Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
ScienceDirect

Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

TMREES22-Fr, EURACA, 09 to 11 May 2022, Metz-Grand Est, France

Experimental evaluation of the limit condition for tap-staggered

autotransformers through noise and vibration analysis
Edoardo A. Pianaa ,∗, Francesco Paloneb , Simone Saccob , Roberto Spezieb
a Applied Acoustics Laboratory, University of Brescia, via Branze 38, Brescia 25123, Italy
b TERNA Rete Italia S.p.A., viale Egidio Galbani, 70 00156 Rome, Italy

Received 22 June 2022; accepted 19 July 2022

Available online 1 August 2022

Abstract
The growing demand for electric energy and the development of green sources such as photovoltaic and wind power are
requiring the integration of new systems in the already developed transmission network. This task is not always straightforward,
since when a large amount of power is not used, it gives rise to reactive loads. Usually, to put back into phase the voltage and
the current, specific devices such as reactors are applied at the electric station level. One of the practices that are becoming
increasingly common is the use of two autotransformers adopting the tap-staggering technique. In this way, already existing
devices can be used to rearrange the electric line parameters. One of the downsides is that, related to the specific design of
the transformers, high magnetic flux can occur in the core. Due to overexcitation, vibrations generated by magnetostriction can
become extremely high and can bring to damages that in some cases can cause an impairment of the device. This article aims
to find suitable parameters able to predict the approaching of a limit condition beyond which the autotransformer can undergo
damage. For this purpose, experimental investigations considering the vibrations and the noise emitted by five autotransformers
were carried out in different tap staggering conditions. It was found that the acceleration values very much depend on the
position of the transducer, while the acoustic noise measurements give an average of the sound radiated by the different parts
of the autotransformers but depend on the distance from the case of the device. For this reason, it is advised not to exceed an
average overall value of 80 dB(A) sound pressure level at a 2 m distance from the autotransformer.
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the TMREES22-Fr, EURACA, 2022.

Keywords: Tap-staggering; Autotransformer; Vibro-acoustic analysis; Bolt loosening; High-voltage transformer; Reactive power

1. Introduction
During periods of low electricity demand, there is an excess of reactive power that can lead to overvoltage
problems in power systems [1]. In recent years, many countries such as the UK have experienced serious
problems with the electric transmission network when high reactive power situations are matched with low-demand
conditions [2]. One example is the falloff in the demand during the night-time and the reactive power surplus
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: edoardo.piana@unibs.it (E.A. Piana).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.07.116
2352-4847/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:
//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the TMREES22-Fr, EURACA, 2022.
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Abbreviations
ATR Autotransformer
H Vertical position of the accelerometer referred to the centre of mass of the ATR
L Longitudinal position of the accelerometer referred to the centre of mass of the ATR
OLTC On load tap changer
SPL Sound pressure level
THD Total harmonic distortion
W Width position of the accelerometer referred to the centre of mass of the ATR

caused by the decommissioning of large industrial loads. These two events can cause severe voltage rise issues.
Such occurrences can also be found when the electricity demand is low and there is a high reactive power produced
by capacitive circuits. The increasing addition of many intermittent sources based on renewable power into the grid,
such as wind or solar power, has further improved the problems in matching generation and demand [3]. As shown
by the large number of researches related to different types of algorithms applicable to the optimal deployment
of control devices, such as the works of [4] or [5], the installation and regulation of many compensation devices
distributed in different locations, usually in the form of shunt reactors, proved to be a challenging task for system
operators. An alternative approach to reactive power management is that of arranging the parallel transformers of
the transmission grid in small, staggered taps to absorb the excess reactive power. Some studies have confirmed
the capability of the network to draw the reactive power from the transmission grid using the tap staggering
technique [6]. The in-depth study of the autotransformers evolution [7] and the development of a magnetic model of
the ATRs [8] are two important steps in the implementation of the tap staggering technique on the Italian distribution
network. A drawback of the tap staggering method is that, related to the design, high flux densities in the transformer
can occur. In this condition, vibrations [9] and noise [10] due to magnetostriction and emitted by the autotransformer
are greatly increased. Vibration-induced stresses can be especially harmful for the core and the windings, that
together account for over 30% of the ATR failures [11]. The vibration levels can be so high to produce damage
due to the wearing of the laminate surfaces or the loosening of the autotransformer bolts [12,13]. The study of such
vibro-acoustic emissions can be useful to make a non-destructive diagnosis of the power transformer [14].
Usually, an estimate of the limit state of power transformers and autotransformers is made by inspecting the
degree of polymerization and the short-circuit resistance [15]. Such kinds of investigations can be impractical if a
fast reliable estimate must be done on-site. This paper aims to describe the results of the acoustic and vibration
measurements carried out on different autotransformers and the correlation between the two quantities. Several
parameters derived from the measurements can be used to further characterize the phenomena. Finally, the vibration
measurements have been used as an input to a model [16] useful for predicting the possible loosening of the bolts
used to pack the core laminates.

