250 Journal of International Council on Electrical Engineering Vol. 2, No. 3, pp.

250~256, 2012
http://dx.doi.org/10.5370/JICEE.2012.2.3.250

Technical Review on Parallel Ground Continuity Conductor of

Underground Cable systems

Jong-Beom Lee† and Chae-Kyun Jung*

Abstract – The Induced sheath voltage is significantly increased at single point bonding section when the
ground fault occurs on power cable system because there is no return path of fault current. For solving
this problem, therefore, many researchers recommend the PGCC (Parallel Ground Continuity Conductor).
In this paper, the characteristics of PGCC are extensively analyzed for reducing the level of induced
sheath voltage at the single point bonded section for Korea underground power cable system

Keywords: Parallel ground continuity conductor, Overvoltage, Underground cable

1. Introduction installed SVLs in single point bonded section were

exploded by single line to ground fault, which caused heavy
Generally, single point bonding section consists in damage to joint box.
arranging for the sheaths of the three cables to be connected Therefore, in this paper, the characteristics of PGCC are
together and earthed at one point only. In Korea, in each extensively analyzed for reducing the level of induced
single point bonded section, the SVL (sheath voltage limiter) sheath voltage at the single point bonded section for Korea
units should be connected between the unbounded ends of underground power cable system. Firstly, the optimal
the cable sheaths. In this section, during a ground fault, the installation section is estimated by evaluating of
zero sequence fault current carried by the cable conductor economical and technical efficiency. Next, the adequate
cannot return by any path because single point bonded conductor size of PGCC will be decided by maximum fault
cable sheath is ground at one position only or the sheaths current considering an expected maximum circuit breaker
are separated by SVLs. Specially, the induced sheath capacity. The additional various cases are also considered
voltage is significantly increased at this point when the including the dimension and the position of PGCC, spacing
ground fault occurs on power cable system because there is between PGCC and phase conductors, faulty phase, cable
no return path of fault current. For solving this problem, construction types and two PGCCs usage. Korea electric
therefore, many researchers recommend the PGCC (Parallel power company, KEPCO, has now plan for adopting PGCC
Ground Continuity Conductor) in single point bonded which is suitable on Korea underground power cable
section. system based on the results of this paper. Accordingly, the
The PGCC is very effective for suppressing an induced PGCC will expect to be applied on real power cable system
sheath overvoltage because of providing an external fault in Korea, and it also contributes to safety service.
current path. Accordingly, a single point bonded cable
installation with PGCC which is earthed at both ends of the
route is recommended. The spacing between PGCC and 2. Induced sheath overvoltage by PGCC
phase conductor should be closed to limit the voltage level installation
during a single phase ground fault. The size of PGCC
should be also adequate to carry the full expected fault PGCC is installed for reducing a sheath overvoltage
current for the cable system. However, in Korea, the occurred at single point bonded section through providing a
PGCCs are not applied for single point bonded section till return path of fault current. The overvoltage (Ec) induced
now. The sheaths are just separated by SVLs. Recently, the on PGCC lying in parallel with set of three conductors cab
be expressed by Equation (1).
† Corresponding Author: Div. of Electric and Electronics Engineering,
Wonkwang University, Korea (ipower@wonkwang.ac.kr)    √ 
* Power System Lab., KEPCO Research Institute, Korea E = jωI (2 × 10 )[ ln  
+j 
ln ( ) (1)

(chekyun@kepco.co.kr)
Received: March 19, 2012; Accepted: June 19, 2012
 Technical Review on Parallel Ground Continuity Conductor of Underground Cable systems 251

where, Ib is conductor current of phase B and S1C, S2C As shown in Equation (6), the sheath voltage can be
and S3C are axial spacings between PGCC and conductor of influenced by the distance between PGCC and phase
phase A, Phase B and C, respectively. conductor. GMR of PGCC(rg) can be also influenced when
If Ia or Ic is considered
onsidered in Equation (1), Ib can be the PGCC is installed on the sys
system. The sheath voltage is
alternated by a ∙ I or a ∙ I , respectively. Where, a is reduced by closer distance of S and thicker GMR of rg.
 √
− +j . Also, the maximum overvoltage between sheath
 
and earth can be expressed by Equations (2) to (5) when the
single line to ground fault occurs
urs on underground power
cable system. For a trefoil arrangement (S12=S23=S13=S)
which is considered for PGCC installation in this paper, the
sheath voltages are equal and are expressed by Equation (6).

