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

net/publication/323649896

Non-Invasive Current Sensor for Multi-Core Cables

Article in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · March 2018

DOI: 10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540

CITATIONS READS
22 3,360

5 authors, including:

Xiangguo Yang Wilsun Xu

18 PUBLICATIONS 89 CITATIONS
University of Alberta
302 PUBLICATIONS 12,267 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Xiangguo Yang on 01 August 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. , NO. , NOVEMBER 2017
Non-Invasive Current Sensor for Multi-Core Cables
Guangchao Geng, Member, IEEE, Xiangguo Yang, Member, IEEE, Yang Gao, William Hammond, and
Wilsun Xu, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—Multi-core cables are widely used in medium- and
low-voltage electric power systems. Current measurement of in-
dividual conductors in such cables is especially useful for various
advanced applications but technically difficult to implement.
Since existing current sensing devices are designed for single
conductor, one has to break the cable enclosure or connector to
access individual conductors for current measurement, which is
practically infeasible. A non-invasive current sensor for multi-
core cables is proposed, designed, implemented and verified in
this work. It is able to measure magnetic field outside the cable
using a sensor array and reversely calculate the currents on in-
dividual conductors. It is easy to install and adapt multiple cable
specifications. Such device is able to determine current phasors,
perform harmonic analysis and detect current disturbance with
sufficient accuracy. The effectiveness of the proposed approach
is validated by both laboratory experiment and field test.
Index Terms—Current measurement, disturbance detection,
harmonics, magnetic sensor array, multi-core cable.
I. I NTRODUCTION
ABLES are widely used in medium- and low-voltage
C electric power systems for residential, commercial, in-
dustrial and utility applications, due to its advantage of low-
cost and convenience in installation and maintenance.
Current measurement is a fundamental need for power
system monitoring and diagnosis. Steady-state current infor-
mation, including root-mean-square (RMS) value and phasor,
enables multiple applications like energy use metering [1],
troubleshooting (e.g., identify unbalanced phase) [2], dynamic
thermal rating [3], predictive maintenance [4]. More advanced
power quality applications are enabled if current waveforms
are available, such as fault anticipation and diagnosis [5],
condition monitoring [6], end-user behavior modeling [7], etc.
A power cable encloses one or more electrical conductors
held with a sheath/armor. For example, a four-conductor Teck
cable for ABC-N phase connection is illustrated in Fig. 1.
Existing current sensing device, like clamp-on current probe,
is designed for single conductor cases. For multi-core (also
known as multi-conductor or multi-phase) cables, conventional
current probe is only able to identify the net current, i.e.,
zero-sequence current for a three-phase system, instead of
individual currents of each conductor. It is unable to obtain
This work was supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation
of China (51607155, 51507121) and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation
(20150004).
G. Geng is with the College of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310027, China.
X. Yang is with the School of Energy and Power Engineering, Wuhan
University of Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430070, China
W. Hammond is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Univer-
sity of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R3, Canada.
Y. Gao and W. Xu are with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2R3, Canada.
Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
1
Outer Jacket
Inner Jacket
Ground Conductor
} Phase Conductor
(ABC-N)
Insulation
Aluminum Armor
Fig. 1. An illustration of four-conductor Teck cable.
Space in the
panel is limited
for installing
current probes
for each
conductor
The panel is
preferred to be
Non-invasive current
sensor can be
installed here
closed due to
safety
considerations
Fig. 2. An illustration of current sensor installation outside a panel.
sufficient information required by the aforementioned appli-
cations. Also, field personnels are unable to break the cable
enclosure/connector or open the panel to access individual
conductors, due to safety regulations. Space near cable joint
is commonly limited for installing current probes, especially
inside a panel or at a space-limited facility. There is, therefore,
a need for a non-invasive instrument to identify all currents on
individual conductors in a multi-core cable, contactlessly from
the outside of the cable enclosure. Fig. 2 further illustrates the
non-invasive approach of cable current measurement.
For such multi-conductor systems, sensor array is used to
capture magnetic fields nearby and reversely determine the
currents inside [8]. Similar concepts were practiced for current
measurement of overhead lines [9], [10], where conductors
are inaccessible hence a non-invasive approach is preferred.
Reference [11] investigated current monitoring method for
underground multi-core cables in a substation, which is based
on priori knowledge of conductor geometry. However, for most
of applications, such information is not available. This work
proposes a current sensing approach to identify conductor
positions and currents of multiple conductors simultaneously,
based on a non-linear least squares algorithm. Conductor
geometry is not necessary to know beforehand.
To verify this idea, a prototype current sensing instrument
is developed. A mounting structure is designed to clamp the
 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. , NO. , NOVEMBER 2017

