C57 127-2018

Copyrighted material licensed to Electricity of Vietnam by Clarivate Analytics (US) LLC, subscriptions.techstreet.
com, downloaded on 2019-03-25 07:21:06 +0000 by

No further reproduction or distribution is permitted.
IEEE Guide for the Detection,
Location and Interpretation of
Sources of Acoustic Emissions
from Electrical Discharges in Power
Transformers and Power Reactors
IEEE Power and Energy Society
Sponsored by the
Transformers Committee
Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.
IEEE IEEE Std C57.127™-2018

3 Park Avenue (Revision of IEEE Std C57.127-2007)
New York, NY 10016-5997
USA
Copyrighted material licensed to Electricity of Vietnam by Clarivate Analytics (US) LLC, subscriptions.techstreet.com, downloaded on 2019-03-25 07:21:06 +0000 by
IEEE Std C57.127™-2018
(Revision of IEEE Std C57.127-2007)

Sponsor
Transformers Committee
of the
IEEE Power and Energy Society
Approved 23 October 2018
IEEE-SA Standards Board

Abstract: The detection and location of acoustic emissions (AEs) from partial discharges (PDs)
and other sources in liquid-insulated power transformers and reactors are covered in this
guide. A means of associating the relative magnitude and position of PDs and other sources with
the acoustic signals obtained by strategically located transducers is provided.
Keywords: acoustic emission (AE), attenuation, burst, gas-in-oil analysis, IEEE

C57.127™, low-amplitude discharges, partial discharge (PD), power transformers, reactors

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
3 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5997, USA
Copyright © 2019 by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

All rights reserved. Published 11 March 2019. Printed in the United States of America.
IEEE is a registered trademark in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, owned by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Incorporated.
PDF: ISBN 978-1-5044-5469-8 STD23500

Print: ISBN 978-1-5044-5468-1 STDPD23500
IEEE prohibits discrimination, harassment, and bullying.

For more information, visit http://www.ieee.org/web/aboutus/whatis/policies/p9-26.html
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written permission
of the publisher.
Important Notices and Disclaimers Concerning IEEE Standards Documents
IEEE documents are made available for use subject to important notices and legal disclaimers. These notices
and disclaimers, or a reference to this page, appear in all standards and may be found under the heading
“Important Notices and Disclaimers Concerning IEEE Standards Documents.” They can also be obtained on
request from IEEE or viewed at http://standards.ieee.org/IPR/disclaimers.html.
Notice and Disclaimer of Liability Concerning the Use of IEEE Standards

Documents
IEEE Standards documents (standards, recommended practices, and guides), both full-use and trial-use,
are developed within IEEE Societies and the Standards Coordinating Committees of the IEEE Standards
Association (“IEEE-SA”) Standards Board. IEEE (“the Institute”) develops its standards through a consensus
development process, approved by the American National Standards Institute (“ANSI”), which brings
together volunteers representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve the final product. IEEE Standards
are documents developed through scientific, academic, and industry-based technical working groups.
Volunteers in IEEE working groups are not necessarily members of the Institute and participate without
compensation from IEEE. While IEEE administers the process and establishes rules to promote fairness in the
consensus development process, IEEE does not independently evaluate, test, or verify the accuracy of any of
the information or the soundness of any judgments contained in its standards.
IEEE Standards do not guarantee or ensure safety, security, health, or environmental protection, or ensure
against interference with or from other devices or networks. Implementers and users of IEEE Standards
documents are responsible for determining and complying with all appropriate safety, security, environmental,
health, and interference protection practices and all applicable laws and regulations.
IEEE does not warrant or represent the accuracy or content of the material contained in its standards, and
expressly disclaims all warranties (express, implied and statutory) not included in this or any other document
relating to the standard, including, but not limited to, the warranties of: merchantability; fitness for a particular
purpose; non-infringement; and quality, accuracy, effectiveness, currency, or completeness of material. In
addition, IEEE disclaims any and all conditions relating to: results; and workmanlike effort. IEEE standards
documents are supplied “AS IS” and “WITH ALL FAULTS.”
Use of an IEEE standard is wholly voluntary. The existence of an IEEE standard does not imply that there
are no other ways to produce, test, measure, purchase, market, or provide other goods and services related to

the scope of the IEEE standard. Furthermore, the viewpoint expressed at the time a standard is approved and
issued is subject to change brought about through developments in the state of the art and comments received
from users of the standard.
In publishing and making its standards available, IEEE is not suggesting or rendering professional or other
services for, or on behalf of, any person or entity nor is IEEE undertaking to perform any duty owed by any
other person or entity to another. Any person utilizing any IEEE Standards document, should rely upon his or
her own independent judgment in the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances or, as appropriate,
seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the appropriateness of a given IEEE standard.
IN NO EVENT SHALL IEEE BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS;
OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE PUBLICATION, USE OF, OR RELIANCE
UPON ANY STANDARD, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE AND
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH DAMAGE WAS FORESEEABLE.
3
Copyright © 2019 IEEE. All rights reserved.
Translations
The IEEE consensus development process involves the review of documents in English only. In the event that
an IEEE standard is translated, only the English version published by IEEE should be considered the approved
IEEE standard.
Official statements
A statement, written or oral, that is not processed in accordance with the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations
Manual shall not be considered or inferred to be the official position of IEEE or any of its committees and shall
not be considered to be, or be relied upon as, a formal position of IEEE. At lectures, symposia, seminars, or
educational courses, an individual presenting information on IEEE standards shall make it clear that his or her
views should be considered the personal views of that individual rather than the formal position of IEEE.
Comments on standards
Comments for revision of IEEE Standards documents are welcome from any interested party, regardless
of membership affiliation with IEEE. However, IEEE does not provide consulting information or advice
pertaining to IEEE Standards documents. Suggestions for changes in documents should be in the form of a
proposed change of text, together with appropriate supporting comments. Since IEEE standards represent a
consensus of concerned interests, it is important that any responses to comments and questions also receive
the concurrence of a balance of interests. For this reason, IEEE and the members of its societies and Standards
Coordinating Committees are not able to provide an instant response to comments or questions except in
those cases where the matter has previously been addressed. For the same reason, IEEE does not respond to
interpretation requests. Any person who would like to participate in revisions to an IEEE standard is welcome
to join the relevant IEEE working group.
Comments on standards should be submitted to the following address:
Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

445 Hoes Lane
Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA
Laws and regulations

Users of IEEE Standards documents should consult all applicable laws and regulations. Compliance with
the provisions of any IEEE Standards document does not imply compliance to any applicable regulatory
requirements. Implementers of the standard are responsible for observing or referring to the applicable
regulatory requirements. IEEE does not, by the publication of its standards, intend to urge action that is not in
compliance with applicable laws, and these documents may not be construed as doing so.
Copyrights
IEEE draft and approved standards are copyrighted by IEEE under US and international copyright laws. They
are made available by IEEE and are adopted for a wide variety of both public and private uses. These include
both use, by reference, in laws and regulations, and use in private self-regulation, standardization, and the
promotion of engineering practices and methods. By making these documents available for use and adoption
by public authorities and private users, IEEE does not waive any rights in copyright to the documents.
4
Photocopies
Subject to payment of the appropriate fee, IEEE will grant users a limited, non-exclusive license to photocopy
portions of any individual standard for company or organizational internal use or individual, non-commercial
use only. To arrange for payment of licensing fees, please contact Copyright Clearance Center, Customer
Service, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA; +1 978 750 8400. Permission to photocopy portions
of any individual standard for educational classroom use can also be obtained through the Copyright Clearance
Center.
Updating of IEEE Standards documents
Users of IEEE Standards documents should be aware that these documents may be superseded at any time
by the issuance of new editions or may be amended from time to time through the issuance of amendments,
corrigenda, or errata. An official IEEE document at any point in time consists of the current edition of the
document together with any amendments, corrigenda, or errata then in effect.
Every IEEE standard is subjected to review at least every 10 years. When a document is more than 10 years old
and has not undergone a revision process, it is reasonable to conclude that its contents, although still of some
value, do not wholly reflect the present state of the art. Users are cautioned to check to determine that they have
the latest edition of any IEEE standard.
In order to determine whether a given document is the current edition and whether it has been amended
through the issuance of amendments, corrigenda, or errata, visit the IEEE Xplore at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/
or contact IEEE at the address listed previously. For more information about the IEEE-SA or IEEE’s standards
development process, visit the IEEE-SA Website at http://standards.ieee.org.
Errata
Errata, if any, for all IEEE standards can be accessed on the IEEE-SA Website at the following URL: http://
standards.ieee.org/findstds/errata/index.html. Users are encouraged to check this URL for errata periodically.
Patents
Attention is called to the possibility that implementation of this standard may require use of subject matter

covered by patent rights. By publication of this standard, no position is taken by the IEEE with respect to the
existence or validity of any patent rights in connection therewith. If a patent holder or patent applicant has
filed a statement of assurance via an Accepted Letter of Assurance, then the statement is listed on the IEEE-
SA Website at http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/patents.html. Letters of Assurance may indicate
whether the Submitter is willing or unwilling to grant licenses under patent rights without compensation
or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair
discrimination to applicants desiring to obtain such licenses.
Essential Patent Claims may exist for which a Letter of Assurance has not been received. The IEEE is not
responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting inquiries
into the legal validity or scope of Patents Claims, or determining whether any licensing terms or conditions
provided in connection with submission of a Letter of Assurance, if any, or in any licensing agreements are
reasonable or non-discriminatory. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the
validity of any patent rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, is entirely their own responsibility.
Further information may be obtained from the IEEE Standards Association.
5
Participants
At the time this guide was completed, the Detection on PD—Acoustic Emission Working Group had the
following membership:
Detlev Gross, Chair

John Harley, Vice Chair
Omar Ahmed Alexander Kraetge Alaor Scardazzi

Jeffrey Benach David Larochelle Aron Sexton
Robert Brusetti Gustavo Leal Hemchandra Shertukde
Luc Dorpmanns Gregorio Lobo Andre Shor
Michael Franchek Ali Naderian Jahromi Charles Sweetser
Thang Hochanh Arturo Nunez Mark Tostrud
Stephen Jordan Amitabh Sarkar Marco Tozzi
The following members of the individual balloting committee voted on this guide. Balloters may have voted
for approval, disapproval, or abstention.
Tauhid Haque Ansari Peter Kelly John Roach

Stephen Antosz Sheldon Kennedy Zoltan Roman
Donald Ayers James Kinney Rodrigo Ronchi
Barry Beaster Zan Kiparizoski Ryandi Ryandi
Robert Beavers Axel Kraemer Dinesh Sankarakurup
Emil Bercea Alexander Kraetge Daniel Sauer
Enrique Betancourt Jim Kulchisky Roderick Sauls
Wallace Binder Raja Kuppuswamy Bartien Sayogo
Thomas Blackburn John Lackey Ewald Schweiger
William Bloethe Chung-Yiu Lam Hemchandra Shertukde
W. Boettger Benjamin Lanz Hyeong Sim
Alain Bolliger David Larochelle Jerry Smith
Demetrio Bucaneg Jr. Michael Lauxman Gary Smullin
William Byrd Aleksandr Levin Sanjib Som
Paul Cardinal Mario Locarno Brian Sparling
Suresh Channarasappa Kumar Mani Thomas Spitzer
Stephen Conrad J.Dennis Marlow Wayne Stec
Gary Donner Lee Matthews Craig Stiegemeier

Jorge Fernandez Daher James McBride Gary Stoedter
Namal Fernando Mark McNally Charles Sweetser
Bruce Forsyth Susan McNelly Juan Thierry
Anthony Franchitti Andrew McNulty Mark Tostrud
George Frimpong Charles McShane Marco Tozzi
Jalal Gohari Joseph Melanson James Van De Ligt
Edwin Goodwin Daniel Mulkey Ajith Varghese
William Griesacker Ali Naderian Jahromi Jason Varnell
Detlev Gross K. R. M. Nair John Vergis
Randall Groves Lorraine Padden Jane Verner
Bal Gupta Bansi Patel Dharam Vir
John Harley Dhiru Patel Loren Wagenaar
Roger Hayes David Peelo David Walker
Werner Hoelzl Brian Penny David Wallace
Philip Hopkinson Christopher Petrola David Wallach
Richard Jackson Alvaro Portillo Kenneth White
Nathan Jacob Bertrand Poulin Baitun Yang
John John Iulian Profir Peter Zhao
Stephen Jordan Lakshman Raut Leo Zibert
Laszlo Kadar Johannes Rickmann Waldemar Ziomek
6
When the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved this guide on 23 October 2018, it had the following membership:
Jean-Philippe Faure, Chair

Gary Hoffman, Vice Chair
John D. Kulick, Past Chair
Konstantinos Karachalios, Secretary
Ted Burse Xiaohui Liu Robby Robson

Guido R. Hiertz Kevin Lu Dorothy Stanley
Christel Hunter Daleep Mohla Mehmet Ulema
Joseph L. Koepfinger* Andrew Myles Phil Wennblom
Thomas Koshy Paul Nikolich Philip Winston
Hung Ling Ronald C. Petersen Howard Wolfman
Dong Liu Annette D. Reilly Jingyi Zhou
*Member Emeritus
7
Introduction
This introduction is not part of IEEE Std C57.127-2018, IEEE Guide for the Detection, Location and Interpretation of
Sources of Acoustic Emissions from Electrical Discharges in Power Transformers and Power Reactors.
This guide is an expansion of IEEE Std C57.127™-2007. It has been expanded to add a detailed background
theory, to better describe the different techniques available, and to add new applications of acoustic location.
Documented case studies have also been added to highlight specific situations. Active workers in the field are
constantly trying to improve their methods. More effective methods may appear in the future.
8
Contents
1. Overview�� 14
1.1 Scope�� 14
1.2 Purpose�� 14
1.3 Safety warning�� 14
2. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations�� 15

2.1 Definitions�� 15
2.2 Acronyms and abbreviations�� 16
3. Detection and measurement of PD—background information�� 17
4. Acoustic signal and transmission characteristics�� 18

4.1 Acoustic signal�� 18
4.2 Acoustic signal propagation�� 21
4.3 Velocity of sound in materials�� 23
4.4 Competing signal paths�� 24
5. AE systems—technical concepts�� 26

5.1 Introduction�� 26
5.2 All-acoustic system�� 26
5.3 Acoustic system with an electrical PD trigger�� 27
5.4 On-line (continuous) acoustic monitoring system�� 28
5.5 Acoustic sensors�� 29
5.6 Multiple sensors system�� 30
5.7 Band-pass filter�� 30
6. AE testing�� 30
6.1 General considerations on the application of sensors�� 30
7. AE field test procedure�� 32

7.2 Test setup�� 32
7.3 Sensor placement and initial scan�� 32
7.4 Testing methodologies�� 33
7.5 Reporting and follow up�� 34

8. Factory test procedure�� 34
8.2 Initial sensor placement�� 34
8.3 Measurements and changing of sensor placement�� 37
9. Characterization of AE signals�� 38

