An Analytical Approach for Evaluating the

Effectiveness of Compensation Lines to Reduce the

Inductive Coupling Interface between High Voltage
Transmission Lines and Buried Pipelines
Mohammad Nazemi Robert Dommerque Tobias Hennig
Asset Management Asset Management Asset Management
Amprion GmbH Amprion GmbH Amprion GmbH
Dortmund, Germany Dortmund, Germany Dortmund, Germany
mohammad.nazemi@amprion.net robert.dommerque@amprion.net tobias.hennig@amprion.net

Abstract—Transmission system operators have to utilize their
network grids to a maximum degree of transmission capability.
Increased current in the transmission lines especially in close
proximity to metallic pipelines will cause an electromagnetic
interface between high voltage transmission lines and neighbour-
ing buried pipes, which may limit the maximum transmission
capability of the transmission lines. Especially in Germany, this
is a big challenge due to the dense infrastructure and population.
Implementing a compensation line under ground or on tower
combined with transmission line structures may reduce the total
induced electromotive force (EMF), which induces a voltage to the
pipeline. However, the compensation line is not always effective,
as it may increase the produced magnetic field and consequently
induced EMF. The effectiveness of the compensation line depends
on several parameters. In this paper, an analytical approach is
developed to evaluate the effectiveness of the compensation line,
reducing inductive coupling interface. A sensitivity analysis is
carried out and discussed to find a better understanding of each
concept of the compensation.
Index Terms—High voltage transmission line, buried pipeline,
inductive coupling interface and compensation line
I. I NTRODUCTION
The permanent rising demand for energy, difficulties in the
extension of existing and construction of new transmission
lines is forcing the utilities to utilize the maximum transmis-
sion capabilities of the existing power lines. Under normal
operating condition, the transmission line voltage is limited to
its maximum allowable value, thereby providing the tendency
for increased current in the line for higher power transfer capa-
bility. In case of close proximity of high voltage structures to
the metallic pipelines, the resulting magnetic field due to line
currents induces a voltage to the pipeline [1]. This influence
is categorized into three types, namely Capacitive, Inductive
and Conductive coupling modes of interface. Considering the
screening effect of the ground surface against electric field, the
capacitive coupling can be neglected for buried pipelines. The
978-1-7281-5579-1/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
induced voltage on the pipelines occurs under both steady-
state (normal) and transient (fault) conditions of the trans-
mission lines. The conductive coupling has to be considered
only when the fault current flows in earthing electrodes and
increases the earthing potential, while the inductive coupling
has to be considered under both normal and fault conditions.
Beside recommendations reported by various research studies
in recent years [2]–[6], a number of reports, standards and
guides have also been established or updated recently, to define
safety limits of the voltages and currents under normal and
fault conditions [1], [7], [8]. Usage of buried compensation
lines near the pipeline to reduce inductive interface has been
reported in [9], [10], however there is still a lack of systematic
approach for evaluation of the effectiveness of compensation
lines, not only under ground but also on the tower combined
with transmission line construction.
In order to find a better systematic understanding of the
effectiveness of implemented compensation lines, in the first
step the inductive coupling interface between transmission
lines and buried pipelines under steady-state condition is
analytically investigated in this paper. The transient behaviour
under fault condition is not addressed here because of space
limitation. A large set of parameters, which have an influence
on this type of interface is varied and a sensitivity analysis is
carried out to find an appropriate and effective compensation
concept.
II. BASICS OF I NDUCTIVE COUPLING INTERFACE
In the subsequent sections the mathematical model for
calculation of the magnetic field, the induced current in
shield wire or in compensation line as well as the induced
electromotive force (EMF) per unit length are derived in detail.
For simplicity, an arbitrary observation point is referred for
the calculations, instead of considering a physically existing
buried pipeline. The voltage and current propagation along
the pipeline based on travelling wave effects has not been
considered here and will be reported by the authors separately.
A. Magnetic field where ω is the angular frequency and DI,II is the corresponding
Considering Ampere’s law, the total magnetic flux density distances:
(I6=II)
p
from main and image conductors at one observation point e.g. DI,II = (xI − xII )2 + (yI − yII )2 (10)
P(x, y) can be calculated as [11]:
The self impedance of the shield wire and compensation line
→
− µ0 X Ii →− can also be similarly calculated as follows:
BP = φ P,i (1)
2π i ri ωµ0

