Performance of Transmission Line Components at Increasing Operating Temperatures

Technical Report

Performance of Transmission Line Components at Increasing Operating Temperatures

1002094

Interim Report, December 2003

EPRI Project Manager A. Edris

EPRI 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA 800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES

THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT. ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT EPRIsolutions, Inc.

ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this report should be directed to EPRI Orders and Conferences, 1355 Willow Way, Suite 278, Concord, CA 94520, (800) 313-3774, press 2 or internally x5379, (925) 609-9169, (925) 609-1310 (fax). Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Copyright 2003 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

CITATIONS
This report was prepared by EPRIsolutions, Inc. 100 Research Drive Haslet, TX 76052 Principal Investigators M. Ostendorp D. Cannon J. Young This report describes research sponsored by EPRI. The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner: Performance of Transmission Line Components at Increasing Operating Temperatures, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2003. 1002094.

iii

REPORT SUMMARY

In todays competitive and regulatory environment, utilities are required to maximize power transfer over existing right-of-ways (ROW). Rather than investing in the expense of upgrading to larger conductors, most utilities are pursuing the lower capital-expense (cost) option of increasing thermal operating limits and pushing more current through existing conductors and associated hardware. As a result, conductors and associated hardware and attachments may be subjected to higher temperatures more frequently and for longer periods. Previous EPRI research investigated how high-temperature operation affects mechanical properties of bare overhead conductors. This past research considered only the behavior of bare conductors. It did not investigate the affect of high-temperature operation on conductor connectors, attachments, and other related hardware. This projects objective is to evaluate the effect of high-temperature conductor operation on the performance of conductor connectors, attachments, and other hardware. The initial work has focused on experimentally determining temperature distribution in the conductor, hardware, and associated components in the attachment areas of the conductor system. To accomplish this, static thermal tests were performed on autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC), aluminum conductor, steel-reinforced (ACSR), and aluminum conductor, steel-supported (ACSS) conductors to establish thermal behavior of components under controlled steady-state conductor operating temperatures. One cyclic thermal test of an ACSR conductor thermally cycled the conductor with attached components between typical nominal and emergency operating temperatures for a large number of cycles, simulating cyclic thermal conditions a conductor might encounter over its life. Results & Findings Components other than compression joints and marker balls appear unlikely to generate temperatures that might lead to excessive degradation of the conductor or the components during high-temperature operations. Marker balls installed on the conductor caused a slight increase on conductor operating temperature in the region of the marker ball. Nearly half of compression joints included in tests of AAC and ACSR conductors exhibited excessive temperatures, increasing over time, as a result of high temperature operations. Compression joints on ACSS/TW (trapezoidal wire) conductors performed admirably, showing no indication of thermal degradation during the course of static testing. However, these static tests were of fairly short duration, and additional cyclic thermal testing of the ACSS/TW conductors should be completed before accepting this conclusion. Forensic testing has not yet been done to determine whether there are any long-term effects on the mechanical and electrical characteristics of the tested conductor and components due to high temperature operation. Additional tests are needed to obtain this data.

Challenges & Objectives The objective of this collaborative effort is to evaluate the effect of high-temperature conductor operation on the performance of conductor connectors, attachments, and other hardware. This initial work is focused on determining temperature distribution in the conductor, hardware, and associated components in the attachment areas of the conductor system. Future efforts will develop thermal models and investigate accelerated agingif anythat results from elevated temperature operation. Applications, Values & Use This project will directly benefit EPRI member utilities by helping them assess the impact of high-temperature operation of their transmission lines. Study results provide the needed thermal data and models for utilities to confidently and safely operate thermally limited circuits at or near the emergency rating of the power line without reducing the expected service life of the circuits components. EPRI Perspective Maximizing the power transfer on existing ROW enables utilities to make best use of their existing facilities. Increased capacity on existing facilities minimizes the need for capital expenditures and new construction, both of which have become increasingly difficult to justify to the public at large, regulators, and investors. Approach In the first phase, the project team completed a selected number of high-temperature tests on conductors and attached hardware. Testing was conducted on commonly used types of 795-kcmil conductor: an AAC Arbutus, an ACSR Drake, and two ACSS/TW conductors designed for hightemperature operation. In each test, the conductor was equipped with an assortment of typical connectors, attachments, and hardware, then tested at varying and increasing operating temperatures to measure the thermal behavior of the conductor and associated components. Maximum operating temperatures tested were 120C for the AAC Arbutus, 150C for the ACSR Drake, and 250C for the ACSS conductors. The team performed one cyclic thermal loading test on an ACSR Drake conductor to simulate the cyclic nature of emergency operations over a conductors life. Future phases (anticipated to be completed in 2003 and 2004) will include cyclic thermal testing of other conductors and forensic tests of conductors and components to document long-term physical effects of high-temperature operation. Keywords Transmission lines High-temperature operation Conductor Components Hardware Thermal behavior

vi

ABSTRACT
In todays competitive and regulatory environment, utilities are required to maximize power transfer over existing right-of-ways (ROW). Most utilities are pursuing the lower capital-expense (cost) option of increasing thermal operating limits and pushing more current through existing conductors and associated hardware, rather than investing in the expense of upgrading to larger conductors. As a result, conductors and the associated hardware and attachments may be subjected to higher temperatures, more frequently and for longer periods than in the past. Previous EPRI research [1] has investigated how high temperature operation affects the mechanical properties of bare overhead conductors. This past research considered only the behavior of bare conductors. It did not investigate the affect of high temperature operation on conductor connectors, attachments, and other related hardware. The objective of this project is to evaluate the effect of high temperature conductor operation on the performance of conductor connectors, attachments, and other hardware. The initial work has focused on experimentally determining the temperature distribution in the conductor, hardware, and associated components in the attachment areas of the conductor system. To accomplish this, static thermal tests were performed on AAC, ACSR, and ACSS conductors to establish thermal behavior of components under controlled steady-state conductor operating temperatures. One cyclic thermal test of an ACSR conductor was performed in which the conductor with attached components was cycled between typical nominal and emergency operating temperatures for a large number of cycles to simulate cyclic thermal conditions a conductor might encounter over its life. Components other than compression joints and marker balls appear unlikely to generate temperatures that might lead to excessive degradation of the conductor or the components during high temperature operations. Marker balls installed on the conductor caused a slight increase on the conductor operating temperature in the region of the marker ball. Nearly half of the compression joints included in the tests of AAC and ACSR conductors exhibited excessive temperatures, increasing over time, as a result of high temperature operations. The compression joints on the ACSS/TW conductors performed admirably, showing no indication of thermal degradation during the course of the static testing. However, these static tests were of fairly short duration and additional cyclic thermal testing of the ACSS/TW conductors should be completed before accepting this conclusion. Forensic testing has not yet been done to determine whether there are any long-term effects on the mechanical and electrical characteristics of the tested conductor and components due to high temperature operation. Additional tests are needed to obtain this data.

vii

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1-1 Background ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 1-1 Project Scope..................................................................................................................... 1-2 Report Overview................................................................................................................. 1-2 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 2-1 IEEE Draft Guide................................................................................................................ 2-1 Qualification Tests of Connectors....................................................................................... 2-2 High Temperature Effects on Connectors........................................................................... 2-2 Alcoa Tests of Connectors for ACSS Conductors............................................................... 2-3 Suspension Clamps ........................................................................................................... 2-4 EPRI Tests on Polymer Insulators...................................................................................... 2-4 Reynolds Aluminum Tests of SSAC and Hardware ............................................................ 2-5 High Temperature Tests of ACSR Conductor Hardware..................................................... 2-6 Ontario Hydro Study........................................................................................................... 2-7 Centerpoint Energy Tests................................................................................................... 2-7 Literature Summary............................................................................................................ 2-7 3 TEST PLAN ......................................................................................................................... 3-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 Test Frame......................................................................................................................... 3-1 Power Supply and Hydraulics............................................................................................. 3-5 Control Electronics and Data Acquisition ............................................................................ 3-7 Thermal Imaging ................................................................................................................ 3-8 Air Curtains ........................................................................................................................ 3-8 Conductors......................................................................................................................... 3-9 Components....................................................................................................................... 3-9

ix

Compression Dead Ends ..............................................................................................3-12 Compression Splices ....................................................................................................3-13 Marker Balls..................................................................................................................3-13 Line Guard....................................................................................................................3-16 AGS Unit.......................................................................................................................3-18 Suspension Shoe..........................................................................................................3-18 Stockbridge Dampers ...................................................................................................3-20 Mechanical Splices .......................................................................................................3-22 Mechanical Strain Clamps (Dead Ends) .......................................................................3-23 Other Considerations.........................................................................................................3-25 Reference Thermocouples............................................................................................3-25 Component Thermal Interaction....................................................................................3-25 Air Curtains...................................................................................................................3-25 Stray Air Currents .........................................................................................................3-26 Thermocouple Placement .............................................................................................3-26 Mast Effects on Airflow .................................................................................................3-26 Magnetic Field Effects...................................................................................................3-26 Ambient Temperature Effects .......................................................................................3-27 Securing Thermocouples ..............................................................................................3-27 Variable Emissivity........................................................................................................3-27 Contamination ..............................................................................................................3-27 Reflections....................................................................................................................3-28 Testing Procedure ........................................................................................................3-28 4 AAC CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS.............................................................. 4-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 4-1 Presentation & Discussion of Results ................................................................................. 4-1 Summary...........................................................................................................................4-12 5 ACSR CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS ........................................................... 5-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 5-1 Presentation & Discussion of Results ................................................................................. 5-1 Evaluation of Test Arrangement ........................................................................................5-14 Summary...........................................................................................................................5-16

6 ACSS/TW SUWANNEE CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS................................ 6-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 6-1 Presentation & Discussion of Results ................................................................................. 6-2 Summary...........................................................................................................................6-13 7 ACSS/TW MERRIMACK CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS .............................. 7-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 7-1 Presentation & Discussion of Results ................................................................................. 7-2 Summary............................................................................................................................ 7-4 8 ACSR CONDUCTOR - CYCLIC THERMAL TEST .............................................................. 8-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 8-1 Test Plan ............................................................................................................................ 8-1 Presentation & Discussion of Results ................................................................................. 8-2 Summary...........................................................................................................................8-15 9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................... 9-1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ 9-1 Summary of Static Thermal Tests....................................................................................... 9-2 Summary of Cyclic Thermal Test........................................................................................ 9-7 Conclusions........................................................................................................................ 9-8 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 9-9 10 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................10-1

xi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1 CAD Rendering of Test Frame Assembly as Viewed from the Southeast .............. 3-2 Figure 3-2 Mast Suspension Point Turnbuckle and Hardware................................................. 3-3 Figure 3-3 East Dead End Turnbuckles and Hardware ........................................................... 3-4 Figure 3-4 West Dead End Load Cell and Hardware............................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-5 DC Power Supply................................................................................................... 3-6 Figure 3-6 Hydraulic Actuator and Load-Cell .......................................................................... 3-7 Figure 3-7 Air Curtain w/Rollers (Detached)............................................................................ 3-8 Figure 3-8 Component Location by Location Number ............................................................3-11 Figure 3-9 Compression Dead End Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement .......................3-12 Figure 3-10 Compression Dead End Measuring Point Location .............................................3-13 Figure 3-11 Compression Splice Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement............................3-14 Figure 3-12 Compression Splice Measuring Point Locations..................................................3-14 Figure 3-13 Marker Ball Cross-Section Thermocouple Placementg .......................................3-15 Figure 3-14 Northern Marker Ball as Installed ........................................................................3-15 Figure 3-15 Line Guard Location Conductor Damage ............................................................3-16 Figure 3-16 Line Guard Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement..........................................3-17 Figure 3-17 Line Guard Measuring Point................................................................................3-17 Figure 3-18 AGS Unit Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement ............................................3-18 Figure 3-19 AGS Unit as Installed ..........................................................................................3-19 Figure 3-20 Suspension Shoe Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement................................3-19 Figure 3-21 Suspension Shoe as Installed .............................................................................3-20 Figure 3-22 Stockbridge Damper Cross-section Thermocouple Placement............................3-21 Figure 3-23 Stockbridge Dampers as Installed.......................................................................3-21 Figure 3-24 Mechanical Splice Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement...............................3-22 Figure 3-25 Mechanical Splice as Installed ............................................................................3-23 Figure 3-26 Mechanical Strain Clamp (Dead End) Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement ......................................................................................................................3-24 Figure 3-27 Mechanical Strain Clamp (Dead End) as Installed ..............................................3-24 Figure 4-1 Thermal Images for South Splice at 50C, 90C, and 120C (top to bottom) w/Wind (right) and without Wind (left) ............................................................................. 4-5 Figure 4-2 AAC North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature.............................. 4-6 Figure 4-3 AAC South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature ............................. 4-6

xiii

Figure 4-4 AAC North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature ..................... 4-7 Figure 4-5 AAC South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature..................... 4-8 Figure 4-6 AAC North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature................. 4-8 Figure 4-7 AAC South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature ................ 4-9 Figure 4-8 AAC North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature................................... 4-9 Figure 4-9 AAC South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature .................................4-10 Figure 4-10 AAC North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature .......................4-10 Figure 4-11 AAC South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature.......................4-11 Figure 4-12 AAC North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature...................4-11 Figure 4-13 AAC South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature ..................4-12 Figure 5-1 Thermal Images for South Splice at 75C, 110C, and 150C (top to bottom) w/Wind (left) and w/o Wind (right).................................................................................... 5-5 Figure 5-2 Thermal Images for South Dead End at 75C, 110C, and 150C (top to bottom) w/Wind (right) and without Wind (left) ................................................................. 5-6 Figure 5-3 ACSR North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature ........................... 5-8 Figure 5-4 ACSR South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature........................... 5-8 Figure 5-5 ACSR North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature................... 5-9 Figure 5-6 ACSR South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature .................. 5-9 Figure 5-7 ACSR North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature .............5-10 Figure 5-8 ACSR South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature.............5-10 Figure 5-9 ACSR North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature ...............................5-11 Figure 5-10 ACSR South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature.............................5-11 Figure 5-11 ACSR North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature.....................5-12 Figure 5-12 ACSR South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature ....................5-12 Figure 5-13 ACSR North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature ................5-13 Figure 5-14 ACSR South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature ...............5-13 Figure 5-15 Distribution of Core Temperatures for Bare Conductor........................................5-15 Figure 5-16 Distribution of Core Temperatures w/Marker Balls ..............................................5-15 Figure 6-1 Photo of Loop with Busbar, Terminal Lug, and Mechanical Strain Clamp............... 6-2 Figure 6-2 Melting Clamp-Type Marker Ball ............................................................................ 6-6 Figure 6-3 Suwannee North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature .................... 6-7 Figure 6-4 Suwannee South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature.................... 6-7 Figure 6-5 Suwannee North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature............ 6-8 Figure 6-6 Suwannee South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature ........... 6-9 Figure 6-7 Suwannee North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature ....... 6-9 Figure 6-8 Suwannee South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature......6-10 Figure 6-9 Suwannee North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature ........................6-10 Figure 6-10 Suwannee South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature......................6-11 Figure 6-11 Suwannee North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature..............6-11

xiv

Figure 6-12 Suwannee South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature .............6-12 Figure 6-13 Suwannee North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature .........6-12 Figure 6-14 Suwannee South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature.........6-13 Figure 7-1 Merrimack North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperatures................... 7-5 Figure 7-2 Merrimack South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperatures .................. 7-5 Figure 7-3 Merrimack North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperatures .......... 7-6 Figure 7-4 Merrimack South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperatures.......... 7-6 Figure 7-5 Merrimack North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures...... 7-7 Figure 7-6 Merrimack South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures ..... 7-7 Figure 7-7 Merrimack North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperatures........................ 7-8 Figure 7-8 Merrimack South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperatures ....................... 7-8 Figure 7-9 Merrimack North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperatures ............... 7-9 Figure 7-10 Merrimack South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperatures............. 7-9 Figure 7-11 Merrimack North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures........7-10 Figure 7-12 Merrimack South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures .......7-10 Figure 8-1 Applied Thermal Loading Cycles............................................................................ 8-2 Figure 8-2 All Temperature Data Collected for First Full Day of Testing.................................. 8-3 Figure 8-3 Temperature Measurements for Compression Splice on North Conductor for First Full Day of Testing................................................................................................... 8-4 Figure 8-4 Temperature Measurements for Compression Splice on South Conductor for First Full Day of Testing................................................................................................... 8-4 Figure 8-5 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Compression Dead End..................... 8-8 Figure 8-6 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Compression Dead End .................... 8-8 Figure 8-7 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Compression Splice........................... 8-9 Figure 8-8 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Compression Splice .......................... 8-9 Figure 8-9 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Marker Ball (Wrap-on Type)..............8-10 Figure 8-10 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Marker Ball (Clamp-on Type) .........8-10 Figure 8-11 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North AGS Unit ........................................8-11 Figure 8-12 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Suspension Shoe...........................8-11 Figure 8-13 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Damper...........................................8-12 Figure 8-14 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Damper ..........................................8-12 Figure 8-15 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Mechanical Strain Clamp................8-13 Figure 8-16 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Mechanical Strain Clamp ...............8-13 Figure 8-17 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Line Guard......................................8-14 Figure 8-18 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Mechanical Splice ..........................8-14

xv

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Tensile Test Results................................................................................................ 2-3 Table 3-1 Components Tested...............................................................................................3-10 Table 4-1 Temperature Measurements for AAC North Conductor ........................................... 4-2 Table 4-2 Temperature Measurements for AAC South Conductor .......................................... 4-2 Table 4-3 AAC North Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperature................ 4-4 Table 4-4 AAC South Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperature ............... 4-4 Table 5-1 ACSR North Conductor Temperatures .................................................................... 5-2 Table 5-2 ACSR South Conductor Temperatures ................................................................... 5-2 Table 5-3 ACSR North Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures ........... 5-4 Table 5-4 ACSR South Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures........... 5-4 Table 6-1 ACSS/TW Suwannee North Conductor Temperatures ............................................ 6-3 Table 6-2 ACSS/TW Suwannee South Conductor Temperatures ........................................... 6-4 Table 6-3 ACSS/TW Suwannee North Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures.................................................................................................................. 6-5 Table 6-4 ACSS/TW Suwannee South Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures.................................................................................................................. 6-5 Table 7-1 ACSS/TW Merrimack North Conductor Temperatures ............................................ 7-2 Table 7-2 ACSS/TW Merrimack South Conductor Temperatures............................................ 7-3 Table 8-1 ACSR North Conductor Cyclic Loading Test Temperatures .................................... 8-5 Table 8-2 ACSR South Conductor Cyclic Loading Test Temperatures.................................... 8-5 Table 8-3 ACSR North Cyclic Loading Temperatures Normalized to Target Maximum Temperature.................................................................................................................... 8-6 Table 8-4 ACSR South Conductor Cyclic Loading Temperatures Normalized to Target Maximum Temperature ................................................................................................... 8-6 Table 9-1 Normalized Temperatures for North AAC and ACSR Conductor without Wind........ 9-3 Table 9-2 Normalized Temperatures for North ACSS/TW Conductors without Wind ............... 9-3 Table 9-3 Normalized Temperatures for South AAC and ACSR Conductors without Wind ..... 9-4 Table 9-4 Normalized Temperatures for South ACSS Conductors without Wind..................... 9-5 Table 9-5 Normalized Temperatures for North AAC and ACSR Conductors with Wind ........... 9-6 Table 9-6 Normalized Temperatures for ACSS Conductors with Wind.................................... 9-6 Table 9-7 Normalized Temperatures for South AAC and ACSR Conductors with Wind .......... 9-7 Table 9-8 Normalized Temperatures for South ACSS Conductors with Wind.......................... 9-8

xvii

1
INTRODUCTION
Background
As a result of deregulation and increased competition, utilities are required to push the envelope and maximize power transfer over existing right-of-ways (ROW). Before investing the expense of upgrading to larger conductors, utilities are pursuing the lower capital-expense (cost) option of increasing thermal operating limits and pushing more current through existing conductors and associated hardware. As a result, conductors and the associated hardware and attachments may be subjected to higher temperatures, more frequently and for longer periods than in the past. Previous EPRI research [1] has investigated how the high temperature operation affects the mechanical properties of bare overhead conductors. This comprehensive research studied the thermal elongation, stress-strain, and creep properties of All Aluminum (AAC) conductor, the Aluminum Conductor Steel Reinforced (ACSR) conductor, and Aluminum Conductor Steel Supported (ACSS) conductor at high temperatures (i.e., temperatures of operation of up to 210C above ambient in the case of the ACSS). This work illustrated that the coefficients of thermal elongation of conductors are significantly higher than published values, which is an important finding in regards to the sag prediction at high operating temperatures. The study also clearly showed that the operating temperature has a significant effect on the stress-strain characteristics of the conductor, also critical to accurate sag prediction. Finally, the work confirmed that high operating temperatures significantly accelerate the rate of creep and accumulated creep in the conductor. This past EPRI research considered only the behavior of bare conductors. It did not investigate the affect of high temperature operation on conductor connectors, attachments, and other related hardware. Several questions still exist surrounding these components: For example, how does the high temperature operation affect the temperature of the conductor in the attachment region? Similarly, how much of the thermal energy from the current flow is transferred into these other components, and how is it dissipated? Also, how does the increased thermal loading from the elevated current level affect the strength of the conductors, connectors, attachments, and other hardware? And finally, does the increased temperature of the conductor at the attachment points lead to accelerated aging of the conductors, connectors, attachments, and other hardware?

Objectives
The objective of this project is to evaluate the effect of high temperature conductor operation on the performance of conductor connectors, attachments, and other hardware. The initial phase of this project is focused on determining the temperature distribution in the conductor, hardware, 1-1

Introduction

and associated components in the attachment areas of the conductor system. Subsequent phases of the project will investigate the development of a suitable thermal model and the accelerated aging resulting from the elevated temperature operation, if any.

Project Scope
Several high temperature tests of conductors and attached hardware were carried out at the EPRI Center in Haslet, Texas. Two types of testing have been completed. The majority of testing has been static testing of conductors with various attached hardware to establish thermal performance of components under controlled steady-state conductor operating temperatures. One additional dynamic test has been performed in which the conductor with attached components was cycled between typical nominal and emergency operating temperatures for a large number of cycles to simulate cyclic thermal conditions a conductor might encounter over its life. Static testing has been conducted on four different conductors: (1) 795-kcmil AAC Arbutus, (2) 795-kcmil ACSR Drake, (3) 959.6-kcmil ACSS/TW Suwannee, and (4) 1433.6-kcmil ACSS/TW Merrimack. In each test, the conductor was equipped with an assortment of typical connectors, attachments, and hardware, and tested at varying increasing operating temperatures to measure the thermal behavior of the conductor and associated components. Maximum operating temperatures tested were 120C for the AAC, 150C for the ACSR, and 250C for the ACSS/TW. To date, dynamic testing has been performed only on the 795-kcmil ACSR Drake conductor. The test setup for this test was the same as for the static testing of the Drake conductor. The conductor was subjected to approximately 320-cycles of loading in which each cycle consisted of 1-hr operation at 50C conductor temperature, followed by an increase in conductor temperature to 125C and a 1-hr hold at that conductor temperature, followed by a reduction of conductor temperature back to 50C. Future phases of the project (anticipated to be completed in 2004) will expand the testing to include other conductor types including other sizes of commonly used AAC, ACSR, and ACSS conductors. In particular, dynamic cyclic thermal loading tests of other conductors are planned. Future work will also begin to look at the effects of high temperature operation on degradation of conductor and component physical properties. The results of these tests will be included in future interim and final reports.

Report Overview
The results of literature review on the subject are presented in Chapter 2 of this report. Chapter 3 describes in detail the test plan and setup used in the experiments. This section describes the development and construction of the frame that was used for the testing; the preparation of the test conductor, attachments, and hardware; and the selection and installation of the test instrumentation and data acquisition system. 1-2

Introduction

Chapter 4 through 8 present test results for the five different conductor tests performed. Chapter 4 contains results from the static thermal test of the AAC Arbutus conductor. Chapter 5 contains results from the static thermal test and the cyclic thermal test of the ACSR Drake conductor. Chapter 6 contains results from the static thermal test of the ACSS/TW Suwannee conductor. Chapter 7 contains results from the static thermal test of the ACSS/TW Merrimack conductor. Chapter 8 presents test results from cyclic thermal load testing of the ACSR Drake conductor. A summary of all the test results is provided in Chapter 9. This section also makes conclusions and recommendations as appropriate.

1-3

2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Prior to the development of the test program and the test frame, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify the current knowledge base and any past research on this subject. A great deal of literature was found regarding effects of high temperature operation on the bare conductor. A much more limited collection of literature was found concerning the high temperature effects of operation on connectors and other hardware.

