IMPEDANCE CALCULATION OF CABLES USING

SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CABLE CONDUCTORS

by

Kodzo Obed A b l e d u

B.Sc.(Hons.), U n i v e r s i t y o f S c i e n c e and Technology, Kumasi, 1976

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCE

in

THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

(Department o f E l e c t r i c a l E n g i n e e r i n g )

We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as conforming

to t h e r e q u i r e d standard

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

September, 1979

(c) Kodzo Obed A b l e d u , 1979

In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r
an advanced degree a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agree t h a t
the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .
I f u r t h e r agree that permission f o r extensive copying o f t h i s t h e s i s
f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my Department o r
by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n
o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my
written permission.

Department n f £ U F C T K ( ^ * U - 6 K G t r ^ R i H q

The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia
2075 Wesbrook P l a c e
Vancouver, Canada
V6T 1W5

Date S€PTe/Wfe<S« ^ ,
 ABSTRACT

The impedances o f c a b l e s =are some o f t h e parameters needed

f o r v a r i o u s s t u d i e s i n c a b l e systems.

I n t h i s work, the impedances o f c a b l e s a r e c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g

the s u b d i v i s i o n s o f t h e c o n d u c t o r s ( i n c l u d i n g ground) i n t h e system.

Use i s a l s o made o f a n a l y t i c a l l y d e r i v e d ground r e t u r n formulae t o

speed up t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s . The impedances o f most l i n e a r m a t e r i a l s

are c a l c u l a t e d w i t h a good degree o f a c c u r a c y b u t m a t e r i a l s w i t h h i g h l y

nonlinear p r o p e r t i e s , l i k e s t e e l pipes, give large d e v i a t i o n s i n the

r e s u l t s when they a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e l i n e a r model used.

The method i s used t o study a t e s t case o f i n d u c e d sheath

c u r r e n t s i n bonded sheaths and i t g i v e s v e r y good r e s u l t s when compared

w i t h t h e measured v a l u e s .
 i i i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT i i

TABLE OF CONTENTS i i i

LIST OF TABLES • V

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS v i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v i i i

LIST OF SYMBOLS i x

1. INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 A B r i e f Review of Methods for the Calculation of Cable

Impedances 1

1.2 Skin and P r o x i m i t y Effects

1.3 A Brief Explanation of t h e Method of Subconductors 4

1.4 Scope of the Thesis 5

2. THEORY AND T H E F O R M A T I O N AND S O L U T I O N OF E Q U A T I O N S 6

2.1 Subdivisions of the Conductors ^

2.2 Assumptions ^

2.3 Loop Impedances of Subconductors ^

2.4 Formation of Impedance Matrix

2.5 Bundling of the Subconductors i n t h e Impedance Matrix * ' ' "

2.6 Reduction of the Large Impedance Matrix

2.7 The C h o i c e and C o n s t r a i n t on t h e R e t u r n Path 15

2.8 Including the Constraint on the Current i n the Matrix Solution- 13

3. RETURN PATH IMPEDANCE , 20

3.1 Return i n Neutral Conductors Only 20

3.2 Return i n Ground Only 20

3.3 Return i n Ground and N e u t r a l Conductors 22

3.4 Use of A n a l y t i c a l Equations f o r Ground Return Impedance • • . 2 2

 iv

3.5 Model U s i n g Ground Return Formulae D i r e c t l y w i t h the

Subconductors - Model I I 25

3.6 R e p r e s e n t i n g the Ground as One U n d i v i d e d Conductor -

Model I I I 26

3.7 Mutual Impedance between a Subconductor and Ground w i t h Common

Return i n Another Subconductor 28

3.8 Comparison o f Model I I I w i t h the T r a n s i e n t Network A n a l y z e r

Circuit 31

4. RESULTS 33

4.1 Comparison of the Method o f Subconductors w i t h Standard

Methods 33

4.2 Comparison o f Ground Return Formulae 37

4.3 Comparison o f R e s u l t s from the D i f f e r e n t Models . . . . . . 47

4.4 Reproduction of Test Results 49

4.5 P i p e Type Cables 54

5. CONCLUSIONS 63

LIST OF REFERENCES 64
 V

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE

4.1 Variation of Impedance with t h e Number of Subdivisions 34

4.2 Variation o f t h e I m p e d a n c e o f t h e C i r c u i t o f F i g . 4.3 with the

Number o f S u b d i v i s i o n s , Showing the I n c l u s i o n of Both S k i n and
Proximity Effects i n the Calculations 37

4.3 Self Impedance of Ground Return Path as C a l c u l a t e d Using Subdivided

Ground and Other Formulae

4.4 Mutual Impedance Between Two U n d e r g r o u n d Conductors ^

4.5 Comparison of Various Models 0

4.6 Induced Currents i n Bonded Sheaths ~,->

4.7 Impedance of Pipe Type Cables for Various Degrees of Magnetic - - -

Saturation J
~

4.8 Zero Sequence Impedance Measurements on Three Cables Enclosed

o
i n a Pipe with Pipe Return J

4.9 Impedances of Cables i n Magnetic Pipes Represented a s Two

Concentric Pipes of D i f f e r e n t P e r m e a b i l i t i e s ^
 vi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURE

1.1 Current d i s t r i b u t i o n i n s o l i d round conductors due to skin

and proximity effects 3

1.2 Current d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the subdivided conductors of the

model 5

2.1 Subdivision of the main conductors 6

2.2 C i r c u i t of two subconductors with common return 7

2.3 Geometry of Subconductors £, k, q. 8

2.4 I l l u s t r a t i o n of the reduction process. 15

:
2.5 A two-w;ir'e r e t u r n ' c i r c u i t 1'6

2.6 A two-wire c i r c u i t with, common r e t u r n in a third _

conductor 16

3.1 Subdivision of ground into layers of subconductors 21

3.2 Model with, only subconductors and ground return .26

3.3. Model with ground represented as only one conductor 27

3.4 A c i r c u i t of two conductors with common ground return 29

3.5 A c i r c u i t of one conductor and the ground with common return

in another conductor 29

4.1 A return c i r c u i t of two conductors far apart - . . . 33

4.2 Variation of impedance with the number of subconductors 35

4.3 A return c i r c u i t of two conductors very close together 35

4.4 V a r i a t i o n of the impedance of a buried conductor with

depth of b u r i a l 3'8
4.5 Cross sections of buried conductors for ground return impedance
calculations • 40

4.6 Comparison of calculated s e l f impedances of a ground return loop • 43

4.7 Comparison of calculated mutual impedances between two buried

conductors 46

4.8 E l e c t r i c a l layout of the induced sheath current test 50

4.9 C i r c u i t diagram of the induced sheath current test 51-

 vii

4.10 V a r i a t i o n o f magnetic p e r m e a b i l i t y o f s t e e l p i p e w i t h c u r r e n t

i n the p i p e 57

4.11 Shape o f m a g n e t i z i n g curve d u r i n g one c y c l e 57

4.12 L i n e a r i z e d m a g n e t i z i n g curves 62
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would l i k e t o express my thanks t o my s u p e r v i s o r ,

Dr. H.W. Dommel, f o r h i s h e l p throughout t h i s work and f o r the t i m e l y

suggestions and c o r r e c t i o n s he made. A l s o , I w i s h t o convey my g r a t i t u d e

to Mr. Gary Armanini of B r i t i s h Columbia Hydro and Power A u t h o r i t y , f o r

making h i s r e p o r t and t e s t r e s u l t s a v a i l a b l e f o r use i n t h i s work.

I am a l s o very g r a t e f u l to the Government of the R e p u b l i c o f

Ghana f o r f i n a n c i n g my e d u c a t i o n a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia.

For reading through and c o r r e c t i n g the s c r i p t s , I would like

to thank Ms. M a r i l y n Hankey o f the F a c u l t y o f Commerce. The t y p i n g i s

b e a u t i f u l l y done by Mrs. Shih-Ying Hoy o f the Department o f E l e c t r i c a l

Engineering; I do a p p r e c i a t e i t v e r y much.
 ix

L i s t o f Symbols

B flux density
D„ d i s t a n c e between conductors £ and q
£q
D p i p e diameter
P

e =2.71828

f frequency

g s u b s c r i p t denoting ground

GMR geometric mean r a d i u s

h depth o f b u r i a l o f conductor

i, I current
I pipe current
p
j complex o p e r a t o r = /-I

i,j,k,£,n subscripts

km kilometres

m = /(jyu/p)

m metres

M inductance

q s u b s c r i p t denoting return path

r,R resistance, radius

v,V voltage

X reactance

Z impedance

K , Q Bessel functions

log Common l o g a r i t h m (base 10)

£n Natural logarithm (base e)

Hz hertz

U a b s o l u t e p e r m e a b i l i t y o f f r e e space = 4irx 10 ^ H/m

 X

y =viQy , permeability

y r relative permeability

tj) flux

¥ flux linkage =

ir =3.1415926...

y =0.5772157... Eulers Constant

ft ohm

(JJ =2lTf
 1

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 A Brief Review of Methods f o r the Calculation of Cable Impedances

For the analysis of transmission line systems, one o f the basic

input parameters i s the impedance of the lines. Fault studies, surge

propagation studies and the c a l c u l a t i o n of mutual induction effects between

lines and p a r a l l e l adjacent conductors (such as other lines, pipes and

fences) a l l require reasonably accurate impedance data.

Underground cable systems have been analysed by many authors.

The work of D.M. Simmons [1] resulted i n the publication of standard charts

which a r e found i n many h a n d b o o k s and which are often used i n impedance

calculations for distribution systems. For single-cored (coaxial) cables,

Schelkunoff [2] h a s done a comprehensive analysis and h i s r e s u l t s are widely

used.