9.2 HVDC transformers and reactors�� 38
9.3 Characteristics of PD from static electrification�� 39
9.4 Acoustic activity from thermal faults, the core, mechanical noises, and other sources�� 39
9.5 Application of acoustics during factory impulse test�� 40
10. Integrating AE results with data from oil analysis�� 41
11. Acoustic activity interpretation�� 43
Annex A (informative) Bibliography�� 45
9
Annex B (informative) Signal processing�� 51
Annex C (informative) Tutorial and case studies for detection and location of AE from PD�� 54
10
List of Figures
Figure 1—Typical AE burst�� 19
Figure 2—Oscillations in an AE burst�� 19
Figure 3—Acoustic signal showing pressure wave (1) and the slower shear wave (2) reflections from
stiffener on a transformer tank. Lower trace (3) shows tank wall sound path without stiffener�� 20
Figure 4—Ultrasonic detection of air-borne PD signal using parabolic reflectors�� 20
Figure 5—“Original Defekt Sucher,” mechanical Instrument to investigate structural sound (~1930)�� 21
Figure 6—“Textbook” triangulation, tank homogeneously filled and wall as thin membrane�� 22
Figure 7—Compression wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths�� 24
Figure 8—Shear wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths�� 24
Figure 9—Arrival of different wave fronts—fast tank wall path and straight oil path�� 25
Figure 10—Bolted magnetic wall shunts seated in rubber will block acoustic signals almost entirely�� 25
Figure 11—Hidden PD source—signal paths and assumed location�� 26
Figure 12—Example of HV-side of three-phase transformer assembly�� 35
Figure 13—Example of sensor locations with PD source in center phase. Typically sensors are
located on each side wall.�� 36
Figure 14—Example of sensor locations with PD source in outer phase. Typically sensors are located
on each side wall and on the end wall.�� 36
Figure 15—Example of sensor locations when phase of PD source is not known. Sensors are located
initially on one side wall.�� 37
Figure 16—Transformer tank—plan view�� 37
Figure 17—Response of lightning impulse as el. trigger (CH1) and acoustic signals (CH3+CH4)�� 41

Figure B.1—Determining the starting time using the energy criterion�� 52
Figure B.2—Comparison of conventional (FFT) and high-resolution subspace method (MUSIC) for
spectral analysis of “clear” (left) and strongly noised (right) AE burst from PD�� 53
Figure C.1—A PD source emits stress waves that are detected by a sensor on the tank wall. This
signal is processed to validate that it is PD and to determine the location.�� 54
Figure C.2—Views of the workstation screen showing PD hits versus time and the location of the
source of PD in the transformer tank�� 56
Figure C.3—Internal flashover�� 56
Figure C.4—Acoustic activity and three-dimensional PD source location in a 330 MVA, 400/115/35
kV transformer�� 57
Figure C.5—Plot showing the time (horizontal) when the acoustic activity produces locatable events
(vertical) for a portion of the test�� 58
11
Figure C.6—Load current versus acoustic activity�� 58
Figure C.7—Voltage profile�� 59
Figure C.8—Three-dimensional plots versus construction photographs showing two clusters of

acoustic activity�� 60
Figure C.9—Internal inspection findings after unit failed�� 61
Figure C.10—PD pattern of paper layer delamination (flat gas-filled pockets)�� 61
Figure C.11—Using an HV cable as CC (left) and UHF drain valve sensor (right)�� 62
Figure C.12—Signal of three acoustic sensors based on electrical trigger signal (red)�� 62
Figure C.13—Triangulation results of the measurements as shown with Figure C.12�� 63
Figure C.14—High voltage cable box and found location of the PD activity�� 63
Figure C.15—PD pattern on X2—spherical gas bubble�� 64
Figure C.16—Acoustic location results on X2 LV with sensors underneath (left) and above (right) the tank64
Figure C.17—Identified locations on the reverse switch of tap changer X1 and X2�� 65
Figure C.18—Faint acoustic signals in front of X2—wall shunt attenuation�� 65
Figure C.19—Shell-type core styles (top view)—standard (a) and five-limb variant (b)�� 66
Figure C.20—PD of a floating potential on HV C phase�� 66
Figure C.21—Faint acoustic signal as captured on the lower part of C coil�� 67
Figure C.22—Assumed construction of the coil stack and location of the static shields�� 67
Figure C.23—Acoustic signals as found at the top of coil 1�� 68
Figure C.24—Path of the acoustic signal through the oil channels under the pressure disk�� 69
Figure C.25—Travel path of the acoustic signal through the oil channels deeply into the winding�� 69
12
List of Tables
Table 1—Acoustic properties of various materials (Lundgaard [B45])�� 23
Table 2—Time lag in electrical PD detectors�� 28
Table 3—AE testing: field versus factory differences�� 31
Table 4—Comparison of electrical and acoustic PD signals�� 42
Table C.1—DGA history of the transformer with PD activity�� 56
Table C.2—DGA values�� 57
13
1. Overview
1.1 Scope
This guide is applicable to the detection and location of sources of acoustic emissions (AEs) from partial
discharges (PDs) and other sources in power transformers and power reactors. There are descriptions of
acoustic instrumentation, test procedures, and interpretation of results.
1.2 Purpose
This guide is intended to provide information that may be helpful in planning, installing, and operating
acoustic measuring equipment and in meaningful interpretation of resulting data.

1.3 Safety warning
The safety warnings in this subclause apply only to work done on transformers installed in the field, not to
factory testing. Refer to factory test codes for safety warnings for these situations. Partial discharge (PD)
14
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
IEEE Guide for the Detection, Location and Interpretation of Sources of Acoustic Emissions
from Electrical Discharges in Power Transformers and Power Reactors
location should only be attempted by those technicians and engineers trained in working on high-voltage
transformers and knowledgeable of the risks associated with this work.
WARNING
The transformer tank must be connected to a low resistance ground to limit the extremely high voltages
being induced into the ground circuit and the tank if a high voltage to ground failure occurs. The personnel
risk is very high if the transformer fails to ground. Even when grounded properly, the voltage on the tank to
a different ground source may be LETHAL at the instant the failure occurs.
WARNING
If the transformer is being energized or de-energized, or there is another type of power system voltage, all
personnel should maintain a reasonable distance from the transformer and equipment electrically connected
to the tank due to the possibility of a failure. It is recommended that acoustic emission measurement
equipment connected to the tank be electrically isolated from the transformer tank, e.g., by optical means or
by high-voltage electrical insulation, when measuring during transient events to eliminate the danger to the
equipment or operators.
WARNING
It is preferable to make all connections to the tank with the transformer de-energized, but in no case should
the transformer voltage be above normal voltage while the acoustic emission measuring devices are
installed. Personnel must not access areas where high voltages are within minimum approach distance, such
as on top of energized transformers or in bushing compartments.
WARNING
The transformer ground circuit must never be changed (connected or disconnected) while the transformer is
energized. Even with the transformer de-energized, it is possible to have circulating currents in substation
ground circuits; therefore, appropriate care should be exercised when connecting or disconnecting ground
circuits.

2. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations
2.1 Definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. The IEEE Standards Dictionary
Online should be consulted for terms not defined in this clause.1
acoustic couplant: A material used at the structure-to-sensor interface to improve the transmission of acoustic
energy across the interface during acoustic emission (AE) monitoring (see 5.5).
acoustic emission (AE): The phenomena whereby transient elastic waves are generated by the rapid release of
energy from localized sources within a material, or the transient waves so generated (see 4.1).
1
IEEE Standards Dictionary Online is available at: http://dictionary.ieee.org.
15
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
acoustic impedance: The decisive factor for determining reflection and transmission properties when passing
from one acoustic medium to another. The acoustic impedance is denoted Z and defined as density (γ) times the
propagation velocity (v), Z = γ × v .
AE burst rate: Denotes the actual number of discrete AE events or bursts per unit time, usually one second, or
per cycle of the ac voltage wave.
AE burst: A group of AE oscillations constituting a transient signal (see 5.5).
AE oscillation rate or count rate: The number of AE oscillations that exceed the counter threshold level in a
time interval, often one second, or a number of cycles, depending on the instrument being used (see 4.1).
AE oscillation: An oscillation produced by a resonant piezo-electric crystal when perturbed by a pressure

wave, which could be caused by an electrical discharge or other source.
Barkhausen effect: The non-uniform, hence non-linear, flipping of the magnetic domains during
magnetization (see 9.4).
critical angle: The largest incidence angle (from normal) for which a wave can enter a medium that has a
higher propagation velocity.
direct acoustic (oil-borne) path: Path of propagation from the acoustic signal source directly (straight line)
to the sensor location on the tank wall, without obstruction such as windings, core, or major blocking/bracing.
magnetostriction noise: A linear property of the magnetic material that undergoes a deformation due to the
magnetic forces (see 9.4).
pressure waves: These waves consist of alternate compression and rarefaction forces in the direction of
propagation. They occur in both liquids and solids. Syn: longitudinal waves.
shear waves: A pressure wave in the insulating liquid impinging at normal incidence on the tank will generate
motion in the tank wall that is perpendicular to the propagation direction similar to a vibrating string. Shear
waves require an acoustically solid material for effective propagation so do not exist in liquids, but can be
found in any solid transformer material, such as metal, pressboard, or wood for instance. Syn: transverse
waves.

speed of sound in steel: Longitudinal wave about 5900 m/s; transverse wave about 3200 m/s, respectively.
structure-borne path: Propagation of the PD acoustic signal through the transformer structure.
2.2 Acronyms and abbreviations
AE acoustic emission
CC coupling capacitor
CT current transformer
DGA dissolved gas analysis
FFT Fast Fourier Transform
HRSA high-resolution spectral analysis
HV high voltage
HVDC high-voltage direct-current
16
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
JTFA joint time-frequency analysis

LTC load tap changer
LV low voltage
MV medium voltage
OLTC on-load tap changer
PD partial discharge
RF radio frequency
RFCT radio-frequency current transformer
RIV radio-influence voltage
SNR signal-to-noise ratio
UPS uninterruptible power source
UV ultraviolet
3. Detection and measurement of PD—background information

Since PD cannot be measured directly, its energy by-products such as electrical transients, chemical changes,
electromagnetic emissions, vibration, sound, light, and heat must be measured. Each of these energy by-
products, when measured, has advantages and disadvantages for identifying PD. The measurement methods
for power transformers and reactors are as follows:
a) Radio frequency—VHF: The VHF measurement of radio waves is in the frequency range of 30 MHz
to 300 MHz. This VHF measurement is usually associated with aerial antennas, but not exclusively.
Some window-type receiver devices may also monitor the VHF range. The signal attenuation and
noise reduction are similar but less compared to the UHF frequency. The corona type of PD emits
mostly up to a frequency of approximately 300 MHz.
b) Radio frequency—UHF: The UHF measurement of radio waves is in the frequency range of 300 MHz
to 3 GHz. These measurements are often performed using a window style UHF receiver. UHF tests are
less affected by external noise. Signals are strongly attenuated when they pass through the bushings or
travel longer distances between the source and the transformer. Cell phone and TV stations operate in

the UHF band and might introduce strong noise unless the antenna is shielded. Discharges directly in
the oil have an upper frequency limit of only a few hundred kilohertz and cannot be detected by UHF.
However, it is likely that gas or bubbles will be produced and will make PD measurable by UHF.
c) Radio-frequency current transformers (RFCTs): RFCTs are designed to measure up to several tens
or hundreds of megahertz. They can be placed on ground returns and/or bushing taps. The RFCT by
itself is generally considered non-intrusive; however, the RFCT may require an outage to be installed.
Installation is simplified with the use of clamp-on RFCT. It can be used both for off-line and online
measurement states.
d) Coupling capacitor (CC): The CC sensor interfaces directly with the voltage terminal. This is the
method described in IEC 60270 [B37], IEEE Std C57.113™-2010 [B40]. This is a common factory
test method. Results are measured in picocoulombs. This measurement works well under a controlled
noise-free environment but may not work well in a field environment. For field measurements,
this method can utilize either a user-supplied capacitor or the condenser layered bushing seen
at the capacitive tap as the CC. When the user supplies an external reference capacitor for online
measurements, the measurement is considered intrusive.
e) Acoustic emission (AE): Consists of one or more ultrasonic receiving transducers that are sensitive
to the AE generated by an electrical source. Acoustic sound sources are wide-banded (> 1 MHz). Due
17
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
to the propagation characteristics of the insulation medium and apparatus structure, ultrasonic AE is
measured in the 20 kHz to 500 kHz frequency range.
f) Ultraviolet (UV) light: Detects UV light generated by corona, external PD on surfaces, and arcing.
This method generally detects external events within line-of-sight. With the help of daylight blocking
filter and very sensitive cameras, UV measurements can be obtained in direct sunlight.
g) Dissolved gas analysis (DGA): In the case of PD in voids or gas bubbles, the main gas formed is
hydrogen together with significant amounts of methane (typically 10%) and minor amounts of the
other gases. Variable amounts of the carbon oxides may also result from PDs in cellulose, although
usually in lower quantities than the other gases (Dahlgren and Harley [B17], Duval and dePabla
[B19]). In the case of discharges of the sparking-type in oil or in paper, significant amounts of all the
hydrocarbons (including acetylene) are formed in addition to hydrogen.
h) Power factor tip-up: PD produces a power loss, which is a function of applied voltage. If PD is present,
losses increase and the power factor changes with applied voltage. The power factor difference
between applied voltage levels is known as “tip-up.”
This guide focuses on the detection and location of electrical discharges using AE techniques. These techniques
are sometimes combined with one or more of the previously listed PD detection and measurement methods.
4. Acoustic signal and transmission characteristics

4.1 Acoustic signal
The electron avalanche of a PD event releases energy that causes a local heating of the gas or other material
and, hence, causes a rapid local pressure increase. The spectrum of the resulting sound extends into several
MHz (Lundgaard “Partial Discharge—Part XIV” [B45]). The resulting pressure wave or longitudinal wave
propagates through the medium at a certain speed, which is a property of the medium and is being influenced
by other parameters, for example, the temperature.
Figure 1 shows a waveform from an acoustic sensor mounted on the outside of a transformer tank. It is typical
of one burst of PD. The rapid rise of the wave front, followed by a decay, indicates that a direct wave has
impinged on the inside tank wall within the critical angle for a pressure wave.
The horizontal axis shows time in microseconds. The burst had a length of 144 µs from the first threshold
crossing to the last threshold crossing.
18
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure 1—Typical AE burst
The vertical axis is an indication of amplitude, which can be measured in volts and shown as decibel or volts.
The number of acoustic bursts in a unit of time, usually one second, is a measure of acoustic activity.
Figure 2 is a detail of the waveform in Figure 1. There are 16 oscillations (also called counts) at or above the
indicated threshold of ±100.

Figure 2—Oscillations in an AE burst
In solid materials, such as steel used for transformer tanks, shear waves velocity (typically 3200 ms−1) is
substantially lower than pressure waves (typically 5900 ms-1) (Lundgaard [B44], [B45]). Because the shear
wave arrives later, it is typically buried in the signal of the pressure wave and, therefore, usually not of
importance for detection and location. Figure 3 shows an example of the pressure wave (Figure 3, callout
1) and the slower shear wave (Figure 3, callout 2) acquired on a transformer tank wall (upper trace). Here,
additionally, a fin-style tank wall stiffener causes the reflected signal.
19
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure 3—Acoustic signal showing pressure wave (1) and the slower shear wave (2)
reflections from stiffener on a transformer tank. Lower trace (3) shows tank wall sound path
without stiffener
For the detection of air-borne sound of PD activity, different types of microphones are suitable and have
been used. Typically, parabolic reflectors, as shown in Figure 4, are used in order to amplify the usually faint
acoustic signals and to obtain directivity for locating the source. Often, such devices are equipped with notch
and bead sighter or a laser pointer to aim the device for identification of the source. Using higher frequencies
improves the directivity, as the wavelength becomes shorter. Thus, usually, ultrasonic frequencies are used.
The majority of commercially available sensors operate at 40 kHz resulting in a wavelength of 8.5 mm for
340 ms−1, which does not limit the location precision. The devices are equipped with circuits to convert the
ultrasonic signal into audible sound and come with speakers or headsets.
Figure 4—Ultrasonic detection of air-borne PD signal using parabolic reflectors
For the acquisition of structural sound, such as with gas-insulated switchgear, cable accessories, or transformer
tanks, stethoscope-like instruments were in use in the 1930s to mechanically guide and amplify sound signals
(Figure 5). Versions with rods made of insulating material were available to investigate test objects on
moderate high voltage (Gross “Acoustic Location…” [B25]).
20
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure 5—“Original Defekt Sucher,” mechanical Instrument to investigate structural sound

(~1930)
Nowadays, typically, piezoelectric sensors are used to acquire such signals. Jacques and Pierre Curie found
the piezoelectric effect about 1880 [B16]. In 1916 research was conducted to use the principle for detecting
submarines. However, widely industrial applications of piezoelectric sensors did not start until the 1950s.
At its inception, the AE of PD in liquids and solids can be considered as a steep impulse with a slower decay
and, hence, the spectral amplitude of the resulting signal shows decaying amplitude with increasing frequency.
Therefore, the highest sensitivity can be achieved toward the lower frequencies.
However, acoustic signals originating from mechanical sources also show predominantly higher signal
amplitudes in the lower frequency range. Moreover, impulse sound originating from the changing size and
orientation of magnetic domains in core material, the so-called Barkhausen noise (Bartnikas and McMahon
[B6]; Howells and Norton “Detection of Partial Discharges…” [B35]; Clatterbuck, et al. [B14] reaches
well into several tens of kHz. Selection of the proper acoustic sensor and its frequency range is always a
compromise and strongly depends on the application and signal processing technology used.

