
Detection time (ms)
Connection Fault
type location Proposed
NSB method
method
Primary 16 22
Y-Y
Secondary 18 -
Primary 19 24
Yn-Yn
Secondary 20 -
Primary 14 15
D-Yn
Secondary 19 -
Primary 19 24
Yn-D
Secondary 15 16
Primary 14 17
D-D
Secondary 13 16

Case 4: Turn-to-turn fault during unbalanced loading

condition
Unbalanced loading condition has similar features to the
asymmetrical external fault, but with different intensity.
During this condition, asymmetrical currents flow which
Fig. 8. Turn-to-turn fault during asymmetric external fault: a) primary
currents, b) secondary currents, c) positive sequence differential affects the NSB method. To better illustrate these effects,
current, d) negative-sequence differential current, e) its phase angle, another experiment is conducted in the laboratory using the
and f) FDI value. same transformer and loading condition, but with 2 % of
Despite the NSB differential method, the directional one unbalanced current. In such a condition, a turn-to-turn fault is
has serious shortcoming in detecting turn-to-turn faults during occurred at t=87 ms and Fig. 9 shows the result of this
asymmetrical external faults. Fig. 8 (e) shows the angle experiment. As can be observed, the unbalance operating
difference between the primary and secondary negative- condition can not affect the NSB differential method and it
sequence currents (ΔϕNS). As can be observed, after the detects the fault appropriately after 13 ms. However, the NSB
external fault incident the ΔϕNS value is approximately about directional method misoperates under such scenario.
180º, which indicates the external origin of flowing negative- According to the performed experimental studies, even
sequence current. However, after the occurrence of a turn-to- existing a small percent of unbalance load can result in
turn fault, the observed change in the value of ΔϕNS is not misoperation of the directional method. The operation of the
enough to reach the operating threshold, thereby the fault proposed method for such a scenario can be evaluated
could not be detected. considering the trend of FDI value. As can be observed, it can
For the accurate calculation of negative-sequence phase detect the turn-to-turn fault 12 ms after the fault incident.
angles, some amounts of negative-sequence currents should
be present at both the primary and secondary sides. Therefore,
the turn-to-turn fault detection after clearing the external fault
by opening the line circuit breaker, depends on the post
external fault condition. In the case where opening of the
circuit breaker puts the transformer in the no-load condition,
the directional method fails to detect the turn-to-turn fault.
While, in the case that after the line opening, the transformer
remains loaded, there is a chance for the NSB directional
method to detect the turn-to-turn fault. Overall, it can be
concluded that the NSB directional method faces difficulties
in detecting turn-to-turn faults during asymmetric external
fault events.
To further evaluate performance of the proposed method
for such conditions, more experiments with the different
transformer winding connections are conducted and the results
are given in Table II. For comparison, results of the NSB
differential method are also provided.

0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics

locations (primary and secondary sides), different fault

intensities, and with various transformer configurations (Y-Y,
Yn-Yn, D-Yn, Yn-D, and D-D) and loading conditions (full-
load and no-load). The obtained results show satisfactory
performance of the proposed method. The average results of
some of these studies are provided in Table III.
TABLE III
RESULTS OF THE SIMULATION STUDIES
Average detection
Connection type Loading condition
time (ms)
Full-load 17
Y-Y
No-load 8
Full-load 18
Yn-Yn
No-load 9
Full-load 17
D-Yn
No-load 8
Full-load 16
Yn-D
No-load 7
Full-load 15
D-D
No-load 7