  √ 
E = jωI (2 × 10)[−  ln ∙  + j 
ln (  ) (2)


  ∙ √ 
E = jωI (2 × 10 )[ ln  
+j 
ln ( ) (3)


Fig. 1. SVL overvoltage in case of no PGCC

PGCC.
  √ 
E = jωI (2 × 10 )[−  ln ∙  − j  ln (  ) (4)


3. Model System
where, S12 is axial spacing
ing between phase A and phase B,
S23 is axial spacing between phase B and phase C, S13 is The diagram of a real power cable system discussed in
axial spacing between phase A and phase C and d is this paper is shown in Fig. 3. It is a single core cable
geometric mean sheath diameter. transmission system with the voltage of 154 kV. The total
length of the cable is 3.392 km. It consists of three

E = jωI (2 × 10 ) ln    (5) crossbonded major sections with three minor sections for
each major section. Joint No. 9 is the single point bonded
Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 illustrate the overvoltage induced on section. As usual, the sheaths
ths are jointed and cross bonded
SVL at single point bonded section according to installation between two sections.
of PGCC or not. As shown in Fig. 1, in the absence of a
PGCC, if the ground fault occurs on a cable, in the case of
trefoil arrangement, the overvoltage induced
ced on SVL is the
vectorial sum of voltage gradient on sheath(Es) expressed in
Equation (5) and the earth potential rise(Ve). Accordingly,
in this case, it is possible to damage SVL according the
amplitude of added overvoltage.
However, as shown in Fig. 2, if PGCC is installed in
same system, the fault current is distributed to sheath and
PGCC because PGCC provides a return path of fault
current. Consequently, the overvoltage induced on SVL is
significantly reduced to ‘Es-Ec’. Equation (6) shows the
voltage gradient on sheath when the PGCC is installed on
underground power cable system. Where, S is the distance Fig. 2. SVL overvoltage in case of installation of PGCC
PGCC.
between PGCC and phase conductor, rg is GMR(geometric
mean radius) of PGCC. In this paper, the single line to ground fault is supposed
to occur at 1.065 km from A S/S to test the effects of PGCC.
   EMTP/ATP is used forr system modeling and simulation.
E = jωI (2 × 10 ) ln[ 
] (6)
252 Jong-Beom Lee and Chae-Kyun Jung

Table 2. Dimension
imension of PGCC according to kinds of conducto
conductor size
Radius of Radius of
Type Permittivity
conductor [m] insulation [m]
TFR-CV
0.00915 0.01085 2.4
240 ㎟
TFR-CV
0.0132 0.0174 2.4
500 ㎟

Fig. 3. Underground power cable system

system. 5. Selection of PGCC installation section

5.1 Classification of installation section

4. Selection of PGCC conductor size
For analyzing the effects of PGCC, the installation
The conductor size of PGCC has been determined by conditions are variously considered including installation
IEC 60364-5-54
54 in this paper. Equation (7) expresses the section, conductor dimension, the use of two PGCCs and
calculation method. As shown in Equation (7), the the distance between PGCC and phase conductor. Firstly,
conductor size of PGCC is determined by fault current of for more detailed analysis, 3 kinds of installation methods
PGC, duration time and material characteristics. aree proposed as shown in Fig. 4. In Type 1, the PGCC is
installed between last NJ 2 to B S/S. Type 2 and Type 3 are
   installed between NJ 1 and B S/S, single point bonded
A= 
(7)
section and B S/S, respectively.

where,
 () θ θ
k =  ln (1 + ) (8)
ρ θ

A : conductor size of PGCC [㎟], I : conductor current in

PGCC [A], tc : duration time [sec], B : reciprocal of
temperature coefficient of resistance at 00℃ [K], ρ20 : (a) Type 1
electrical resistivity at 20℃ [Ω.m], θi : initial temperature

