82

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 30, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2015

Contributions to Differences Between On-Site

and Factory-Measured Noise Levels of
Power Transformers
R. Girgis, Life Fellow, IEEE, and M. Bernesj, Member, IEEE

AbstractOver the years, there have been a number of cases

where users experienced higher noise levels of transformers on-site
versus what was measured in the factory acceptance tests. In some
of these cases, measurements have shown that a power transformer
can have significantly different noise characteristics (both noise
level and frequency spectrum) on-site compared to what was measured in the factory. This difference can range from a few decibels
to more than 10 dB in some cases. Some of these differences are
found to be caused by local environmental factors that influenced
the on-site measurements. Others were caused by operating conditions on-site that are different from those of the factory tests.
This paper presents results of investigations and measurements
performed, over the past several years, on the main contributors to
this difference. For each of these contributors, data are presented
that demonstrate the impact of this contributor as well as quantify typical magnitudes of this impact. It is hoped that the material
presented in this paper will assist users in: 1) understanding some
of the pitfalls of on-site measurement of transformer noise; 2) how
operating conditions contribute to the noise performance of transformers on-site; and 3) how significantly higher on-site noise levels
can, in some cases, indicate an issue with the transformer or any
of its components/accessories. It is also hoped that the material in
this paper will contribute to industry standards/application guides
on noise determination and abatement.
Index TermsCore noise, load noise, noise measurements, transformer noise, transformers.

versus what was measured in the factory acceptance tests. In the

process of investigating these cases, the authors of this paper
performed extensive noise measurements and comprehensive
analysis of the data. This paper reports on the findings of these
investigations supported by some of the most salient data obtained.
In the following sections of this paper (Sections IIIX), key
contributors to differences between noise levels of transformers
as measured in the factory and those measured on-site are presented. In each of these sections, a contributor is first described,
followed by an example that demonstrates the impact of this
contributor as well as quantifies the magnitude of this impact
using corresponding noise measurements performed on-site and
in the factory.
The main contributors presented in this paper are: 1) system
voltage and tap changer setting; 2) load; 3) noise of auxiliary
transformers and reactors; 4) vibrations of structures attached to
the transformer; 5) sound buildup from sound/fire walls; 6) other
on-site sources of noise, such as adjacent transformers and/or
ambient noise; 7) dc current; 8) mounting; and 9) other factors,
such as temperature, voltage and current harmonics, and remanent core magnetization. Where applicable, reference is made
in some of these sections to material included in [1] and [2] related to these contributors.

I. INTRODUCTION

EASUREMENTS have shown that a power transformer

can have significantly different noise characteristics
on-site versus what is measured in the factory. This difference
has been recognized by the industry. IEC 60076-10-1 Determination of sound levelsApplication guide, Section8 [1],
[2] include general descriptions of some of the contributors
to this difference. However, the authors do not know of any
quantitative studies that have been presented in the published
literature on these and other contributors.
Over the years, there have been a number of cases where
users experienced higher noise levels of transformers on-site

Manuscript received November 05, 2013; revised February 04, 2014; accepted March 16, 2014. Date of publication April 11, 2014; date of current version January 21, 2015. Paper no. TPWRD-001259-2013.
The authors are with ABB Power Transformer Plant, St. Louis, MO 63120
USA (e-mail: ramsis.girgis@us.abb.com; mats.s.bernesjo@us.abb.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2014.2313295

II. CONTRIBUTION OF SYSTEM VOLTAGE

CHANGER SETTINGS

AND

TAP

Transformer core noise level is a strong function of the core

excitation which is determined by the voltage applied as well as
the tap position in the primary winding. In factory acceptance
tests (FATs), core noise is typically measured at 100% voltage
and with the tap changer(s) set at their nominal tap(s). However, on-site, the system voltage is often different than the rated
voltage of the transformer, and the tap changer is often not set at
the corresponding tap position. Below are two examples of the
contribution of system voltage and tap position to higher noise
levels of power transformers measured on-site.
The first transformer is a 70 MVA, 138/14.4 16 0.938%
kV step-down transformer. During the time of the on-site noise
measurement, this transformer was fed from a system operating at 141.5 kV. With no taps in the high-voltage winding, the
transformer core had about 2.5% core overexcitation. Table I
compares the core noise level of the transformer as measured
on-site with that measured at the factory. As shown by the table,