2. Materials and methods

As pointed out in the introduction, in transmission networks the operation of two parallel autotransformers (ATRs)
in different tap positions can provide a means of absorbing reactive power. However, this practice puts the ATRs core
under the influence of high magnetic flux density. The magnetic flux density can be so high to generate vibrations,
and therefore noise levels, which are unusual compared to the nominal operating conditions. The magnetic flux
density can be controlled by the setting of the taps of the units, using the On Load Tap Changer (OLTC) of the
2 transformers. Since the age of the devices can have an impact on the emitted amount of noise and vibrations,
several measurements were carried out on nominally identical ATRs having different ages. The characteristics and
the construction year of the ATRs are reported in Table 1. The primary/secondary rated voltage and the rated power
were chosen as shown in Table 1 because this particular type of ATR is most commonly used in Italy for adopting
the tap-staggering technique.
All the vibration measurements were carried out in narrow band and the signals were recorded as Waveform
Audio Format files. The sessions concerning autotransformers 1 and 2 were recorded using only an Analog Devices
accelerometer type ADXL335. During the sessions involving autotransformers 3, 4, and 5 an OROS OR 36
628
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Table 1. Characteristics of the ATRs subject to vibro-acoustic measurements.

ATR ID Primary/secondary rated voltage [kV] Rated power [MVA] Construction year
1 400/155 250 1996
2 400/155 250 1996
3 400/135 250 2011
4 400/135 250 2016
5 400/135 250 2009

Fig. 1. Measurement setup.

multichannel analyser equipped with accelerometers PCB type 352C33 and one Bruel & Kjaer microphone type
4189 was used (Fig. 1). All the transducers were calibrated before and after the measurements. The expanded
uncertainty ((95% confidence interval) of the microphone chain is ±1 dB, while for the accelerometer it is ±10%.
The data acquired during the experiments were post-processed using a MATLAB® script. The script performs an
FFT analysis useful to derive information about the condition of the core and the possible onset of non-linearities
typical of stress situations. Moreover, narrow band analyses give details that can be useful for the application of
the technique presented at the end of Section 3 for the diagnosis of possible loosening of the bolts. During the
measurements, particular care was taken not to exceed 2.5 m height from the ground with any equipment in the
vicinity of the autotransformers to avoid safety issues due to electric discharges caused by the voltage difference
with ground.

3. Results and discussion

Fig. 2 shows the graphs of the time series recorded by the accelerometers and the corresponding narrow band
analysis measured on ATR1. The accelerometer was placed on the long side of the transformer, in the middle point,
and at about 1/3 of the transformer height (position with reference to the centre of mass: H = −0.5 m, L = 0 m,
W = 1.6 m, between two ribs on the 155 kV side). The figures show the results for 3 different configurations
of the taps: +5/–1 (i.e. +10%/–2% of the rated voltage), +5/–3 (i.e. +10%/–6% of the rated voltage) and +5/–5
629
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Fig. 2. Left: time series; right: narrow band analysis (ATR1).