4.2 Acoustic signal propagation
Generally, pulse-like AE due to PD activity travels well in liquids, such as the oil of a liquid filled power
transformer. In liquids, the pressure wave from a point source (such as PD) travels with a spherical wave
front. As any radiation having a spherical wave front, the acoustic signal undergoes a progressive decay with
increasing distance from the source, also known as free space path loss (provided that there are no obstacles).
However, this distance-dependent decrease is not a loss per se, but rather a decrease due to the fact that the
signal power is spread over the increasing surface of the spherical wave front, as shown in Equation (1):
1
S = Pt (1)
4π d 2
where
S is the power per area at a sensor

d is the distance of a source
Pt is the power of the source
21
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
The topics of transmission, attenuation, acoustic impedance, and further relevant acoustic signal parameters
are comprehensively discussed in Lundgaard “Partial Discharge—Part XIV” [B45].
Given a tank containing nothing but liquid and having tank walls with acoustic properties such that they may
be considered thin membrane without any lateral transmission ability, the “textbook” triangulation method to
locate a pulse-like AE source becomes possible. Figure 6 shows this tank and the three sensors S1-S3 placed
on three orthogonal faces of the tank.
Figure 6—“Textbook” triangulation, tank homogeneously filled and wall as thin membrane
With such an “ideal” tank, finding the location requires only to solve the sphere functions found in Equation (2)
based on the differences in arrival time, while knowing the transmission velocity (v) of the medium (Markalous,
Tenbohlen, and Feser [B46]).
( x − x1 ) 2 + ( y − y1 ) 2 + ( z − z1 ) 2 = vt1
( x − x2 ) 2 + ( y − y2 ) 2 + ( z − z2 ) 2 = vt2 (2)
( x − x3 ) 2 + ( y − y3 ) 2 + ( z − z3 ) 2 = vt3
However, in most cases, real-life transformers do not comply with the conditions necessary for applying this
method. First, transformers contain materials and structures that hamper the free transmission of the pressure
wave. Furthermore, the wave may take other, longer paths to a remote sensor, or perhaps not reach the sensor at
all due to blockage. Second, the tank wall is, in reality, a thick steel plate, which, by its nature, has faster sound

transmission properties than the insulating liquid. Consequently, sound originating from sources laterally
displaced from the sensor may reach the sensor faster through the steel tank wall than through the liquid.
Whenever the all-acoustic method (i.e., based only on the time of arrival at three or more orthogonally placed
sensors and assuming a uniform propagation velocity throughout the tank) is to be applied to transformers
in practice, it must be recognized that this localization method suffers from significant uncertainties and
potentially misleading results because of the differences in wave propagation through the tank wall and
through the liquid.
Additionally, systems based on the all-acoustic method can only distinguish between mechanically induced
sounds and sound originating from PD activity within the transformer by analyzing the shape of the pulses.
Moreover, correctly assigning a triplet of pulses arriving at the three sensors to derive a location result is
quite demanding, especially if the reciprocal of the repetition rate comes in the range of the travel time to be
considered. If the acoustic detection method is complemented with an electrical trigger signal derived from
a bushing tap or other location as shown in 5.3, the time of inception (t0) is defined and any mechanically
induced sound sources are thereby excluded.
22
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
4.3 Velocity of sound in materials

The typical speed of propagation for transformer mineral oil2 is 1415 ms−1 at a temperature of 20 °C
(Lundgaard “Partial Discharge—Part XIV” [B45]). However, the propagation speed has a substantial negative
temperature coefficient, which is typical for most liquids and, hence, the speed of propagation goes down to
about 1200 ms−1 for transformer mineral oil at 80 °C.
Other than liquids, solid materials not only allow propagation of the compression (longitudinal) wave, but
offer propagation of the shear (transverse) wave as well, whereas typically the compression wave has a
substantially higher transmission speed than the shear wave (approximately by a factor of two—see Table 1).
For steel, as used for transformer tanks, the compression wave travels at a speed of 5900 ms−1, while the shear
wave travels at about 3200 ms−1.
Moreover, some of the solid insulating materials used in liquid filled power transformers, such as wood or
pressboard, are not isotropic, but show internal orientations of the fibers and, hence, show different propagation
speed depending on the fiber orientation.
Based on the properties of steel used for transformer tanks, the propagation in clear oil space can only be
assumed if the signal arrives straight or within a corner angle given by the formula below in Equation (3).
Thus, the typical aperture angle 2α is about 28°, only, if choosing vmineralOil = 1415 ms−1 and vsteel = 5900 ms−1.
voil
α = arctan (3)
vsteel
Table 1—Acoustic properties of various materials (Lundgaard [B45])

Material Pressure Shear (transverse) wave Density
(longitudinal) wave
Transformer mineral oil at 20 °C 1415 ms−1 n/a ~0.86 gcm-3
Transformer mineral oil at 80 °C 1200 ms −1
n/a —
Steel 5900 ms −1
3200 ms −1
7.8 gcm-3
Copper 4700 ms−1 2300 ms−1 8.9 gcm-3
Aluminum 6300 ms −1
3100 ms −1
2.7 gcm-3
Epoxy 2600 ms−1 1100 ms−1 1.2 gcm-3
Pressboard 1950 ms −1
no data 1.25 gcm-3

Crepe paper 1500–1600 ms−1 no data ~0.9 gcm-3
Air 343 ms−1 n/a 1.29 kgm-3
SF6 1330 ms−1 n/a 6.2 kgm-3
2
The localization technique discussed in this guide is applicable to any insulating liquids used in power transformers and reactors. The
term “oil” is used in this document to simplify reading but applies to any insulating fluid unless otherwise stated.
23
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
4.4 Competing signal paths
Figure 7—Compression wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths
Figure 7 shows the situation with a sensor (S) placed at a tank wall (Figure 7, callout 1). Only for signal
sources within the aperture angle 2α, the direct oil path provides the signal arriving first. For a source located
outside the aperture angle 2α, as shown, the direct oil path signal (Figure 7, callout 2) arrives later than the
fastest signal possible, which arrives under the critical angle α at the tank wall (Figure 7, callout 3) and travels
with the high-speed compression wave within the tank wall to the sensor.

Figure 8—Shear wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths
If considering the slower shear wave in the tank wall, the aperture angle 2α becomes wider, within which the
direct oil path signal (Figure 8, callout 2) arrives the earliest. The situation at a tank wall (Figure 8, callout 1) is
shown with Figure 8. Here, for the shear wave traveling at vsteel = 3200 ms−1 in steel, the critical angle is about
24°. Hence, the aperture angle 2α is about 48°. The shear wave is the more dominant propagation mode for
thinner tank walls, as found with smaller transformers, whereas the compression wave dominates with thick
steel walls. Above the critical angle, total reflection dominates the signal path (Figure 8, callout 4).
24
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure 9—Arrival of different wave fronts—fast tank wall path and straight oil path
However, in most cases, the direct oil path signal, although arriving later, can be clearly identified, since the
faster tank wall signal shows clearly smaller amplitudes. Figure 9 shows a screenshot of such signal arriving
from a laterally displaced source. Here, the sudden increase of the signal after the initial small amplitude of the
fast tank wall signal (Figure 9, callout 1), when the straight oil path signal arrives (Figure 9, callout 2), can be
clearly seen. With Figure 9, trace 1 shows the electrical trigger as derived from a bushing tap.
The clear oil path signal is given for investigations to cover leads; mechanical structures, such as brackets,
fiber nuts and bolts, and tap changers; and any other unobstructed elements outside of the coils. However, even
here, external structures, such as flanges, hatches, and fin or dome like stiffeners—the latter sometimes filled
with sand—hamper proper placing of the sensors. Moreover, magnetic wall shunts attenuate acoustic signals
or even block them entirely, if they are mounted on rubber to additionally correct a sound problem (Figure 10).
Figure 10—Bolted magnetic wall shunts seated in rubber will block acoustic signals almost
entirely
25
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
For PD activity inside a coil stack, barrier cylinders, or other structural material deeply buried inside the
transformer structure, location is difficult, if the signal is detectable at all. However, as every transformer needs
to have oil channels of sufficient cross section to provide the required cooling, even in seemingly hopeless
cases sometimes surprising results can be achieved.
Figure 11 illustrates such a case, where the source is hidden within a transformer structure (Figure 11, callout
1), but the acoustic signal makes it to the sensors through oil channels. Of course, after exiting the oil channel
(Figure 11, callout 2), we again have the different propagation paths, such as straight oil path and shear wave
in the tank wall. In the first place, the operator assumes an overall straight signal path, which in this example
surprisingly points to a location outside of the tank (Figure 11, callout 3).
Figure 11—Hidden PD source—signal paths and assumed location
Thus, upon observing the indications of a shear wave, the operator will move the sensor (S) to the left and the
location referring to the total path traveled is moving. Thus, whenever attempting to locate PD acoustically,
drawings should be at hand or at least an understanding of the internal structure of the unit has to be gained
from the external indications, such as drive head of the tap changer, position of bushings, tank form, etc.
5. AE systems—technical concepts

5.1 Introduction

PD detection and location work is carried out both in the factory and in the field, the latter being done with the
transformer either connected to the grid or supplied by a separate power source.
Acoustic PD systems are most often used when PD has been identified as a result of other diagnostic
procedures, such as DGA and electrical PD measurement. In some cases, the acoustic system can be installed,
temporarily or permanently, to trend acoustic activity.
Many different types of instrumentation are available for detection and location of AE. Several types of typical
AE systems and sensors are described in this clause that have been shown effective in certain transformer
arrangements; however, other systems may be equally or more effective, depending on the transformer
physical parameters and the location of the PD.
5.2 All-acoustic system

The first category, the all-acoustic system, consists of one or more ultrasonic transducers, as described in
5.5, that are sensitive to the AE generated by a PD event. The detection and coarse location of one or more
26
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
sources can be accomplished by moving one or more externally mounted sensors to different locations on the
transformer tank. A more precise location of a PD source may be determined by the relative arrival times of the
acoustic signals at each of the sensors. No voltage or current readings are required on the transformer.
In one variation, the system combines the acquisition and saving of multiple AE signals with the capability to:
a) Qualify the signal as PD by determining the fit of the AE waveform to parameters such as rise time,
duration time, and asynchronicity with the excitation frequency (e.g., 60 Hz).
b) Provide a relative measure of activity level by determining the energy level at the transducer face.
This is done by counting the number of bursts and the area beneath the burst envelope that is above the
threshold setting. Note this does not provide the actual level of PD energy.
c) Calculate the location of signal source(s).
Results of tests can be displayed as graphs such as point plots, line graphs, bar graphs, or cluster graphs with
multiple parameters or waveforms or the results of summations of data. This same data is used to generate
reports that give the hardware and software setup information, acquisition activity, and location of the
source(s) of the PD.
In a second variation, signal processing is done with wavelet transform methodology. This technique works
when sensors are placed within an adjacent distance of 1 m apart and not close together. The wavelet transform
is conducted on the multiplexed signals two at a time with one signal being the signal from the first sensor
found to provide a signal above the threshold amplitude. The wavelet transform provides both frequency and
time domain representations. A scaling factor and translation parameters associated with the frequency of the
vibrations are applied to obtain estimates of the time delays for the triggering pulse vibrations detected at the
multiplicity of points, and the estimates of the transformed and scaled signals are then evaluated to determine
the position of the PD fault generating the triggering pulse vibrations.
5.3 Acoustic system with an electrical PD trigger

The second category, the acoustic system with an electrical PD trigger, pairs the array of acoustic sensors
described in 5.5 with a current or voltage measurement device that detects the PD signal electrically. The
electric signal is usually considered as detected instantaneously. When using this assumption, the arrival time
of the electric signal is used as time zero for the PD event. The difference in arrival times of the electric signal
and an acoustic signal is the propagation time between the PD source and that sensor location. PD location is

based on the absolute arrival time at each sensor, as opposed to the all-acoustic system described in 5.2 that
uses the difference in arrival time between sensors.
The assumption of instantaneous detection of the electric signal is correct for wideband electrical detection.
At the most, this delay is in the range of a few microseconds and therefore can be neglected. However, a
narrowband detection system would introduce a delay caused by the filter response, which would need to be
considered. Table 2 shows the time lags due to the response time of the narrowband processing measured in
three different electrical PD detector types.
The numbers are provided only as an example. Other detectors from different manufacturers may have
different time lags since this property is not specified in the standards. It can be seen that a narrowband detector
may introduce a time lag that may be taken into account if very accurate location measurements are desired.
27
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Table 2—Time lag in electrical PD detectors

Type of detector Time-lag to t0 Signal rise time Approximate location
(10−90%) error in oil
Wide-band with active 0.2 µs 1.2 µs Negligible (< 2 mm)
integrator (100−400 kHz)
Narrow-band at 1 MHz 16 µs 35 µs 20 mm−70 mm
with 9 kHz bandwidth
Narrow-band at 1 MHz 16 µs 50 µs 20 mm−100 mm
with 4.5 kHz bandwidth
One advantage of the combined system is that the electrical measurement provides confirmation that the
acoustic sensors are locating a PD event as opposed to another acoustic noise source. Furthermore, the
electrical signal is a convenient trigger that can be used to start the data acquisition at the acoustic sensors
and also helps removing noise using averaging techniques. However, choosing the appropriate trigger level
requires experience and is a trial and error process.
An electrical reference to the PD can be derived from the following various sources:
a) Bushing tap
b) Split-core RFCT or Rogowski coil around:
1) Neutral connection
2) Main tank ground
3) High voltage cable at the cable box or on the neutral strap of such cable
4) Power frequency CT leads
c) VHF or UHF drain valve sensor
Not only will these sensors provide t0 but will also provide an overview of the electrical activity in the unit
(IEEE Std C57.113–2010 [B40]). The characteristics of this phase related representation of the PD can bring
other clues that can influence and speed up the localization efforts. Table 3 gives an indication on the usability
of the sensors whether the inspection is made in the field or in the factory.