IEEE Draft Guide

There is an IEEE draft guide [2] concerning the effects of high temperature operation on high voltage conductors, connectors, and accessories. This guide provides a good overview of the current knowledge base and past research on high temperature operations. It also includes an extensive bibliography of papers and reports related to this subject. The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) guide primarily discusses high temperature effects in general terms without providing concrete requirements or limitations. The guide does point out though that the published research on many aspects of this topic is limited. The biggest part of this document discusses temperature effects on the bare conductor, discussing issues such as creep, loss of strength, and sags and tension. The effects of high temperature on creep and sag were covered by EPRI in previous years and are beyond the scope of the current research. The effect of high temperature operation on the strength of the aluminum conductor strands is discussed in the IEEE guide and has been well documented elsewhere. The effects of high temperature on galvanized and aluminum clad steel core wires are summarized in the guide as well. The guide indicates that the zinc coating on galvanized strands does not adhere well at temperatures above 200C and begins to alloy to the steel at temperatures above 300C, which causes the eventual embrittlement of the steel and reduces the protection from corrosion. A smaller portion of the document discusses connectors that mechanically join (i.e., compression and mechanical splices, dead ends, taps, etc) two or more conductors to provide a continuous electrical path. This section of the guide discusses the anticipated connector deterioration and failure processes, evaluating existing connectors and the selection of new connectors for high temperature operation, and finally provides a listing of mitigation measures for weak or failed connectors. The guide highlights a selected number of important considerations regarding high temperature operation of connectors. First, it points out that the heat-cycle test [3] that is used to qualify connector design only requires cyclic thermal loading of the connector to control the conductor a temperature at 100C above ambient temperature, which is at a point well below the temperatures that some conductors are being used at during emergency operation. Second, the guide states that a high number of operations of a conductor connector to temperatures above 93C are likely to degrade the joint interface due to the evaporation or boiling of the injected joint compound used inside the connector. 2-1

Literature Review

The smallest portion of the IEEE guide discusses effects associated with the high temperature operation of conductor hardware, which are defined as non-current carrying devices attached directly to the conductor. In particular, this section discusses the thermal effects of ferrous metallic, non-ferrous metallic, and non-metallic hardware. It points out that ferrous conductor hardware is subject to significant heat gains resulting from hysteresis and eddy current losses. This issue appears to be well known and is generally avoided now through the use of non-ferrous metallic hardware. The guide suggests that the use of non-ferrous metallic hardware does not generate internal heat due to current flow and that this type of hardware typically operates at a cooler temperature than the attached conductor. At the same time, the guide points out that there exists little published information relative to the effects of conductor high temperature operation on elastomeric hardware components, which is generally the limit of non-metallic conductor hardware.

Qualification Tests of Connectors

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI), ANSI C119.4 standard [3] is a performance standard for the use of connectors in transmission line conductors. This standard sets electrical and mechanical test requirements for these connectors and is not intended to be an operational guide recommending field operating conditions or temperatures. However, a major part of the standard is the Current Cycle Test requirement that serves organizations to qualify connector designs by specifying the application of a large number of thermal cycles to the connector to evaluate the integrity and performance of this class of components. The specified maximum temperature of the control conductor for these tests is specified at no more than 100C above ambient temperature for Class A, B, and C connectors and 175C for Class AA connectors. Connector designs have generally not been tested to operating temperatures above these levels. In the near future, the ANSI C119.4 Subcommittee is planning to develop a module on elevated temperature connectors used with ACSS conductors.

High Temperature Effects on Connectors

A recent paper [4] reports on the results of current cycle testing performed on ACSR conductors with the intent to determine the effects of high temperature operation on full-tension joints and conductors. In this effort, eight test loops were prepared using samples of 1/0 ACSR Raven conductor. Each loop included four single piece splices, each separated by a pair of aluminum dead ends acting as equalizers between test samples. Four of these test loops were subjected to current cycle tests reaching a maximum 100 to 105C temperature rise over ambient, as required by ANSI C119.4 for Class C, B, and A connectors. In the first phase of the effort, three of these test loops were subjected to 125, 250, and 500 cycles, respectively, as required by the standard for Class C, B, and A connectors. The fourth loop was cycled to a 100 to 105C temperature rise over ambient for a total of 1000 cycles. The remaining four test loops in the second phase of the project were subjected to current cycle tests as required for Class AA connectors. In this case, each of the four loops was cycled to a 175 to 180C temperature rise over ambient for 125, 250, 500, and 1000 cycles respectively.

2-2

Literature Review

The connectors passed the temperature and resistance stability criteria of the current cycle test for all four loops tested to a maximum temperature rise of 100C above ambient. However, two of the four loops tested to a maximum temperature rise of 175C failed this resistance stability criterion. Connectors tested to 125 and 500 cycles passed this criterion while connectors tested to 250 and 1000 cycles failed. At the conclusion of the current cycle tests the connector and conductor materials were tested mechanically to assess the effects of the high temperature operation on the residual strength of the components. Hardness testing showed that loops tested to 100C above ambient showed a slight reduction in hardness for the connectors and a larger hardness reduction in the conductor. Loops tested to 175C above ambient showed a slightly larger hardness reduction in the connector and a major reduction in hardness for the conductor. In fact, the results showed that the conductor was too soft to establish a hardness value for the loops cycled to 175C for 500 and 1000 cycles. Similarly, tensile testing was performed on each section of the loop, which consisted of two dead end fittings joined together by two lengths of conductor and a single conductor splice located in the middle of each sample. In each case, these sections were loaded to failure by attaching to the dead end fittings. As required for a Class 1 full tension high voltage connector, the connection was considered to pass the requirements of the test if the connection withstood at least 95% of the rated breaking strength of the conductor. Pass and fail results of these tensile tests are summarized in Table 2-1. The results clearly show the negative effect of the prolonged high temperature operation on the strength of connectors.
Table 2-1 Tensile Test Results 100C Results No. Cycles No. Pass 125 250 500 1000 4 4 3 1 No. Fail 0 0 1 3 No. Pass 3 1 1 0 No. Fail 1 3 3 4 175C Results

Alcoa Tests of Connectors for ACSS Conductors

An unpublished reference was obtained documenting the results of a limited number of tests performed on ACSS conductor connectors by Alcoa-Fujikura, Ltd (referred to as Steel Supported Aluminum Conductor (SSAC) at the time of testing) [5]. This reference describes the results of testing performed in the early 1980s. In support of manufacturing and quality assurance, current cycle tests were performed on new 336.4 kcmil (with 26/7 Stranding) and 477 kcmil (with 24/7 2-3

Literature Review

Stranding) ACSS conductors. The tests were performed in accordance with the requirements of the NEMA CC3 guide, except that the target conductor maximum operating temperature was raised to 200C. Otherwise, these tests were conducted using standard conductor accessories and connections. The results of the tests showed that the standard joints did not meet the temperature or resistance requirements of the NEMA guide. In response, Alcoa-Fujikura redesigned the connectors for the ACSS conductor and verified the validity of the new design by passing the 200C current cycle test requirements of the NEMA guide. Based on these results, it would appear that normal connectors designed for ACSR conductors may not be suitable for operation at 200C above ambient, but the results did not indicate or suggest a safe operating limit for standard ACSR connectors.

Suspension Clamps
Several other papers were found that addressed the thermal effects of suspension clamps [6, 7, 8]. However, the issues addressed in each of these papers were really addressing the issues around and the effects of magnetic heating in ferrous clamps. The results reported in each paper show that ferrous clamps exhibit higher operating temperatures than the temperatures recorded for the attached conductor, while non-ferrous clamps were observed to operate at reduced temperatures relative to the attached conductor. Since virtually all hardware attached to power line conductors is now manufactured of non-ferrous metals, the reported effects and consequences have now been largely eliminated and are no longer a concern (with the exception where existing power lines are operated at higher operating temperatures). Some utilities undoubtedly still have old lines in operation that have ferrous hardware attached to the conductor, and the information reported in these papers should be considered carefully before choosing to operate one of these lines at elevated temperatures. These studies show that the temperature of the ferrous clamps can be upwards of 50% higher than the temperature of the supported conductor.

EPRI Tests on Polymer Insulators

A recently completed Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) study [9] reports on the results of high temperature tests of polymer insulators. Tests were performed at three different research laboratories and are documented in the EPRI report. Sumitomo Electric Industries performed high temperature operation tests on a typical conductor suspension assembly using a polymer insulator [10]. In the test, temperatures were measured on the conductor, suspension clamp, shackle, link, insulator pin, and polymer insulator, as well as the ambient temperature. Sumitomo reports that the temperatures of the test components at the maximum conductor operating temperature of 292C (not referenced to ambient temperature) ranged from 163C at the suspension clamp, to 88C at the shackle, to 43C at the link, to 32C at the insulator pin, to 28C at the insulator. The ambient temperature at the time of the test was measured at 17C.

2-4

Literature Review

Tests were also performed at NEETRAC [11] on a typical conductor suspension assembly using a polymer insulator. In these tests temperatures were measured at the insulator end fitting near the fiberglass rod end and near the suspension fitting end, on the suspension fitting conductor keeper, on the suspension fitting body near the conductor groove, and on the conductor itself. The testing included the mechanical loading of the suspension assembly and current cycling of the conductor to a maximum conductor core operating temperature of 250C (not referenced to ambient temperature). Tests were conducted on high voltage polymer suspension insulators of five different manufacturers. The measured insulator end fitting temperature (i.e., nearest the fiberglass rod) ranged from 47o to 61C depending on the type of polymer insulator. The end fitting temperature nearest the conductor was slightly higher, ranging from 54o to 67C. After the thermal testing each insulator was tested mechanically to determine the residual strength. Results showed no measurable degradation of the mechanical performance of the five polymer insulators regardless of the manufacturer. Laboratory tests performed by EPRI [12] are also reported. Again, tests were performed on a typical polymer suspension insulator assembly. In each test, thermocouples were used to measure the conductor temperature, the insulator end fitting temperature, and the ambient temperature. Sufficient current was applied to the conductor to generate a nominal operating temperature of 200C. Tests generated end-fitting temperatures ranging from 38 to 46C at ambient temperatures ranging from 19 to 27C. Finally, tests performed by NEETRAC to determine the thermal and mechanical properties of polymer post insulators are also reported. In this test program, polymer post insulators from five manufacturers were tested. The polymer post insulators were tested mechanically inside a small environmental chamber. Two types of tests were performed. In the more elaborate test (Long Test) each assembly was evaluated in four phases including the measurement of the (1) roomtemperature load-deflection behavior, (2) the elevated temperature creep, (3) the elevated temperature load-deflection, and (4) the short-term load-to-destruction. In the less elaborate test program (Short Test) the test program was streamlined to obtain only the pertinent data in a more economical manner. All of the insulators from three suppliers passed the Long Test at the 55C operating temperature of the test. The pass criterion was based on the premise that the failure load for the insulator met or exceeded the minimum value. All of the insulators from two of the manufacturers passed the Short Test.

Reynolds Aluminum Tests of SSAC and Hardware

Reynolds Aluminum performed current cycle tests of ACSS conductors (referred to as SSAC at the time) and associated fittings [13]. Tests were performed on a loop of 1033.5 kcmil (with a 45/7 Stranding) Ortolan SSAC conductor with various fittings installed. The test setup included two compression dead end fittings, two mechanical dead end fittings, two compression splice fittings (full tension rating), two compression splice fittings (partial tension capacity rating), a suspension assembly with a normal suspension clamp and no armor rods, and a suspension assembly with an Armor Grip Suspension (AGS) unit. In each case, thermocouples were placed at the surface of each piece of hardware and on each bare conductor section between the different hardware pieces.

2-5

Literature Review

The conductor was subjected to about 1600 Amps in the current cycle test to achieve an operating temperature of 200C. After 500 cycles, the current cycling was interrupted and one side of the loop was subjected to seven hours of vibration at room temperature, a frequency of 5 Hertz, and a double-amplitude of 0.25 in. The test loop was then cycled to 200C for eight more cycles and then the same side of the loop was vibrated for another six hours. The loop was then removed from the test rig and ultimate strength tests were performed. Once the testing was completed, each compression fitting was dissected and inspected for deterioration. In all cases, the temperatures measured at the conductor hardware were well below the conductor operating temperatures. At a 200C conductor operating temperature the measured full-tension splice temperatures ranged from 120o to 130C. The operating temperature of the partial-tension splices were observed to be significantly higher ranging from 160 to 170C. On the contrary, the operating temperature at the suspension clamp was 84C and the temperature measured at the first insulator pin was 37C. Operating temperatures at the AGS unit were 102C on the armor rods, 46C on the clamp surface, and 106C beneath the neoprene sleeve. The tensile tests of the side of the loop that was not subjected to vibration resulted in failure at 102% of the conductors rated breaking strength. The initial tensile test of the side of the loop that was subjected to vibration resulted in slippage of the conductor inside the mechanical dead end fitting. It was concluded that the loosening of that connection due to the vibration testing was likely to have caused the slippage. Following this, the fitting was retightened and the test was repeated. Failure occurred at 103% of the conductors rated breaking strength.

High Temperature Tests of ACSR Conductor Hardware

Detroit Edison conducted tests of ACSR conductors and hardware to determine if power line hardware could be safely operated at temperatures of up to 200C [14]. Tests were conducted over a temperature range from 75C to 200C. Hardware tested included aluminum body bolttype strain clamps, aluminum body suspension clamps, armor rods, parallel groove clamps, line dampers, and full-tension splices. Hardware was tested with 477 kcmil ACSR Hawk, 795 kcmil ACSR Drake, 954 kcmil ACSR Cardinal, and 1431 kcmil ACSR Bobolink conductors. In each case, the conductors were tensioned to 4000 lbs and thermocouples were used at each component to measure temperature. Each conductor was then subjected to current to adjust the operating temperature to the target value. Data was collected at several temperatures ranging from 75 and 200C. Based on the information provided it does not appear that any current cycling was performed. Test results indicate the presence of a nearly linear relationship between the conductor and the hardware temperature. For the strain clamp, suspension clamp and armor rods, the document provides a linear equation for each conductor size that can be used to predict the conductor and hardware temperature. For the remaining hardware, the report provides linear relationships only in a graphical form. In general these relationships seem to show that the relative percent difference between the conductor temperature and the hardware temperature tends to get smaller as the size of the conductor is increased. The aluminum strain clamp temperature ranged from 35 to 61% of the conductor operating temperature for the four conductors tested. The aluminum suspension clamp 2-6

Literature Review

temperature ranged from 29 to 43% of the conductor temperature. On the contrary, the armor rod temperatures were higher at 68 to 80% of the conductors temperature. The conductor splices also operated below the conductor operating temperature in these tests, although exact percentage differences are not provided in the paper. Tensile tests of two conductor assemblies were performed to determine the residual strength. The first tensile test was conducted while maintaining the conductor temperature at a nominal 200C. This tensile test of the heated 477 kcmil ACSR Hawk conductor resulted in a tensile failure in the bare conductor at about 92% of the ultimate strength of a control sample that was tested at ambient temperature. The 795 kcmil ACSR Drake conductor was loaded to 400C and held at that temperature for six hours before conducting the tensile test. That conductor failed at approximately 42% of the ultimate failure load of a non-heated sample.

Ontario Hydro Study

Ontario Hydro conducted a study in the 1970s on the effects of high temperature operations on conductor and hardware behavior [15]. This report is not available in the public domain, so limited information about the test arrangement and results is available. The study included extensive measurements of temperatures for conductors, conductor joints (splices and deadends), and ferrous and aluminum suspension clamps. Average test temperatures for ACSR conductors were as high as 250C. The report concluded that: (1) fully cleaned and properly installed compression fittings run substantially cooler than the conductor, (2) within the limiting temperature of 220C the accessories should not show any detrimental effects, (3) ferrous hardware components run hotter than the conductor, and (4) non-ferrous hardware components run much cooler than the conductor.

Centerpoint Energy Tests

EPRIsolutions conducted high temperature testing of 959.6-kcmil ACSS/TW Suwannee conductor for Centerpoint Engergy (formerly Reliant Energy HL&P) in 2000 [16]. In addition to determining the thermo-mechanical properties of coefficient of thermal expansion, cooling rate, and bird-caging temperature, these tests evaluated the thermal gradient at several pieces of hardware under conductor operating temperatures of 180C and 200C. Components tested included suspension shoes, armor grip suspension units, and spacers. Temperature measurements were made at a limited number of locations, so measurements comparable to those made in the current EPRI study are not generally available. However, the measured hardware temperatures did not reach the temperature level of the bare conductor in any case tested.

Literature Summary
In summary, while it appears that there is not a great deal of literature on the subject of high temperature performance of conductor hardware at high temperatures, there is some that is relevant to our topic. However, the review clearly showed some inconsistency in the reported results. Some of the results indicate that compression connectors on ACSR conductors are subject to resistance instability and thermal runaway when operated at high temperatures. Other results 2-7

Literature Review

appear to indicate that no such problem exists for ACSS conductors, but its not clear whether specially designed connectors were used for those tests. Also, all of the published results regarding connector performance under high temperature operation is for normal round-wire ACSR and ACSS conductors. Currently, there is no published data for ACSR/TW or ACSS/TW trapezoidal stranded conductors. Results for other components consistently indicate that the components operate at temperatures below the conductor temperatures. However, under high temperature operations this can still be a relatively high temperature. And there are several types of line hardware that have not been included in the reported test results including bundle spacers, line guards, mechanical repair sleeves, and aerial marker balls. Information about any long-term effects of operating conductor hardware at higher temperatures has been difficult to locate. A few studies of ACSR and ACSS connectors provide indications of the effect on the residual strength. However, data concerning the effect of high temperature operation on the residual strength of other components in general and on connectors for other types of conductors (e.g. ACSR/TW) is not readily available. The literature search on this topic is ongoing and will be expanded in future interim and final reports as more information becomes available. References to a few documents have been found for which we have as yet been unable to obtain a copy of the document. Each of these references is likely to provide additional important background information to this project. Therefore, attempts to locate the remaining research documents and any other pertinent references for inclusion in future reports will continue.

2-8

3
TEST PLAN
Overview
The objectives of these tests are to evaluate the high temperature performance of several common conductor sizes and associated line hardware in a simulated line configuration. To accomplish this objective it was necessary to design and build a test frame to support the test article and allow proper control of mechanical and thermal loading of the sample. An appropriate data acquisition system along with necessary thermal measurement instrumentation was also required. This chapter describes the resulting test arrangement and the organization of the testing.

Test Frame
A test frame was constructed and assembled using standard Engineering and Test Center fixtures and components. The total length of frame can be used to accommodate conductor samples of up to twenty-five meters as a single length of conductor, or as used in this case as a double loop of conductor reaching a length of up to fifty meters. Additionally, the test frame was designed to accommodate a vertical displacement of up to two meters to simulate the geometry of suspension points of conductor spans, with exit angles between 0 and 7. The test frame was designed to simulate the tensions and hardware geometries associated with three specific weight spans (i.e., approximately150, 300, and 450 meters in Length) and three corresponding average tensions (10%, 20%, and 30% of Rated Breaking Strength), respectively, depending on the type of conductor and span configuration to be tested. The frames runners are constructed of W10X77 steel I-beams (drawn in red in Figure 3-1) and the upright mast and horizontal, transverse bracings are W18X60 steel I-beams (drawn in blue). The mast is stabilized by knee braces constructed of two-and-one-quarter inch steel standard pipe sections. The test frame is secured to the floor via three-and-one-half inch steel standard pipe legs bolted to the bottom of each of the frames runners. A 2-inch turnbuckle is used at the top of the mast to provide a continuous adjustment to the vertical displacement of the suspension point. At the same time an eighteen inch long spreader bar of the same type is used for bundling the conductors in the test spans in order to create the conductor loop. In each test, the conductor is strung and electrically isolated using porcelain insulator strings of varying lengths (seven for each string shown in Figure 3-2). Each porcelain insulator string uses standard 8-inch diameter cap and pin insulator bells but the number of bells can be varied depending on the desired height. 3-1

Test Plan

Figure 3-1 CAD Rendering of Test Frame Assembly as Viewed from the Southeast

3-2

Test Plan

Figure 3-2 Mast Suspension Point Turnbuckle and Hardware

3-3

Test Plan

The east compression dead ends are secured to the test frame via three-quarter inches diameter turnbuckles and standard lugs. These turnbuckles are electrically isolated via two strings of eight inch porcelain insulator bells. Electrical connections to the high current DC power supply are made on the east end as displayed in Figure 3-3.

Figure 3-3 East Dead End Turnbuckles and Hardware

3-4

Test Plan

The west mechanical dead ends are attached to a load cell on the end of a hydraulic actuator via a spreader and kept electrically isolated using insulator strings of two, 8-inch porcelain bells. The loop of conductor is allowed a large radius to prevent kinks and is routed out of the working space and kept from contacting the grounded frame. Tension in the conductor is applied via hydraulic actuator on the west end of the test frame as shown in Figure 3-4.

Figure 3-4 West Dead End Load Cell and Hardware

Power Supply and Hydraulics

DC power is supplied for resistance heating by a 2000-Amp (maximum.) current source as seen in Figure 3-5. A secondary 2000-Amp current source is available to provide a maximum DC test current of 4000 Amps. The current source is directly connected to the test sample via four, 4/0 copper leads. Each 4/0 copper lead is connected directly to the compression dead end using NEMA 4-hole pad connectors. A twelve inch stroke, 60-kip hydraulic actuator is used to apply tension to the conductor in accordance with the specified test value. The hydraulic actuator is powered by a Materials Testing System (MTS) servo-valve and supplied by MTS hydraulic pumps as shown in Figure 3-6. Also shown is the 18-inch wide standard termination plate used to maintain a sufficient 3-5

Test Plan

conductor spacing throughout the test span. Thermocouple data cables (yellow) transmit temperature measurements provided by each thermocouple to the Centers high speed data acquisition system.

Figure 3-5 DC Power Supply

3-6

Test Plan

Figure 3-6 Hydraulic Actuator and Load-Cell

Control Electronics and Data Acquisition

An MTS TestStar IIm control system is used to control the tension of the simulation and also to provide supervisory control of the temperature. Feedback for the control loops is provided by a 110-kip load-cell and a type K reference thermocouple located on the core of the conductor at a sufficient distance away from any of the test components. Additionally, an MTS 409 is used to control the temperature and the output of the DC power supply in accordance with the selected set points and the test schedule provided by the TestStar IIm. Sixty-four channels of thermocouple data acquisition are provided by a National Instruments SCXI DAQ module and twin TC-2095 signal conditioners. The data acquisition system utilizes stainless steel jacketed, ungrounded, type K thermocouples and shielded data extension wire to minimize noise. Readings are taken one hundred times a second and averaged over a user selected time period. The pre-test verification indicates that the measured temperatures are 3-7

Test Plan

accurate to within 0.1C with a confidence of plus or minus three standard deviations. Upon averaging, the temperature is recorded and stored as electronic media on the computers hard drive. Data is saved in the format of columnar, tab-delimited text files together with time/date stamps. The file is automatically saved and backed up every 5 minutes or any other user selected time period. The DAQ system is software-controlled by National Instruments LabView.

Thermal Imaging
A FLIR Systems Agema 595 ThermaCAM infrared imaging camera is used to record thermal images of each component at various temperatures and controlled conditions. The FLIR Agema 595 ThermaCAM Explorer software is used to analyze and record the images in a nonproprietary format for use in reporting.

Air Curtains
Forty-eight inch long air curtains are used to generate a laminar wind (shown in Figure 3-7). The velocity of this simulated breeze can be tuned to two or four feet per second (i.e., approximately 1.2 to 2.4 meters per second) by blocking the input ducts with magnetic sheets and/or redirecting the flow at the output louvers. The air curtains are mounted on the underside of a fiberglass beam that has been equipped with rollers to allow relocation anywhere along the test setup.

Figure 3-7 Air Curtain w/Rollers (Detached)

3-8

Test Plan

Conductors
Four different conductors were selected for testing. They were selected based on size, type, and industry application. Future testing may include other conductors not yet tested. The first conductor tested was the 795-kcmil AAC Arbutus. This is a 37-strand all-aluminum conductor with an outside diameter of 1.026-inches. Its rated breaking strength is 13,900-lbs. The second conductor tested was the 795-kcmil ACSR Drake. This is a 26/7 stranded aluminum conductor, steel reinforced with an outside diameter of 1.108-inches. Its rated breaking strength is 31,500-lbs. This is one of the more commonly used conductor sizes and could be considered the baseline for selection of the other conductors tested. The third conductor tested was the 959.6-kcmil ACSS/TW Suwannee conductor. This is a 22/7 stranded aluminum, steel-supported conductor with trapezoidal aluminum strands. This particular conductor has an outside diameter of 1.108-inches and is designed as a replacement for the ACSR Drake while using the same size hardware. The conductors rated breaking strength is 30,700-lbs. This conductor was selected for testing because of its size similarity with the ACSR Drake and because of some previous test experience and available test data from Centerpoint Energy. The fourth conductor tested was the 1433.6 ACSS/TW Merrimack conductor. This is a 39/19 stranded aluminum, steel-supported conductor with trapezoidal aluminum strands. This conductor has an outside diameter of 1.34-inches and a rated breaking strength of 38,400-lbs. Whereas the ACSR Drake and ACSS/TW Suwannee conductors have only two layers of aluminum surrounding the steel core, the ACSS/TW Merrimack conductor has three layers of aluminum. It also has 19-strand steel core that is 0.489-inches in diameter, while the Drake and Suwannee conductors have 7-strand steel cores that are 0.408-inches and 0.4479-inches in diameter, respectively. This conductor was selected for testing because of the additional layer of aluminum and Centerpoint Energys willingness to donate the conductor and all necessary hardware for the testing.

