Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
T
R
T
"
dT
TT
0
t
o
(I
2
I
2
R
x
2
)
$odt
T
o
A
2
dC
loge
T
R
T
o
T
"
T
o
(I
2
I
2
R
x
2
)
$
o
t
o
T
o
A
2
dC
T
o
dC
$
o
I(
T
o
A
2
dC
$
o
t
o
loge(
T
R
T
o
T
"
T
o
)I
2
R
x
2
)
"
2
APPENDIX E
Calculation of Short-term Ratings
Within NGTS 2.5 a simplified calculation for short-term cable ratings is quoted. The calculation method
is derived below. The results are generally conservative by a significant margin and GIMLI will normally
be used when the full capability of the cables is needed.
For a steady initial load of x pu the conductor temperature can be calculated from:
(1)
This equation assumes temperature-independent losses. From the initial condition all the additional
losses due to the load current I are assumed to remain within the conductor and to heat it adiabatically.
Temperature dependent losses are used but the thermal capacity of the conductor is taken to be
temperature independent.
Hence
(2)
Where
T
1
= Initial conductor temperature (
F
C)
T
g
= Ground ambient temperature (
F
C)
T
R
= Rated conductor temperature (
F
C)
T
o
= Constant in derivation of resistivity (
F
C)
(Copper 234.5
F
C Aluminium 228
F
C (IEC 228))
!
D
= Temperature rise due to dielectric losses (K)
I
R
= Continuous rating of conductor (A)
I = Short-term rating of conductor (A)
x = Per unit preload of conductor relative to I
R
o = Length of conductor element being considered (m)
d = Density of conductor (kg/m
3
)
C = Thermal capacity of conductor (J/kgK)
A = Cross-section of conductor (m
2
)
$
o
= Resistivity of conductor at 0
0
C (#m)
t
o
= Period of short-term overload(s)
The derivation assumes that the second term on the right hand side in equation 2 can be neglected.
This assumption is optimistic since it raises the short-term rating but the effect is general much less than
0.1% and is an acceptable approximation. Integrating equation 2 then gives:
(3)
Hence (4)
and (5)
Uncontrolled
when Printed
TGN(T)67
Page 36 Issue 1
August 1996
T
o
dC
$
o
T
o
(
o
C)
d(kg/m
3
)
C(J/kgK at O
o
C)
$
o
(%m at O
o
C)
T
o
dC
$
o
(J%
"
m
4
)
In NGTS 2.5 the constant is quoted as 226
2
x 10
12
and the equations are exactly equivalent to
equation (1) and (5) above.
Using values from Kaye and Laby for material constants:
Copper Aluminium
234.5 228
8933 2698
379 880
1.55 x 10
-8
2.50 x 10
-8
5.122 x 10
16
2.165 x 10
16
The value used in NGTS 2.5 for copper is 5.108 x 10
16
which is effectively the same as that in the table
above.
Work by Ong-Hall and Larsen in TR(T)240, to be published shortly, will show that this calculation is from
12% to 22% conservative over the period 3 minutes to 30 minutes for a selected cable system.
However, the short-term ratings given by the above equations and required by NGTS 2.5 are generally
sufficient for many rating purposes and will always be conservative.
Uncontrolled
when Printed
TGN(T)67
Page 37 Issue 1
August 1996
FF
0
&(
'F
'x
)
X
0
(xx
0
)
FF
0
f
A
(AA
0
)f
s
(SS
0
)f
L
(LL
0
)
APPENDIX F
Calculation of Six Hour Ratings
A method of calculating six hour ratings for inclusion in CUP has been developed. It is based on various
GIMLI studies that have given six hour and continuous ratings for directly buried cables and for cables
in troughs. The results are based on similar calculations to those used for Tables 5 to 56. The basis
is piece-wise linear interpolation which can be applied to any continuous function with multiple variables.
The general form is given by:
and the actual equation used here is:
where F
0
is the ratio of six hour to continuous rating for the reference case and f
A
, f
S
and f
L
are the
sensitivity coefficients for cross-sectional area, spacing and laying depth respectively. A, S and L are
the conductor cross-section, cable spacing and cable laying depth respectively and the subscript o
refers to the reference case of a 1300 mm
2
conductor with a spacing of 0.35 m and a laying depth of 0.25
m.
The results are valid for 132 kV, 275 kV and 400 kV cross-bonded cables laid in flat formation.
The dependence of all the coefficients on preload are given in the table below.
F
0
f
A
f
S
f
L
Preload (%)
85% 1.094 3.107 x 10
-5
-0.124 0.183
75% 1.140 4.516 x 10
-5
-0.184 0.262
60% 1.192 6.036 x 10
-5
-0.251 0.345
30% 1.253 7.731 x 10
-5
-0.328 0.436
0% 1.272 8.234 x 10
-5
-0.351 0.462
The table gives a spurious air of accuracy for the calculation. The coefficients are necessary to calculate
the dependence of the six hour rating on the design parameters but the overall result is conservative
compared with the original GIMLI calculation. A comparison with the table in Section 18 shows that the
six hour ratings from 85% preload for studies in Tables 4 to 56 were 14%, 13% and 10% greater than
the continuous rating at 400 kV, 275 kV and 132 kV respectively compared with the figure of 9.4% in the
table above. At the normal laying depth of 950 mm the comparison is between 26%, 22% and 22% at
400 kV, 275 kV and 132 kV respectively with the figure of 22.2% from the above table (1.094 + 0.183
(0.95 - 0.25) = 1.222). Where possible it is preferable to use the ratings derived from GIMLI but this is
a useful method of obtaining six hour ratings quickly.
Uncontrolled
when Printed
TGN(T)67
Page 38 Issue 1
August 1996
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed
Uncontrolled
when Printed