See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264799632

Quiet Transformers: Design Issues

Conference Paper · October 2013

DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2620.0962

CITATIONS READS

5 5,837

4 authors:

Luis Fernández Braña C. M. A. Vasques

EFACEC ENERGIA S.A University of Aveiro
4 PUBLICATIONS 21 CITATIONS 45 PUBLICATIONS 643 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hugo Miguel Rodrigues Campelo Xose M. LOPEZ-FERNANDEZ

EFACEC Energia, S.A. University of Vigo
36 PUBLICATIONS 209 CITATIONS 25 PUBLICATIONS 140 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Hugo Miguel Rodrigues Campelo on 18 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

Quiet Transformers: Design Issues

a b) a) a)c)
Luis FERNÁNDEZ BRAÑA ), César M. A. VASQUES , Hugo M. R. CAMPELO and Xosé M. LÓPEZ-FERNÁNDEZ
a)
R&D, EFACEC ENERGIA Parque empresarial da Arroteia, 1018, 4466-952 San Mamede de Infesta, Portugal
E-mail: luis.brana@efacec.com E-mail: hugo.campelo@efacec.com E-mail: xm.lopez@efacec.com
b)
INEGI, University of Porto, Campus da FEUP, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias 400, , 4200-465 Porto, Portugal , E-mail: cvasques@inegi.up.pt
c)
Electrical Engineering, University of Vigo, E.I.I. Industriales, Campus Lagoas, 36310 Vigo, Spain, E-mail: xmlopez@uvigo.es
.

Abstract — Over the last years, Environmental European legislation has imposed more restrictive limits regarding
noise emission. As a result, the power transformer industry must adapt its products to fulfill these requirements.
Nevertheless, the design and manufacturing of “quiet” transformers demands an effective understanding of the
whole process of transmission and radiation in the transformer, and its measurement principles. This paper
describes the noise sources of power transformers and their physical background, reviews the influential factors for
noise measurement methods acknowledged by international standards, presents the new tendencies in experimental
measurement techniques and reviews applicable noise reduction techniques.
Keywords— Transformer, core noise, load noise, magnetostriction, resonance

I. INTRODUCTION
Acoustic pollution is part of the most general subject of the pollution. Nevertheless, noise had not reached the
level of social concern attributed to other environmental problems until more recent years. It adds that, in the
current context, social concern about disturbances that noise causes tends to increase not only due to objective
factors -urban noise already has reached high risk health thresholds for health, Veira [1]- but also due to
increasing social conviction that good welfare must be associated to the absence of noise pollution. Thus, the
entailment of the absence of noise with the quality of life is promoting a growing social concern about this
issue.
It has been estimated that about a 20% of the population of Western European population is exposed to noise
levels that scientists and health professional consider unacceptable for health as they can seriously disturb sleep
and induce noxious effects on the cardiovascular system. The number of complaints related to this subject is
increasing: the poll about environment of the Eurobarometer in 1995 [2] showed that noise was the fifth
concern in order of importance related with the local environment and it was the only concern which showed an
increase since 1992 [2].
Also, urban areas have experienced growing population densities for several decades, Hassan [3]. Therefore, if
this tendency continues it is expectable that noise remains a social concern in the coming years.
As a result, public authorities have reacted. In the European Union, the emission of national legal directives
progressively more restrictive, especially in cities, has been a trend in the last few years following the European
Directive 92 [4], which established the basic guidelines on noise area in the union. For instance, in the Iberian
Peninsula, DL 9/2007 [5] established a noise level limit of 55 dB(A) in residential areas in Portugal and [6] RD
1367/2007 established a limit of 60 dB(A) in residential areas in Spain.
Summing up, it is expected that in the coming years, the technical specifications demanded for power
transformers manufacturers will be increasingly restrictive in pursuant to the environmental legislation. In this
context, the design and manufacturing of “quiet” transformers fulfilling with the ever demanding legislative
requirements in residential areas demands an effective understanding of the whole process of the noise
generation, transmission and radiation in the transformer as well as its measurements principles. Accordingly,
in the following sections this paper describes the main noise sources of power transformers and their physical
background, and reviews the influential factors for noise measurement methods acknowledged by international
standards, the new tendencies in experimental measurement techniques and applicable noise reduction
techniques.

1
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

II. TRANSFORMER NOISE SOURCES

The transformer noise is mainly caused by the following sources:
 Core Noise: Noise caused by magnetostrictive strain of core laminations and the pull of magnetic
forces, it occurs at twice the line frequency (100 Hz or 120 Hz) and due to nonlinear nature of
magnetostriction, higher harmonics of even order also appear as a result of core vibration;
 Load Noise: Noise caused by Lorentz forces resulting from the interaction between the magnetic
leakage flux of one winding and the electric currents in the conductors of other winding. These forces
induce vibrations in the windings which result in acoustic radiations with twice the line frequency (100
Hz or 120 Hz);
 Cooling Noise: Noise produced by fans, oil pumps and other cooling equipment components; the sum
of Core Noise and Cooling Noise results in the No-Load Noise.
The total noise emitted by the power transformer is the total sum of these components. Nevertheless, given the
nature of the noise magnitude and the employed units (dB), the concept of dominant source must be introduced.
This means that quiet often the most significant contribution to the noise generated by multiple sources is due
to only one source of noise. In the case of power transformers, the dominant noise source is always either the
No-Load Noise or the Load Noise. According to Reiplinger [7] and other authors the dominant source is
determined by the power of the transformer: for the majority of the transformers with power lower than
approximately 120-150 MVA the No-Load Noise will be predominant whereas for higher powers the Load-
Noise will be the dominant source, (see Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Contribution to total noise from each generating source