(i.e. +10%/–10% of the rated voltage). From Fig. 2 it is possible to note that the peak accelerations depend on the
setting of the tap and are 0.66 m/s2 , 0.99 m/s2 and 2.44 m/s2 respectively. Looking at the acceleration spectra, it
is possible to notice a similar increase at the different tap configurations. In particular, the frequency bands giving
the highest acceleration values are placed at 100 Hz, 200 Hz, 300 Hz and 400 Hz. The reason why the main
component of the vibration spectra can be found at 100 Hz is that the voltage-dependent vibration is originated by
magnetostriction. This phenomenon leads to oscillations of the Weiss Domains in the metal laminates of the core,
which align themselves along the time-varying magnetic flux induced by the applied voltage twice every period. For
this reason, the main vibration frequency found during the measurements is twice the electrical frequency, that is,
100 Hz. Transformers often vibrate with larger amplitudes at the 3rd harmonic (300 Hz) than at the basic frequency
(100 Hz) [17]. It must be pointed out that the 3rd and the 4th frequency components usually become dominant after
the start-up when the ATR is in continuous service.
It is possible to plot the acceleration levels as a function of the setting of the tap. The result of this analysis is
illustrated in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Vibration levels at 100 Hz, 200 Hz and 300 Hz as a function of the tap settings.

630
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Fig. 4. Left: time series; right: narrow band analysis (ATR2).

Looking at Fig. 3 it can be noted that for ATR1 the component at 100 Hz is the one showing the highest values,
while the one at 300 Hz has a more regular behaviour as a function of the setting of the tap. The data gathered
for the second autotransformer were post-processed exactly like the ones acquired for the first autotransformer. The
accelerometer was placed in the same position described for the autotransformer 1, on the 400 kV side. Fig. 4
reports the time series and the narrow band spectra for the tap settings +5/–1, +5/–3 and +5/–5 measured on
ATR2.
The peak amplitudes of the accelerations range from 1.2 m/s2 , 1.6 m/s2 for settings +5/–1, +5/–3 to 2.6 m/s2
for setting +5/–5. As concerns the narrow band analysis, the component at 300 Hz is the one having the highest
values. The trend of the acceleration level components at 100 Hz, 200 Hz and 300 Hz as a function of the tap
settings are reported in Fig. 3 together with the ones given for autotransformer 1.
For the measurements on ATRs 3, 4 and 5 a different acquisition system (OROS type OR36) and different
transducers have been used. Another difference is that a microphone was connected to the analyser and used to
capture the noise radiated by the ATRs. The quality of the acquisition system is excellent, and this explains why
the measured “background noise” level is much lower than the one that can be observed in the graphs of Figs. 2
and 4. The ATR used for the third set of measurements is shown in Fig. 5 together with the points used to pick up
the accelerations.

Fig. 5. Autotransformer 4 and positions of the accelerometers: long side (left) and short side (right).

631
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

The positions of the four accelerometers, with reference to the centre of mass, are H = –0.5 m, L = 0.5 m, W
= 1.6 m for accelerometer 1; H = +1.5 m, L = 1.5 m, W = 1.6 m for accelerometer 2; H = 1 m, L = 3.6 m, W =
0 m for accelerometer 3, and H = –0.5 m, L = 3.6 m, W = 0 m for accelerometer 4. The four accelerometers were
used to detect the point having the highest acceleration. The accelerometers were placed on the 135 kV long side.
One microphone was positioned at 7 m distance from the 135 kV side of the autotransformer, midplane location.
Position 1 shows the highest values, with an acceleration level of 133 dB. With this different acquisition system, it
was possible to extend the investigated frequency span, thus allowing to examine the behaviour of the device above
500 Hz. In Fig. 6 the spectrum of the accelerations measured in Position 1 is given for a frequency range going
from 20 Hz to 5 kHz. It can be noted that the highest levels appear in the sub-range 20–500 Hz.