0885-8977 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

GIRGIS AND BERNESJ: CONTRIBUTIONS TO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ON-SITE AND FACTORY-MEASURED NOISE LEVELS OF POWER TRANSFORMERS

TABLE I
ON-SITE VERSUS FACTORY MEASUREMENTS, dB (A)

the transformer tested 3.2 dB greater than the factory measurement. For this transformer design, the 2.5% overexcitation corresponds to a 2.6 dB increase in core noise level. In other words,
the transformer would have measured 63.3 dB (A) (65.9 2.6)
on-site if it were operating on the rated voltage of the transformer. This level is within 0.6 dB of the factory measurement.
The second transformer is a 336 MVA, 230
2.5% 69
16
0.625% 13.8 kV autotransformer. The user reported
much higher noise and vibration levels on-site compared
to other transformers of the same design that are located in
other substations. In order to investigate the perceived higher
noise levels, on-site noise measurements were performed. The
measured core noise level on-site was 3 dB higher than that
measured in the factory [80.4 versus 77.4 dB (A)]. At the
time of the on-site noise measurement, this transformer was
fed from the power grid at 238.6 kV while the de-energized
HV winding tap changer and the onload tap changer (OLTC)
of the transformer were set at tap positions that caused 3.7%
higher core excitation when compared to the core excitation
during the factory tests. For this transformer design, the 3.7%
overexcitation corresponds to 4.7 dB. In other words, the
transformer on-site would have measured 75.7 dB (A) (80.4
4.7) if it was operating at the same level of core excitation as
at the factory. This level is 1.7 dB the factory measurement.
This 1.7 dB difference can be attributed to the fact that factory
noise-level measurements using the sound pressure measuring
method, according to IEEE Standard C57.12.90 Section 13 [3],
are inflated by sound reflections from walls of the test area.
For this size of transformers, using the corresponding equation
in [4], the wall sound reflection error is estimated to be in the
range of 1.52 dB.
III. CONTRIBUTION OF THE LOAD
In the factory, no load and load noise are measured separately
at rated voltage and rated current; respectively. The two sound
power levels are added to predict the total noise level of the
transformer. However, this assumes that the vibrations and the
resulting sound power are independent.
First, under actual operating conditions, the transformer is
generally loaded to a certain percent of its rated power. Load
noise, corresponding to the load on the transformer, adds to the
no load noise of the transformer. The impact of load noise on the
total noise of the transformer at the site depends on the percent
load and the relative magnitudes of no load and load noise for
the design. Load noise increases significantly with load; therefore, its contribution to the total noise of the transformer is only
significant for large power transformers and low no-load noise
transformers when highly loaded [6].
An indirect impact of the transformer load on its total noise
level is the impact of load on core noise. Depending upon the