Components
The selection of the components for the test program was based on the frequency of use by utilities and by the availability of that component for the size of conductor being tested. The types of components tested were also selected because of the need for research for that type of component and in some cases, the particular needs of individual utilities were considered. There was some variation in the components tested according to the conductor size and ready availability of components for that conductor. The components were placed in specific locations along the loop of conductor and in relation to the frame to most closely simulate actual span conditions. The frame is oriented with the conductor running east and west. Therefore, the two lengths of conductor are referred to as the North and South conductors. Components attached to the conductors are identified according to the conductor and their relative position east to west on the conductor. 3-9

Test Plan

Typical components and locations are graphically depicted in Figure 3-8. The locations are spaced to provide physical clearance and to minimize thermal interaction. A certain amount of built-in redundancy and experimental control has been attained by including two or more of identical components, wherever practical. The typical component selection is outlined in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1 Components Tested Typical Number Tested 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 Typical Number of Thermocouples 4 4 3 5 3 3 4 3 4 4

Component Compression Dead End Compression Splice Line Guard AGS Unit Stockbridge Dampers Marker Balls Mechanical Strain Clamp Mechanical Splice Suspension Shoe Repair sleeve Triple-bundle spacerdamper Twin-bundle spacerdamper Terminal lug w/NEMA pad Busbar

Comments

Applicable Conductors

Minor Repair Armor Grip Suspension Bolt On, Wire Wrap Bolt On Major Repair w/Armor rods Major Repair

Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Arbutus & Drake Arbutus, Drake, Suwannee, & Merrimack Suwannee & Merrimack

w/Line Guard

Suwannee

w/Line Guard

Merrimack

1 1

4 1

Suwannee & Merrimack Suwannee & Merrimack

3-10

Test Plan

Figure 3-8 Component Location by Location Number

3-11

Test Plan

Thermocouples are placed in the same location on the component at each location number. However, thermocouple placement may vary from conductor to conductor due to differences in the geometry of the hardware. The location of the reference thermocouple is always on the conductor core approximately one foot away from the end of any component with one exception. In the case of the suspension point hardware and the dampers, the reference thermocouple is located between the ends of the armor rods and the clamp of the damper. Both, the suspension point components and the dampers share this reference for the northern and southern locations. For thermocouple placement the conductor core is defined either as the outer surface of the steel core for steel-reinforced steel-supported conductors and as the outer surface of the first multistrand layer in all-aluminum conductors. Compression Dead Ends The circuits conductor loops are terminated electrically and mechanically on the east end of the frame by compression dead end fittings and are located in line with the electrical insulation. These compression fittings were instrumented with four thermocouples, one on the conductor core, one on the surface of the outside conductor layer, one on the surface of the compression dead end fitting, and one as a reference on the core of the conductor a short distance from the dead end fitting. Figure 3-9 illustrates the locations thermocouple locations were placed within the cross-section of the dead end fittings at the measurement location. This measuring point was located approximately half way along the crimped portion of the fitting as illustrated in Figure 3-10.

Figure 3-9 Compression Dead End Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

3-12

Test Plan

Figure 3-10 Compression Dead End Measuring Point Location

For the ACSS tests compression dead ends were also installed at the west end of each conductor and a busbar and compression terminal lug with NEMA pad were installed in the loop at the west end of the conductors. These compression fittings were instrumented in the same was as illustrated here for the compression dead ends on the east end of the conductors. Compression Splices Compression splices were installed mid-span by cutting the conductor completely through and installing as per manufacturers guidelines. For each test two splices were installed, one on the North conductor and the other adjacent to it on the South conductor. Each splice was then instrumented with four thermocouples, one on the conductor core, one on the surface of the outside conductor layer, one on the surface of the compression splice fitting, and one as a reference on the core of the conductor a short distance from the splice. Figure 3-11 illustrates the placement of the thermocouples in the cross-section of the splices. The thermocouple measurement points are located approximately half way along the crimped portion of the fitting, one to left of center and one to right as illustrated in Figure 3-12. Marker Balls Marker Balls were installed at mid-span using a bolt-on type on the west end of the North conductor and a wire-wrap type on the east end of the South conductor. Both items were installed as per manufacturers guidelines on each conductor tested. At each marker ball location three thermocouples were installed, one on the conductor core inside the marker ball, one on the conductor surface inside the marker ball, and one reference thermocouple on the conductor core a short distance from the marker ball. Figure 3-13 illustrates where thermocouples were placed 3-13

Test Plan

on the conductor cross-section within the marker balls. The points of installation are located approximately half way along the length of the conductor enclosed within the marker ball. Figure 3-14 shows an installed marker ball with thermocouples installed.

Figure 3-11 Compression Splice Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

Figure 3-12 Compression Splice Measuring Point Locations

3-14

Test Plan

Figure 3-13 Marker Ball Cross-Section Thermocouple Placementg

Figure 3-14 Northern Marker Ball as Installed

3-15

Test Plan

Line Guard A line guard was installed on the east end of the North conductor between the compression splice and the suspension point for most tests. The exception was the ACSS tests in which the line guard and compression splice locations were swapped. The line guard was installed in accordance with the specifications provided by the manufacturer. Prior to installing the line guard, 10% of the outer conductor strands were intentionally cut at that location to simulate the use of a line guard for a repair as shown in Figure 3-15. Three thermocouples were installed for the line guard, one on the conductor core, one on the conductor surface, and one reference thermocouple on the conductor core a short distance from the line guard. Figure 3-16 illustrates the locations where thermocouples were placed within the conductor cross-section at the line guard. This measuring point is located approximately half way along the length of the conductor enclosed within the line guard at the point of damage. Figure 3-17 shows an installed line guard with installed thermocouples.

Figure 3-15 Line Guard Location Conductor Damage

3-16

Test Plan

Figure 3-16 Line Guard Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

Figure 3-17 Line Guard Measuring Point

3-17

Test Plan

AGS Unit An Armor Grip Suspension (AGS) unit was installed at the suspension point and hung from the mast section as the support for the North conductor in each test. Five thermocouples were installed for the AGS unit, one on the conductor core, one on the conductor surface, one at the armor rod surface, one on the AGS housing surface, and one reference thermocouple on the conductor core a short distance from the AGS unit. Figure 3-18 illustrate where thermocouples were placed within the cross-section of the AGS unit. The thermocouples were located approximately half-way along the length of the conductor enclosed within the urethane bushing of the AGS unit. Figure 3-19 shows an installed AGS unit with thermocouples installed. Suspension Shoe A suspension shoe with armor rods was installed at the suspension point and hung from the mast section to support the South conductor for each test. Four thermocouples were installed for the suspension shoe, one on the conductor core, one on the conductor surface, one on the suspension clamp surface, and one reference thermocouple on the conductor core a short distance from the AGS unit. Figure 3-20 illustrate where thermocouples were placed within the cross-section of the suspension shoe connection. The thermocouples were located approximately half-way along the length of the conductor enclosed within the saddle of the shoe. Figure 3-21 shows an installed suspension shoe with thermocouples installed.

Figure 3-18 AGS Unit Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

3-18

Test Plan

Figure 3-19 AGS Unit as Installed

Figure 3-20 Suspension Shoe Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

3-19

Test Plan

Figure 3-21 Suspension Shoe as Installed

Stockbridge Dampers Stockbridge dampers were installed in close proximity to the ends of the armor rods on the west side of the suspension points on both the North and South conductors. Three or four thermocouples were installed for the dampers, one on the conductor core, one on the clamp surface, one reference thermocouple on the conductor core a short distance from the damper, and in some cases one on the conductor surface. Figure 3-22 illustrates where thermocouples were placed within the cross-section of the suspension shoe connection. The thermocouples were located approximately half-way along the length of the conductor enclosed within dampers clamp. Figure 3-23 shows an installed damper with thermocouples installed.

3-20

Test Plan

Figure 3-22 Stockbridge Damper Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

Figure 3-23 Stockbridge Dampers as Installed

3-21

Test Plan

Mechanical Splices A mechanical splice from Preformed Line Products was installed at mid-span on the west end of the South conductor for tests of the AAC and ACSR conductors. A significant number of conductor strands were cut prior to installing the mechanical splice on the conductor to simulate a major conductor repair. Three thermocouples were installed for the mechanical splice, one on the conductor core, one on the conductor surface, and one reference thermocouple on the conductor core a short distance from the mechanical splice. Figure 3-24 illustrates where thermocouples were placed within the cross-section of the mechanical splice. The thermocouples were located approximately half-way along the length of the mechanical splice near the point of conductor damage. For the ACSS tests the mechanical splice from Preformed Line Products was replaced with a compression repair sleeve supplied by Centerpoint Energy for those tests. This repair sleeve was instruments in that same way as the compression splices discussed previously and illustrated in Figures 3-11 and 3-12.

Figure 3-24 Mechanical Splice Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

3-22

Test Plan

Figure 3-25 Mechanical Splice as Installed

Mechanical Strain Clamps (Dead Ends) The circuits conductor loops are terminated mechanically on the west side of the frame by mechanical dead end fittings for tests with of the AAC and ACSR conductors. For the ACSS conductors these strain clamps were replaced with compression dead ends and a strain clamp was installed in the conductor loop under no tension. Four thermocouples were installed for the mechanical strain clamps, one on the conductor core, one on the conductor surface, one on the strain clamp surface, and one reference thermocouple on the conductor core a short distance from the strain clamp. Figure 3-26 illustrates where thermocouples were placed within the crosssection of the strain clamp connection. Figure 3-27 shows an installed mechanical strain clamp with thermocouples installed.

3-23

Test Plan

Figure 3-26 Mechanical Strain Clamp (Dead End) Cross-Section Thermocouple Placement

Figure 3-27 Mechanical Strain Clamp (Dead End) as Installed

3-24

Test Plan

Other Considerations
Reference Thermocouples Because the system is a single circuit, a single control thermocouple controls the amount of current needed to heat the entire length of conductor. This control thermocouple is on the conductor core between the compression dead end and the compression splice on the east end of the South conductor for the AAC and ACSR tests. For the ACSS tests the positions of the compression splice and marker ball on the South conductor were swapped, so the control thermocouple is between the compression dead end and the marker ball for those tests. The control thermocouple was placed at this point to minimize the distance from the power supply on the east end. Because of the non-linear and reactive nature of the thermal disposition of the components, for each nominal temperature test case (50C, 75C, etc.) each of the components may actually be at a different temperature at dynamic equilibrium thus manifesting the need to place an individual reference thermocouple at each component location. For AAC and ACSR tests these reference thermocouples were placed fairly close to the component being referenced. For the ACSS tests these reference thermocouples were moved approximately to the mid-span between components. Component Thermal Interaction There was some concern that the components interacted with each other well beyond the scope of simple thermal conduction along the conductor. Current remains constant at all points in a single circuit, however temperature is not necessarily constant at all points. It varies with the mass of the attached components and the components ability to dissipate heat via radiation, conduction, and convection. The characteristics of each component are based on geometry and position within the span. Additionally the heat content and heat capacity of the components should be varied. Resistance heating is dependent only on two factors: the current and resistance. While the current is held constant (static testing), the resistance of the span is a function of the temperature as well as the cross-sectional area of the conducting medium and the resistance characteristics of all of the attached components. These complex conditions affect the interaction of the thermal behavior of the reactive system. Air Curtains Due to pragmatic budget limitations, only three 48-inch air curtains were used to study the effects of wind instead of providing the facilities to expose the complete span to the air flow. The three air curtains were sized sufficiently to cover even the largest components within the conductor test span. However due to the interactive nature of the system of components and due to the single reference point for control of temperature, some issues arose when different areas were cooled because of the interaction with cooled or non-cooled components. More specifically, different temperature profiles would be found if measuring a single component with constant 3-25

Test Plan

wind applied. The shake out of the test frame revealed that this was dependent upon the location of the other air curtains despite the fact that a constant temperature was maintained at the reference electrode. The analysis showed that this was the result of the interaction among the components along the length of the single circuit. Because of these issues a test protocol was developed and followed that specifically addressed the placement of the air curtains along the length of the test span for each of the components. Therefore almost all tests that included the effects of wind are performed consistently by having the air curtains located in the exact same manner for each of the components. The only variation is that for the testing of the ACSS conductors near the end of the project, additional air curtains were obtained to speed up the testing process. Stray Air Currents All testing was performed indoors. The facility used for the testing provides an enclosed albeit non-temperature controlled environment. In order to minimize the chance of stray air currents, all exterior doors were closed throughout each test, all air-circulating fans and blowers shut off, and the actual work near the test frame was kept to a minimum. Thermocouple Placement The size and characteristics of the components vary somewhat from one conductor to the other because of differences in the size and construction. Components for different conductors are not identical; therefore the thermocouple placement will be varied somewhat from one set to another. Some temperature variations shown in the test results may be due to slight differences in thermocouple placement between different components and different tests. Mast Effects on Airflow Because the air curtains were designed to apply uniform airflow normal to the conductor, the mast structure interfered with the airflow provided at the conductor suspension point. Therefore, a regular shop fan was used to direct air into this area and the magnitude was tuned using a hand held anemometer by moving the fan relative to frame. Nevertheless, the geometry of the mast and the lack of consistency in the airflow profile of the shop fan made it difficult to control this part of the test. Similarly, for the tests of the ACSS conductors the mechanical strain clamp was placed in the conductor loop on the west end of the test frame. This location was also not covered by the air curtains, requiring the use of the regular shop fan to simulate wind on this component. Magnetic Field Effects The intense magnetic field around the energized conductor affected the thermal imaging camera (note the vertical lines in some of the images of the suspension points and the mechanical dead ends). The presence of this field occasionally distorted the infrared image but did not negatively 3-26

Test Plan

affect the overall temperature readings. Also, the hand-held anemometer was rendered useless when the circuit was energized due to the effect of the magnetic field. Therefore, the airflow was tuned prior to the energization of the circuit. Results showed that the control of the temperature was most easily accomplished when the airflow was initiated. Thus the circuit was brought to temperature, the current was turned off, and the airflow tuned. Following this, the current was turned on and the circuit was then allowed to come to a thermal equilibrium. This process was followed for the evaluation of each component. Ambient Temperature Effects While the ambient temperature was not controlled, ambient conditions were recorded throughout each test. Variations in ambient conditions may have an effect on the thermal profiles measured in the tests. However, this effect is thought to be small at the higher emergency operating temperatures. Securing Thermocouples At times, because of the thermal expansion and contraction of the conductor, test span, and components, and the movement caused by the changes in the magnetic fields, thermocouples became loose and had to be secured more efficiently. In each case in which this was identified, the tests were repeated to obtain a complete and accurate set of test data. It is possible that smaller movements in thermocouples went undetected. This could cause some minor variations and inaccuracies in measured temperatures. Variable Emissivity Accurate thermal imaging is dependent on several parameters including emissivity of the target object for with the temperature is being measured. Emissivity is a function of temperature as well as a characteristic of the surface condition of the target object. Depending on the emissivity of the target, the resulting temperature reading can vary greatly. Therefore, it is critical that the effective emissivity of the target is considered in the interpretation of any of the infrared images and thermal signatures. Contamination Some of the packing materials on the components (plastic shrink wrap and others), Teflon tape residue, silicone adhesive, marking dyes, and grease from the compression fittings affected the effective emissivity of some locations on various test components. While every effort was made to avoid contamination and to clean each component following the installation in the test span, this contamination must be considered in the interpretation of the infrared imagery because they may appear to constitute apparent thermal anomalies.

3-27

Test Plan

Reflections Reflections from skylights and sodium vapor lamps above the conductor and components are occasionally apparent in the thermal images, especially at lower temperatures or in the with wind test cases. It is imperative to consider these reflections in the interpretation of the infrared imagery because they may be interpreted as apparent temperature rises. Testing Procedure For each conductor sample and at each target temperature, the current in the conductor was increased slowly to increase the temperature gradually to the target value. At the conductor target temperature, the conductor and all components were allowed to stabilize and achieve a thermal equilibrium. At this time, the thermal characteristics of each component were recorded using infrared thermography while continuing to monitor the thermocouple measurements of the overall test span. Corresponding thermal images and thermocouple readings are synchronized using a date and time stamp.

3-28

4
AAC CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS
Overview
The AAC Arbutus conductor was tested in a static thermal loading mode. This means that current was applied as necessary to achieve a target temperature for the duration of testing at that target temperature. For this conductor the target temperatures tested were 50C, 75C, 90C, 105C, and 120C. These temperatures were selected as a range between a normal operating temperature of 50C and an emergency operating temperature of 120C. Tests were conducted at these temperatures with no wind and at then repeated for the same current with a 4-ft/sec (~2.7-mph) simulated wind. At each target temperature, thermocouple data was recorded and thermal images were obtained for each conductor component included in the test. For all components there was a reference thermocouple placed within 6 to 10-inches of the component; a thermocouple placed at the conductor core, defined as the interface between the first and second layers of aluminum; and a thermocouple placed on the surface of the outside conductor layer. Where appropriate an additional thermocouple was typically placed on the surface of the attached component as well.

Presentation & Discussion of Results

Table 4-1 provides a summary of temperature measurements for these tests on the North conductor. Scanning these measurements, it appears that virtually every thermocouple is indicating a temperature at or below the target temperature for the test. With the exception of the AGS Unit, the resulting temperatures for the with wind case tend to be roughly 30% less than temperatures for the no wind case. There appears to be little if any cooling effect on the AGS unit, which can probably be attributed to the difficulty with applying the simulated wind effectively at the tower attachment point in our test setup. Table 4-2 provides a summary of temperature measurements for the South conductor. Scanning these measurements, all thermocouples other than those associated with the compression splice and the marker ball indicate a temperature below the target temperature for the test. Accepting that the wind flow may not be fully effective at the suspension shoe, if we ignore the cooling effect of the wind on that component, the resulting temperatures for the with wind case tend to be between 20 and 25% less than the temperatures for the no wind case. This cooling effect is probably slightly lower for the South conductor because this conductor was on the leeward side of the North conductor wind flow. Therefore, there was some shielding of the conductor from the air flow and the conductor was further from the source allowing for greater dissipation and lower cooling impact. 4-1

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests Table 4-1 Temperature Measurements for AAC North Conductor

Component Measurement Location Ambient Ambient East Compression DE Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Compression Splice Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Line Guard Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface AGS Unit Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Damper Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Marker Ball Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Strain Clamp Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

105 C 120 C 120 C 50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 105 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 26.9 34.1 31.2 34.6 27.5 33.9 29.8 34.5 29.3 33 45.3 38.7 63.4 43.5 75.4 45.8 84.4 51.7 94.7 65.5 40.9 38.0 55.6 42.1 64.1 44.1 72.4 48.9 79.2 58.0 40.7 37.8 55.3 41.9 63.7 43.7 72.0 48.5 78.6 57.4 39.7 37.3 53.4 40.6 60.6 42.1 68.5 45.9 73.9 54.0 46.9 37.9 69.2 41.7 80.9 44.7 86.9 45.0 92.4 43.5 46.4 38.7 68.8 42.8 80.3 45.5 93.1 49.7 109.2 51.3 46.1 38.9 68.4 43.2 79.6 45.9 92.2 50.3 107.8 51.5 43.7 38.3 63.8 42.0 72.6 44.3 83.5 47.8 96.4 47.9 50.7 45.3 73.1 58.9 86.9 66.0 98.2 79.4 112.0 96.5 50.0 40.6 70.5 46.0 83.1 47.7 95.8 55.9 109.2 56.8 48.9 40.1 68.1 45.0 79.3 46.4 90.8 53.5 103.3 54.5 43.0 40.7 57.6 44.8 65.1 50.7 80.7 46.8 86.3 77.5 38.8 44.1 54.2 55.9 60.7 57.1 71.4 77.9 77.3 81.2 38.0 43.5 53.1 54.7 58.9 55.2 69.8 76.1 75.3 78.8 33.6 40.1 45.7 46.7 45.6 46.2 55.2 59.3 57.0 59.4 31.4 38.5 42.6 43.5 40.4 43.6 49.3 53.0 50.5 52.7 43.0 40.7 57.6 44.8 65.1 50.7 80.7 46.8 86.3 77.5 44.1 40.5 61.6 44.8 72.9 51.0 82.0 50.6 87.2 78.8 43.7 40.3 60.9 44.5 71.6 50.5 80.9 50.0 85.8 77.3 44.7 38.9 61.7 48.3 74.0 46.8 80.3 48.2 83.3 65.9 44.6 39.2 61.3 49.3 73.5 47.3 83.2 53.8 87.9 69.4 42.5 36.6 58.1 43.1 67.8 42.9 65.5 42.3 67.4 52.5 40.8 39.5 57.0 44.1 69.6 45.0 74.7 47.2 83.4 40.4 34.8 35.5 46.9 40.1 49.8 42.7 58.3 47.0 60.3 48.1 34.9 35.5 47.0 40.2 50.0 42.9 58.4 47.2 60.4 48.3 32.4 33.6 42.7 36.5 43.0 37.4 50.3 34.9 51.4 34.7

Table 4-2 Temperature Measurements for AAC South Conductor

Ambient Compression DE

Compression Splice

Marker Ball

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Mechanical Splice

Strain Clamp

Ambient Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Reference Conductor Core Clamp Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 105 C 105 C 120 C 120 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 26.9 34.1 31.2 34.6 27.5 33.9 29.8 34.5 29.3 33.0 46.6 38.7 64.2 43.8 80.5 46.5 88.3 52.3 95.0 70.7 41.4 37.7 55.4 41.5 64.8 43.6 73.1 47.7 77.8 66.9 41.1 37.4 54.9 41.0 64.1 43.0 72.5 47.1 76.7 66.2 40.4 37.0 53.7 40.2 62.1 41.9 69.9 45.2 73.8 64.0 26.7 36.6 29.8 39.8 87.0 43.2 91.4 46.9 127.6 58.8 52.6 44.2 78.6 56.8 102.2 65.5 127.3 83.9 157.7 77.6 51.8 42.5 76.6 52.6 99.0 60.4 122.0 74.8 145.2 67.3 49.7 41.2 72.5 49.7 93.6 56.5 114.8 67.0 136.5 59.1 50.8 46.4 73.5 61.9 92.8 68.7 102.7 90.4 113.6 92.1 54.8 49.4 76.8 67.3 100.5 78.2 112.5 100.5 123.9 108.6 53.0 48.3 73.7 64.9 94.7 74.8 105.9 95.2 116.4 98.3 44.7 40.6 61.7 48.3 74.0 54.2 80.3 62.6 83.3 65.9 36.1 38.9 48.6 44.5 51.8 44.4 61.1 54.0 64.2 51.1 36.2 38.9 48.8 44.7 52.2 44.2 61.5 54.7 64.6 51.3 34.9 38.2 46.6 42.7 48.3 42.4 56.9 50.3 59.1 47.8 44.7 38.9 61.7 42.6 74.0 46.8 80.3 48.2 83.3 55.0 44.6 39.2 61.3 43.1 73.5 47.3 83.2 53.8 87.9 56.2 42.5 36.6 58.1 39.9 67.8 42.9 65.5 42.3 67.4 45.4 46.2 34.9 62.7 46.3 76.6 44.4 86.6 52.3 91.2 52.3 36.3 33.5 47.9 43.0 51.6 39.8 58.2 35.6 60.5 47.8 36.5 33.7 48.1 43.6 51.9 40.8 58.7 37.1 61.1 48.3 39.0 38.4 53.9 42.4 63.9 44.7 70.8 47.4 77.0 45.3 33.6 35.8 44.8 42.0 45.5 44.4 54.6 44.3 56.3 48.9 34.0 36.3 45.4 42.8 46.7 45.8 55.8 45.9 57.8 50.9 32.4 34.4 42.9 38.6 42.9 39.5 50.7 37.4 52.3 40.7

4-2

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Tables 4-3 and 4-4 provide normalized temperature measurements for the North and South conductors, respectively. The normalization factor is the target temperature, 50C, 75C, 90C, 105C, or 120C as appropriate. These tables do a particularly good job of highlighting those locations where the measured temperature exceeds the target operating temperature for the test. Scanning these tables it is clear that only the marker ball and compression splice on the South conductor generating temperature profiles larger than the target conductor temperatures. Figure 4-1 shows the thermal images collected for this compression splice at 50C, 90C, and 105C with and without wind. These images and the data in Table 4-4 illustrate how the temperature this splice was increasing relative to the conductor target temperature during the course of testing. Even in the first test the splice was operating at a temperature slightly above conductor temperature. As the testing proceeds the magnitude of this temperature rise gets much larger. This is a probably indication of a construction flaw within this splice. Thermal images of the marker ball on the South conductor are not too revealing. However, the data in Table 4-4 shows that the ratio of the temperatures at the marker ball measurement locations to the target conductor temperatures are not increasing over the course of the test. Therefore, the resulting high temperature at the marker ball is likely due simply to the lack of convective cooling within the marker ball. This trapped heat has the effect of slightly increasing the conductor temperature inside the marker ball. Note that the effect may even extend slightly outside of the marker ball as indicated by the temperature ratio for the reference thermocouple on the conductor core just a few inches outside of the marker ball. It is also of interest to note that the marker ball on the South conductor is a clamp-on type of marker ball while the marker ball on the North conductor is a wire-wrap type of marker ball. Notice in the tables that the marker ball on the North conductor does not display elevated operating temperatures in the conductor to the degree that the marker ball on the South conductor does. The working theory is that the wrap-type marker ball dissipates more heat out of the conductor through its wire-wrap attachment. Figures 4-2 through 4-7 provide a graphical illustration of the thermal distributions at the reference core thermocouple, the conductor core within the component, and the conductor surface within the component. These plots are arranged for easy comparison between thermal distributions in the North and South conductors. Figures 4-2 and 4-3 show the thermal distribution for the reference thermocouples, which are located within a few inches of each component. Comparing the plots for the North and South conductor, one can clearly see that the South conductor is experiencing higher temperatures in the area of the compression splice and marker ball. One should note that the compression splice on the North conductor is in the same relative position on the conductor as the compression splice on the South conductor. However, the North conductor does not have a marker ball in this portion of the span. Due to clearance issues between the conductors, the North conductor marker ball was placed on the other side of the tower suspension point. One consideration here was that the distance between the splice and marker ball on the South conductor may have been small enough to allow thermal interaction between the two components, contributing to the high temperatures. This theory will be addressed later.

