You are on page 1of 5

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268269505

SAFE SEPARATION DISTANCE BETWEEN 132KV POWER LINES AND NEARBY


METALLIC CONDUCTORS

Article

CITATIONS READS

0 2,275

2 authors:

Abdullah Hamed Al-Badi Ehab El-Saadany


Sultan Qaboos University University of Waterloo
92 PUBLICATIONS   754 CITATIONS    394 PUBLICATIONS   10,333 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Cyber attacks on AGC systems View project

MEMS Generators View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ehab El-Saadany on 20 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


International Conference on Communication, Computer & Power (ICCCP’07) Muscat, February 19-21, 2007

SAFE SEPARATION DISTANCE BETWEEN 132KV POWER LINES AND


NEARBY METALLIC CONDUCTORS

A. H. Al-Badi* and E.F. EL-Saadany**


*
Electrical & Computer Engineering Department
College of Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University
P.O. Box 33, Muscat 123, Oman, E-mail:albadi@squ.edu.om
**
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada, N2L 3G1, Email: ehab@hivolt.uwaterloo.ca

Abstract-- Electromagnetic interference effects of transmission The pipe picks up a voltage relative to the soil that is
lines upon nearby metallic structure such as pipelines, proportional to the transmission line voltage. Further, the
communication lines or railroads are a real problem, which can bffmconductive interference occurs during lightning strikes
place both operator safety and pipeline integrity at risk. This or a phase to ground fault. When this occurs, a large voltage
paper presents a group of figures that determine the safe cone is created around the grounding system and as a result a
separation distance between pipeline and overhead voltage can get into the pipeline through the pipe coating
transmission lines as a result of electromagnetic interference
effects. The study was conducted for a given fault current and
defects. Moreover, the inductive interference, is generated
soil resistivity according to IEEE standard 80. It is expected by
that this work will help utilities to place their system in the the magnetic field and present during both normal operating
right location along the corridor and will show them whether a conditions and fault conditions when the pipe is placed
mitigation system is required or not and the requirement for parallel with three-phase overhead transmission lines.
any further study to their system.
It is well known that different levels of magnetic and
Keywords-- electromagnetic, interference, pipelines, power electric fields will be surrounding the power system in the
transmission lines, safe separation distance. air and soil with the capability of energizing pipelines. The
induced voltage on a pipeline can be dangerous for workers
I. INTRODUCTION and represents safety hazards. A potential shock exists when
Analysis of AC electromagnetic interference between someone touches an exposed part of the pipeline while
high voltage overhead power transmission lines and nearby standing on soil, which is at a different potential. Moreover,
conductors such as pipeline, communication line or railroad pipe corrosion can be initiated from AC discharges [1-9],
has been a topic of growing interest. The main reason for where excessive coating stress voltages (the difference
such interest is due to the restrictions that are currently between the pipe steel potential and local soil potential) can
imposed on public utilities in the use of right-of-way (ROW) lead to degradation of the coating, resulting in an accelerated
and due to the significant increase in the load and short corrosion.
circuit current levels. When pipelines are located in shared
ROW with power lines, the pipeline can incur high induced To reduce the effects of the AC interference levels to
voltages and currents due the AC interference. acceptable limits according to NACE standard RP-01-77-95
[10] and ANSI/IEEE Standards 80 [11], mitigation system
The likelihood of interference increases depends on should be designed [5].
several different factors. Overhead line current, quality of
pipeline coating and the length of pipeline parallel to and This paper presents a group of graphs that yield safe
close by the transmission lines are among the most important separation distance between pipeline and overhead
factors. The electromagnetic interference between a power transmission lines due to the effect electromagnetic
system network and neighboring gas pipeline has been interference, for a given fault current and soil resistivity
traditionally divided into three main categories: capacitive according to IEEE standards. It is expected that this work
(electrostatic), conductive (resistive) and inductive will help utilities to place their system in the right location
(magnetic) coupling [1]. The capacitive interference, which with respect to overhead transmission lines. Moreover, this
is generated by electric field and occurs when the pipe is work will indicate any requirement for a mitigation system
placed on a foundation that is well insulated from ground. and any further required studies.