Fig. 9. Turn-to-turn fault during unbalanced loading condition: a)
primary currents, b) secondary currents, c) positive sequence
differential current, d) negative-sequence differential current, e) its
phase angle, and f) FDI value.
In all of the previous studies, the results were shown for
turn-to-turn faults involving 2.14 % of the available turns on
phase a of the transformer (junctions 2 to 3 are connected to
each other). This is the most difficult fault case for the
protection system to be detected. Besides, the proposed
method has been tested for other applicable turn-to-turn faults
with different intensities. The obtained results prove the
appropriate performance of the proposed method for practical
applications. The results for higher percentages of involved
turns indicate that the related faults can be identified more
easily and faster. It should be noted that, the proposed method
does not depend on the transformer size. All of the previous
experimental studies are conducted on a custom-built 15 kVA
transformer. However, the proposed method works well for
larger transformer sizes. To see it, extensive simulation tests
are conducted in the next subsection.
B. Simulation-based Tests
The previous experimental studies were conducted on a
transformer specially built for the short circuit studies. Since
these studies are destructive, they cannot be applied on real
large-scale high voltage transformers. Therefore, extensive
simulation studies on a 160 MVA, 230/63 kV transformer
modeled using the approach in [38], are conducted to further
assess the performance of the proposed method. In this
approach, the concept of dividing the faulty winding into two
sub-windings and calculating new parameters is used. The
simulated network information is provided in Appendix.
The simulation studies contain different fault incident times
(voltage peak and zero crossing instants), different fault
8
V. CONCLUSION
Incipient transformer turn-to-turn fault detection can
considerably reduce the repair time and expenditure.
Therefore, existing a sensitive protection method for such
faults brings many benefits for the power system. On the other
hand, since power systems are nowadays running near their
operational limits, unsecure tripping of a transformer can
threaten the overall system stability and result in further
catastrophic consequences. Therefore, the protection method
for turn-to-turn fault detection should not only be sensitive,
but also have proper selectivity to reliably distinguish between
internal and external faults. In this way, a novel method based
on the magnetic equivalent circuit of the faulty transformer
has been proposed in this paper. This method is simple and
easy to implement and does not require additional equipment.
Comprehensive experimental and simulation studies
demonstrate that the proposed method is able to detect low-
level turn-to-turn faults in less than a cycle even in presence
of an asymmetrical external fault in the system. According to
the experimental tests, the method easily detects the faults on
the lowermost available junctions, i.e. approximately 2% of
shortened turns. This is the most difficult and lowest level of
turn-to-turn fault we could apply on the custom-built
transformer. The simulation-based studies not only approved
this sensitivity, but also reveal that the method is even able to
detect faults involving 1 % of shortened turns. Besides, the
obtained results verify selectivity of the proposed method by
properly remaining stable during the external faults.
APPENDIX
The simulation system is modeled in PSCAD/EMTD
environment similar to Fig. 4 and based on a real 230 kV
network in the Iran national grid. Besides, it is considered that
the nominal resistive load is connected to the secondary side
of transformer. Other main parameters are as follows:
Equivalent source: Vs=230 kV, Zs=0.521+j10.93 ohm
Transformer: Sn=160 MVA, Vp=230 kV, Vs=63 kV, Uk%=
14.6 %