Carson [10], Pollaczek [19], Wedepohl and Wilcox [9] have also

derived equations f o r the impedance of underground cables with ground r e -

turn. Smith and Barger [3], Lewis, et a l . [4,5] and others have calculated

the impedances of concentric neutral cables used i n distribution systems.

In many of the formulae used i n impedance calculations, factors

are used to correct f o r two i m p o r t a n t effects, namely: skin and proximity

effects. Another approach has been used by C o m e l l i n i , et a l . [7] and Lucas

and Talukdar [ 2 2 ] , who h a v e calculated the impedances of transmission lines

by dividing a l l the conductors (including ground) into smaller conductors

of specific shape, which automatically accounts f o r t h e two e f f e c t s mentioned

above. This approach i s also used i n this thesis. Cables with sector
 2

shaped conductors or conductors of any irregular cross s e c t i o n or of non-

uniform properties across the cross section can e a s i l y be h a n d l e d with this

method.

1.2 Skin and Proximity Effects

The r e s i s t a n c e of a transmission line to direct current is easily

determined from the p h y s i c a l dimensions of the wire and the type of material

because direct current is uniformly distributed across the cross section of

the wire. In the case of alternating current, there exists a nonuniform

distribution of current over the cross s e c t i o n of a conductor which is caused

by the variation of current in the conductor. This phenomenon is called

"skin effect".

Another phenomenon, called "proximity effect", arises due to the

presence of other current-carrying conductors c l o s e by. Changing currents

in these neighbouring conductors causes a distortion in the current d i s t r i -

bution in the first conductor. This distortion, unlike that due to skin

effect, is not symmetrical around the axis of symmetry of the conductor (if

the conductor is circular). In a two-wire line, for instance, more current

tends to flow either on the sides of the conductors which face each other

or on the opposite sides.

The phenomena of s k i n and proximity effects in round conductors

are illustrated in Figure 1.1.

 3

^>

Current Distributions

( a ) Skin Effect (b) P r o x i m i t y E f f e c t

Figure 1.1 Current distribution in solid round conductors due to skin and
proximity effects

The uneven current distribution across the cross s e c t i o n of the

conductors causes additional power loss above that produced by an equivalent

amount of direct current, thus i n c r e a s i n g the effective a.c. resistance of

the conductor.

The higher current density towards the conductor surface reduces

the self linkage in the inner part of the conductor. This decreases the

internal inductance of the conductor.

The extent to which the above effects alter the values of the

conductor impedance depends o n how pronounced they are. Skin effect varies

very much w i t h the size of the conductor and w i t h the frequency - i t increases

with both - while proximity effect depends mainly on the geometry (being

more pronounced for closer spacings between conductors).

 Bessel functions are used to calculate increases in resistance

to alternating current due to skin effect analytically. This method is

widely found in the literature, e x p e c i a l l y when coaxial cables and cylin-

drical conductors are being analyzed [1,9]. On the other hand, proximity

effect is more difficult to analyze. Charts and correcting factor tables

[17] derived from otherwise complicated formulae [18] are customarily used

in most hand calculations to correct for this effect.

In general, underground cables are large in size and are usually

laid close together. This makes both skin and proximity effects important

in the c a l c u l a t i o n of impedances, even at power frequency and especially

at higher frequencies as needed for switching surge studies.

1.3 A Brief Explanation of the Method of Subconductors

In the work of Enrico Comellini et a l . [7] it is shown that i t

is possible to take both effects into account simultaneously in calculating

the impedance of any transmission line. This is done by dividing the main

conductors into smaller subconductors of c y l i n d r i c a l shape, by finding the

self and m u t u a l impedances of these subconductors, and by bundling them to

give the impedance of the main conductors. The work described in this

thesis is based on the above reference.

Dividing the conductors into parallel cylindrical subconductors

seeks to approximate the current distributions shown in Figure 1.1 by those

of Figure 1.2.
 Conductor s

Approximate Current
Distributions

(a) Skin Effect (b) Proximity Effect

Figure 1.2 Current d i s t r i b u t i o n in subdivided conductors
of the model

Obviously the accuracy to be expected from such a representation

w i l l depend on the degree of discretization, and hence on the number of

subconductors.

1.4 Scope of This Thesis

The theory for calculating the impedances from subconductors is

developed using a fictitious 'return path' which allows more flexibility

in the model. •Analytically derived ground return formulae are then incor-

porated into the model to reduce the number of subconductors, storage and

computing time.

Pipe type cables are modelled by treating the steel pipe as

concentric layers of pipe material, with each layer having a different

permeability depending on the degree of saturation.

 6

Chapter 2

T H E O R Y AND T H E F O R M A T I O N A N D S O L U T I O N OF EQUATIONS

2.1 Subdivisions of the Conductors

In the model described below, each core of the cable i s considered

a main conductor, as i s the sheath, and i f present, the neutral conductor

and the armour. Each main conductor i s divided into a number of parallel

cylindrical subconductors (Figure=2.1). The c h o i c e o f a cylindrical shape

for the subconductors makes the derived inductance formulae simple. Other

shapes f o r the subconductors have been tried by Lucas and Talukdar [22] b u t

the resistance values c a l c u l a t e d by them show a large deviation from measured

values at higher frequencies, which suggests that further rese.arch i s needed

before these other shapes can be used w i t h confidence.

Figure 2.1 Subdivision of main conductors

2.2 Assumptions

It i s assumed that:

i) Each subconductor i s uniform and homogeneous throughout i t s length;

ii) The magneitc permeability of a subconductor i s constant throughout

 7

the whole cycle of alternating current, but may be different from

that of any other subconductor;

i i i ) There is uniform current distribution in each subconductor; and

iv) A l l subconductors are parallel.

2.3 Loop Impedances of Subconductors

To derive the loop impedances of the subconductors, first consider

the two loops formed by any two subconductors, % and k, with a common return

path, q, in Figure 2.2. The return path can e i t h e r be one of the subconductors

or a fictitious conductor chosen for the voltage measurements and the calcu-

lation of inductances.

Figure 2.2 Loops formed by two subconductors with a

common return

Writing the loop equations for subconductor Z gives:

(2.1)
where = voltage drop per unit length of subconductor

= r e s i s t a n c e per unit length of subconductor

R^ = resistance per unit length of return path

i , i , = currents in subconductors £ and k respectively

JO AC
M = mutual inductance between loops formed by subconductors
J6K.

£ and k with a common return in q

N = number of subconductors (N=2, for £, k in Figure 2.2)

For ac steady-state conditions, the instantaneous voltage v and

current i in (2.1) are replaced by the phasor values V and I and by the

phasor value jcol.

Figure 2.3: Geometry of subconductors (£,k,q).

Figure 2.3 shows the cross s e c t i o n of two such subconductors and

the return path. To derive the inductance formulae, consider current I in

subconductor £ and returning in q.

 The flux density B at radius r outside £ is:

B =
yi (2.2)
.2irr

Total flux per unit length in the elemental cylinder of thickness <5r

6<j> = B * Sr

yi
6r (2.3)
2Trr

Flux linkage of loop k^ due to current I in i i s :

* Kk
yi dr (2.4)
2irr 2
r=D r=D
£k

Flux linkage of loop k^ due to return current I in q is:

kq
yldr _ _yl_
r D.
(2.5)
2irr 2TT
q(equiv)-
r = r
q( Q ly)
e u

where r the equivalent radius of subconductor q for inductance

q(equiv)

calculation (=r^e ^ r q ^ ^ , the geometric mean radius)

The two fluxes are additive; hence the total flux linkage i s :

&q
(2.6)
*£k - 2V t o
ZTT r exp(-y /4)
}
£k q rq '

The mutual inductance (M£^) between loops & and k is therefore

M£k
£k y
2T:
£n
Iq kg + .IS. (2.7)

where yr^=relative permeability of .the return path.

 To derive the self inductance of loop £ we c o n s i d e r t h e same

current path.

Flux linkage of loop £^ due t o c u r r e n t I i n £ i s :

£q
uldr ul 13_
£n (2.8)
2irr 2TT
r=r £(equiv)
£(equiv)

Flux linkage of loop £^ d u e t o c u r r e n t I returning i n q i s :

D
£q
pi , pi „ £q
• £ — d r = ^— £n (2.9)
2irr 2TT
r=r k q(equiv) t
q(equiv)

Hence the total flux linkage i s :

D
£q , r£ .
* = ~ £n 7 ^ exp( - r - ) ^ exp ( ) (2.10)
££ 2
ZTT
IT./ £

where u . and p are the relative permeabilities of subconductors £ and

r£ rq

respectively

The self inductance ( M

^£) of loop £ i s

D
£q D
£q y
r£ , y
rq_
M = n = £n (2.11)
££ h i 27 £ q

2.4: Formation of Impedance Matrix

Writing the loop equations, using (2.1), (2.7) and (2.11), for a

the subconductors gives a s e t of l i n e a r equations

 11

V
11 J
llll llln ^lkl*" Z
llkm 11

In Z
lnll Z
lnln Z
lnkl Z
Inkm In

(2.12a)

V. "klkm
kl J
klll kl

km Z
kmll Z
' • • kmln kmkm km

i.e. [V] = [ Z b ± g ] [I] (2.12b)

th
where V.. refers to the voltage on the i subconductor of the
Ji
.th . , „
2 main conductor.
1 1
I., i s the current i n the i * " * subconductor of the j*"* main

conductor.

Z.. i s the mutual impedance between the loops formed by

jimn
1 1 1 1 1
the i * " * and n*"* subconductors of the j " * and m"^ main

conductors respectively.

i n
The p a r t i t i o n i n g of the matrix [ Z ^ g ] (2.12a) groups the equa-

tions of the subconductors within each main conductor together.