5.4 On-line (continuous) acoustic monitoring system
The main purpose of permanently installed online acoustic monitoring systems is to provide an early indication
of an incipient fault to a remote location, which can then be followed by more extensive field tests. The acoustic
sensors are placed at locations where faults may be anticipated based on past experience or highest probability
of problems occurrence. The data acquisition/processing systems are able to transmit collected data and/or
warning alerts to locations outside the substation. Supply of power from the station dc source or another
uninterruptible supply may be specified. For long-term robustness, the systems require protection of inputs,
outputs, and grounds similar to electronic relays.
The data is often limited to activity levels rather than specific waveforms. Location information is often limited
to knowledge of which sensor is most active.
A test to establish the baseline data of acoustic activity on the transformer is performed during the installation
process. This test provides information to establish the best hardware and software settings for permanent
monitoring. It is helpful for gain settings to be the same as adjacent transformers in order to compare readings
if signals are thought to be the result of network disturbances.
28
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Permanent mounting of sensors is desirable for long-term installations. This may be accomplished with a
thin coating of suitable epoxy and a mechanical holder. The epoxy should be chosen to avoid broken bonds
due to differential thermal expansion between the sensor and the wall. The bonding agent is usually a suitable
couplant.
Correlation between electric PD and acoustic signals can be used to confirm that the acoustic waves come
from an electrical source. Such systems are comprised of acoustic sensors and an electric PD input high-
frequency current transformer installed on the case ground connection or a special RF transducer mounted
inside the transformer. These systems utilize the concurrence of an acoustic event and an electrical or RF
signal to confirm that the acoustic signal is PD. In some systems, the time difference is used to give a measure
of location.
Warning alerts caused by level of activity above a baseline or trend of activity are usually reason to take gas
samples and perhaps perform more extensive acoustic or other testing.
There are occasions when power transformers such as GSUs, spare units in service following a main unit
failure, or critically important units are monitored at the early stage of energization for a short period of time,
usually 24 h to 72 h. The objective of this test is the early detection of incipient failures due to PD during
energization, which may cascade into catastrophic transformer failure if not detected early in operation.
The transformer is instrumented with a plurality of AE sensors covering the tank and other necessary
components like on-load tap changer (OLTC) tanks. Acoustic data are collected over multiple 24-h periods.
5.5 Acoustic sensors

The sensor mounted on the external surface of the transformer tank is a piezoelectric displacement transducer
operating in its compression mode. Different investigators are using sensors with a sensitive region ranging
from about 20 kHz to 500 kHz. It has been shown that the main frequency of a PD of about 150 pC magnitude
is 100 kHz (Bengtsson and Jӧnsson [B7]). Users typically choose sensors with resonant frequency (for
longitudinal waves) of either 60 kHz or 150 kHz. For larger discharges, frequencies should decrease. Also,
attenuation affects high frequencies more than low. These factors favor the sensor with the 60 kHz resonant
frequency for factory and laboratory use. In the field, however, numerous noises or harmonics of noises are
encountered in the 20 kHz to 60 kHz frequency range. Since the sensor is sensitive to pressure waves in its
frequency range that may not be from a PD source, these noises may lead to false readings. A number of users
favor the 150 kHz resonant frequency sensor for all-acoustic system field application for this reason.

Acoustic systems with electrical PD trigger are less susceptible to interferences from noise. Consequently,
lower frequency sensors may be used.
Being a piezoelectric device, the sensor will also respond to varying electromagnetic fields such as those found
in substations. To minimize this effect, the transducer can be either a “differential” type utilizing two crystals
(mounted out of phase for noise reduction) or a shielded single-crystal transducer with an integral preamplifier
circuit. The latter is the preferred and most common configuration because its comparatively high amplitude,
low impedance output is less susceptible to degradation due to noise pickup in the connecting cables.
Acoustic couplant gel or grease should be applied to the face of the transducer or matching piece just prior
to test. Gels or solids that retain high viscosity at the transformer wall at operating temperature are preferred
because low viscosity couplants will not transfer shear stresses. Couplants produced for ultrasonic non-
destructive testing purposes are generally suitable. Gelled glycerin and silicone grease are particularly efficient
and are recommended. Silicone grease can be difficult to remove from the tank surface.
Benefits of the externally mounted sensors include the ability to reconfigure the sensors as necessary to obtain
a clearer acoustic signal, the flexibility to move the system to another transformer, and the ease of retrofitting
29
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
existing transformers. The disadvantage of the external configuration is that it is more sensitive to external
noise sources.
5.6 Multiple sensors system

A transducer system has been developed to aid optimization of sensitivity and rejection of non-PD signals
(Bartnikas and McMahon [B6]). It consists of three relatively closely placed acoustic sensors mounted in a
rigid movable frame. An electric detector may be used to sense the time of origin of the PD, which allows
determination of the total transit time of the wave front. This system is intended to be operated by an
experienced person. In searching for possible PD signals and their origin, the detector frame is moved to
selected positions on the transformer tank. At each position, a set of different trigger and time frame settings
are studied on the evaluation unit, which may be a digital oscilloscope. Suitable algorithms in the evaluation
unit determine the direction and possibly the distance to the discharge source.
5.7 Band-pass filter

The use of a band-pass filter is optional. Its purpose is to negate as many of the effects as possible of signals
that are not associated with PDs. These include vibrations caused by the magnetostrictive action of the core
(Barkhausen noise), pumps, and fans. Most of these fall below 30 kHz; however, the Barkhausen noise
emanating from the core has sometimes been found to be in the 50 kHz range. Hence, a 100 kHz high-pass
section with a rapid, roll-off response characteristic is needed. The reasonably generous band-pass (200 kHz)
allows for variations between different transducers, insofar as their resonant frequencies are concerned.
The filter is a band-pass type with lower and upper cutoff frequencies at which the response to a constant
sinusoidal input voltage has fallen by 3 dB from the maximum value.
6. AE testing
6.1 General considerations on the application of sensors
Transducer placement and mounting are critical to avoid attenuated or misleading signals. Some things to
consider include the following:
a) The contact between the transducer and the transformer tank is critical. Simply placing a transducer on
the transformer tank surface often produces a very weak signal. It is advisable to wipe the area free of

dirt, oil, bugs, etc., and polish it with a mild abrasive or abrasive cloth before placing the transducer.
b) An acoustic couplant is essential for enhancing the mechanical and acoustical coupling between the
transducer and the tank surface. It should be evenly applied to the clean mounting surface of the
transducer before placement.
c) A sound transmitting epoxy, straps, or strong adhesive tape may have to be used if the mounting
location is non-magnetic.
d) Transducers mounted on the tank walls may detect both direct and wall-borne signals. Those mounted
on a bolted plate or other gasketed surface may receive the direct signal more clearly, but the wall-
borne signals may be distorted or dissipated because of the gasket.
e) Avoid locations where there is magnetic or non-magnetic tank shielding, which will cause extra signal
attenuation.
f) On transformers built with double-wall construction, transducers should be located on the welded ribs
that span between the two tank walls to provide a strong signal. The air in the cavity between the walls
attenuates acoustic signals.
30
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
g) If possible avoid locations above gas spaces. This adds extra impedance in the transmission path,
which produces additional attenuation. Signals may be difficult to resolve.
h) Avoid mounting sensors on tank stiffeners unless the tank has a double-skin wall.
i) For safety reasons, do not locate sensors in areas of high voltage unless measuring instrument is
isolated from the operator (fiber optic or wireless).
j) Provide sufficient spacing between sensors to insure independent signals. Distance depends on the
depth of the electrical source.
k) Verify sensor operation, either the entire system or each sensor. Amplifiers should be set for similar
sensitivity for all sensors.
l) An acoustic verification rod may be helpful in determining an initial location for a sensor. The rod
is made of a solid sound-conducting insulation material, typically wood or fiberglass. It is used by
placing one end against the transformer tank, the other end against one’s ear, and listening for sounds
that could indicate PD.
m) Aluminum or stainless steel walls are non-magnetic. Sensors may have to be placed using epoxy or
adequate fixtures.
n) Do not mount sensors on control boxes.
o) Load tap changer (LTC) operation contains a high electromechanical energy that usually propagates
through the entire transformer. Actions should be taken in order to identify operations during the test
and distinguish them in post-test analysis to identify the source of AE.
p) Shell-form transformers: Locate the sensors on top (above the core) or bottom (below the core).
q) Transient voltage protection must be applied to the input of test instruments/devices.
r) Extraneous electrostatic and magnetic signals may cause false indications and damage equipment.
Table 3—AE testing: field versus factory differences

Test considerations Field Factory
Ambient noise sources Limited control; e.g., noise from Controllable
rain or hail. Signal processing or
post-test analysis can reduce or
eliminate noise in some cases.
Cooling pumps May be required by system Can be shut off

operating requirements.
Weather Limited control; e.g., noise Testing done indoors
from rain. Signal processing or
post-test analysis can reduce or
eliminate noise in some cases.
Instrumentation power supply Isolation, filtering, and/or UPS required Clean power available
Grounding Single point grounding for test object Appropriate grounding
and equipment needs to be established. provisions built into test bay
Equipment access Precautions needed for working Precautions needed for working
near energized facilities. near energized facilities
Transformer design Generally limited knowledge Full design information available
of what is inside the tank.
Test voltage Limited adjustment range unless Full control of voltage levels
a test power supply is taken to
the transformer location.
Table continues
31
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Table 3—AE testing: field versus factory differences (continued)

Test considerations Field Factory
Gas blanket (air or nitrogen) Use care that sensors are mounted Use care that sensors are
below oil level. Also, bubbles mounted below oil level
may be present during certain
operating conditions.
Electrical trigger RFCT, VHF, or UHF antenna RFCT, VHF, or UHF antenna,
bushing capacitance tap
Power frequency 50Hz or 60 Hz Up to 400 Hz
7. AE field test procedure

7.1 Introduction
AE testing is usually done in response to gas-in-oil test results or noises that may indicate PD activity. In most
cases, the transformers are monitored while carrying load, but tests can be performed without load as well.
This requires safety precautions when placing the transducers, assuring that minimum approach distances are
not compromised. Refer to the safety warnings of 1.3.
7.2 Test setup

Approximately 2 h to 3 h are usually required to prepare for inspection after arrival at a site. This will depend
on number of sensors to be installed and accessibility to the unit, power source, etc. If a test power supply is
being used, extra time will be needed to set up and check out the power supply.
Set up the test equipment at a convenient location for access to the transformer and the station service source.
When investigating a heavily gassing/high risk transformer, it is recommended to install the test equipment at
a safe distance or in a protected area.
Establish a common point ground for all of the test equipment and the transformer.
The transducers are connected to the test equipment with coaxial cables. Cable routings should be chosen
to minimize interference pickup from bus work and grounding connections in the test area. Verify proper
operation of the inspection system.

An operational test should be followed in order to assure the same sensitivity of all sensors. Many users verify
transducer sensitivity by breaking the lead of a number 2 pencil against the tank close to the transducer. Users
advise this is limited to tanks with 19 mm (3/4 in) maximum wall thickness. Another technique is to activate
an acoustic transducer to create a signal into the tank and measure the output of the other sensors. The signals
recorded by the various transducers should be compared to see if they are reasonable and consistent.
7.3 Sensor placement and initial scan

There is usually no indication of where to look for the noise source, unless online PD monitoring is being
used and provides first clues (suspected phase, HV or LV side, etc.). Therefore, a scan covering the complete
transformer is the first step, as follows:
a) For a three-phase core form transformer, install one sensor in the general area of the bottom connection
of each bushing. Place additional sensors at approximately the center of each winding limb on the high
and low voltage sides of the tank. If extra sensors are available, place them on the tank ends. See item
m) of 6.1.
32
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
b) Similarly, for a single-phase core form transformer, install one sensor in the general area of each
bushing bottom connection. Place additional sensors at approximately the center of each limb of the
windings on each of the four sides of the transformer tank. See item m) of 6.1.
c) If the transformer has a preventive autotransformer inside, consideration should be given to placing
one or two transducers close to its location.
d) Using the same sensor locations and software settings when testing identical transformers permits
establishing ambient baseline data for that particular design. The sensors may have to be moved to
improve reception of signals from a specific source.
e) Sufficient couplant gel is to be applied to the face of the transducer to help ensure efficient
transmission of the AE signal from the tank wall to the sensing crystal. Too much couplant will not be
harmful (though wasteful), whereas too little couplant can seriously inhibit the transducer’s sensing
capabilities.
f) Magnetic shielding blocks the signal from the sensors. The location where shielding is installed is
usually obtained by referring to pictures or notes from past experience with the transformer or from
the manufacturer.
g) In the case of transformers indicating PD, a high-frequency split-core CT or ammeter (Rogowski coil
type) around the transformer case ground can be used as a direct signal to the digitizer. This can be
used as the trigger transducer to indicate time zero.
The face of the transducer with its film of couplant should be brought into contact with the transformer tank
wall with only sufficient pressure applied in order to get a good signal and hold it in position. It is necessary to
hold the sensor steady so that no signals are generated due to relative movement between the sensor and tank
wall. This can be achieved by means of a magnetic clamp, adhesive tape, or epoxy.
The time period for the initial scan is dependent on the acoustic activity rate. Some users monitor for about 4 h
before changing transducer placement. This helps to assure the emission patterns are consistent and repeatable.
If activity rates are low or erratic, overnight monitoring may be required.
7.4 Testing methodologies

When the transformer is energized from the power system, voltage levels are fairly constant making inception
and extinction levels of acoustic activity very difficult to determine. Techniques for varying system conditions
to help characterize the AE source include the following:

a) Varying transformer loading to see if the acoustic activity is load related
b) Raising or lowering the bus voltage several kilovolts by tap-changing and/or capacitor/reactor
switching
c) Moving the transformer on-load tap-changer(s) up or down one step at a time to see the impact on the
acoustic activity
If the transformer is energized from a test power supply, the test voltage can be raised and lowered at will for
determination of acoustic activity inception and extinction levels.
Signal sensitivity is unique to each particular AE measuring system. Trigger level settings depend on the
normal operating noise on the transformer to be tested (this depends on core type, pump/fan operation noise,
etc.). The best initial settings are the least sensitive settings that give a clear AE pattern (avoiding the noise
coming from the core, pumps/fans, or other sources). The settings can then be optimized during the signal
location process.
33
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
A three-dimensional layout can be constructed, for instance, using a convenient corner of the tank for zero
coordinates. For tanks with rounded corners, consider squaring them off for reference. After sensor locations
are plotted, the time delay in each transducer signal can be used to estimate the source location. Using the
maximum number of sensors possible improves the accuracy and usability of this approach.
7.5 Reporting and follow up

Comparison of actual problems and the predictions from acoustic monitoring are important for building the
knowledge base on the response of a particular monitoring system. This greatly enhances the usefulness of
acoustic monitoring as a diagnostic tool.
The investigation report should include information on the test setup, test procedures, test waveforms (if any),
and predicted signal sources based on experience, internal assembly drawings, and/or photographs of the
transformer under test.
Follow-up reporting may include comparison of the actual problem and the predictions from the investigation.
Useful information includes the following:
a) What was found

b) Where it was located
c) Differences between predicted and real locations
d) How the problem was corrected
Acoustic monitoring after repair allows comparison of before and after acoustic signatures and allows
establishing the new baseline data of the transformer.
8. Factory test procedure

8.1 Introduction
The input of the electrical PD detector is typically connected to the bushing capacitance tap but any sensor
mentioned in Table 3 can be used. The output is connected to one of the channels of the acoustic location
system. It is recommended to use an electrical apparent charge detector rather than a radio-influence voltage

(RIV) meter since the frequency range of the former is much closer to that of the AE than the latter. However,
either can be used for the trigger. The AE sensors are connected to the transformer tank wall. The outputs of the
sensors are connected to the acoustic location system for viewing the acoustic signal and its time delay from
the electrical signal.
8.2 Initial sensor placement

The initial placement of the AE sensors onto the tank wall can make the difference between an efficient
location of the PD source and a more time consuming one. Guidance in making an informed estimate of where
to initially place the sensors can come from the induced voltage test. This test, in most cases, will indicate
which phase of the transformer contains the PD source. If so, the sensors should then be placed in the area
of the problem phase. Caution should be exercised because there has been at least one experience where the
induced voltage test indicated the PD to be located in one phase and the acoustic test located it on a different
phase, the latter being verified through internal inspection (Núñez [B54]). A typical example would be a delta
winding where each bushing is connected to two phases.
Another source of information is to examine the transformer internal assembly drawings and photographs
if available. They may show likely areas of PD sources, and indicate whether the problem may be on the LV
34
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
or HV side, or an end wall, and whether it is toward the top, middle, or bottom of the tank. An example of a
simplified HV-side transformer assembly is shown in Figure 12. A search for the problem PD source within
such an assembly can include placing sensors along the windings, over each de-energized tap-changer, and/or
along the high-voltage leads connecting each HV winding to its respective bushing.
Ideally, initial placement of sensors would resemble one of the three arrangements shown in Figure 13,
Figure 14, and Figure 15. Figure 13 and Figure 14 are for the case when the problem phase is known; Figure 15
is for when it is not known. In Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15, the top, middle, and bottom of the suspect
phases are tested in an effort to obtain general overall coverage of each phase. In actual practice, however,
often the most convenient placement of the sensors is not possible due to obstructions such as radiators, tank
stiffeners, on-load tap changers, and control cabinets. Figure 16 shows the plan view of an actual transformer
tank having all of the aforementioned obstructions.
Some creativity is therefore required, and the actual sensor placement may be significantly different from the
arrangements shown in Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15. For example, due to the presence of radiators or
internal wiring trays, the sensors for one phase might need to be placed on the opposite side-wall than the other
two phases.
Mounting the sensors on manhole or other covers may provide an AE signal path that is clear of tank wall-
carried signal if the cover is isolated from the tank by flexible gaskets. The transformer oil must be in contact
with the inside surface of the cover for the sensor to be effective.
Shell form-type transformer arrangement requires special mention owing to the shielding used inside the tank
walls. It may only be possible to place sensors on the top of the tank or in areas where there is no shielding.
Figure 12—Example of HV-side of three-phase transformer assembly
35
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure 13—Example of sensor locations with PD source in center phase. Typically sensors
are located on each side wall.
Figure 14—Example of sensor locations with PD source in outer phase. Typically sensors Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.
are located on each side wall and on the end wall.
36
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure 15—Example of sensor locations when phase of PD source is not known. Sensors
are located initially on one side wall.