83

power factor of the load and the direction of the power flow, the
magnetic flux density in portions of the core may be lower or
higher than the rated flux density. This is caused by the superposition of stray flux returning from the windings to the main flux
in the core. The result may be a higher or lower core noise level;
which would cause the transformer noise level on-site to differ
from that measured in the factory. As an example, in a step-up
transformer, inductive loading on the outermost winding results
in an increase of the flux density in the core while capacitive
loading results in a lower flux density.
This situation was experienced when on-site noise measurements were made on a 150 MVA, 138 16 0.625% 47.3 14.1
kV transformer that was loaded at about 50% of its rated power.
At 100% voltage and rated tap position, the total transformer
noise measured 2.6 dB lower than the core noise level measured
in the factory. In this example, because of the low load on the
transformer, the contribution of load noise to the total noise of
the transformer was negligible. Therefore, the 2.6 dB was determined to be partially attributed to the lower than rated total
flux density in the transformer core yokes under load. The other
part of this difference was due to the generic error caused by
wall sound reflections in the noise measurements made in the
factory using the sound pressure measuring method.
In addition, the internal voltage drop in the transformer windings is proportional to load current which, in turn, can result in
higher or lower than rated core excitation depending on the tap
changing settings of the transformer; which, in turn, causes a
variation in the transformer noise level. In the transformer example before, the tap changing setting was such that the load
did not affect core excitation to any appreciable amount.
IV. CONTRIBUTION FROM NOISE OF AUXILIARY
TRANSFORMERS AND REACTORS
A significant number of power transformers; especially in
North America, are equipped with a preventive autotransformer
(PA); that allows the manufacturer to design a power transformer with additional means of regulating the L.V. winding
under load. The PA consists of a gapped core reactor which provides the current limiting impedance for reactance type On Load
Tap Changers. The core is excited only when the tap changer is
set at the odd positions (referred to as the bridging positions).
Under these conditions, the core of the PA is commonly excited
and the amount of the excitation depends on the tap changer position. The PA is part of the transformer design and is located
in the transformer oil compartment as an auxiliary device. However, in Factory Acceptance Tests, transformer core noise is typically measured at 100% voltage and with the OLTC at its nominal tap; in which the PA core is not excited. However, when the
transformer is operating on-site, the tap changer could very well
be set at a bridging position which would energize the PA and
generate additional noise.
Being small in size, the Sound Power level of a PA is typically
very small compared to the Sound Power level of the main transformer. Therefore, the noise level of the transformer is typically
not impacted by the noise of the PA. However, if for design, material, or construction reasons, the noise level of the PA is excessive, the noise level of the transformer operating at a bridging

84

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 30, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2015

TABLE II
ON-SITE TRANSFORMER NOISE MEASUREMENT AT BRIDGING
NONBRIDGING TAP POSITIONS, dB (A)

Fig. 1. Comparison of on-site noise measurement of a transformer operating at

a bridging versus nonbridging tap positions.

tap position would be higher, or much higher, than when the

transformer is operating at a nonbridging position.
This was no more evident than in the case of a 60 MVA,
%
%
kV step-down transformer.
The user reported significantly higher noise levels on-site compared to another transformer in the same substation. The user
also received noise complaints from residents in the vicinity of
the substation reporting occasional high noise levels from the
substation.
The authors of this paper were requested to investigate the
high noise issue of this transformer that was built by another
manufacturer. Upon performing detailed on-site noise measurements on this and the other transformer in the substation, it was
found that in the bridging tap position, the transformer tested
12.2 dB greater than when operating on a nonbridging tap. In
addition, there was a marked difference between the measured
frequency spectra of the transformer noise under these two operating conditions.
Table II compares the measured core noise level of the
main frequency components of the transformer on-site at two
different tap positions; a bridging tap position versus. a nonbridging position. As demonstrated by the table, the 250 Hz
frequency component tested about 19 dB higher at the bridging
position. The other frequency components tested 8.213.6 dB
higher, resulting in a 12.2 dB higher total transformer noise
level. This clearly indicated that the cause of the higher noise
at the bridging tap position is an extremely noisy PA. This is
even more evident from Fig. 1; where the 125 Hz frequency
component is plotted around the transformer at the two measured tap positions. The figure shows a much higher noise level
around the area of the transformer where the PA is located. It
was recommended to the user that the manufacturer needed to
replace the high noise PA with a low noise PA during the next
scheduled outage.
Additionally, some transformers are supplied with an internal
currentlimiting reactor connected in the circuit of the tertiary
winding. When this tertiary is loaded, the reactor noise adds to
the noise of the main transformer. The contribution is higher at

