CHAPTER 5

OVERHEAD HV CONDUCTORS AND THERMAL RATINGS

5.1 Introduction

The remote goal of this dissertation research work is to increase the efficient use of

overhead HV conductors by using DGPS conductor sag monitoring instrument. The intention is

to instantaneously provide electric grid operators with information pertinent to code mandated

conductor ground clearance. The proposed system as described previously in Chapter 3 is to be

used for monitoring conductor sag within a critical spans (i.e. spans experiencing the highest

conductor temperature) of a transmission network. Knowledge about the conductor sag in real

time allows for efficient dynamic loading of the network without violating the code mandated

conductor ground clearance limits. One objective of this chapter is to propose a framework for

DTLR. The idea of maximum steady state load increase (MSSLI) at a bus using distribution

sensitivity factors is used to illustrate the concept of transmission capacity for certain given

constraints. This includes the "n-1" contingency analysis.

5.2 Overhead High Voltage Conductor Geometry

Mathematical models of the physical behavior of overhead conductors have been

established for the purpose of conductor thermal ratings [13, 27, 28, 29, 56, 58]. The form of a

conductor when installed and held between two fixed supports (i.e. towers) is described by a

catenary. The exact shape of the curve is a hyperbolic cosine as shown in Figure 5.1.

ℓ
 Figure 5.1. Typical catenary characteristics of an overhead conductor

The parameters in Figure 5.1 are defined below,

RF = resultant tension in pounds at the tower support,

H = horizontal tension,

V = vertical tension,

L = conductor span length (i.e. L=2x),

ℓ = physical conductor length,

y2 = ordinate of the lowest point of the curve,

y1 = ordinate of the point of tangency,

D = sag,

w = weight of conductor in pounds per foot.

The catenary equations are [27, 28, 98],

x
y 1 = y 2 cosh ( )
y 2 where, y 2 =H /w , and cosh x =(e x +e−x )/2

H wx
D= y 1 − y 2 = [ cosh( )−1 ]
w H . (5.1)
2 3 4
wx w x
D= + + ...
2 H 24 H 3 . (5.2)

The catenary curve can be approximated to a parabola provided the span length is much greater

than the conductor sag D (i.e. L>> D ), thereby simplifying the mathematical complexity. In
most cases, the ratio of the span length to conductor sag is in the order of 100:1 [98, 117]. This

leads to the widespread use of the parabolic version of the overhead conductor instead of the

catenary model in most electric utility applications. At the maximum sag D, x=L/2, and by using

Equation (5.2),
2 3 4
wL w L
D= + + ...
8 H 384 H 3 (5.3)

3 5
ℓ H wx x x
= sinh ( ) sinh x=x+ + + .. .
similarly [28], 2 w H , 3 ! 5!
2 3 4 5
ℓ w x w x
=x + + + ...
2 6 H 120 H 4
2

2 3 4 5
w L w L
ℓ=L+ + + .. .
24 H 1920 H 4
2
(5.4)

In this application, the parabolic approximation, Equation (5.5) is used instead of the catenary

equation,

2
D=(wL )/(8 H ) . (5.5)

By substituting the horizontal tension, H from (5.5) into (5.4) yields (5.6),
2 4
8 D 32 D
ℓ=L+ + + ...
3 L 15 L3 (5.6)

ℓ≈(8/3 L)D 2 +L

∂ ℓ ' 16
=ℓ = D
∂D 3L . (5.7)

Data from measured tension and current on the Arizona Public Service (APS) Yavapai-

Willowlake 230kV 795 ACSR rail (45/7) overhead transmission line have been used to illustrate

the mathematical models of the overhead conductor described above. For a span length L=500
ft, a plot of Equation (5.7) as shown in Figure 5.2 indicates that the relationship between the

variation ∂ ℓ/∂ D of the actual overhead conductor length, ℓ with respect to its sag, D is a

linear positive slope. This is the case when Hook's law [98] is ensured.

The length of the span under consideration was 500 ft with a conductor specific weight of

0.896 lb/ft. The mathematical model of the overhead conductor and the conductor data supplied

by APS are used to generate Figures 5.3 through 5.5. Figure 5.4 shows the variation of the

conductor sag over different times of the three-day period covering April 30-May 2, 1998.