Fig. 6. Full frequency range used for the measurements. The main components are in the 20–500 Hz frequency range.

Fig. 7 shows the spectra for positions 1, 2, 3 and 4. The measured acceleration levels display a high degree of
variability, with the long side of the ATR subject to higher values, as found in other studies [18].
Fig. 8 shows the result of the sound pressure level measurement, giving outcomes that are very similar to the
vibration levels. On the right side of the figure, the trend of the vibration levels at different taps settings is represented
together with the average A-weighted sound pressure level measured at 2 m around the autotransformer. It can be
noted that the trend of the average sound pressure level is very similar to the trend of the acceleration level at
300 Hz even though the vibration component at 100 Hz is dominant. This behaviour is related to the application
of the A-weighting, which heavily reduces the lower frequency components. The development of an algorithm to
process the information on the 300 Hz frequency component together with the overall A-weighted sound pressure
level can help detecting the stress level caused by the tap staggering procedure.
The last two sets of measurements were made on almost identical ATRs deployed at the same substation. In
this case, two accelerometers were installed on the ATRs in the same position for both devices. Since the most
interesting results of the previous measurements were found on the long side of the ATR, it was decided to focus
only on this side, adding a measurement position at the base of the ATR. Fig. 9 shows the measurement points
chosen for the accelerometers. The positions of the two accelerometers, with reference to the centre of mass are: H
= –0.5 m, L = 0 m, W = 1.6 m for accelerometer 1, and H = –1.5 m, L = 0 m, W = 1.6 m for accelerometer 2.
A further microphone was placed 5 m far from the long side of the autotransformer. Figs. 10 and 11 show the result
of the vibration level measurements for autotransformers 4 and 5 respectively. Fig. 12 gathers the sound pressure
level spectra.
Measurement position 1 was placed on the case of the autotransformer, at one-third of its height. Accelerometer
2 was placed at the bottom of the autotransformer, close to one of the pillars used to pack the laminates forming
the core. For both the autotransformers the 135 kV side was considered for the investigations.
632
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Fig. 7. Measured acceleration level spectra. Acc.1–4: accelerometer positions (top left, top right, bottom left, and bottom right, respectively).

Fig. 8. Sound pressure level spectra measured at 7 m in front of autotransformer 3 and trend of the narrow band acceleration components
and of the average sound pressure level around the device as a function of the setting of the tap.

633
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Fig. 9. Measurement positions for the accelerometers on autotransformers 4 and 5.

Fig. 10. Result of the vibration measurements for autotransformer 4.

Looking at the graphs in Figs. 10 and 11, it can be noted that the amplitude of the narrow band spectra is higher
for the position placed on the case with overall vibration levels of 133 dB for autotransformer 4 and 137 dB for
autotransformer 5 (setting +5/–5). It is anyway always clear that the settings produce very different vibration levels
at the base and on the case of the autotransformer.
Looking at the values measured for the different settings of the taps, it is again clear that they induce vibration
and sound pressure levels which are increasingly higher. Another remark can be done on the basis that, even if
the two ATRs considered in this last set of measurements are nominally identical, they give very different results.
Moreover, the spectra measured on ATR 4 are completely different from the ones measured on ATR 5 due to the
presence of strong components at 150 Hz, 250 Hz, 350 Hz and 450 Hz. For this reason, an analysis of the total
harmonic distortion of the two transformers will be presented later in this section. Considering the frequency bands
at 100 Hz, 200 Hz, 300 Hz and 400 Hz, it is possible again to plot the trend of the acceleration level as a function
of the setting of the tap.
In Fig. 13 the variation of the acceleration levels is reported together with the average overall A-weighted sound
pressure level measured around ATRs 4 and 5 (2 m distance from the case) as a function of the tap setting. The
behaviour of the two ATRs is evident, being the higher frequency component for ATR 4 the one at 100 Hz and
for ATR 5 the one at 300 Hz. It is anyway interesting to note that the overall A-weighted sound pressure levels
measured close to the two ATRs are very similar for equivalent tap settings.
It is now possible to put together the results shown in Fig. 8 and in Fig. 13 trying to find a limit above which it
is not advisable to push the tap staggering procedure. The acceleration levels at a single frequency do not seem to
provide repeatable information, thus it was chosen to rely upon the overall A-weighted sound pressure level. From
634
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Fig. 11. Result of the vibration measurements for autotransformers 5.