A. CORE NOISE
Iron core vibrations were identified as the main cause of transformer noise already in the early thirties. Tests
and field observations have shown that noise emissions are primarily dependent on the rated power of the
transformer and the flux density in the iron core, not on the loading.
The noise generation by the magnetic core is a phenomenon which is still currently under research.
Traditionally the noise generated by the magnetic core has been considered the main source of noise emission
from a power transformer. The magnetic core generates noise due to two independent physical phenomena: the
magnetostriction and the pull caused especially at core joints by the interaction between magnetic forces, also
known as Maxwell or reluctance forces.
Magnetostriction is a characteristic property of ferromagnetic material which forces it to change its shape in
presence of magnetic fields. This effect was first identified by Joule in 1842.
Ferromagnetic materials have an inner structure which is divided into two domains, each one of them is a

2
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

magnetically polarized region. When a magnetic field is applied, the boundaries between the domains change
and thus the domains rotate. Both effects are reflected in the dimensional change of the material, as can be
observed in Fig. 2.

Figure 2. Magnetostriction effect. a) Magnetic field distribution; b) Set of forces representing the strain.
In spite of being a well studied phenomenon, nowadays the vibration and noise caused by the magnetostriction
is determined in a purely experimental way. The absence of a completely defined physical model greatly
hinders the analysis and quantification of this physical phenomenon. Either way, in recent times some numeric
models based on the variation of energy have been formulated to be implanted in finite element software
Delaere, [8]. Yet, these models do not calculate the elongation of the magnetic sheet but from the experimental
measurement they calculate the “equivalent” force to produce the same variation that magnetostrictive strains
do. Furthermore, the magnetic and elastic properties of ferromagnetic materials depend on each other making it
necessary taking into account the different couplings between these properties.
Contrarily, in the beginning of the 20th century it was commonly assumed that the main cause of transformer
noise was the magnetic pull between the laminations at their joints induced by the interaction between magnetic
forces. These forces are caused by the interaction of magnetic fields due to the different orientation of the
magnetic poles. They are more intense at the joints because the airgap existing between the two groups of
magnetic sheets forces the magnetic flux to change its direction pursuing the way of lower reluctance.
Consequently, as can be observed in Fig. 3, attractive magnetic forces are induced between the different groups
of sheets.

3
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

Figure 3. Magnetic field acting on the core steel sheets. a) Magnetic field distribution. b) Resultant magnetic forces.
B. LOAD NOISE
Load noise is the noise emitted by a loaded transformer additionally to its no-load noise. It is caused by
electromagnetic forces as a result from the interaction between the leakage fields and the winding current, as
exhibited in Fig. 4. Load noise is proportional to the square of the current. As well as with the core noise, by
mechanical fluid coupling the vibrations are transmitted to the tank thorough acoustic waves in the oil, and the
tank acts as noise radiator where vibratory energy is released to air as structure borne noise.

Figure 4. Leakage fields at windings.

Windings vibrate radially and axially. Radial vibrations make significant contributions to the transformer noise
only with great winding diameters. Therefore, winding noise is mainly caused by axial vibrations.
Through several decades the contribution of the load noise to the total transformer noise has been considered as
insignificant. In spite of decreased magnetostriction, improved magnetic properties of core sheets and therewith
the connected reduction of core noise, the simultaneous rise of flux densities and the great difference between
the noise generated by the magnetic core and the winding make the transformer no load noise the dominating

4
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

noise component.
This concept began to change years ago. The use of Hi-B steel sheets, improved core designs –especially the
adoption of step-lap cores– and flux density reduction in the transformers have decreased the impact of the
noise generated in the magnetic core to such an extent that the noise generated in the windings is coming
increasingly into force.
C. COOLING NOISE
In transformers with normal design the noise of the cooling equipment can be considered negligible since its
impact over the total noise of the transformer is often lower than 2 dB(A).
III. EXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENTS
A. STANDARD MEASUREMENT APPROACHES
Different experimental methods to measure sound power levels of acoustic sources have been broadly
discussed in international forums for decades. Traditionally, the Sound Pressure Method has been considered
the general method of measurement and has been the only one accepted by international standards. Yet, some
attempts have been made in the late eighties to assess the accuracy of the Sound Intensity Method and some
authors, such as Champoux [9], concluded that this measurement method induces lower deviations,
independently of the test conditions. Accordingly, the CIGRE Working Group [10] also devoted great efforts
on this subject to determine the conditions for proper measurement of transformer sound power level by using
the Sound Intensity Method and, as a result, the Sound Intensity Method was incorporated when the noise
standards IEC 60076-10 [11, 12] were rewritten and issued in 2001 and 2005. Currently, the IEEE commitment
is discussing the incorporation of this method to the ANSI transformer standard as well. All this efforts to
determine the adequate noise measuring methods for power transformers are not in vain since the accuracy of
the experimental methods has been acknowledged as a critical factor in order to develop transformers with low
noise emission.
Sound pressure is defined as the difference between the instantaneous pressure and the static atmospheric
pressure, measuring the variation in the static pressure of the air due to the energy caused by the sound waves.
Hearing is directly sensitive to sound pressure. Sound intensity, I( , ), may be defined as the sound power
transferred by a sound wave per unit area normal to the propagation direction. It is related to the sound pressure
by
I( , ) = ( , ) ( , ) (1)
where ( , ) is the sound pressure and ( , ) is the particle velocity vector of an acoustic media with spatial
and time coordinates and . Notice that both I( , ) and ( , ) are vectors, which means that both have
direction and magnitude, while ( , ) is a spatial and time dependent scalar field.
Let us consider the case of a sound source producing spherical waves (radiating equally in all directions),
idealistically representing the noise radiated by a transformer. For convenience, the average acoustic intensity
over the time of one cycle of harmonic motion, , at a distance r in the radial direction from the center of the
source, is defined as
( )
I( ) = ∫ ( , ) ( , )d = (2)

where ( ) is the root mean square (rms) value of the sound pressure, is the density of air and the
velocity of sound in air.
Sound power W is defined as the total sound energy emitted by a source per unit time. It is obtained by
integrating the sound intensity over an imaginary surface area surrounding a source. Thus, integrating equation
(2) over the radiating surface of a half-sphere with surface area , we have
( ) ( )
=∫ d =2 = ( ) ( ) (3)

As can be seen in equation (3), the sound power is directly correlated with sound pressure and intensity. Also,
for a constant sound power, the acoustic pressure and intensity depend on the distance from the source, i.e.,
∝ 1⁄ and ∝ 1⁄ .