VERSUS

higher loads and is a function of the size, design, and construction of the reactor. In these circumstances, the measured noise
level on-site may deviate from the level reported during the final
factory acceptance tests.
V. CONTRIBUTION FROM VIBRATIONS OF STRUCTURES
ATTACHED TO THE TRANSFORMER
External mechanical structures are often solidly attached to
Power Transformers; especially generator step up transformers.
The vibrations of the transformer tank are transmitted mechanically to these structures causing them to vibrate excessively in
some cases when the frequency of the vibrations coincide with,
or is in a close vicinity of, the mechanical resonance frequency
of the structure. The noise generated by these vibrations adds to
the total noise level of the transformer when measured on-site.
A very good example of this situation is a 110 MVA,
230 8 1.25% 34.5 kV wind-farm transformer that measured 11.9 dB higher noise level on-site compared to what
was measured in the factory. Investigations performed to
determine the contributors to this difference, together with
detailed noise and vibration measurements using the Sound
Intensity measuring method, showed that 3.2 dB was due to a
2.7% core overexcitation. Another 1.5 to 2 dB was caused by
sound buildup around the transformer due to sound reflections
from adjacent fire walls (as will be explained in Section VI of
this paper). The remaining 5 to 6 dB was found to be caused
by excessive vibrations of the metallic structure covering the
bus duct connecting the LV bushings of the transformer to the
generator.
Fig. 2 below presents both factory and on-site noise-level
measurements around the transformer. The much higher noise
levels measured on-site correspond to measuring positions 16 to
25; with the highest difference noted at stations 20 to 22 which
are located just below the bus-duct. This is further confirmed by
on-site noise measurements around the transformer using both
the sound intensity and sound pressure measuring methods, [7],
[8]. These measurements are presented in Fig. 3 below for the
400 Hz 1/3-Octave frequency component.
Fig. 3 clearly indicates that the significantly higher noise
levels measured using the Sound Pressure method at stations
17 to 21 are due to noise external to the transformer. This
frequency component was found to be the main contributor to
this difference. This indicates that the excessive vibrations of
the bus-duct structure were caused by mechanical resonance

GIRGIS AND BERNESJ: CONTRIBUTIONS TO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ON-SITE AND FACTORY-MEASURED NOISE LEVELS OF POWER TRANSFORMERS

85

L-shaped sound barriers installed 2.1 m from the transformer

sides facing a local residential area. This is demonstrated by the
higher noise levels measured at measuring positions 10 to 16 in
Fig. 2 above.
VII. CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OTHER ON-SITE
SOURCES OF NOISE

Fig. 2. Noise measurements around the transformer.

In the factory acceptance tests, transformers are noise tested

either in a sound room, or in a low ambient noise environment.
Additionally, per the IEC and IEEE Standards [1] and [3], a
correction for the contribution of ambient noise is made during
the factory tests. However, when on-site noise measurements
are made using the sound pressure measuring method, the noise
measurements are inflated by noise coming from other on-site
sources of noise. These include noise from other transformers
and equipment located in the same site (sometimes within close
proximity of the transformer being measured) as well as ambient
noise in that location.
A. Contribution of Noise From Adjacent Transformers

Fig. 3. On-site noise measurements of the 400 Hz 1/3-Octave frequency component of the transformer noise.

magnification excited by the 360 Hz component of the transformer tank vibrations.

