F E A T U R E A R T I C L E

Frequency Response Analysis

and Short-Circuit Impedance
Measurement in Detection of Winding
Deformation Within Power Transformers
Key words: transformer diagnosis, transformer winding deformation, frequency response analysis,
short-circuit impedance

Mehdi Bagheri, Mohammad Salay Naderi,

Introduction Trevor Blackburn, and Toan Phung
Power transformers are in service under different
environmental, electrical, and mechanical conditions [1] and may School of Electrical Engineering
be subject to enormous hazards during the course of operation and Telecommunications,
[2], [3]. They are commonly considered to be the heart of the
transmission and distribution sectors of electric power systems;
University of New South Wales,
monitoring their condition and diagnosing faults are important Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
parts of the maintenance function [4]. Utility engineers strive to
keep power transformers in service and to prevent even short-
term outages. Failure of a transformer can cause extensive
damage to equipment owned by consumers or the utility [5]. Frequency response analysis is con-
Mechanical defects are probably the most common cause of
problems in transformers. They include winding deformation in
sidered an accurate, fast, economi-
the axial or radial direction, hoop buckling, tilting, spiralling, cal, and nondestructive method of
displacements between high- and low-voltage windings, shorted detection of winding deformation
or open-circuited turns, partial winding collapse, loosened
clamping structures, core movement, faulty grounding of within power transformers, provid-
core or screens, broken clamping structures, and intermittent ing more detailed information than
internal connections. They may be due to short-circuit currents,
earthquakes, careless transportation between sites, explosion of
short-circuit impedance measure-
combustible gases accumulating in the transformer oil, and so ments.
on. Repair of such defects may require taking the transformer
out of service, which could prove costly to the utility.
Short-circuit impedance (SCI) measurements have been
used for many years to detect transformer winding deformation
and core displacement. Frequency response analysis (FRA) Mechanical Deformation of Windings
is considered a highly accurate, fast, economical, and Of all the possible causes of transformer failure, mechanical
nondestructive method of detecting winding defects and deformation of windings as a result of high short-circuit currents
damage in the transformer core [6], [7]. In the study reported is probably the most common [8]. Such currents may generate
in this article, FRA and SCI measurements were used to detect radial, axial, or combined forces acting on a transformer winding.
mechanical defects in the windings of a failed 400-MVA step-up The result could be radial, axial, or angular deformation of
transformer. the windings or conductor rupture [9]. Transformer winding

May/June — Vol. 29, No. 3 0883-7554/12/$31/©2013/IEEE 33

 deformation categories have been discussed in the literature SC x Dx  f 
U x = 0.248 K R  , (2)
[10]–[12]. They are listed as follows: 2
2(V / N t ) H m N B  50 

a) radial forces,
• forced buckling, where NB is the number of transformer core limbs surrounded by
• free buckling (hoop buckling), HV and LV windings, KR is the Rogowsky coefficient taken as 1
• hoop tension (stretching), and for most HV and LV winding arrangements [13] but which can
• relaxation buckling; be calculated if necessary [14], f is the operational frequency,
b) axial forces, Hm = (Hm1 + Hm2)/2, where Hm1 is the height of the LV winding
• tilting (cable-wise tilting, strand-wise tilting), and Hm2 is the height of the HV winding, V is the nominal
• conductor bending between radial spacers; and voltage of the winding, Nt is the number of winding turns, and S
c) combined forces, is the apparent power quoted on the transformer nameplate. In
• spiraling, addition, Dx = DC2 + (BW2 − BW1)/3 and Cx = C2 + (BW1 + BW2)/3,
• telescoping, and where the distances C2, DC2, BW1, and BW2 are shown in Figure
• twisting. 2. Clearly, winding deformation (changes in the geometrical
In all cases the force F acting on the transformer winding is factors) will result in a change of Ux.
given by

F = L(B × I), (1)

where I is the short-circuit current, B is the magnetic induction,

and L is the winding length.

