You are on page 1of 6

THE THEORY OF THE EXCITATION FUNCTION:

A DEMONSTRATION OF ITS PHYSICAL MEANING

Claude H. Gary, member IEEE

Electricite de France, Paris

Abstract-This paper presents a simple demonstration and the physical meaning of the excitation function due to corona effect on EHV conductors. Its purpose is to promote and to make easier the ap- plication of the excitation function, in order to improve the calcula- tion methods of Radio Interference of EHV lines.

INTRODUCTION

Radio interference (RI), generated by a corona streamer is caused by the movement of space charges in the electric field of the conductor. These charges are due to the ionization of air in the immediate vicinity of the conductor. As a source of RI, the streamer is usually represented

as a current generator: the current injected from this generator into the conductor depends only on the own characteristics of this streamer. In 1956 (1), Adams demonstrated that this representation was somewhat imperfect, and that in reality the corona streamer induced currents in all conductors of a multiwire system (and not only in the conductor that produced it). These currents depend on the character-

istics of the conductor under corona and on the selfs and mutual capac- itances of the conductors.

The separation into two terms constitutes a worthy progress, for it shows that the RI currents in conductors of different lines are not necessarily equal from one line to the other, even if they are produced

by identical corona streamers. According to Adams the term that expresses the characteristics of the corona streamer is the "excitation function". In this paper we present a new demonstration of the meaning of the excitation function. Although this one is not thoroughly rigorous,

it nevertheless presents the advantage of permitting to grasp, in a very concrete way, itstheoretical and practical significance.

DEMONSTRATION BY MEANS OF THE POTENTIAL FUNCTION

Elementary case of a coaxial element

Let us consider an element consisting of a cylindrical conductor

having a radius r, and located coaxially within a cylinder of radius R, representing the mass of zero potential.

Fig. 1.

Paper 71 TP 153-PWR, recommended and approved by the Transmission and

Engineering Society for presentation

Distribution Committee of the IEEE Power

at the IEEE Winter Power Meeting, New York, N.Y., January 31-February 5, 1971.

Manuscript submitted September 16, 1970;

24, 1970.

made available for printing December

per unit length is placed

within this coaxial element. Let the space charge be in the form of an

infinitely thin cylinder of radius p (fig. 1). If the center conductor is connected to ground, it will be at zero

In this

potential and carry a charge q induced by the presence of

electrical state, the radial electrostatical field is given by Gauss's theorem:

Suppose that a space charge of density

qo

qo.

atapointoftheradius r<cs cy L: 2r.qs

at a point of the radius <cscR : E2-

q

2n6t,.s

i

J

(1)

Integrating in order to obtain the potential difference:

Vr

VRJElds+

r

R

E2ds = -E

2

.

[Lnq

r

r

q.tn&}

(2)

Since Vr - VR = 0, the charge per unit length induced on the center conductor is:

9

=

-

9

R

(3)

Now assume that the cylindrical space charge

velocity dp/dt. This expansion results in the rate of change dq/dt of the

induced charge, that represents the injected current. To calculate this current

qo uniformly expands at

dq

dt

dq

d!

d?

dt

1

In R

qo

P

dp

dt

(4)

substitutingfor

1

In

R/r

c

2nrE.

(5)

where C = capacity per unit length of the coaxial cell:

.

C

2lCEo

So

p

dp

dt

(6)

It should be noted that this current is the product of two terms:

one,

c

2nEo

which depends on the cell geometry; and

the second, 2L *P

P

dt'

which solely depends on the characteristics of the space charge, that is to say, its quantity and the law of its movement. Next, the excitation function will be defined from the second term of the product.