ωµ0

De

′ ′
Z GG = RG + +j · ln (11)
where µ0 = 4π · 10−7 (H/m) is the magnetic permeability of 8 2π DGMR,G
free space. Ii and ri represent the current of conductor i and
  
ωµ0 ωµ0 De
→
−
its distance to observation point, respectively and φ P,i is the Z ′CC = RC′ + +j · ln (12)
8 2π DGMR,C
unit vector in the direction of the cross product of the current
where RG′ and RC′ represent the AC resistance of the shield
vector and the vector segment ri . The horizontal and vertical
wire and compensation conductors in Ω/m, respectively.
components can be rewritten in complex notation as: 1
DGMR = r · e− 4 is the Geometric Mean Radius (GMR),
n
where r represents the radius of the conductors. In the case
 
µ0 X yi − y y + yi + D e
Bh = − Ii − (2) of compensation line under ground, the mutual impedance
2π i=1 ri2 r′ 2i
between compensation line and other conductors is calcu-
µ0 X
n 
x − xi x − xi
 lated according to [12], considering the return current path;
Bv = I − (3) (I ∈ {a, b, c, G}):
2π i=1 i ri2 r′ 2i " 2
y C,I − 3x2C,I
 2y #!
lC,I

′ µ0 C,I
where the vector segments from main and image conductors Z C,I = jω ln − · (13)
are defined as:
2π DC,I 3γ 3 l6C,I
p where DC,I is the distance between compensation line and
ri = (x − xi )2 + (y − yi )2 (4)
phase conductors or ground shield wire, which is calculated
p
r′i = (x − xi )2 + (y + yi + De )2 (5) as in (10) substituting II = C and variables xC,I , y C,I and lC,I
are defined as follows:
De is the complex penetration depth and is given by [11]: q
lC,I = x2C,I + y 2C,I (14)
2
De = = (1 − j)δ (6) xC,I = xI − xC y C,I = yI − yC + De (15)
γ
C. Induced currents and EMF
where δ is the skin depth of the ground:
r Upon calculation of the coupled impedance matrix and
2 ρ
r
δ= = 503 (7) further considering the shield wire and compensation line to
σωµ f be grounded, we have:
    ′ T
ρ is the earth resistivity expressed in Ω · m and f is the
 ′  ′
UG Z GG Z ′GC I z
frequency in Hz. The propagation constant γ in (6) represents = · G + GM · in (16)
U ′C Z ′GC Z ′CC IC z′CM
the return current path, which is used to correct the Carson’s  ′    ′ −1  ′ T
Z GG Z ′GC
 
equations [11]: UG 0 IG z
= → =− · GM · in
U ′C 0 IC Z ′GC Z ′CC z′CM
p p 1p (17)
γ = jωµ(σ + jωǫ) ≈ jωµσ = 2j (8)
δ where M ∈ {a, b, c} notates the phase conductors. z′GM and
where σ and ǫ are the earth conductivity and earth permittivity, z′CM represent the impedance vector of phase conductors to
respectively. ground shield wire and compensation line, respectively and
in is the alternating steady-state current in each of the phase
B. Coupled impedance matrix conductors:    
The coupled impedance matrix consists of self and mutual Ia I
impedance between phase conductors and shield wire; even- in = I b  = I · e−j2π/3  (18)
tually compensation line can be calculated based on basic Ic I · e+j2π/3
Carson’s equation according to [11], which is rewritten in The induced EMF per unit length at observation point P
many different forms in the literature e.g. [1]–[3]. Considering without shield wire and compensation line is:
the notation of I, II ∈ {a, b, c, G, C}, where a, b, c correspond
to three phase conductors and G and C represent ground shield E 0 = z′PM · in (19)
wire and compensation line, the mutual impedances are: considering only the shield wire, it becomes:
Z ′PG ′
    