Figure 16—Transformer tank—plan view
8.3 Measurements and changing of sensor placement

With the sensors in place, a simple check may be performed to ensure that they are indeed operational.
Using low signal amplification setting, this check can be accomplished by gently tapping on the tank wall
immediately beside one of the sensors. This will create an acoustic signal, which should be detected by the
sensor and displayed on the oscilloscope. Use this procedure to check each sensor in turn. Now, the first set of
AE measurements is ready to be taken. To do so, energize the transformer in the same manner as during the
routine induced voltage test. Increase the voltage slowly until the electrical apparent charge detector measures
sustained PD activity or until the full test voltage level is reached that can be safely sustained continuously. (Do
not raise the voltage level beyond this amount, as a higher voltage level, though possibly producing greater
PD activity, unduly stresses the transformer insulation.) At this voltage level, and with a medium acoustic
signal amplification setting, the oscilloscope trigger sensitivity level must be calibrated to the corresponding
electrical PD detector signal. Now, for every half-cycle of the voltage wave, the oscilloscope will be triggered
to begin data acquisition from both the electrical PD detector and the AE PD sensors. “Time-zero” will be the
instant in time that the data acquisition is triggered to begin. As many sensors as the oscilloscope will allow
37
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
should be displayed at once. Data that invites analysis can be “frozen” on-screen and stored in memory using
the digital oscilloscope.
The interpretation of the acoustic signals displayed on the oscilloscope is done according to Clause 9 of this
guide. If none of the sensors indicate PD activity, increase their signal amplification slightly and repeat the
test. If there are still no clear signs of activity, the sensors will have to be moved manually, perhaps by a
displacement of half a meter either vertically or horizontally, and retested again. Another suggestion is to
move some of the sensors to the opposite side of the tank. This is a trial-and-error process that continues until
at least one of the sensors indicates the presence of PD activity. Again, this process can be expedited with the
examination of the transformer internal assembly drawings and photographs.
When one or more of the sensors shows activity, assuming in the simplest case that only one problem PD
source is present, the rest of the sensors may be manually moved into the vicinity of the active area. The
objective is to obtain AE signals from all sensors, and to position them so as to minimize the time differential
between “time-zero” and the beginning of the acoustically detected PD signal. Ideally, this minimum time
difference will correspond to a maximum number of individual oscillations in the signal as measured by the
counting circuit; however, this may not necessarily be so (refer to 4.2 and Clause 5 for calculation of the
distance from the sensors to the PD source).
Using this procedure for sensor placement and AE measurement, the PD source can often be located to within
25 cm or less.
9. Characterization of AE signals

9.1 Introduction
Characterizing whether an AE signal is PD is usually done by considering factors such as length of the burst,
movement of the AE signal relative to the excitation frequency, and rise time of the first oscillation to cross the
threshold.
PDs obtained by conventional electrical methods use a threshold to predict severe activity. This level
is generally about 300 pC to 500 pC. Because of variations in the acoustic signal caused by distance and
interfering materials, there is no similar threshold for acoustic systems. A strong signal buried deep within
a winding may be very weak by the time it reaches the acoustic sensor. Also, differences in amplifier gain
settings cause differences in magnitude.

9.2 HVDC transformers and reactors
PD detection and location devices are used in the same way during high-voltage direct-current (HVDC)
transformer and reactor factory and field measurements as they are with normal ac equipment tests. If the
transformers are energized without having the converter operating, there is no extra background noise and PD
measurements are the same as ac equipment. However, in field measurements, the following may apply:
a) EMI interference may be higher in an HVDC substation, requiring additional shielding of

instrumentation, cables, and wires. Due to commutation transients there is significant high-frequency
voltage difference between different parts of the ground system.
b) The background noise level in HVDC transformers in operation is much higher than in normal ac
transformers and reactors due to the fast transients at converter operation (e.g., valve commutation).
Higher trigger thresholds may compensate for this. If noise levels are too high, acoustic monitoring
for PD is not useful.
c) Acoustic monitoring during inverter operation may be more difficult than rectifier operation because
of the fast transients from high capacitive currents at valve firing.
38
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
d) A sensor of 150 kHz resonant frequency may reduce the noise level compared to one of 60 kHz
resonant frequency, but it will also reduce the sensitivity to PD sources under paper.
Sensor location notes cited in other parts of this guide should be observed. In addition, the acoustic signal may
be attenuated in the area around the valve winding bushing turrets, possibly caused by the extra insulation
barriers used around the bushing connection for resistivity grading. Better results in this location may be
obtained by looking down into the turret by mounting the sensor on the bushing flange mounting surface.
9.3 Characteristics of PD from static electrification

The failures of a number of large power transformers have been attributed to accumulation of charge and
subsequent flashover discharge. Field tests have indicated a correlation of the charge buildup, accompanied
by an increasing level of PD activity, with oil temperatures below approximately 40 °C and relatively high oil
velocity (Carpenter, Kresge, and Musick [B13]; EPRI Report TR-111386 [B22]; Moore, et al. [B50]). This
phenomenon is called static electrification.
It was expected that gases consistent with PD and flashover discharge would be formed; however, DGAs
taken during the field tests did not indicate any increase in levels of hydrogen or other gases (Moore, et al.
[B50]). This was probably because of the relatively short period of time and sporadic occurrences of the static
electrification.
External sensor placement is mostly toward the top of the transformer using care to avoid internal shielding.
However, the high energy discharges of advanced static electrification can be detected by sensors located at
almost any location clear of shielding. These discharges can sometimes be heard as loud bangs by persons
standing near the transformer.
Static electrification discharges can be detected by acoustic methods well before they become damaging (EPRI
Report TR-111386 [B22]). Field test experiences have shown that the most critical situations where static
electrification can occur is during start-up or lightly loaded operation in cold weather (EPRI Report TR-111386
[B22]; Moore, et al. [B50]; Núñez, Miller, and Ward [B56]). Acoustic activity due to static electrification is
gradually reduced as oil temperature is increased. It practically stops after reaching 50 °C.
9.4 Acoustic activity from thermal faults, the core, mechanical noises, and other
sources

AE techniques have typically been used only for the detection and location of PD/arcing in power transformers
when an indication of a problem is pointed out by other techniques (usually gas-in-oil). However, it has been
observed through the years that transformers without gassing history and/or no indication of an electrical
problem produce acoustic activity when monitored over a fixed period of time (Núñez, Miller, and Ward
[B56]). These signals must be differentiated from PD signals for the results to be effective. Some examples
and their characteristics follow:
a) Core magnetostriction noise (Barkhausen effect): The primary frequency occurs at twice the power
frequency; the amplitude of this signal in both half cycles is about the same. Overfluxing may create
considerable noise, which may have harmonics that reach to the 30 kHz to 40 kHz frequency range or
above.
b) Pumped liquid noise: The discharge from oil circulating pumps may interfere with PD signals with
transducers placed low on the transformer tank. They usually have no correlation with the 50 Hz or
60 Hz waveform.
c) Loose nameplates, pipes hitting each other, fan noise, etc., may sometimes have repeatable waveforms
close to PD signals. The length of the signal is often much longer than the PD signal, which is
characteristically under 150 µs.
39
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
d) Loose shielding connections in the transformer tank wall may cause large PD indications, but not be
detrimental to transformer operation. The location of the signals should be considered and correlated
with transformer design drawings.
e) Wiring from the sensors to the amplifiers, if not properly shielded, will pick up spurious PD signals.
Look at every possible source before concluding there are major problems inside the transformer.
f) Trucks, environmental noises (thunderstorms, rain, snow, hail, wind, etc.), and miscellaneous events
near the transformer tank may activate the acoustic sensors. These are random signals lasting longer
than 1 ms.
g) Switching and load tap changer movement are random signals.
h) Thermal faults may cause random signals (EPRI Report 1007176 [B21], Miller, et al. [B49]).
The correlation of additional parameters of the transformer during the test (current, voltage, pump/fan current,
oil temperature, winding temperature, phase angle, etc.) with the AE data may assist in identification and
separation of the different acoustic sources detected during a test (Miller and Núñez [B48]). A sensor isolated
from the transformer tank may be used as a reference for some environmental noises. If possible, a correlation
with electrical PD detection can aid in distinguishing between PD and noise signals.
9.5 Application of acoustics during factory impulse test

Several effects hamper the application of both electrical and acoustical PD measurements under impulse
testing. However, especially using acoustic detection with electrical trigger can provide useful results.
Additionally, such internal discharge due to impulse testing, which is detected by disturbance of the impulse
voltage graph, shows typically strong magnitudes and is often more like a partial flashover.
The electrical detection suffers from the fact that the amplitude spectrum of the impulse voltage includes
the frequencies used for electrical PD testing. Here, the signal derived from a bushing tap, for instance, will
always contain both the response to the impulse voltage and superimposed PD signal. Alternatively, VHF or
UHF sensors can be used to pick up an undistorted electrical signal.
Likewise, the acoustic signal is disturbed by sound of the firing impulse generator and especially of external
spark gaps for chopped lightning tests. Moreover, averaging techniques can only be used on the few impulse
shots, if at all. As the acoustic signal is typically much stronger, if compared with tests under ac, often passive
sensors without built-in pre-amplifier are used and/or acoustic attenuation applied. Figure 17 shows such

single-shot measurement with the remains of the impulse voltage (CH1) and signals of two acoustic sensors
(CH3+4).
40
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure 17—Response of lightning impulse as el. trigger (CH1) and acoustic signals
(CH3+CH4)
The electric PD detection covers a wider area, including, e.g., bushing and tap changer. External noise will
also be detected and is difficult to remove. The correlation between instrument reading and actual discharge
magnitude is better than with the acoustic method. Several international standards exist that define the
instrument response, which is the readout in picocoulombs or microvolts, allowing a better comparison
between manufacturer and in-field measurements.
Table 4 gives a rough overview of the comparison of electrical and acoustic PD signals.
10. Integrating AE results with data from oil analysis

Although AE data is useful in its own right, it becomes even more so when used in conjunction with dissolved
gas-in-oil data. For example, if the problem has been present for some time, as is typical of situations that
develop in the field, good correlation should be expected between gas analysis and AE data. As with any
diagnostic tool, a baseline reading should be established before or at the start of monitoring AE signals. The
increase and rate of increase of combustible gases from the baseline DGA reading, in combination with events
that occur on the transformer, then become relevant diagnostic data.
PD and/or arcing in the presence of oil produce hydrogen (H2) and other gases. PD and the generation of H2
due to PD, are the earliest (first) warning signals of most incipient faults known to the industry.
If DGAs show a continuing increase of H2 in combination with AE signals emanating from a source determined
to be in a specific area, there is a good possibility that the PD is taking place in the specific area. Refer to IEC
60599 [B38] and IEEE Std C57.104™ [B39] for more information.
41
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Table 4—Comparison of electrical and acoustic PD signals

Source Electrical Acoustic Remark
detection detection
PD generated within the transformer
PD on the outside of the winding Yes Yes Best use for acoustic detector,
location (triangulation)
PD within the winding Yes unlikely Strong acoustic attenuation inside the winding.
RIV-detector signal affected by
circuit L-C resonance
PD between winding and core Yes difficult Acoustic signal reflection at the core required
PD between core and tank Yes Yes PD location is often difficult
Arcing/tracking of the oil surface Yes Yes
Arcing/tracking of the Yes Yes
bushing surface in the oil
PD in the bushing Yes possible See NOTE 1
PD in the de-energized Yes Yes
tap changer
PD in the on-load tap changer Yes Yes See NOTE 2—sensor placement
on LTC compartment
Noise sources
PD outside the transformer, Yes No See NOTE 3
(e.g., corona on busbar,
PD in switchgear)
Strong tracking/leader discharge Yes possible See NOTE 3 and NOTE 4
Nearby lightning strokes Yes possible See NOTE 3 and NOTE 4—unlikely single events
Nearby car ignition Yes No See NOTE 3—no relation to phase angle
Switched electronic Yes No See NOTE 3
power supplies
Radio stations, transmitter Yes No Electrical noise filter (band-stop) or
shift in RIV frequency required
Weather (rain, sleet, snow, hail) No Yes
Other events
Moisture/degradation in the oil No No Use other diagnostic methods to supplement
the PD detection (PF, DGA, etc.)