Generalization of the preceding expressions

a) In order to further the calculations, a cylindrical symmetrical

configuration is adopted, including the space charge. But by virtue of

the superposition theorem, it is quite obvious that a small element

of this space charge cut out at any place of the cylinder of radius p

induces a charge Xq on the center conductor. Instead of considering the

whole space charge, only a local space charge can be placed at a point

Xqo

305

-~~~~~oo

of radius p, without changing the already obtained

equations (3) and

(6). Note: Although, when using this method, the

charge induced by a

point charge can be calculated, the total charge

conductor is unknown. Nevertheless, it is

AL

dx

distribution along the

estimated that 95% of the

induced charge is concentrated on a conductor

±5p, as illustrated in fig. 2.

length of about

q =Jf q dx

dx

I

5 P

4

S

Fig. 2.

x

CONDUCTOR AXIS

qo0,p

b) In equation (3), the expression In

R/p

in R/r

is no other than the potential function 0(p). This function expresses

the potential of the point at radius p when the center conductor is at + l and the earthed cylinder at 0 potential. Therefore the expression can be written:

q '- ;- qo.e(M)

(7)

q

=

- qo .e(M)

(10)

APPLICATION TO A MULTI-WIRE LINE

Consider a multi-wire line consisting of n conductors of radii

rn; let us assume that a space charge qo is located in the

vicinity of conductor 1, at a point M close enough so that the electrical

field around 1, in the absence of qo, is essentially radial.

rl, r2

,

Let us find the potential functions 6(M) associated with the

various conductors.

a) The potential function 61(M) associated with conductor 1.

Let conductor 1 be at + 1 potential and all the others grounded

(fig. 3)

V+1

Me 0

2

V =O

3

Fig. 3.

4

where qo is a localized charge placed at a point M in space, and 6(M) is

the potential function of the conductor whose induced charge is to be found.

It is assumed that expression (7) can be applied to any configura- tion of conductors, and in particular to a multiwire line.

Using Gauss's identity The preceding generalization, divided into step a) and b), has the

advantage of being very concrete, yet it is not altogether obvious.

This is why another demonstration is suggested here, which does not require any particular geometrical hypothesis. This demonstration

is based on Gauss's identity, which is expressed in the following man-

ner:

Assume a system of n conductors, successively submitted to two

different electrostatical states; these two states are respectively charac-

From equation:

q

=civl + C12 V2 + --- Clmnv

q

C11

/ for V1 = +1 j VKO

V(K)

(C41 )

1

The radial field around I then equals:

E

2nEos

(C12

(12)

integrating in order to obtain the potential of the point M at radius p:

lM)

fEds

C1

ri

J2n6uo

In P(

ri

Therefore it can be deduced that:

(13)

terized

by charge qi and qi', and by potential Vi and Vi'; the identity is

e I (M)

written:

- ttC-1 In - p

2 nZo

r1

[ vq'

n

=

E

n

(8)

Further assume a conductor C and a point M of the dielectrical space, submitted to two electrostatical states, such as they are described in the following table;

CHARGE

 

q

MO

0

POTENTIAL

+1

e((M)

Fr

st

Fi rst state

CHARGE POTENTIAL

q

qa.

0

V

sen

second state

s

b) The potential function 6i(M) associated with conductor i * 1.

In this case, conductor i is considered to be at + 1 potential, and all the others are at zero potential of the earth (fig. 4)

1

C

I

2

.

M(pI S

0

v=+1

Fig. 4.

n

According (8), Gauss's identity is written as follows:

(+ 1 ) xq

+ S3(M) x qO

=

Oxq

+ VxO

from where it is immediately drawn that:

(9)

From equation

q= c11v1 + C12V2 *

306

q1 = C1i

for Vj =+

,

+Cln

Vn

VK = 0

(KI

i

)

}

(15)

Therefore the radial field around 1 is:

E = C1 /27CeoS

(16)

integrating in the same manner as above:

O.80(M) =

Eds =

'r

1i

2T e, o

81(M

M= -

11

Cli

2 3To

In p

r,

In

p

r,

(17)

(18)

c) Calculating the currents injected in the conductors by the mov- ingcharge qo.

The charges induced into the various conductors are determined by equation (10)

and

q, = -q

qi = q

(

- Cl

Cli ln

23fo

Ln

P

r

(19)

(20)

The current induced in conductor i is obtained by differentiating equations (19) (20)

C11

2it.

q.

P

dp

dt

(21)

This equation can be generalized in the form

C1j

q1

P

dp

dt

where j: conductor index near which the charge

i: conductor index on which the current is

qj

is located

measured

(22)

The following important deduction can be made from the examin- ation of the generalized equation for induced currents. The current in each conductor depends on the capacitance coefficient of this con-

ductor considered as an element of a whole system. These capacitance coefficients are determined by the geometry of the system only, i.e. the size of conductors and the distances between them and earth. Hence, the first term in the equation for induced current is a well de- fined constant for each conductor. The second term is governed by the laws of the formation and movement of the space charges within the ionized zone very close to the surface of the conductor under corona. The excitation function is directly related to the second term that com- pletely describes all physical characteristics of the corona. This function

will be developed in the next paragraph.

