0609-137-Mep228 10/11/06 16:10 Page 30

WGA2.26
REPORT

Mechanical condition assessment

of transformer windings using
Frequency Response Analysis (FRA)

I n t ro d u c t i o n ✓ March 2006: Northfleet,

In recent years, there
have been many papers pub-
lished on the subject of so-
called “Transfer Function” or
“Frequency Response Anal-
ysis (FRA)” methods for
detecting winding move-
ment in power transformers.
Essentially, these techniques
involve injecting a high fre-
quency signal at one termi-
nal of a transformer and
measuring the response of
the winding to that signal.
The CIGRE 2003 Collo-
quium in Merida, Mexico
[1], on Diagnostic Methods
and Interpretation, con-
cluded that such techniques
were widely used and much
more sensitive than the tra-
ditional and internationally
accepted method of impe-
dance measurements, but
that work was required on
standardisation and inter-
pretation.
Members:
Patrick PICHER, Convenor (Canada)
John LAPWORTH, TF-1 leader (United Kingdom)
Tim NOONAN, TF-2 leader (Ireland)
Jochen CHRISTIAN, TF-3 leader (Germany)
Micheal E. ALPATOV (Russia)
Dierk BORMANN (Sweden)
Richard BREYTENBACH (South Africa)
Peter DICK (Canada)
Alexandr DROBISHEVSKY (Russia)
Lionel DUMBRVA (Romania)
Robin FISHER (Switzerland)
Hans Kristan HOIDALEN (Norway)
Paul JARMAN (United Kingdom)
Istvan KISPAL (Hungary)
Micheal KRUEGER (Austria)
Thomas LEIBFRIED (Germany)
Ryszard MALEWSKI (Poland)
Rodrigo OCON (Mexico)
Ernesto PEREZ (Spain)
Johannes RICKMANN (United States)
Yukiyasu SHIRASAKA (Japan)
Stephan TENBOHLEN (Germany)
Martin TIBERG (Switzerland)
Zhongdong WANG (United Kingdom)
Peter WERELIUS (Sweden)
Rafal ZALESKI (Poland)
Kent (UK)
✓ August 2006: Paris
This report presents the
WG achievements on the
comparison of measurement
techniques, the description of
typical FRA responses and the
modelling to support inter-
pretation. A brief description
of the final report content is
presented in conclusion.
Experimental
comparison of
m e a s u re m e n t
techniques
Objectives
In order to make a start
on standardisation of mea-
surement techniques, a meet-
ing was arranged at the
Siemens transformer works
in Nuremberg in January
2005 (Figure 1), with the
intention of:

Accordingly, in 2004, CIGRE SC A2 decided to set • characterising differences in measurement tech-

up a new Working Group on the subject. Experts from
SC D1 have participated to the WG A2.26. The WG was
set up under the following organisation:
✓ Task Force 1: Introduction to FRA
✓ Task Force 2: Measurement Techniques
✓ Task Force 3: Interpretation
The following meetings have been held:
✓ June 2004: Montreal
✓ August 2004: Paris
✓ January 2005: Nuremberg
✓ June 2005: Moscow
niques (impulse, swept frequency, measuring
impedance, test leads setup, etc.)
• comparing types of FRA measurements on a new
transformer (“end to end”,“inter-winding”,“open”
& “short-circuit” tests, etc.)
• identifying good FRA practices and define practi-
cal limitations of FRA measurements
Summary of test programme
A total of nine different measuring systems (labelled
A–I in this report) were used, including both impulse

30 E L E C T R A N° 228 - Octobre 2006

0609-137-Mep228 10/11/06 16:10 Page 31

WGA2.26
REPORT

Fig. 1: Nuremberg attendees and test object

and swept frequency methods and four commercially
available equipments.
The test object was a single phase 420/21 kV,
266 MVA generator transformer designed for transport
via the German railway system, with long horizontally
installed HV and neutral bushings.
The impulse methods were unable to reproduce the
low frequency response because of digitizers set to acquire
the higher frequencies. Some swept frequency methods
also did not have sufficient dynamic range to repro-
duce the typical 90 dB minimum obtained with a
50-ohms measuring impedance.

A series of tests was devised to compare measured

responses between the various equipments, to assess
repeatability of measurements and to estimate the use-
fulness of different measurements.

Main results and conclusions

The main results and conclusions from the compar-

ative testing were as follows.

All test equipments produced essentially the same

measured responses for the test object over a mid range
of frequencies from about 10 kHz to 500 kHz, but there
were significant differences above and below this range
(Figure 2). Fig. 2: Measured HV responses

No. 228 - October 2006 ELECTRA 31

0609-137-Mep228 10/11/06 16:10 Page 32

WGA2.26
REPORT

In Figure 3, the repeatability of each system is eval-

uated by repetition of the measurement on the HV wind-
ing after a series of tests. Differences at high frequencies
appeared to be due to differences in test lead setups, in
particular different practices used for grounding the test
leads (Figure 4), and this appeared to affect the repeata-
bility achievable above about 500 kHz. A subsequent
trial was arranged in Northfleet, Kent (UK), to investi-
gate the effects of variations of measurement practices,
e.g., ground loops, use of braids, etc.

Fig. 5: LV1 and LV2 winding responses

(linear frequency scale up to 2 MHz)

As regards the value of different types of measure-

ments, ‘inter-winding’ responses – both capacitive and
inductive (turns ratio) transfers - were found to be insen-
sitive to tap position (Figure 6), so are expected to be less
sensitive to winding movement compared to ‘end to end’
measurements.