Figure 5.5 reveals the complex relationship between the overhead conductor sag and current

loading, due to variable conductor ambient conditions.

105000
Variation of actual conductor length with sag (-)

100000

95000

90000

85000

80000

75000
7.80 7.90 8.00 8.10 8.20 8.30 8.40 8.50 8.60 8.70

Sag (ft)

Figure 5.2. Calculated rate of change of physical conductor length with maximum sag using the

APS Yavapai-Willowlake 230 kV 795 ACSR rail (45/7) conductor data [Data supplied by

Arizona Public Service in April 1998]

 9
8
7
Catenary ordinate (ft)

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250
Horizontal distance along span (ft)

Figure 5.3. Catenary of a 230 kV 795 ACSR rail (45/7) APS overhead conductor

[Data supplied by Arizona Public Service in April 1998]

8.80

8.60
Overhead conductor sag (ft)

8.40

8.20

8.00

7.80

7.60

7.40
4/30/98 12:00:00 5/1/98 0:00:00 5/1/98 12:00:00 5/2/98 0:00:00 5/2/98 12:00:00
Date and time (h) of day

Fig

ure 5.4. Variation of the Yavapai-Willowlake 230 kV 795 ACSR rail (45/7) conductor sag at

different times of the day [Data supplied by Arizona Public Service]

 8.80
8.70
Overhead coductor sag (ft)

8.60
8.50
8.40
8.30
8.20
8.10
8.00
7.90
7.80
265 275 285 295 305 315 325 335 345 355 365
Conductor current (A)

Figure 5.5. Loading profile of a 230 kV 795 ACSR rail (45/7) overhead conductor [Data

supplied by Arizona Public Service in April 1998]

The mathematical models of the sag/tension above assume uniform behavior of the given

conductor material [14]. This introduces a significant amount of error in the conductor sag

computation since most HV conductors comes in a composite form (e.g. ACSR). The modulus

correction can be defined as Δℓ=ℓΔH / AE where, A is the conductor cross sectional area and E

is the composite modulus of elasticity within a specific region of expansion.

5.3 Factors Affecting Conductor Thermal Ratings

The conductor temperature and sag are the main factors that determine the maximum

allowable current that an overhead HV conductor can carry. An overhead conductor operates in

thermodynamic balance by gaining heat from its surroundings as a result of solar radiation, its

absorptivity capability, and ohmic heating (I2R). On the other hand heat is lost to its
surroundings through radiation and convection. The heat balance expression of Equation (5.8)

relates conductor current and conductor temperature, and can therefore be used as one of the

relationships for calculating DTLR [13, 64, 82],

dT c
q s −qc −q r =mC p −I 2 R ( T c )
dt . (5.8)

dT c
mC p
The heat storage term, dt is zero under steady state conditions hence,

q c +q r −q s
I=
√ R(T c )

where, qs = solar heat gain (watts per lineal foot of conductor),

qc = convectional heat loss (watts per lineal foot of conductor),

qr = radiational heat loss (watts per lineal foot of conductor),

mCp = total heat capacity of conductor (Ws/ft oC),

I = conductor current (amperes at 60 Hz),

Tc = conductor temperature (oC),

R(Tc) = 60Hz resistance per lineal foot of conductor at Tc (/ft).

The solar heat gain qs can be calculated or measured directly, qr is a function of temperature rise,

conductor diameter and emmisivity, and qc is a function of temperature rise above ambient,

conductor diameter, wind speed and direction.

The transient heat balance equation is,

dT c
q c +q r + mC p =q s + I 2 R(T c )
dt

dT c 1
= [ I 2 R (T c )+q s−qc −q r ]
dt mC p . (5.9)
The variations in the terms on the left side of Equation (5.8) could be computed for known

variations of the conductor temperature using the equations and tables suggested in [13].