The resistances and inductances i n the impedance matrix [ Z ^ g ]

are constant, but since the current d i v i s i o n among subconductors changes

with frequency, skin and proximity effects are accounted f o r .

Normally the large impedance matrix i s not of d i r e c t i n t e r e s t .

Instead, the matrix giving voltages on the main conductors i n terms of the
 12

currents i n these main conductors i s needed, which can be obtained from

the large impedance matrix ] by reduction. Mathematically, this i s

equivalent to solving the algebraic equations '(2.12a) with the conditions

of (2.13) and (2.14) shown below. Practically, i t i s equivalent to redis-

tribution of currents i n a l l subconductors to achieve a current distribution

which, when m u l t i p l i e d by the impedances of (2.12a), satisfies the voltage

condition of (2.13).

The voltages on the subconductors forming any main conductor are

equal; hence:

V., = V.0 = = V. = V. (2.13)

J l J2 jn j

Also, the current i n any main conductor i s t h e sum o f the currents i n the

subconductors into which!.it i s divided. Thus:

I. = I... + I + . . . + I. (2.14)
J J l J2 jn

2•5 Bundling of the Subconductors i n the Impedance Matrix

Expressing the voltages on the main conductors i n terms of the

currents they carry i s accomplished by the use of equations (2.13) and (2.14)

in (2.12a).

Consider the f i r s t main conductor; assume i t i s subdivided into n

subconductors as shown i n (2.12a).

(a) Subtracting the f i r s t equation ( i . e . row-1 i n 2.12a) from the

subsequent equations ( i . e . row-2 to row-n) of that main conductor

leaves the left-hand side of the other equations equal to zero

(- illustrated i n (2.15)).
 13

(b) By w r i t i n g I instead of 1^^ i n the f i r s t equation of the first

conductor ( i . e . row-1) , an e r r o r of adding ^ilYlJ'H +

••• +
^im^ln^

to first equation has been made since I-^I^l +

^12 +
••• +
^j_n'

Corresponding errors are introduced into a l l the other equations.

These errors a r e removed by subtracting the f i r s t column of the

whole matrix [Z, . ] from the subsequent (n-1) columns of that

bigJ

main conductor.

These two s t e p s are i l l u s t r a t e d i n equation (2.16).

(c) The same steps, (a) and ( b ) , are c a r r i e d out on the other main

conductors. These give a set of linear equations (2.15) express-

: i n g the voltages on the conductors i n terms of the t o t a l currents

til
in these conductors and i n t h e 2nd t o n- subconductors.

" v
l ' Z
l l l l ?
1112- ?
lllnj | Z
l l k l • • C
llkm V
0
S.211 ; - ' • hi
; ;

0 ?
lnln< (2.15)

\ Z
k l l l > z
k l k l ?
klkm \
•
0 *

0
kmll ' f ^kmkl ' • *°kmkm

The symbol " 5" denotes the elements which have been changed i n

(2.15) due to the operations (a) and ( b ) , and the general term i s :

C = Z —Z — Z (2.16)
kmqn kmqn klqn kmql

(for m,n^l)
 14

2.6 Reduction of the Large Impedance Matrix

The equations (2.15) are rearranged f o r the reduction process by

exchanging the positions of rows and columns i n such a way t h a t the "bundled"

equations of (2.15) corresponding to the main conductors come f i r s t , as shown

in (2.17)

1
J
l l l l J
l l k l

V,
k
J
k l l l J
klkm

0
= 12 (2.17)

0
km

or i n abbreviated form,

V A B

(2.18)
0 C D

,-1,
From (2.18) V=(A-BD C)I (2.19a)

Hence the desired impedance matrix [Zc] i s

[Z„] = [A - BD-1C] (2.19b)

Reference [8] provides a more efficient way o f finding [Zc] from

(2.17). Using Gaussian elimination on t h e m a t r i x (2.17), starting from the

last row and going up u n t i l the submatrix [B], as shown i n (2.18), has just

been reduced to zero, achieves the reduction.

 15

The d e s i r e d impedance m a t r i x [Zc]'corresponds to the submatrix

stored in [A*] in (2.20).

V,
k .
(2.20)

0
12

_ 0
^ I
km J

An i l l u s t r a t i o n of this final reduction stage is shown in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4 Illustration of the reduction process

2.7 The Choice and the Constraint on the Return Path

Obviously, the geometry and l o c a t i o n of the return path in Figure

2.2 w i l l influence the values obtained for the inductances. The influence

of the return path is removed by requiring that the current through this

path s h o u l d be zero. To illustrate this, consider the circuit shown in

Figure 2.5.
 Figure 2.5 A t w o - w/i r e r e t u r n , c i r c u i t

Writing the loop equation for F i g . 2.5 gives:

+ 2 21
V
l = ( R
1 +
h ( R
2 +
^X22-X12> h <' >

s i n c e 1^=1

2 22
V
l " ( R
1 + R
2 +
J ( X
11 + X
22 ~ 2 X
12 } )
h <' >

Introducing a fictitious return path gives a configuration of Figure.2.6.

For equivalence o f t h e two c i r c u i t s we r e q u i r e :

Figure 2.6 A, • t w o - w . i r e . c i r c u i t with, common r e t u r n

in a t h i r d conductor
 17

The loop e q u a t i o n s o f Figure,2.6 a r e :

V a = (% + J ^ - X ^ ) ) ^ + <R q + j ( X q q -X l q ))I q + (X 1 2 -X 2 q ) I f e

>
(2.24)
V, = ( R 2 + i(X 2 2 -X 2 q ))I b + (R q + i(X q q -X 2 q ))I q + (X 1 2 -X l q ) I a

Imposing the c o n s t r a i n t t h a t the c u r r e n t i n the r e t u r n path i s

zero means t h a t

I q = 0 = I a + I b (2.25)

I a = - I b (2.26)

From e q u a t i o n s (2.24) and (2.25)

V a - V b = [R x + j ( X 1 1 - X l q ) - ( X 1 2 - X l q ) ] I a - [R +
2 j(X 2 2 -X 2 q )

(2 27)
- 12- 2q ( X X ) ]
h -

Using (2.26) i n (2.27) g i v e s

V _ V = [ R + R + ( X + X 2 X ) ] X ( 2 # 2 8 )
a b 1 2 J H 22" 12 a

which i s i d e n t i c a l to (2.22) d e r i v e d u s i n g F i g u r e 2.5.

Therefore, i t i s t h e o r e t i c a l l y p o s s i b l e t o choose a r e t u r n path

of any convenient shape and l o c a t i o n f o r the i n d u c t a n c e c a l c u l a t i o n s as ...

long as a zero c u r r e n t c o n s t r a i n t i s imposed on such a path. Nevertheless,

considerations discussed i n s e c t i o n 3.6 would r e q u i r e t h a t the r e t u r n path

should be c y l i n d r i c a l i n shape, have a s m a l l r a d i u s , and be p l a c e d a t a

s m a l l d i s t a n c e below the e a r t h s u r f a c e n o t f a r from the c a b l e s and other

conductors.
 18

2.8 I n c l u d i n g the C o n s t r a i n t on the C u r r e n t i n the M a t r i x S o l u t i o n

Equation (2.20) g i v e s the v o l t a g e s on the main conductors (measured

w i t h r e s p e c t to the r e t u r n path) i n terms of the c u r r e n t s i n these conductors.

In p r a c t i c e , however, v o l t a g e s are measured w i t h r e s p e c t to the l o c a l ground

(or n e u t r a l conductor or s h e a t h ) . I f the c o n s t r a i n t on the c u r r e n t i s

i n t r o d u c e d , t h i s changes (2.20) i n t o the form:

J
J
ll lk

(2.29)
V. J
k-1 J
k-l,l k-l,k k-1

V. -I
k J L_- k l ••• J
kk k-1-
k
Since £ I
o = 0 ( 2 . 3 0 )
1=1 iL

and I - - l r l 2 - ...-I ^ t

This gives:

Z Z
z
i r z
i k lk-1 lk

( 2 . 3 1 )

V. Z Z
k-1
Z
k-l,l Z
k-l,k k-l,k-l k-l,k k-1
Z Z
Z
kl Z
kk k,k-l" kk

I f conductor k r e p r e s e n t s the l o c a l ground (or n e u t r a l conductor

or the sheath) w i t h r e s p e c t to which a l l v o l t a g e s are measured, then sub-

tracting the e q u a t i o n f o r V from the other equations accomplishes this

rC

and g i v e s :
 19

r- *
V -V
1 k Z
l l lk-1

(2.32)

V -V
k-1 k J
kl J
k - l , k - l k-1

where Z . . = Z. . + Z, , - 2Z.,
13 IJ kk ik

The Z matrix is the impedance m a t r i x which implies a local ground

(or neutral conductor or sheath).

 20

Chapter 3 RETURN PATH IMPEDANCE

In practice, there are three cases for the return path i n any

transmission system:

(i) return i n neutral conductors (including pipes and ground wires only);

(ii) return i n ground only; or

(iii) return i n ground and n e u t r a l conductors.

3.1 Return i n Neutral Conductors Only

Each sheath, pipe or neutral conductor i s represented as a separate

conductor, as a r e the c o r e s , and i s d i v i d e d as i n S e c t i o n 2.1. The formulae

of equations (2.7) and (2.11) a r e used to form the impedance matrix of the

subconductors. The n e u t r a l s or sheaths can be " e l i m i n a t e d " i n the reduction

process, i f so d e s i r e d , to obtain the impedance matrix which relates the

voltages from phase to neutral to the phase currents. In fact, any other

conductor can also be eliminated i n the reduction process, i f so desired,

provided that there i s zero voltage on i t , or that i t i s connected i n parallel

with another conductor.