instrument on the cable jacket. Current phasors at fundamental
frequency as well as harmonic currents are identified. Distur-
bances, like sag or swell events, are detected by the proposed
approach. Based on a laboratory test bed, experiment results
confirm the technical feasibility to achieve the aforementioned
goals. Also, a field test is carried out for further validation
using a real-world multi-core cable in a utility facility. The
proposed approach is expected to enable the capability of
measuring multi-core cables for state-of-the-art power quality
analyzer/monitor technology, which is commonly based on
clamp-like current probes designed for single conductor.
II. P RINCIPLE OF C URRENT S ENSING
An AC current phasor If at frequency f on a straight
conductor generates an alternating magnetic field around it.
µ0 cos δ
Bf = If (1)
2πr
where Bf is magnetic flux density at an arbitrary location
with position and angular distance r and δ to the conductor.
µ0 is magnetic permeability constant. Note that, this is valid
as long as there is no cable shield or the shield is made of
non-magnetic material like aluminum.
Such magnetic field can be detected by magnetic field sensor
placed at the given location, it is able to convert magnetic flux
density to its output voltage. The relationship between sensor
output voltage and magnetic flux density is defined as
µ0 cos δ
Vf = ρf eiφf Bf = ρf eiφf If . (2)
2πr
where gain factor ρf and phase shift φf are used to describe
the behavior (i.e., sensitivity) of a magnetic field sensor.
Assume (xI , yI ) and (xS , yS ) as the positions of the con-
ductor and the sensor in a Cartesian coordinate system, the
sensor output voltage Vf can be expressed by the equation
as (3). Detailed formulation derivation and the method to
determine sensor parameters can be found in [12], [13].
In the problem of current measurement using external
magnetic field sensor, sensor position (xS , yS ), frequency
response (ρf , φf ) and output voltage phasor Vf are all known,
conductor position (xI , yI ) and current phasor If are to be
determined. Moreover, for a multi-conductor system like a
multi-core cable, the sensed magnetic field is the overlap of
individual magnetic fields generated by multiple currents on
different conductors. In order to solve the unknowns, an array
of sensors located at different positions around the cable is
used to establish sufficient number of equations as (2). If the
number of equations is greater than or equal to the number of
unknowns, the currents on each conductor can be solved.
For example, for a four-conductor Teck cable shown in
Fig. 1, each conductor has four unknowns (xI , yI , real and
imaginary part of If ). The total number of unknowns is
16. Each sensor is able to establish two equations (real and
imaginary part of Vf ). Therefore, at least eight sensors at
different positions have to be employed.
Once sufficient number of equations are obtained, a non-
linear least-squares (NLLS) formulation can be set up to solve
all the unknowns, which will be covered in the next section.
III. N ON -L INEAR L EAST-S QUARES F ORMULATION
A. Basic NLLS Formulation
The idea of least-squares is to find the optimal input of a
model that best fits the measured output using an optimization
formulation. In the problem of multi-core cable current mea-
surement for a given frequency f , e.g., fundamental frequency,
we are looking at the best combination of conductor positions
and currents that is able to best fit measured voltage signals
from the sensor array. For any given combination, one is able
to calculate the sensor output voltage using (3). The objective
function of NLLS is to minimize the difference between the
calculated voltages and the measured voltages by finding the
best combination of conductor positions and currents.
Following the idea above, we are able to set up a basic
version of NLLS formulation as (4) on the bottom of this
page, where SI is the conductor set with dimension n and
superscript/subscript j, SS is the conductor set with dimension
m and superscript/subscript k. In this formulation, conductor
positions (xjI , yIj ) and currents If,j of all conductors are to
be determined. Auxiliary variables Vf,k,j , representing the
voltage component of k-th sensor caused by j-th conductor
current just as defined in (3), are also to be optimized. The
accumulation of such components from all the conductors is
namely the calculated sensor voltages, whose difference with
respect to the measured values Vf,k is minimized. Necessary
inequality constraints are also included. First, all the conductor
positions should be inside the circular sensor array with radius
RI . Second, each current magnitude has to be below their
upper bound If,max , which is commonly the rated current of
a cable or the load it is serving.