4-3

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests Table 4-3 AAC North Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperature

Component Measurement Location Ambient Ambient East Compression DE Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Compression Splice Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Line Guard Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface AGS Unit Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Damper Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Marker Ball Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Strain Clamp Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 105 C 105 C 120 C 120 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 0.54 0.68 0.42 0.46 0.31 0.38 0.28 0.33 0.24 0.28 0.91 0.77 0.85 0.58 0.84 0.51 0.80 0.49 0.79 0.55 0.82 0.76 0.74 0.56 0.71 0.49 0.69 0.47 0.66 0.48 0.81 0.76 0.74 0.56 0.71 0.49 0.69 0.46 0.66 0.48 0.79 0.75 0.71 0.54 0.67 0.47 0.65 0.44 0.62 0.45 0.94 0.76 0.92 0.56 0.90 0.50 0.83 0.43 0.77 0.36 0.93 0.77 0.92 0.57 0.89 0.51 0.89 0.47 0.91 0.43 0.92 0.78 0.91 0.58 0.88 0.51 0.88 0.48 0.90 0.43 0.87 0.77 0.85 0.56 0.81 0.49 0.80 0.46 0.80 0.40 1.01 0.91 0.97 0.79 0.97 0.73 0.94 0.76 0.93 0.80 1.00 0.81 0.94 0.61 0.92 0.53 0.91 0.53 0.91 0.47 0.98 0.80 0.91 0.60 0.88 0.52 0.86 0.51 0.86 0.45 0.86 0.81 0.77 0.60 0.72 0.56 0.77 0.45 0.72 0.65 0.78 0.88 0.72 0.75 0.67 0.63 0.68 0.74 0.64 0.68 0.76 0.87 0.71 0.73 0.65 0.61 0.66 0.72 0.63 0.66 0.67 0.80 0.61 0.62 0.51 0.51 0.53 0.56 0.48 0.50 0.63 0.77 0.57 0.58 0.45 0.48 0.47 0.50 0.42 0.44 0.86 0.81 0.77 0.60 0.72 0.56 0.77 0.45 0.72 0.65 0.88 0.81 0.82 0.60 0.81 0.57 0.78 0.48 0.73 0.66 0.87 0.81 0.81 0.59 0.80 0.56 0.77 0.48 0.72 0.64 0.89 0.78 0.82 0.64 0.82 0.52 0.76 0.46 0.69 0.55 0.89 0.78 0.82 0.66 0.82 0.53 0.79 0.51 0.73 0.58 0.85 0.73 0.77 0.57 0.75 0.48 0.62 0.40 0.56 0.44 0.82 0.79 0.76 0.59 0.77 0.50 0.71 0.45 0.70 0.34 0.70 0.71 0.63 0.53 0.55 0.47 0.56 0.45 0.50 0.40 0.70 0.71 0.63 0.54 0.56 0.48 0.56 0.45 0.50 0.40 0.65 0.67 0.57 0.49 0.48 0.42 0.48 0.33 0.43 0.29

Table 4-4 AAC South Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperature

Ambient Compression DE

Compression Splice

Marker Ball

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Mechanical Splice

Strain Clamp

Ambient Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Reference Conductor Core Clamp Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 105 C 105 C 120 C 120 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 0.54 0.68 0.42 0.46 0.31 0.38 0.28 0.33 0.24 0.28 0.93 0.77 0.86 0.58 0.89 0.52 0.84 0.50 0.79 0.59 0.83 0.75 0.74 0.55 0.72 0.48 0.70 0.45 0.65 0.56 0.82 0.75 0.73 0.55 0.71 0.48 0.69 0.45 0.64 0.55 0.81 0.74 0.72 0.54 0.69 0.47 0.67 0.43 0.62 0.53 0.53 0.73 0.40 0.53 0.97 0.48 0.87 0.45 1.06 0.49 1.05 0.88 1.05 0.76 1.14 0.73 1.21 0.80 1.31 0.65 1.04 0.85 1.02 0.70 1.10 0.67 1.16 0.71 1.21 0.56 0.99 0.82 0.97 0.66 1.04 0.63 1.09 0.64 1.14 0.49 1.02 0.93 0.98 0.83 1.03 0.76 0.98 0.86 0.95 0.77 1.10 0.99 1.02 0.90 1.12 0.87 1.07 0.96 1.03 0.91 1.06 0.97 0.98 0.87 1.05 0.83 1.01 0.91 0.97 0.82 0.89 0.81 0.82 0.64 0.82 0.60 0.76 0.60 0.69 0.55 0.72 0.78 0.65 0.59 0.58 0.49 0.58 0.51 0.54 0.43 0.72 0.78 0.65 0.60 0.58 0.49 0.59 0.52 0.54 0.43 0.70 0.76 0.62 0.57 0.54 0.47 0.54 0.48 0.49 0.40 0.89 0.78 0.82 0.57 0.82 0.52 0.76 0.46 0.69 0.46 0.89 0.78 0.82 0.57 0.82 0.53 0.79 0.51 0.73 0.47 0.85 0.73 0.77 0.53 0.75 0.48 0.62 0.40 0.56 0.38 0.92 0.70 0.84 0.62 0.85 0.49 0.82 0.50 0.76 0.44 0.73 0.67 0.64 0.57 0.57 0.44 0.55 0.34 0.50 0.40 0.73 0.67 0.64 0.58 0.58 0.45 0.56 0.35 0.51 0.40 0.78 0.77 0.72 0.57 0.71 0.50 0.67 0.45 0.64 0.38 0.67 0.72 0.60 0.56 0.51 0.49 0.52 0.42 0.47 0.41 0.68 0.73 0.61 0.57 0.52 0.51 0.53 0.44 0.48 0.42 0.65 0.69 0.57 0.51 0.48 0.44 0.48 0.36 0.44 0.34

4-4

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Figure 4-1 Thermal Images for South Splice at 50C, 90C, and 120C (top to bottom) w/Wind (right) and without Wind (left)

4-5

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 120 180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

East Compression DE

Compression Splice

0.0

90

Line Guard

AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 4-2 AAC North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C)100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 Compression DE Compression Splice Marker Ball Suspension Shoe 90 Damper Mechanical Splice 50 120 180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

Strain Clamp

50

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Figure 4-3 AAC South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature

4-6

Strain Clamp

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Figures 4-4 and 4-5 show a clear spike in the core temperature at the South conductor splice and illustrate that its operating temperature is well above the operating temperature of the adjacent splice on the North conductor. However, note that the temperature at the splice on the North conductor is also higher than the temperature for other attached components, but not above the target conductor operating temperature. Figures 4-6 and 4-7 illustrate the same effect. Another interesting phenomenon is also illustrated by Figures 4-4 through 4-7. There is a noticeable dip in the conductor core temperature at the locations of the suspension shoe and the AGS unit. This illustrates the ability that these connections have to absorb and dissipate heat from the conductor. Figures 4-8 through 4-13 provide the same types of graphical presentation of results for the tests with wind. Comparing these graphs with those in Figures 4-2 through 4-7 provides a clear illustration of the cooling effect of the small wind that was applied during these tests. The other notable effect illustrated is that of the marker balls on cooling of the conductor by wind. Note that for the with wind case the thermocouple in and around the marker ball show temperatures greater than those shown in the splice on the South conductor. Even though that splice has clearly given an indication that it has a high resistance and resulting high temperature, just the light 2.7-mph wind applied during this test was sufficient to cool it to the point that its thermal signature is virtually indistinguishable from that of the conductor itself. This illustrates the importance of external factors such as electrical load and ambient wind conditions on the success of infrared inspections of conductor joints.

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Core Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0
East Compression DE Compression Splice Line Guard AGS Unit

120 90

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Marker Ball Strain Clamp

50

Figure 4-4 AAC North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature

4-7

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Core Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0
Compression DE Compression Splice Marker Ball Suspension Shoe

120 90

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Mechanical Splice Damper

50
Strain Clamp

Figure 4-5 AAC South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 120 180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

East Compression DE

90

Compression Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Line Guard

AGS Unit

Damper

Marker Ball

50

Figure 4-6 AAC North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

4-8

Strain Clamp

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
Compression DE

120
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Marker Ball Suspension Shoe

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Mechanical Splice Strain Clamp

50

Figure 4-7 AAC South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
East Compression DE

120
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Line Guard AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Marker Ball Strain Clamp

50

Figure 4-8 AAC North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature

4-9

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

20 0.0 1 80 .0 1 60 .0 14 0.0 12 0.0 Re f. Te mp. (D eg. C) 10 0.0 8 0.0 60 .0 4 0.0 2 0.0 0.0 E D n o i s s e r p m o C e c i l p S n o i s s e r p m o C l a B r e k r a M e o h S n o i s n e p s u S 90 r e p m a D e c i l p S l a c i n a h c e M 50 1 20 1 80 .0-2 00 .0 1 60 .0-1 80 .0 1 40 .0-1 60 .0 1 20 .0-1 40 .0 1 00 .0-1 20 .0 8 0.0 -10 0.0 6 0.0 -80 .0 4 0.0 -60 .0 2 0.0 -40 .0 0 .0-2 0.0

Te st Te mp. (D eg. C)

p m a l C n i a r t S

Figure 4-9 AAC South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Core Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
East Compression DE

120
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Line Guard AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Marker Ball Strain Clamp

50

Figure 4-10 AAC North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature

4-10

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Core Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
Compression DE

120
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Marker Ball Suspension Shoe

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Mechanical Splice Strain Clamp

50

Figure 4-11 AAC South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
East Compression DE

120
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Line Guard AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Marker Ball Strain Clamp

50

Figure 4-12 AAC North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

4-11

AAC Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
Compression DE

120
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Marker Ball Suspension Shoe

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Mechanical Splice Strain Clamp

50

Figure 4-13 AAC South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

Summary
In summary, the results of static testing of the AAC Arbutus conductor seem to indicate minimal excessive heating of conductor components other than marker balls should be expected at emergency operating temperatures. This assumes that the compression fittings on the line are free of defects. While it has not been definitively defined yet, it is assumed that the compression splice that was operating well above the target conductor temperature does indeed contain a construction defect that generates a excessively high electrical resistance and resulting high temperature operation. The results also clearly show that the effect of a light wind on the conductor (+2.7-mph) has a significant cooling effect on the conductor at attached components. The cooling effect of the wind is somewhat less effective for the marker balls.

4-12

5
ACSR CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS
Overview
The ACSR Drake conductor was tested in a static thermal loading mode. This means that current was applied as necessary to achieve a target temperature for the duration of testing at that target temperature. For this conductor the target temperatures tested were 50C, 75C, 90C, 110C, 130C, and 150C. These temperatures were selected as a range between a normal operating temperature of 50C and an emergency operating temperature of 150C. Tests were conducted at these temperatures with no wind and at then repeated for the same current with a 4-ft/sec (~2.7-mph) simulated wind. At each target temperature, thermocouple data was recorded and thermal images were obtained for each conductor component included in the test. For all components there was a reference thermocouple placed within 6 to 10-inches of the component; a thermocouple placed at the conductor core, defined as the interface between the first and second layers of aluminum; and a thermocouple placed on the surface of the outside conductor layer. Where appropriate an additional thermocouple was typically placed on the surface of the attached component as well.

Presentation & Discussion of Results

Table 5-1 provides a summary of temperature measurements for these tests on the North conductor. Scanning these measurements, it appears that every thermocouple is indicating a temperature at or below the target temperature for the test. The resulting temperatures for the with wind case tend to be roughly 25% less than temperatures for the no wind case. For the ACSR conductor, the cooling effect of the wind on the AGS unit is nearly as effective as on the other components with the temperatures averaging 22% lower for with wind than without wind. Table 5-2 provides a summary of temperature measurements for the South conductor. Scanning these measurements, all thermocouples other than those associated with the compression splice, the compression dead end, and the marker ball indicate a temperature below the target temperature for the test. Marker ball temperatures are slightly above the target conductor temperatures. The temperatures recorded for the compression splice are substantially above the conductor operating temperature, and in fact are substantially higher for the with wind case than for the without wind case. The compression dead end temperatures track below the target conductor operating temperatures except for the 110C, 130C, and 150C tests w/wind, for which the temperatures are at or moderately above the operating temperature. 5-1

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests Table 5-1 ACSR North Conductor Temperatures

Component Measurement Location Ambient Ambient East Compression DE Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Compression Splice Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Line Guard Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface AGS Unit Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Damper Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Marker Ball Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Strain Clamp Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

110 C 130 C 130 C 150 C 150 C 50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 110 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 29.7 28.1 33.5 29.6 32.8 30.3 33.6 27.9 28.2 28.6 30.7 30.8 41.0 31.6 58.5 39.1 68.3 42.2 79.8 48.9 93.5 49.2 107.2 57.9 40.5 33.0 53.8 42.1 61.5 47.0 69.8 57.0 78.6 57.5 89.7 67.6 40.7 33.0 54.1 42.2 61.9 47.0 70.5 56.7 79.5 57.2 90.8 67.3 39.3 31.6 50.9 39.3 57.4 43.4 64.1 50.7 70.9 51.5 80.3 59.7 28.7 40.5 71.1 56.3 81.8 63.6 97.9 80.8 108.6 80.6 131.5 104.6 47.1 39.4 72.8 54.4 82.7 63.6 98.3 82.1 104.8 82.5 129.3 108.8 46.8 38.8 71.7 53.3 81.1 62.0 96.1 79.5 102.2 80.0 125.8 105.2 40.7 37.7 70.0 50.6 78.5 59.1 92.7 74.8 97.7 75.3 119.6 97.7 48.3 37.1 72.3 51.2 84.5 57.9 100.0 75.9 111.5 74.8 130.1 96.9 44.8 36.5 69.2 49.2 78.9 58.1 92.5 70.5 103.7 70.8 119.4 90.8 44.8 36.3 68.8 48.7 78.4 57.4 91.9 69.7 102.7 70.0 118.2 89.7 44.3 34.7 63.8 41.7 73.5 51.4 86.0 58.5 93.8 62.6 109.0 67.7 37.4 31.3 51.4 38.7 54.3 43.8 59.6 47.0 58.0 47.6 66.1 59.1 38.2 32.0 53.1 40.3 56.5 45.5 62.8 50.0 62.1 50.6 71.0 63.0 36.3 29.6 48.6 35.1 50.8 39.0 54.8 39.6 51.4 40.4 58.3 49.6 34.6 28.0 45.4 32.1 46.4 35.3 49.0 34.2 44.3 34.9 50.1 42.4 44.3 34.7 63.8 41.7 73.5 51.4 86.0 58.5 93.8 62.6 109.0 67.7 44.3 34.4 64.0 41.3 73.9 51.7 86.8 57.8 94.9 62.1 111.0 67.8 43.5 34.0 62.7 40.5 71.9 50.3 84.0 55.3 90.7 59.2 106.0 64.8 47.4 37.6 74.5 48.1 86.1 60.8 103.5 75.8 117.1 86.2 136.1 92.2 48.3 40.6 72.8 53.2 85.0 69.3 102.0 89.7 118.9 99.0 137.9 110.3 48.4 41.2 72.8 54.1 85.3 70.1 102.3 91.1 119.6 100.7 138.2 112.0 43.5 32.8 63.5 38.7 72.1 46.1 85.4 50.7 95.7 56.7 108.1 59.0 36.5 31.6 50.9 36.0 52.6 41.0 58.7 40.4 60.4 45.9 67.3 53.2 36.4 31.4 50.6 35.7 52.1 40.6 58.2 39.8 59.5 45.2 66.4 52.4 35.4 29.5 46.7 32.1 47.9 34.9 52.2 31.1 52.4 34.8 58.1 37.5

Table 5-2 ACSR South Conductor Temperatures

Component Ambient Compression DE

Compression Splice

Marker Ball

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Mechanical Splice

Strain Clamp

Measurement Location Ambient Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Reference Conductor Core Clamp Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

110 C 130 C 130 C 150 C 150 C 50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 110 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 29.7 28.1 33.5 29.6 32.8 30.3 33.6 27.9 28.2 28.6 30.7 30.8 29.4 38.9 67.1 53.1 81.1 59.0 95.9 76.9 111.4 78.4 131.0 93.2 41.4 49.0 61.5 72.6 72.1 85.1 83.7 129.2 90.5 129.1 107.7 151.1 41.4 49.3 61.8 73.6 72.9 86.1 84.7 130.7 91.8 130.5 109.3 154.2 39.4 40.9 56.4 56.6 64.5 65.2 73.8 96.4 78.9 96.1 92.2 109.4 46.6 48.6 80.9 80.7 93.0 104.6 112.3 137.0 126.8 141.0 154.9 161.9 46.1 61.5 87.5 109.4 99.8 142.9 121.0 186.4 133.1 188.4 170.0 218.4 46.0 60.3 86.3 106.7 98.2 139.2 119.0 182.9 130.7 184.9 166.0 213.3 29.8 60.9 87.0 107.0 98.9 140.0 119.6 177.4 130.8 179.5 167.0 209.0 49.5 43.4 75.6 63.6 86.0 77.2 104.9 93.8 126.5 93.5 147.7 116.3 52.2 51.3 77.9 77.9 92.5 92.4 111.6 115.9 136.0 116.2 158.5 143.9 52.0 50.7 77.6 76.7 91.9 90.9 110.7 114.5 135.1 114.6 157.3 141.8 44.6 35.2 63.8 42.9 73.1 53.6 85.0 61.3 95.6 68.2 109.5 77.6 37.0 29.6 50.9 35.3 52.8 39.6 58.5 42.3 57.8 42.7 64.5 50.8 37.2 29.8 51.5 35.9 53.6 40.5 59.7 43.8 59.4 44.5 66.3 53.0 34.3 27.5 45.4 31.0 45.2 33.8 48.8 33.2 44.7 33.8 49.7 39.1 44.6 35.2 63.8 42.9 73.1 53.6 85.0 61.3 95.6 68.2 109.5 77.6 44.3 34.1 63.0 41.2 72.4 51.1 83.9 55.3 94.3 63.3 108.4 72.5 43.7 34.1 62.3 40.8 71.2 50.3 82.1 53.9 91.4 61.5 105.4 70.3 46.5 32.8 66.2 41.2 77.3 47.1 90.0 55.8 101.3 59.2 119.3 71.9 38.3 28.2 50.1 34.1 54.5 37.1 60.0 42.3 61.0 41.9 70.1 50.8 38.0 28.0 49.6 33.7 53.6 36.4 58.9 41.0 59.3 40.9 68.2 49.7 43.0 32.9 62.3 38.4 71.1 45.0 84.3 52.2 95.4 57.2 109.7 64.0 35.5 32.0 48.1 36.9 49.8 41.2 54.6 40.7 55.5 47.6 62.0 54.9 35.5 32.0 48.1 36.9 49.8 41.3 54.7 40.2 55.6 47.7 62.1 54.9 33.7 29.2 42.9 31.6 43.4 33.4 46.5 30.6 45.0 34.2 49.5 39.5

5-2

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Tables 5-3 and 5-4 provide normalized temperature measurements for the North and South conductors, respectively. The normalization factor is the target temperature; 50C, 75C, 90C, 110C, 130C, or 150C as appropriate. These tables do a particularly good job of highlighting those locations where the measured temperature exceeds the target operating temperature for the test. Scanning these tables it is clear that the marker ball, compression splice, and compression dead end on the South conductor generating temperature profiles slightly to significantly larger than the target conductor temperatures for one or more tests. Furthermore, they clearly show that the splice and dead end were operating at higher temperatures during the tests with wind than those without wind. It turns out that the order of testing it critical to gaining an understanding of these observed results. For this conductor, all of the test temperatures were first completed without wind, and then tests of all temperatures were repeated with wind. Figure 5-1 shows the thermal images collected for this compression splice at 75C, 110C, and 150C with and without wind. Knowing the order of testing, these images and the data in Table 5-4 illustrate how the temperature this splice was increasing relative to the conductor target temperature during the course of testing. By the second test the splice was operating at a temperature slightly above conductor temperature. As the testing proceeds the magnitude of this temperature rise gets much larger. This is a probably indication of a construction flaw within this splice. Figure 5-2 shows the thermal images collected for the South compression dead end component at 75C, 110C, and 150C with and without wind. These images and the tabulated data illustrate that the temperature of this component was also increasing over the course of testing. However, this component was just beginning to exceed conductor operating temperatures towards the end of testing. Thermal images of the marker ball on the South conductor are not too revealing. However, the data in Table 5-4 shows that the ratio of the temperatures at the marker ball measurement locations to the target conductor temperatures are not increasing over the course of the test. Therefore, the resulting high temperature at the marker ball is likely due simply to the lack of convective cooling within the marker ball. This trapped heat has the effect of slightly increasing the conductor temperature inside the marker ball. Note that the effect may even extend slightly outside of the marker ball as indicated by the temperature ratio for the reference thermocouple on the conductor core just a few inches outside of the marker ball. The marker ball on the South conductor is a clamp-on type of marker ball while the marker ball on the North conductor is a wire-wrap type of marker ball. As mentioned in the AAC Arbutus test results, the tables show that the marker ball on the North conductor does not display elevated operating temperatures in the conductor to the degree that the marker ball on the South conductor does. The theory is that the wrap-type marker ball dissipates more heat out of the conductor through its wire-wrap attachment.