ISSN 1813-419X 447


International Conference on Communication, Computer & Power (ICCCP’07) Muscat, February 19-21, 2007

II. SAFETY VOLTAGE LIMITS sec., soil resistivity of 100 :.m, the permissible “safe
touch voltage“, according to ANSI/IEEE standard is
The criteria used to evaluate the voltages appearing on the 244.8-V. The touch voltage limit could be increased by
pipeline with respect to human safety and the maintenance of applying a layer of crashed rock.
pipeline coating integrity is as follows:
o Coating stress voltages must be maintained sufficiently
o At exposed pipeline appurtenances such as valve sites low to prevent arcing through pipeline coating. This
and metering stations, the maximum acceptable touch typically occurs for coating stress voltages on order of 3-
voltage, during normal operating conditions, according to 5 kV or higher for modern coatings such as fusion
NACE standard RP-01-77-95 [10] and ANSI/IEEE bonded epoxy [12].
Standard 80 safety criteria [11] is 15 volts for structures
which may be contacted by unexpected workers and III. SYSTEM MODEL PARAMETERS
general public. Pipeline potentials with respect to local
earth ranging from 15 to 65 volts are considered The circuit diagram for the system under study is
acceptable in different countries. presented in Fig. 1. The system under consideration consists
of transmission lines and a neighboring pipeline. The system
was modeled and simulated using CDEGS software [13].
o During fault conditions, pipeline potentials with respect The length of the parallelism (transmission lines and
to local earth (i.e., touch voltages) are not to exceed the pipeline) was varied from 0.5 km to 20 km; the pipeline is
limit determined in accordance with ANSI/IEEE placed at the central site with burial depth of 0.6m.
Standard 80-2000. In this case, with fault duration of 0.3
B u ried P ip elin e

P h a se c

P h a se b

P h a se a

C en tra l site
T erm in a l 2 T erm in a l 1

Fig.1: Circuit model for the case under study


Fault current (phase-to-ground fault): 1KA, 3KA, 5 KA
The following is a list of parameter settings of the & 8 KA.
computer models used in this study:
System
Pipe (18 inch) Length of parallelism: varied from 0.5km to 20 km
Coating Resistivity: 13924 : .m (20000 : .m 2 ) Soil Resistivity : 50 : .m , 500 : .m and 1000 : .m
Coating thickness: 0.0036m Separation distance: varied from 10 m to 3800 m
Outer Diameter: 0.4572 m
Inner Diameter: 0.45 m
Wall thickness: 0.0036m
Burial depth: 0.6m
Relative Resistivity: 17 (with respect to annealed IV. DISCUSSIONS OF RESULTS
copper).
Relative permeability: 250 (with respect to free space).
Grounding: None A. Steady-State Condition

Overhead Transmission line During steady state condition, the currents flowing are
AAAC (single-ELM) 132 kV relatively low in magnitude compared to fault conditions and
G.M.R: 0.7122 cm their effects on nearby pipelines tend to cancel one another.
Conductor outer radius: 0.94 cm However, the interference maybe produced due to the
Outer strand radius: 0.188 cm difference in the relative distance of each phase from the
Number of strands: 19 nearby pipelines and due to any phase imbalance in the line.
Under the steady state, for buried pipeline, only the
inductive interference exist, although the magnetic field is

ISSN 1813-419X 448


International Conference on Communication, Computer & Power (ICCCP’07) Muscat, February 19-21, 2007

low the induced voltage on an unmitigated pipeline can I=1kA I=3kA I=5kA I=8kA
reach values that exceed the allowable limit according to
some international standards.
1800
Based on two different values of load currents per phase, 1650
different separation distances and soil resistively of 1000 1500
.m, the induced pipeline potential, in rms, during steady 1350

Separation, m
state conditions is shown in Fig.2 for parallelism of 10 and 1200
15 km. It should be noted that the effect of the soil resistivity 1050
on the induced voltage will be negligible at steady-state. 900
750
600
450
I=200A I=400A I=200A I=400A 300
150
0
40
Parallelism=10km 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
35
Parallelism, km
30
25 Fig. 3. The safe touch voltage with different fault currents at
Voltage, V

Parallelism=15km
20 soil resistivity of 50 :.m
15
From Fig. 3, for a parallelism of 8 km the safe separation
10
distance between the power lines and pipeline should not be
5 less than 300m if the fault current is greater than 1kA for soil
0 resistivity of 50 :.m. For the same parallelism, increasing
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 the fault current to 3 kA will increase the minimum safe
Separation, m separation distance to 900 m. Adding a layer of crashed
rock can reduce the safe separation distance. However, it is
Fig. 2. Induced pipeline potentials at different values of load possible to reduce this distance to that imposed on utilities
currents, 132 kV, soil resistivity=1000 : .m by designing a mitigation system.
In the past, different types of mitigation strategies have
been employed, but many have been found to be either very
B. Results of Fault Conditions expensive, as lumped grounding, or ineffective or even
hazardous like cancellation wires [6]. The preferred
Based on two values of soil resistivities (50 :.m and 500 mitigation technique was found to be the gradient control
:.m) the pipeline potentials under different values of single wires. These wires not only provide good grounding for the
phase to ground faults are found. All types of interference pipe and thus lower the absolute value of the pipeline
were considered during the fault conditions, the subsequent potentials, but they also raise earth potentials in the vicinity
figures include the total pipeline voltages. of the pipeline. Therefore, the difference in potential
between the pipeline and the local earth will be reduced, thus
x Soil resistivity = 50 :.m providing reduced touch voltages and decreasing coating
Under phase-to-ground fault, with fault duration of 0.3 stress voltages.
sec., soil resistivity of 50 :.m, the permissible “safe touch
voltage“, according to ANSI/IEEE standard is 228.3V. Fig. x Soil resistivity = 500:.m
3 shows the safe separation distance (horizontal distance Under phase-to-ground fault, with fault duration of 0.3
from pipeline and the center of overhead line) and sec., soil resistivity of 500 :.m, the permissible “safe touch
parallelism (pipeline length parallel to overhead line) for voltage“, according to ANSI/IEEE standard is 377 V. Fig. 4
same safe touch voltage without using any mitigation shows the safe separation distance and parallelism for same
system. safe touch voltage without using any mitigation system.