NOTE 1—Field tests have proven that acoustic detection of PD in the bushing can be achieved if acoustic sensors are
placed on the grounded flange of the bushing, close to the capacitance tap (Lopez, et al. [B43]). See 1.3 safety warning.
NOTE 2—Several cases have been reported where PD/arcing and/or tracking (carbon paths) have been detected inside
LTC compartments, either on the insulating support bars or on the diverter switch cylinder (Liñán, Núñez, and Jiménez
[B42]; Núñez [B54]).
NOTE 3—Successful electrical PD detection requires noise suppression (e.g., gating together with an external noise
antenna) and observation of the PD-phase pattern (fingerprint).
NOTE 4—Very strong electrical signals can couple into the transducer or amplifier if the detector is not sufficiently
screened.
The two sources of data can often supplement each other in yet other ways. For instance, sometimes the
breakdown of constituents in the gas analysis is so complex that, although it is obvious that a significant
problem is involved, it is not possible to determine whether the cause is due to PD or is thermal in origin. The
AE system responds to internal signals produced by PD, arcs, or gas bubbles. Thermal phenomena that are
below the threshold of causing gas bubbles can produce acoustic signals, but with different characteristics than
the signals produced by PD (EPRI Report 1007176 [B21]). Therefore, the existence of any AE signal having
42
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
the characteristics associated with PD together with the continuing increase or acceleration of hydrogen gas,
verify the existence of PD in oil. The absence of AE activity in this case may indicate that the problem is
located in an area where the signal is highly attenuated. If AE signals continue and/or increase, with no further
increase or acceleration of H2 or other combustible gases, the AE signals may be due to components external to
the transformer tank. As the combination of information produced by these two techniques is so advantageous,
it is particularly recommended that gas analysis results be taken into account when interpreting AE data.
When evaluating transformers on the shop floor, the same good correlation between dissolved gas and PD
is normally obtained after HV dielectric tests and temperature rise tests. AE technique provides essentially
real time data relative to activity occurring at that instant. DGA analysis on the other hand is to some extent
historical in nature. Depending on the location of the source and the activity level of PD, there may be a delay
of seconds to much longer time periods before gassing is observed. It cannot be assumed that because there is
gas there is PD and vice versa. Normally, RIV or apparent charge detection is carried out in the factory and this
provides an alternate database for correlation with AE data in the signal interpretation process.
11. Acoustic activity interpretation

Correlation between AE characteristics and electrical PD levels (picocoulomb) will often mislead the
investigation. This is particularly true in the field due to the external disturbances and effects of attenuation in
both the acoustic and electrical signals. This means that no absolute value of PD activity can be determined
from AE measurements made in the field.
It is important to verify whether the acoustic signal is due to internal PDs or if it is caused by some other source
such as mechanical noise. To make this verification requires expertise of the investigator and other evidences
such as the presence of indicating combustible gases or electrical PD. Data processing technology may also
be helpful. This can be performed by separating the acoustic signals based on the particular characteristics of
each individual source (amplitude, duration, energy, counts, etc.).
In general, a more intense PD source will typically produce a higher AE magnitude and count rate than a weak
source. This is because at the site of an intense discharge there may be multiple locations or perturbations
that are producing higher energy PD and AE. It is necessary to consider the transformer design when making
acoustic measurements on transformers, as follows:
a) Some transformers do not have tank wall shielding or directed flow barriers and have tank wall
thickness 6 mm or less. A given PD will probably produce more acoustic energy at the transducer

location if the transformer has 6 mm or less tank wall thickness than if the transformer has 10 mm tank
wall thickness and tank wall shielding.
b) The locations of the PD likely to lead to failure may be in areas where the attenuation of the PD signal
is high. These would include areas within the windings and in the high-low spaces. The attenuation is
caused by the acoustic signal not having a clear path out of the winding, thicker tank walls, tank wall
shielding, the presence of more insulation barriers, directed oil wraps, etc. A source that is likely to
lead to failure may be attenuated to the point that the PD count rate is low or nonexistent.
c) The acoustic energy at the sensor reflects a combination of magnitude and repetition rate of the PD, the
distance it is away from the transducer, and the effect of intervening materials. The AE characteristic
that warrants the need for further investigation varies depending on the size of the transformer as well
as the magnitude and type of PD. The data obtained from acoustic tests is not sufficiently definitive to
warrant its use as either acceptance or go/no-go criteria and should not be used for such.
Since the value of many power transformers is high and the cost of a catastrophic failure is great, the detection
of any internal PD in such transformers should be a cause for further investigation. By taking into account
the type of signal obtained, the behavior of the discharge with time, the approximate location of the emitting
43
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
source, and an estimate of the level of the activity involved, acoustic measurements can be used as a means of
identifying the potential source, cause, and severity of PD problems.
The acoustic measurement alone does not provide an estimate of the severity of the problem. A database and
grading system based on case histories of similar problems may help with this analysis. Also, it can indicate
the need for more frequent samples of oil for combustible gas measurements or other advanced diagnostic
measurements, which, when combined with the acoustic data, will often provide the means for identifying the
cause and severity of the problem.
44
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Annex A
(informative)
Bibliography
Bibliographical references are resources that provide additional or helpful material but do not need to be
understood or used to implement this standard. Reference to these resources is made for informational use
only.
Since the early 1950s, there has been much activity in the area of ultrasonic/AE detection of partial discharges.
The following bibliography is intended to give a broad overview of the subject and provide references for
further study.
[B1] “Acoustic Emission Detection of Partial Discharges in Power Transformers,” EPRI final report no. EL-
4009, 1985.
[B2] Allan, D. J., J. A. C. Forrest, E. L. Howitt, and A. B. Petchell, “Electric and Acoustic Location of
Discharges in Transformers,” Conference on Diagnostic Testing of High Voltage Power Apparatus in Service,
IEE Conference Publication No. 94, March 1973, pp 65-70.
[B3] Anderson, J. G., “Ultrasonic Detection and Location in Insulating Structures,” AIEE Transactions No.
75, 1956.
[B4] Application Note AN23, “Table of Ultrasonic Properties,” Metrotek Inc., Richland WA.
[B5] ASTM Standard E 650-85, Standard guide for mounting piezoelectric acoustic emission sensors.
[B6] Bartnikas, R., and E. J. McMahon, “Engineering Dielectrics,” Vol. 1, Chapter 10, by R.T. Harrold, ASTM
Publication, STP669-1979.
[B7] Bengtsson, T., and B. Jönsson, “Transformer PD Diagnosis using Acoustic Emission Technique,” ISH-
97, paper no. 115.
[B8] Bengtsson, T., M. Leijon, and L. Ming, “Acoustic Frequencies Emitted by Partial Discharges in Oil,”

ISH-93, paper no. 63.10.
[B9] Berent, D., “Acoustic Monitoring and Gas-In-Oil Analysis for Transformers,” Report #62PAIC95, pp
83.183.6, Doble Engineering Company.
[B10] Boczar, T., “Identification of a Specific Type of PD from Acoustic Emission Frequency Spectra,” IEEE
Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, pp. 598-606, August 2001. [New York, NY.], http://dx
.doi.org/10.1109/94.946712
[B11] Boczar, T. and D. Zmarzly, “Application of Wavelet Analysis to Acoustic Emission Pulses Generated
by Partial Discharges,” IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, pp. 433-449, June 2004.
[New York, NY.]
[B12] Boguslaw, J., “Utilization of Acoustic Emission for Detection, Measurement, and Location of Partial
Discharges,” AEWG-Second International Conference on Acoustic Emission, Lake Tahoe, 1985.
[B13] Carpenter, J. H., J. S. Kresge, and C. B. Musick, “Ultrasonic Corona Detection,” IEEE Transactions
PAS-86, No. 8, 1965.
45
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
[B14] Clatterbuck, D. M. et al., “An extended model of the Barkhausen effect based on the ABBM model,”
Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 87, p. 4771, 2000, http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.373154.
[B15] Cohen, L., Time-Frequency Analysis. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall PTR, 1995, p.
07458.
[B16] Curie, J., and P. Curie, Développement par compression de l’électricité polaire dans les cristaux
hémièdres à faces inclinées (Development, via compression, of electric polarization in hemihedral crystals
with inclined faces), Bulletin de la Société Minérologique de France, vol. 3, 1880, pages 90-93.
[B17] Dahlgren, D. and J. W. Harley, “Implementing a Static Electrification Diagnostic Model,” EPRI
Symposium on Static Electrification, May 19-21, 1999, Monterey, CA.
[B18] Duval, M., “A review of faults detectable by gas-in-oil analysis in transformers,” Electrical Insulation
Magazine, IEEE, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 8-17, May-June 2002. [New York, NY.], http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MEI
.2002.1014963
[B19] Duval, M. and A. dePabla, “Interpretation of gas-in-oil analysis using new IEC publication 60599 and
IEC TC 10 databases,” Electrical Insulation Magazine, IEEE, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 31-41, March-April 2001.
[New York, NY.], http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/57.917529
[B20] Eleftherion, P. M., “Partial Discharge XXI: Acoustic Emission-Based PD Source Location in
Transformers,” Electrical Insulation Magazine, IEEE, 08837554/95, 1995.
[B21] Report, E. P. R. I., “Development of a New Acoustic Emissions Technique for the Detection and
Location of Gassing Sources in Power Transformers: Phase 1 Results,” EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, Allegheny
Power, American Electric Power, Bonneville Power Administration, Consolidated Edison Company of New
York, Inc., Electricite de France, Exelon Corporation, and Public Service Electric and Gas Company: 2002,
Product ID 1007176.3
[B22] Report, E. P. R. I., TR-111386, “RAMAPO static electrification tests: EPRI and Consolidated Edison
Company of New York.
[B23] Fredrick, J. R., Ultrasonic Engineering. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965, pp. 13-21.
[B24] Große, C. U. and H.-W. Reinhardt, “Schallemissionsquellen automatisch lokalisieren MP

Materialprüfung,” Jahrg. 41. München, Germany: Carl Hanser Verlag, 1999, p. 342.
[B25] Gross, D., “Acoustic Location of Transformer PD under non-ideal conditions,” The 19th International
Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, Pilsen, Czech Republic, August, 23-28, 2015.
[B26] Gross, D., “Acquisition and location of partial discharge—esp. in transformers,” Dissertation, TU Graz
2016.
[B27] Harrold, R. T., “Acoustic Waveguides for Sensing and Locating Electrical Discharges in High Voltage
Power Transformers and Other Apparatus,” IEEE Trans. on PAS, vol. PAS-98, no. 2, pp. 449-457, April 1979,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPAS.1979.319381.
[B28] Harrold, R. T., “Acoustical Properties of Insulating Liquids and Gases,” IEEE International Symposium
of Electrical Insulation, Philadelphia, 1978, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/EIC.1978.7463651.
[B29] Harrold, R. T., IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation, Vol. E.I.10. No. 4, December 1975.
3
EPRI publications are available from the Electric Power Research Institute (http://www.epri.com).
46
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
[B30] Harrold, R. T., “The Relationship between Ultrasonic and Electrical Measurements of Under-Oil
Corona Sources,” IEEE Transactions, vol. EI-11, pp. 8-11, March 1976.
[B31] Heroux, P., “A Statistical Study of Electrical and Acoustical Characteristics of Pulsative Corona,” IEEE
paper AT6 122–2, Winter Power Meeting 1976.
[B32] Herzfeld, K. F. and T. A. Litovitz, Absorption and Dispersion of Ultrasonic Waves. New York: Academic
Press, 1959, p. 454.
[B33] Hinkley, D. V., Nr. 3, Vol. 58. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 1971, Inference about the
change-point from cumulative sum tests, Biometrika, pp. 509-523.
[B34] Howells, E., “Acoustic Emission from Stressed Dielectric Liquids,” ISA paper no. 74219 Instrumentation
Symposium, Albuquerque, 1974.
[B35] Howells, E. and E. T. Norton, “Detection of Partial Discharges in Transformers Using Acoustic Emission
Techniques,” IEEE Transactions, PAS 97, No. 5, 1978, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPAS.1978.354646.
[B36] Howells, E. and E. T. Norton, “Parameters Affecting the Velocity of Sound in Transformer Oil,” IEEE
Transactions, vol. PAS-103, pp. 1111–1115, May 1984.
[B37] IEC 60270, High-voltage test techniques—partial discharge measurements.4
[B38] IEC 60599, Mineral Oil-impregnated Equipment in Service—Interpretation of Dissolved and Free
Gases Analysis.
[B39] IEEE Std C57.104™, IEEE Guide for the Interpretation of Gasses Generated in Oil Immersed
Transformers.5,6
[B40] IEEE Std C57.113™-2010, IEEE Guide for Partial Discharge Measurement in Liquid Filled Power
Transformers and Shunt Reactors.
[B41] Kawanda, H., M. Honda, T. Inoe, and T. Amemya, “Partial Discharge Automatic Monitor for Oil-Filled
Power Transformers,” IEEE paper no. 833M424-8, PES Summer Meeting 1983.
[B42] Liñán, R., A. Núñez, and L. Jiménez, “On-line ultrasonic diagnosis to prevent catastrophic failures in

power transformers,” EPRI 2000 Substation Equipment Diagnosis Conference VIII, February 20-23, New
Orleans, Louisiana.
[B43] Lopez, A., H. Equihua, R. Liñán, R. Alvarez, and A. Núñez, “Detection of incipient failures on power
transformers using on-line non-intrusive diagnosis techniques,” IEEE XI Power summer meeting 1998,
Acapulco, Mexico.
[B44] Lundgaard, L. E., “Partial discharge XIII. Acoustic partial discharge detection—fundamental
considerations,” IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 25-31, July-August 1992, http://dx
.doi.org/10.1109/57.145095.
4
IEC publications are available from the International Electrotechnical Commission (http://www.iec.ch) and the American National
Standards Institute (http://www.ansi.org/).
5
The IEEE standards or products referred to in Annex A are trademarks owned by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Incorporated.
6
IEEE publications are available from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (http://standards.ieee.org/).
47
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
[B45] Lundgaard, L. E., “Partial Discharge-Part XIV: Acoustic Partial Discharge Detection-Practical
Application,” IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 34-43, 1992, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
57.156943.
[B46] Markalous, S., S. Tenbohlen, and K. Feser, “New robust non-iterative algorithms for acoustic PD-
localization in oil/paper-insulated transformers,” 14th Int. Symp. on High Voltage Engineering, August 25-29,
2005, Beijing, PR China, paper no. G-040.
[B47] Meunier, R. and G. H. Vaillancourt, “Propagation behaviour of acoustic partial discharge signals in oil-
filled transformers,” Conference Record of the International Conference on Conduction and Breakdown in
Dielectric Liquids, July 15-19, 1996, Roma, Italy, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICDL.1996.565542.
[B48] Miller, R. K. and A. Núñez, “Detect and locate sources of Power Transformers deterioration using high
speed Acoustic Emission waveform acquisition with location and pattern recognition,” EPRI 2002 Substation
Equipment Diagnosis Conference X, February 17-20, San Antonio, Texas.
[B49] Miller, R. K., F. Shu, A. Núñez, and S. Ternowcheck, “Advances in Acoustic Emission Testing for
Detecting, Locating and Assessing Electrical and Thermal Faults,” EPRI 2003 Substation Equipment
Diagnosis Conference X, February 23–26, New Orleans, Louisiana.
[B50] Moore, H. R., L. J. Savio, D. Chu, and J. E. Sandstrom, “Report on Studies of Static Electrification
performed on a Service-Aged Transformer,” Sixty-Third International Conference of Doble Clients, March
25-29, 1996, Boston, Massachusetts.
[B51] Morel, J. F. and B. Fallow, ““Detection and Location of Partial Discharges by Ultrasonics,” ERA
Transactions 2947, Rev,” General Electric, vol. 80, pp. 225-228, 1971.
[B52] Noro, A., K. Nakamura, K. Horii, H. Katsukawa, and R. Matsuoka, “Acoustic-Based Real-Time Fault
Location in Power Substation,” Third International Symposium on Electricity Distribution and Energy
Management, ISEDEM Proceedings, vol., pp. 106-111, 1993.
[B53] Noro, A., K. Nakamura, T. Watanabe, and T. Morita, “Acoustic-Based Real-Time Partial Discharge
Location in Model Transformer,” Proceedings ICSPAT, 1994, pp. 1077-1082.
[B54] Núñez, A., “Acoustic Technique for the detection and location of partial discharge in power
transformers,” Thesis, Instituto Politecnico Nacional-Instituto de Investigaciones Electricas, Mexico, 1999.