5
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

For a more general surface composed of irregular subareas, the acoustic sound power is obtained as
=∑ (4)
where is the intensity of the th segment and is the surface area perpendicular to the energy flow trhough
the th segment. Sound power can thus be computed from measured values of sound pressure or sound intensity
levels knowing the area over which the measurements were made. Traditionally, the main use of sound
intensity measurements is for the location of noise sources; however, in the context of transformers, and given
the better immunity of sound-intensity levels measurement to ambient background noise, it is being more and
more used to determine the total sound power radiated by a transformer.
Due to the large range of pressures involved in acoustic measurements and the remarkably capability of our
ears to respond logarithmically, not linearly, to acoustic stimuli, in terms of both magnitude and frequency, the
use of compressed or logarithmic scales (using ratios) representing acoustic quantities like pressure, intensity
and power in terms of deciBel (dB) is nowadays a common practice. Accordingly, the sound pressure level
is a logarithmic measure of sound pressure (measured in dB) in comparison to a reference level, and is defined
as

= 10 log = 20 log (5)

where = 20 Pa is the reference sound pressure corresponding to the threshold of audibility of human
hearing. Similarly, the sound intensity and power levels, and , are defined as

= 10 log (6)

= 10 log (7)

where = 10 W⁄m is the reference intensity corresponding to the threshold of audibility and =
10 W is the internationally agreed reference power.
To mimic the sound pressure perceived by the human ears, an internationally standardized frequency response
A-weighting scale should be applied to the measured sound levels, with units expressed in dB(A). According to
the standard IEC 60076-10 [11], the A-weighted sound power level, , can be calculated from either the
corrected average A-weighted sound pressure level, , or the average A-weighted sound intensity level, ,
both averaged from the measurements performed at the different positions, and defined according to

= + 10 log (8)

= + 10 log (9)

where = 1 m is the reference area.

B. INFLUENTIAL FACTORS WHEN MEASURING NOISE
According to the standards IEC 60076-10, [11, 12], a reliable sound intensity measurement of the total dB(A)
level requires that the difference between the sound pressure and sound intensity measurements must be lower
than eight dB(A). This limit has been determined in function of some factors whose impact determines the
accuracy of the measurement methods.
1. Ambient noise
When measuring the noise emitted by the transformer, ambient noise increases the measured sound pressure
level but has no impact when the sound intensity is measured around the transformer. This effect is greater at
frequencies other than those from the transformer noise. The ambient noise is partially corrected by the IEC
standard [11, 12] by applying an environmental correction factor for low levels of the ambient noise, defined
as:

= 10 log 1+ (10)
/

where S is the area of the measurement surface and A is the ratio of the sound absorption area of the test room,
defined as:

6
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

= (11)
where α is the average acoustic absorption coefficient [11] and is the total area of the surface of the test
room in square meters.
Therefore, according to IEC standard 60076-10 [12] the corrected average A-weighted sound pressure level is
determined by
. .
= 10 log 10 − 10 − (12)
where is the uncorrected average A-weighted sound pressure level and the calculated average A-
weighted background noise pressure level.
Nevertheless the correction factor is currently being discussed in international working groups as it is not
unanimously considered as sufficiently accurate because it is applied only to the total dB(A) level and usually
the frequency spectrum of the ambient noise differs from the frequency spectrum of the transformer noise. This
is especially true when measuring the fundamental frequency (100/120 Hz) of the load noise. Also, ambient
noise cannot be higher than the true noise level of the transformer when using any of the measurement
methods.

2. Walls
When measuring the noise emitted by the transformer, the sound is reflected by the walls and ceiling which
surrounds the transformer tested. Again, this sound does not influence the sound intensity around the
transformer but has a significant impact if the Sound Pressure Method is used. The error induced by this factor
is estimated to be within a range between 1 and 3 dB. This effect is corrected in the IEC standard [11, 12] by
applying the room correction factor .
3. Reactive near – field sound close to the transformer
This part of the sound field gives no contribution to the far field sound from the transformer. However, it gives
an error when determining sound power levels using sound pressure measurements close to the sound source.
This noise component is not corrected in both IEC and IEEE noise measurement standards [11-13].
4. Booth transformer
The noise from the booth transformer can induce measurement errors if it is located in the test hall. This noise
ought not to be accounted for as part of the ambient noise when measuring the transformer load noise but as an
independent effect. This factor has greater influence when using the Sound Pressure Method.
5. Distance
When the ambient noise level is low compared to the transformer noise level and the measurements are carried
out at distances greater than two meters, the transformer noise level measured using is practically identical by
using both methods of measure. However, when less than this distance the measurements performed by using
the Sound Pressure Method can reach deviations within a range of 1-3 dB(A) due to reactive near field –
reactive sound.
Therefore, altogether, the Sound Intensity Method is the most accurate and consistent method for measuring the
noise level emitted by a transformer. Nevertheless, a greater difference than that which is accepted in IEC
standard 60076-10 [11, 12] indicates extreme ambient conditions and/or unreasonable wall reflections. Under
these conditions, neither the Sound Pressure nor the Sound Intensity Methods provide accurate measurements.
C. NEW MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES
Both methods of measurement acknowledged by IEC 60076-10 [11] can be classified as “indirect methods”
since they measure a consequence of the mechanical vibrations: noise. These methods are based on the use of
microphones in order to measure the noise around the transformer perimeter. As it was mentioned before, these
“indirect methods” are exposed to factors related with the environment where the transformer is located which
can lead to performing wrong measurements.