[℃], θf : final temperature [℃]

Table 1. Factors and result for calculation of conductor size

Factor I tc B ρ20 θi θf
Value 50,000 0.5 234.5 10-8
1.7241×10 30 250
Calculated conductor size : 201.3[
201.3[㎟]
(b) Type 2

In this paper, fault current of 50 kA and duration time of

0.5 secc are assumed for calculation of PGCC conductor size
as a Korean standard. The detailed data are listed in Table
1. Finally, the calculated conductor size is 201.3 ㎟.
Accordingly, the conductor size of TFR TFR-CV 240 ㎟ is
selected for PGCC. However, for more detailed analysis
TFR-CV 500 ㎟
according to the change of conductor size, TFR
(C) Type 3
of PGCC is also considered. In Table 2, the dimension and
permittivity are listed according to the kinds of conductor
Fig. 4. Installation ttypes of PGCC.
size.
 Technical Review on Parallel Ground Continuity Conductor of Underground Cable systems 253

5.2 Selection result of installation section

For the selection of optimal installation section, the

proposed 3 kinds of installation types are simulated and
compared in duct as well as trefoil arrangements when the
single line to ground fault is assumed to occur on phase A.
Table 3 classifies the analysis cases according to the
construction formation and kinds of types expressed in Fig.
4. The PGCC is installed at vacant duct in duct formation,
and it is supposed to be installed closely to Phase C in
trefoil arrangement. The induced sheath voltages measured Fig. 6. Sheath voltage reduction rate of Type 1 to Type 3 in
at center SVLs of 3 set SVLs in single point bonded section trefoil arrangement.
are compared because the voltage induced at center SVLs is
higher than one of left hand or right hand SVLs. Fig. 5 Consequently, although the reduction rates of Type 1 and
shows the reduction rate of induced sheath voltage in duct Type 2 are almost same, Type 1 is more economical than
arrangement. As shown in Fig. 5, Type 1 and Type 2 are Type 2 considering installation length of PGCC. On the
similarly reduced, but Type 3 has no effect on induced other hand, there is no reduction effect in Type 3. Therefore,
sheath voltage by installation of PGCC. Averagely, Type 1 in this paper, Type 1 is selected for optimal installation
and Type 2 in duct formation show 36.1 % and 34.8 % of section of PGCC. In addition, the reduction effect of trefoil
sheath voltage reduction, respectively. But, Type 3 is just arrangement is better than duct because of closer distance
5.07 %. Fig. 6 is in case of trefoil arrangement. As shown in between phase conductor and PGCC. As shown in Table 4,
Fig. 6, the induced sheath voltage of Type 1 and Type 2 are the average reduction rates in duct and trefoil are 36.1 %
also similarly reduced, Type 3 is very slightly reduced. The and 62.1 %, respectively.
average reduction rate of each type is 62.1 %, 62.3 % and
4.19 %. In addition, the reduction rate of phase C is better Table 4. Average reduction rate according to installation
than one of other phase. From these results, it can be proved types and arrangement
Average reduction rate [%]
that the distance between phase conductor and PGCC is Arrangement
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
closer, the sheath voltage reduction rate is better.
Duct 36.1 34.8 5.07
Trefoil 62.1 62.3 4.19
Table 3. Cases according to construction formation and
kinds of installation types
Arrangement Types Conductor size
6. SIMULATION RESULTS
Type 1 TFR-CV 240 ㎟
Duct Type 2 TFR-CV 240 ㎟ 6.1 Change of conductor size
Type 3 TFR-CV 240 ㎟
Type 1 TFR-CV 240 ㎟
Trefoil As discussed in Sections 4 and 5 for optimal installation
Type 2 TFR-CV 240 ㎟
of PGCC, TFR CV 240 ㎟ of conductor size and Type 1 of
installation section are selected. However, in this section,
the reduction effect of TFR CV 500 ㎟ is also analyzed for
comparison according to the change of conductor size in
Type 1 of installation section. In Fig. 7, the induced
voltages of TFR CV 240 ㎟ and TFR CV 500 ㎟ are
compared in duct formation. As shown in Fig. 7, the
reduction effect of TFR CV 500 ㎟ is averagely a little
better than that of TFR CV 240 ㎟. The average reduction
rates of both conductor sizes are 36.1 % and 42.6 %, the
difference is just 6.5%. In trefoil arrangement, the reduction
effect of TFR CV 500 ㎟ is also slightly better than TFR
Fig. 5. Sheath voltage reduction rate of Type 1 to Type 3 in CV 240 ㎟ as shown in Fig. 8. The average reduction rates
duct formation.
254 Jong-Beom Lee and Chae-Kyun Jung