5-3

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests Table 5-3 ACSR North Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures

Component Measurement Location Ambient Ambient East Compression DE Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Compression Splice Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Line Guard Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface AGS Unit Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Damper Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Marker Ball Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Strain Clamp Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

110 C 130 C 130 C 150 C 150 C 50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 110 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 0.59 0.56 0.45 0.39 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.21 0.82 0.63 0.78 0.52 0.76 0.47 0.73 0.44 0.72 0.38 0.71 0.39 0.81 0.66 0.72 0.56 0.68 0.52 0.63 0.52 0.60 0.44 0.60 0.45 0.81 0.66 0.72 0.56 0.69 0.52 0.64 0.52 0.61 0.44 0.61 0.45 0.79 0.63 0.68 0.52 0.64 0.48 0.58 0.46 0.55 0.40 0.54 0.40 0.57 0.81 0.95 0.75 0.91 0.71 0.89 0.73 0.84 0.62 0.88 0.70 0.94 0.79 0.97 0.73 0.92 0.71 0.89 0.75 0.81 0.63 0.86 0.73 0.94 0.78 0.96 0.71 0.90 0.69 0.87 0.72 0.79 0.62 0.84 0.70 0.81 0.75 0.93 0.67 0.87 0.66 0.84 0.68 0.75 0.58 0.80 0.65 0.97 0.74 0.96 0.68 0.94 0.64 0.91 0.69 0.86 0.58 0.87 0.65 0.90 0.73 0.92 0.66 0.88 0.65 0.84 0.64 0.80 0.54 0.80 0.61 0.90 0.73 0.92 0.65 0.87 0.64 0.84 0.63 0.79 0.54 0.79 0.60 0.89 0.69 0.85 0.56 0.82 0.57 0.78 0.53 0.72 0.48 0.73 0.45 0.75 0.63 0.69 0.52 0.60 0.49 0.54 0.43 0.45 0.37 0.44 0.39 0.76 0.64 0.71 0.54 0.63 0.51 0.57 0.45 0.48 0.39 0.47 0.42 0.73 0.59 0.65 0.47 0.56 0.43 0.50 0.36 0.40 0.31 0.39 0.33 0.69 0.56 0.61 0.43 0.52 0.39 0.45 0.31 0.34 0.27 0.33 0.28 0.89 0.69 0.85 0.56 0.82 0.57 0.78 0.53 0.72 0.48 0.73 0.45 0.89 0.69 0.85 0.55 0.82 0.57 0.79 0.53 0.73 0.48 0.74 0.45 0.87 0.68 0.84 0.54 0.80 0.56 0.76 0.50 0.70 0.46 0.71 0.43 0.95 0.75 0.99 0.64 0.96 0.68 0.94 0.69 0.90 0.66 0.91 0.61 0.97 0.81 0.97 0.71 0.94 0.77 0.93 0.82 0.91 0.76 0.92 0.74 0.97 0.82 0.97 0.72 0.95 0.78 0.93 0.83 0.92 0.77 0.92 0.75 0.87 0.66 0.85 0.52 0.80 0.51 0.78 0.46 0.74 0.44 0.72 0.39 0.73 0.63 0.68 0.48 0.58 0.46 0.53 0.37 0.46 0.35 0.45 0.35 0.73 0.63 0.67 0.48 0.58 0.45 0.53 0.36 0.46 0.35 0.44 0.35 0.71 0.59 0.62 0.43 0.53 0.39 0.47 0.28 0.40 0.27 0.39 0.25

Table 5-4 ACSR South Conductor Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures

Component Ambient Compression DE

Compression Splice

Marker Ball

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Mechanical Splice

Strain Clamp

Measurement Location Ambient Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Reference Conductor Core Clamp Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

110 C 130 C 130 C 150 C 150 C 50 C No 50 C w/ 75 C No 75 C w/ 90 C No 90 C w/ 110 C Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind No Wind w/ Wind 0.59 0.56 0.45 0.39 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.21 0.59 0.78 0.89 0.71 0.90 0.66 0.87 0.70 0.86 0.60 0.87 0.62 0.83 0.98 0.82 0.97 0.80 0.95 0.76 1.17 0.70 0.99 0.72 1.01 0.83 0.99 0.82 0.98 0.81 0.96 0.77 1.19 0.71 1.00 0.73 1.03 0.79 0.82 0.75 0.75 0.72 0.72 0.67 0.88 0.61 0.74 0.61 0.73 0.93 0.97 1.08 1.08 1.03 1.16 1.02 1.25 0.98 1.08 1.03 1.08 0.92 1.23 1.17 1.46 1.11 1.59 1.10 1.69 1.02 1.45 1.13 1.46 0.92 1.21 1.15 1.42 1.09 1.55 1.08 1.66 1.01 1.42 1.11 1.42 0.60 1.22 1.16 1.43 1.10 1.56 1.09 1.61 1.01 1.38 1.11 1.39 0.99 0.87 1.01 0.85 0.96 0.86 0.95 0.85 0.97 0.72 0.98 0.78 1.04 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.03 1.03 1.01 1.05 1.05 0.89 1.06 0.96 1.04 1.01 1.03 1.02 1.02 1.01 1.01 1.04 1.04 0.88 1.05 0.95 0.89 0.70 0.85 0.57 0.81 0.60 0.77 0.56 0.74 0.52 0.73 0.52 0.74 0.59 0.68 0.47 0.59 0.44 0.53 0.38 0.44 0.33 0.43 0.34 0.74 0.60 0.69 0.48 0.60 0.45 0.54 0.40 0.46 0.34 0.44 0.35 0.69 0.55 0.61 0.41 0.50 0.38 0.44 0.30 0.34 0.26 0.33 0.26 0.89 0.70 0.85 0.57 0.81 0.60 0.77 0.56 0.74 0.52 0.73 0.52 0.89 0.68 0.84 0.55 0.80 0.57 0.76 0.50 0.73 0.49 0.72 0.48 0.87 0.68 0.83 0.54 0.79 0.56 0.75 0.49 0.70 0.47 0.70 0.47 0.93 0.66 0.88 0.55 0.86 0.52 0.82 0.51 0.78 0.46 0.80 0.48 0.77 0.56 0.67 0.45 0.61 0.41 0.55 0.38 0.47 0.32 0.47 0.34 0.76 0.56 0.66 0.45 0.60 0.40 0.54 0.37 0.46 0.31 0.45 0.33 0.86 0.66 0.83 0.51 0.79 0.50 0.77 0.47 0.73 0.44 0.73 0.43 0.71 0.64 0.64 0.49 0.55 0.46 0.50 0.37 0.43 0.37 0.41 0.37 0.71 0.64 0.64 0.49 0.55 0.46 0.50 0.37 0.43 0.37 0.41 0.37 0.67 0.58 0.57 0.42 0.48 0.37 0.42 0.28 0.35 0.26 0.33 0.26

5-4

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Figure 5-1 Thermal Images for South Splice at 75C, 110C, and 150C (top to bottom) w/Wind (left) and w/o Wind (right)

5-5

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Figure 5-2 Thermal Images for South Dead End at 75C, 110C, and 150C (top to bottom) w/Wind (right) and without Wind (left)

Accepting that the compression fittings on the South conductor are bad, if we ignore the cooling effect of the wind on those component, the resulting temperatures for the remaining components in the with wind case tend to be about 25% less than the temperatures for the no wind case. Unlike in the previous test with AAC Arbutus, this cooling effect seems to be approximately the same for both conductors, despite the fact that the South conductor was on the leeward side of the North conductor and further from the wind source. 5-6

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Figures 5-3 through 5-8 provide a graphical illustration of the thermal distributions at the reference core thermocouple, the conductor core within the component, and the conductor surface within the component. These plots are arranged for easy comparison between thermal distributions in the North and South conductors. Figures 5-3 and 5-4 show the thermal distribution for the reference thermocouples, which are located within a few inches of each component. Comparing the plots for the North and South conductor, one can clearly see that the South conductor is experiencing higher temperatures in the area of the compression splice and marker ball. As in the AAC Arbutus test, the compression splice on the North conductor is in the same relative position on the conductor as the compression splice on the South conductor, but the North conductor does not have a marker ball in this portion of the span. The theory that the distance between the splice and marker ball on the South conductor may have been small enough to allow thermal interaction between the two components, contributing to the high temperatures, will be addressed shortly. Figures 5-5 and 5-6 show a clear spike in the core temperature at the South conductor splice, illustrating that its operating temperature is well above the operating temperature of the adjacent splice on the North conductor. However, once again the temperature at the splice on the North conductor is also higher than the temperature for other attached components, but not above the target conductor operating temperature. Figures 5-7 and 5-8 illustrate the same effect. Notice that Figures 5-5 through 5-8 once again show a noticeable dip in the conductor core temperature at the locations of the suspension shoe and the AGS unit, illustrating the ability that these connections have to absorb and dissipate heat from the conductor. Figures 5-9 through 5-14 provide the same types of graphical presentation of results for the tests with wind. While the AAC Arbutus results showed the effectiveness of wind cooling at all components except the marker balls, the results for this ACSR Drake test show that wind cooling is not always effective for bad compression joints. While the failing compression splice on the Arbutus test was at lower temperatures than the marker ball, in this test the compression splice is still significantly hotter than any other component location despite the wind effect.

5-7

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 130 180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Compression Splice

90

Line Guard

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

AGS Unit

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 5-3 ACSR North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
Compression DE

Strain Clamp

50

130
Compression Splice

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

0.0

90
Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Damper Mechanical Splice Strain Clamp

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

50

Figure 5-4 ACSR South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature

5-8

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
East Compression DE

130
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Line Guard AGS Unit Damper Marker Ball

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Figure 5-5 ACSR North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Core Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 130 Compression DE 0.0 Compression Splice Marker Ball 90 Suspension Shoe Damper Mechanical Splice Strain Clamp 50 Test Temp. (Deg. C) 180-200 160-180 140-160 120-140 100-120 80-100 60-80 40-60 20-40 0-20

Figure 5-6 ACSR South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature

Strain Clamp

50

5-9

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0
East Compression DE

130
Compression Splice

0.0

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

90
Line Guard AGS Unit Damper Marker Ball Strain Clamp

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

50

Figure 5-7 ACSR North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0
Compression DE Compression Splice Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Damper

130 90
Mechanical Splice Strain Clamp

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

50

Figure 5-8 ACSR South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

5-10

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0
East Compression DE Compression Splice Line Guard AGS Unit Damper

130 90
Marker Ball

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Figure 5-9 ACSR North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0
Compression DE Compression Splice Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Damper

Strain Clamp

50

130 90
Mechanical Splice

180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Figure 5-10 ACSR South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature

Strain Clamp

50

5-11

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

120.0

100.0

80.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 60.0

40.0

20.0 130
East Compression DE

100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

0.0

Compression Splice

90
Line Guard AGS Unit Damper Marker Ball Strain Clamp

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

50

Figure 5-11 ACSR North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature

250.0

200.0

150.0 Core Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 130
Compression DE

50.0

0.0

Compression Splice

90
Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Damper Mechanical Splice Strain Clamp

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

50

Figure 5-12 ACSR South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature

5-12

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

200.0 180.0 160.0 140.0 120.0 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 130 180.0-200.0 160.0-180.0 140.0-160.0 120.0-140.0 100.0-120.0 80.0-100.0 60.0-80.0 40.0-60.0 20.0-40.0 0.0-20.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Compression Splice

90

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Line Guard

AGS Unit

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 5-13 ACSR North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

250

200

150 Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 100 200-250 150-200 100-150 50-100 0-50

50

Strain Clamp

50

S5 0

Component

Compression DE

Compression Splice

S3

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Marker Ball

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Mechanical Splice

Figure 5-14 ACSR South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

Strain Clamp

S1

5-13

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Evaluation of Test Arrangement

Two factors led to some concern that some systematic errors may exist in the test arrangement that would bring the validity of the results into question. The first is that compression splices at the same physical location on the conductor appeared to fail as evidenced by extreme high temperatures developed during the testing. Since in both cases an identical splice on the adjacent conductor a mere 18-inches away seemed to operate normally, there was a concern that something about the test setup might be causing a localized phenomenon at this location. The second is that the bad splice was in both tests located in the same span within 10 to 15-ft of the clamp-on marker ball, which also generated temperatures higher than the nominal conductor operating temperature. As a result, there was an interest in learning whether the marker ball and splice might be close enough together to generate a thermal interaction that would artificially drive the temperatures of the respective components higher. To study these effects and determine if they had merit, another new ACSR Drake conductor sample was placed into the test frame and instrumented to measure the thermal distribution along an essentially bare conductor. The only components attached to the conductor for this test were the compression dead ends at the East end, the mechanical dead ends at the West end, and AGS unit and suspension shoe with armor rods at the tower support points. Thermocouples were placed on the core of the conductor, defined as the interface between the steel core strands and the first layer of aluminum, as a spacing of approximately 5-ft along the entire conductor length. Current was then applied to this bare conductor are required to generate steady-state operating temperatures of 50C, 75C, and 90C at the temperature control location. The results of this test are shown in Figure 5-15. A couple of observations can be made from these results. First, the large dip in temperature near the center of the graph is caused by the superior heat dissipation by the AGS unit and suspension shoe and armor rods at the tower attachment point. Second, for any given temperature level, the variation in temperature between the North and South conductors is small. However, this difference is systematic as the North conductors are lower in temperature than the South conductor on the East end for each test and about the same temperature on the West end. Nevertheless, the difference is small and seems insignificant. The test setup was then modified by placing the marker balls in their usual places on the North and South conductors and repeating the test. These results are shown in Figure 5-16. This test actually gives much better correlation between temperatures measured on the North and South conductors in general. The only exceptions are at the locations where the marker balls are attached. The clamp-on marker ball is within the East span of the South conductor and the wraptype marker ball is within the West span of the North conductor. On the West end of the North conductor, note the dip in temperature at the location of the wrap-type marker ball. This confirms our previous hypothesis that the wrap-type attachment helps to dissipate heat and lower the conductor temperature. On the East end of the South conductor, note the slight rise in temperature at the location of the clamp-on marker ball. This confirms the slightly increased temperatures we saw in the AAC Arbutus and ACSR Drake tests. Finally, notice that the conductor temperature returns to a nominal value matching the rest of the conductors within approximately 5-ft of the marker ball center. This is an indication that the 10 to 15-ft spacing

5-14

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

between the marker ball and compression splice should be sufficient to minimize and thermal interaction between these components.
120

100

80 South 50C North 50C South 75C North 75C South 90C North 90C 40

60

20

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Distance from East End (ft)

Figure 5-15 Distribution of Core Temperatures for Bare Conductor

120

100

80 South - 50C North - 50C South - 75C North - 75C South - 90C North - 90C 40

60

20

0 0 10 20 30 40 Position (ft) 50 60 70 80

Figure 5-16 Distribution of Core Temperatures w/Marker Balls

5-15

ACSR Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Summary
In summary, the results of static testing of the ACSR Drake conductor seem to indicate minimal excessive heating of conductor components other than marker balls should be expected at emergency operating temperatures. This assumes that the compression fittings on the line are free of defects. While it has not been definitively defined yet, it is assumed that the compression splice and compression dead end that were operating well above the target conductor temperature do indeed contain construction defects that generate an excessively high electrical resistance and resulting high temperature operation. The results also clearly show that the effect of a light wind on the conductor (+2.7-mph) has a significant cooling effect on the conductor at attached components in the absence of severely defective compression joints. However, even a +2.7-mph wind is inadequate to sufficiently cool a severely defective joint. Once again, the cooling effect of the wind appears somewhat less effective for the marker balls.

5-16

6
ACSS/TW SUWANNEE CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS

Overview
The ACSS/TW Suwannee conductor was tested in a static thermal loading mode. This means that current was applied as necessary to achieve a target temperature for the duration of testing at that target temperature. For this conductor the target temperatures tested were 90C, 125C, 180C, 200C, and 250C. The 90C temperature was tested to provide a common temperature between all of the tested conductors. The 125C temperature was selected because it is a commonly used emergency rating for utilities today. The 180C and 200C temperatures were selected based on suggested normal and emergency high temperature ratings from Centerpoint Energy, who donated the conductor and accessories for the tests. Finally, the 250C temperature was selected as a commonly mentioned nominal temperature limit for ACSS conductors. Tests were conducted at these temperatures with no wind and at then repeated for the same current with a 4-ft/sec (~2.7-mph) simulated wind. At each target temperature, thermocouple data was recorded and thermal images were obtained for each conductor component included in the test. For this test a change was made in the location of the reference thermocouples for each component. Rather than placing the reference thermocouple within inches of the referenced component, where the thermal behavior of the component could affect the thermal signature of the reference, reference thermocouples were placed approximately half-way between adjacent components in the span. Generally, this placed the reference thermocouples several feet from the components. The reference thermocouples were placed at the interface between the steel core and the first aluminum layer as in previous tests. In addition, for each component thermocouples were placed on the conductor core and on the surface of the outside conductor layer within the component attachment. Where appropriate an additional thermocouple was typically placed on the surface of the attached component as well. Some changes were also made in the components tested for this conductor. First, the spiral wrapped mechanical splice that was tested with the AAC and ACSR conductors was replaced with a compression repair sleeve. Second, at the request of Centerpoint Energy, several additional components were added to the test including a low-tension terminal lug with NEMA pad, a busbar, and a triple-bundle spacer-damper with line guards. Third, the location of the compression splices on both the North and South conductors were changed slightly. The splices are still in the East span of the conductors, but their positions were swapped with the position of 6-1

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

the other component in the span. For the North conductor the splice was swapped with the line guard placing it between the line guard and AGS unit instead of between the compression dead end and the line guard. For the South conductor the splice was swapped with the marker ball placing it between the marker ball and the suspension clamp instead of between the compression dead end and the marker ball. Finally, because the aluminum strands of this conductor are annealed and in Centerpoint Energys experience unable to withstand more than a few hundred pounds of tension with a mechanical dead end, the mechanical dead ends at the West end of the conductor were replaced with another set of compression dead ends w/Nema pads. A larger loop was then created between the South and North conductors on the West end and fitted with the busbar, terminal lug, and one mechanical strain clamp under zero tension as shown in Figure 6-1.

Figure 6-1 Photo of Loop with Busbar, Terminal Lug, and Mechanical Strain Clamp

Presentation & Discussion of Results

Table 6-1 provides a summary of temperature measurements for these tests on the North conductor. Scanning these measurements, it appears that only thermocouples showing a temperature above the target temperature for the test are some of the reference thermocouples discussed in the previous section. For the most part, these reference temperatures are within 6-2

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

+5C of the target conductor temperature, which would be expected since the references are generally at least 3-ft from any attached components. The exception is the two reference thermocouples that are nearest the marker ball on this conductor, which exhibit core temperatures in some tests that are more than 10C greater that the target conductor core temperature. Note that the measured temperatures for all of the compression joints are well below the target conductor temperature for all tests. Table 6-2 provides a summary of temperature measurements for the South conductor. These results show that most thermocouples other than those associated with the marker ball and one reference thermocouple are at or below the target temperature for the test. Marker ball core temperatures are as much as 20C above the target conductor temperatures. Unlike the previous tests with the AAC Arbutus and ACSR Drake conductors, the temperatures recorded for the compression splice are well below the conductor operating temperature for all tests. Looking at Tables 6-1 and 6-2 and comparing the temperatures from with and without wind tests, the resulting temperatures for the with wind case tend to be roughly 30% less than temperatures for the no wind case. The cooling effect of the wind at the attachment points in this experiment is not as effective as for the other components with the temperatures averaging only 10% lower for the suspension shoe with wind and 15% lower for the AGS unit with wind. An interesting observation is that the effectiveness of simulated wind in cooling the components seems to greater at higher temperatures. The temperatures with wind in the 250C test tend to be 40 to 45% lower than temperatures without wind, compared to a reduction of only 30 to 35% in temperatures in the 90C case. This trend can generally be observed for each temperature.
Table 6-1 ACSS/TW Suwannee North Conductor Temperatures
Component Ambient Measurement Location Ambient
90 C No Wind 24.4 55.3 54.1 48.3 92.2 81.3 80.8 89.8 66.3 58.4 65.4 88.6 49.2 50.5 39.0 36.5 57.9 56.9 41.2 90.3 85.6 85.0 91.5 61.8 61.6 54.2 80.3
o

90 C w/ Wind 25.3 40.2 39.5 36.0 59.1 51.8 51.2 39.9 38.4 37.5 37.8 55.4 47.8 47.2 36.0 33.7 30.0 29.7 23.4 55.3 64.0 63.4 47.7 33.9 33.5 29.0 37.0

125 C No Wind 26.0 72.2 70.4 60.9 127.3 109.4 108.3 123.7 87.1 72.7 85.4 121.1 63.4 65.2 47.6 43.8 76.4 74.8 49.3 124.1 116.8 115.7 129.9 85.7 85.4 73.4 116.7

125 C w/ Wind 26.4 44.7 43.8 39.5 70.7 59.6 59.2 48.7 46.6 45.2 45.4 75.1 59.6 57.9 41.7 38.3 34.6 34.0 24.8 73.2 84.4 83.4 61.5 44.2 43.5 34.2 58.4

180 C No Wind 19.9 91.8 88.9 71.3 172.0 152.5 150.2 181.9 118.7 112.0 115.5 172.5 85.2 87.9 53.5 46.4 99.0 96.3 65.0 176.9 163.4 160.9 171.6 110.4 109.9 86.5 174.3

180 C w/ Wind 26.3 53.4 51.8 44.6 90.2 82.4 80.9 109.1 56.1 53.6 55.9 96.7 77.7 74.9 51.0 45.8 51.1 49.3 24.7 142.1 132.4 132.1 101.9 48.5 47.4 33.0 92.2

200 C No Wind 22.9 109.4 105.8 80.8 206.9 174.2 171.2 197.8 137.4 129.1 133.1 188.8 99.1 101.2 61.1 53.1 115.7 112.3 86.8 211.6 194.2 191.5 213.4 131.3 130.9 101.8 201.4

200 C w/ Wind 24.6 56.2 54.5 44.1 106.2 58.3 56.5 103.6 54.4 51.2 52.5 94.6 86.0 82.3 53.7 47.4 60.4 58.3 47.3 107.0 121.2 117.8 112.0 66.8 67.0 51.4 89.3

250 C No Wind 21.9 130.6 126.1 92.2 251.3 206.1 202.4 251.3 172.0 150.2 167.0 230.6 104.0 106.9 63.7 54.7 126.3 122.1 94.4 252.5 234.0 230.5 255.4 155.0 155.1 118.2 243.7

250 C w/ Wind 27.0 70.9 68.4 52.3 86.2 75.7 73.3 151.1 72.1 58.9 71.7 67.7 81.3 78.3 56.4 60.4 73.9 70.7 54.7 132.4 155.5 149.5 150.8 56.8 56.2 41.8 102.1

East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Conductor Reference Line Guard Conductor Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference

Conductor AGS Unit

Damper

Conductor Marker Ball Conductor Spacer Damper Conductor

6-3

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests Table 6-2 ACSS/TW Suwannee South Conductor Temperatures
90 C No Wind 24.4 58.2 57.3 55.3 90.7 95.7 83.1 86.0 60.0 57.7 52.0 92.2 48.1 46.0 39.8 67.3 59.9 63.5 86.6 59.4 59.5 57.7 82.7 47.7 47.4 43.6 42.3 42.0 48.7 49.3 46.4 42.9 84.6 51.4 48.5 38.7
o

Component Ambient

Thermocouple Location Ambient

90 C w/ Wind 25.3 43.5 42.9 41.5 65.3 81.3 75.4 50.8 40.4 39.9 38.5 74.1 44.8 43.2 37.3 30.5 27.0 28.7 58.8 37.3 37.9 35.0 46.6 30.3 30.3 29.5 29.0 28.9 29.5 29.5 28.9 28.5 69.0 40.5 38.9 30.6

125 C No Wind 26.0 76.7 75.4 72.0 123.9 134.1 113.7 120.6 78.6 74.8 65.8 129.4 61.9 58.2 50.0 89.3 77.0 83.2 115.6 80.0 80.1 76.8 118.0 61.0 60.3 57.0 52.4 52.4 62.8 63.6 59.1 53.5 113.6 65.7 61.3 45.5

125 C w/ Wind 26.4 49.0 48.2 47.0 80.4 111.9 101.2 66.0 49.6 48.8 46.6 104.8 53.5 51.0 40.8 35.9 30.7 33.1 78.3 44.7 45.4 41.6 74.6 38.5 38.2 36.4 34.9 34.6 37.1 37.3 35.7 34.0 106.0 49.0 46.0 32.6

180 C No Wind 19.9 98.2 95.8 90.0 177.9 193.1 164.9 168.8 96.7 94.1 89.0 187.1 78.8 71.8 55.2 122.0 103.3 112.2 162.4 93.5 93.9 89.2 160.4 72.4 70.9 66.5 57.0 56.5 71.1 72.1 65.4 58.6 164.8 78.9 71.4 43.4

180 C w/ Wind 26.3 66.0 64.2 62.2 106.7 163.0 152.0 105.9 56.9 55.8 52.0 143.0 68.6 65.0 50.7 75.0 60.5 67.0 125.4 59.1 59.3 56.1 78.0 38.5 37.9 35.0 33.9 34.0 41.9 42.7 39.2 34.6 155.8 54.1 49.0 28.8

200 C No Wind 22.9 120.7 117.7 110.8 201.5 220.0 193.1 190.8 113.8 110.7 104.2 215.6 90.9 83.5 63.8 141.8 120.4 130.8 193.1 118.2 118.5 111.9 192.0 82.7 80.9 76.1 65.0 64.4 80.0 81.2 74.4 66.5 189.6 91.0 82.4 49.6

200 C w/ Wind 24.6 62.1 75.0 57.4 109.4 181.7 170.0 103.9 58.5 57.2 52.6 151.5 69.9 65.1 49.9 75.1 62.1 68.5 89.8 65.8 65.5 64.3 80.4 48.7 47.4 45.0 36.5 40.7 45.4 45.7 43.1 40.4 140.5 58.3 50.2 33.6

250 C No Wind 21.9 142.0 138.3 129.8 247.1 272.8 261.5 235.2 137.9 133.0 121.4 267.9 101.0 92.0 66.6 168.7 141.1 155.0 233.4 141.2 141.7 133.1 228.9 96.0 93.4 85.9 71.7 71.7 92.2 93.8 84.4 74.7 229.1 108.6 97.7 56.1

250 C w/ Wind 27.0 84.8 82.5 76.9 111.1 222.4 145.5 176.7 85.0 81.9 72.1 167.6 69.4 64.9 47.6 96.8 77.1 86.9 115.4 83.3 83.0 80.9 104.5 52.0 51.4 43.0 39.7 43.0 48.0 48.3 45.3 42.8 181.2 52.0 48.7 31.8

East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Conductor Control Marker Ball Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Conductor Reference Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Reference

Conductor Suspension Shoe

Damper

Conductor Repair Splice

Conductor

West Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface NEMA Pad Busbar Busbar Surface NEMA Pad Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface NEMA Pad Conductor Conductor Reference Strain Clamp Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

Tables 6-3 and 6-4 provide normalized temperature measurements for the North and South conductors, respectively. The normalization factor is the target temperature; 90C, 125C, 180C, 200C, or 250C as appropriate. These tables highlight those locations where the measured temperature exceeds the target operating temperature for the test. For the North conductor, almost all of the reference thermocouples have temperature ratios near 1.0, indicating that the measured reference temperature is approximately the same as the target conductor operating temperature. All other thermocouples have temperature ratios of less than one, indicated that the measured temperatures are below the target operating temperature of the conductor and there is no excessive heating affect from the test components. The same conclusion can be drawn for the South conductor with a single exception. On the South conductor the measured core temperature at the clamp-type marker ball exceeds the target conductor temperature by as much at 10%. Notice also that all of the compression joints are operating at temperatures well below the conductor operating temperature.