Off-line Transformer Winding

Deformation Diagnosis Methods
Major off-line methods for winding-deformation detection
employed by utilities and researchers include SCI measurements
and FRA.

SCI Measurements
The SCI may be considered as a parameter that highlights
imperfect magnetic coupling between primary and secondary
windings. It contains resistive and inductive terms, the latter
being much more important than the former. The SCI (or leakage
inductance) can be represented as an additional inductance in
series with the transformer primary inductance, as shown in
Figure 1. A high SCI value leads to a high voltage drop across
the transformer terminals and thus affects network voltage
regulation, while a low value influences the network short-
circuit current.
The distances between the HV winding, the LV winding, and
the core of the transformer have considerable influence on the
SCI value (Figure 2). The SCI Ux is given by

Figure 1. Schematic model of primary, secondary, and leakage Figure 2. Schematic of transformer core and windings: (a) top
inductances of a transformer. view and (b) side cut view.

34 IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine

 The measured SCI for a transformer should be compared
to the value printed on the nameplate or quoted in factory test
results. Winding displacement that may have occurred since the
factory tests were performed may then be detected. According
to [15], changes of more than ±3% should be considered as
indicating winding deformation or core displacement. However,
changes should not exceed ±1% for transformers with capacities
above 100 MVA [16].

SCI Measurement Setup

Measurements of SCI can be performed on single- or three-
phase transformers, usually on the HV winding, with the LV
winding short-circuited. The cross-sectional area of the cable
used to short-circuit the LV winding must be at least 30%
greater than that of the winding conductor [17], and it must be
as short as possible. The resistance of the connection between
the LV terminals and the shorting cable must also be as small as
possible. The SCI measurement test setup for single- and three-
phase transformers is shown in Figures 3a and 3b, respectively.
FRA
Frequency response analysis has been used as a comparative
diagnosis method for several years, and its accuracy and
sensitivity have been extensively discussed in the literature
[18]–[24]. Initial FRA measurements during factory testing
are considered as the winding fingerprint. Changes in winding
Figure 4. Common frequency response analysis (FRA) setup for
measurements on concentric transformer windings.
configuration would almost certainly cause changes in the
frequency response trace [25]. The initial measurements of the
distributed resistance, capacitance, and inductance of a winding
may also be usefully compared with the same measurements
following transformer maintenance, repair, or transport [26],
[27].
Frequency response analysis measurements can be made on
a winding by injecting a preset signal, Vin, at the line lead, and
detecting the response, Vout, at the neutral lead of the transformer,
as shown in Figure 4. The frequency response magnitude K (the
voltage attenuation in decibels) is defined as
K = 20 log10(Vout/Vin). (3)

The minimum and maximum measurement frequencies for

transformers are usually 20 Hz and 2 MHz, respectively [22].The
available equipment can operate up to 25 MHz. However, some
researchers believe that reliable results are obtained only within
the range 10 Hz to 1 MHz [28], while others have recommended
an upper bound of 10 MHz [29]. Frequency response analysis
data are commonly presented as Bode diagrams [30], with
frequency on the x-axis and frequency response magnitude on
the y-axis.

Results
In this study, a failed 400-MVA step-up transformer was used
to compare the effectiveness of FRA and SCI measurements for
fault detection. The principal parameters of the transformer are
given in Table 1.

Table 1. Parameters for a 400-MVA Step-Up Transformer.

Parameter Value Parameter Value

Figure 3. Short-circuit impedance measurement setup: (a)
Manufacture date May 1993 No-load current (%) 0.37
single-phase transformer and (b) three-phase transformer.
The test is made by short-circuiting the line leads of the low- Rated voltage (kV) 242/20 Number of phases 3
voltage windings and applying a single-phase voltage at rated
Rated power (MVA) 400 Number of limbs 5
frequency to two terminals of the other winding. Three succes-
sive readings are taken on the three pairs of leads [15]. If the Rated current (A) 954/11,550 Frequency (Hz) 50
neutral terminal is available, the measurment can be conducted
No. of coolers 12 Cooling system OFAF
through the line lead and the neutral lead.