THE DEFINITION OF THE EXCITATION FUNCTION:

GENERALIZATION OF qp° d P

Because of the internal characteristics of the electrical field within the zone of the ionized air, in the neighbourhood of the conductor, the function

q

P

dp

dt

presents an impulsive form of very short duration. This impulsive func- tion-can be described by a Fourier spectrum, F(Q.). On the other hand, the character of the space charge is such that

the impulses f(t) are pseudo-periodically repeted, or more exactly randomly. Experience shows, that the successive impulses all have the

same form, but fluctuate in amplitude and time intervals around stable average values. Under these conditions, the Fourier spectrum of a single

307

impulse is replaced by the spectral density G(w). Without going into the theory of stationary random signals, let us merely recall that the spectral density defines an energy. The RMS of g(c) of the pseudo- periodic signal, contained within an infinitely small frequency interval dw is directly related to G(co), according to Parseval's theorem, by:

dg2(c)

= G2(.))

d d

(23)

Consequently if the original signal passes through a measuring device tuned to the frequency coo and with a "quadratic equivalent" bandwidth of B Hz the RMS value of the measured signal is:

9tOo) =

G (po)

(24)

Let n be the numbei of discreet uncorrelated corona sources per

unit length of conductor and let Gi be the spectral density of the source

"i"; then the resultant RMS value of all the sources per unit length of conductor is

n

(25)

This quantity r' is called the excitation function. In consequence, the RMS value of the injected HF current, measured at frequency wo and

with a bandwidth of B Hz, per length unit of a multi-wire line is:

Jj

=

2

6

.

or, in a generalized matrix relation:

1

23rrto [c [i

(26)

(27)

This result is similar to and consistent with equation (6), because the quantity r had been uniquely defined from the

qo dp

P dt

function, a characteristics of the moving space charge. The random aspect of the r function is due to the inherent

nature of the space charges. It is introduced to take into account the

measuring system and in particular, the bandwidth of -a receiver with a

square-law detector. Adams calls r the "spectral density of the excita-

tion function" [1 ].

SYSTEM OF BUNDLED CONDUCTORS

The calculations performed as yet were based on the hypothesis

that the conductors were cylindrical, and that their mutual distances were very large with respect to their radii. It was furthermore assumed that the space charges moved within the region of radial field. It is important to know whether the results remain fundamentally the same when the single conductor is replaced by a bundle, commonly used on EHV lines.

Practical evidence of the excitation function

In practice, the excitation function used in the pre-calculation of the RI level of a line appears in the equation (27) where [C] is the matrix of the capacitance coefficients of the line and derived for cylin- drical conductors of equivalent radius (i.e. conductors carrying, under

equal conditions, the same charge as the bundle).

It must be remembered that the magnitude that can be measured is the current [J], and not the excitation function [Fr. In a general case [r] represents an important parameter in the calculation and has to be derived from experimental measurements of HF currents and capacity, achieved in a test cage, for example.

The validity of the excitation function is proved, if the following

equation is satisfied:

[c4[ Ji] = fC2]f [ J2]

=

2rr6

where J1 and J2 are the HF currents measured on the same bundle, submitted to the same gradient, and placed in two different systems characterized respectively by the capacitance matrices [C II and [C2]. The experimental checking of the above relation has been carried

out by placing the same bundle in a cage and on a line. The measured currents were found exactly in conformity with this law, obviously under conditions of identical corona streamers (heavy rain). This was shown in reference [2] and widely used in references [3] [41 [5] . However, a closer examination of the behaviour of a bundle in- dicates that the concept of the equivalent cylinder has to be revised and that it is necessary to take into account the mutual effects between

the subconductors of the bundles. The problem arises whether the

excitation function of a conductor with a given surface gradient and surface conditions, is the same when this conductor is alone or when it is part of a bundle. Another problem can be stated in the following way:

is the total HF current induced in a bundle with interconnected sub- conductors different from the one in a bundle with insulated subcon- ductors? If that were the case, it would indeed be better to choose the

arrangement with the least total current, since this would reduce the interference field of the bundle.