A highly erratic weather condition implies that the maximum current computed may not

be reliable. On the other hand, if the net weather for a given time interval is static, the

confidence of the result will then be higher. For such cases a confidence index, based on the

variation of the net weather effect for different time windows is recommended. A mathematical

model for calculating the current/temperature relationship of overhead conductors is given in the

IEEE Standard 738-1993, and also in [27, 29]. Real time measurements of conductor sag have

the potential of being accurately converted to DTLR. These dynamic ratings are then useable in

connection with systems studies to determine the maximum ATC of circuits.

Convection depends on wind speed as well as wind direction. Radiation however,

depends on the temperature of the conductor compared to the ambient conditions and the

emissivity of the conductor. The conductor thermal time constant which can be defined as the

time required to establish 63 percent of a new steady state of power level is dependent on

conductor size and wind speed. For low wind speeds, the thermal time constant is on the order

of 15 minutes for small conductors and on the order of 30 minutes for large conductors [14].

Wind speed is highly variable and its future values cannot be predicted from present observations

with any certainty and so are the wind direction and solar radiation. These are some of the main

concerns relating the reliability of DTLR systems.

5.4 Overhead Conductor Thermal Ratings

Overhead conductor temperature and sag information can be used to (1) determine the

load carrying capabilities of overhead conductors, (2) ensure that conductors do not violate their
code mandated clearances, (3) for estimating the conductor loss of strength caused by annealing,

and (4) to limit the elevated temperature creep of conductors. Many transmission circuits are

continuous or short time (up to 0.5 h.) rated [15, 18, 25, 56, 80]. These ratings provide different

levels of capacity improvements. Static thermal ratings of overhead conductors are based on

different assumptions at different utilities. Overhead conductor rating methods have traditionally

been based on the assumptions of worst case weather conditions. Thus, in conventional steady

state loading, the capacity to carry current is assumed to be fixed. Therefore, the steady state

thermal ratings of the conductor is a published current (ampere) level, and this does not take into

account the existing conductor temperature and sag. These conservative methods assume high

ambient temperature, low wind speed, and high solar radiation [14, 56, 64]. In most cases, the

clearance (or sag) of an overhead conductor from ground or objects below it (or under build) is

the main factor limiting its steady state thermal ratings. Transmission lines are designed in such

a way that at maximum allowable conductor temperatures, the clearance is equal to or greater

than the code mandated value, in addition to a safety margin. Under most conditions, if the

actual conductor temperature and sag are known, the conductor may be loaded to a value

significantly higher than the static ratings. This forms the basis for DTLR.

In order to insure an acceptable conductor loss of life and code mandated clearance

limits, various ampacity levels may be imposed to ensure a satisfactory operation of transmission

circuits. These are the normal, long time emergency (LTE) ratings and short time emergency

(STE) ratings. These ratings are enforced by various utilities to preserve conductor thermal

limits within acceptable industry norms.

Note that these conservative ampere ratings are different for different utility companies.

As an example, the New York Power Pool uses the normal, STE and LTE ratings below with
respect to temperature and time [56]. The normal ratings which are also the ampacity ratings

intended for routine use specify the maximum conductor current with the conductor temperature

limited up to 95oC. The LTE ratings specifies the ampacity level of a conductor with the

conductor temperature and time duration limited up respectively to 115 oC and 3 hours. The STE

ratings specify the ampacity level of a conductor with the conductor temperature and time

duration limited up to 125oC and 15 minutes respectively. These are based on the amount of

conductor loss of life which a respective company is willing to relinquish without violating the

mandated clearance limits. Some details about the two revised (i.e. 1971 and 1981) conservative

ampacity ratings widely used by some utilities in the state of New York for a Drake (commonly

used for 115 kV and 230 kV circuits) 795 kcmil ACSR are given in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1. Conservative ampere ratings for Drake 795 kcmil 26/7 ACSR conductor

(New York Power Pool) [56]

1971 Rating 1981 Revised Rating

Rating (0.02% probability level, (Unspecified probability level,
assumed life 25 years) assumed life 25 years)
Summer Winter Summer Winter
Air temperature 40oC 10oC 35oC 10oC
Wind Speed 2 ft/s 2 ft/s 3 ft/s 3 ft/s
Normal (95oC) 970 A 1240 A 1101 A 1347 A
LTE (115oC, 3 hrs) 1140 A 1370 A 1270 A 1476 A
STE (125oC, 15 min) 1310 A 1520 A 1430 A 1616 A

The temperature of the overhead conductor can be determined after having obtained an

accurate conductor sag measurements by using the critical span sag-temperature relationship.