µ0 ρf eiφf If [(xS cos θ − yS sin θ) (xS − xI ) + (yS cos θ + xS sin θ) (yS − yI )]

Vf = h i (3)
2 2
p
2π x2S + yS2 (xS − xI ) + (yS − yI )
X 2
min ψ(xjI , yIj , If,j , Vf,k,j )
P
= Vf,k − j∈SI Vf,k,j
j∈SI ,k∈SS k∈SS

j 2 j 2 2
 (xI ) + (yI ) ≤ RI




 |If,j | ≤ If,max
 (4)
s.t. iφf,k
h
k k k j k k k j
i

 µ ρ
0 f,k e If,j (xS cos θ k − y S sin θ k )(xS − x I ) + (y S cos θ k + x S sin θ k )(yS − y I )
 V

 f,k,j = q h i
j j
2π (xk )2 + (y k )2 (xk − x )2 + (y k − y )2


S S S I S I

Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
GENG et al.: NON-INVASIVE CURRENT SENSOR FOR MULTI-CORE CABLES 3

B. Enhanced NLLS Formulation using Harmonics established as (6). The equations of the identified harmonics
The basic NLLS formulation (4) is sufficient to identify are included in the NLLS, measuring accuracy is improved
currents at a given frequency, i.e., fundamental frequency given additional observed information.
for most of the cases. However, if currents with more than
one frequencies are observed on cable conductors, e.g., fun- C. Auxiliary Constraints
damental current with harmonics, it is possible to utilize The following auxiliary constraints may be added into the
such harmonics to further enhance the accuracy of current NLLS formulation aforementioned, in order to utilize optional
measurement, with some minor modifications based on the information to increase measuring performance.
basic NLLS formulation (4). 1) Zero-Sequence Current Constraint: For a three-phase
For a periodical AC current waveform i(t), one is able to cable serving a system without its own ground current, e.g.,
perform Fourier transformation to obtain a series of current a delta-connected load, one is able to assume zero-sequence
phasors at different discrete frequencies {I1 · · · If · · · IFmax }, current is zero. Therefore, the following constraint can be
where Fmax is the maximum harmonic order. Similar trans- added into the NLLS formualtion to provide more information.
formation can be done on sensor output voltage to obtain X
{V1 · · · Vf · · · VFmax } from its time-domain signal v(t). Each If,j = 0 ∀f ∈ SF (7)
harmonic current component generates magnetic field around j∈SI
the cable and therefore contributes to sensor output voltage 2) Cable Geometry Constraints: The cable specification
as (3), both at the corresponding frequency. Hence, one is may be available in some application scenarios, in such
able to establish more equations like (3) for various harmonic circumstance the geometry distances of conductors may be
frequencies. Note that, all these harmonics enabled equations known beforehand. Corresponding geometry constraints as (8)
share the same conductor positions (xI , yI ), they are able to (on the bottom of the page) can be used to assist optimum
significantly increase the redundancy of the established NLLS searching, where dj1 ,j2 is the reference distance between j1 -
formulation and therefore enhance the measuring accuracy. th and j2 -th conductors. ∆d is the tolerance value.
One practical issue is how to determine which harmonic
orders to be used in the additional NLLS equations. Including
IV. M ETHOD OF C URRENT M EASUREMENT
all the harmonic orders, i.e., from 1 to Fmax , is technically
infeasible because it will dramatically increase the dimension A. Trans-Impedance Matrix
of NLLS and reduce its solving efficiency. Also, for most Once the proposed NLLS formulation is solved, the rela-
of the cases, only a limited number of harmonic orders are tionship between sensor output voltage Vf,k and conductor
observed in the measured currents. Therefore, the following current If,j is established. It can be simplified by introducing
strategy is designed to determine the effective harmonic order the concept of trans-impedance matrix [Z], which regards
set SF , which indicates the best combination of harmonic the cable-sensor system as a black box with an impedance
orders that one or more cable currents may have. based circuit network, represented by an impedance matrix

|Vf,k |
 [Z]. Therefore the currents and the voltages follow a linear
SF = max ≥ IHD, ∀f ∈ [1 . . . Fmax ] (5) relationship as (9), where each matrix element Zf,k,j is
k∈SS |V1,k |
evaluated as (10) on the bottom of the page.
According to this strategy, the harmonic orders with suf-     
ficiently large sensor voltage individual harmonic distortion Vf,1 Zf,1,1 . . . Zf,1,nI If,1
.. .. .. ..   .. 
(IHD) (greater than a threshold IHD) are selected. The fol- =   .  (9)
  