for both conductor sizes are 62.1 % and 66.3 %. The arrangement of Type 1 listed in Table 3. PGCC is installed
difference is very small. Accordingly, although TFR CV closely to Phase C. Fig. 9 shows the simulation results
500 ㎟ is a little better, TFR CV 240 ㎟ is more when the single line to ground fault occurs on each phase.
economical for optimal conductor size of PGCC because As shown in Fig. 9, averagely, the reduction rate of faulty
the reduction difference is not big. phase C is better than other phase faults because of position
of PGCC. The average reduction rates of faulty phase A, B
and C are 62.1 %, 68.8 % and 72.4 %, respectively.
Next, the sheath voltage reduction rate is also discussed
in case of the use of two PGCCs in trefoil arrangement of
Type 1. Its result is compared with result of one PGCC. The
detailed arrangement information is listed in Table 5.

Table 5. Case of the use of two PGCCs

Arrangement Type Conductor size
Trefoil
Type 1 TFR-CV 240 ㎟
(Two PGCCs)

Fig. 7. Sheath voltage reduction rate according to change of Fig. 10 shows the simulation results when one PGCC and
conductor size in duct formation. two PGCCs are installed on power cable system. As shown
in Fig. 10, the reduction rate of two PGCCs is better than
one PGCC. The average reduction rates of one PGCC and
two PGCCs are 62.1 % and 83.9 %, respectively. From
these results, it proves that two PGCCs is much more
effective than one PGCC, its difference rate is 21.8 %.
However, for use of two PGCCs on real power cable
system, the economical estimation will be performed in the
near future.

Fig. 8. Sheath voltage reduction rate according to change of

conductor size in trefoil arrangement.

6.2 Effects of faulty phase and two PGCCs

Fig. 10. Sheath voltage reduction rate comparison of one

PGCC with two PGCCs.

6.3 Transposed installation of one PGCC

Finally, in this paper, the sheath voltage reduction rate is

analyzed in case of transposed installation of one PGCC
Fig. 9. Sheath voltage reduction rate according to change of recommended by ANSI/IEEE Std. 575. As shown in Table 6,
faulty phase. PGCC is transposed between Phase C and Phase A. In other
words, firstly, the PGCC which is placed closely to Phase C
In this section, firstly, the sheath voltage reduction rate is is installed from No. 8-1 to No. 9 as shown in Fig. 3, than it
discussed according to the change of faulty phase in trefoil is transposed closely to Phase A from No. 9 to B S/S.
 Technical Review on Parallel Ground Continuity Conductor of Underground Cable systems 255