Fig. 12. Result of the sound pressure level measurements for autotransformers 4 and 5.

Fig. 13. Acceleration components and average of the A-weighted sound pressure level around the device as a function of the setting of the
tap and the narrow band frequency component (left: autotransformer 4, right: autotransformer 5).

635
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

a practical point of view, this quantity is also easier to check in the field, since a simple measurement carried out
averaging the SPL around the autotransformer can be sufficient to understand the stress conditions. A possible limit
above which the stress state is reached can be set at about 80 dB(A). For this reason, the +5–5 tap setting, which
is the only one bringing to overall A-weighted SPL values above this limit, should be avoided.
One last consideration can be done by comparing the total harmonic distortion (THD) evaluated using the data
acquired by the accelerometer placed in position 1 and the microphone at a 5 m distance from ATR 5 (Fig. 14).

Fig. 14. THD measured by accelerometer 1 (left) and microphone (right) on autotransformer 5. Tap settings +5/–3 (top), +5/–5 (bottom).

From Fig. 14 it is evident how, going from tap setting +5/–3 to +5/–5, the THD for the accelerometer 1 signal
increases from –7.05 dB to –4.5 dB, while considering the microphone the THD decreases from 1.9 dB to –16.89 dB,
with values that are not directly comparable because the THD for the +5/–3 setting is computed based on the 100 Hz
fundamental while for the setting +5/–5 it is computed for the 300 Hz component. This non-linear behaviour is a
clear sign that the ATR core is subject to dangerous values of the magnetic flux, which must be controlled and kept
as low as possible to avoid outages.
The last evaluation concerning the possibility that, due to the high vibration levels, the bolts used to pack the core
can loosen causing damage to the laminates and then failure of the ATR, can be done based on the study presented
in [16]. The main parameters to be considered are the vibration displacement and its frequency. Depending on the
size and the pitch of the thread and applying the vibratory conveyor theory, it is possible to predict the loosening
velocity. For the case at hand, considering an M30 thread and the overall vibration velocity measured on ATR
636
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

Fig. 15. Loosening velocity of an M30 bolt as a function of frequency and of the axial force for 1.23 mm vibration displacement.

5 – position 1 (equal to 1.23 mm), a graph showing the loosening velocity as a function of frequency and the
longitudinal load on the bolt can be plotted (Fig. 15).
For example, considering an axial load on the bolt equal to 1000 N and a vibration with a frequency of 200 Hz,
the loosening velocity is equal to 0.25 mm/s. On the other hand, if the axial load is higher than 10 000 N, the
loosening velocity caused by the vibration is negligible. For this reason, it can be concluded that the limit in the
application of this type of evaluation is the lack of information about the axial load from the ATRs’ manufacturers.

4. Conclusions
The application of the tap staggering technique using ATRs is an economic way to control the amount of reactive
power in transmission lines. This article presents the results of a set of noise and vibration measurements carried out
on five ATRs of different ages (ranging from 6 to 26 years old) subject to different socket settings. The study aimed
to find a suitable parameter able to indicate when the tap staggering technique is more likely to damage the devices.
While vibration measurements are usually adopted to monitor the condition of ATRs, there is a lack of analyses
carried out considering sound pressure level as an indicator. Different parameters such as noise or vibration narrow
band levels, overall levels, and THD have been used as indicators. The conclusion is that, while the displacement
of the vibrations can be used to verify if there is a chance that the bolts keeping the core laminates packed together
can loosen, a feasible way to check on the field if the degree of stress-induced on an autotransformer is too high
and can bring to failures is to limit the overall A-weighted sound pressure level, measured at 2 m from the body
of the device, below 80 dB(A).