May/June — Vol. 29, No. 3 35

 Table 2. Measured Short-Circuit Impedance Values.1

Measurement Zmeasured Change

scheme Measurement (Ω) Zfactory (Ω) (%)

HV-LV A-Neutral 17.028 17.290 1.515

HV-LV B-Neutral 17.798 17.290 2.938

HV-LV C-Neutral 17.088 17.290 1.168

1
Accuracy of multimeter: 0.5 mV.

SCI Measurements
The LV winding terminals were short-circuited, and SCI
measurements were made between the HV windings and the
neutral terminal. The measured impedances are presented in
Table 2.
The percentage change, defined as 100|Zfactory − Zmeasured|/Zfactory,
is smaller than the maximum permitted change (3%) suggested
in [15], for each of the three phases. Thus one standard [15]
indicates that winding deformation or displacement had not
occurred. (However, the change of 2.93% for phase B might
appear suspicious to an expert.) On the other hand, each of
the three changes exceeds the 1% figure suggested in [16] for
transformers with capacities above 100 MVA. Thus a second
standard [16] indicates that deformation or displacement had
occurred in each of the three windings. Clearly the two standards
yield conflicting indications.

FRA Measurements
Measurements of FRA were made by applying a 5.66-V
signal across each winding, at 801 frequencies in the range 20
Hz to 2 MHz. The characteristic impedance of the measurement
cables was 50 Ω. The measured FRA traces were compared with
fingerprint traces obtained during transformer overhaul (before
failure).
The results are shown in Figure 5. To avoid compression of
the higher frequency data, the frequency response magnitudes
are presented on a logarithmic frequency scale in Figures 5a, 5b,
and 5c. It will be seen that the measured traces for phases A and
C are very similar to their fingerprints. However, the same is not
true of phase B. Figure 5d shows the measured and fingerprint
impedances for phase B. The measured and fingerprint
impedances for phases A and C were very nearly identical.
A common method of interpreting FRA data is to use
statistical indices, particularly the correlation coefficient, the
standard deviation, and the relative factor.
The correlation coefficient (CC) is defined as [31]
N

CC(X ,Y ) =
∑ i =1 XiYi ,
N N (4)
∑ i =1 (Xi )2 ∑ i =1 (Yi )2
where Xi and Yi are the ith elements of the fingerprint and Figure 5. (a), (b), and (c) show the measured and fingerprint
measured FRA traces, respectively, and N is the number of frequency response magnitudes for phases A, B, and C, respec-
elements (or samples). CC is thus a number whose absolute tively, of the transformer HV side. (d) shows the measured and
value lies between 0 and 1. fingerprint impedances for phase B.

36 IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine

 Table 3. Deformation Levels and the Corresponding RXY Values 1  1 N 2
∑ i =1 Xi − N
N
at Low (LF), Medium (MF), and High (HF) Frequencies [34]–[36]. DX =
N
∑ Xi  and (8)
i =1
Deformation level Limits for RXY1

Severe RLF <0.6

1  1 N 2
∑ i =1 Yi − N
Moderate 1.0 > RLF ≥ 0.6 or RMF <0.6 N
DY =
N
∑ i 
Y
Slight 2.0 > RLF ≥ 1.0 or 0.6 ≤ RMF < 1 i =1