VI. CONTRIBUTON OF SOUND BUILDUP FROM
SOUND/FIRE WALLS
Concrete walls are often used for fire protection in between
multiple units on-site. In some cases, the walls are covered
with layers of a sound absorbing material for noise reduction
purposes. Sound reflections from these walls cause buildup
of sound around the transformer; resulting in a much higher
on-site measured noise level. The magnitude of the noise level
increase depends on a number of factors; such as whether the
walls partially, or fully, surround the transformer, whether the
walls are provided with sound absorbing material, and how far
the walls are located from the transformer.
As mentioned in the previous section of this paper, 1.5 to 2
dB of the difference found between factory and on-site noise
measurements of that transformer was caused by sound buildup
around the transformer due to sound reflections from adjacent
fire walls. This transformer was located in a substation with

This is a very common contributor to higher noise levels measured on-site versus. factory. In the example described in Section II of this paper, two 70 MVA transformers were located in
close proximity of each other with a fire wall in between. One
transformer was several dB noisier than the other.
Detailed on-site measurements; using both the sound intensity and sound pressure methods, showed that the higher noise
transformer contributed 1.5 to 2 dB to the noise measurements
of the lower noise transformer. Conversely, the lower noise
transformer contributed only about 0.5 dB to the noise measurements of the higher noise transformer.
In another substation; where three large single-phase power
transformers were located in close vicinity of each other with
only fire walls in between, it was found that the other two transformers contributed about 1.5 dB to the measured noise level
of the third transformer when measurements are made using the
sound pressure measuring method.
B. Contribution of Ambient Noise
One of the common contributors to the on-site noise-level
measurement using the Sound Pressure measuring method is
ambient noise and other sources of noise in the area. An example to demonstrate this effect is a case where measurements
were made on two different sites, one with minimal ambient
noise and one with higher ambient noise. The noise levels of the
transformers in these sites were measured at 2 m distance from
the transformers using both the Sound Pressure and Sound Intensity measuring methods. The measurements were made outside the near-field area around the transformer so that the difference between the readings obtained with the two sound measuring methods is a measure of the contribution of only the ambient noise to noise-level measurements using the Sound Pressure measuring method.
Table III below presents a summary of these measurements
for the main frequency components of the transformer noise.
The table shows practically no contribution of ambient noise for
the transformer located in the low ambient area. Conversely, the
contribution of the ambient noise is 3.3 dB in the higher ambient

86

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 30, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2015

TABLE III
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEASUREMENTS USING THE SOUND PRESSURE AND
SOUND INTENSITY MEASURING METHODS AT TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS

noise location. The main contribution of ambient in this case is

in the 500 Hz frequency range. These measurements were made
in a desert area but the location of the higher noise ambient was
at some distance from a busy highway.
Above is a typical example of the magnitude of contribution
from ambient noise. However, there have been cases; where
high noise levels of transformers were reported only to find out
that the noise measurements made in these cases were either
mostly ambient noise or dominated by ambient noise. This is
more typical in cases where noise levels are measured at the
boundary of a substation using the Sound Pressure measuring
method.
Needless to mention, other sources of noise; such as cooling
towers, other machinery, high voltage corona, etc. contribute
significantly to the ambient noise and, in-turn, contribute to the
error in the on-site noise measurements around transformers
when using the sound pressure measuring method.
VIII. CONTRIBUTION OF DC CURRENT
It is well known that when a transformer is subjected to dc
current, it causes a magnetic flux density shift in the core resulting in a significant increase in its core noise level of as much
as 20 dB, or even higher. The magnitude of the increase in the
core noise of the transformer is a function of the design of the
transformer, core-type, and the magnitude of dc. When power
transformers in service are connected to the power grid and the
ground neutral on-site they, in some cases, are subjected to low
levels of dc current flowing through the low voltage power grid.
The flow of this dc current causes the noise measured on-site to
be much higher than measured in the factory.
Initially, dc was not suspected in the case of this low noise design of this large autotransformer. On-site noise measurements
were performed in response to complaints from the nearby community. The on-site measured noise level of this transformer
was 13.8 dB greater than the measured noise level in the factory. Analysis of the data showed that 4 dB out of this 13.8 dB
difference was caused by about 3% core overexcitation and additional noise from other transformers on-site. Table IV below
compares noise levels of this transformer originally measured in
the factory to the corresponding on-site measurements after correcting for these two factors. The measurements are presented
in full octave bands as well as total dB (A).
As shown by the table, the on-site measurements are much
higher than the factory measurements. This particular transformer was designed with low flux density in the core in
addition to using highly grain oriented core steel; hence, a

