Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Temporary overvoltages; in substations, which led to the development of the very fast
Slow front overvoltages (switching overvoltages); front overvoltages class, and consequently to a reorganization
Fast front overvoltages (lightning overvoltages); of the overvoltage classes.
Longitudinal overvoltages. B. Standard dielectric strength
B. Comparison of overvoltages and insulation strength In what concerns the dielectric strength, the two guides
Considering the previous results from the voltage stresses, characterize the accumulated probabilistic distribution of the
this chapter takes in consideration several factors that dielectric breakdown with very different expressions. IEC uses
influence the choice of the insulation. These factors are a modified Weibull distribution, while REN uses a Gaussian.
similarly defined in both standards, and represent the several The differences are negligible, and never higher than 5%.
uncertainties that characterize the system: However, the standard deviation used by these standards is
Performance (acceptable number of insulation different. IEC uses a range of 3%-6%, while REN uses 6%-
failures); 8%, for disruptions caused by atmospheric and switching
Statistical nature of test results; overvoltages, respectively.
Deviation of the characteristics of the insulators The expressions used to relate the U50 voltage with the air
production and installation; clearance are also different, but both produce similar results,
Ageing; always with differences below 4%. In figures 1 and 2, a
comparison is presented between the expressions used for each
Different shapes of overvoltages, different from the
standard.
standardized ones;
Real atmospheric conditions, different from the
standardized ones;
Analysis precision.
C. Standardized results
Both standards present the standard insulation level as the
main output of the insulation coordination process. This
standard insulation level is the combination of:
The maximum system voltage;
Set of standard rated values of withstand voltages
that best fit and characterize the insulation, for
each of the overvoltage class that stresses the
system.
III. INSULATION COORDINATION ON OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION Fig. 1 – Comparison between expressions of U50(d) for switching
LINES overvoltages
In this chapter, a more detailed analysis is made of the
insulation coordination methodology, when applied to
overhead transmission line design. With this objective in mind,
another two standards will be compared and analyzed: the IEC
60071-2 [3] and the Insulation Coordination Guide from REN
[4].
This analysis will firstly focus on the dielectric stresses, then
on the dielectric strength of the insulation, followed by the
application of insulation coordination methods that relate both
of these factors, concluding with the air clearances proposed in
both standards.
A. Standard dielectric stresses
Fig. 2 - Comparison between expressions of U50(d) for lightning
Both standards divide the main representative dielectric overvoltages
stresses in equivalent classes, already analyzed in chapter II.
However, the time lag between these two guides results in C. Insulation coordination method application
different designations of the classes, as well as different Both guides suggest the same insulation coordination
expected values for the statistical overvoltages. With the methods, although each one applies a different insulation
natural technological evolution, since the last version of coordination factor. The differences found in the deterministic
REN’s guide, there’s been an intensification in the use of SF6 method are exposed in table 1.
3
Table 1 – Comparison of deterministic insulation coordination factors IV. INSULATION DISTANCES ON OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION
IEC REN LINES
Switching 1 1,2: 72,5 kV – 220kV In this chapter, the minimum air clearances used for
1,15: 420 kV insulation in overhead transmission lines are presented, as well
Lightning 1 1,2: 72,5 kV – 220kV as the methodology and critical analysis to achieve them.
1,25: 420 kV
A. Characterization of air clearances
From table 1 it’s possible to verify that the values proposed
In this section, an extensive analysis is made of the
by IEC are clearly less conservative than the ones from REN.
expressions used to calculate the U50 voltage (voltage where
Although there are no differences in the probabilistic
the air gap has a 50% probability of breakdown) of an air gap
method in the two guides, the simplified probabilistic method
with length d. This analysis is extended to the breakdown
is suggested in each standard with different values for the
caused by both types of overvoltages, and the several
statistical insulation coordination factor. These differences are
expressions are compared, with their validity range evaluated.
presented in figure 3.
B. Phase-to-ground air clearances
The phase-to-ground air clearances are divided in two types
of clearances: the air clearances between protection rods, and
between live parts and structures.
The first one is given by insulation coordination, and the
standard values are given by IEC. However, some deeper
research [5] revealed that the standard rated air clearances
used by IEC do not use the most adequate gap factor for
overhead transmission lines. With the proper gap factor, we
could reach a reduction of 6% to 15%, as shown in figure 5.
Range 1
Uw Voltage range Urw
Range 1
Range 2
Range 1 air Uw
clearances Range 2
Fig. 7 – Comparison between real and IEC Conductor-Crossarm gap
factors
A. Base configuration
The base configuration for this compaction will be the
400kV YS tower from the Portuguese national electric grid, as
15,58
shown in figure 10 [7].
2,23
3,10
3,10
7,75
10,00
R 3,40
R 3,40 R 3,40
5,10
18,32
performance (0,55 to 0,4 faults/100km of line/year obtained
with the program IEEE Flash v1,9).
In conclusion, the use of these compact configurations
2,23
3,10
3,10
provides not only a reduction in costs of production and
installation, but also an increase in service continuity due to
9,21
the enhanced lightning performance.
10,00
R 4,20
R 3,83 R 3,83 VII. CONCLUSION
Pursuing the main objective of this dissertation, an analysis
5,10
was made of the general methodology of insulation
coordination presented in the international standards. It was
concluded that both provided a similar path to achieve it.
Figure 13 – Proposed configuration for altitudes under 400 m Then, a more detailed analysis was made, comparing the
insulation coordination methodologies when applied to
19,52 overhead transmission lines. Some conclusions were drawn
from the comparison of IEC and REN guides, more
specifically, the consequences of the temporal lag existing
2,23
3,10
3,44 3,44
REFERENCES
[1] IEC, “Standard 60071-1, Insulation coordination - Part 1: Definitions,
1,81
1,81
3,10