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could
have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability
The data that has been used is confidential.

References
[1] Chen L, Li HY, Cox S, Bailey K. Ancillary service for transmission systems by tap stagger operation in distribution networks. IEEE
Trans Power Deliv 2016;31:1701–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2015.2504599.
[2] Leslie Julian. ETYS 2021. 2021, https://www.nationalgrideso.com/research-publications/etys.
637
E.A. Piana, F. Palone, S. Sacco et al. Energy Reports 8 (2022) 627–638

[3] Leborgne RC, Stypulkowski YS. Optimal reactive power compensation in weak grids with insertion of wind and solar sources. In: 2017
Brazilian power electronics conference (COBEP). Juiz de Fora: IEEE; 2017, p. 1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/COBEP.2017.8257362.
[4] Shokouhandeh H, Latif S, Irshad S, Ahmadi Kamarposhti M, Colak I, Eguchi K. Optimal management of reactive power considering
voltage and location of control devices using artificial bee algorithm. Appl Sci 2021;12:27. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app12010027.
[5] Huang C-M, Chen S-J, Huang Y-C, Yang H-T. Comparative study of evolutionary computation methods for active–reactive power
dispatch. IET Gener Transm Distrib 2012;6:636. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2011.0559.
[6] Chen L, Li H. Optimized reactive power supports using transformer tap stagger in distribution networks. IEEE Trans Smart Grid
2017;8:1987–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2016.2539824.
[7] Colla L, Di Giulio A, Iuliani V, Palone F, Rebolini M. Autotransformers evolution, reliability, safety and modelling in the Italian
transmission grid. In: 44th international conference on large high voltage electric systems 2012. 2012.
[8] Colla L, Iuliani V, Palone F, Rebolini M, Taricone C. EHV/HV autotransformers modeling for electromagnetic transients simulation
of power systems. In: 19th international conference on electrical machines, ICEM 2010. 2010, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICELMACH.
2010.5607995.
[9] Zhu L, Yang Q, Yan R, Zhang X, Yang Y. Research on dynamic vibration of transformer with wireless power transfer system load.
IEEE Trans Magn 2015;51:1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2015.2454298.
[10] Wang G, Zeng X, Zhao Y. Research on the effect of core joints on transformer noise. IEEE Trans Magn 2021;57:1–6. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2021.3104737.
[11] Barkas D, Chronis I, Psomopoulos C. Failure mapping and critical measurements for the operating condition assessment of power
transformers. Energy Rep 2022.
[12] Tenbohlen S, Uhde D, Poittevin J, Sundermann U, Borsi H, Werle P, Matthes H. Enhanced diagnosis of power transformers using on-
and off-line methods: Results, examples and future trends. CIGRE Paper, 2000, p. 12–204, 8.
[13] Yoon JT, Park KM, Youn BD, Lee W-R. Diagnostics of mechanical faults in power transformers - Vibration sensor network design
under vibration uncertainty. 2014, p. 7.
[14] Bartoletti C, Desiderio M, Di Carlo D, Fazio G, Muzi F, Sacerdoti G, Salvatori F. Vibro-acoustic techniques to diagnose power
transformers. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2004;19:221–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2003.820177.
[15] L’vov MYu, Antipov KM, L’vov YuN, Mamikonyants LG, Komarov VB, Tsurpal SV, Shifrin LN, Dement’ev YuA. An estimate of the
limit state of power transformers and autotransformers. Power Technol Eng 2008;42:113–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10749-008-0022-y.
[16] Fernando S. Mechanisms and prevention of vibration loosening in bolted joints. Aust J Mech Eng 2005;2:73–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1080/14484846.2005.11464482.
[17] Beltle M, Tenbohlen S. Investigations on vibrations of power transformers. 2011, p. 7.
[18] Jin M, Pan J, Huang H, Zhou J. Transmission of vibration of a power transformer from the internal structures to the tank. 2012, p. 7.

638