Table 6. Case of transposed PGCC more economical than Type 2 considering installation
Arrangement Type Conductor size length of PGCC. Therefore, in this paper, Type 1 is selected
Trefoil for optimal installation section of PGCC. In addition, the
Type 1 TFR-CV 240 ㎟
(Transposed PGCC)
reduction effect of trefoil arrangement is better than duct
because of closer distance between phase conductor and
PGCC.
In trefoil arrangement, the reduction effect of TFR CV
500 ㎟ is also slightly better than that of TFR CV 240 ㎟.
The average reduction rates for both conductor sizes are
62.1 % and 66.3 %, the difference is very small. Two
PGCCs are much more effective than one PGCC with
difference rate of 21.8 %. Finally, the average reduction
rate of transposed PGCC is 70.8 %, 8.7 % better than no
transposed PGCC. Comparing duct formation and directly
buried formation, there is little difference in trefoil
arrangement because the spacing between phase conductors
Fig. 11. Sheath voltage reduction rate comparison of no
of trefoil arrangement is closer than duct or directly buried
transposed PGCC with transposed PGCCs.
formation.
Korea electric power company is now planning for
In Fig. 11, the sheath voltage reduction rate of transposed
adopting PGCC based on the results of this paper.
PGCC is compared with no transposed PGCC. As shown in
Accordingly, in the near future, the results of this paper will
Fig. 11, the effect of transposed PGCC is better than no
contribute to the application of PGCC on real power cable
transposed PGCC. The average reduction rate of transposed
system in Korea.
PGCC is 70.8 %, about 8.7 % better than no transposed
PGCC. Consequently, the difference is not big compared
with duct formation or directly buried formation because
the spacing between phase conductors is closer than duct or References
directly buried formation.
[1] CIGRE WG B1.18, “Special Bonding of High Voltage
Power Cables, Oct. 2005
[2] IEEE, “IEEE Guide for the Application of Sheath
7. CONCLUSION
Bonding Methods for Single-conductor Cables and
This paper describes the characteristics of PGCC for Calculation of induced Voltage and Current in Cable
single point bonded underground power cable systems. The Sheaths, ANSI/IEEE Std. 575-19980
optimal PGCC conductor size and installation section are [3] J. W. Kang, C. K. Jung, K. K. Choi, T. I. Jang, H. H.
selected, in addition, the various analysis considering Yoon, “A Study on Transient Analysis by Installation
conductor size, two PGCCs and transposed installation are of Earth Continuity Conductor on Underground Power
also performed. The detailed results are the following; Cable Systems, 2008 ICEE Conference, July 2008
The conductor size of PGCC has been determined by [4] KEPRI, “A Study on the Establishment of Grounding
IEC 60364-5-54, the calculated conductor size is 201.3 ㎟. Technology for the Underground Power Transmission
System, 1998
Accordingly, the conductor size of 240 ㎟ is selected as
[5] KEPCO, “Underground Transmission Cable System”,
optimal conductor size for PGCC.
Dec. 2002
For selection of optimal installation section, 3 kinds of
[6] IEC 60364-5-54, “Electrical installations of buildings –
installation types are proposed in duct as well as trefoil
Part 5-54 : Selection and erection of electrical
arrangement. In duct formation, averagely, each sheath
equipment – Earthing arrangements, protective
voltage reduction rate of Type 1 and Type 2 is 36.1 % and
conductors and protective bonding conductors”, June
34.8 %, respectively, but Type 3 is just 5.07 %. In trefoil
2002
arrangement, the sheath voltage reduction rate of Type 1,
[7] J. B. Lee and C. K. Jung, “Parallel Ground Continuity
Type 2 and Type 2 are 62.1 %, 62.3 % and 4.19 %. Type 1
Conductor in Single Pont Bonded Section, “ICEE 2011
and Type 2 are also similarly reduced, but Type 3 is just
Conference Proceedings, July 2011
slightly reduced. Comparing Type 1 and Type 2, Type 1 is
256 Jong-Beom Lee and Chae-Kyun Jung

Jong-Beom Lee received his B.Sc.,

M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical
Engineering from Hanyang University,
Korea, in 1981, 1983 and 1986,
respectively. He worked at the Korea
Electrotechnology Research Institute
from 1987 to 1990. He was a Visiting
Scholar at Texas A&M University and the Swiss Federal
Institute of Technology (ETH), Switzerland. He is currently
a Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Wonkwang University, Korea. His current research interests
are power systems operation, analysis of power cable
systems and DC system analysis.

Chae-Kyun Jung received his B.Sc.,

M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical
Engineering from Wonkwang Univer-
sity, Korea, in 1999, 2002 and 2006,
respectively. He worked at University
of Siegen as a post-doctor researcher
from 2006 to 2007. He has been
working at the KEPCO Research Institute from 2007 where
he is currently a senior researcher in the Power System
research laborotory. His research interests include power
systems operation, analysis of power cable systems and
fault location.