 . . . .
lowing enhanced NLLS formulation with harmonics can be Vf,nS Zf,nS ,1 ... Zf,nS ,nI If,nI

X 2
min ψ(xjI , yIj , If,j , Vf,k,j )
P
= Vf,k − j∈SI Vf,k,j
f ∈SF ,j∈SI ,k∈SS k∈SS ,f ∈SF

j 2 j 2 2


 (xI ) + (y I ) ≤ R I


 |If,j | ≤ If,max
 (6)
s.t. h i

 µ0 ρf,k eiφf,k If,j (xkS cos θk − ySk sin θk )(xkS − xjI ) + (ySk cos θk + xkS sin θk )(ySk − yIj )


 Vf,k,j = q h i
2π (xk )2 + (y k )2 (xk − xj )2 + (y k − y j )2


S S S I S I

2 2
(dj1 ,j2 − ∆d) ≤ (xjI1 − xjI2 )2 + (yIj1 − yIj2 )2 ≤ (dj1 ,j2 + ∆d) , ∀j1 , j2 ∈ SI , j1 6= j2 (8)
h
 
 i
µ0 ρf,k eiφf,k xkS cos θk − ySk sin θk xkS − xjI + ySk cos θk + xkS sin θk ySk − yIj
Zf,k,j = q  2  2  (10)
k

2 k

2  k j k j
2π xS + yS xS − xI + yS − yI

Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at
4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL.
Input: Sensor voltages in time domain v(t)
Fourier Transformation
Sensor voltages in frequency domain [V]
Trans-impedance
Solve linear least-square (11)
matrix [Z]
N Solve nonlinear least-
||[V]–[Z][I]|| < ε
square (4) or (6)
Y
Output: Currents in frequency domain [I]
Inverse Fourier Transformation
Output: Currents in time domain i(t)
Fig. 3. Flowchart of the proposed current measurement approach.
After solving NLLS formulation as (4) or (6), we obtain all
the variable values to determine Zf,k,j and therefore build the
matrix [Z]. Note that, as long as the relative positions between
the sensors and the conductors are not changed, the matrix [Z]
remains constant. This property enables us to solve currents
using (9) without solving (4) or (6) repetitively.
B. Current Measurement in Frequency Domain
For a given frequency f , we are able to use a linear least-
squares (LLS) formulation as (11) to solve the overdetermined
system (9) and identify currents at the frequency f .
2
min ψ([I]) = ||[V ] − [Z][I]||
As an LLS problem, the optimal solution [I] can be obtained
analytically as (12) using a series of linear algebra calculations
instead of any sophisticated optimization algorithm. The com-
putational burden is significantly reduced.