Normal winding RLF ≥2.0, RMF ≥1.0, and RHF ≥0.6

and are respectively the standard variances of the fingerprint (Xi)
1
LF:1 kHz to 100 kHz, MF: 100 kHz to 600 kHz, HF: 600 kHz to 1 MHz. and measured (Yi) data [35].
The frequency response data may be conveniently divided
into three bands, namely low-, medium-, and high-frequency
bands. In [37] it is stated that the data are dominated by the
transformer core at low frequencies, by the winding structure
The standard deviation (SD) is defined as [31]
at medium frequencies, and by the connection leads at high
N
frequencies. However, the boundaries between the bands are not
SD(X ,Y ) =
∑ i =1 (Yi − Xi )2 , (5) widely agreed. Low-, medium- and high-frequency bands for
N −1 RXY, and deformation levels related to the RXY values, have been
defined in the Chinese standard [34] and by some other workers
where Xi, Yi, and N have the same significance as above. CC [35], [36] (see Table 3). These definitions have been widely used
and SD have been evaluated within various frequency bands for FRA trace evaluation and have been adopted in the present
[28], [32], [33], but the band limits differ between authors. In a work.
careful study [31] several transformer windings were gradually The calculated values of CC and SD for each of the three
deformed in the radial and axial directions, up to 1% physical phases are given in Table 4 and the corresponding values of
deformation, and values of CC and SD were calculated at each RXY in Table 5. It will be seen that, for phase B, CC and SD
step. It was concluded that it would be appropriate to use single indicate deformation and RXY indicates slight deformation at low
values of CC and SD as indicators of winding deformation over frequency and no deformation at medium and high frequency.
any frequency band within the range 10 Hz to 3 MHz. More There is no indication of deformation of phase A or phase C.
specifically, |CC| <0.9998 and SD >1 could each be taken as These indications were checked by internal inspection after
indicating winding deformation. These criteria have been detanking the transformer. Figure 6 presents side and front views
adopted in the present work, over the frequency band 20 Hz to of phase B of the HV winding. Clearly the winding had suffered
2 MHz. slight deformation.
The relative factor (RXY) is defined as [34]–[36]
Discussion
 −10 Measurements of SCI have been used for many years
10 1 − PXY < 10
RXY =  , (6) to detect and locate transformer winding deformation and
− log10 (1 − PXY ) Otherwise displacement. Given (2), the SCI values would be expected to

change, because of changes of Bw1 and Bw2, if significant radial
where PXY is given by movement occurred within a winding. Changes in Hm would also
be expected to influence the SCI value. However, internal axial
movement between transformer winding discs, e.g., bending
1  1 N 2  N 2 and tilting of conductors, would not be expected to do so, since
Y − 1
∑ i =1 Xi − N ∑ Xi  ∑Yi 
N

N  i N they would not change any of the factors in (2). Bending and
i =1 i =1
PXY = (7) tilting of winding conductors are illustrated in Figures 7a and
DX DY 7b, respectively.
The results presented in this article suggest that FRA is
and DX and DY are given by capable of providing reliable information on the level of

Table 4. Correlation Coefficient (CC) and Standard Deviation (SD) Values.

CC SD

Frequency band Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase A Phase B Phase C

20 Hz to 2 MHz 0.9999 0.9977 1 0.5859 3.6367 0.5004

May/June — Vol. 29, No. 3 37

 deformation of transformer windings, based on single values of Table 5. RXY Values.
the statistical quantities CC, SD, and Rxy. However, it does not at
present provide information on the type of deformation. A more RXY
precise interpretation of FRA data needs to be developed. Frequency band1 Phase A Phase B Phase C

Low 10 1.2674 10
Conclusion
Off-line SCI and FRA measurements were conducted on Medium 10 1.0724 10
a transformer that had failed because of deformation of the
High 10 2.3831 10
B phase of the HV winding. Interpreted according to IEEE
Standard 62-1995 [15], the SCI values indicated that winding Low: 1 kHz to 100 kHz. Medium: 100 kHz to 600 kHz. High: 600 kHz to 1
1

deformation had not occurred, but interpreted according to MHz.