7
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

In the last few years, a new way of measuring has aroused based on optical fibers, taking advantage of this
great development of this technology. These types of sensors are currently successfully employed for
measuring temperature on the active part of the transformer. Lamela [14] has reported direct measurements in
the inside of a prototype transformer. On the other hand, Kung [15] has reported measurements of the
vibrations on a transformer tank by using optical fibers based on Bragg Grating technology.
Potential benefits of this technology are clear: measurements become independent of the transformer location,
avoiding the effect of external noise and the reflected noise emitted by the transformer itself. In addition, as
well as with temperature measurement, the fiber optic sensors are immune and do not interfere with magnetic
fields of the active part of the transformers.
IV. DESIGN ASPECTS
The design and manufacture of “quiet” transformers demands an effective understanding of the whole process
of noise generation, transmission and radiation, due to the magnetic core, windings (Load-Noise) or even the
auxiliary cooling equipment. However, The complexity of the interactions among the physical phenomena
involved in a power transformer (electromagnetism, heat transfer and rheology) has greatly hindered the
development of analytical models. Thus, noise calculation methods of both magnetic core and windings are
nowadays mainly based on empirical approaches, some examples being given by Ishida [16] where the
magnetic core commonly depends on power and magnetic flux density of the steel, or by the empirical
equations used to calculate the noise generated by the winding ,which are based on the power of the
transformer, as the equation developed by Reiplinger [7] which was adopted by the IEC standard for the load
noise calculation.
Yet, calculation methods exhibit significant deviations regarding the measurements. It has been verified that the
calculation method developed by Reiplinger [7] can underestimate the noise level originated in the windings in
a range of 0-15 dB(A). As a result, empirical methods must be modified in order to include both electric and
geometric parameters until reach minimal uncertainties.
Nowadays, the use of multiphysics software based on numerical approximation methods such as the finite
element method represents a very powerful option in order to design “quieter” transformers through an
appropriate control of the mechanisms of sound generation, transmission and radiation present in a transformer.
The simulation of multiphysics coupling – electromagnetic, mechanical and acoustic – as well as the realistic
modeling of the thermal and hydrodynamic behavior of the oil, currently represents great challenges when
developing and using finite element models for the analysis and design of transformers.
Lastly, the diversity of materials which composes power transformers – paper, copper, steel, wood, etc. – as
well as geometrical particularities, like frictional contacts among steel sheets, must be taken into account when
modeling a power transformer, making the detailed modeling and good understanding of all phenomena
involved in the machine even more difficult and complex.
V. VIBRATION FUNDAMENTALS
A large proportion of noise radiators take the form of vibrating solid surfaces. One such example is the noise
produced by power transformers where, typically, structure borne noise radiated by transformers originates
from the vibration of the core and windings, which is then transmitted through the oil and structural
connections to the vibrating surface of tank which then radiates noise to the free field. In most cases, reduction
of the surface vibration will produce proportional changes in the radiated sound.
It is, of course, preferable and advisable to reduce the vibrational excitation forces (or displacements) at source,
but for technical and economic reasons this may not be feasible. Alternatively, passive (or active) vibration
control strategies may be used. Thus, for that purpose, it is essential to have a basic understanding of the
fundamental principles involved in structural vibrations and conventional passive vibration control approaches,
briefly described in what follows.
A. SPRING-MASS-DAMPER SYSTEM
Nearly all vibration phenomena follows basic principles so that generally only a simple model is necessary to
qualitatively explain a vibration event and the physics involved. Of course, for a fully quantitative simulation,
much more detailed models need to be developed, for example, using finite element approximation methods,
but even these often consist essentially of an assembly of simple models.

8
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

A system with a single degree of freedom (SDoF) is the simplest among the vibratory systems. However, the
role of SDoF systems in vibration theory is very important because any linear vibratory (discrete or continuous)
system behaves like an SDoF system near an isolated resonance frequency or as a connection of coupled SDoF
systems in a wider frequency range. Understanding the dynamic vibratory behavior of SDoF systems can
therefore be considered as the initial building block for the physical modeling and understanding of more
complex systems with many degrees of freedom.
An SDoF is commonly accepted to be represented by a spring-mass-damper system (see Figure 5) consisting of
three elements – inertia, elastic and damping elements – allowing the phenomenological representation of
general dissipative elastodynamic systems. In the time domain, the equation of motion can be derived by
applying Newton’s second law – equating internal forces (inertia, damping and elasticity) with the external
(excitation) force – in the form
̈( ) + ̇( ) + ( )= ( ) (13)
where ( ) is the time-dependent displacement of a non-elastic mass from the equilibrium position, ( ) is
the external force applied to the mass, and and are the stiffness and viscous damping coefficients. Usually,
the inertia and elastic parameters are easily identified from the physical consideration, while the damping
coefficient more difficult to obtain is estimated from measurements. The three terms in the left-hand side of
equation (13) represent the force of inertia, the damper reaction force and the force with which the spring acts
on the mass, respectively.