Case of a bundle with interconnected subconductors

It follows that the induced HF current is

=

ni

2

c

Tr

11

o

0 n

ri

(32)

If the excitation function of every subconductor i is Fi, every I-ibeing

equal in amplitude but uncorrelated, the equation (32) leads immediate-

ly to:

Jn

1

2n

2

Tr Fo

ri

V n-

(33)

an equation that provides the means to compare the excitation functions of bundles with different numbers of subconductors.

Case of a bundle with insulated subconductors

To simplify the discussion, let us assume that a bundle with n insulated subconductors is located in the center of a cylindrical cage (fig. 6). Furthermore, let ri be the excitation function of subconductor i in corona. The current induced in subconductor j is given by an ap- proximate equation:

Ji

=

J

it t

2.n6o

-ri

(34)

Interconnected conductors can be considered equipotential from the HF point of view provided that the distance between the electrical

connections (generally through the spacers) is a small fraction of the

wave length at con, the frequency under consideration.

Let the bundle be formed by n identical conductors of radius r, let the space charge qo move in the vicinity of the conductor i

and

(fig. 5).

Q

Q I~~~~~~~~~~

/

P"

2>.

-

-_ -o

"

//

Fig. 5.

The total induced charge, i.e. the sum of the charges induced in all conductors, will be calculated by considering the potential function. In the immediate neighbourhood s of the conductor, the field due to the charge on the conductor is essentially radial. Now, when the bundle is at the + 1 potential, this charge is equal to

I

I

I I

//

"I

I

"I.