3.2 Return i n Ground Only,

Model 1: The ground i s considered as a separate conductor and i s subdivided

into layers of subconductors as shown i n Figure 3.1. The d i a m e t e r s of the

subconductors i n any lower layer are chosen to be twice that of the previous

layer. This choice appears reasonable because the current density i n the

ground decreases a s o n e moves farther away from the cables. Reasonable

results were obtained by using a depth equal to 3300/,rp/f metres.

 (a)

( b )

Figure 3.1 Subdivisions of ground into layers of subconductors

 22

p = ground resistivity in ftm, and

f = frequency in Hz.

The ground, as a system of subconductors, is eliminated in the

reduction process as shown in section 2.8, thus leaving the ground return

implicitly included in the reduced impedance matrix. The difference between

the results of the arrangements in Figures 3* 1 ( a ) and (b) is discussed in

section 4.2.

3.3 Return in Ground and N e u t r a l conductors

If the return is through both ground and n e u t r a l conductors, the

system is modelled as a set of k conductors which are subdivided into sub-

conductors . The ground is one such conductor and i t is eliminated in the

reduction process. The neutrals can be retained or eliminated as desired.

3.4 Use of Analytical Equations for Ground Return Impedance

To represent the ground return adequately, it must be divided

into a large number of subconductors. In systems where many cables or

conductors must be considered, i t is better to calculate the ground return

impedance directly to reduce the amount of storage and computing time.

Equations for ground return circuits of overhead transmission ..

lines were derived by J.R. Carson [11] and are widely used in the power

industry. These equations assume that the conductors are located in air

over flat earth which is infinite in extent a n d h a s an u n i f o r m resistivity.

When these same equations are applied to underground cables, useful approxi-

mations to the true values of ground return impedances can be obtained.

 23

With overhead lines, image conductors which l i e below the ground are used

in the calculations. However, when these equations are applied to under-

ground cables, these images now l i e above the ground surface at heights

equal to the depth of burial.

In a later paper [10], Carson showed that for conductors buried

underground, the variation of ground return impedance with distance below

the earth's surface is relatively small for the usual depths of burial (i.e.

about 1.0 m) and that the ground return impedance (Zg) can be calculated as:

Z = (1+C) Z° (3.1)
S g

where Z^ = the ground return impedance if the earth were to

extend indefinitely in a l l directions around the

conductor so that circular symmetry exists,

C = a correction factor which accounts for the fact that

the conductor is located near ground surface

Reference [10] gives C as:

for small m (3.2)

2K0 (jm) 2 log(l/m)

and reference [12] gives Z as:

° _ m& Ko(mr) ,„
g 2rrr KL(mr)

where m = / (3.4)

K5, are modified Bessel functions

r = internal radius of the earth (i.e. outer radius of the

conductor insulation)
 24

p = ground resistivity

to = 2iTf, f=frequency

y = magnetic permeability of ground

Carson's formula for overhead conductors cannot be used for c a l -

culating the s e l f impedance of underground conductors. Equations (3.1) i s

used for this purpose, but the mutual impedances are calculated using the

overhead formula - which i s known to give good approximations for buried

conductors at power frequencies [ 2 0 ] .

Equations for c a l c u l a t i n g the s e l f and mutual impedances of under-

ground conductors have also been derived by F. Pollaczek involving i n f i n i t e

series [19]. Closed-form approximations to the s e l f and mutual impedances

of underground conductors v a l i d for a wide range of values of the parameters

involved have been derived by Wedepohl and Wilcox [9]. These equations (3.5),

given below, are accurate up to frequencies of approximately 160 KHz for

separations of approximately 1.0m between the conductors, and to approximately

1.7 MHz i f the separation i s only 30 cm. Thus very accurate approximations

can be obtained for most p r a c t i c a l cases of cables l a i d i n the same trench

to quite high frequencies. These equations are:

Zs = ^ { -An M + T2 " T3 n^} fl M (3.5a)

(YmD } ,
Z £ n +
i k = *f£ i- J " f m£ } ft/m (3.5b)

where Z , Z-y^ are s e l f and mutual impedances of ground return path respectively,
s

(ft/m)

Y = Eulers constant = 0.5772157

h = depth of b u r i a l of conductor (metres)

I = sum of depths of b u r i a l of conductors i and k (metres)

 25

r = outer radius of conductor (metres)

D M = d i s t a n c e between conductors i and k (metres)

IK.

m = /jtju/p

p = earth resistivity i n fim

Equations (3.5) are valid f o r the range |mr| < 0.25 for self impedance and

|mD_^J < 0.25 for mutual impedance.

For the range |mD., | > 0 . 2 5 r e f e r e n c e [9] suggests the integration:

IK.

-£/(a2+m2) -V /(a2+m2) -£/(a2-rm2)

-e exp(jax)dx
J
ik 2TT
+
|a|+/(a +m ) 2 2
2/(a +m )
2 2

(3.6)

where x = horizontal d i s t a n c e between conductors i and k

V= modulus of the difference of the depths of burial

of conductors i and k.

3.5 Model Using Ground Return Formulae Directly with the Subconductors

Model II: A very simple model which uses the a n a l y t i c a l ground return

formulae treats each subconductor as an i n s u l a t e d conductor with the return

loop through the ground (Figure 3.2) and uses the available ground return

formulae to calculate the self and mutual impedances. Equations ( 3 . 5 ) may

be used i n this case. If the results a r e needed f o r power frequency only,

equations (3.7) and ( 3 . 8 ) below, which a r e found i n many h a n d b o o k s [24, 25],

may b e used.
 Figure 3.2 Model with only subconductors and ground return

The impedances at 60 Hz of the circuit in Figure 3.2 are:

i i i J ( ° -
4892 fi/km 3 7
z = R + R
g
+ 1 7 3 6 l o
s £MR7 +
°- ) <-)

Z.. = R + j(0.1736 log + 0.4892) ft/km (3.8)

l k g
°ik

where Z^ and Z^ are the self and m u t u a l impedances respectively, and

Rg = r e s i s t a n c e of ground return path (=0.0592 ft/km)

GMR^ = geometric mean radius of conductor i (m)

R^ = r e s i s t a n c e of conductor i (ft/km)

D k =
d i s t a n c e between conductor i and k (m)

3.6 Representing the Ground as One Undivided Conductor

Model III In view of the fact that the equations used for ground return

impedance c a l c u l a t i o n s may be inaccurate at high frequencies and for wide

separations between conductors if approximations are used, or costly to

obtain if infinite series are used, it would be advantageous if most of

 27

the elements of the matrix [Z, . 1 of equation (2.12a) could be calculated

bxg

with the simpler equations (2.7) and (2.11). This involves the introduction

of a fictitious return path with respect to which the inductances are calcu-

lated. The ground is then considered as one a d d i t i o n a l conductor ( n o t i.

subdivided i n this case) and the mutual impedances between the ground and

the subconductors a r e c a l c u l a t e d as shown below.

With this approach, eddy currents which would circulate in the

ground i f current flows into conductor 1 above ground and returns through

conductor 2 above ground, are ignored. In reference [20] i t has been shown

that this effect i s negligible up t o 1 KHz for the case of a 500 kV overhead

line. In the lower frequency region, this approach gives very accurate

answers, but at higher frequencies the results must be i n t e r p r e t e d with some

caution, unless i t c a n be shown that skin effect i n the conductors is much

more pronounced than eddy current effects i n the ground.

The main advantage of this model i s that t h e more complicated

ground return formulae must only be used i n one row and one column of the

matrix i n (2.12a).

Figure 3.3 Model with ground represented as only one conductor

 28

In addition, there is freedom as to the choice of location of

the fictitious return path. The distances to be used in equation (3.5)

can be nearly halved by centrally locating this path. This reduces the

values of the parameter |mD^| in equation (3.5), thereby g i v i n g more accurate

approximations, and also delays the use of the more complicated formula (3.6)

for much h i g h e r frequencies.

Writing the loop equations for the circuit of Figure 3.3 gives:

~ V "
1
J
l l Z
1N Z
l g

=
v„ (3.9)
N IN Z
NN Z
Ng N

V
gN gg
z z
M
g _ J
gl il !_ g.

in which Z. refers to the mutual impedance between subconductor i and

ig

ground with common r e t u r n in q. This cannot be calculated directly by

equation (3.5). Equation (3.5) is valid only when the common r e t u r n is

the ground. The next s e c t i o n 3.7 shows how Z is derived using equations

(3.5).

3.7 The M u t u a l Impedance B e t w e e n a S u b c o n d u c t o r and Ground w i t h Common

Return i n Another Subconductor

Consider Figure (3.4) i n which the common r e t u r n is the ground.

The loop impedances may be w r i t t e n as:

J
Hg
J
12g

(3.10)

22g
Z
91 J

L 2 1
s
 29

t
(ground return) *1

v»

Figure 3.4 Two c o n d u c t o r s with common ground

return

A l l the impedance terms in (3.10) can be c a l c u l a t e d by using

Carson's or Wedelpohl'.s equations.

Now consider a similar circuit in Figure (3.5) i n which the

common return is conductor 2.

: »

> Vn
¥ Q
(ground)

if (reiurn )

Figure 3.5 Circuit of one conductor and the ground

with common return in a second conductor
 30

The loop equations may b e w r i t t e n as:

-112 J
lg2

(3.11)

J
gg2.

The third subscripts i n equations (3.10) and (3.11) denote t h e common return.