TABLE IV
ON-SITE VERSUS FACTORY NOISE-LEVEL MEASUREMENTS

low core noise transformer. Upon reviewing the factory measurements and examining possible mechanical resonances, the
factory measured noise levels were found to be within 12 dB
of the calculated noise level of the transformer. Extensive investigations, and analysis of the on-site noise levels concluded
that this large difference is not caused by anything wrong
with the transformer. Having the highest difference between
factory and on-site noise levels at the 500 Hz octave indicated
a significant increase in the core excitation level. At the time,
possible dc current flowing into the neutral of the transformer
was suspected to be the cause of this excessive noise level. This
was based on the signature of the transformer noise on-site.
Subsequent to this conclusion, the user measured the dc current
at the neutral of the transformer bank. The measurements
showed that approximately 0.751 A dc was present. When
calculations were made of the increase of the noise level of
the different frequency components of core noise of this transformer due to this level of dc, it was confirmed that this level of
dc produces an increase of the core noise of this design almost
identical to the magnitude of the on-site measured increase in
the noise level as shown in Table IV above.
IX. CONTRIBUTION OF MOUNTING
During factory acceptance testing, transformers are typically
mounted on a structural support consisting of an air cushion
platform, wooden blocks, metallic frame, etc. Neither IEC
nor IEEE describes how the transformer should be mounted
during the noise test. On-site, power transformers are typically
mounted on a concrete pad or on a metallic structure; which
is different than the way the transformer is mounted during
the factory testing. Extensive investigations performed by
the authors of this paper showed that some of the individual
frequency components of core and load noise are significantly
affected by how the transformer is mounted. The lower the
frequency, the higher the impact [9]. The impact on the total
noise level of the transformer in dB (A) is typically low for
core noise.
An excellent example of this effect is a 336 MVA, 230
16 0.625% 69/13.1 kV autotransformer. This transformer was
tested for core noise in the factory and the measurements were
compared with the on-site measurements when it was lightly
loaded and fans not running. Table V presents a summary of
these measurements.
The table shows that, other than the 125 Hz component, the
on-site measurements are very close to those measured in the
factory. The 125 Hz component, however, tested 9.6 dB higher
than the corresponding factory measurement. Based on extensive measurements on effect of mounting on transformer noise,

GIRGIS AND BERNESJ: CONTRIBUTIONS TO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ON-SITE AND FACTORY-MEASURED NOISE LEVELS OF POWER TRANSFORMERS

TABLE V
ON-SITE VERSUS FACTORY NOISE MEASUREMENTS

87

On-site, energizing, and de-energizing the transformer, or

switching actions in the network, introduces remanent flux;
hence, increasing the core noise level of the transformer. However, this remanent flux decays naturally within minutes, but
may take a little longer in some cases.
XI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

this 9.6 dB difference in the 125 Hz component between factory and on-site is attributed to the difference in mounting of
the transformer.
X. CONTRIBUTIONS OF OTHER FACTORS
Factors, other than those presented in Sections IIIX above,
may contribute to differences between transformer noise levels
measured on-site and those measured at the factory acceptance
tests. Below are some of these factors:
A. Operating Temperature of the Transformer
Comprehensive measurements have shown that, for some
core materials and certain operating conditions, higher core
temperatures cause the core noise level of transformers to be
higher than that measured at no-load conditions in the factory.
Also, higher winding and structural parts temperatures under
load affect the clamping stresses on the windings and, therefore, can affect the part of the transformer load noise caused
by axial winding vibrations. At this time, limited measurements
were performed by the authors to quantify the noise increase
caused by this factor. More details on the impact of the operating temperature on both core and load noise are planned to be
presented in a future paper.
B. Current and Voltage Harmonics
During factory acceptance testing, Industry Standards require
voltage and current to be sinusoidal. The presence of current
and/or voltage harmonics on-site would increase the total noise
level of the transformer. This contribution is typically very small
as limits are typically maintained on the harmonic distortion
of the bus voltage. In cases where harmonic currents are injected in windings of transformers and reactors by power electronic devices, load noise increases. This increase is typically
significant in applications where current harmonics are of high
magnitudes. In those cases, the effect on the overall noise level
of the transformer in dB (A) can be significant as higher frequency components of the transformer noise are attenuated less
by A-weighting.
C. Remanent Core Magnetization
Remanent flux has a similar effect on the core noise level to
that produced by dc currents. During factory testing, great care
is taken to ensure that the remanent flux originating from impulse testing (mainly switching impulse), or resistance measurements, is dissipated prior to performing the transformer noise
tests.