6-4

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests Table 6-3 ACSS/TW Suwannee North Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures
Component Ambient Measurement Location Ambient
90 C No Wind 0.27 0.61 0.60 0.54 1.02 0.90 0.90 1.00 0.74 0.65 0.73 0.98 0.55 0.56 0.43 0.41 0.64 0.63 0.46 1.00 0.95 0.94 1.02 0.69 0.68 0.60 0.89
o

90 C w/ Wind 0.28 0.45 0.44 0.40 0.66 0.58 0.57 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.62 0.53 0.52 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.33 0.26 0.61 0.71 0.70 0.53 0.38 0.37 0.32 0.41

125 C No Wind 0.21 0.58 0.56 0.49 1.02 0.88 0.87 0.99 0.70 0.58 0.68 0.97 0.51 0.52 0.38 0.35 0.61 0.60 0.39 0.99 0.93 0.93 1.04 0.69 0.68 0.59 0.93

125 C w/ Wind 0.21 0.36 0.35 0.32 0.57 0.48 0.47 0.39 0.37 0.36 0.36 0.60 0.48 0.46 0.33 0.31 0.28 0.27 0.20 0.59 0.68 0.67 0.49 0.35 0.35 0.27 0.47

180 C No Wind 0.11 0.51 0.49 0.40 0.96 0.85 0.83 1.01 0.66 0.62 0.64 0.96 0.47 0.49 0.30 0.26 0.55 0.54 0.36 0.98 0.91 0.89 0.95 0.61 0.61 0.48 0.97

180 C w/ Wind 0.15 0.30 0.29 0.25 0.50 0.46 0.45 0.61 0.31 0.30 0.31 0.54 0.43 0.42 0.28 0.25 0.28 0.27 0.14 0.79 0.74 0.73 0.57 0.27 0.26 0.18 0.51

200 C No Wind 0.11 0.55 0.53 0.40 1.03 0.87 0.86 0.99 0.69 0.65 0.67 0.94 0.50 0.51 0.31 0.27 0.58 0.56 0.43 1.06 0.97 0.96 1.07 0.66 0.65 0.51 1.01

200 C w/ Wind 0.12 0.28 0.27 0.22 0.53 0.29 0.28 0.52 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.47 0.43 0.41 0.27 0.24 0.30 0.29 0.24 0.54 0.61 0.59 0.56 0.33 0.34 0.26 0.45

250 C No Wind 0.09 0.52 0.50 0.37 1.01 0.82 0.81 1.01 0.69 0.60 0.67 0.92 0.42 0.43 0.25 0.22 0.51 0.49 0.38 1.01 0.94 0.92 1.02 0.62 0.62 0.47 0.97

250 C w/ Wind 0.11 0.28 0.27 0.21 0.34 0.30 0.29 0.60 0.29 0.24 0.29 0.27 0.33 0.31 0.23 0.24 0.30 0.28 0.22 0.53 0.62 0.60 0.60 0.23 0.22 0.17 0.41

East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Conductor Reference Line Guard Conductor Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference

Conductor AGS Unit

Damper

Conductor Marker Ball Conductor Spacer Damper Conductor

Table 6-4 ACSS/TW Suwannee South Temperatures Normalized to Target Temperatures

Component Ambient Thermocouple Location Ambient
90 C No Wind 0.27 0.65 0.64 0.61 1.01 1.06 0.92 0.96 0.67 0.64 0.58 1.02 0.53 0.51 0.44 0.75 0.67 0.71 0.96 0.66 0.66 0.64 0.92 0.53 0.53 0.48 0.47 0.47 0.54 0.55 0.52 0.48 0.94 0.57 0.54 0.43
o

90 C w/ Wind 0.28 0.48 0.48 0.46 0.73 0.90 0.84 0.56 0.45 0.44 0.43 0.82 0.50 0.48 0.41 0.34 0.30 0.32 0.65 0.41 0.42 0.39 0.52 0.34 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.77 0.45 0.43 0.34

125 C No Wind 0.21 0.61 0.60 0.58 0.99 1.07 0.91 0.96 0.63 0.60 0.53 1.04 0.50 0.47 0.40 0.71 0.62 0.67 0.92 0.64 0.64 0.61 0.94 0.49 0.48 0.46 0.42 0.42 0.50 0.51 0.47 0.43 0.91 0.53 0.49 0.36

125 C w/ Wind 0.21 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.64 0.90 0.81 0.53 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.84 0.43 0.41 0.33 0.29 0.25 0.26 0.63 0.36 0.36 0.33 0.60 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.85 0.39 0.37 0.26

180 C No Wind 0.11 0.55 0.53 0.50 0.99 1.07 0.92 0.94 0.54 0.52 0.49 1.04 0.44 0.40 0.31 0.68 0.57 0.62 0.90 0.52 0.52 0.50 0.89 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.32 0.31 0.40 0.40 0.36 0.33 0.92 0.44 0.40 0.24

180 C w/ Wind 0.15 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.59 0.91 0.84 0.59 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.79 0.38 0.36 0.28 0.42 0.34 0.37 0.70 0.33 0.33 0.31 0.43 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.23 0.24 0.22 0.19 0.87 0.30 0.27 0.16

200 C No Wind 0.11 0.60 0.59 0.55 1.01 1.10 0.97 0.95 0.57 0.55 0.52 1.08 0.45 0.42 0.32 0.71 0.60 0.65 0.97 0.59 0.59 0.56 0.96 0.41 0.40 0.38 0.33 0.32 0.40 0.41 0.37 0.33 0.95 0.46 0.41 0.25

200 C w/ Wind 0.12 0.31 0.38 0.29 0.55 0.91 0.85 0.52 0.29 0.29 0.26 0.76 0.35 0.33 0.25 0.38 0.31 0.34 0.45 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.40 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.20 0.70 0.29 0.25 0.17

250 C No Wind 0.09 0.57 0.55 0.52 0.99 1.09 1.05 0.94 0.55 0.53 0.49 1.07 0.40 0.37 0.27 0.67 0.56 0.62 0.93 0.56 0.57 0.53 0.92 0.38 0.37 0.34 0.29 0.29 0.37 0.38 0.34 0.30 0.92 0.43 0.39 0.22

250 C w/ Wind 0.11 0.34 0.33 0.31 0.44 0.89 0.58 0.71 0.34 0.33 0.29 0.67 0.28 0.26 0.19 0.39 0.31 0.35 0.46 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.42 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.72 0.21 0.19 0.13

East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Conductor Control Marker Ball Conductor Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Reference

Conductor Suspension Shoe

Damper

Conductor Repair Splice

Conductor

West Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface NEMA Pad Busbar Busbar Surface NEMA Pad Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface NEMA Pad Conductor Conductor Reference Strain Clamp Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface

6-5

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

The only real thermal problem observed in these tests was with the marker balls. As discussed previously, the temperature of the conductor within the marker ball was slightly elevated for the clamp-type ball on the South conductor. While the temperature within the wrap-type ball was slightly elevated relative to other components, it remained below the target conductor temperatures for each test. Otherwise the marker balls performed satisfactorily until extremely high temperatures were achieved in the conductor. Specifically, the material in the marker balls began to melt as higher temperatures were reached in the conductor. The first indications of this were observed at 180C, with very pronounced effects being observed at 200 and 250C. In the case of the wrap-type marker ball the component remained intact and functional, supported by the internal wrap-type connection. However, the clamp-type marker ball actually melted through as shown in Figure 6-2.

Figure 6-2 Melting Clamp-Type Marker Ball

Figures 6-3 through 6-8 provide a graphical illustration of the thermal distributions at the reference core thermocouple, the conductor core within the component, and the conductor surface within the component. These plots are arranged for easy comparison between thermal distributions in the North and South conductors. Figures 6-3 and 6-4 show the thermal distribution for the reference thermocouples, which are located approximately 3-ft or more from each component. Recall that for the previous tests the reference thermocouples were located within inches of the components. Comparing Figures 6-3 and 6-4 with the comparable plots from previous tests (Figures 4-2, 4-3, 5-3, and 5-4), youll notice that the plot of reference temperatures for the Suwannee tests is somewhat smoother than the comparable plots from the previous tests. This is an indication that moving the reference thermocouples to locations further from the adjacent components may have lessened thermal effects of adjacent components on the measured reference temperatures. 6-6

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250 200 0.0

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

Line Guard

180

Compression Splice

AGS Unit

125

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 6-3 Suwannee North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Spacer Damper

90

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

180

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 6-4 Suwannee South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperature

Strain Clamp

90

6-7

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Figures 6-5 and 6-6 show clear spikes in the core temperature at the North conductor line guard and marker ball, and at the South marker ball and damper. However, other than the marker ball on the South conductor, all of these temperature spikes are still below the target conductor operating temperature. The most notable observation is that, unlike the previous tests of AAC Arbutus and ACSR Drake conductors, there are no temperature spikes in these tests associated with the compression joints. Figures 6-7 and 6-8 illustrate the same effects. Notice that Figures 6-5 through 6-8 once again show a dip in the conductor temperature at the locations of the suspension shoe and the AGS unit. Figures 6-9 through 6-14 provide the same types of graphical presentation of results for the tests with wind. Looking at Figures 6-9 and 6-10, it is clear that the plots of reference temperatures are not nearly as uniform as those in Figures 6-3 and 6-4. This illustrates the inexactness of the simulated wind in our test setup and the difficulty in adjusting the wind uniformly on the test article. Nevertheless, the tests with simulated wind were adequate to illustrate the significant cooling effects of a light breeze for the bare conductor and all conductor components except the marker balls. While not cooled as effectively as other components, the wind induced cooling of the marker ball locations was still sufficient to keep the conductor temperatures below target temperatures in this test.

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250
East Compression DE

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

0.0

Line Guard

180
Compression Splice AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Marker Ball Spacer Damper

90

Figure 6-5 Suwannee North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature

6-8

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

Suspension Shoe

180

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 6-6 Suwannee South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperature

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

Strain Clamp

90

100.0

50.0 250

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Line Guard

180

Compression Splice

AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 6-7 Suwannee North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

Spacer Damper

90

6-9

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

Suspension Shoe

180

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 6-8 Suwannee South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

Strain Clamp

90

100.0

50.0 250 200 0.0

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

Line Guard

180

Compression Splice

AGS Unit

125

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 6-9 Suwannee North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature

6-10

Spacer Damper

90

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

180

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 6-10 Suwannee South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperature

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 100.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 50.0 250 0.0
East Compression DE Line Guard Compression Splice AGS Unit

Strain Clamp

90

0.0-50.0

180 Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Marker Ball Spacer Damper

90

Figure 6-11 Suwannee North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature

6-11

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

180

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 6-12 Suwannee South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperature

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

Strain Clamp

90

100.0

50.0 250 0.0

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

East Compression DE

Line Guard

180

Compression Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

AGS Unit

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 6-13 Suwannee North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

6-12

Spacer Damper

90

ACSS/TW Suwannee Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

Suspension Shoe

180

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 6-14 Suwannee South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperature

Summary
In summary, the results of static testing of the ACSS/TW Suwannee conductor seem to indicate minimal excessive heating of conductor components other than marker balls should be expected at operating temperatures up to 250C. The results also show that the effect of a light wind on the conductor (+2.7-mph) has a significant cooling effect on the conductor and attached components. The cooling effect of the wind appears somewhat less effective at the marker ball locations, yet adequate.

Strain Clamp

90

6-13

7
ACSS/TW MERRIMACK CONDUCTOR STATIC THERMAL TESTS

Overview
The ACSS/TW Merrimack conductor was tested in a static thermal loading mode. This means that current was applied as necessary to achieve a target temperature for the duration of testing at that target temperature. For this conductor the target temperatures tested were 90C, 125C, 180C, 200C, and 250C. The 90C temperature was tested to provide a common temperature between all of the tested conductors. The 125C temperature was selected because it is a commonly used emergency rating for utilities today. The 180C and 200C temperatures were selected based on suggested normal and emergency high temperature ratings from Centerpoint Energy, who donated the conductor and accessories for the tests. Finally, the 250C temperature was selected as a commonly mentioned nominal temperature limit for ACSS conductors. Tests were conducted at these temperatures with no wind and at then repeated for the same current with a 4-ft/sec (~2.7-mph) simulated wind. At each target temperature, thermocouple data was recorded and thermal images were obtained for each conductor component included in the test. For this test the reference thermocouples were again placed approximately half-way between adjacent components in the span. Generally, this placed the reference thermocouples three or more feet from the components. The reference thermocouples were placed at the interface between the steel core and the first aluminum layer as in previous tests. In addition, for each component thermocouples were placed on the conductor core and on the surface of the outside conductor layer within the component attachment. Where appropriate an additional thermocouple was typically placed on the surface of the attached component as well. The components tested for this conductor were the same as those tested for the ACSS/TW Suwannee conductor with one minor exception. Rather than a triple-bundle spacer with line guards, a twin-bundle spacer with line guards was tested. Just as with the Suwannee conductor, the spiral wrapped mechanical splice that was tested with the AAC and ACSR conductors was replaced with a compression repair sleeve. Other differences from the original AAC and ACSR conductor tests were the addition of a low-tension terminal lug with NEMA pad, a busbar, mechanical strain clamp in the West end loop and swapping positions of the compression splice and marker ball on the South conductor and the compression splice and line guard on the North conductor, just as was done for the Suwannee conductor test.

7-1

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Presentation & Discussion of Results

Table 7-1 provides a summary of temperature measurements for these tests on the North conductor. Scanning these measurements, it appears that only thermocouples showing a temperature above the target temperature for the test are some of the reference thermocouples discussed in the previous sections and the conductor core inside the marker ball for tests at 200C and 250C without wind. For the most part, these reference temperatures are within +5C of the target conductor temperature, which would be expected since the references are generally at least 3-ft from any attached components. The exception is one of the reference thermocouples nearest the marker ball on this conductor, which exhibits core temperatures in some tests that are more than 10C greater that the target conductor core temperature. Note that the measured temperatures for all of the compression joints are well below the target conductor temperature for all tests.
Table 7-1 ACSS/TW Merrimack North Conductor Temperatures
90 C No Wind 18.6 52.0 51.6 50.5 88.1 68.7 68.4 88.1 49.9 51.2 46.7 85.8 41.5 33.9 32.4 28.0 54.6 52.7 40.3 90.4 88.9 83.1 94.4 61.4 57.6 46.8 91.4
o

Component Ambient

Measurement Location Ambient

90 C w/ Wind 23.9 38.4 38.1 37.9 60.3 50.7 50.7 43.3 37.0 38.3 37.0 53.6 41.2 33.3 34.4 31.5 42.8 41.7 36.0 53.9 65.1 61.9 62.1 44.9 42.5 38.7 45.3

125 C No Wind 20.9 61.8 61.4 59.7 120.1 87.4 87.2 117.4 54.7 56.9 52.8 110.5 49.3 38.1 35.9 29.4 68.2 65.6 47.6 118.1 114.2 104.9 121.9 75.4 69.0 55.1 118.2

125 C w/ Wind 30.0 45.6 45.2 44.6 69.0 60.6 59.8 74.2 41.2 43.6 40.2 66.3 54.6 36.6 44.3 40.7 53.9 51.5 38.6 85.1 97.6 90.1 74.9 50.6 45.6 38.5 67.8

180 C No Wind 22.7 91.6 90.5 86.8 171.9 132.0 131.4 176.7 94.3 98.6 85.2 165.3 79.4 54.7 57.8 47.1 107.1 102.2 72.0 182.2 184.9 165.6 191.0 116.4 106.7 83.9 183.0

180 C w/ Wind 25.0 53.7 53.0 52.2 103.5 88.2 87.2 109.6 46.3 50.7 47.9 90.0 69.5 47.1 51.9 45.1 64.4 61.6 46.2 89.6 111.5 96.9 99.9 67.3 57.6 51.2 75.7

200 C No Wind 21.1 99.5 98.5 93.6 192.6 151.4 150.8 200.3 102.5 105.6 92.4 191.9 85.7 59.3 58.9 46.9 121.2 116.1 79.9 204.1 212.3 179.9 218.2 131.1 110.9 91.3 202.0

200 C w/ Wind 30.9 56.6 56.2 54.8 75.3 83.6 83.7 88.1 45.0 47.2 43.0 91.7 82.9 75.3 61.4 53.5 70.8 67.9 48.9 105.8 123.0 104.9 105.7 68.9 57.9 50.1 79.6

250 C No Wind 27.0 121.3 119.9 112.3 242.5 176.5 174.9 231.0 123.2 124.7 104.4 222.7 104.0 94.7 73.4 60.1 145.0 139.6 94.4 255.1 258.1 213.4 263.3 161.0 135.9 110.6 247.9

250 C w/ Wind 29.5 66.5 65.9 63.8 109.2 96.9 96.9 95.1 70.6 73.0 64.7 109.2 98.9 87.5 71.6 60.9 78.8 75.1 53.6 164.6 169.1 140.8 153.0 74.3 60.1 53.7 117.8

East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Conductor Reference Line Guard Conductor Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Reference

Conductor AGS Unit

Damper

Conductor Marker Ball Conductor Spacer Damper

Conductor

Table 7-2 provides a summary of temperature measurements for the South conductor. These results show that most thermocouples are again at or below the target temperature for the test. The only exception is the conductor core within the marker ball for tests at 180C and 200C, at 12C and 16C over temperatures, respectively, and a few reference thermocouples, which are all less than 3C above the target temperature. Unlike the previous tests with the AAC Arbutus and ACSR Drake conductors, the temperatures recorded for the compression splice are well below the conductor operating temperature for all tests. Looking at Tables 7-1 and 7-2 and comparing the temperatures from with and without wind tests, the resulting temperatures for the with wind case tend to be roughly 30% less than 7-2

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

temperatures for the no wind case for the South conductor and almost 40% less for the North conductor. The cooling effect of the wind at the attachment points in this experiment is not effective at all with the temperatures associated with both the suspension shoe and the AGS unit running about the same on both the with and without wind tests. As in the previous test, the amount of cooling from the wind appears to be a greater percentage at the higher temperatures. The temperatures with wind in the 250C test tend to be about 40% lower than temperatures without wind, compared to a reduction of only +20% in temperatures for the 90C case. This trend can generally be observed for each temperature. As in the Suwannee test, the only real thermal problem observed in these tests was with the marker balls. Other than a slight increase in conductor core temperature inside the clamp-on marker ball, the marker balls performed satisfactorily until extremely high temperatures were achieve in the conductor. At the higher temperatures the material in the marker balls began to melt. The first indications of this were observed at 180C, with very pronounced effects being observed at 200 and 250C. Once again the wrap-type marker ball remained intact and functional, supported by the internal wrap-type connection but the clamp-type marker ball began to melt through as shown previously in Figure 7-2.
Table 7-2 ACSS/TW Merrimack South Conductor Temperatures
Component Ambient Measurement Location Ambient
90 C No Wind 18.6 52.4 52.0 49.2 90.9 95.2 78.7 92.2 49.7 48.9 47.6 88.8 28.6 24.8 38.8 56.6 63.3 64.7 89.5 55.3 55.0 53.9 91.3 46.5 47.2 48.5 37.5 42.6 45.5 45.6 42.9 42.3 73.7 41.5 41.9 34.7
o

90 C w/ Wind 23.9 38.6 38.4 37.4 65.9 82.3 69.5 54.7 45.1 44.7 45.7 60.7 27.8 28.9 37.4 45.1 47.3 49.7 53.5 38.6 38.5 38.2 48.4 38.0 38.3 38.8 33.1 37.9 41.1 41.2 38.8 38.3 69.1 47.3 47.6 42.6

125 C No Wind 20.9 61.0 60.5 57.2 121.2 124.1 100.5 118.5 54.2 53.1 52.8 113.9 34.2 25.4 44.3 72.6 81.4 83.6 114.4 61.0 60.4 59.7 116.9 54.2 55.1 57.2 44.7 53.7 58.8 59.0 55.0 53.4 106.0 49.4 50.4 40.1

125 C w/ Wind 30.0 48.5 48.6 47.1 77.1 96.0 79.2 78.7 49.7 49.0 46.2 75.2 43.2 34.7 49.3 60.9 67.3 69.4 73.9 40.7 40.4 39.5 48.9 40.7 41.2 41.9 35.5 47.8 54.6 54.8 50.9 49.2 77.7 39.4 39.6 31.8

180 C No Wind 22.7 94.5 92.7 84.3 178.9 192.0 150.2 180.0 96.4 95.0 93.6 175.5 73.1 30.3 69.9 105.2 122.3 125.1 172.2 104.4 103.5 99.9 174.5 86.4 87.9 90.0 63.1 74.3 81.5 81.8 74.7 73.8 144.7 71.8 73.1 57.2

180 C w/ Wind 25.0 56.2 56.0 53.6 116.9 149.4 119.1 116.1 60.2 59.1 54.8 104.2 59.9 31.8 62.4 68.2 75.7 78.6 78.5 47.6 47.0 47.4 94.8 51.0 51.7 52.7 41.8 59.1 67.4 67.7 60.7 60.2 108.1 62.9 65.2 50.0

200 C No Wind 21.1 101.7 99.2 89.2 199.4 215.9 167.2 202.7 101.9 100.2 98.0 199.7 75.7 63.2 74.6 118.8 141.6 144.4 200.8 115.4 114.3 109.0 196.6 92.1 93.7 96.0 66.6 81.0 90.1 90.5 82.9 79.9 173.5 78.8 80.4 61.8

200 C w/ Wind 30.9 62.6 61.7 58.0 117.0 162.8 129.7 124.7 57.8 57.9 60.7 108.1 69.7 61.8 69.9 69.6 78.6 81.1 81.1 46.5 45.6 46.2 99.6 47.6 48.3 49.3 40.0 52.7 51.1 51.0 46.2 50.1 80.5 54.1 57.4 41.7

250 C No Wind 27.0 125.3 122.3 109.3 251.1 240.7 179.7 239.6 120.6 118.8 103.0 232.4 90.8 76.2 89.9 141.8 169.9 173.6 239.9 144.1 142.8 135.9 233.4 116.5 118.2 119.2 82.0 99.9 112.4 113.0 102.3 98.1 214.5 96.1 98.5 70.1

250 C w/ Wind 29.5 75.2 73.8 68.0 150.9 166.4 118.1 132.9 60.6 61.9 54.8 131.6 85.6 73.6 85.7 77.0 88.4 92.5 116.7 52.8 52.2 50.5 106.1 62.3 63.4 63.3 42.0 71.7 72.8 72.8 66.3 69.7 118.6 62.2 62.6 45.3

East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Conductor Control Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Conductor Reference Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Conductor Reference Suspension Shoe Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Damper Clamp Surface Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Conductor Reference Repair Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Conductor Reference West Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface NEMA Pad Busbar Busbar Surface Conductor Core NEMA Pad Conductor Surface Clamp Surface NEMA Pad Conductor Conductor Reference Strain Clamp Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Marker Ball

7-3

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

Figures 7-1 through 7-6 provide a graphical illustration of the thermal distributions at the reference core thermocouple, the conductor core within the component, and the conductor surface within the component. These plots are arranged for easy comparison between thermal distributions in the North and South conductors. Figures 7-1 and 7-2 show the thermal distribution for the reference thermocouples, which are again, located roughly 3-ft or more from each component. Comparing Figures 7-1 and 7-2 with the comparable plots from previous tests (Figures 4-2, 4-3, 5-3, 5-4, 6-3, and 6-4) youll notice that the plot of reference temperatures for the Merrimack tests is somewhat smoother than the comparable plots from the previous tests. This shows that moving the reference thermocouples to locations further from the adjacent components may have lessened thermal effects of adjacent components on the measured reference temperatures. Figures 7-3 and 7-4 once again show clear spikes in the core temperature at the North conductor line guard and marker ball, and at the South marker ball and damper. But, other than the marker ball on the North conductor, all of these temperature spikes are still below the target conductor operating temperature. This is a change from the Suwannee test in which the South conductor marker ball yielded a temperature above the target. The reason the South marker ball did not generate a higher temperature in this test is that the marker ball was removed for the 250C temperature to minimize further damage from melting of the marker ball. As was the case for the Suwannee tests, there are no temperature spikes in these tests associated with the compression joints and there is a noticeable dip in temperatures at the tower attachment points. Figures 7-5 and 7-6 illustrate the same results. Figures 7-7 through 7-12 provide the same types of graphical presentation of results for the tests with wind. These plots illustrate the significant cooling effect of a light wind. Even the marker balls, while not cooled as effectively as other components, were cooled sufficiently to keep the conductor temperatures below target temperatures in this test.

Summary
In summary, the results of static testing of the ACSS/TW Suwannee conductor seem to indicate minimal excessive heating of conductor components other than marker balls should be expected at operating temperatures up to 250C. The results also show that the effect of a light wind on the conductor (+2.7-mph) has a significant cooling effect on the conductor and attached components. The cooling effect of the wind appears somewhat less effective at the marker ball locations, yet adequate.