Figure 5. Spring-mass-damper system (left) and its free vibration response (right).
B. FREE AND FORCED HARMONIC RESPONSE
Free (or unforced) vibration of an SDoF system corresponds to zero external loading, i.e., ( ) = 0; it is
uniquely determined by the initial (position and velocity) conditions and it is quite useful to understand the
effect of damping on the oscillating nature of vibration response. For convenience, substituting = ⁄2√
and = ⁄ into equation (14), where is the viscous damping ratio and the undamped natural
frequency, yields
̈( ) + 2 ̇( ) + ( )=0 (14)
which for < 1 has his solution given by
( )= e sin( + ) (15)
where and are constants that depend upon the initial conditions, and = 1− is the damped
natural frequency. The solution of this equation describes the free vibration of the system, which falls into three
categories: (i) underdamped when < 1, (ii) critically damped when = 1 and (iii) overdamped when > 1.
While oscillatory behavior is obtained for underdamped systems, an overdamped system does not oscillate, but
rather returns to its rest position exponentially, where critical damping represents the minimum amount of
damping that yields a non-oscillating response; critical damping can also be thought of as the case that
separates non-oscillation from oscillation. Normally, it is only case (i) which is of interest in practical vibration
problems. The solution in equation (14) presented in (15) is plotted in Figure 5, where it can be seen that the
damping has two effects: it controls the decay of free vibration and it changes the frequency of vibration
(although with a small effect in practice).

9
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

A model of equation (13) which is more mathematically manageable can be obtained in the frequency domain.
Thus, assuming harmonic excitation, ( ) = e , and response, ( ) = e , where and represent
force and displacement amplitudes, = √−1 and is the circular frequency of the applied force, the so-called
receptance frequency response function (FRF) of the system (displacement per unit force transfer function) is
given by
1 1 1
= or = (16)

where Ω = ⁄ is excitation frequency normalized to the undamped natural frequency. From equation (15) it
can be concluded that the displacement FRF is maximum at frequency = 1 − 2 . The phenomenon
when a system response has maximum values is called resonance, which is a key concept in any vibration
analysis. Worthy to mention is that the resonance frequency is formally not equal to the damped natural
frequency previously mentioned, verifying for the displacement case the relation < < . However, for
small damping, since all these frequencies are about equal, resonance or natural frequency designations have
been used interchangeably to designate the frequency at which the amplitude of the system response is
maximum and inversely proportional to the damping factor. Resonance is generally to be avoided in designing
structures, since it means large-amplitude vibrations, which can cause fatigue failure, discomfort, loud noises or
even catastrophic responses.

Let us now examine different excitation regimes in equation (15):

1
(i) For → 0 (or Ω → 0) we have = (stiffness controlled response);
1 1
(ii) For → (or Ω → 1) we have = = (damping controlled response);
1
(iii) Lastly, for ≫ (or Ω ≫ 1) we have =− (mass controlled response).
As illustrated in Figure 6, damping only has an appreciable effect around the resonance frequency. Further,
outside the resonance area, the low frequency displacement response is controlled by the stiffness of the system
while the high frequency displacement behavior is controlled by the mass of the system and inversely
proportional to the square of the frequency.

Figure 6. Receptance (displacement per unit harmonic force) magnitude of a spring-mass-damper system.
Similar conclusions apply for more complex systems with many degrees of freedom and widely separated
modes. However, it is worthy to mention that any complex structure (i.e., more complicated than a single mass
on a simple spring) can vibrate in many preferred different ways denoted as normal modes of vibration. Every
structure has a set of normal modes that depend on the structure geometry, materials and boundary conditions.
Each normal mode can be treated as an SDoF system with its own resonance frequency, damping ratio and
mode shape, a pattern of motion in which all parts of the system move sinusoidally with the same frequency
and with a fixed phase relation. The most general motion of a system is obtained by a linear combination of the
response of each of its normal modes. The modes are normal in the sense that they can move independently,

10
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

that is to say that an excitation of one mode will never cause motion of a different mode. Depending upon of
the spectral content of the excitation and modal density of the structure, several modes can be selectively
excited and contribute to the net spatial response with different modal participation factors.
C. VIBRATION DAMPING
Often in the design of systems, damping is introduced to achieve a reduced level of vibrations, or to perform
vibration suppression. Damping mechanisms in complex structures take various forms, which present
considerable difficulties for mathematical representation. Consequently, there are many theoretical models of
damping trying to accurately represent the dissipation of energy in structural vibrating systems. It is generally
agreed, however, that the only way to gain a true estimate of the damping in a built-up structure is by
measurement, rather than prediction. However, in the modeling of systems, damping can be neglected if the
mechanical energy that is dissipated during the time duration of interest is small in comparison to the initial
total mechanical energy of excitation in the system. Even for highly damped systems, it is useful to perform an
analysis with the damping terms neglected, in order to study several crucial dynamic characteristics, e.g., modal
characteristics (undamped natural frequencies and mode shapes).
Three primary mechanisms of damping are important in the study of mechanical systems. They are: (i) internal
damping (of material); (ii) structural damping (at joints and interfaces) and (iii) fluid damping (through fluid-
structure interactions). Internal (material) damping results from mechanical energy dissipation within the
material due to various microscopic and macroscopic processes. Structural damping is caused by mechanical
energy dissipation resulting from relative motions between components in a mechanical structure that has
common points of contact, joints or supports. Fluid damping arises from the mechanical energy dissipation
resulting from drag forces and associated dynamic interactions when a mechanical system or its components
move in a fluid.
It is common practice to consider simple equivalent damping models to represent complex energy dissipation
mechanism in vibrating systems. The most well-known and used are the so called viscous damping and
hysteretic damping models. Viscous damping is the most basic attempt to model energy dissipation in vibrating
systems and forms the most common model used in lumped mass, single- as well as multiple-degree-of-
freedom systems. It relies on the use of damper elements (dashpots) which can be thought of as a perforated
piston fitted into a cylinder filled with oil. This piston is perforated with holes so that motion of the piston in
the oil is possible. The damping force is proportional to the velocity of the piston, in a direction opposite that of
the piston motion. Motivated by the ability to solve the resulting equation of motion, this form assumes that the
damping is a linear, time invariant and viscous (proportional to velocity).
Whilst viscous damping receives the most attention, it is not the most common form of damping. A model of
structural (hysteretic) damping that is widely used stems from a complex elastic modulus, (1 + ), where
and are the elastic modulus and extensional loss factor, respectively. This leads to the concept of a complex
stiffness (1 + ) which can be employed for the harmonically excited SDoF systems. The loss factor is
widely used by practitioners to incorporate damping into their models. This is because it better represents
structural damping, as the damping force is proportional to displacement but in phase with the velocity.
However, it cannot be used in time-domain models for transient excitation because it predicts a non-causal
response of the system, that is, the system responds before it is excited. This problem can be overcome,
however, by making the loss factor frequency-dependent, as is the case with viscoelastic materials, which also a
damping model of significant interest and application. Viscous damping is defined by the constant or its
nondimensional form , and at the resonance frequency it relates to the loss factor used in an hysteretic model
by = 2 .
D. VIBRATION CONTROL
The control of vibration has generally to be achieved without additional cost, and thus detailed knowledge of
structural dynamics is required together with familiarity of standard vibration control techniques. Therefore,
vibration control has been predominantly carried out using passive means, typically simpler and less expensive,
but active vibration control strategies (not detailed here) have also been successfully applied and may constitute
valid alternatives when passive means fail to succeed or reached their limit.
A generic vibration control problem can be separated into three components: the source, the transmission path
and the receiver. The boundaries of the three components are defined by the problem being considered and the
person solving the problem, and differ substantial from one problem and person to another. In particular, for a