−1
[I] = [Z]T [Z] [Z]T [V ] (12)
One is able to repeat this procedure for all the frequen-
cies being measured, therefore all the current phasors at the
frequencies of interest are obtained. Note that, the NLLS
formulation (4) or (6) is only required to be solved once,
then the matrix [Z] is established and the LLS (11) is solved
continuously in order to achieve cycle-to-cycle monitoring.
Also, the objective value of (11), i.e., the residual of the
overdetermined system (9), is checked every cycle. It indicates
the degree of mismatch between the calculated sensor voltages
and the measured ones. If it is found to be abnormally large,
this may be caused by a location adjustment or re-installation
of the measuring device. At this time, the NLLS formulation
has to be solved again to update the matrix [Z].
C. Current Measurement in Time Domain
The method described so far is only in frequency domain,
that is, the output is in the form of current phasors at different
frequencies. For the purpose of monitoring, communication or
visualization, it is natural to recover time-domain waveforms
using the obtained current phasors as (13).
X
ij (t) = |If,j | cos (2πf t + ∠If,j ) (13)
f ∈SF
Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
, NO. , NOVEMBER 2017
Sensor
parameters
Fig. 4. A close-up view of the sensor array and its PCBs.
D. Procedure Flowchart
As a brief summary of the proposed multi-core cable current
measurement approach, a procedure flowchart is provided as
shown in Fig. 3. Time-domain sensor output voltage wave-
forms are used as the input. Corresponding voltage phasors
at different frequencies are obtained using Fourier transfor-
mation. Based on the voltage phasor and trans-impedance
matrix, one is able to solve the linear least-squares problem
(11) to obtain current phasors at the given frequencies. If the
mismatch is found to be larger than a specified threshold , the
nonlinear least-squares problem (4) or (6) is solved to update
the trans-impedance matrix. The outcome is current phasor
in frequency domain. Current waveform is also available as
another output after inverse Fourier transformation.
(11)
V. T EST B ED S ETUP
A. Prototype Instrument
A prototype instrument is developed to verify the effec-
tiveness of the proposed method. 24 magnetic field sen-
sors are used in the sensor array, distributed on a circle
with radius rS = 23.5mm. Each sensor is with dimension
of 2.8×φ3.0mm, commercially available with part number
SDR0302-102KL [14]. The sensors and their amplifier cir-
cuits are integrated on two pieces of printed circuit boards
(PCB). Each PCB is with a semi-circle opening with radius
rC = 22.5mm to accommodate cables. The sensor PCB is
shown as Fig. 4. The PCB connects with another pair of PCBs,
which accommodate DAQ connectors and power supply.
The sensor sensitivity is 11.373V/T, the amplifying ratio
is 6000. Combining the sensor and its amplifier circuit, the
overall gain factor of output voltage is ρ = 6.824×104 V/T,
the phase delay is φ = 13.61◦ . For the frequency window of
interest, the frequency response of the sensing system is almost
constant. Also, all the sensors have the identical sensitivity.
Therefore, the values of gain factor and phase delay above are
used for all the sensors and all the studied frequencies.
The PCBs are protected by a 3D printed, sandwich-like
mounting structure. It is built with poly-lactic acid (PLA)
filament and assembled using aluminum screws/nuts, in order
to minimize its impact on magnetic field around the cable.
Fixing handles and locating pins are designed to mount the
instrument easily on a cable with fixed sensor positions, as
shown Fig. 5. Fig. 6 further demonstrates the open and close
status of the mounting structure.
 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
GENG et al.: NON-INVASIVE CURRENT SENSOR FOR MULTI-CORE CABLES 5

Fig. 7. Test bed of multi-core cable current measurement.

Fig. 5. Design diagram of the mounting structure.

Fig. 6. Open and close status of the mounting structure.

Fig. 8. A screen shot of real-time LabVIEW front panel.

B. Laboratory Test Bed
An overview of the test bed is shown in Fig. 7. A four-
1) Phasor Measurement: In this scheme, the fundamental
conductor Teck cable (ABC-N phase) with conductor AWG
frequency phasors of sinusoidal currents on each con-
size 1 are tested. Detailed specification of the cable can be
ductor are measured. This scheme is able to support
found in [15]. The tested reference currents are in the range
applications like energy use metering and basic trou-
of 2-16A, which are obtained using a three-phase power source
bleshooting scenarios, e.g., unbalanced currents.
and adjustable load boxes. The currents are also measured by
2) Harmonic Analysis: This scheme goes beyond perfect
Fluke i1000s clamp-on AC current probes [16] for comparison.
sinusoidal waveform and considers realistic currents
A National Instruments CompactDAQ system with two NI-
with harmonics. Harmonic currents are identified along
9220 voltage input data acquisition modules [17] are utilized
with the fundamental frequency component. Also, time-
to acquire the amplified sensor analog signals, at sampling
domain waveforms are recovered for further analysis.
rate of 128 points per cycle. The maximum harmonic order
Typical application scenarios include inspecting harmon-
considered is Fmax = 24. The acquired data is processed in
ics and other power quality issues.
real time using LabVIEW software [18] on a laptop, where
3) Event Detection: This scheme looks at non-repetitive
the measurement results are displayed on the screen instanta-
events like sag and swell, which indicate current dis-
neously. LLS and NLLS solving use the sampled waveforms
turbance. It enables various power disturbance analytics
of 1 and 10 cycles, respectively. The NLLS formulation is
applications, e.g., waveform abnormality detection.
implemented in AMPL [19] and solved by KNITRO [20].
A screen shot of LabVIEW front panel is provided in Fig. 8.
Sensor voltage waveforms and phasors, as well as calculated B. Scheme 1: Phasor Measurement
current phasors and conductor positions are displayed and Absolute error EI (14) and relative error EI % (15) are used
refreshed in real time. The threshold  in Fig. 3 is set as 0.5, as indices to evaluate the accuracy of current measurement in
in order to trigger NLLS solving after detecting conductor po- phasor form. Subscript f is omitted here as all the results in
sition change. Reference current phasors measured by current this section are for fundamental frequency. Note that neutral
probes are also shown for the purpose of comparison. current is not taken into account in error analysis, as it
commonly has very small values.
VI. L ABORATORY E XPERIMENT
E = max |Ij − I j | (14)
A. Verification Schemes j∈SI