7-4

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250 0.0

East Compression DE Line Guard Compression Splice AGS Unit

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

180 Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper Marker Ball Spacer Damper

90

Figure 7-1 Merrimack North Conductor without Wind Reference Temperatures

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

0.0

East Compression DE

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

Suspension Shoe

180

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 7-2 Merrimack South Conductor without Wind Reference Temperatures

Strain Clamp

90

7-5

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250 0.0

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

East Compression DE

180

Line Guard

Compression Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

AGS Unit

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 7-3 Merrimack North Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperatures

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Spacer Damper

90

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

Suspension Shoe

180

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 7-4 Merrimack South Conductor without Wind Conductor Core Temperatures

7-6

Strain Clamp

90

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250 0.0

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

East Compression DE

Line Guard

180

Compression Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

AGS Unit

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 7-5 Merrimack North Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

East Compression DE

0.0

Spacer Damper

90

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

Suspension Shoe

180

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 7-6 Merrimack South Conductor without Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures

Strain Clamp

90

7-7

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250 0.0

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

East Compression DE

Line Guard

180

Compression Splice

AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 7-7 Merrimack North Conductor with Wind Reference Temperatures

300.0

250.0

200.0

Ref. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250

100.0

50.0

0.0

East Compression DE

Spacer Damper

90

Marker Ball

Compression Splice

180

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE

NEMA Pad

Figure 7-8 Merrimack South Conductor with Wind Reference Temperatures

7-8

Strain Clamp

90

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250 0.0

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

East Compression DE

180

Line Guard

Compression Splice

AGS Unit

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

Damper

Marker Ball

Figure 7-9 Merrimack North Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperatures

300.0

250.0

200.0

Core Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250
East Compression DE Marker Ball Compression Splice Suspension Shoe

100.0

50.0

0.0

Spacer Damper

90

180
Damper Repair Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

West Compression DE NEMA Pad Strain Clamp

90

Figure 7-10 Merrimack South Conductor with Wind Conductor Core Temperatures

7-9

ACSS/TW Merrimack Conductor Static Thermal Tests

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0

100.0

50.0 250
East Compression DE

250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0

0.0

180
Line Guard Compression Splice

Test Temp. (Deg. C)

AGS Unit Damper Marker Ball Spacer Damper

90

Figure 7-11 Merrimack North Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures

300.0

250.0

200.0

Surf. Temp. (Deg. C) 150.0 250.0-300.0 200.0-250.0 150.0-200.0 100.0-150.0 50.0-100.0 0.0-50.0 250
East Compression DE Marker Ball Compression Splice Suspension Shoe

100.0

50.0

0.0
Damper Repair Splice West Compression DE

180 Test Temp. (Deg. C)

NEMA Pad Strain Clamp

90

Figure 7-12 Merrimack South Conductor with Wind Conductor Surface Temperatures

7-10

8
ACSR CONDUCTOR - CYCLIC THERMAL TEST
Overview
When conductors and their associated hardware are subjected to varying thermal loads, the continuous thermal cycling may contribute to the degradation of the in-service components. In particular, compression splices and joints are subject to accelerated degradation due to cyclic thermal loading. In fact, ANSI C119.4 [3] specifies a current cycle test that is used to qualify the design of these compression joints. Since conductors are subjected to cyclic thermal loading over the duration of their life, it is important to assess the effects of these thermal cycles on the performance of the conductor and associated components. Therefore, a cyclic thermal loading test was designed to begin to gain a better understanding of the effects thermal cycling to emergency operating temperatures over the lifetime of a conductor.

Test Plan
The test was set up in the same way as the previous tests, using same test frame, thermal control, and instrumentation package. The ACSR Drake conductor was selected for this first cyclic thermal loading test because it is the most common of the conductors tested so far, in terms of installed transmission conductor miles. A new ACSR Drake conductor was installed in the test frame using new compression joints. Other components were reused from the previous static thermal test of the ACSR Drake conductor. Thermocouples were installed in the same locations as for the static thermal testing. The load control program was modified to continuously cycle the temperature of the conductor core between 50C and 125C over the course of several weeks. The defined thermal loading cycle consisted of a 1-hr hold at 50C, a ramp of conductor temperature to 125C, a hold of the temperature at 125C for 1-hr, and finally a reduction of the temperature back to 50C. The planned thermal loading cycles are illustrated in Figure 8-1 for an ambient temperature of 30C. Actual heating and cooling times will vary with ambient temperature and other external factors. However the load control program is based on the 1-hr duration at 50C and 1-hr duration at 125C and these temperatures and durations are valid for the control temperature regardless of the other external factors. A safety feature was programmed into the thermal loading control program to monitor the thermocouple temperatures and shut down the test if any of the thermocouple temperatures ever exceeded a prescribed thermal limit. In the case of the ACSR Drake conductor this thermal limit was set at 250C. This feature was added to avoid possible damage to equipment or the test article if a thermal runaway situation ever developed. 8-1

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

160

140

120

100

80

Tambient Tconductor

60

40

20

0 0:00 2:24 4:48 7:12 Time (Hr:Min) 9:36 12:00 14:24

Figure 8-1 Applied Thermal Loading Cycles

For the duration of the test, thermocouple measurements were recorded with the data acquisition system. Once each week, infrared images of each component were recorded while the test was in a 1-hr hold period at 125C. The test was set up to run continuously for approximately one week at a time, conducting approximately 40 thermal cycles each week. At the end of each week, the thermocouple data was downloaded and saved and the test was restarted for the next week. Testing was planned to run for approximately seven weeks (or 280-cycles), which would be sufficient to yield about a 10% loss in aluminum strength due to annealing. However, an extra week of testing was conducted to yield a total of approximately 320 thermal cycles over the duration of testing.

Presentation & Discussion of Results

These tests generated an extremely large volume of data and it is not possible to present the complete data set. The data was first separated into daily files showing all the temperature measurements for that day. Figure 8-2 is a sample plot showing all the temperature data collected for the first full day of testing. Note that most of the maximum temperatures measured are at or below the 125C maximum target conductor temperature. Although this is not evident from this plot, the only measurements that exceed the target temperature of 125C for any of these cycles are at the marker ball on the South conductor.

8-2

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

16 0

14 0

12 0

Temp-Degrees C

10 0

80

60

40

20

0 19:12 0:00 4:48 9:36 14:24 19:12 0:00 4:48

Time (Hr:Min)

Figure 8-2 All Temperature Data Collected for First Full Day of Testing

Figures 8-3 and 8-4 show the data for only the compression splices on the North and South conductors, respectively, on that first full day of testing. Note the similarity in these plots. None of the measured temperatures are at or above the 125C maximum conductor temperature and the maximums for both splices are approximately the same. The figures presented to this point illustrate the general characteristics of the tests and the data. However, it is not practical to present all of the results in this fashion. Therefore, these detailed time history plots will be presented only where they offer specific value to our understanding of the test results. Rather than presenting detailed time history data, it seems more appropriate to show average maximum temperatures measured at points of interest at different times during the test. Therefore, the results will be summarized based on these average maximum temperatures during the 125C hold period of the 3rd, 80th, 160th, 240th, and 320th cycles. Tables 8-1 and 8-2 present these average maximum temperature measurements for the North and South conductors, respectively. Tables 8-3 and 8-4 present the temperatures for both conductors normalized to 125C. Excluding the reference thermocouples, the only measurement locations that exceed the maximum conductor temperature of 125C are at the marker ball on the South conductor, the compression splice on the South conductor, and the compression dead end on the North conductor. Figures 8-5 through 8-15 are plots showing the thermal trends for each component during the cyclic thermal loading tests. These plots help us to better visualize the data shown in Tables 8-1 through 8-4. These figures are grouped by similar components for ease of comparison.

8-3

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

140

120

100

80

N-Splice-Reference N-Splice-CondCore N-Splice-CondSurface

60

N-Splice-SpliceSurface

40

20

0 19:12 0:00 4:48 9:36 14:24 19:12 0:00 4:48 Time (Hr:Min)

Figure 8-3 Temperature Measurements for Compression Splice on North Conductor for First Full Day of Testing

140

120

100

80

S-Splice-Reference S-Splice-Core S-Splice-CondSurface

60

S-Splice-SpliceSurface

40

20

0 19:12 0:00 4:48 9:36 14:24 19:12 0:00 4:48 Time (Hr:Min)

Figure 8-4 Temperature Measurements for Compression Splice on South Conductor for First Full Day of Testing

8-4

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test Table 8-1 ACSR North Conductor Cyclic Loading Test Temperatures
Avg. Temp. @ Component Measurement Location Ambient Ambient Reference East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Line Guard Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference AGS Unit Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Reference Damper Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Marker Ball Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Strain Clamp Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

125 C - Cycle 3 125 C - Cycle 80 125 C - Cycle 160 125 C - Cycle 240 125 C - Cycle 320 25.0 32.3 29.5 29.2 29.3 97.4 102.8 110.7 141.1 153.2 73.1 84.0 96.8 150.7 162.2 73.1 84.3 96.4 146.4 162.6 69.8 81.4 93.4 139.3 154.4 113.1 122.9 123.5 122.0 119.4 99.1 119.7 123.6 117.1 113.5 92.1 115.0 120.4 115.5 111.8 90.0 106.6 109.1 103.7 102.0 119.0 122.4 122.3 121.3 121.9 105.1 115.0 106.3 103.3 105.2 102.8 112.4 104.0 101.0 102.9 93.0 92.6 90.2 94.0 96.1 59.6 70.3 64.3 62.7 65.3 56.1 66.5 61.0 59.9 62.1 46.3 53.5 48.6 48.6 49.2 39.6 48.2 43.5 44.0 44.0 93.0 92.6 90.2 94.0 96.1 90.0 91.0 88.1 90.7 91.6 79.6 82.1 79.2 81.5 82.2 120.1 118.0 116.5 119.1 117.4 116.5 111.9 114.1 117.0 114.5 109.3 105.8 107.1 109.5 107.1 27.1 35.3 107.3 106.6 106.0 53.0 58.6 56.1 57.8 57.0 55.7 60.8 58.2 59.8 59.1 46.8 52.9 50.9 52.4 51.3

Table 8-2 ACSR South Conductor Cyclic Loading Test Temperatures

Avg. Temp. @ Component Ambient Compression DE Measurement Location Ambient Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Reference Conductor Core Clamp Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Compression Splice

Marker Ball

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Mechanical Splice

Strain Clamp

125 C - Cycle 3 125 C - Cycle 80 125 C - Cycle 160 125 C - Cycle 240 125 C - Cycle 320 25.0 32.3 29.5 29.2 29.3 102.4 101.1 103.8 104.6 103.4 73.5 76.3 77.5 79.6 78.1 74.6 77.2 78.6 80.7 79.2 62.8 66.8 68.4 70.0 69.1 113.8 129.5 126.9 134.9 131.5 100.5 136.2 132.7 149.9 143.2 92.4 121.8 118.5 133.8 128.5 97.5 132.4 128.7 145.2 138.9 125.6 122.9 125.7 126.9 124.8 131.3 125.8 131.1 133.2 129.9 127.4 122.1 126.2 128.1 124.5 96.3 98.2 96.7 97.7 98.0 57.0 68.7 65.4 65.4 65.1 58.3 66.8 61.6 61.4 60.3 45.0 55.5 51.9 52.3 51.6 96.3 98.2 96.7 97.7 98.0 92.6 94.5 91.9 92.9 93.7 26.1 83.5 80.4 81.0 81.7 99.4 102.6 104.9 106.1 104.1 55.9 59.0 61.7 63.3 62.7 55.1 58.0 60.6 62.2 61.6 95.1 96.8 99.3 100.0 100.0 48.3 55.8 54.0 55.4 54.3 52.1 59.0 57.1 58.5 57.5 25.6 52.3 50.5 51.7 50.6

8-5

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test Table 8-3 ACSR North Cyclic Loading Temperatures Normalized to Target Maximum Temperature
Avg. Temp. @ Component Measurement Location Ambient Ambient Reference East Compression DE Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Compression Splice Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Line Guard Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference AGS Unit Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Reference Damper Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Marker Ball Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Strain Clamp Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

125 C - Cycle 3 125 C - Cycle 80 125 C - Cycle 160 125 C - Cycle 240 125 C - Cycle 320 0.20 0.26 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.78 0.82 0.89 1.13 1.23 0.58 0.67 0.77 1.21 1.30 0.58 0.67 0.77 1.17 1.30 0.56 0.65 0.75 1.11 1.23 0.90 0.98 0.99 0.98 0.96 0.79 0.96 0.99 0.94 0.91 0.74 0.92 0.96 0.92 0.89 0.72 0.85 0.87 0.83 0.82 0.95 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.84 0.92 0.85 0.83 0.84 0.82 0.90 0.83 0.81 0.82 0.74 0.74 0.72 0.75 0.77 0.48 0.56 0.51 0.50 0.52 0.45 0.53 0.49 0.48 0.50 0.37 0.43 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.32 0.39 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.74 0.74 0.72 0.75 0.77 0.72 0.73 0.71 0.73 0.73 0.64 0.66 0.63 0.65 0.66 0.96 0.94 0.93 0.95 0.94 0.93 0.89 0.91 0.94 0.92 0.87 0.85 0.86 0.88 0.86 0.22 0.28 0.86 0.85 0.85 0.42 0.47 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.45 0.49 0.47 0.48 0.47 0.37 0.42 0.41 0.42 0.41

Table 8-4 ACSR South Conductor Cyclic Loading Temperatures Normalized to Target Maximum Temperature
Avg. Temp. @ Component Ambient Compression DE Measurement Location Ambient Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Reference Conductor Core Clamp Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Avg. Temp. @
o

Compression Splice

Marker Ball

Suspension Shoe

Damper

Mechanical Splice

Strain Clamp

125 C - Cycle 3 125 C - Cycle 80 125 C - Cycle 160 125 C - Cycle 240 125 C - Cycle 320 0.20 0.26 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.82 0.81 0.83 0.84 0.83 0.59 0.61 0.62 0.64 0.62 0.60 0.62 0.63 0.65 0.63 0.50 0.53 0.55 0.56 0.55 0.91 1.04 1.01 1.08 1.05 0.80 1.09 1.06 1.20 1.15 0.74 0.97 0.95 1.07 1.03 0.78 1.06 1.03 1.16 1.11 1.01 0.98 1.01 1.02 1.00 1.05 1.01 1.05 1.07 1.04 1.02 0.98 1.01 1.02 1.00 0.77 0.79 0.77 0.78 0.78 0.46 0.55 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.47 0.53 0.49 0.49 0.48 0.36 0.44 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.77 0.79 0.77 0.78 0.78 0.74 0.76 0.74 0.74 0.75 0.21 0.67 0.64 0.65 0.65 0.80 0.82 0.84 0.85 0.83 0.45 0.47 0.49 0.51 0.50 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50 0.49 0.76 0.77 0.79 0.80 0.80 0.39 0.45 0.43 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.47 0.46 0.47 0.46 0.21 0.42 0.40 0.41 0.41

8-6

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

Looking at Figures 8-5 and 8-6 for the compression dead end components, it is clear that the dead end component on the North conductor developed a thermal problem during the test while the dead end on the South conductor did not. The North compression dead end started out at a temperature well below the conductor operating temperature. Figure 8-5 clearly shows that the temperature of this compression fitting is steadily increasing as more thermal cycles are applied to the conductor. Comparing this dead end with the dead end on the South conductor, note that the starting temperatures were comparable, but that the South dead end was able to sustain those low operating temperatures throughout the testing. This leads us to the conclusion that there is probably a construction flaw in the compression dead end on the North conductor. Figures 8-7 and 8-8 show the thermal trends for the compression splices on the North and South conductors, respectively. These plots show that the compression splice on the South developed a thermal problem during the test while the splice on the North conductor did not. Notice that once again the thermal behavior of the two splices was almost identical in the third cycle, but it begins to deviate significantly by the 80th cycle. Comparing Figures 8-5 and 8-8, it appears that the problem on the compression dead end is more severe that the problem on the splice. Its interesting to note that, while the splice temperatures were only 25C below the conductor temperature on the 3rd cycle, this compression dead end temperatures started out over 50C below the conductor temperature. By the time we reached the 320th cycle the North dead end temperatures were running about 25C above conductor temperature while the South splice temperatures were running only about 10C above the conductor temperature. Figures 8-9 and 8-10 show the thermal trends at the marker ball locations. The measured temperatures at these locations are fairly uniform for all five of the cycles presented. For these five cycles the core temperature averages 130C and the surface temperature averages just over 125C inside the South marker ball. This marker ball was the clamp-on type. The data shows that the wrap-type marker ball on the North conductor generates lower temperatures within the marker, less that the 125C conductor operating temperature. Figures 8-11 and 8-12 show the thermal trends during the cyclic thermal loading test for the suspension shoe and AGS unit attachments to the support structure. These plots also show uniform temperature behavior throughout the test with temperatures in the area of the suspension shoe and AGS unit well below the nominal conductor operating temperature. Looking through Figures 8-13 through 8-18 we see the same trend for all of the remaining components. Each component shows a generally uniform maximum temperature throughout the cyclic loading test with temperatures below the nominal conductor maximum temperature. The temperatures for the dampers and the line guard are higher than the remaining component, but still uniform throughout the test.

8-7

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Ref Cond Core Cond Surface

80.0

DE Surface

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycle 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-5 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Compression Dead End

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

Dead End Surface

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-6 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Compression Dead End

8-8

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

Splice Surface

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-7 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Compression Splice

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

Splice Surface

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-8 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Compression Splice

8-9

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-9 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Marker Ball (Wrap-on Type)
180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-10 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Marker Ball (Clamp-on Type)

8-10

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

Rubber Interface

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 1 2 3 Cycles 4 5 6

Figure 8-11 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North AGS Unit

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

Clamp

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-12 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Suspension Shoe

8-11

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-13 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Damper

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Clamp Surface

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-14 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Damper

8-12

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

Clamp Surface

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-15 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Mechanical Strain Clamp

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

Clamp Surface

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-16 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Mechanical Strain Clamp

8-13

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-17 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for North Line Guard

180.0

160.0

140.0

120.0

100.0

Reference Conductor Core Conductor Surface

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 0 50 100 150 Cycles 200 250 300 350

Figure 8-18 Thermal Trend During Cyclic Test for South Mechanical Splice

8-14

ACSR Conductor - Cyclic Thermal Test

Summary
In summary, the results of cyclic thermal testing of the ACSR Drake conductor and components indicates that no long term degradation in the thermal behavior of components other than compression joints is likely as a result of cyclically applied emergency operating temperatures. However, the cyclically applied emergency operating temperatures have been shown to generate degraded electrical and thermal behavior in one-half of the compression joints included in this test. Each compression joint was prepared according to manufacturers recommendations, so no known flaws exist. However, post-test forensic evidence for these connections has not yet been collected and therefore a firm cause for the thermal degradation cant be stated at this time. Further analysis of the joints is necessary. These results cannot be construed to indicate that there are not other areas of physical degradation of the tested components, since post-test forensics have not yet been performed on any of these components. While the electrical and thermal performance of the connections may have remained sound throughout the test, there may still be physical degradation such as loss of mechanical strength that has not yet been documented. Further work is required to make this assessment.

8-15

9
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Overview
In todays competitive and regulatory environment, utilities are required to maximize power transfer over existing right-of-ways (ROW). Most utilities are pursuing the lower capital-expense (cost) option of increasing thermal operating limits and pushing more current through existing conductors and associated hardware, rather than investing in the expense of upgrading to larger conductors. As a result, conductors and the associated hardware and attachments may be subjected to higher temperatures, more frequently and for longer periods than in the past. Previous EPRI research [1] has investigated how high temperature operation affects the mechanical properties of bare overhead conductors. This past research considered only the behavior of bare conductors. It did not investigate the affect of high temperature operation on conductor connectors, attachments, and other related hardware. The objective of this project is to evaluate the effect of high temperature conductor operation on the performance of conductor connectors, attachments, and other hardware. The initial work has focused on experimentally determining the temperature distribution in the conductor, hardware, and associated components in the attachment areas of the conductor system. A test frame was constructed that simulated the tower attachment point and two short spans of conductor with various attached hardware items. The conductor was arranged in a loop so that there were actually two conductors, a North conductor and a South conductor. Attached hardware in the tests included compression dead ends, compression splices, marker balls, suspension clamps and armor rods, Armor Grip Suspension units, Stockbridge dampers, line guards, mechanical splices, compression repair sleeves, mechanical strain clamps, compression terminal lugs with NEMA pads, and busbars. The specific hardware varied somewhat between tests. The majority of testing was static thermal testing of conductors to establish thermal performance of components under controlled steady-state conductor operating temperatures. One cyclic thermal test was performed in which the conductor with attached components was cycled between typical nominal and emergency operating temperatures for a large number of cycles to simulate cyclic thermal conditions a conductor might encounter over its life. Thermal loading was generated by applying a controlled current to the conductor using a DC transformer. Thermocouples were used to record temperatures in the conductor and hardware during testing. Generally, thermocouples were placed on the conductor core, conductor surface, and hardware surface for each test. In addition, reference thermocouples were placed on the core of the conductor near the various hardware components. 9-1

Summary and Conclusions

Summary of Static Thermal Tests

Static testing was conducted on four different conductors: (1) 795-kcmil AAC Arbutus, (2) 795-kcmil ACSR Drake, (3) 959.6-kcmil ACSS/TW Suwannee, and (4) 1433.6-kcmil ACSS/TW Merrimack. In each test, the conductor was equipped with an assortment of typical connectors, attachments, and hardware, and tested at varying increasing operating temperatures to measure the thermal behavior of the conductor and associated components. Maximum operating temperatures tested were 120C for the AAC, 150C for the ACSR, and 250C for the ACSS/TW. Tests were performed at each conductor temperature without wind and with a simulated wind of approximately 4-ft/sec. Because applied thermal loading varied by conductor type, it makes sense to compare the results by normalizing measured temperatures to the target conductor temperature for the test. These ratios are shown in Tables 9-1 through 9-4 for the tests without wind and Tables 9-5 and 9-8 for the tests with wind. Blank fields in these tables simply indicate that the reference component was not included in the test or that a thermocouple was not installed at that location for the test. Values of 1.0 or greater have been placed in bold characters in the tables to call attention to them. Values greater than 1.0 indicate that the measured temperature was greater than the nominal conductor temperature at the core. Looking at Tables 9-1 through 9-4 for the tests without wind, three things become clear. First, the temperature ratios for the ACSS conductors tend to be lower than the ratios for the AAC and ACSR conductors. This can probably be attributed to the fact that the absolute test temperatures for the ACSS conductors were much higher relative to ambient temperature than the tests for the AAC and ACSR conductors. If we look only at temperature ratios for the 90C temperature, which was tested for all four conductors, we see that the temperature ratios are much more similar between the conductors. Second, the compression splice on the South conductor was operating at temperatures above the nominal conductor temperature for both the AAC and ACSR tests, but not for the ACSS tests. Third, the marker ball on the South conductor, which is the clamp-on type, was caused conductor temperatures to be slightly elevated for each test. Conversely, the marker ball on the North conductor, which is the wrap-type, yielded slightly elevated conductor temperatures only for the last few tests of the ACSS/TW Merrimack conductor. Looking at Tables 9-5 through 9-8 for the tests with wind, it appears that the temperature ratios are generally significantly lower than the ratios for the tests without wind. This was expected because of the cooling effect of the simulated wind. However, there are two exceptions to this. First, the temperature ratios for the compression dead end and compression splice on the South ACSR Drake conductor are significantly higher for the with wind case than they were for the without wind case. The ratios for these components show that they were operating above the nominal conductor temperature. This result doesnt seem logical, since you would expect the wind to cool the component. The reason for this occurrence is a thermal failure of the subject compression fittings. This failure was evident for the compression splice during the tests without wind, but it didnt become apparent for the dead end fitting until the tests with wind were conducted. Second, the temperatures at the marker ball locations are nearly as high for the tests with wind as they were for the tests without wind. This makes sense because the conductor within the marker ball is shielded from the wind. 9-2

Summary and Conclusions Table 9-1 Normalized Temperatures for North AAC and ACSR Conductor without Wind
AAC Arbutus Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Line Guard Line Guard AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit Damper Damper Damper Marker Ball Marker Ball Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Spacer Damper Spacer Damper Spacer Damper
o o o o o o o