The term Z. =Z . , „ i s t h e o n e o f i n t e r e s t here. The c i r c u i t s of Figures (3.4)

lg2 gl2

and (3.5) are equivalent i f

Va = \ ~ V 2
(3.12)

Vb = -V 2
(3.13)

and I 2 - - ( I g + IX) (3.14)

Substituting these into equation (3.10) gives

•v - v" I,
l l g 12g 12g 22g
x 2
1
Z Z Z Z

(3.15)

-Z -Z -I -I,
- " V
2 - 12g 22g g 1

V - V
1 2 Z
llg + Z
22g~ 2 Z
12g Z
22g Z
12g

(3.16)
Z
22g Z
12g J
22g g

From (3.12) and ( 3 . 1 3 ) , i t i s evident that equations (3.11) and (3.16) are

identical, hence:

(3.17)
Z
lg2 Z
22g Z
12g

The mutual impedances (Z^g) required i n equation (3.9) can there-

fore be c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g (3.17), (note that Z. =Z. where q i s the f i c t i t i o u s

i g i g q

common return).
 31

Thus using equation (3.17) i n forming the matrix of equation

(3.9) results i n the use of the ground return formulae for only one row and

one column. If the i n f i n i t e series (or infinite integral) forms of the

ground return impedance must be used, model III w i l l be f a s t e r than model

II since the i n f i n i t e series would have to be evaluated for every element

of the matrix [Z, . ] i n the l a t t e r case,

big

3.8 Comparison of Model III with the Transient Network Analyzer Circuits

It should be noted that the procedure i n Model III i s related to

the method used i n representing three phase transmission lines on the Transient

Network Analyser (TNA) [26], where the impedance of the ground return i s

decoupled from the phases. It i s then i n c l u d e d as an e x t r a conductor and

therefore e l i m i n a t e s the need to model the ground return i n every line.

On a t h r e e phase line,

Z Z
A V
a Z
ab ac
aa
= Z (3.18)
A V
b ba Z
bb be

AV Z z
ca
Z
cb cc
c

Assuming that the line i s transposed, the average mutual impedance i s ;

z = f (z , + z, + z ) (3.19)
m 3 ab be ca

Scjuation (3.18) can be w r i t t e n as:

~AV -z -Z Z -Z
a
Z
ab m m m
aa m ac

= , -z -Z -Z
A V
b Z
bb be m
ba m m m

AV -Z -Z Z -Z
c ca m
Z
cb m cc m m

I +1, +i
a b c
 32

where I a + 1^ + I c = I g i s the c u r r e n t i n the e x t r a conductor, ground i n

t h i s case. The ground r e t u r n formula w i t h i t s pronounced frequency dependence

i s then o n l y used for i n the l a s t column. A l l o t h e r elements Z ^ - Z

a m ,

Z , -Z a r e c a l c u l a t e d w i t h ground i g n o r e d . Furthermore, i f the l i n e i s

ab m . 0 . 0

t r a n s p o s e d , the d i a g o n a l elements Z ^ - Z ^ , e t c . , become e q u a l to the p o s i t i v e

sequence impedance, and a l l o f f - d i a g o n a l elements Z -Z , e t c . , become z e r o .

 '33

Chapter 4 RESULTS

4.1 Comparison of the Method of Subdivisions with Standard Methods

This section shows how s k i n and proximity effects are taken into

account by subdividing the conductors. The impedance of a return circuit

of two conductors placed two metres apart, as shown in Figure 4.1, is calculated.

The d.c. r e s i s t a n c e of each conductor is 0.0417 fi/km and the frequency is

60 Hz.

2000.0mm

Figure 4.1 A return c i r c u i t of two conductors for apart

The large separation between the two conductors makes proximity

effect negligible. The increase in r e s i s t a n c e due to skin effect is corrected

for by using Bessel functions. The UBC/BPA l i n e constants program [16] is

used for this.

The corrected value of the impedance i s :

Z= 0.0887 + j 0.7901 fi/km

This is taken as the exact reference value. By using various numbers of

subdivisions the impedances shown in Table 4.1 are obtained.

Figure 4.2 shows the impedance variations as a function of the

number of subdivisions. It is seen that the exact reference values are

 34

Table 4.1 Variation of Impedance with t h e Number of Subdivisions

X Errors
No. of R X
internal
Subdivisions ft/km n/km
ft/km R X

1 0.0833 0.7913 0.0377 6.1% 0.2%

7 0.0855 0.8016 0.0480 3.6% 1.4%

19 0.0878 0.7944 0.0408 1.0% 0.5%

37 0.0883 0.7923 0.0387 0.5% 0.3%

61 0.0885 0.7914 0.0378 0.2% 0.2%

Reference 0.0887 0.7901 0.0365 0.0% 0.0%

approached as t h e number of subdivisions i s increased. However, i t i s best

to keep t h e number of subdivisions as low as p o s s i b l e . Nineteen subdivisions

may be a p p r o p r i a t e i f an e r r o r of one p e r c e n t i s tolerable. Substantial

savings i n storage and computing time result from keeping t h e number of

subdivisions down.

The two c o n d u c t o r s forming the return circuit of Figure.4.1 are

brought close together, as shown i n Figure 4.3. Various numbers of sub-

divisions are used o n t h e two c o n d u c t o r s . The impedances calculated are

compared with calculations done using standard methods which involve the

use of published charts and t a b l e s to correct for proximity effect as shown

in Chapter 2 of reference [17].

 35

0-032 -

NUMBER OF SUBCONDUCTORS

Broken lines are the reference values. •'

Figure 4.2 Variation of impedance with t h e number of subconductors

l< i
27.02 mm

Figure 4.3 A return circuit of two c o n d u c t o r s very close together

According to reference [17], the a . c . resistance of the return

circuit above i s

r = R' x ~y (A.D
 36

where R'=a.c. resistance corrected for skin effect only.

R"/R' = proximity effect resistance ratio.

A similar equation holds for the inductance. From the Charts

and Tables of reference [17], the proximity effect r e s i s t a n c e and inductance

ratios are calculated to be 1.18 and 0.95 respectively. The impedance of

the circuit in Figure 4.3, when corrected for skin effect only, i s :

Z = 0.0887 + j 0.1410 ft/km

Applying the above proximity correction factors gives a value of Z=0.1048 +

j 0.1340 ft/km. This is used as the reference value in Table 4.2 which com-

pares i t with those obtained from various subdivisions.

In using conventional methods of impedance calculations, corrections

for proximity effect are made for two or three conductors by the use of

"estimating charts" and correcting "factor tables" derived from otherwise

complicated formulae [18], as mentioned above. On the other hand, the

method of subdivisions is not limited to only two or three conductors or

common, f o r m s of conductor arrangement (flat or delta spacing) as the charts

referred to above seem to be. Also, in using subdivisions, the current

division among the p a r a l l e l conductors need not be known a priori. Where

many conductors are involved and the current division is not known (as is

the case in most cable systems in cities where many cables and pipes run

parallel in the same or adjacent ducts), this method of subdividing the

conductors is very useful, and gives reasonably accurate results.

 37

Table 4.2 Variation of the Impedance of the C i r c u i t of Fig. 4.3

with t h e Number of Subdivisions, Showing the Inclusion
of Both Skin and P r o x i m i t y Effects i n the Calculations.

X Error in
No. of R X
internal
Subdivisions ft/km ft/km
ft/km R X

**
1 0.0833 0.1422 0.0377 20.5% 6.1%

7 0.0966 0.1474 0.0429 7.8% 10.0%

19 0.1010 0.1394 0.0349 3.6% 4.0%

37 0.1022 0.1370 0.0325 2.5% 2.2%

61 0.1026 0.1361 0.0316 2.1% 1.6%

SKIN * 0.0887 0.1410 0.0365 15.4% 5.2%

Reference
0.1048 0.1340 0.0295 0.0% 0.0%
Value

*•Corrected for skin effect only.

** No c o r r e c t i o n f o r b o t h skin and p r o x i m i t y effects.

4.2 Comparison of Ground Return. Formulae

Formulae for calculating the self and mutual impedances of loops

with ground return have been given b y many authors, i n c l u d i n g Carson [10,11],

Pollaczek [19], Wedepohl and W i l c o x [9], and Kalyuzhnyi and L i f s h i t s [13].

Most of these formulae are given i n the form of infinite series and are

not always easy to use. The v a r i a t i o n of ground return impedance with

frequency, as g i v e n b y some of the formulae, a r e compared i n this section.

According to J.R. Carson [10], the variation of the ground return impedance

with the depth of burial.'.'.of a conductor is minimal, and can be calculated

for most frequencies by using equation (3.1). This is verified by using

Model I to calculate the impedance of a buried conductor with ground return

for various depths of burial. The results of this are shown in Figure 4.4.

1.171

M69
1-167 • <

in
o
z
<
IMPI

1 1
8 •

1-5 -1-0 -0-5 0 0-5 10 t-5

DEPTH OF BURIAL(m)

Figure 4.4 V a r i a t i o n of the impedance of a buried conductor

w i t h depth of b u r i a l

A very simple and useful form of the ground return impedance has

been given by Wedepohl and W i l c o x (equations (3.5)), which is an approxima-

tion of the infinite series form of solution.

K a l y u z h n y i and Lifshits [13] also derive a formula, the final ',.

results of which, though very different from the more conventional ones,
 39

are claimed to agree very closely with experimentally measured data.