The following schemes aiming at different applications are Ij − I j

E% = max × 100% (15)
tested to verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach: j∈SI Ij

Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. , NO. , NOVEMBER 2017

TABLE I 90
120 6 60
C URRENT P HASOR M EASUREMENT R ESULT OF BALANCED C ASES

Current Position 1 Position 2 Position 3 4

(A) E (A) E% E (A) E% E (A) E%
150 30

2.037 0.030 1.467% 0.032 1.632% 0.043 2.096% 2

4.073 0.091 2.270% 0.120 2.936% 0.154 3.776%
6.109 0.169 2.817% 0.196 3.212% 0.263 4.319%
8.146 0.240 3.009% 0.277 3.400% 0.372 4.560%
10.182 0.312 3.118% 0.363 3.550% 0.472 4.670% 180 0 0
12.219 0.367 3.064% 0.424 3.484% 0.560 4.584%
14.255 0.417 3.003% 0.494 3.501% 0.653 4.576%
16.292 0.496 3.063% 0.562 3.483% 0.751 4.603%

TABLE II 210 330

C URRENT P HASOR M EASUREMENT R ESULT OF U NBALANCED C ASES

Position 1 Position 2 Position 3 240 300

Current Sensor Voltage (V)
Combination 270
E (A) E% E (A) E% E (A) E%
(8, 8, 7) 0.641 4.008% 0.533 3.734% 0.848 5.964% Fig. 9. Sensor voltage phasors of a typical four-conductor problem.
(8, 7, 7) 0.760 4.798% 0.524 3.700% 0.750 4.675%
(8, 7, 6) 0.769 5.482% 1.051 7.646% 0.772 4.846%
(8, 6, 6) 0.841 5.287% 0.526 3.360% 0.835 5.225%
(8, 6, 5) 0.832 6.176% 0.886 7.350% 0.867 5.409%
(7, 6, 5) 0.661 5.455% 0.924 7.586% 0.692 4.997% 20
(7, 6, 4) 0.630 6.912% 0.820 6.739% 0.714 6.723%
(7, 5, 4) 0.747 6.771% 0.740 7.331% 0.787 5.575%
10

Y Axis (mm)
TABLE III
M EASURING R ESULTS AFTER R EMOVING M ULTIPLE S ENSORS
0
Number of Sensors (nS ) E (A) E%
24 0.680 4.602%
23 0.702 4.922% -10
22 0.701 4.913%
21 0.696 4.883%
20 0.821 5.761% -20 Sensor
Conductor