IEC Standard 60076-5, Ed. 3.0, 2006 [16], they indicated that
deformation had occurred in each of the three windings. Two
indices derived from comparison of fingerprint and measured
FRA data indicated deformation of the phase B winding, and a
third index indicated slight deformation of that winding. Visual
inspection of the failed transformer showed that the B phase
winding had been deformed.
Since SCI measurements are made only at the operational
frequency, it is to be expected that they will provide less
detailed information on the state of the windings than the

Figure 6. Buckled HV winding of phase B. (a) Side view of the

middle discs. (b) Front view of the upper discs. Figure 7. Bending (a) and tilting (b) of winding conductors.

38 IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine

more comprehensive FRA measurements. Nevertheless it is
recommended that both types of measurement be performed
on power transformers (along with other conventional test
measurements) as part of routine maintenance.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank Dr. Robert Fleming, Co-
Editor-in-Chief of this Magazine, for his advice on the writing
of this article.
References
[1] M. S. Naderi, M. Vakilian, T. R. Blackburn, B. T. Phung, and A. Nasiri,
“A hybrid transformer model for determination of partial discharge
location in transformer winding,” IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., vol.
14, pp. 436–443, 2007.
[2] M. Bagheri, A. Hekmati, R. Heidarzadeh, and M. S. Naderi, “Impulse
voltage distribution in intershield disk winding vs interleaved and
continuous disk winding in power transformer,” in IEEE Power and
Energy Conference (PECon’08), 2008, pp. 387–392.
[3] W. Ziomek, K. Vijayan, D. Boyd, K. Kuby, and M. Franchek, “High
voltage power transformer insulation design,” in IEEE Electrical
Insulation Conference (EIC’11), 2011, pp. 211–215.
[4] M. Bagheri, Mohammad S. Naderi, T. Blackburn, and B. T. Phung,
“Dean-Stark vs FDS and KFT methods in moisture content recognition
of transformer,” in IEEE International Conference on Power Energy
(PECON’12), Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, 2–5 Dec., 2012, pp. 686–691.
[5] C. Q. Su “Case study: Lessons learned from the failure of a new 230-kV
transformer-cable termination,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., vol. 26, pp.
15–19, 2010.
[6] J.-W. Kim, B. K. Park, S. C. Jeong, S. W. Kim, and P. G. Park, “Fault
diagnosis of a power transformer using an improved Frequency-Response
Analysis,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 169–178, 2005.
[7] A. Shintemirov, W. H. Tang, and Q. H. Wu, “Transformer core parameter
identification using frequency response analysis,” IEEE Trans. Magn.,
vol. 46, no 1, pp. 141–149, 2010.
[8] M. Bagheri, M. S. Naderi, T. Blackburn, and B. T. Phung, “Practical
challenges in online transformer winding deformation diagnostics,” in
International Conference on Electrical Power and Energy Conversion
Systems, Sharjah-UAE, 2011, pp. 1–6.
[9] M. Florkowski and J. Furgal, “Transformer winding defects
identification based on a high frequency method,” Meas. Sci. Technol.,
doi:10.1088/0957-0233/18/9/012, Jul. 2007.
[10] W. J. McNutt, W. M. Johnson, R. A. Nelson, and R. E. Ayers, “Power
transformer short-circuit strength—Requirements, Design, and
Demonstration,” IEEE Trans. Power Appr., vol. PAS-89, pp. 1955–1969,
1970.
[11] S. V. Kulkarni and S. A. Khaparde, Transformer Engineering Design and
Practice. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker Inc., 2004.
[12] R. M. Del Vecchio, B. Poulin, P. T. Feghali, D. M. Shah, and R. Ahuja,
Transformer Design Principles, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
(Taylor and Francis Group), 2010.
[13] R. Doebbelin and A. Lindemann, “Leakage inductance determination
for transformers with interleaving of windings,” in Progress in
Electromagnetics Research Symposium. Cambridge, USA, July 5–8,
2010, pp. 439–443.
[14] M. Jablonski and E. Napieralska-Juszczak, “Internal faults in power
transformers,” IET Electr. Power Appl., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 105–111, 2007.