Equation (5.10) gives a close approximation of temperature as a function of the overhead

conductor sag,

T c=T i + A ( Sc −Si )+ B ( S c− Si )2 +C ( S c −S i )3 + D ( S c −S i ) 4 , (5.10)

where in Equation (5.10), Tc is the computed present conductor temperature, and Ti is that of an

unenergized conductor replica. Sc and Si, are respectively the corresponding conductor sags. The

calibrated parameters A, B, C and D can be determined empirically by using various temperature

and conductor sag measurement together with curve fitting techniques [15]. Thus, these

constants are determined under controlled conditions with known Ti and Si. The values of the

temperature, Ti can be measured using available instruments for known conductor sag values Si.

The conductor sag can be derived from the real time measurements of the DGPS conductor sag

instrument which can then be used to determine the conductor temperature and hence, the

permissible conductor loading for operational purposes. An expression for a third degree

approximation of Equation (5.10) has been proposed by T. O. Seppa et al., and the conductor

ampacity is then computed using Equation (5.11) [15]. However, this equation is an empirical

relationship which the present author has not validated. Note also that the validity of IT is

dependent on the accuracy of determining the parameters in Equation (5.8).

T m−T o
I M =I T
√ T c −T o , (5.11)

S p =√ 3 V I M ,

where IM = ampacity at maximum allowable conductor temperature, [A]

IT = ampacity to limit conductor to the computed temperature, [A]

Tc = computed conductor temperature [oC]

Tm = maximum allowable conductor temperature [oC]

T0 = actual ambient temperature, [oC]

Sp = apparent power, [MVA].

 Note that due to the stochastic nature of ambient conditions, a conductor replica as

proposed by Seppa et al is used to determine the actual ambient temperature, T0 and the net

radiation This mathematical model (5.11) has been the basic tool in many applications for the

determination of dynamic thermal ratings of overhead conductors. An example of how this

model is used to calculate the allowable ampacity level of overhead HV conductor, specifically a

230 kV ACSR "Drake" is illustrated in [15]. Ultimately, the results obtained in this respect for a

given condition could be used for on-line system study, and to also estimate the ratio of the

change in conductor sag, Sc and conductor current, I (i.e., ΔS c / ΔI ) for anticipatory purposes.

Based on the temperature- sag model, typical line loading information may be transmitted to the

systems operator via an appropriate communications device. This may include the present safe

conductor loading levels, and more importantly, the amount of load that must be reduced to

achieve the required safe loading level. The concept is summarized in Figure 5.6.

System study

Postprocessed Sag Temp Equation Rating Systems

GPS Equation
DGPS .
Signal (5.10) (5.11) Operator
Measurements

Figure 5.6. Block diagram for conductor ampacity rating calculation

5.5 Determination of Maximum Transfer Capacity

In a competitive deregulated electric power industry any electric consumer should be able

to purchase power from any generating company. This results in two generic transmission

issues: the first is the problem of obtaining circuit capacity for point-to-point transmission, and

the second is the development of transmission service from a control area to a point. In order to

preserve system reliability, the “n-1” type of line contingency study is done. Consequently, a
method known as the maximum steady state load increase (MSSLI) [20] at a specific bus is

considered under this section. The method is iterative and based on the linearization of system

operation near high levels of operation. The “n-1” contingency (line outage) security

consideration is included in the calculation. This may be used as an index to assess the steady

state transmission capacity between regions in an interconnected power system. This concept

can also be extended to include the DTLR case for a given conductor temperature and ambient

conditions, and the same algorithm used for the MSSLI simulations are also therefore applicable.