.-I

20

1 20

1

n

11

1%

0 \ \

30

0

4

"I 1-

1

iX

~~~~p,q0

-I 1

/

/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

Fig. 6.

where yij are the entries of the matrix of capacitance coefficients of the system of subconductors. In a conventional bundle the subcon- ductor spacing is assumed to be much larger than p, the distance of the space charge from the axis of the subconductor. Under these conditions the equation for Jileads to accurate results. The total current injected onto the bundle is

q.

=

C11

n

where C1 1 is calculated for the equivalent cylinder of the bundle. Hence, the field intensity is approximately equal to

E _=

C

1

2r Eo nS

The corresponding potential function is:

(28)

J =

1

2 rr

o

j

]

r

(35)

Finally, let us try to find the relation between the elementary

capacities 7ij and the total bundle capacity C1 1 This relation depends

(29) only on the geometry of the bundle. Let us consider now the fictitious case, where every subconductor is at the same potential V; the charge Qi of the subconductor i is:

8(p)

=

1

2iT&

2Trreiodn

In

r

_

(30)

Qi = EX j V;

Therefore, the induced charge

q = -q0 O(p)

(31) butbydefinition C11:

~0 ~

~

~

~

~

~

Q

=

is the total charge, because 0(p) is the potential function

of the bundle.

This equation is valid only in the immediate vicinity of a subconductor.

 

therefore

308

c11 V

n

=

vF j

(36)

J=5n

j=1i

Cil

n

and the equation for the sum of injected currents becomes:

j=_-

1

2rcto

-

Cii

n

r

(38)

This equation is identical to the one developed for the current injected into a conventional bundle. Therefore, it can be concluded that the total current induced by a corona streamer is the same for a bundle with interconnected or insulated subconductors.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The current induced into a conductor by the movement, in its neighbourhood, of a space charge, can be calculated by using the potential function.

2. In the case of a multi-wire system (power transmission line) the preceding relation shows that currents are induced in all the con- ductors. They depend on the movement of the space charge and on the geometry of the system. This geometry is expressed by means of the capacitance coefficients. 3. In applying these results to the "corona streamers", it is pos- sible, while introducing the spectral density of the movement of the charges and the quadratic bandwidth of a measuring device, to de- termine, in a very concrete manner, the excitation function worked out by Adams.

4. The examination of the "corona" behaviour of a conductor bundle leads to a relation between the excitation function of a sub- conductor, and the excitation function of the whole bundle. It is demonstrated that the total current, injected in a bundle by the corona effect, is the same, whether the bundle is conventional or whether each subconductor is insulated from the others.

REFERENCES

[1]

G. E. Adams: The calculation of the radio interference level of

transmission lines caused by corona discharges. AIEE Trans.

Part III - June

1956, pp. 411-419.

[2]

J. Clade, C. Gary, M.

undertaken at the experimental station at les Renardieres, CIGRE

Moreau: Results of studies on corona effect

1970 - report

31-08 -

p. 6.

[3]

J. W. Juette, L. E. Zaffanella: Radio noise currents and audible

noise

on short sections of UHV bundle conductors. Paper 69.TP

690 - IEEE Power Meeting, Dallas 1969.

[41 C. H. Gary, M. R.

Moreau: Predetermination of the radio noise

Paper 68 C 57 PWR, EHV Trans-

level under rain of an EHV line.

mission Conference, Montreal 1968.

[5] J. J. Clade, C. H. Gary, M. R. Moreau: Usage and checking of the

fields, currents and excitation func- test lines. Paper 69

theoretical relations between

tions in radiofrequencies

TP 64, IEEE Power

in the case of short

Meeting - New York 1968.

Discussion

G. E. Adams (University of Missouri,

not been actively working in the field of radio interference for several

occasionally from the outside to see

what was happening. I have been continually impressed with the

progress that has been made by workers both here and abroad.

I have been especially interested in several aspects which even in

1959 were obviously in need of additional research and, in some cases,

confirmation. One of these aspects is the subject of this paper, the

excitation function, or what I usually referred to as the "genera-

time, this concept seemed to be

tion" 1,2,3 of the conductor. At the

rigorously defined mathematically and intuitively made sense. How-

years, I have tried to "look in"

Columbia, Mo.): Although I have

Manuscript received February 16, 1971.

309

ever, no experimental ly derived relationships,

of test cage measurements into actual line performance.

The author has succeeded admirably in coupling together the

previously made and reported with a

demonstration of the physical meaning

my opinion, this is a contribution

to

a wider understanding of the fundamentals of the phenomenon

involved. I recommend that the Transmission and Distribution Committee consider reclassifying this paper as a Transactions paper if this is possible.

REFERENCES

[1] The Calculation of the Radio Interference Level of Transmission

by Corona Discharges, G. E. Adams, AIEE Trans-

the literature since it should lead

of the excitation function. In

results of such experiments

especially with respect to translating the results

results were available to verify

the mathematical-

to

Lines caused

actions, Part III, 1956.

[2] An Analysis

Conductors,

of the Radio-Interference Characteristics of Bundled

G. E. Adams, AIEE Transactions, Part III, 1956.

[3] Radio Interference and Transmission Line Design, G. E. Adams,

Proceedings of C.I.G.R.E. Conference, 1958.

G. W. Juette and L. E. Zaffanella (General Electric Company, Pittsfield,

Mass. 01 201): Conductor test

tool in radio noise research at Project UHV in Pittsfield,

cages have been used for several years as

an important

Mass. As pointed out in the