Kalyuzhnyi and Lifshits give the self impedance of ground return (Ze) as:

Ze = ^ [An -2— - J- (4.2)

2TT I y P r n

where y =
0.5772157 - Euler's constant

..r = radius of buried conductor over insulation (m)

p = <WP

p = resistivity of ground (ftm)

h = depth of burial of conductor (m)

Equation (4.2) gives a real part (Re) of:

Re = 2?r2f . 10_7 Q/m (4.3)

which is quite different from that obtained from Carson's equations which

approximates [17] to:

Re = TT2f . 10 7
tt/m (4.4)

Carson's equations (or approximations of them) have been used for many years

by several authors and others involved with analysing the conduction of

electric current through the ground. The very marked deviation from Carson's

equations g i v e n by Kalyuzhnyi and L i f s h i t s i s , therefore, worthy of

inves tigation.

In order to determine which formula best approximates the behaviour

of the earth, the impedances of the circuits of Figure 4.5 are calculated

by using the subdivided ground representations of Figure 3.1 (i.e. Model I).

In this calculation, the ground is divided into five layers of 62 subconductors.

In Table 4.3 and Figure 4.6, the results obtained from the self impedance
 Oo012m

(a )

Figure 4.5 Cross s e c t i o n s of b u r i e d conductors for ground

r e t u r n impedance c a l c u l a t i o n s
calculations using Model I and by using the various formulae are compared.

There is c l o s e agreement in the resistance values as calculated using the

above method of subdividing the ground, Carson;'s equations, and Wedepohl's

equations, but the results obtained using Kalyuzhnyi and Lifshits equation

deviate from the others.

The reactance values c a l c u l a t e d from the first three methods

deviate more widely from each other than the calculated resistance values.

The deviations of reactance range between 7% at power frequency to 12% at

1.0 MHz.between the results of Carson's and Wedepohl's formulae while the

results from the subdivisions method l i e somewhere i n between (see Figure

4.6 b) for a l l frequencies. A very marked deviation in reactance (over 50%

at power frequency) is obtained from the formula of Kalyuzhnyi and Lifshits.

Discrepancies in the various calculations arise from the fact that

a l l the methods are approximations to the real case and also because the

"interstices" between the subconductors are neglected in Figure 3.1 a. To

evaluate the influence of this latter approximation, most of the interstices

of Figure 3.1 a were filled with subconductors: for a fuller representation

of the ground cross section. Results obtained using the latter show only

a slight improvement over the results of Figure 3.1 a. For example, at

60 H z , the impedance of the conductor in Figure 4.5 a with ground return is

calculated to be Z=0.0597 + j 0.9236 ft/km when the ground representation of

Figure 3.1 a is used. By using the ground representation of Figure 3.1 b,

the c a l c u l a t e d impedance i s : Z = 0.0589 + j 0.9181 ft/km. The latter rep-

resentation of the ground only gives an improvement of less than 1% in the

results when compared w i t h the former. Therefore the ground return rep-

resentation given in Figure 3.1 a would be adequate for this purpose.

 Fre- RESISTANCE (ft/km) REACTANCE (ft/km)

quency Subdl-. Wede— .. K a l y u - Subdi- Wede- Kalyu-

Carson Carson
(Hz ) visions pohl zhnyi visions pohl zhnyi

2.2 .002 0.002 0.02 0.004 0.039 0.041 0.038 0.062

4.5 .005 0.005 0.05 0.009 0.077 0.081 0.075 0.119

9.0 .009 0.009 0.09 0.018 0.150 0.160 0.145 0.230

15.0 .015 0.015 0.015 0.030 0.244 0.260 0.236 0.374

30.0 .030 0.030 0.031 0.059 0.475 0.503 0.460 0.723

60.0 .060 0.059 0.062 0.118 0.924 0.979 0.914 1.39

120.0 .120 0.119 0.124 0.237 1.80 1.91 1.73 2.68

500.0 .499 0.497 0.518 0.987 7.03 7.49 6.79 10.3

IK 1.00 0.998 1.04 1.97 13.6 14.5 13.2 19.7

5K 5.05 5.05 5.20 9.87 63.0 67.6 60.7 88.3

10K 10.2 10.2 10.4 19.7 121.0 131.0 117.0 168.0

5 OK 52.2 53.1 52.5 98.7 555.0 601.0 535.0 738.0

0.1M 106.0 109.0 105.0 197.4 1064. 1155. 1026. 1389.

0.5M 556.0 611.0 530.0 987.0 4767. 5207. 4622. 6371.

l.OM 116. 1320. 1064. 1974. 9038. 9881. 8810. 11870.

Table 4.3 S e l f Impedance o f Ground R e t u r n Path

as C a l c u l a t e d U s i n g S u b d i v i d e d Ground,
and O t h e r Formulae
 43

Figure "4.6 Comparison of calculated self impedances of a

ground r e t u r n loop.
 44

Mutual Impedance of Ground Return Path

Table 4.4 and Figure 4.7 show the results of the mutual impedances

calculated for the two buried conductors of Figure 4.5b. Deviations of about

1% in the r e s i s t a n c e and about 15% in the reactance are obtained at power

frequency between the results of subdivisions and those obtained from Wedepohl's

equations.

The mutual impedance values c a l c u l a t e d by using subdivisions and

by using Carson's overhead line equations [11,16] are similar for most of

the frequencies used; thus it seems Carson's overhead line equations may be

used for c a l c u l a t i n g the mutual impedances between buried conductors [20].

Despite this close agreement in the results, i t should be remembered that

Carson's equations [11] were derived for conductors located above ground.
 Table 4.4 Mutual Impedance Between Two Underground
Conductors

RESISTANCE (ft/km) REACTANCE (ft/km)

Fre-
quency Subdi- Wede- Subdi- Wede-
Carson Carson*
Hz visions pohl visions pohl

2.2 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.024 0.024 0.026

4.5 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.046 0.045 0.052

9.0 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.088 0.087 0.099

15.0 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.142 0.139 0.161

30.0 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.271 0.266 0.308

60.0 0.060 0.059 0.059 0.516 0.506 0.590

120.0 0.119 0.118 0.119 0.979 0.959 1.13

500.0 0.4.99 0.490 0.497 3.63 3.55 4.25

Ik 0.999 0.978 0.996 6 . 8 2'- 6.66 8.06

5k 5.03 4.84 5.04 29.0 28.3 35.2

10k 10.1 9.60 10.1 53.6 52.4 66.0

5.0k<- 51.8 46.4 52.5 216.0 213.0 278.0

100k 105.0 90.7 108.0 386.0 385.0 509.0

500k 599.0 413.0 594.0 1376.0 1471.0 1983.

* Overhead line equations used.

cc-
i-

t- -
ID

X---Wedepohl

a
o-
o
100 1000 10000
FREQUENCY C Hz ,100000 1000000
)

«nO"

+ — Subdivisions

o—Carson (0/H)

X---Wedepohl

no 100 idoo loooo iooooo 1006000"

Figure 4.7
FREQUENCY ( Hz ) I
Comparison of calculated mutual impedances
between two buried conductors.
 47

4.3 Comparison of Results from the Different Models

The data i s taken from r e f e r e n c e [4] . T h r e e distribution cables

(1/0 AWG a l u m i n u m cored cables with reduced neutrals) are l a i d i n a flat

formation 8 inches apart. The c o r e and sheath resistances are 0.1882 and

0.4707 ohms/1000'f t respectively with the inside and o u t s i d e diameters of the

insulation a s 515 m i l s and 955 m i l s respectively.

The listed values of the zero (0), positive (1) and negative (2)

sequence impedance matrix elements at 60 Hz i n the reference are:

~0.483+j0.236 symmetric

1 -0.003+j0.001 -0.007+j0.008 ft/1000 ft.

tW •
0.0 -jO.003 0.199+j0.096 0.010+j0.004_

By using Model II and t h e ground return impedance formulae of equations (3.7)

and (3.8), the sequence impedances calculated are:

"0.483+J0.231 symmetric

-0.003+j0.001 -0.007+j0.008 ft/lOOOft.

[ Z
012]= 1

0.0' -jO.003 0.198+j0.089 O.OlO+jO.002

If the ground return impedance equations (3.5) derived by Wedepohl and Wilcox

are used i n Model II, the following impedance matrix is obtained.

0 2 1

0 0.506+J0.219 symmetric

-0.002+j0.001 -0.007+j0.008 ft/lOOOft.

0.0 -jO.003 0.198+j0.083 0.010+j0.002

 48

The maximum deviation between the sequence impedances and the reference

values is less than 3% i n the positive sequence. By using the model of

section 3.6 where the ground is represented as only one conductor (Model III),

the following impedances are obtained, with equations (3.5) being used for

the ground return impedance calculations:

0 2 1

.0 r 0.510+j 0.225 symmetric

[Z 0 1 2 ]=L -0.002+j0.001 -0.007+j0.008 ft/1000 ft.

2 |_0.0 +J0.003 0.198+J0.900 0.010+j0.002 _

The maximum deviation is 3.6% from the reference: i n the zero sequence.

By dividing the ground return path into subconductors and using

none of the analytically derived ground return formulae (Model I), the follow-

ing are calculated for comparison purposes.

0 2 1

"0.486+j0.231 symmetric

-0.003+j0.001 -0.007+j0.008 ft/1000 ft.

[ Z
012 ] = 1

-0.0 -t-jO.003 0.198+j0.900 O.OlO+jO.002

The maximum deviation in this case i s 1.5% in the positive sequence magnitude.

The summary of the comparison is presented in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 The Comparison of Various Models

Computing Max Matrix

Model Time Deviation Size
(s) %

I 10.3 1.5 101 x 101

II 0.73 3.0 39 x 39
III 0.78 3.6 40 x. 40
 49

4.4 Reproduction of Test Results

A test was conducted at British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority

[21] on a cable system where the induced currents in bonded sheaths were

measured for various values of phase currents. These test results are re-

produced in this section. The impedances needed to calculate the induced

sheath currents are c a l c u l a t e d using Model II.