As presented above, there are a number of different effects

that can contribute to significant differences between the measured noise levels of transformers in the factory versus on-site.
This paper presented a summary of the results of extensive investigations performed by the authors of this paper on contributors to these differences. The following is a short summary of
the findings of this study related to these contributors and possible magnitudes of their impact on the measured noise level of
transformers on-site.
System Voltage and Tap Changer Setting: Transformers are
typically measured at 100% voltage and nominal tap in the factory. However, on-site, the voltage applied to the transformer
and/or the tap position used are often different. The combinations of these result mostly in an overexcitation of the core and,
therefore, a higher noise level of the transformer on-site. Two
examples given in this paper showed differences of 3.2 and 4.7
dB attributed to this factor.
Load: On-site, transformers are generally loaded to a certain
percentage of its rated power. Since load noise decreases significantly with load its contribution to the total noise of the transformer is only significant for highly loaded large power transformers and low no-load noise transformers. Another effect of
load on the total noise of the transformer is the internal voltage
drop in the transformer windings which is proportional to load
current. Depending on the direction of the power flow and power
factor of the load, this voltage drop can cause higher or lower
core excitation. One example given in this paper showed a difference of 2.6 dB lower transformer noise when the transformer
had about 50% load.
Noise of Auxiliary Transformers and Reactors: Transformers
are typically measured at 100% voltage and nominal tap in the
factory excluding the Preventive Autotransformer from the circuit as a noise contributor. However, on-site, the tap position
used is often different and, when at a bridging position, the PA
is excited and its noise adds to the total noise of the transformer
on-site. The example given in this paper presented a case of an
excessively noisy PA that caused the noise level of the main
transformer when at a bridging position to be as much as 12.2
dB higher than that at a nonbridging position.
Vibrations of Structures Attached to the Transformer: Vibrations of the transformer tank are transmitted mechanically to
structures attached to the transformer which includes, but is not
limited to, bus ducts; etc. The example presented in Section V
of this paper demonstrates a 56 dB contribution of excessive
vibrations of such a structure to the measured noise level around
the transformer.
Sound Buildup From Sound/Fire Walls: Sound reflections
from these walls cause buildup of sound around the transformer
on-site; resulting in higher noise levels when measured on-site.
The example given in Section V of this paper showed a 1.52

88

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 30, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2015