[15] IEEE Guide for Diagnostic Field Testing of Electric Power Apparatus,
Part 1: Oil Filled Power Transformers, Regulators, and Reactors, IEEE
Std.62-1995.
[16] Power Transformer: Ability to Withstand Short Circuit, IEC 60076-5, Ed.
3.0, 2006.
[17] V. Sokolov and B. Vanin, “Experience with detection and identification
of winding buckling in power transformers,” in Proceedings of the 68th
Annual International Conference of Doble Clients, 2001, pp. 1–13.
[18] Z. Wang, J. Li, and D. M. Sofian, “Interpretation of transformer FRA
responses—Part I: Influence of winding structure,” IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 24, no 2, pp.703–710, 2009.
May/June — Vol. 29, No. 3 39
[19] J. A. S. B. Jayasinghe, Z. D. Wang, P. N. Jarman, and A. W. Darwin,
“Investigations on sensitivity of FRA technique in diagnosis of
transformer winding deformations,” in IEEE International Symposium on
Electrical Insulation (ISEI’04), 2004, pp. 496–499.
[20] S. M. Islam, “Detection of shorted turns and winding movements in large
power transformers using frequency response analysis,” in IEEE Power
Engineering Society, winter meeting, vol. 3, 2000, pp. 2233–2238.
[21] M. Wang, A. J. Vandermaar, and K. D. Srivastava, “Transformer
winding movement monitoring in service—Key factors affecting FRA
measurements,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., vol. 20, pp. 5–12, 2004.
[22] M. Bagheri, M. S. Naderi, and T. Blackburn, “Advanced transformer
winding deformation diagnosis: Moving from off-line to on-line,” IEEE
Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 1860–1870, 2012.
[23] A. A. Reykherdt and V. G. Davydov, “Effects of test cable ground
extensions on repeatability of frequency response analysis measurements
on power transformers,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., vol. 28, pp. 26–31,
2012.
[24] A. A. Reykherdt and V. G. Davydov, “Case studies of factors influencing
frequency response analysis measurements and power transformer
diagnostics,” IEEE Electr. Insul. Mag., vol. 27, pp. 22–30, 2011.
[25] M. Bagheri, M. S. Naderi, and T. Blackburn, “Frequency response
analysis vs. flux division measurement in detection of transformer
winding internal short circuit,” in IEEE International Conference on
Power Systems Technology (Powercon’12), Auckland, New Zealand,
30 Oct.–2 Nov., 2012, pp. 1–5.
[26] M. Bagheri, M. S. Naderi, T. Blackburn, and D. Zhang, “Transformer
frequency response analysis: A mathematical approach to interpret mid-
frequency oscillations,” in IEEE International Conference on Power
Energy (PECON’12), Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, 2–5 Dec., 2012, pp.
927–931.
[27] M. Bagheri, M. S. Naderi, T. Blackburn, and T. Phung, “FRA vs. short
circuit impedance measurement in detection of mechanical defects within
large power transformer,” in IEEE International Symposium on Electrical
Insulation (ISEI’12), Puerto Rico, USA, 2012, pp. 301–305.
[28] J. R. Secue and E. Mombello, “Sweep frequency response analysis
(SFRA) for the assessment of winding displacements and deformation
in power transformers,” Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 78, pp. 1119–1128,
2008.
[29] M. Wang, A. J. Vandermaar, and K. D. Srivastava, “Improved detection
of power transformer winding movement by extending the FRA high
frequency range,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, pp. 1930–1938, 2005.
[30] M. Bagheri, M. S. Naderi, T. Blackburn, T. Phung, and H. Haeri, “On-
line transformer winding deformation diagnosis: A profound insight to
methods,” in 26th International Power Systems Conference (PSC’11),
Tehran, Iran, 2011, pp. 1–14.
[31] P. M. Nirgude, D. Ashokraju, A. D. Rajkumar, and B. P. Singh,
“Application of numerical eveluation techniques for interpreting
frequency response measurements in power transformers,” IET Sci.,
Meas. Technol., vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 275–285, 2008.
[32] S. A. Ryder, “Methods for comparing frequency response analysis
measurements,” in IEEE International Symposium on Electrical
Insulation, Boston, MA, 2002, pp. 187–190.