[B55] Núñez A., and E. Gasperin, “Non-invasive acoustic testing and monitoring of power transformers,”
2013 CIGRÉ Canada Conference, paper 213.
[B56] Núñez, A., R. K. Miller, and B. Ward, “Reduction of failure risk in power transformers through the
detection and location of incipient faults using acoustic emission,” TechCon 2003 North America, February
3-4, 2003, St. Petersburg, Florida, USA.
[B57] “Partial Discharge Detection Using Acoustic Emission Report,” Physical Acoustics Corporation, P.O.
Box 3135, Princeton, NJ 08543.
[B58] Phung, B. T., R. E. James, T. R. Blackburn, and Q. Su, “Partial Discharge Ultrasonic Wave Propagation
in Steel Transformer Tanks,” Proceedings of 7th ISH, Dresden, Germany, vol. 7, pp. 131-134, 1991.
[B59] Rao, B. D. and K. V. S. Hari, “Effect of spatial smoothing on the performance of MUSIC and the
minimum-norm method,” IEEE Proceedings, vol.137, Pt. F. no 6, December 1990, http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/
ip-f-2.1990.0065.
48
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
[B60] Reason, J., “Online Transformer Monitoring,” Special Report,” Electrical World (Brisbane), October,
pp. 19-26, 1995.
[B61] Rose, J. L., Ultrasonic Waves in Solid Media. UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
[B62] Shertukde, H. M., “Detection of Partial Discharges Using a Fault Diagnostic Device for Electrical Power
Transformers,” Proceedings Doble Client Conference, March 30-April 3, 1998, Boston, Massachusetts.
[B63] Shertukde, H. M., H. Alnajjar, and U. Prabhune, “Fault Detection Device For Electrical Power
Transformers Using Novel DSP Scheme,” Proceedings ICPAT, pp. 1219-1223, October 7-10, 1996, Boston,
Massachusetts.
[B64] Shertukde, H. M., and Y. Bar-Shalom, “Target Parameter Estimation in the near field with two sensors,”
IEEE Transactions on Acoustic Speech and Signal Processing, August 1988, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/29
.1665.
[B65] Shertukde, H. M. and J. G. Lackey, “Interpretation of Results Obtained from Testing of Oil-filled
Electrical Power Transformers in Field for Several Utilities in the World,” Conference Record of the 1998
IEEE International Symposium on Electrical Insulation, Arlington, Virginia, pp. 49-52, June 1998, http://dx
.doi.org/10.1109/ELINSL.1998.704645.
[B66] Shertukde, H. M. and R. H. Shertukde, “Fault Area Network for Electrical Power Transformers—A
Novel Tool for On-line Monitoring of Large Power Transformers,” Conference Record of the 2002 IEEE
International Symposium on Electrical Insulation, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 207-211, April 2002, http://dx
.doi.org/10.1109/ELINSL.2002.995914.
[B67] Shertukde, H. M. and R. H. Shertukde, “Monitoring vs. Diagnostics—FAN-EPT: A Novel Tool for On-
Line Monitoring and Diagnostics of Large Power Transformers,” Proceedings IEEE T&D Conference, Japan,
October 7, 2002, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TDC.2002.1177822.
[B68] Shertukde, R. H. and H. M. Shertukde, “Manufacture of Fault Diagnostic Device for Electrical Power
Transformers (FD2EPT),” Proceedings ICSPAT, vol. 1996, pp. 1229-1233, 7-10 October 1996.
[B69] Sikorski, W., K. Siodla, and P. Staniek, “On-line monitoring system of partial discharges occurring
in power transformer insulation using acoustic emission method,” 15th International Symposium on High
Voltage Engineering, ISH-2007, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2007.

[B70] Sikorski, W. and W. Ziomek, “Detection, Recognition and Location of Partial Discharge Sources Using
Acoustic Emission Method,” Acoustic Emission, Wojciech Sikorski [Ed.], InTech, Rijeka, Croatia, 2012, pp.
49-74, http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/31394.
[B71] Stoica, P. and R. L. Moses, Introduction to Spectral Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Upper Saddle
River, 1997, p. 07458.
[B72] Train, D., A. Mercier, and D. Thorne, “The Detection of Partial Discharges in High Voltage Potential
Transformers in Service,” IEEE Transactions, vol. PAS-93, pp. 1909-1916, November 1974.
[B73] Van Brunt, R. J., “Stochastic Properties of Partial-discharge Phenomena,” IEEE Transactions on
Electrical Insulation, vol. 26, no. 5, October 1991, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/14.99099.
[B74] Van Brunt, R. J. and E. W. Cernyar, “Influence of memory propagation on phase-resolved stochastic
behavior of ac-generated partial discharges,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 58, no. 24, p. 17, June 1991.
49
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
[B75] Vohl, P. E., Y. Gervais, and D. Mukhedkar, “Model Analysis of Pulses Generated by Partial Discharges,”
IEEE paper no. A76-4168, PES Summer Meeting, 1976.
[B76] Von Glahn, P., K. L. Stricklett, R. J. Van Brunt, and L. A. V. Cheim, “Correlation Between Electrical
and Acoustic Detection of Partial Discharge in Liquids and Implications for Continuous Data Recording,”
Conference Record of the 1996 IEEE International Symposium on Electrical Insulation, Montreal, Canada,
pp. 69-74, June 1996, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ELINSL.1996.549285.
[B77] Wagenaars, P., P. A. A. F. Wouters, P. C. J. M. van der Wielen, and E. F. Steennis, Algorithms for Arrival
Time Estimation of Partial Discharge Pulses in Cable Systems. Canada: IEEE Vancouver, 2008, http://dx.doi
.org/10.1109/ELINSL.2008.4570425.
[B78] Wood, J. W., G. H. Hickling, R. T. Hindmarch, and B. P. Raju, “Electrical and Ultrasonic Characteristics
of Partial Discharges in Oil Immersed Insulation,” IEEE Conference on Dielectric Materials, Measurements
and Applications, Cambridge, England, 1975.
[B79] Young, R. K., Wavelet Theory and Its Applications. Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.
[B80] Ziomek, W., E. Kuffel, W. Sikorski, P. Staniek, and K. Siodla, “Location and recognition of partial
discharge sources in a power transformer using advanced acoustic emission method,” Electrical Review,
(Przeglad Elektrotechniczny), R. 84, N. 10, pp. 20-23.
50
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Annex B
(informative)
Signal processing
To evaluate the source of a PD signal, it is necessary to establish its physical disposition or location within
the confines of the transformer. A technique that is sometimes utilized is based on the presumption that the
sensor location resulting in the highest AE oscillation or count rate would be closest to the source (Núñez
[B54]). This is not always true because of the attenuation that can be caused due to passage of the sound wave
through different insulation materials and copper. Even under most favorable circumstances this technique
can only indicate the general zone wherein the source may probably lie. For more accurate location more
precise solutions need to be used. Some of the techniques are as follows:
a) Time domain: Finding the start of a candidate signal in the time domain is the simplest and most
reliable approach.
b) Cross-correlation: This requires two channels of data from two acoustic sensor locations, with the
data in one channel artificially delayed with respect to the other channel of data. One then attempts
to evaluate the cross-correlation of these data by multiplying the corresponding data points. When
the artificial time delay is equivalent to the real-time delay between the two data channels, a
maximum occurs, which indicates the possibility of source location after corresponding mathematical
manipulations are conducted. This method is hampered by the necessarily different waveforms
recorded at different locations.
c) Signal enhancement: Averaging is a very powerful technique for recovering repetitive signals from
random noise when there is a stable trigger. In this method, randomness in the signal is reduced to
almost zero amplitude while the true repetitive portion of the signal remains unaffected. However, as
AE signals vary in amplitude, the degree of enhancement obtained is usually less than that predicted
by theory.
d) Fast Fourier Transform (FFT): The signal can be analyzed in the frequency domain by using suitable
Fourier techniques (Noro, et al. [B52]; H. M. Shertukde [B62]). This can result in corresponding
power spectral densities, which can be manipulated mathematically to get the estimate of the time
delay and then, correspondingly, the source location.
e) Wavelet transform: The signal can be analyzed in the frequency as well as the time domain using

suitable wavelet transform techniques (Shertukde, Alnajjar, and Prabhune [B63]; R. H. Shertukde and
H. M. Shertukde [B68]; Young [B79]). This can result in corresponding wide band cross ambiguity
functions with estimation of the time delay and source location accuracy. These estimated time delays
in conjunction with proper signal characteristics (amplitude, signal-to-noise ratio, and shape) yield
PD source location accuracy.
f) Joint time-frequency analysis (JTFA) (Cohen [B15]): JTFA is an effective tool for processing of AE
signals. It combines the time domain and frequency domain to describe and observe the signal that, at
a given time, constitutes the time-frequency spectrum of the signal. The application of JTFA allows
not only continuous observation of changes in the frequency composition of the AE signal, but also
gives the ability to detect the narrow-band noises and disturbances (Ziomek, et al., [B80]; Sikorski,
Siodla, and Staniek [B69]). The AE pulses generated by PDs are characterized by a wide frequency
spectrum and different duration times dependent on the discharge type. Therefore, the analysis of
pseudo three-dimensional images, i.e., color-coded mapping of spectra, depicting time-frequency-
amplitude or time-frequency-energy is an especially useful technique for the PD pattern recognition
(Boczar and Zmarzly [B11]).
g) High-resolution spectral analysis (HRSA) as an alternative for classical FFT in frequency domain
analysis: HRSA methods, also known as subspace methods, generate the frequency component
51
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
estimates for a signal based on eigenanalysis or eigendecomposition of the correlation matrix (Stoica
and Moses [B71]). Subspace methods, such as multiple signal classification (MUSIC), estimation
of signal parameters via rotational invariant techniques (ESPRIT), and the minimum-norm method,
employ the noise subspace to estimate unknown frequency parameters of a random process and are
very effective in the detection of harmonics buried in noise (the AE signal originating from PDs can be
approximated as exponentially attenuated harmonic oscillations). It is especially true when the signal-
to-noise ratio (SNR) is low (Ziomek, et al. [B80]; Stoica and Moses [B71]; Rao and Hari [B59]).
This property makes the subspace analysis method particularly attractive for efficient detection of
PD signals recorded under industrial conditions with strong noises. Therefore, it is recommended
to replace the classic FFT analysis with the MUSIC algorithm, or similar high-resolution spectral
method. This results in enhanced PD detection sensitivity and fault recognition efficiency (see
Figure B.2) (Sikorski and Ziomek [B70]; Sikorski, Siodla, and Staniek [B69].
Figure B.1—Determining the starting time using the energy criterion
52
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure B.2—Comparison of conventional (FFT) and high-resolution subspace method

(MUSIC) for spectral analysis of “clear” (left) and strongly noised (right) AE burst from PD
53
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Annex C
(informative)
Tutorial and case studies for detection and location of AE from PD

Acoustic detection systems can be used to detect and/or locate PD in transformers. The physical phenomena
that allow such are the following:
a) AEs are transient elastic waves in the range of ultrasound, usually between 20 kHz and 1 MHz,
generated by the rapid release of energy from a source.
b) PDs are pulse-like and cause mechanical stress waves (acoustic waves) to propagate within the
transformer.
c) If the stress waves propagate to the transformer tank wall, they may be detected with a transducer that
is tuned to the right frequency.
d) PD sources can be located by measuring the relative time of arrival of acoustic waves at multiple
transducer locations.
As shown in Figure C.1, sensors, generally attached to the outside of the transformer tank, detect the stress
waves caused by PD. This acoustic wave is converted to a voltage signal by the sensor, which is processed
and displayed, and combined with other signals or otherwise processed to aid in interpretation of the acoustic
disturbance.

Figure C.1—A PD source emits stress waves that are detected by a sensor on the tank wall.
This signal is processed to validate that it is PD and to determine the location.
The advantages of the acoustic system are as follows:
a) It can be used when the transformer is online.

b) It can be used during transformer applied voltage or induced voltage tests.
c) It is non-invasive.
d) Some commercial systems can differentiate between actual PD and other acoustic noises.
54
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Problems in interpretation of signals can be caused by the different velocities of propagation in steel, oil, and
insulation. Blocking of signals may be caused by magnetic shields and other obstructions.
C.1 Types of systems

Many different types of acoustic PD systems are in use to detect and/or locate PD. These generic systems
include the following:
a) Digital oscilloscopes with the ability to display multiple channels of waveforms

b) Automated workstations with or without electrical PD triggers
c) On-line continuous monitoring systems
C.2 Sensors
The sensors most often used in AE applications have a sensitive range centered at about 60 kHz or 150 kHz.
The higher frequency sensor is often chosen for field work because of fewer potentially interfering noises.
C.3 Acoustic PD systems

Acoustic PD systems are often used in the following situations:
a) When DGA indicates the possible presence of PD

b) When static electrification is suspected
c) When electrical PD is detected, for confirmation and source location
d) As a diagnostic warning tool for suspect or very important transformers
e) For PD detection during factory impulse testing
C.4 Case studies

C.4.1 Case 1—250 MVA autotransformer internal flashover
During induced voltage test in the laboratory, PD activity in a three-phase 250 MVA 400/121/10.5 kV
autotransformer manufactured in 1998 was measured by the analog electrical method. Location was carried
out using the acoustic method with a workstation-type automated instrument. Results of the location test are
shown in Figure C.2. After partial dismantling of the transformer, an internal flashover was located in phase
A (see Figure C.3). Insulation between the upper stress ring of the 110 KV winding and the upper yoke was
broken. The accuracy of the three-dimensional location was in the range of 0.3 m-0.5 m.
55
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure C.2—Views of the workstation screen showing PD hits versus time and the location
of the source of PD in the transformer tank
Figure C.3—Internal flashover

C.4.2 Case 2—330 MVA autotransformer anomalous DGA results
DGA results recorded in Table C.1 showed high hydrogen levels and presence of methane indicating possible
PD in a three-phase 330 MVA, 400/115/35 kV autotransformer manufactured in 1976. The carbon oxides may
be the result of PD in cellulose.
Unstable PD activity was detected during a 14-h acoustic testing period. A workstation-type automated
instrument indicated location as shown in Figure C.4. Using design drawings, the fault was located near the
core cooling duct of phase A. After consideration of DGA results, location, and PD signals, it was decided to
keep the transformer in service.
Table C.1—DGA history of the transformer with PD activity

Sample date H2 O2 N2 CH4 CO CO2 C2H4 C2H6 C2H2
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
30-X-92 141 8757 23 314 5 59 362 1 1 0
02-II-93 388 15 794 48 396 18 217 1423 1 3 1
Table continues
56
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Table C.1—DGA history of the transformer with PD activity (continued)

Sample date H2 O2 N2 CH4 CO CO2 C2H4 C2H6 C2H2
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
06-IV-93 439 13 986 39 287 15 242 1519 2 4 1
29-X-93 569 16 412 45 363 20 383 2436 1 4 1
18-XII-96 359 21 799 59 595 44 527 4225 2 7 1
09-XII-97 360 19 084 54 129 31 519 3357 4 8 1
16-XI-98 403 21 457 58 815 30 482 4298 4 8 1
12-III-99 407 24 992 68 877 26 357 3352 3 7 1
Figure C.4—Acoustic activity and three-dimensional PD source location in a 330 MVA,

400/115/35 kV transformer
C.4.3 Case 3—146 MVA autotransformer—effect of voltage and load on PD activity

Single-phase autotransformer: 500/230/13.8 kV, ONAN/ONAF/ONAF, 146/194/243 MVA, core form.