Fig. 3: HV winding responses: repeatability test

(linear frequency scale up to 2 MHz)

Fig. 6: Capacitive inter-winding response

at tap Max and Max-1.

Fig. 4: Test lead connections on horizontal HV “Short-circuit” measurements (across the HV wind-
bushing with a large loop in ground connection ing with the LVs shorted, Figure 7) gave simpler responses
below about 20 kHz. Such measurements allow the influ-
Repeatability up to 2 MHz was not a problem for ence of the core to be removed, and are believed to be
measurements on the LV windings with their short bush-
ings (Figure 5). Subtle differences between different mea-
suring systems were suspected to be due to the variation
of input impedance.

Whereas measurement impedance affected the

detailed form of the resonances, there was no evidence
that there was any benefit to any particular impedance
value. More research is needed to determine if the mea-
surement impedance has an influence on the sensitiv-
ity to winding displacement. For the best consistency
between two different sets of results, the same measur-
Fig. 7: Open (red) and short-circuit (blue)
ing impedance should be used. measurements.

32 E L E C T R A N° 228 - Octobre 2006

0609-137-Mep228 10/11/06 16:10 Page 33
capable of detecting circulating current problems between
sub-conductors of a turn. The fact that open and short-
circuit measurements are not significantly different above
20 kHz suggests that at these frequencies, leakage fluxes
determining winding impedances are essentially the same.
Second FRA Wo r k s h o p
Following the test programme carried out at the
Siemens factory in Nuremberg, a second test session was
organized in a substation of National Grid, UK, in North-
fleet, to investigate the effects of variations of cabling
practices and evaluate the value of standardization. The
tests were performed using several instruments on an
auto-transformer 400/275kV, 500MVA. Figure 8 shows
Fig. 8: FRA measurements obtained with
various cabling practices (top) and after
standardization (bottom)
the measurements obtained using various lengths and
layouts of the extension grounding leads, compared to a
standardized practice using a short braid. It was demon-
strated that standardized measurement practices extend
the repeatability to higher frequencies.
Typical FRA responses
Although the detailed form of winding responses
depends on the winding arrangement, geometry and
WGA2.26
REPORT
physical dimensions of a particular design, it is observed
that the same general form is obtained for windings of
the same type. It is useful to be able to recognise such
“typical” responses. It must be kept in mind that there
responses were obtained using an “end-to-end” measure-
ment with 50-Ω measuring impedance.
For HV windings, particularly those employing tech-
niques such as interleaving to smooth the impulse dis-
tribution at the line end, the generic form is an overall
reducing attenuation with frequency after the first min-
imum until a maximum close to 0 dB at about 1 MHz
(Figure 9), with superimposed resonances of varying
degrees. Above about 500 kHz there is usually less evi-
dence of resonances and internal leads have a significant
influence and can introduce differences between phases.
Fig. 9: Typical HV winding response
(Fully interleaved winding, single phase unit)
LV windings, particularly the simple spiral windings
of large generator transformers, usually have a series of
well defined resonances up to 2 MHz (Figure 10).
Fig. 10: Typical LV winding response
(Generator transformer, single layer wound)
In addition to the general form of the response being
determined by the type of winding involved, connec-
tion arrangements can also have a significant influence
on the form of the response over a limited range of fre-
quencies.
No. 228 - October 2006 ELECTRA 33
0609-137-Mep228 10/11/06 16:10 Page 34
WGA2.26
REPORT
Fig. 11: Measured (top) and calculated (bottom)
HV responses for Nuremberg transformer –
at tap Max (black) and Max-1 (red)
WG A2.26 is collating examples of typical responses
for the range of transformer types typically encountered.
M o d e l l i n g t o s u p p o r t i n t e r p re -
tation
In order to be able to confidently interpret any
change or unusual feature in a measured response, it is
necessary to have an understanding of controlling fac-
tors. Experience alone can build up knowledge and
insights, but modelling provides the best hope for a thor-
ough understanding.
The measured responses of the Nuremberg trans-
former have been successfully reproduced (Figure 11)
by a lumped parameter model which includes mutual
inductances and capacitances for each disc pair calcu-
lated using only the winding geometrical dimensions,
together with a representation of the core. This trans-
former has a double layer LV winding, a partially inter-
leaved disc HV winding and a single layer HV tap
winding.
34 E L E C T R A N° 228 - Octobre 2006
The model has been used to predict the changes in
responses caused by various winding deformations.
Radial and axial displacements both resulted in frequency
shifts of resonances.
The model has been useful in increasing the under-
standing of what determines the various features of fre-
quency responses. An important discovery has been that
for “end to end” measurements, the main features of a
winding response are determined primarily by the struc-
ture of that winding and that interaction with other wind-
ings has significantly less influence, introducing only
minor features and changes to resonant frequencies.
As far as WG A2.26 is concerned, the main purpose
of modelling is to contribute to the understanding of
generic issues rather than reproduce measured responses
of particular windings.
Conclusion
The final report of WG A2.26 will provide guidance
on recommended practices, the practical limitations of
FRA measurements and how winding movement can be
identified from measured responses.
One difficulty in interpreting FRA responses, espe-
cially for new users, arises from the fact that FRA mea-
surements are graphical rather than numeric, and that
there is no generally accepted guide for interpretation.
The intention of WG A2.26 is to assist by providing
a description of typical responses and controlling fac-
tors, together with a collection of case examples which
illustrate how various types of winding movement can
be detected by FRA.
R e f e rences
[1] CIGRE A2 2003 Colloquium papers on the
detection of transformer winding movement by FRA and
other techniques, Merida Mexico, June 2003. ■