ACSR Drake
o o o o

Measurement Location 50 C 75 C 90 C 105 C 120 C 50 C 75 C 90 C 110 C 130 C 150 C Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface 0.82 0.81 0.79 0.93 0.92 0.87 1.00 0.98 0.78 0.76 0.67 0.63 0.88 0.87 0.89 0.85 0.70 0.70 0.65 0.74 0.74 0.71 0.92 0.91 0.85 0.94 0.91 0.72 0.71 0.61 0.57 0.82 0.81 0.82 0.77 0.63 0.63 0.57 0.71 0.71 0.67 0.89 0.88 0.81 0.92 0.88 0.67 0.65 0.51 0.45 0.81 0.80 0.82 0.75 0.55 0.56 0.48 0.69 0.69 0.65 0.89 0.88 0.80 0.91 0.86 0.68 0.66 0.53 0.47 0.78 0.77 0.79 0.62 0.56 0.56 0.48 0.66 0.66 0.62 0.91 0.90 0.80 0.91 0.86 0.64 0.63 0.48 0.42 0.73 0.72 0.73 0.56 0.50 0.50 0.43 0.81 0.81 0.79 0.94 0.94 0.81 0.90 0.90 0.75 0.76 0.73 0.69 0.89 0.87 0.97 0.97 0.73 0.73 0.71 0.72 0.72 0.68 0.97 0.96 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.69 0.71 0.65 0.61 0.85 0.84 0.97 0.97 0.68 0.67 0.62 0.68 0.69 0.64 0.92 0.90 0.87 0.88 0.87 0.60 0.63 0.56 0.52 0.82 0.80 0.94 0.95 0.58 0.58 0.53 0.63 0.64 0.58 0.89 0.87 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.54 0.57 0.50 0.45 0.79 0.76 0.93 0.93 0.53 0.53 0.47 0.60 0.61 0.55 0.81 0.79 0.75 0.80 0.79 0.45 0.48 0.40 0.34 0.73 0.70 0.91 0.92 0.46 0.46 0.40 0.60 0.61 0.54 0.86 0.84 0.80 0.80 0.79 0.44 0.47 0.39 0.33 0.74 0.71 0.92 0.92 0.45 0.44 0.39

Table 9-2 Normalized Temperatures for North ACSS/TW Conductors without Wind
ACSS/TW Suwannee Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Line Guard Line Guard AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit Damper Damper Damper Marker Ball Marker Ball Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Spacer Damper Spacer Damper Spacer Damper
o o o o o o

ACSS/TW Merrimack
o o o o

Measurement Location 90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C 90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface 0.61 0.60 0.54 0.74 0.65 0.73 0.90 0.90 0.55 0.56 0.43 0.41 0.64 0.63 0.46 0.95 0.94 0.58 0.56 0.49 0.70 0.58 0.68 0.88 0.87 0.51 0.52 0.38 0.35 0.61 0.60 0.39 0.93 0.93 0.51 0.49 0.40 0.66 0.62 0.64 0.85 0.83 0.47 0.49 0.30 0.26 0.55 0.54 0.36 0.91 0.89 0.55 0.53 0.40 0.69 0.65 0.67 0.87 0.86 0.50 0.51 0.31 0.27 0.58 0.56 0.43 0.97 0.96 0.52 0.50 0.37 0.69 0.60 0.67 0.82 0.81 0.42 0.43 0.25 0.22 0.51 0.49 0.38 0.94 0.92 0.58 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.57 0.52 0.76 0.76 0.46 0.38 0.36 0.31 0.61 0.59 0.45 0.99 0.92 0.49 0.49 0.48 0.44 0.46 0.42 0.70 0.70 0.39 0.30 0.29 0.24 0.55 0.52 0.38 0.91 0.84 0.51 0.50 0.48 0.52 0.55 0.47 0.73 0.73 0.44 0.30 0.32 0.26 0.60 0.57 0.40 1.03 0.92 0.50 0.49 0.47 0.51 0.53 0.46 0.76 0.75 0.43 0.30 0.29 0.23 0.61 0.58 0.40 1.06 0.90 0.49 0.48 0.45 0.49 0.50 0.42 0.71 0.70 0.42 0.38 0.29 0.24 0.58 0.56 0.38 1.03 0.85

0.69 0.68 0.60

0.69 0.68 0.59

0.61 0.61 0.48

0.66 0.65 0.51

0.62 0.62 0.47

0.68 0.64 0.52

0.60 0.55 0.44

0.65 0.59 0.47

0.66 0.55 0.46

0.64 0.54 0.44

9-3

Summary and Conclusions Table 9-3 Normalized Temperatures for South AAC and ACSR Conductors without Wind
AAC Arbutus Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Marker Ball Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Damper Damper Damper Repair Splice Repair Splice Repair Splice Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE Busbar NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad
o o o o o o o

ACSR Drake
o o o o

Measurement Location 50 C 75 C 90 C 105 C 120 C 50 C 75 C 90 C 110 C 130 C 150 C Conductor Core 0.83 0.74 0.72 0.70 0.65 0.83 0.82 0.80 0.76 0.70 0.72 Conductor Surface 0.82 0.73 0.71 0.69 0.64 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.77 0.71 0.73 Dead End Surface 0.81 0.72 0.69 0.67 0.62 0.79 0.75 0.72 0.67 0.61 0.61 Conductor Core 1.05 1.05 1.14 1.21 1.31 0.92 1.17 1.11 1.10 1.02 1.13 Conductor Surface 1.04 1.02 1.10 1.16 1.21 0.92 1.15 1.09 1.08 1.01 1.11 Splice Surface 0.99 0.97 1.04 1.09 1.14 0.60 1.16 1.10 1.09 1.01 1.11 Conductor Core 1.10 1.02 1.12 1.07 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.03 1.01 1.05 1.06 Conductor Surface 1.06 0.98 1.05 1.01 0.97 1.04 1.03 1.02 1.01 1.04 1.05 Conductor Core 0.72 0.65 0.58 0.58 0.54 0.74 0.68 0.59 0.53 0.44 0.43 Conductor Surface 0.72 0.65 0.58 0.59 0.54 0.74 0.69 0.60 0.54 0.46 0.44 Clamp Surface 0.70 0.62 0.54 0.54 0.49 0.69 0.61 0.50 0.44 0.34 0.33 Clamp Surface 0.89 0.82 0.82 0.79 0.73 0.89 0.84 0.80 0.76 0.73 0.72 Conductor Surface Conductor Core 0.85 0.77 0.75 0.62 0.56 0.87 0.83 0.79 0.75 0.70 0.70 Conductor Core 0.73 0.64 0.57 0.55 0.50 0.77 0.67 0.61 0.55 0.47 0.47 Conductor Surface 0.73 0.64 0.58 0.56 0.51 0.76 0.66 0.60 0.54 0.46 0.45 Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface NEMA Pad Busbar Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface NEMA Pad 0.67 0.68 0.65 0.60 0.61 0.57 0.51 0.52 0.48 0.52 0.53 0.48 0.47 0.48 0.44 0.71 0.71 0.67 0.64 0.64 0.57 0.55 0.55 0.48 0.50 0.50 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.35 0.41 0.41 0.33

9-4

Summary and Conclusions Table 9-4 Normalized Temperatures for South ACSS Conductors without Wind
ACSS/TW Suwannee Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Marker Ball Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Damper Damper Damper Repair Splice Repair Splice Repair Splice Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE Busbar NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad Measurement Location Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface NEMA Pad Busbar Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface NEMA Pad
o o o o o o

ACSS/TW Merrimack
o o o o

90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C 90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C 0.65 0.61 0.55 0.60 0.57 0.58 0.49 0.53 0.51 0.50 0.64 0.60 0.53 0.59 0.55 0.58 0.48 0.52 0.50 0.49 0.61 0.58 0.50 0.55 0.52 0.55 0.46 0.47 0.45 0.44 0.67 0.63 0.54 0.57 0.55 0.55 0.43 0.54 0.51 0.48 0.64 0.60 0.52 0.55 0.53 0.54 0.42 0.53 0.50 0.48 0.58 0.53 0.49 0.52 0.49 0.53 0.42 0.52 0.49 0.41 1.06 1.07 1.07 1.10 1.09 1.06 0.99 1.07 1.08 0.96 0.92 0.91 0.92 0.97 1.05 0.87 0.80 0.83 0.84 0.72 0.53 0.50 0.44 0.45 0.40 0.32 0.27 0.41 0.38 0.36 0.51 0.47 0.40 0.42 0.37 0.28 0.20 0.17 0.32 0.30 0.44 0.40 0.31 0.32 0.27 0.43 0.35 0.39 0.37 0.36 0.75 0.71 0.68 0.71 0.67 0.63 0.58 0.58 0.59 0.57 0.67 0.62 0.57 0.60 0.56 0.70 0.65 0.68 0.71 0.68 0.71 0.67 0.62 0.65 0.62 0.72 0.67 0.70 0.72 0.69 0.66 0.64 0.52 0.59 0.56 0.61 0.49 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.66 0.64 0.52 0.59 0.57 0.61 0.48 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.64 0.61 0.50 0.56 0.53 0.60 0.48 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.57 0.53 0.44 0.46 0.43 0.46 0.40 0.40 0.39 0.38 0.54 0.49 0.40 0.41 0.39 0.47 0.40 0.41 0.40 0.39 0.43 0.36 0.24 0.25 0.22 0.39 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.28 0.53 0.49 0.40 0.41 0.38 0.52 0.43 0.48 0.46 0.47 0.53 0.48 0.39 0.40 0.37 0.52 0.44 0.49 0.47 0.47 0.48 0.46 0.37 0.38 0.34 0.54 0.46 0.50 0.48 0.48 0.47 0.42 0.32 0.33 0.29 0.42 0.36 0.35 0.33 0.33 0.47 0.42 0.31 0.32 0.29 0.47 0.43 0.41 0.41 0.40 0.54 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.37 0.51 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.55 0.51 0.40 0.41 0.38 0.51 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.52 0.47 0.36 0.37 0.34 0.48 0.44 0.42 0.41 0.41 0.48 0.43 0.33 0.33 0.30 0.47 0.43 0.41 0.40 0.39

9-5

Summary and Conclusions Table 9-5 Normalized Temperatures for North AAC and ACSR Conductors with Wind
AAC Arbutus Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Line Guard Line Guard AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit Damper Damper Damper Marker Ball Marker Ball Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Spacer Damper Spacer Damper Spacer Damper
o o o o o o o

ACSR Drake
o o o o

Measurement Location 50 C 75 C 90 C 105 C 120 C 50 C 75 C 90 C 110 C 130 C 150 C Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface 0.76 0.76 0.75 0.77 0.78 0.77 0.81 0.80 0.88 0.87 0.80 0.77 0.81 0.81 0.78 0.73 0.71 0.71 0.67 0.56 0.56 0.54 0.57 0.58 0.56 0.61 0.60 0.75 0.73 0.62 0.58 0.60 0.59 0.66 0.57 0.53 0.54 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.47 0.51 0.51 0.49 0.53 0.52 0.63 0.61 0.51 0.48 0.57 0.56 0.53 0.48 0.47 0.48 0.42 0.47 0.46 0.44 0.47 0.48 0.46 0.53 0.51 0.74 0.72 0.56 0.50 0.48 0.48 0.51 0.40 0.45 0.45 0.33 0.48 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.40 0.47 0.45 0.68 0.66 0.50 0.44 0.66 0.64 0.58 0.44 0.40 0.40 0.29 0.66 0.66 0.63 0.79 0.78 0.75 0.73 0.73 0.63 0.64 0.59 0.56 0.69 0.68 0.81 0.82 0.63 0.63 0.59 0.56 0.56 0.52 0.73 0.71 0.67 0.66 0.65 0.52 0.54 0.47 0.43 0.55 0.54 0.71 0.72 0.48 0.48 0.43 0.52 0.52 0.48 0.71 0.69 0.66 0.65 0.64 0.49 0.51 0.43 0.39 0.57 0.56 0.77 0.78 0.46 0.45 0.39 0.52 0.52 0.46 0.75 0.72 0.68 0.64 0.63 0.43 0.45 0.36 0.31 0.53 0.50 0.82 0.83 0.37 0.36 0.28 0.44 0.44 0.40 0.63 0.62 0.58 0.54 0.54 0.37 0.39 0.31 0.27 0.48 0.46 0.76 0.77 0.35 0.35 0.27 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.73 0.70 0.65 0.61 0.60 0.39 0.42 0.33 0.28 0.45 0.43 0.74 0.75 0.35 0.35 0.25

Table 9-6 Normalized Temperatures for ACSS Conductors with Wind

ACSS/TW Suwannee Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Line Guard Line Guard AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit AGS Unit Damper Damper Damper Marker Ball Marker Ball Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Spacer Damper Spacer Damper Spacer Damper
o o o o o o

ACSS/TW Merrimack
o o o o

Measurement Location 90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C 90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Rubber Interface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface 0.45 0.44 0.40 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.58 0.57 0.53 0.52 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.33 0.26 0.71 0.70 0.36 0.35 0.32 0.37 0.36 0.36 0.48 0.47 0.48 0.46 0.33 0.31 0.28 0.27 0.20 0.68 0.67 0.30 0.29 0.25 0.31 0.30 0.31 0.46 0.45 0.43 0.42 0.28 0.25 0.28 0.27 0.14 0.74 0.73 0.28 0.27 0.22 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.29 0.28 0.43 0.41 0.27 0.24 0.30 0.29 0.24 0.61 0.59 0.28 0.27 0.21 0.29 0.24 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.33 0.31 0.23 0.24 0.30 0.28 0.22 0.62 0.60 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.43 0.41 0.56 0.56 0.46 0.37 0.38 0.35 0.48 0.46 0.40 0.72 0.69 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.33 0.35 0.32 0.48 0.48 0.44 0.29 0.35 0.33 0.43 0.41 0.31 0.78 0.72 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.26 0.28 0.27 0.49 0.48 0.39 0.26 0.29 0.25 0.36 0.34 0.26 0.62 0.54 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.23 0.24 0.22 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.38 0.31 0.27 0.35 0.34 0.24 0.62 0.52 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.26 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.35 0.29 0.24 0.32 0.30 0.21 0.68 0.56

0.38 0.37 0.32

0.35 0.35 0.27

0.27 0.26 0.18

0.33 0.34 0.26

0.23 0.22 0.17

0.50 0.47 0.43

0.40 0.36 0.31

0.37 0.32 0.28

0.34 0.29 0.25

0.30 0.24 0.21

9-6

Summary and Conclusions Table 9-7 Normalized Temperatures for South AAC and ACSR Conductors with Wind
AAC Arbutus Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Marker Ball Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Damper Damper Damper Repair Splice Repair Splice Repair Splice Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE Busbar NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad
o o o o o o o

ACSR Drake
o o o o

Measurement Location 50 C 75 C 90 C 105 C 120 C 50 C 75 C 90 C 110 C 130 C 150 C Conductor Core 0.75 0.55 0.48 0.45 0.56 0.98 0.97 0.95 1.17 0.99 1.01 Conductor Surface 0.75 0.55 0.48 0.45 0.55 0.99 0.98 0.96 1.19 1.00 1.03 Dead End Surface 0.74 0.54 0.47 0.43 0.53 0.82 0.75 0.72 0.88 0.74 0.73 Conductor Core 0.88 0.76 0.73 0.80 0.65 1.23 1.46 1.59 1.69 1.45 1.46 Conductor Surface 0.85 0.70 0.67 0.71 0.56 1.21 1.42 1.55 1.66 1.42 1.42 Splice Surface 0.82 0.66 0.63 0.64 0.49 1.22 1.43 1.56 1.61 1.38 1.39 Conductor Core 0.99 0.90 0.87 0.96 0.91 1.03 1.04 1.03 1.05 0.89 0.96 Conductor Surface 0.97 0.87 0.83 0.91 0.82 1.01 1.02 1.01 1.04 0.88 0.95 Conductor Core 0.78 0.59 0.49 0.51 0.43 0.59 0.47 0.44 0.38 0.33 0.34 Conductor Surface 0.78 0.60 0.49 0.52 0.43 0.60 0.48 0.45 0.40 0.34 0.35 Clamp Surface 0.76 0.57 0.47 0.48 0.40 0.55 0.41 0.38 0.30 0.26 0.26 Clamp Surface 0.78 0.57 0.53 0.51 0.47 0.68 0.55 0.57 0.50 0.49 0.48 Conductor Surface Conductor Core 0.73 0.53 0.48 0.40 0.38 0.68 0.54 0.56 0.49 0.47 0.47 Conductor Core 0.67 0.57 0.44 0.34 0.40 0.56 0.45 0.41 0.38 0.32 0.34 Conductor Surface 0.67 0.58 0.45 0.35 0.40 0.56 0.45 0.40 0.37 0.31 0.33 Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface NEMA Pad Busbar Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface NEMA Pad 0.72 0.73 0.69 0.56 0.57 0.51 0.49 0.51 0.44 0.42 0.44 0.36 0.41 0.42 0.34 0.64 0.64 0.58 0.49 0.49 0.42 0.46 0.46 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.28 0.37 0.37 0.26 0.37 0.37 0.26

Summary of Cyclic Thermal Test

The cyclic thermal test was performed only on the 795-kcmil ACSR Drake conductor. The test setup for this test was the same as for the static thermal testing of the Drake conductor. The conductor was subjected to approximately 320-cycles of loading in which each cycle consisted of 1-hr operation at 50C conductor temperature, followed by an increase in conductor temperature to 125C and a 1-hr hold at that conductor temperature, followed by a reduction of conductor temperature back to 50C. The results of this test illustrated that the thermal behavior for most of the tested components was basically uniform throughout the test. There was no consistent increase or decrease in measured temperatures for any of the components other than the compression joints. In the case of the compression joints, half of the joints included in the tests showed a deterioration of thermal behavior during the course of the test. The compression splice on the South conductor began deteriorating very early in the test and generating temperatures above the nominal conductor temperatures well before the 80th cycle of testing. Evidence of deterioration in the compression dead end on the North conductor began much later in the test, but the joint was generating temperatures well above the nominal conductor temperature by the 240th cycle. In fact, this joint generated temperatures even higher than those generated by the compression splice by the end of the test. 9-7

Summary and Conclusions Table 9-8 Normalized Temperatures for South ACSS Conductors with Wind
ACSS/TW Suwannee Component East Compression DE East Compression DE East Compression DE Compression Splice Compression Splice Compression Splice Marker Ball Marker Ball Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Suspension Shoe Damper Damper Damper Repair Splice Repair Splice Repair Splice Strain Clamp Strain Clamp Strain Clamp West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE West Compression DE Busbar NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad NEMA Pad Measurement Location Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Surface Conductor Core Conductor Core Conductor Surface Splice Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Dead End Surface NEMA Pad Busbar Surface Conductor Core Conductor Surface Clamp Surface NEMA Pad
o o o o o o

ACSS/TW Merrimack
o o o o

90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C 90 C 125 C 180 C 200 C 250 C 0.48 0.48 0.46 0.45 0.44 0.43 0.90 0.84 0.50 0.48 0.41 0.34 0.30 0.32 0.41 0.42 0.39 0.45 0.43 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.90 0.81 0.43 0.41 0.33 0.29 0.25 0.26 0.36 0.36 0.33 0.39 0.37 0.26 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.91 0.84 0.38 0.36 0.28 0.42 0.34 0.37 0.33 0.33 0.31 0.30 0.27 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.23 0.24 0.22 0.19 0.31 0.38 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.26 0.91 0.85 0.35 0.33 0.25 0.38 0.31 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.29 0.25 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.20 0.34 0.33 0.31 0.34 0.33 0.29 0.89 0.58 0.28 0.26 0.19 0.39 0.31 0.35 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.21 0.19 0.13 0.21 0.21 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.91 0.77 0.31 0.32 0.42 0.50 0.53 0.55 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.53 0.53 0.47 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.37 0.42 0.46 0.46 0.43 0.43 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.77 0.63 0.35 0.28 0.39 0.49 0.54 0.56 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.28 0.38 0.44 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.31 0.31 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.30 0.83 0.66 0.33 0.18 0.35 0.38 0.42 0.44 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.35 0.36 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.23 0.33 0.37 0.38 0.34 0.33 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.81 0.65 0.35 0.31 0.35 0.35 0.39 0.41 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.27 0.29 0.21 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.20 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.23 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.24 0.25 0.22 0.67 0.47 0.34 0.29 0.34 0.31 0.35 0.37 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.25 0.25 0.18 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.27 0.28

Conclusions
Based on the results of these tests, a few limited conclusions can be made. First, it appears that components other than compression joints and marker balls are unlikely to generate temperatures that might lead to excessive degradation of the conductor or the components during high temperature operations. Temperatures generated in the areas of these components remained well below conductor operating temperatures throughout each test. Second, marker balls installed on the conductor clearly cause a slight increase on the conductor operating temperature in the region of the marker ball. This increase is more significant in the case of wind on the conductor, where the marker ball shields the conductor from the cooling effect of the wind. Third, a significant percentage (nearly half) of the compression joints included in the tests of AAC and ACSR conductors exhibited excessive temperatures, increasing over time, as a result of high temperature operations. This result occurred during both static and cyclic thermal testing. A forensic investigation of these joints to determine the reason for this behavior has not yet been done. However each joint was assembled according to manufacturer recommendations and is assumed to be as good as a typical joint on an installed transmission line.

9-8

Summary and Conclusions

Fourth, the compression joints on the ACSS/TW conductors performed admirably, showing no indication of thermal degradation during the course of the static testing. However, these static tests were fairly short duration with little if any cyclic nature to the test. Therefore, this result should be used with caution until additional cyclic thermal testing of the ACSS/TW conductors can be completed. Finally, it is impossible to make any conclusion regarding long-term effects of high temperature operations on the mechanical and electrical characteristics of the tested conductor and components until some further component testing can be completed. Based on the tests completed to date, we have no data to conclude whether the strength of the conductor or components has been impaired by these tests. Additional tests should be done to obtain this data.

Recommendations
These tests stopped short of measuring the effect of high temperature operation on the mechanical strength or electrical resistance of the conductor or components. The conductor and components used in these tests should be evaluated for these effects, with particular attention to those tested in the cyclic thermal loading test. The cyclic thermal loading test illustrated how compression joints on an ACSR conductor can deteriorate over time due to the cyclic nature of operating to emergency thermal limits. Static thermal testing of the ACSS conductors did not illustrate a similar deterioration on compression joints over a very short time period. However, it is possible that a high number of cyclic operations to emergency temperatures would cause a similar degradation in compression joints of ACSS conductors. Therefore, cyclic thermal loading tests should be completed for the ACSS conductors and AAC. The results of these tests showed thermal issues only with compression joints and marker balls. Based on these results for the tested conductors, it appears that there would be little value in testing components other than compression joints and marker balls in future activities.

9-9

10
REFERENCES
1. High Temperature Mechanical Properties of Bare Overhead Conductors, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000. 1000276. 2. Draft Guide for Determining the Effects of High Temperature Operation on Conductors, Connectors, and Accessories, IEEE, New York, NY: 2001. P1283/D7.0. 3. American National Standard for Electric Connectors: Connectors for Use Between Aluminum-to-Aluminum or Aluminum-to-Copper Bare Overhead Conductors, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Rosslyn, VA: 1998. ANSI C119.4. 4. G Di Troia, Effects of High Temperature Operation On Transmission Full-Tension Joints and Conductors, Presented at Meeting 23 of CIGRE Study Committee 22-WG12, Evreux, France, August 26, 2000. 5. R McCoy, SSAC Fittings, Letter from Alcoa Fujikura Ltd to Northeast Utilities, April 1997. 6. V Crabb and J Sheadel, Magnetic Heating of Transmission Line Clamps, AIEE Transactions, vol. 68, pp 1032-1035, 1949. 7. R Farley and D Paddon, Aluminum Suspension Clamps, Electrical Review, vol. 168, no. 14, pp. 652-653, 1961. 8. V Morgan, Non-Magnetic Suspension Clamps for Overhead Power Lines, Electrical Review, vol. 175, no. 9, pp. 314-317, 1964. 9. Effect of Elevated Conductor Temperature Operation on Polymer Suspension Insulators and the Effect of elevated Temperatures on the Mechanical Performance of Polymer Post Insulators, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, Southern Company, Bonneville Power Administration, American Electric Power, City Public Service of San Antonio, Eskom, Tennessee Valley Authority, and Excel Energy: 2001. 10. ZTACIR Insulator Test Result, Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd. 11. Mechanical Performance of Suspension Insulators in Transmission Lines Operated at Elevated Temperatures, NEETRAC, Atlanta, GA: 2000. NEETRAC Project No. 00-085. 12. Initial Investigation in the Effect of Elevated Conductor Temperature Operation on NCI, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2000. 1000033.

10-1

References

13. H Adams, Thermal Cycle Tests of SSAC and Associated Fittings, Reynolds Aluminum, Series No. 34, 1976. 14. W Howitt and T Simpkins, Effect of Elevated Temperature on the Performance of Conductor Accessories, IEEE Paper C72 188-6, 1972. 15. G Clarke, Summary Report on the Effects of High Operating Temperatures on Conductors and Hardware Behavior, Ontario Hydro Research Division, Report No. 77-177-H, 1977. 16. Fantaye, E, and Ostendorp, M, High Temperature Mechanical Properties of ACSS/TW Suwannee, EPRIsolutions, Inc., 100 Research Dr., Haslet, TX 76052, Report No. HC-2000-T1, Project T176, 2000. 17. R Champa, Heating Characteristics of the Armor-Grip Suspension at Elevated Temperatures, Preformed Line Products Co. Research and Engineering, TR-591-E, 1976.

10-2

Program: Transmission Systems Asset Management & Utilization

About EPRI EPRI creates science and technology solutions for the global energy and energy services industry. U.S. electric utilities established the Electric Power Research Institute in 1973 as a nonprofit research consortium for the benefit of utility members, their customers, and society. Now known simply as EPRI, the company provides a wide range of innovative products and services to more than 1000 energyrelated organizations in 40 countries. EPRIs multidisciplinary team of scientists and engineers draws on a worldwide network of technical and business expertise to help solve todays toughest energy and environmental problems. EPRI. Electrify the World

2003 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved. Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America 1002094

EPRI 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA 800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com