ISSN 1813-419X 449


International Conference on Communication, Computer & Power (ICCCP’07) Muscat, February 19-21, 2007

Annual Meeting of the American Power Conference,


I=1kA I=3kA I=5kA
Chicago, April 10-12, 2000, pp. 311-316.
3400
[2] CIGRE Working Group 36.02, “ Guide On The
3200 Interference of High Voltage AC Power Systems On
3000
2800 Metallic Pipelines,” 1995.
2600 [3] R. D. Southey, F. P. Dawalibi, and W. Vukonich,
2400
Separation, m

2200 “Recent Advances in the Mitigation of AC Voltages


2000
1800 Occurring in Pipelines Located Close to Electric
1600 Transmission Lines,” IEEE Transactions on Power
1400
1200 Delivery, Vol. 9, No. 2, April 1994, pp. 1090-1097.
1000
800 [4] F. P. Dawalibi, R. D. Southey, J. Ma, and Y. Li, “On the
600 Mechanisms of Electromagnetic Interference between
400
200 Electrical Power Systems and Neighboring Pipelines,”
0
NACE 2000, T10B Symposium on DC &AC
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Interference, Orlando, March 26-31, 2000.
Parallelism , km [5] A. H. Al-Badi and I.A. Metwally, "Induced Voltages on
Pipelines Installed in Corridors of AC power Lines,"
Fig. 4. The safe touch voltage with different fault currents at Journal of Electric Power components & Systems, to be
soil resistivity of 500 :.m publish.
[7] A. H. Al-Badi and H. Al-Rizzo," Simulation of
Comparing both Figure 3 and Figure4, it is clear that Electromagnetic Coupling on Pipelines Close to
increasing the soil resistivity will increase the minimum safe Overhead Transmission Lines: A Parametric Study,"
separation distance. This can be explained by the fact that Journal of Communications Software and Systems, to be
high soil resistivity means higher system grounding publish.
impedance and higher potential differences between the [8] Y. Baba, M. Ishii, “Numerical electromagnetic field
grounding structure and the pipeline. Thus the soil resistivity analysis on lighting surge response of tower with shield
plays a major rule in determining the minimum separation wire,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 15,
distances between the power lines and pipeline. No. 3, July 2000, pp. 1010-1015.
[9] R. D. Southey, W. Ruan, and F. P. Dawalibi, “AC
From the preceding figures we can notice that once the Mitigation Requirements: A Parametric Analysis,” The
length of parallelism exceeds about 14km, its effect on the Corrosion/2001 NACE International Conference, Texas,
pipeline voltage will be negligible. March 11-16, 2001.
[10] Mitigation of Alternating Current and Lightning Effects
V. CONCLUSIONS on Metallic Structures and Corrosion Control Systems,
NACE Standard RP0177-95.
Electromagnetic interference caused by 132-kV overhead [11] IEEE guide for safety in alternating current substation
transmission lines on neighboring, 18’’ parallel pipeline has grounding (ANSI), Publication 80,193.
been analyzed under both steady-state and single-phase-to- [12] J. Dabkowski, M. Frazier “ Power line fault current
ground fault using a computer software package. The model coupling to nearby natural gas pipelines”, volume 3:
developed can predict the level of the total voltage on the analysis of pipeline coating impedance, EPRI Report
pipeline. Graphs were developed that yield safe separation EL-5472 , A.G.A. Cat. No. L51537, August 1988.
distance between power line and pipeline for different soil [13] CDEGS Software Package Safe Engineering Services &
Technologies ltd., Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2000.
resistivities and different fault currents assuming that no
mitigation is used on the pipeline. To reduce the minimum
separation distance between the power lines and pipeline, a
mitigation system should be designed. The mitigation
consists of buried zinc wire that has to be connected with the
pipeline at some strategic location. It is expected that this
work will help utilities to place their system in the right
location along the corridor.

VI. REFERENCES:

[1] Y. Li, F. P. Dawalibi, and J. Ma, “Electromagnetic


Interference Caused by a Power System Network and a
Neighboring Pipeline,” Proceedings of the 62nd

ISSN 1813-419X 450

View publication stats