The MSSLI is defined to be that value of load increase at a given bus for a steady state

condition that makes the loading in any line of the system reach rated value when considering the

most severe first (i.e., “n-1”) contingency. To start with, the initial conditions of the problem are

set based on a load flow study. The initial load flow study represents the actual steady state

operating point of the system. The bus susceptance matrix Bbus is also formed. The

corresponding linear sensitivity factors (i.e., generation shift and line outage distribution) are

computed based on the elements of the susceptance matrix. The generation shift factor,
ali

which represents the sensitivity of power flow on line l to a change in generation at bus i is

defined as follows:

Δf l
ali =
ΔPi . (5.12)

where l, i = line and bus indices respectively

Pi = change in generation at bus i

fl = variation of power flow on line l when a change in generation, Pi occurs at bus i.
It is assumed in Equation (5.12) that the change in generation, Pi is exactly compensated by an

opposite change in generation at the swing bus with all other generators remaining fixed. As

shown in [93] the complex generation shift factor is described as,

1 ¿
ali = ¿ ( Z bus , ni −Z bus , mi )
zl (5.13)

where (*) denotes complex conjugation and,

i - generator bus index other than the reference bus

n, m - bus indices corresponding to line l

zl = rl +jxl - line impedance of line l (from index n to m)

Zbus, ni and Zbus, mi - entries in the Zbus matrix referenced to the swing bus.

The complex notation in Equation (5.13) can be dropped to obtain the approximate line

megawatt (i.e., active) power flows. By so doing the generation shift factor, ali then becomes

purely real, where the Xbus matrix is the imaginary part of the bus impedance, Zbus matrix.

1
ali = X − X mi )
x l ( ni (5.14)

Similarly, the line outage distribution factors are,

Δf l
dl,k=
f ok (5.15)

where,

dl,k = distribution factor for line l after line k is outaged

f ok = original power flow on line k before being outaged (opened)

fl = variation in megawatt power flow on line l due to the outage of line k.
 The Xbus matrix is formed by inverting the B’ bus susceptance matrix with the reference bus

elements removed, and then later including zeros in the row and column corresponding to the

reference bus. The power transfer distribution factor (PTDF) may also be defined by Equation

(5.16) where, neither i nor j is the swing bus,

xk
xl
( X in− X jn− X im+ X jm )
dl, k=
x k−( X nn + X mm−2 X nm ) . (5.16)

In Equation (5.16), all real notation is used as before to estimate the megawatt power flows. A

shift in generation and load at all buses is required by the sale of power. The shift at the buses is

dependent of the way the extra load is going to be served, (i.e. either from point-to-point or from

control area-to-point). For point-to-point calculations, there will be load rescheduling only at the

two specified buses. For control area-to-point calculations, a generation redispatch is required.

In this dissertation work, a redispatch proportional to the generator ratings, often referred to as

participation “a” factors is adopted [41, 93]. Once the generation and load shift at buses have

been calculated, the new power flow on each line in the network is computed using a pre-

calculated generation shift factors,

f^ l =f ol + ∑ ( a li ΔPi )
i . (5.17)

^
where, f l = flow on line l after failure of a generator on bus i
o
fl = flow prior to the generator failure.
The MSSLI is found iteratively, advancing load level in steps until a system circuit

reaches its rating. This method identifies the line(s) which has reached its capacity, as well as

the corresponding load levels of the entire system. Figure 5.7 shows the MSSLI algorithm used.

In Figure 5.7 the circuits DTLR are proposed for use as Prated.

Initialize with

existing

conditions
 Point-to-point or
Control area-to-point

MSSLI estimation
at desired bus

Calculation of Pbus
at all buses

Pmax  Pbus NO
Correct
Pbus
YES

(n-1) contingency

analysis
YES
Pline  Prated Report
Pline
NO

Increase Pbus

Figure 5.7. Algorithm for MSSLI index

The use of dynamically updated circuit ratings will allow the full use of transmission circuits
nearly in real time. In this way circuit capacity may be marketed to interested entities, and
circuits may be more fully used by the operating transmission company. An illustrative example
is developed to indicate how the calculation of MSSLI is done. For this purpose, a six bus
example is used as shown in Figure 5.8. The corresponding system data are listed in Tables 5.2
and 5.3. The illustrative studies are presented here in three cases: a base case (i.e. initial load
flow) study, an i