11
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

transformer, the core and windings could be considered to be the vibration source and the oil and structural
connections could be the transmission path to the receiver vibrating structure, in this case the tank. Once these
have been defined, the vibration control problem may reduce to one of changing the size and distribution of
mass, stiffness and damping to minimize the vibration at the receiver. However, the receiver in the case of
transformers (the tank) is also the source of vibration of a coupled vibroacoustic problem which radiates noise
to the free field and other receivers. Whilst this is very easy to write down, it can be very difficult to do in
reality because of the difficulty in determining which parameters to change. For more complex systems
involving internal and external fluid coupling and interactions and complex thermal gradients, this task
becomes even more difficult, probably needing to be partitioned into different subsystems and design phases
with different goals and receivers. However, in a broad sense, general vibration control solutions can involve:
(i) source modification; (ii) vibration isolation; (iii) vibration damping; (iv) the addition of vibration
absorbers/neutralizers; (v) structural modification; and (vi) material selection. The most relevant ones will be
discussed in what follows.
I. Damping Treatments
The attenuation of vibration by added damping generally involves the application of highly dissipative
materials to the radiating structure to convert a large proportion of the vibratory energy into heat and therefore
to reduce the vibration level. Viscoelastic materials present significant damping features, having both damping
and stiffness dependent upon frequency and temperature. In the frequency domain, sufficient for a great
number of analyses, these materials are usually modeled using frequency dependent hysteretic (complex
modulus) approaches.
A common added damping technology resorts on the application of viscoelastic damping treatments to reduce
sound radiation by a vibrating structure. Damping treatments may be considered in the form of viscoelastic
(e.g. rubber, cork) layers surface mounted, sprayed or painted onto the surface of the structure in constrained or
unconstrained configurations, but are only effective when applied to rather thin structural components, such as
metal panels of a few millimeters in thickness. Also, damping treatments are successful only in cases where the
radiation is caused by the resonant response of the structure vibrating in one or more of its normal modes. To
be effective, the added damping should also exceed the material damping naturally existing in the structure and
that coming from fluid structure interactions.
II. Vibration Isolation
Vibration isolation is the dynamic decoupling of two connecting systems and is usually achieved by placing a
flexible resilient element (isolator) in the transmission path between the structure, which is directly subject to
the source of vibration, and the receiver structures to which it is connected. Vibration isolation is a vast subject
and there are many types of passive vibration isolators used for many different applications. A few of these
applications are for industrial equipment, such as pumps, motors, HVAC systems or washing machines,
isolation of civil engineering structures from earthquakes (base isolation), or even sensitive laboratory
equipment.
A passive isolation system in general contains mass, spring, and damping elements, and every object with
flexible links or supports has a fundamental resonance frequency. Vibration isolation phenomena can be
analyzed using transmissibility curves plotting transmissibility as a function of frequency. Transmissibility is
the ratio of vibration of the isolated surface to that of the source. Vibrations are never completely eliminated,
but they can be greatly reduced. Below the resonance frequency, transmissibility hovers near unity, meaning
that that vibration is going through the system without being amplified or reduced. At the resonant frequency,
energy is transmitted efficiently, and detrimentally the incoming vibration is amplified. Damping in the system
limits the level of amplification at the resonant frequency at the cost of increasing the response above the
resonant frequency, where little energy can be transmitted and the curve rolls off to a low value. In short, a
passive isolator can be seen as a mechanical low-pass filter for transmitted vibrations which if properly
designed dynamically isolates structural systems with great success and simplicity.
III. Vibration Absorbers and Neutralizers
Vibration absorbers involve the connection of ancillary mechanical resonators either to the directly excited
structure or to the connected structure. In a narrow frequency range around resonance, vibration absorbers
apply strong dynamic reaction forces which suppress the vibrational response of the structures to which they
are attached. This technique is generally only applicable to harmonic excitation at a fixed frequency, such as

12
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

that of the fundamental tone of transformers noise and vibration.