[33] G. M. Kennedy, A. J. McGrail, and J. A. Lapworth, “Using cross-
correlation coefficients to analyze transformer sweep frequency response
analysis (SFRA) traces,” in IEEE PES PowerAfrica, Johannesburg, South
Africa, 16–20 July, 2007, pp. 1–6.
[34] Frequency Response Analysis on Winding Deformation of Power
Transformers, People’s Republic of China, Electric Power Industry
Standard, DL/T911-2004, ICS27.100, F24, Document No. 15182-2005,
June 1, 2005.
[35] A. Kraetge, M. Kruger, and P. Fong, “Frequency response analysis—
Status of the worldwide standardization activities,” in International
Conference on Condition Monitoring and Diagnosis, Bejing, China, April
21–24, 2008, pp. 651–654.
[36] R. Wimmer, S. Tenbohlen, M. Heindl, A. Kraetge, M. Kruger, and J.
Christian, “Development of algorithms to assess the FRA,” presented at
the 15th International Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, Paper
No. T7-523, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2007.
[37] Measurement of Frequency Response, IEC Standard 60076-18, Ed. 1.0,
2012-07.
 Mehdi Bagheri (S ’07, M ’12) received
his MSc degree in power engineering
from Sharif University of Technology,
Tehran, Iran, in 2007. He joined the Iran
Transformer Research Institute (ITRI) in
Tehran as a research engineer and was head
of the Test and Diagnostic Department
of ITRI between 2008 and 2010. He is
currently pursuing the PhD degree at
the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. His
research interests include high-voltage engineering, condition
assessment, diagnosis of power transformers, condition
monitoring, electrical rotating machines, transient in power
system, electrical insulation, and power quality.
Mohammad Salay Naderi (M ’10,
SM ’11) received his BSc in electric pow-
er engineering (1996) and MSc in high
voltage engineering (1998) from Sharif
University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
In 2006 he completed his PhD project on
partial discharge monitoring and localiza-
tion within power transformers at the same
university. During 2004 to 2005 he worked
with the Energy Systems Research Group in the School of Elec-
trical Engineering and Telecommunications, University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, as visiting research associate.
He then moved to the Iran Power Generation, Transmission and
Distribution Company (Tavanir Holding Co.) as deputy direc-
tor general of Technical Supervision, Bureau of Transmission
and Sub-transmission Systems. In 2010 he joined the School of
Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications, University of
New South Wales, as lecturer. His research and teaching inter-
ests are in smart grid, HV engineering and condition monitoring
40 IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine
of power equipment, sustainable energy systems analysis and
development, and distributed generation and its effects on pow-
er-system protection in the smart grid context.
Trevor Blackburn is with the School of
Electrical Engineering and Telecommu-
nications at the University of New South
Wales, Sydney, Australia. His research in-
terests are in power equipment condition
monitoring and gas discharges, particu-
larly in partial discharge monitoring and
lightning applications. He is a member of a
number of CIGRE working groups.
B. T. Phung (M ’87, SM ’12) gained a PhD
in electrical engineering from the Univer-
sity of New South Wales in 1998. He is
currently a senior lecturer in the School of
Electrical Engineering at the University
of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
He has over 30 years of practical research
and development experience in partial dis-
charge measurement and analysis and in
on-line condition monitoring of HV equipment. Much of his
work has involved collaborative projects between the university
and Australian power utilities. His research interests include
electrical insulation (dielectric materials and diagnostic meth-
ods), HV engineering (generation, testing, and measurement
techniques), electromagnetic transients in power systems, and
power system equipment (design and condition monitoring
methods).