The test is c a r r i e d out on two three-phase cables in the same

duct bank. The sheaths of both cables are bonded together at their ends

and grounded through high resistances (see Figure 4.8). The unbalance in

the phase currents, the circulating currents in the sheaths, and the current

in a parallel neutral conductor are measured. Table 4.6 is taken from

reference [21] and it gives both the measured values and the predicted

values of the induced sheath currents obtained using the impedances calcu-

lated from u s u a l handbook methods [3,24].

Writing the loop equations around the loop formed by the bonded

sheaths gives:

° = I Z
Sl,k \ +
I Z
S2,k \ <4'4>

for k= Al, B l , Cl, A2, B2, C2, SI, S2, N

0 = x
si + X
S2
(4.5)

+
*A1 ^1 + x
ci (4.6)

V + (4.7)
X
A2 I
B2 + I
C2

Due to the symmetry in the cables and the spiralling of the cores, most of

the mutual impedances above are equal, for example:

 50

^ I2>70 f t , : j|-

Figure 4.8 E l e c t r i c a l layout of.;the induced sheath current test.

Figure 4.9 Circuit diagram of induced sheath current test.
 52

Z
A1S1 Z
B1S1 Z
C1S1

Z
A1S2 = Z
B1S2 = Z
C1S2

Hence equations (4.4) and (4.5) reduce to:

0
-ZsiSl^l + ( Z
A1S1+ZA1S2) ( I
A1 + I
B1 + I
C1 )

+ ( Z
A2S1+ZA2S2) ( I
A2 + I
B2 + I
C2 )

+ ( Z
S2N W
+
*N ( 4
' 8 )

hl = Z~Z; I ( Z
A1S1 + Z
A1S2)I1 +
(ZA2S1 + Z
A2S2>I2 + ( Z
S2N + Z
S1N ) I
N ] ( 4
' 9 )

The induced sheath current can therefore be c a l c u l a t e d using

equation (4.9). The v a l u e s calculated from using subdivisions i n the

impedance calculations are also presented i n Table 4.6. The measurements

were made f o r two c a s e s i n which t h e bonds between the sheaths were grounded

through ground resistors R ^ and R ^> a n

d when they were not grounded.

There a r e improvements i n the results as c a l c u l a t e d by the method

of subdivisions compared w i t h t h e u s u a l handbook methods [3,5,21]. While

the latter give an average total deviation i n both phase and magnitude of

14% between the c a l c u l a t e d and measured results f o r the ungrounded case,

the former produces only an average total deviation of 8%. Similar results

are also evident i n the second s e t of measurements. The improvements are

mainly due t o the i n c l u s i o n of proximity effects when subdivisions of the

cable conductors and sheaths a r e used i n the impedance calculations. It

should be p o i n t e d out that there a r e a s many as n i n e conductors (including

sheaths and neutral) i n the cable system under consideration.

 Table 4.6 Induced Currents i n Bonded Sheaths

MEASURED CURRENTS (AMPS) CALCULATED % Deviations

Magnitude Mag. & Phase

*
x
* _|_
1
1 1
2 si hi:. * + * +

Ungrc unded Bonds

1 25.01 4° 53.0 191° 23.0|_0° 10.8|255° 13.0 260° 11.8 261° 20 10'; 23 12

2 25.1 [21° 41.4 198° 17.0[0° 9.6 j 269° 10.6 270° 10.0|272° 10 5 11 6

3 23.2[32° 44.9 198° 18.4[rj° 10.0 269° 10.8 273° 10.2 275° 8 2 10 5

4 22.0 j28° 47.4|198° 20.7[0° 10.0 269° 11.0 272° 10.5 274° 10 5 11 6

5 35.0[14° 66.9)191° 29.4 [0° 14.9|255° 16.2 263° . 15.4 265° 8 3 11 7

6 30.6|353° 65.9 191° 30.4[0° 13.5(248° 15.2 256° 14.4|258° 13 7 16 11

Average % De v i a t i o n s 12 5 14 8

Bonds Grounded

1 28.4[21° 56.9 191° 22.8|_0° 13.5|262° 13.5 265° 12.9|267° 0 5 1 7

2, 28.3|21° 55.1 194° 19.9\0° 12.5|262° 13.2 263° 12.6|269° 6 1 8 3

3 29.5[21° 52.4 198° 19.9 [0 ° 12.2j262° 13.0 270° 12.4|271° 7 1 10 5

4 23.0[32° 50.4 194° 21.8[0° 10.7|269° 11.5 271° 11.0|272° 7 3 8 4

o
5 26.4J32° 60.9 198° 25.9 [0° 12.91262° 13.8 273° 13.l|275° 7 2 11 7
6 31.7|28° 55.1 198° 18.0[0° 13.0j 262 ° 13.7 273° 13.0|274° 5 1 9 5
Average % De v i a t i o n s 5 2 8 5
i

* Taken from Reference [21] + calculated using subdivisions.

 54

The main deviations occur in the phase angles. This may be due

to the slow convergence of the reactance to the true value (when subdivisions

are used) as illustrated in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. This causes further lagging

in a l l the phase angles calculated.

To conclude this section, it can be said that only a slight

improvement in impedance calculations can be obtained for systems having

many conductors close together if subdivisions of conductors are used. The

real advantage of subdivisions would be for calculating impedances at higher

frequencies for switching surge studies or studies of other transients in

distribution systems. Another advantage of the method of subconductors is

the fact that other types of cables can be analyzed for which handbook .

formulae may not be readily available, e.g., for sector-shaped conductors.

4.5 Pipe Type Cables

Cables are sometimes enclosed in pipes which act as ducts for

conducting cooling liquids or insulation gases or as protection against

mechanical or c h e m i c a l damage. Common c a s e s are found in o i l and gas filled

cable installations.

Pipe materials may be plastic, aluminum or steel. Plastic or

non-metallic pipes pose no problems in impedance calculations and aluminum

pipes are also easily treated due to their constant permeability. Steel

pipes are highly nonlinear as far as their magnetic properties are concerned.

In this section, the nonlinearity is not taken into account and the whole

steel pipe is assumed linear and having a constant permeability. The cable

conductors and pipe are divided into subconductors and each subconductor is
 55

assigned the permeability of its material. The impedance is then calcu-

lated according to the method presented in Chapter 2. The data is taken

from laboratory experiments conducted at Consolidated Edison Company on

cables enclosed in steel pipes for various degrees of magnetic saturation

of the pipes-and reported in references [14] and [15]. The references give

pipe currents and m a g n e t i c permeabilities at different current levels in

the pipe, in addition to the measured impedance values. The variation of

pipe permeability with current is shown in Figure 4.10. Table 4.7 provides

the results of s i n g l e phase measurements on an unshielded cable in a 5 inch

steel pipe with pipe return. The values c a l c u l a t e d and the percentage

deviations in the reactance are shown alongside the measured values.

From Table 4.7 i t is seen that most of the deviations in the

calculations are in the reactance. This is because the model of Chapter 2

assumes that the conductors are a l l l i n e a r whereas in the actual case the

magnetization curve (or B-H curve) of the s t e e l pipe is nonlinear. Figure

4.11 shows an i l l u s t r a t i o n of the nonlinearity of the B-H curve.

It is evident that around the more linear portions of the B-H

curve ( i . e . , around currents of about 200A i n this pipe and relative

permeability of 1000), the deviations in the reactance as calculated are

small. This may be b e c a u s e the assumed linear model fits this region most.

Deviations in the results here may be due to saturation effects on the

inner surface of the magnetic pipe - s i n c e more current flows on the inside

of the pipe.
Table 4.7 Impedance of Pipe Type Cables for Various
Degrees of Magnetic Saturation

Measured Calculated
Pipe Relative
Errors in
Current Permea- R X R | X
(A) bility micro-ohms; micro-ohms X
/ft /ft

100 762.0 201 151 201 117 23%

150 980.0 223 155 223 137 12%

200 1018.0 218 154 218 140 9%

300 942.0 203 147 203 133 10%

480 784.0 180 141 180 119 15%

980 484.0 141 124 141 92 26%

3500 156.0 88 93 88 62 33%

7400 81.0 80 80 80 55 31%

Figure 4.11 Shape of magnetizing curve during one cycle
 58

The results of zero sequence Impedance calculations for three cables

in the pipe are given in Table 4.8 alongside the measured values. Larger

deviations in the calculated reactances are obtained especially when

large currents flow in the pipe.

It should be recalled that as far as a.c. is concerned, the magnetic

permeability of a nonlinear material is not constant throughout the cycle

but changes with the instantaneous value of the current. By assuming

constant permeability for the steel pipe, an inherent error is being made.

Good results may be obtained only if the assumed permeability approximates

the actual values for most of the range through which the current (or flux)

density in the pipe varies. Furthermore, i t is known that the inner portions

of the pipe carry more current than the middle or outer parts. Thus different

points of the pipe cross section experience different degrees of saturation.

The inner surface may be saturated while the outer is not. An attempt is

made to model this by dividing the pipe into concentric layers and assigning

different permeabilities to the various layers. Table 4.9 gives a summary

of the r e s u l t s when this is applied to the same data as above.

Better results are obtained from the calculations, especially when

the pipe is not i n saturation. To produce the results in Table 4.9, the
 Table 4.8 Zero Sequence Impedance Measurements on Three
Cables Enclosed in a Pipe with Pipe Return.