A vibration absorber is used in one of the two distinct ways: either it is tuned to a troublesome resonance
frequency, where it is configured so that it adds damping to the host structure, or it is tuned to an offending
forcing frequency, to provide a high impedance so that the response of the host structure is minimized at this
frequency. In the former case, it is called a ‘vibration absorber’, and in the latter case, it is called a ‘vibration
neutralizer’.
IV. Structural Modification
Last but not the least, structural modification may be performed if a potential vibration problem is identified at
the design stage or encountered later during dynamic excitation and operation of the structure. Then, options
are either to modify or redesign the structure to avoid the problem. When considering modifying a structure, the
main aim can be to change the resonance frequencies of a structure, to avoid exciting a specific resonance due
to discrete frequency excitation components, exciting a number of modes in the case of broadband excitation,
or even reducing the likelihood of strong dynamic coupling between different structural subsystems by
avoiding close resonance frequencies with the ones from other individual components assembled together in the
structure. Complementary, it may also be of interest to alter the structure, such that the spatial variation of the
excitation does not couple well with a particular mode, or modes, of the structure.
The general techniques involved in changing the resonance frequencies are detuning, that is separating the
resonance frequencies from the discrete excitation frequency components and reducing the number of
responding modes. For changing the spatial coupling between components, one can consider designing a
structure to exhibit nodal points at required locations or decoupling modes having similar mode shapes at the
interface.
V. NOISE REDUCTION TECHNIQUES IN TRANSFORMERS
Design aspects of “quiet” transformers have been classified in function of the transformer component affected.
Both traditional techniques and modern techniques of noise reduction are described.
A. MAGNETIC CORE
Most common techniques for designing low core noise are as follows:
1) Using core steels with higher grades of magnetic orientation and low magnetostriction:
The use of Hi-B grade and scribed core materials can give 2 to 3 dB reduction as compared to non Hi-B grades,
Kulkarni [17].
2) Reducing the flux density in the core:
By using magnetic sheets of reduced flux density reductions of several dB can be achieved. However, this
method has adverse effects on the cost and size of transformers.
3) Control of core resonance frequencies by structural design:
The first two techniques have been used for more than 20 years and they are completely developed. Therefore,
based on the current state-of-the-art core noise reduction, the most interesting technique for transformer
manufacturers is based on an accurate calculation and design of the core resonance frequencies.
According to the IEEE standard C57.136-2000 [18], measurements have shown that exciting a core resonance
can increase the closes core noise frequency component by as much as 10 dB. Even in high harmonics waves
exciting a resonance mode can lead to increases of several dB on the level of noise emitted by the magnetic
core. The net impact depends on the frequency component affected, the design of the core, the core material,
and whether it is a full or partial core resonance. The higher this frequency is, the greater the effect of core
resonance on the total dB level.
Accurate calculation of core frequencies is, therefore, critical for accurate prediction of noise level of power
transformer cores.
The state-of-the-art core noise reflects the lack of maturity of this problem. Due to the complexity of the
analytical approach, modal analysis is typically carried out by means of finite element software, (Wang [19]),
as can be observed in Fig. 5. Nevertheless, for power transformers, the associated phenomena with its geometry
and operation – frictional contacts among steel sheets, clamping structures and the surrounding oil – makes

13
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

obtaining the resolution of this problem such a great challenge for transformer designers.

Figure 7. Modal analysis of a magnetic core.

B. WINDINGS
As previously mentioned, Load Noise can be significantly higher than No-Load Noise for large power
transformers. Moreover, Load Noise is the most difficult transformer noise component to reduce once the
transformer is built as sound panels are not effective at the low frequency of load noise. Winding type, winding
arrangement, winding dimensions, current density, and tank shielding/shunts have a significant effect on the
magnitude of load noise.
C. TANK
The design of the tank and its bracing is very critical to designing “quiet” transformers. Traditionally, general
tank construction has relied on tank stiffness modification to reduce the vibration amplitudes and acoustic
energy radiated by the tank to the surrounding environment. However, whilst the increase of stiffness of the
tank is achieved through the use of U-beams and profiles, this also increases resonance frequencies of the tank
structure which may be detrimentally tuned with the disturbing frequency coming from the active part. The
closeness of these two frequencies leads to an amplification in transmissibility and consequently a significanr
noise increase.
The complexity of the tank design is that the structure must fulfill other demands which usually are opposed to
the low noise emission; especially those which are related with short-circuit stresses. As a result, the tank must
be designed in such a way as to:
1) Increase the mechanical strength of the tank structure;
2) Avoid exciting mechanical resonances of tank fields and braces;
3) Reducing the sound radiation efficiency of the tank.
Mechanical vibrations and acoustic simulations, verified by scale models and full-size experiments, have
provided the design tools that have enabled a successful tank design. An example of 3-D modeling of a
transformer tank performed as part of this technology development is shown in Fig. 6.