′ (I6=II) ωµ0 ωµ0 De ′ ′
Z I,II = +j · ln (9) E G = E 0 + Z PG · I G = zPM − ′ · zGM · in (20)
8 2π DI,II Z GG
and in presence of the compensation line, we have: normalized induced EMF observed at the observation point
 
 I P(x, y) = (30m, −1m) for these configurations are selected
E C = E 0 + Z ′PG Z ′PC · G

(21) as reference parameters for the evaluation.
IC
where the currents in shield wire I G and in compensation line
I C are obtained from (17). The induced EMF value normalized
with the magnitude of the steady-state phase conductor current,
|E|
|I| , is used as a reference parameter in different scenarios in
this paper to evaluate the effectiveness of the compensation
line concept.
III. S ENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
A. Magnetic field (a) I = 2000A (b) |I b | = 40kA
1) shield wire effect: Considering a single circuit in tower
→
− Fig. 2: Double shield wire effect; normalized EMF vs. distance
geometry, the magnitude of the magnetic flux density | B | and
|E| between shield wires under (a) normal and (b) fault conditions.
the normalized induced EMF per nominal current |I| under
normal and fault conditions (40kA fault current in phase “b”)
are illustrated in Fig. 1. As it can be seen, the shield wire Ia Ia Ib Ib Ic Ic
creates a second EMF, which can increase the induced voltage
on the pipeline under steady-state condition, contrary to what Ib Ic Ic Ib Ic I a Ia Ic Ib I a Ia Ib
happens under fault condition, where the current induced in the
shield wire always contributes to the reduction of the EMFs. Config. 1 Config. 2 Config. 3 Config. 4 Config. 5 Config. 6

Fig. 3: Transposition configurations.

Figs. 4, 5 and 6 illustrate the results. In the case of single

circuit, it can be seen in Fig. 4(a) that the distribution of the
magnitude of the magnetic flux density is independent from the
geometry. Only the phase of the magnetic field will be changed
at different configurations. The reason is the symmetrical
three phase conductor currents, which generates the same
(a) I = 2000A (b) |I b | = 40kA magnitude of the magnetic field but with different phases in
Fig. 1: Influence of the shield wire on magnetic field and all configurations. This phenomenon is also obvious in the
normalized EMF under (a) normal and (b) fault conditions. induced current in shield wire and induced EMF at observation
point, illustrated in Figs. 5(a) and 6(a). It is however important
to mention that the transposition of the phase conductors
Fig. 2 shows the calculated |E|
|I| , in case of double shield wire in double circuit configuration will influence the magnetic
with respect to the distance between shield wires s for a typical
field, induced current in shield wire and induced EMF, due
double circuit configuration. Two shield wires are placed at the
to the asymmetrical property of the conductor currents. It is
same height on top of the tower. It is obvious that the shield
clearly obvious that in some geometries, the induced EMF is
wires have a positive effect under fault condition with regards
explicitly less than the others, so the transposition of the phase
to reduction of the EMFs. However, shield wires also showcase
conductors, (in double circuit system) has a big influence on
a negative effect under steady-state condition and will be more
the induced EMF. Proper transposition can even reduce the
severe with the increase in the distance between shield wires.
induced voltage in the neighbouring buried pipelines by more
It can be concluded that due to the different behaviour of
than 50%.
the shield wires under normal and fault conditions, a separate
approach related to the inductive interface under normal and
fault conditions has to be considered.
2) Transposition effect: In case of a single circuit, six
configurations as depicted in Fig. 3 are evaluated. In order
to evaluate the transposition effect in a two circuit system, the
tower geometry is extended into two circuits with different
configurations. The configuration of circuit 2 (left side of
the tower) has been changed to different configurations as
depicted in Fig. 3, while circuit 1 (right side of the tower) (a) Single circuit (b) Double circuit
has been considered unchanged. Magnitude of the magnetic
flux density, the induced current in shield wire and the Fig. 4: Transposition effect on magnetic field.
 line to the pipeline, the higher will be its effectiveness. This
can be observed by following the variation of the vector E C .
Comparing the two vectors E C and E G shows the amount of
reduction of induced voltage on the pipeline at each point,
where the compensation line is located. This behaviour was
also observed for other transposition configurations.