dB contribution of this effect to the overall noise level of the

transformer on-site.
Other On-Site Sources of Noise: Adjacent transformers are a
common contributor to higher noise levels on-site when measuring using the Sound Pressure measuring method. The example given in Section VII showed a difference of 1.52 dB
attributed to this effect. Other sources of noise, as part of the
ambient noise, have a similar impact. The example presented in
Section VII-B of the paper showed a 3.3 dB impact of ambient
noise.
DC Current: When a transformer is subjected to dc current, it
results in a significant core noise increase. The example given in
Section VIII of this paper showed an impact of about 10 dB attributed to 0.751 A dc flowing in the neutral of the transformer.
Contribution of Mounting: On-site, transformers are typically mounted on a concrete pad or on a metallic structure,
which are different from the type of mounting used during factory tests. The example given in Section IX of this paper demonstrates that other than the 125 Hz frequency component, the
on-site noise measurements are very close to those measured
in the factory. The 125 Hz component tested 9.6 dB higher.
Contributions of Other Factors: Operating temperature, current and voltage harmonics, remanent core magnetization can
cause the measured noise levels on-site to vary from those obtained in the factory. However, at this time, limited measurements were performed by the authors to quantify the noise increase caused by these factors. More details on the impact of
some of these factors are planned to be presented in a future
paper.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to express their gratitude to all of
those who helped arrange and perform the extensive on-site
noise measurements used in the studies presented in this paper.
They would also like to acknowledge the contribution by Dr. C.
Ploetner toward some of the text in this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] IEC 60076-10-1: Determination of sound levelsApplication guide,
Section 8.
[2] J. Puri, Causes and Effects of Transformer Sound Levels, in Electric Power Transformer Engineering, 3rd ed. Boca Raton, FL, USA:
CRC, 2012, ch. 20.

[3] IEEE Standard Test Code for Liquid Immersed Distribution, Power,
and regulating Transformers, IEEE C57.12.90-2010, 2010.
[4] Power transformersPart 10: Determination of Sound Levels, IEC
60076-10:2001.
[5] R. Girgis and M. Bernesj, Appropriate test conditions proposed for
industry standards of measuring transformer noise, presented at the
IEEE Power Energy Soc. Conf., Minneapolis, MN, USA, Jul. 28, 2010.
[6] R. Girgis, M. Bernesj, and J. Anger, Comprehensive analysis of load
noise of power transformers, presented at the IEEE Power Energy Soc.
Conf., Calgary, AB, Canada, Jul. 2009.
[7] R. Girgis, K. Garner, M. Bernesj, and J. Anger, Measuring no-load
and load noise of power transformers using the sound pressure and
sound intensity methodsPart I: Outdoors measurements, presented
at the IEEE Power Energy Soc. Conf., Pittsburgh, PA, USA, Jul. 2008.
[8] R. Girgis, K. Garner, M. Bernesj, J. Anger, and D. Chu, Measuring
no-load and load noise of power transformers using the sound pressure and sound intensity methodsPart II: Indoors measurements,
presented at the IEEE Power Energy Soc. Conf., Pittsburgh, PA, USA,
Jul. 2008.
[9] R. Girgis, M. Bernesj, S. Thomas, J. Anger, D. Chu, and H. Moore,
Development of ultra-low transformer noise technology, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 228234, Jan. 2011.
R. Girgis (LF11) received the Ph.D. degree
in electrical engineering from the University of
Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada, in 1978.
He has more than 45 years of R&D experience in
the area of power, distribution, and high frequency
transformers, rotating machines, and pulse power
components. He has published and presented more
than 70 scientific papers in IEEE, IEE, CIGRE,
and other international journals. He co-authored
chapters in two electrical engineering handbooks on
Transformer Design and Transformer Noise.
Dr. Girgis is the chairman of the IEEE Transformers Standards Task Force
revising the IEEE Noise Measuring Standards C57.12.90, section 13. He is the
past Technical Advisor representing the U.S. National Committee in the IEC
Technical Committee 14. He is presently the Research and Development manger
at the Power Transformer Division, ABB, St. Louis, MO,. USA. He is also the
leader of the global ABB R&D activities in the area of transformer core performance and Co-Leader of the global ABB R&D activities in the transformer
noise area.

M. Bernesj (M10) received the M.Sc. degree in

electrical engineering from Narvik University College, Narvik, Norway, in 2000.
He has worked in the power transformer industry
for 14 years. He is presently a Development Engineer at the ABB Power Transformer plant, St
Louis, MO, USA. His past experience includes
positions at the ABB Power Transformers division,
Ludvika, Sweden, as an Electrical Designer and as
a Development Engineer. He has co-authored and
published six scientific papers in IEEE and CIGRE.