Pipe Relative Measured Calculated

Errors
Current Permea- R R X
R
(A) b i l i t y (micro- Dhms/ft) (micro- ohms/ft)

100 762.0 197 134 178 84 10% 37%

150 980.0 204 140 199 103 2% 26%

200 1018.0 200 139 194 107 3% 23%

300 986.0 189 133 180 100 5% 25%

500 767.0 165 124 158 86 4% 31%

970 488.0 141 106 121 60 14% 57%

3600. 154.0 76 71 70 32 •8% 55%

8000 76.0 57 57 55 25 4% 55%

 Table 4.9 Impedance of Cables in Magnetic Pipes Represented
as Two Concentric Pipes of Different Permeabilities.

Pipe Measured Calculated Errors

Current R X X R X
(A) (ufl/ft) (yfi/ft)

100 201 151 203 150 1% .1%

150 223 155 230 181 3% :.17%

200 218 154 227 192 4% 25%

300 203 147 212 185 4% 26%

480 180 141 188 160 4% 13%

980 141 124 146 114 4% 8%
3500 88 93 89 67 1% 28%
7400 80 80 81 57 1% 29%
100* 197 134 186 118 6% 12%
150* 204 140 214 149 5% 6%
200* 200 139 211 159 6% 14%
300* 189 133 196 153 4% 15%
500* 165 124 172 128 4% 3%
970* 141 106 129 83 9% 22%
3600* 76 71 73 36 4% 49%
8000* 57 57 56 28 2% 51%

* Three cables in pipe.

 61

pipe i s divided into only two concentric layers. The inner layer i s

assigned a lower permeability to reflect i t s b e i n g more saturated. No

other criterion is used i n assigning these values; thus, for example, when

the pipe current i s 980A and the relative permeability given is 484, the

inner layer is assigned a lower value of 440 and t h e o u t e r layer assigned

520. Similar choices of about 40 b e l o w and above the corresponding permeability

values l i s t e d i n Tables 4.7 and 4 . 8 a r e made for the other results shown in

Table 4.9.

As can be seen from the results i n Tables 4.7, 4.8 and 4 . 9 the

deviations i n the calculated values of the reactance drop from as h i g h as

26% w h e n constant permeability i s assumed to 8% w h e n two v a l u e s of permeability

are used for the steel p i p e when only one c a b l e is in the pipe and the pipe

current is 980A. A s i m i l a r drop from 57% t o 22% i s also obtained for three

cables i n the pipe.

However, i t should be p o i n t e d out that the method of assigning

permeabilities to the pipe as g i v e n above is rather arbitrary and better

results could be expected i f the different layers of the pipe are assigned

permeability values based o n some definite criterion, such as the average

current densities i n the layers. Furthermore, any such linearization,

no m a t t e r how w e l l i t is done, would s t i l l be i n e r r o r since the permeability

variations during any cycle is of the form of the l i n e a r i z e d sketch shown

in Figure 4.12a, whereas the representation above seeks to put i t i n the

form of Figure 4.12b.

Figure 4.12 L i n e a r i z e d m a g n e t i z a t i o n curves
 631

Chapter 5 CONCLUSIONS

The method of subdivisions of conductors f o r impedance calculations

has been used to calculate the impedance of cables. It i s shown that the

accuracy of the c a l c u l a t i o n depends on t h e number of subconductors used.

The introduction of ground return formulae speeds up t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s .

This method takes account of both skin and p r o x i m i t y effects and

will therefore be highly suited to d i s t r i b u t i o n systems where many conductors

run parallel i n close proximity. It will be very useful especially at higher

frequencies where impedance values a r e needed for switching surge studies.

A test case of circulating currents i n bonded sheaths has been

studied with the model. The c a l c u l a t e d results come close to the field

test results.

The method i s also suited for modelling conductors with nonuniform

properties across the cross section. Cables enclosed i n magnetic pipes are

also modelled with pipe layers assigned different values of permeabilities.

Generally better results are obtained when different layers of pipe material

are assigned different permeability values.

 64

LIST OF REFERENCES

[-1] D . M . Simmons^ " C a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e E l e c t r i c a l P r o b l e m s o f Underground

C a b l e s " , The E l e c t r i c J o u r n a l , v o l . 2 9 , January-December, 1932.

[2] S.A. Schelkunoff, "The Electromagnetic Theory of Coaxial Transmission

Lines and C y l i n d r i c a l S h e l l s " , Bell System Tech. Jour., v o l . 13, pp.
522-79, 1934.

[3] D.R. Smith and J . V . Barger, "Impedance and C i r c u l a t i o n Current

C a l c u l a t i o n s f o r UD M u l t i - W i r e C o n c e n t r i c N e u t r a l C i r c u i t s " , IEEE
Conference Record o f 1971 Conference on Underground D i s t r i b u t i o n ,
Sept. 1971, p p . 992-1000.

[4] W.A. Lewis and R.C. Ender, Discussion of 3, ibid, pp. 1001-1004.

[5] W.A. Lewis, G.D. A l l e n and J . C . Wang, "Circuit Constants for Concentric
Neutral Underground Distribution Cables on a Phase Basis", Paper .
A 77 243-9, IEEE Winter Power Meeting 1977.

[6] G.D. A l l e n and W.A. Lewis, "The E l e c t r i c a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Under-

ground Distribution Concentric-Neutral Cables", Book published by
A.B. Chance Company, Centralia, Missouri, 1976.

[7] E. C o m e l l i n d , A. I n v e r n i z z i , G. M a n z o n i , " A Computer P r o g r a m f o r :

Determining E l e c t r i c a l Resistance and Reactance o f any Transmission
L i n e " , IEEE T r a n s , o n Power Appar. & S y s t . v o l . P A S - 9 2 , p p . 308-314,
1973.

[8] H . W . Dommel and W . S . Meyer, "Computation of Electromagnetic Transients",

ibid, v o l . 6 2 , No. 7, July 1974.

[9] L . M . Wedepohl and D . J . W i l c o x , " T r a n s i e n t A n a l y s i s o f Underground

P o w e r - T r a n s m i s s i o n S y s t e m s " , PROC. I E E , v o l . 1 2 0 , N o . 2 , F e b . 1 9 7 3 ,
pp. 253-260.

[10] J . R . C a r s o n , "Ground Return Impedance: Underground Wire w i t h Earth

Return", B e l l Syst. Tech. J o u r . , v o l . 8 , 1929, pp. 94-98.

.[.11] J.R. C a r s o n , "Wave P r o p a g a t i o n i n O v e r h e a d W i r e s w i t h Ground Return",

Bell Syst. Tech. J o u r . , v o l . 5 , 1926, pp. 539-554.

[12] G. B i a n c h i a n d G. Luoni, "Induced Currents and Losses i n Single-Core

Submarine Cables", IEEE Trans o n Power Appar. & Syst., v o l . PAS-95,
No.l, Jan/Feb,1976, pp. 49-57.

[13] V . F . K a l y u z h n y i and M . „ Y u , L i f s h i t s , "A Method f o r D e t e r m i n i n g t h e

Parameters of 'Underground-Conductor-Earth' Circuits", Electrichestro,
No. 7, 1974, p p . 2 8 - 3 6 .
] J . H . Neher, "Phase Sequence Impedance o f P i p e Type Cables", IEEE Trans.
on Power A p p a r . & S y s t . , A u g u s t 1 9 6 4 , p p . 7 9 5 - 8 0 4 .

] E.R. Thomas a n d R . H . K e r s h a w , " I m p e d a n c e o f P i p e Type Cable", ibid,

vol. PAS-84,No. 10, Oct. 1965, pp. 953-961.

] "Line Constants o f Overhead Lines", - Users m a n u a l , B P A , June 1972.

] Edith Clarke, "Circuit Analysis o f AC Power Systems", v o l . II, General

E l e c t r i c Company, 1 9 7 1 .

] A.H.M. Arnold, "Proximity Effect i n Solid and Hollow Round Conductors"

Jour, of IEE, Part I I , v o l . 88, 1941, pp. 349.

] F . P o l l a c z e k , " S u r l e champ p r o d u i t p a r u n c o n d u c t e u r s i m p l e i n f i n e m e n t
long parcource p a r un courant alternatif",
" R e v u e G e n e r a l De L 1 e l e c t r i c i t e " Tome X X I X , N o . 2 2 , M a y 1 9 3 1 .

] H.W. Dommel, "ELEC 553 - Advanced Analysis o f Power Systems, Classnotes"

Univ. of B . C . , 1978.

] Gary Armanini, "A Proposed Grounding and 'Bonding Scheme for Underground
Distribution Systems", B . C . Hydro Report.

] R. L u c a s a n d S . T a l u k d a r , " A d v a n c e s i n F i n i t e Element T e c h n i q u e s f o r
C a l c u l a t i n g C a b l e R e s i s t a n c e s a n d I n d u c t a n c e s " , IEEE T r a n s . o n Power
Appar- and S y s t . , v o l . PAS-97, No. 3 , May/June 1978.

] B r a n k o D. P o p o v i c , " I n t r o d u c t o r y E n g i n e e r i n g Electromagnetics", Textbook

A d d i s o n - W e s l e y P u b l i s h i n g C o . , May 1 9 7 3 .

] " E l e c t r i c a l Transmission and D i s t r i b u t i o n Reference Book", Fourth

E d i t i o n , Westinghouse E l e c t r i c Co. 1964.

] "Underground Systems Reference Book", NELA P u b l i c a t i o n 0 5 0 ,1 9 3 1 .

] John G. K a s s a k i a n , "The E f f e c t s o f N o n - T r a n s p o s i t i o n a n d E a r t h R e t u r n
Frequency Dependence on T r a n s i e n t s due t o High Speed R e c l o s i n g " ,
IEEE Trans, v o l . PAS-95, M a r c h / A p r i l 1976, p p . 610-618.