(a) Single circuit (b) Double circuit

(I) Under ground (a) (b) (c)
Fig. 5: Transposition effect on induced current in shield wire.
(d) (e)
P (30,-1)
xc = 0 … xc

(a)
(b)
(II) On tower

(c) (d) (e)

(III) Single loop (IV) Double loop

(a) Single circuit (b) Double circuit
Fig. 7: Compensation line concepts.
Fig. 6: Transposition effect on normalized EMF.

B. Compensation line
A compensation line can be implemented to reduce the
induced EMF and consequently the induced voltage on the
neighbouring buried pipelines. The aim of the compensation
lines should be the generation of a magnetic field so as to
reduce the total induced EMF. In this section the effectiveness
of the compensation line at different locations such as under
ground or on the tower combined with transmission line
construction is evaluated. In addition, the concept of single or (a) Induced currents (b) Induced EMF
double loop compensation lines as well as active compensation Fig. 8: Phasor diagram; compensation line under ground at
with intentionally injected current on the line will be developed xC = 0.
and discussed. Fig. 7 shows the different concepts for the
E
compensation lines. The normalized induced EMF value, |I| ,
as a reference parameter will be compared in different sce-
narios to evaluate the effectiveness of the compensation line.
As explained in (21), index “0”, “G” and “C” are related to
the values “without shield wire and compensation line”, “with
only shield wire” and “with compensation line”, respectively.
1) Compensation line under ground: Considering Fig. 7(I),
the compensation line is buried at the depth of the pipeline,
i.e. typically 1m under ground (yC = −1). The position of the
compensation line is swept from the center of the tower to the (a) Induced currents (b) Induced EMF
distance near the pipe, typically xC = 0 · · · 29m. Considering
Fig. 9: Phasor diagram; compensation line under ground sweep
the mathematical method described in section (II-C), the
xC .
value of the induced EMF at observation point P(x, y) =
(30m, −1m) is calculated. Fig. 8 shows the phasor diagram 2) Compensation line on tower: Implementation of a single
of the induced currents in shield wire and compensation line conductor on the tower as a compensation line according to
as well as the normalized phasors related to (21), when the Fig 7(II) is evaluated in Fig. 10. It can be seen that this type of
compensation line is placed at xC = 0. By sweeping the single conductor as a compensation line at almost all possible
compensation line in x direction, the phasor’s components positions has no benefit and can even increase the induced
change not only in magnitude but also in phase angle as de- voltage on the pipeline, as the induced EMF has been further
picted in Fig. 9. It is obvious that, the closer the compensation increased by the adding of the compensation line on the tower.
 3) Single loop: Another possible implementation of com- it may be considered that the currents in compensation lines
pensation lines on tower is to apply a single loop, i.e. two can intentionally be injected in conductors as certain amount
conductors placed symmetrical or asymmetrical on the tower of magnitudes and phase angles. This type of compensation,
as shown in Fig. 7(III). In case of having two conductors as namely, active compensation is discussed in this section.
compensation lines, (16) will be extended as follows: Similar to passive compensation, active compensation can
 ′   ′     ′ T also be under ground, on tower, single or double loop. It
UG Z GG Z ′GC1 Z ′GC2 IG zGM is important to mention that the active compensation has
U ′C1  = Z ′GC1 Z ′CC Z ′C1C2  · I C1  + z′C1M  · in
more effort and is relative costly in comparison with passive
U ′C2 Z ′GC2 Z ′C1C2 Z ′CC I C2 z′C2M one. The effectiveness of an active compensation is also
(22)
 ′ −1  ′ T dependent on the magnitude of the system current (|I n | = I).
Z GG Z ′GC1 Z ′GC2
 