14
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

Figure 8. Displacements caused by vibrations on a transformer tank

The transformer can be equipped with sound panels mounted on the exterior of the transformer tank: these
typically reduce the noise level of the transformer by a few decibels. Sound enclosures have also been used to
reduce sound radiation, but they require a significant increase in size and cost and are less favorable for thermal
and field maintenance operations. Also, both methods are less efficient in reducing load noise and the lower
frequency components of core noise.
Another technique used in the development is reducing the transmissibility of the vibrations of the core and
winding to the tank, hence resulting in lower tank vibrations and sound radiation. The connections between the
clamping structure of the active part and the tank are designed to provide effective vibration isolation.
D. PROPER TRANSFORMER ASSEMBLY TECHNIQUES
According to [18] the individual frequency components of core and load noise are significantly affected by how
the transformer is assembled on the test floor or on the pad in the field. The lower the frequency, the higher the
impact is. It has been found that when the assembly is appropriately designed, the global structural vibrations of
the tank are significantly reduced. As a result, the noise level of the transformer is reduced by an amount
determined by the frequency spectrum of the transformer noise.
E. RESILIENT ABSORBERS
From the point of view of the dB gained, resilient absorbers are one of the most interesting technologies for
reducing noise. According to IEEE Standard C57.136-2005 [18] reductions between 8 and 15 dB(A) can be
reached. These resilient absorbers are made of special cork-based polymers, with a high loss factor and they are
used for producing anti-vibration pads which cover the transformer structure.
The loss factor of a material represents the ratio of energy it dissipates to the amount it, temporarily stores for
each cycle of vibration. Energy dissipation is achieved through the conversion into heat and dissipation into air.
Due to corks having a closed cell structure filled with air, cork has a higher loss factor than rubber, which is an
essential feature to the damping function and consequent dissipation of energy. The specific polymer
formulations and the inclusion of cork, with unique compressibility and recovery characteristics, absorb energy,
yielding high material loss factors.
Nevertheless, the life expectancy of these materials when undergoing the operational conditions of the power
transformers must be still needs to be thoroughly assessed as they may need to be replaced before expiring the
life time of the transformer.
F. COOLING SYSTEM
As was mentioned in Section II, cooling noise can be considered negligible for the majority of the transformers,
the noise emitted by cooling fans can be reduced by selecting low-speed fans or fans with sound absorbing
elements at the inlet and outlet. Other means include special fan and/or blade designs with more favorable noise

15
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

performance. In some extreme cases, in which very strict noise requirements are demanded, fan noise is
eliminated by removing the fans. Obviously, in such a case, additional radiators must be installed for providing
the required cooling capacity. When cooling pumps are used, pumps with low-noise emission can be used as
well.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
This paper has described the current framework on the noise generated by power transformers. Social problems
associated with noise have been described and the legal specifications applicable for power transformers as
well as their impact on dB(A) have been mentioned.
The whole noise phenomenon on power transformers has been characterized. The noise generating sources of
power transformers and their physical background have been described as well as the mechanisms of noise
generation, transmission and radiation to the external field.
Advantages and disadvantages of the experimental methods of noise measurements compiled in international
standards have been described. Influential factors when measuring noise experimentally have been mentioned
and quantified. New and future methods have been shown and their eventual potentialities have been pointed
out.
Vibration fundamentals have been briefly presented. Noise reduction techniques in order to develop “quiet”
transformers have been reviewed and classified in function with the components of the transformer. Their
impact in dB(A) reductions have been quantified. The necessary tools for developing each noise reduction
technology have been quoted and some of their limitations have been shown.
VII. REFERENCES
[1] Impacto social de la contaminación acústica de las infraestructuras líneas en España (in Spanish). Editor:
José Luis VeiraVeira. Netbiblo, 2010.
[2] Report on Standard Eurobarometer 43, Public Opinion in the European Union, European Comission, 1995.
[3] Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends, Editors: R. Hassan, R. Scholes andN. Ash.
Island Press, 2005.
[4] Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the assessment and
management of environmental noise, June 2002.
[5] Decreto-Lei nº 9/2007 da República de Portugal, January 2007 (in Portuguese).
[6] Real Decreto 1367/2007 del Reino de España, October 2007 (in Spanish).
[7] E. Reiplinger, Study of Noise Emitted by Power Transformers based on Today’s Viewpoint, CIGRE Session
1988, Paper # 12 – 08, 8 pages, 1988.
[8] K. Delaere, W. Heylen, K. Hameyer and R. Belmans, Local Magnetostiction Forces for Finite Element
Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 36, No. 5, September 2000.
[9] Y. Champoux, B. Gosselin and J. Nicolas, Application of the Intensity Technique to the Characterization of
Transformer Noise, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 3, No. 4, October 1988.
[10] Cigré Working Group 12, Transformer Noise: Determination of Sound Power Level using the Sound
Intensity Measurement Method, Electra No. 144, pp. 78-95 1992.
[11] IEC 60076-10: 2001, Power transformers – Part 10-1: Determination sound levels, 2001.
[12] IEC 60076-10-1: 2005, Power transformers – Part 10-1: Determination of transformer and reactor sound
levels – User guide, 2005.
[13] IEEE C57.12.90-2010, IEEE Standard Test Code for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and
Regulating Transformers, 2010.
[14] H. Lamela, J. A. García-Souto, and J. Sanz, Measurements of mechanical vibrations at magnetic cores of
power transformers with fiber-optic interferometric intrinsic sensor, IEEE Journal on selected topics in
quantum electronics, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 788-797, October 2000.
[15] P. Kung, L. Wang and M. I. Comanici, Fiber optics temperature/vibration and moisture monitoring in

16
 ARWtr2013
Advanced Research Workshop on Transformers.28 -30 October 2013.Baiona– Spain

power transformers, 2011 Electrical Insulation Conference, Annapolis, Maryland, 5 to 8 June 2011.
[16] M. Ishida, S. Okabe, K. Sato, Analysis of Noise Emitted from Three-Phase Stacked Transformer Model
Core, Kawasaki Steel Techinical Report, no. 39, pp. 29-35, October 1998.
[17] Transformer Engineering Design and Practice, Editors: S. V. Kulkarni, S. A. Khaparde. Marcel Dekker
Inc, 2004.
[18] IEEE C57.136-2005, IEEE Guide for Sound Level Abatement and Determination for Liquid-Immersed
Power Transformers and Shunt Reactors Rated Over 500 kVA, 2005.
[19] Y. Wang, J. Pan and M. Jin, Finite Element Modelling of the Vibration of a Power Transformer, Paper
Number 34, Proceedings of ACOUSTICS 2011, 2011.

17
View publication stats