After two years in operation of three sister units that are part of the same bank, Phase C started gassing. A
steady increase in hydrogen started being detected in February 2005. The other two phases remained stable.
Representative DGA values, shown in Table C.2 below, indicate the existence of PD activity.
Table C.2—DGA values

Date H2 CO CO2 CH4 C2H6 C2H4 C2H2 TDCG
05/31/05 192 187 728 17 5 3 0 404
The utility Asset Management Engineers decided to perform an AE test in order to determine the location of
the gassing site. This test was performed in May 2005.
The autotransformer was monitored continuously for five days. During this period of time it was observed that
significant acoustic activity was detected. This activity was sporadic (only active at certain periods of time);
see Figure C.5.
57
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure C.5—Plot showing the time (horizontal) when the acoustic activity produces
locatable events (vertical) for a portion of the test
As can be observed in Figure C.5, if the test had been done with fewer sensors or for a shorter period of time,
the fault might have not been detected. On the other hand, an online continuous monitoring system might have
allowed detection of this fault earlier and provided more information about its trends.
When analyzing the other data collected during the test, it was observed that the AE was detected when load
was at minimum value (see Figure C.6). This behavior suggested a source only active when the voltage was at
its maximum value.
Figure C.6—Load current versus acoustic activity
58
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
In order to verify that hypothesis, the voltage profile of the transformer was requested from the utility. It was
observed that the fault was active when the system reached the maximum voltage values (see Figure C.7).
Figure C.7—Voltage profile
After five days of continuous monitoring, two areas where the acoustic activity occurred inside the transformer
were obtained. These areas are presented as three dimensional plots. From the average coordinates and
correlation to pre-tanking photographs, the possible areas of concern were at the bottom and top core yokes
(see Figure C.8).
59
IEEE Std C57.127-2018

Figure C.8—Three-dimensional plots versus construction photographs showing two
clusters of acoustic activity
Additional tests were planned and an overhaul was being planned after the summer. The transformer failed on
July 2, 2005.
Internal inspection indicated that the predicted locations were right on the areas where the degradation was
observed (see Figure C.9).
60
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure C.9—Internal inspection findings after unit failed
C.4.4 Case 4—Grid transformer with cable box

This case covers a grid transformer that is connected to polymeric cables on both sides. On the high voltage
side, first an oil-oil bushing is installed followed by an oil-filled duct to the cable box, which is separated from
the main oil reservoir. A while after commissioning, oil samples were taken and analyzed. The oil sample
taken from one cable box showed hydrogen content of a couple of hundred ppm. For the onsite investigation
under online conditions no measurement taps were available. Thus, after making sure that the cable’s ground
connection was made outside of the cable box, a high frequency current transformer offering an opening of
100 mm was used on the high voltage cable.
Figure C.10—PD pattern of paper layer delamination (flat gas-filled pockets)
To estimate the sensitivity, a calibrator signal was fed through the CT opening parallel to the cable
(Figure C.11, left). Figure C.10 shows the signal of the PD activity along with a calibration signal of 1nC.
Thus, the magnitude of the activity is in the range of 5nCiec. The pattern, as such, shows the typical properties
of large flat air pockets between insulation layers.
61
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
The main task of the drain valve sensor, as shown on the right hand side of Figure C.11, is in the first place to be
oil tight. After installing it on the flange of the drain valve with the central pipe moved back, vacuum is pulled
to confirm that it is tightly installed and to avoid bringing air inside of the transformer in service. Then with the
drain valve slowly opened, the central pipe is moved inwards to have the antenna protruding a few centimeters
beyond the inner tank wall. Here as well, the Φ-q-n pattern is analyzed and verified to belong to the activity of
interest.
Figure C.11—Using an HV cable as CC (left) and UHF drain valve sensor (right)
Likewise, the other cables were checked as well as the accessible neutral connection, and it was confirmed that
this was the only activity. Thus, acoustic location was attempted using the electrical trigger. Figure C.12 shows
the signals as captured using three sensors. The acoustic signals arrive about 200 µs after the electrical trigger,
which corresponds to about 26 cm. Here, it is interesting to see that the signal is also being reflected from the
rear side of the pipe having a diameter of 600 mm and, hence, the reflected signal arrives after about 600 µs.
Figure C.12—Signal of three acoustic sensors based on electrical trigger signal (red)
62
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure C.13—Triangulation results of the measurements as shown with Figure C.12
Figure C.13 shows the triangulation result with reference to the centerline of the pipe that heads the cable
(Figure C.14, red line). It turned out that at this location a flexible link was inserted into the connection
between cable bushing and oil-oil bushing, which apparently had been bent during installation. When placing
the sensors on the rear side of the duct, a similar result is found. However, the reflection is stronger on the left
side. Thus, it can be assumed that the activity is stronger on the right side of the duct.
The resulting field enhancement started PD and gases were accumulated between the paper layers. The lead
was replaced and the unit was tested free of PD. Figure C.14 shows the principle of the cable box for this unit
and the location of the source (red circle).
Figure C.14—High voltage cable box and found location of the PD activity
C.4.5 Case 5—Grid autotransformer

A large grid autotransformer failed the PD acceptance test. The unit showed the highest PD magnitude on
X2 with about 1.2 nC (Figure C.15). Here, the pattern shows the typical shape of a void PD, but the pattern
63
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
changed during the test also to flat delamination PD. This indicates that gases are produced and, eventually,
a bubble slips out and stays awhile attached to the conductor. Cross coupling to H3 was relatively high with
about 40% and much larger than during calibration.
Figure C.15—PD pattern on X2—spherical gas bubble
Thus, attempts to acoustic triangulation started on the LV side, where both HV potential (center part of the
coil) and X2 common potential do meet (tap leads and tap changer). However, no signal was captured on that
side. Instead, signals could be captured from underneath the tank (Figure C.16, left).
Moreover, even clearer location results were obtained from the top of the tank (Figure C.16, right). It shall
be noted that the distance the acoustic signal travels is about 250 cm, which is, in light of the “free space path
loss” of the spherical wave front, a remarkable distance. A direct measurement in front of the tap changer was
hampered by massive magnetic wall shunts at the side walls of this unit.
Figure C.16—Acoustic location results on X2 LV with sensors underneath (left) and above
(right) the tank
64
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure C.17—Identified locations on the reverse switch of tap changer X1 and X2
Likewise, a similar defect on X1 was found at the identical position of the tap changer's reverse switch
(Figure C.17). With X1, as well, location was possible from top and bottom. However, after knowing the
exact location of the X2 activity, very faint signals were finally found directly in front to the identified location
(Figure C.18). It shall be noted that not only the strong attenuation due to the wall shunt hamper measurement,
but also strong flux in those shunts, cause Barkhausen noise, which the averaging technique cannot remove
entirely.
As the tap changer of phase 3 does not have the proximity to a neighboring phase, signals of X3 did show only
cross coupling. After untanking, the leads at the tap changers of phase 1 and phase 2 were improved and the
unit successfully passed acceptance.
Figure C.18—Faint acoustic signals in front of X2—wall shunt attenuation
C.4.6 Case 6—Large shell-type autotransformer

Generally, shell-type transformers are very difficult candidates for attempts of acoustic location, as the core
rests horizontally on a frame and shields most of the winding. Access from top and bottom is also difficult, as
65
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
there is often structural material to keep the coils in place. Thus, access can be tried from the sides above and
below the core. Knowledge concerning the internal life is more needed than for core-type transformers, as for
the latter the tank and position of construction elements on the tank tell about the internal life. With shell-type
transformers even the orientation of the coils is not necessarily clear, as there are also variants like a horizontal
five-limb core [Figure C.19, (b)].
Figure C.19—Shell-type core styles (top view)—standard (a) and five-limb variant (b)
The unit, a large grid transformer (YNa0d11) showed discharge of a floating potential on one phase at 20%
during acceptance testing after repair (Figure C.20). The unit underwent repair of a short-circuit damage on
this specific phase. The core was of the horizontal five-limb style and the problem was on C coil. Thus access
was possible from HV side, LV side, and the narrow side.

Figure C.20—PD of a floating potential on HV C phase
Almost 5 nC magnitude offers some possibilities for acoustic location even on a shell-type unit. The electrical
signal from HV, MV (common), and LV (tertiary) indicated that the signals are cross-coupled (no polarity
swap) and that the source should be electrically close to MV C. Acoustic scanning of the assumed areas of
internal leads was not giving results. Finally, a very faint signal was detected below the core in only a confined
area on the HV side (Figure C.21).
66
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure C.21—Faint acoustic signal as captured on the lower part of C coil
The rough distance of the signal source is 100 cm away from the tank wall. The fact that there is only a
slow increase of the acoustic signal indicates that there are competing signal paths due to the spacers and oil
channels of the pancake coil stack. This circumstance is also responsible for the only confined area in which
the signal could be detected.
Subsequently, the voltage was increased, and a similar activity of a floating potential incepted with more
than double the magnitude (12 nC) at 150%. The location result was at about 170 cm depth on the HV side.
Based on this result, the LV side was scanned also and there was also a depth of about 100 cm found, which
corresponds to the tank width of 270 cm.
No drawings were available at the time of the test. However, the discharge type and location fits to the location
of a laminated static shield between high voltage coil and common coil. As the coil is symmetrical, the first
location result concerns the static shield facing to the HV side with the low inception, while the second activity
stands for the static shield on the MV side (Figure C.22).
Figure C.22—Assumed construction of the coil stack and location of the static shields
With this case, no follow up information is available. However, repairing of the laminated static shield
between common and high voltage coil would be very laborious, as this would mean a complete disassembly
of the core and the pancake coils. Besides hampering acoustic location, this is one of the general drawbacks of
shell-type transformers; on the other hand, they do offer compact design and excellent short circuit behavior.
67
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
C.4.7 Case 7—Large grid autotransformer

When attempting an acceptance test on this unit, PD incepted with a delay of a few minutes. The pattern
properties and the cross coupling to other phases indicated that there were two independent activities on the
same phase. Here, further identification was obtained, when viewing the signal in time domain. Subsequently,
the signals of the two sources were clearly separated by choosing the most prominent cross coupling that did
show the smallest response of the other signal. Thus, it is essential to always have a look at the cross-coupling
signals in time domain.
One signal gave a clear cross coupling to the common potential of the neighboring phase including a polarity
swap, which makes a problem with the leads—including the tap leads—the most prominent root cause. This
problem was then quickly located at the tap changer at one of the connections, while using the common of the
other phase as trigger for the triangulation.
The other problem did show a cross coupling to the core as well as to the tertiary of the said coil. Here,
the ratio between calibration ratio and PD ratio was larger than 5. This already clearly indicates a location
inside the coil. Thus, the trigger signal for triangulation was taken from tertiary Y1 and the top of the coil was
searched, as this was the Y1 end of the tertiary. Correlating signals were found just under the top pressure disc
(Figure C.23).

Figure C.23—Acoustic signals as found at the top of coil 1
68
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
Figure C.24—Path of the acoustic signal through the oil channels under the pressure disk
The acoustic signals show a slow increase, which indicates competing travel paths for the acoustic pressure
wave. Moreover, as the signals were captured just under the upper pressure disc, they had to follow the paths
given by the radial placed sticks to form the oil channels between the said disc and the coil stack, as indicated
with Figure C.24. Here, the red arrows show the position of the acoustic sensors. When moving the sensors,
the identified location moves as well because during triangulation a straight path is assumed, where the line
with the total distance points to the oil channel, where the signal exits.
Based on the acoustic travel time, the distance was calculated to 137 cm, which would be close to the centerline,
if assuming a straight path (Figure C.24, dashed line). Even when assuming the path along the radial sticks,
there is still 27 cm additional travel path. Figure C.25 shows the situation in a cut view along the acoustic
travel path.

Figure C.25—Travel path of the acoustic signal through the oil channels deeply into the
winding
However, at this position, in the interface between common, core, and the recessed tertiary, the cross coupling
is possible exactly as observed. In this specific area, the comparably high field of the common potential
“views” the core and the insulation stack on top of the shorter tertiary.
However, fixing the problem required untanking, removal of the yoke, and the pressure disc to redo the
insulation stack on top of the tertiary.
69
IEEE Std C57.127-2018
C.5 Conclusions
Detection and location of PD using acoustic measurements is not a perfect science. All PD systems require
knowledge of how the system is recording and processing data in order to interpret data correctly. Remote
operation of these systems may have the following difficulties:
a) High level PD can be detected and located. It is difficult to detect low PD levels.
b) PD sources in outer parts (leads, etc.) can be detected and located more easily than PD in inner parts.
PD within the winding block might be impossible to detect or location might be false even at high
levels of activity.
c) The correlation is weak between measured and real PD level due to attenuation.
d) For exact location, detailed design drawings are needed.
e) Correlation to on-site operating parameters is needed to separate PD from other acoustic sources, e.g.,
mechanical noises, rain, or hail.
70
Copyrighted material licensed to Electricity of Vietnam by Clarivate Analytics (US) LLC, subscriptions.techstreet.com, downloaded on 2019-03-25 07:21:06 +0000 by Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.
Fax: +1 732 562 1571

Phone: +1 732 981 0060
standards.ieee.org
© IEEE
IEEE

C57 127-2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

C57 127-2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyrighted material licensed to Electricity of Vietnam by Clarivate Analytics (US) LLC, subscriptions.techstreet.

com, downloaded on 2019-03-25 07:21:06 +0000 by

IEEE Power and Energy Society

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

IEEE IEEE Std C57.127™-2018

IEEE Guide for the Detection,

Approved 23 October 2018

IEEE-SA Standards Board

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Keywords: acoustic emission (AE), attenuation, burst, gas-in-oil analysis, IEEE

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Copyright © 2019 by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

PDF: ISBN 978-1-5044-5469-8 STD23500

IEEE prohibits discrimination, harassment, and bullying.

Notice and Disclaimer of Liability Concerning the Use of IEEE Standards

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Comments on standards should be submitted to the following address:

Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

Laws and regulations

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Updating of IEEE Standards documents

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Detlev Gross, Chair

Omar Ahmed Alexander Kraetge Alaor Scardazzi

Tauhid Haque Ansari Peter Kelly John Roach

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Jean-Philippe Faure, Chair

Ted Burse Xiaohui Liu Robby Robson

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

3. Detection and measurement of PD—background information������������������������������������������������������������������ 17

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Figure 4—Ultrasonic detection of air-borne PD signal using parabolic reflectors������������������������������������������ 20

Figure 7—Compression wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths�������������������������������������� 24

Figure 8—Shear wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths�������������������������������������������������� 24

Figure 11—Hidden PD source—signal paths and assumed location�������������������������������������������������������������� 26

Figure 12—Example of HV-side of three-phase transformer assembly��������������������������������������������������������� 35

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Figure C.8—Three-dimensional plots versus construction photographs showing two clusters of

Figure C.9—Internal inspection findings after unit failed������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 61

Figure C.10—PD pattern of paper layer delamination (flat gas-filled pockets)���������������������������������������������� 61

Figure C.13—Triangulation results of the measurements as shown with Figure C.12����������������������������������� 63

Figure C.18—Faint acoustic signals in front of X2—wall shunt attenuation������������������������������������������������� 65

Figure C.20—PD of a floating potential on HV C phase�������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 66

Figure C.21—Faint acoustic signal as captured on the lower part of C coil���������������������������������������������������� 67

Figure C.23—Acoustic signals as found at the top of coil 1��������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Table 1—Acoustic properties of various materials (Lundgaard [B45])���������������������������������������������������������� 23

Table 4—Comparison of electrical and acoustic PD signals�������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42

Table C.1—DGA history of the transformer with PD activity������������������������������������������������������������������������ 56

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

AE burst: A group of AE oscillations constituting a transient signal (see 5.5).

AE oscillation: An oscillation produced by a resonant piezo-electric crystal when perturbed by a pressure

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

2.2 Acronyms and abbreviations

JTFA joint time-frequency analysis

3. Detection and measurement of PD—background information

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

4. Acoustic signal and transmission characteristics

Tong cong ty Dien luc TP Ha Noi.

3. Detection and measurement of PD—background information�� 17

Figure 4—Ultrasonic detection of air-borne PD signal using parabolic reflectors�� 20

Figure 7—Compression wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths�� 24

Figure 8—Shear wave at a tank wall—aperture angle, possible travel paths�� 24

Figure 11—Hidden PD source—signal paths and assumed location�� 26

Figure 12—Example of HV-side of three-phase transformer assembly�� 35

Figure C.9—Internal inspection findings after unit failed�� 61

Figure C.10—PD pattern of paper layer delamination (flat gas-filled pockets)�� 61

Figure C.13—Triangulation results of the measurements as shown with Figure C.12�� 63

Figure C.18—Faint acoustic signals in front of X2—wall shunt attenuation�� 65

Figure C.20—PD of a floating potential on HV C phase�� 66

Figure C.21—Faint acoustic signal as captured on the lower part of C coil�� 67

Figure C.23—Acoustic signals as found at the top of coil 1�� 68

Table 1—Acoustic properties of various materials (Lundgaard [B45])�� 23

Table 4—Comparison of electrical and acoustic PD signals�� 42

Table C.1—DGA history of the transformer with PD activity�� 56