IG zGM In order to have a better qualitative comparison, a set of
I C1  = − Z ′GC1 Z ′CC Z ′C1C2  · z′C1M  · in
active compensation configurations are selected and evaluated.
I C2 Z ′GC2 Z ′C1C2 Z ′CC z′C2M The magnitude of the injected current in compensation lines,
(23)
|I C |, has been considered between 5 to 100A and the phase
Applying the same mathematical method, the induced EMF
angle, ∠I C , is varied between 0◦ to 360◦ (refer to the ∠I a ).
can be calculated. Fig. 11 shows the results. As it can be seen,
It is important to mention that by active compensation, the
in contrary to the single conductor as a compensation line, the
voltage of the compensation line to ground is not zero and the
single loop concept can be effective, when the compensation
conductor has to be isolated properly. The induced voltage on
lines are placed on lower cross arms (configuration (b) and
compensation conductor with the same notation as described
(c) in Fig. 7). The single loop compensation has been found
in chapter II will be calculated as:
to be more effective, when it was combined with a proper  
transposition arrangement.  I
U ′C = Z ′GC Z ′CC · G + z′CM · in

(24)
IC

(a) without compensation (b) with compensation

Fig. 10: Induced EMF; compensation line on tower.
(a) Induced currents (b) Induced EMF
Fig. 12: Phasor diagram; double loop compensation.