literature6 cage test results were translated data. The theories developed by Dr. Adams

are essential for this translation. When Reference 1 was presented by

acknowledged

verifica-

Dr. Adams, more than 15 years ago, its importance was

into equivalent line noise

by many experts. At the

tion was criticized. Dr. Adams' work was also found difficult to read

written at the

General Electric

with Dr. Adams'

many years the

and

personal assistance was for

same time, the lack of experimental

computer program

apply.

The digital radio noise

Company

only one available in this country.

Credit should be given

to Mr. Gary and his frequent coauthor

valuable contributions toward experimental

at hand

physical and mathematical interpretation of a

of course, the last word has not yet been

could the author explain why he has assumed the

Mr. Moreau for their

a

very

nice

example,

verification of the theory in a

represents

complex theory within which,

said. For

conductor

series of IEEE papers. The paper

by

the

high-frequency space

should

potential unchanged

seems that the

charge

movement? It

surge impedance

rather have been

introduced. If so, would this have led to the same conclusions?

REFERENCE

[61 G. W. Juette, L. E. Zaffanella, "Radio noise, audible noise, and

corona loss of EHV and UHV transmission lines under rain: pre-

determination based on cage tests. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON

POWER APPARATUS AND

1168-1178.

Manuscript received August 4, 1971.

SYSTEMS, July/August 1970, pp.

Claude H.

very

Gary:

I would first of all like to thank Dr. Adams for his

of

my paper

and for his support

in

awarding

Paper". I would then like to

study

was

recognized very

view of the

point of

early

between measurements in

function,

tell him

at the

theoretical

question and in the field of its

cages

pre-

as well as the method of

which we have pre-

favorable

appreciation

it

that the basic

"Electricite de

the status of a

"Transactions

of his

importance

France",

of the

both from the

phenomena

The

in

transposition

lines,

understanding

practical applications.

and

determination, based on the excitation

sented at this same session (1)

and usefulness of this idea. One of the

fore to

measurements under the

suggest

(2), have given proof of the signification

of

my paper

was

of

seeing

there-

purposes

a demonstration of the excitation function which would

be more concrete and more

its use

ing the interference

by calling

tention

easy to assimilate, with the hope

as one of the methods of

being generally adopted

fields

of lines.

predetermin-

criticism,

paying no at-

me an op-

Messrs. Juette and Zaffanella made a

attention to the

perfectly pertinent

in

simplification consisting

to the line's wave impedance.

This criticism gives

Manuscript received September 13, 1971.

portunity to demonstrate here that this simplification does not involve any change in the conclusions concerning the properties of the excita- tion function, at least at frequencies lower than about 2 MHz. In the diagram where the conductor's high frequency potential is nil, this potential is a result of the hypothesis of the source's nil impedance, connected at its other end to the earth. Under these con- ditions, the relationship between the induced charge and the space charge is independent of time. We still have

qi = -qo 0 (M)

which means that the induced charge follows strictly and without any

delay all the variations in time of the quantity

Let us now represent the conductor, on both sides of the space

charge, by its wave impedance Z, except in the immediate vicinity of

this space charge, where the conductor will be represented by a certain

capacity r. The theoretical difficulty consists in estimating the length

of conductor to be considered for defining r, as this length is linked to

we shall admit that it is the

conductor above ground. The diagram of the

same as the height of the

circuit now becomes as follows:

the formation distance of the plane

qo 0 (t).

wave.;

Leaving the temporal analysis for the

sion above becomes, at the frequency component co:

frequential analysis, the expres-

q [I jw.-r + I ] = - q0G

(W)

It can be seen if

2

2

1 $

there will be no marked attenuation or

result of i, in relation to the zero impedance hypothesis. And so, for:

phase shifting of q, and as a

Z = 300

r= 200 pF

i

u

=

2

IT

.

1o6

wzr =0.2, involving an attenuation of 0.25 dB.

2

At higher frequencies, the term

0(e)J

/1/7Tf

0WX-~

I77 v

at a given instant, the

charge borne by section

Q is no longer qi, but a certain value q. Like- wise, the potential of this section is no longer zero, but takes as its value:

[ IZ2r + I]

will have an effect of modifying the spectrum of the induced currents:

it would seem then, that taking the wave impedance into consideration

the form of the frequency spectrum

observed under the line. But in any event, the theory of plane waves

exceeds

can therefore be stated, that in the validity field of the plane

waves

defined

lower than the frequency

loses its signification, for EHV lines, as soon as the frequency

about 2 or 3 MHz.

plays an important part

in

It

theory, and a fortiori at frequencies by

zr'w

+ q

. e

(t) + q

the fact of ignoring the wave impedance when calculating currents

space charges does not modify the descrip-

linked to the movement of

r tion of the phenomena in question.

and the circuit equation will be written as follows:

as i

=

-

qo

(t) + q

z

r 2

i

, the differential equation is obtained:

Zr'. dq

2

dIt

=

(t)

REFERENCES

[11 C. Gary,

Level of tion of the

M. Moreau: "Predetermination of the Radio-Interference

High Voltage

Transmission Lines - Part I. Predetermina-

Excitation Function", Paper 71 TP 661 - PWR.

[2] C. Gary, M. Moreau: "Predetermination of the Interference Level

Transmission Lines - Part II. Field Calculating

for High Voltage

Method", Paper 71 TP 662 - PWR.

310