0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Prof. Hossein Mohseni for
his efforts in establishing Power System Model Laboratory of
the University of Tehran and his kind help in conducting the
experimental studies.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Tajdinian and H. Samet, "Divergence distance based index for
discriminating inrush and internal fault currents in power transformers,"
in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, May 2021, doi:
10.1109/TIE.2021.3082071.
[2] S. A. Ahmadi and M. Sanaye-Pasand, "A Robust multi-layer framework
for online condition assessment of power transformers," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, April 2021, doi:
10.1109/TPWRD.2021.3074545.
[3] G. Capolino and A. Cavagnino, "New trends in electrical machines
technology - Part I," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 4281-4285, Aug. 2014.
[4] G. Capolino and A. Cavagnino, " New trends in electrical machines
technology - Part II," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 61, no. 9, pp. 4931-4936, Sept. 2014.
[5] S. Bagheri, Z. Moravej, and G. B. Gharehpetian, "Effect of transformer
winding mechanical defects, internal and external electrical faults and
inrush currents on performance of differential protection," in IET
Generation, Transmission & Distribution, vol. 11, pp. 2508–2520, July
2017.
[6] X. Zhao et al., "Experimental evaluation of transformer internal fault
detection based on V–I characteristics," in IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 4108-4119, May 2020.
[7] N. Farzin, M. Vakilian and E. Hajipour, "Transformer turn-to-turn fault
protection based on fault-related incremental currents," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 700-709, April
2019.
[8] Z. Zhao, C. Yao, C. Li and S. Islam, "Detection of power transformer
winding deformation using improved FRA based on binary morphology
and extreme point variation," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 3509-3519, April 2018.
[9] L. M. R. Oliveira and A. J. M. Cardoso, "A Permeance-based
transformer model and its application to winding interturn arcing fault
studies," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 25, no. 3, pp.
1589-1598, July 2010.
[10] IEEE Guide for Protecting Power Transformers, IEEE Std. 37.91, 2008.
[11] R. Crellin et al., Sudden Pressure Protection for Transformers, Power
System Relaying Committee, IEEE Power and Energy Society, Dec.
2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.pes-psrc.org.
[12] L. M. R. Oliveira, A. J. M. Cardoso, "Comparing power transformer
turn-to-turn faults protection methods: negative-sequence component
versus space-vector algorithms", in IEEE Transactions on Industry
Applications, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 2817-2825, 2017.
[13] A. Guzman, N. Fischer and C. Labuschagne, "Improvements in
transformer protection and control," 62nd Annual Conference for
Protective Relay Engineers, College Station, TX, USA, 2009, pp. 563-
579.
[14] SEL 487E-3, -4 transformer differential relay data sheet, Schweitzer
Engineering Laboratories, Inc, Pullman, WA, 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://selinc.com.
[15] Transformer protection RET670 technical manual, ABB, Sweden, 2014.
[Online]. Available: http://www.abb.com.
[16] Z. Gajic, I. Brncic, B. Hillstrom, and I. Ivankovic, “Sensitive turn-to-
turn fault protection for power transformers,” in CIGRE Study
Committee B5 Colloq., 2005.
[17] N. Farzin, M. Vakilian and E. Hajipour, "Transformer practical turn-to-
turn fault detection performance using negative sequence and space
vector-based methods," 2019 International Conference on Protection
and Automation of Power System (IPAPS), 2019, pp. 1-6.
[18] R. P. Medeiros, F. B. Costa and K. M. Silva, "Power transformer
differential protection using the boundary discrete wavelet transform,"
in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 2083-2095,
Oct. 2016.
[19] B. Vahidi, N. Ghaffarzadeh, S. H. Hosseinian, "A Wavelet-based
method to discriminate internal faults from inrush currents using
correlation coefficient", in International Journal of Electrical Power &
Energy Systems, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 788-793, September 2010.
[20] M. Airesa, R. P. Medeirosb, F. B. Costaa, K. M. Silvac, J. J. Chavezd,
M. Popov, "A Wavelet-based restricted earth-fault power transformer
differential protection" in Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 196,
no. 1, pp. 107246, July 2021.
0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[21] L. Simões, H. Costa, M. Aires, R. P. Medeiros, F. Costa, A. Bretas, "A
Power transformer differential protection based on support vector
machine and wavelet transform," in Electric Power Systems Research,
vol. 197, pp. 1508–1515, Aug. 2021.
[22] M. Tripathy, R. P. Maheshwari, and H. K. Verma, "Power transformer
differential protection based on optimal probabilistic neural network," in
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 25, pp. 102–112, Jan. 2010.
[23] Z. Li, Z. Jiao, A. He, "Knowledge-based artificial neural network for
power transformer protection", in IET Generation, Transmission &
Distribution, vol. 14, no. 24, pp. 5782 – 5791, December 2020.
[24] S. Bhowmick and S. Nandi, "Online detection of an interturn winding
fault in single-phase distribution transformers using a terminal
measurement-based modeling technique," in IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 1007-1015, April 2015.
[25] J. Ma, Z. Wang, Q. Yang and Y. Liu, "A Two terminal network-based
method for discrimination between internal faults and inrush currents,"
in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1599-1605,
July 2010.
[26] A. P. S. Meliopoulos et al., "Dynamic state estimation-based protection:
status and promise," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 32,
no. 1, pp. 320-330, February 2017.
[27] K. Al-Tallaq, and M. Abo-Zahhad, "Impedance-based algorithm for the
discrimination between inrush and short-circuit currents in single-phase
transformers." in Electric Power Components and Systems, vol. 31, no.
6, pp. 593-604, June 2010.
[28] A. Abu-Siada and S. Islam, "A Novel online technique to detect power
transformer winding faults," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 849-857, April 2012.
[29] A. S. Masoum, N. Hashemnia, A. Abu-Siada, M. A. S. Masoum and S.
M. Islam, "Online transformer internal fault detection based on
instantaneous voltage and current measurements considering impact of
harmonics," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 32, no. 2, pp.
587-598, April 2017.
[30] P. A. Venikar, M. S. Ballal, B. S. Umre and H. M. Suryawanshi,
"Search coil based online diagnostics of transformer internal faults," in
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 2520-2529,
Dec. 2017.
[31] G. R. Slemon, "Equivalent circuits for transformers and machines
including non-linear effects," in Proceedings of the IEE - Part IV:
Institution Monographs, vol. 100, no. 5, pp. 129-143, October 1953.
[32] F. Haghjoo, M. Mostafaei and H. Mohammadi, "A New leakage flux
based technique for turn to turn fault protection and faulty region
identification in transformers," in IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 671-679, April 2018.
[33] L. M. R. Oliveira and A. J. M. Cardoso, "Leakage inductances
calculation for power transformers interturn fault studies," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 1213-1220, June
2015.
[34] V. Behjat and A. Vahedi, "Numerical modelling of transformers
interturn faults and characterising the faulty transformer behaviour
under various faults and operating conditions," in IET Electric Power
Applications, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 415-431, May 2011.
[35] A. Abdollahi and F. Matinfar, "Frequency estimation: a least-squares
new approach," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 26, no. 2,
pp. 790-798, April 2011.
[36] M. Abedini, S. -A. Ahmadi and M. Sanaye-Pasand, "A Straightforward
and robust algorithm for accurate estimation of power system
frequency," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Dec. 2021,
doi: 10.1109/TIE.2020.3044793.
[37] H. Mohseni, et al. "New laboratories in high voltage institute of
university of Tehran for teaching power engineering courses", in IET
Generation, Transmission & Distribution, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 2810–
2816, August 2016.
[38] P. Bastard, P. Bertrand and M. Meunier, "A Transformer model for
winding fault studies," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 9,
no. 2, pp. 690-699, April 1994.
BIOGRAPHY
Seyed-Alireza Ahmadi is currently pursuing the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering at the
University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TIE.2022.3140504, IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics

Majid Sanaye-Pasand Senior Member, IEEE) is a

Professor with the School of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, University of Tehran. He is
also an Associate Editor of IEEE Transactions on
Smart Grid.
Moein Abedini is an Assistant Professor with the
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Mohammad Hamed Samimi is an Assistant

Professor with the School of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, University of Tehran,
Tehran, Iran.

10

0278-0046 (c) 2021 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO PARA. Downloaded on January 16,2022 at 15:05:57 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.