a) under ground: Fig. 13 show the selected results of

(a) All configurations (b) Zoomed (b) and (c)
Fig. 11: Induced EMF; single loop compensation.
4) Double loop: Using double loop as compensation lines
as shown in Fig. 7(IV) generates more EMFs to the line
conductors, which can lead to reduction of the total induced
voltage on the pipeline. Fig. 12 shows the calculated results of
induced currents in shield wire and compensation lines (here
C1 to C4 ) and the normalized induced field E C . As it can
be seen, the concept is good but not effective as single loop
concept. Due to more effort for this concept, the single loop
concept is preferred.
5) Active compensation: Beside passive compensation con-
cept, at which the currents are induced in compensation lines,
an active compensation line under ground. For a better com-
parison, the values of normalized induced EMF without com-
pensation (index “G”) and with passive compensation (index
“C”) are also depicted on figures. Index “A” refers to active
compensation in this section. The optimal effectiveness was
observed, when the magnitude of the injected current was less
than 8% of the rated current with the phase angles between
90◦ to 150◦ . It was also observed that the phase angle of
the injected current related to ∠I a = 0 should be positive
to achieve the required effectiveness. Another finding was
that the compensation with high injected current shall be far
from the pipeline to have a positive effect on the reduction of
total induced EMFs, contrary to passive compensation under
ground.
b) On tower: Two typical configurations of passive com-
pensation (configurations (a) and (d) acc. to Fig. 7(II)) are
evaluated by active compensation in Fig. 14. In contrary to
passive compensation, active compensations on top cross arm
can also be effective. Compensation on lower cross arm has
a considerable benefit, only when |I C | is set between 2.5%
to 10% of |I n | (50A to 200A by rated current of 2000A in
Fig. 14 (a)) with angles of 120◦ to 150◦ .
(a) ∠I C = 0◦ (b) ∠I C = 90◦
(c) ∠I C = 120◦ (d) ∠I C = 180◦
Fig. 13: Active compensation; under ground
(a) Config. (a) (b) Config. (d)
Fig. 14: Active compensation; on tower acc. to Fig. 7(II)
c) Single loop: Symmetrical single loop compensation
as configurations (a) and (b) acc. to Fig. 7(III) is evaluated
in Fig. 15. It is interesting to see that again in contrary to
passive compensation, the loop on upper cross arm is effective
with all selected ranges of the magnitude and phase angles of
I C , while the active compensation loop on lower cross arm
has no additional benefit when compared to those by passive
compensation.
(a) Config. (a) (b) Config. (b)
Fig. 15: Active compensation; single loop acc. to Fig. 7(III)
IV. C ONCLUSION
Transmission system operators are constantly increasing
their power transmission capabilities to achieve maximum
degree of utilization. The limits in transmission capability can
be significantly improved, if the inductive coupling interface
with buried pipelines is accurately determined and assessed.
Therefore it is important to develop mitigation methods to
reduce these interfaces. In this paper, an analytical approach
is developed to evaluate, whether using compensation lines
can reduce inductive coupling between transmission line and
buried pipelines. The effectiveness of different compensation
concepts like under ground, on tower, single or double loop
and active compensations are mathematically described and
systematically evaluated and discussed in detail.
Further investigations about effectiveness of the compensation
concepts under fault conditions as well as developing a similar
approach for conductive coupling is ongoing by the authors
and will be reported soon. Additionally, the similar analytical
calculations for the voltage and current propagation along
the pipeline based on travelling wave effects for all types of
coupling interface will be reported in the upcoming works.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Martin Lösing and Dr.
Klaus Kleinekorte for their valuable comments and discussions
and Fahad Sultan Ahmed for proofreading of the paper.
R EFERENCES
[1] CIGRÉ WG.36.02, “Guide on the influence of high voltage AC power
systems on metallic pipelines,” Document No. 95, 1995.
[2] R. Djekidel, S. A. Bessedik, P. Spitéri and D. Mahi, “Passive mitigation
for magnetic between HV power line and aerial pipeline using PSO
algorithms optimization,” Elsevier 165, pp. 18–26, 2018.
[3] K. B. Adedeji, A. A. Ponnle, B. T. Abe, A. A. Jimoh, A. M. Abu-
Mahfouz and Y. Hamam, “GUI-Based AC induced corrosion moni-
toring for buried pipelines near HVTLs,” Engineering Letters, 26:4,
EL 26 4 12, 2018.
[4] D. Micu, G. C. Christoforidis and L. Czumbil, “AC interference on
pipelines due to double circuit power lines: A detailed study,” Elsevier
103, pp. 1–8, 2013.
[5] M. H. Shwehdi, M. A. Alaqil and S. R. Mohamed, “EMF Analysis for a
380kV Transmission OHL in the Vicinity of Buried Pipelines,” in: IEEE
Access, vol. 8, pp. 3710–3717, 2020.
[6] S.H.A. Kaboli, A. Al Hinai, A.H. Al-Badi, Y. Charabi and A. Al Saifi,
“Prediction of Metallic Conductor Voltage Owing to Electromagnetic
Coupling Via a Hybrid ANFIS and Backtracking Search Algorithm,”
in: Energies 2019, 12, 3651.
[7] AfK-Empfehlung Nr. 3, “Maßnahmen beim Bau und Betrieb
von Rohrleitungen im Einflussbereich von Hochspannungs-
Drehstromanlagen und Wechselstrom-Bahnanlagen,” Working group
DVGW/VDE (SfB-TE7), 2014.
[8] CIGRÉ JWG.C4.2.02, “AC Corrosion on metallic pipelines due to
interface from AC power lines, Phenomenon, modelling and counter-
measures,” Document No. 290, 2006.
[9] S. Schmidt and D. Martin, “Wechselstrombeeinflussung kathodisch
geschützter Rohrleitungen durch Hochspannungsfreileitungen,” In: 3R
intl. Journal, Vol. 45, pp. 653–656, 2006.
[10] A. Popoli, L. Sandrolini and A. Cristofolini, “Finite Element Analysis
of Mitigation Measures for AC Interference on Buried Pipelines,” in:
EEEIC / I&CPS Europe, pp. 1–5, 2019.
[11] EPRI, “Transmission line reference book, 345 KV and above: based on
UHV Transmission Research Project RP 68,” The Institute: 1975.
[12] G. Lucca, “Mutual impedance between an overhead and a buried line
with earth return,” in: 9th Intl. Conf. on EMC, pp. 80–86, 1994.