The cable was randomly placed at three positions inside -20 -10 0 10 20
X Axis (mm)
the cable holder for this test. Balanced and unbalanced three-
phase currents were used to emulate possible cable loading Fig. 10. Conductor positions of a typical four-conductor problem.
conditions. For balanced cases, currents ranging from 2A to
16A were tested as Table I, where neutral currents were zeros 90
120 15 60
and only three conductors were measured. For unbalanced
cases, eight combinations of three-phase load currents were
10
tested as Table II (numbers in current combination column 150 30
indicate resistor branches used in each phase), where neutral
5
currents were non-zero and four conductor currents were
identified. The error for balanced and unbalanced cases are
180 0 0
less than 5% and 8%, respectively.
Take an unbalanced case as an example, the sensor output
voltage phasor is illustrated in Fig. 9, which are the input
of the proposed method shown in Fig. 3. The calculated 210 330
conductor positions and current phasors are shown in Fig. 10
and 11, respectively. Acceptable error is observed between Reference Current (A)
the reference currents measured by current probes and the 240 300
Calculated Current (A)
270
calculated currents using the proposed method.
As the designed sensor array has sufficient redundancy, it Fig. 11. Current phasors of a typical four-conductor problem.
is able to achieve robust measurement accuracy when one
or more sensors are incidentally failed or removed due to
limited install space. Table III shows the measuring results in this scheme to quantify the difference between of reference
after removing multiple sensors from the array. and calculated current waveforms with harmonics. Smaller
value of Et indicates better current measurement accuracy.
C. Scheme 2: Harmonic Analysis
XZ T
Instead of fundamental frequency phasor based error indices Et = ij (t) − ij (t) dt (16)
as (14)(15), we use the index of time-domain error Et as (16) j∈SI 0

Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
GENG et al.: NON-INVASIVE CURRENT SENSOR FOR MULTI-CORE CABLES 7

Reference Current 15
8 Calculated Current
Current (A) 10
6
5

Current (A)
4
0
2
-5
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 -10
Harmonic Order Reference Current
-15 Calculated Current
Fig. 12. Frequency spectrum of currents with harmonics. 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
Time (sec)
30
Phase A Phase B Phase C Neutral Fig. 14. Reference and calculated currents in event detection.
20

10
Current (A)

-10

-20
Reference Current
Calculated Current
-30
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
Time (sec)

Fig. 13. Reference and calculated current waveforms with harmonics.

where T is the time window of interest. It was set as 5 cycles

in the cases studied below.
Harmonic loads were used in this scheme. The calculated Fig. 15. Current sensing device setup in the field test.
harmonic current components are shown in Fig. 12, along with
their reference values obtained from current probes. Due to the
Phase A
limitation of page length, currents of only phase A is shown, 60 Phase B
whose total harmonic distortion (THD) is 28.59% and third Phase C
Current (A)

order IHD is 18.79%. It can be observed that both fundamental 40

and harmonic currents are identified close to their reference
values. The recovered time-domain current waveforms are 20

shown in Fig. 13, the calculated and reference waveforms are

also sufficiently close. 0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15
Note that, using harmonic information from sensor array Harmonic Order
signals is able to slightly increase measuring accuracy as (6), Fig. 16. Current measurement result of the field test.
compared with using fundamental component alone as (4).
For the studied case, the value of Et is reduced from 0.092 to
0.032, which indicates a more accurate waveform is obtained. VII. F IELD T EST
In order to further verify the proposed method, a field test
D. Scheme 3: Event Detection was conducted in a utilities site of University of Alberta
A swell in current RMS values was intentionally created Facilities and Operations. The current sensing device was
on one of the cable conductors, which lasted for around five installed on a three-phase three-wire Teck cable serving a 75
cycles. The developed current sensing device was used to HP pump motor in a chilling water plant next to the university
detect this event. In this scheme, similar procedure as Fig. 3 is campus, shown as Fig. 15. The cable measured was with AWG
followed and performed cycle-by-cycle. Therefore, any non- size 2. The rated voltage and current of the motor was 575
repetitive waveform can be captured. Fig. 14 demonstrates the V and 70 A, respectively. Due to safety consideration, we
event waveform calculated from sensor array signals as well as were unable to install our own current probes on individual
the reference waveform directly obtained by a current probe. conductors as the comparing reference. Instead, the current
As they are quite close, the proposed current sensing method monitoring data exported from the utility SCADA database (in
is proved to be able to monitor disturbance on an enclosed the form of three-phase average RMS value) was used as the
cable in a non-invasive way, which is expected to enable many reference. At the moment of the measurement, the reference
advanced applications. three-phase average current value was 70.252 A.

Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This is the author's version of an article that has been published in this journal. Changes were made to this version by the publisher prior to publication.
The final version of record is available at
8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL.
Based on the calculation of sensor array signals, the iden-
tified three-phase currents were 67.003 A, 68.113 A, 64.494
A. Three-phase average RMS value was 66.571 A. Compared
with the reference value aforementioned, the measurement
error was 5.24%. Harmonic currents were also calculated as
shown in Fig. 16. THD for each phase was 4.81%, 4.82%,
5.69%. Fifth order harmonics was found to be the dominant
harmonic component, with IHD for each phase 4.45%, 4.40%,
5.36%. The measurement results show that the motor currents
are fairly balanced with low harmonic distortions, which
indicates good operating condition for the motor.
VIII. C ONCLUSION
A non-invasive current sensor for multi-core cables is pro-
posed, designed, implemented and verified. It is able to mea-
sure currents on the enclosed individual conductors without
breaking the cable jacket. It is convenient for current mea-
surement in situations of both temporary troubleshooting and
permanent monitoring. The measuring accuracy is sufficient
to enable various applications, including phasor measurement,
harmonic analysis, event detection, etc. The effectiveness is
verified using both laboratory experiment and field test.
Future topics include measuring accuracy improvement and
external interference cancellation. With an embedded process-
ing unit and a wireless communication module to be added
as the next step, the proposed non-invasive multi-conductor
current sensor is expected to play a critical role in waveform-
based next-generation power quality monitoring network.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank ATCO Electric for techni-
cal communications, and Utilities Department, University of
Alberta Facilities and Operations for on-site assistance in the
field measurement.
R EFERENCES
[1] N. McNeill, H. Dymond, and P. H. Mellor, “High-fidelity low-cost
electronic current sensor for utility power metering,” IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 2309–2317, Oct 2011.
[2] Fluke Corporation, How to troubleshoot motors and drives, starting
at the inputs. [Online]. Available: http://support.fluke.com/find-sales/
Download/Asset/4234148 6003 ENG A W.PDF
[3] D. Douglass, W. Chisholm, G. Davidson, I. Grant, K. Lindsey, M. Lan-
caster, D. Lawry, T. McCarthy, C. Nascimento, M. Pasha, J. Reding,
T. Seppa, J. Toth, and P. Waltz, “Real-time overhead transmission-line
monitoring for dynamic rating,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 31, no. 3,
pp. 921–927, June 2016.
[4] H. M. Hashemian, “State-of-the-art predictive maintenance techniques,”
IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 226–236, Jan 2011.
[5] A. A. P. Bscaro, R. A. F. Pereira, M. Kezunovic, and J. R. S. Mantovani,
“Integrated fault location and power-quality analysis in electric power
distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 428–
436, April 2016.
[6] Y. Han and Y. H. Song, “Condition monitoring techniques for electrical
equipment-a literature survey,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 18, no. 1,
pp. 4–13, Jan 2003.
[7] F. Sultanem, “Using appliance signatures for monitoring residential loads
at meter panel level,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1380–
1385, Oct 1991.
[8] G. D’Antona, L. Di Rienzo, R. Ottoboni, and A. Manara, “Processing
magnetic sensor array data for ac current measurement in multiconductor
systems,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 1289–1295,
Oct 2001.
View publication stats Copyright (c) 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2813540
, NO. , NOVEMBER 2017
[9] X. Sun, Q. Huang, Y. Hou, L. Jiang, and P. W. T. Pong, “Noncontact
operation-state monitoring technology based on magnetic-field sensing
for overhead high-voltage transmission lines,” IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 2145–2153, Oct 2013.
[10] J. Wu, Z. Chen, C. Wang, and L. Hao, “A novel low-cost multicoil-
based smart current sensor for three-phase currents sensing of overhead
conductors,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 2443–2452,
Dec 2016.
[11] K. Zhu, W. Han, W. K. Lee, and P. W. T. Pong, “On-site non-
invasive current monitoring of multi-core underground power cables
with a magnetic-field sensing platform at a substation,” IEEE Sensors
J., vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 1837–1848, March 2017.
[12] G. Geng, J. Wang, K.-L. Chen, and W. Xu, “Contactless current
measurement for enclosed multi-conductor systems based on sensor
array,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., Early Access.
[13] W. Xu and G. Geng, “Method and system for determining currents in
bundled conductors,” U.S. Patent 62/506,129 (Filed), 2017.
[14] Bourns Inc., SDR0302 Series - SMD Power Inductors. [Online].
Available: http://www.bourns.com/pdfs/SDR0302.pdf
[15] Texcan, Teck 90 Armoured Power Four Conductor 1000V Cables.
[Online]. Available: http://www.texcan.com/media/import/pdf/Teck
Spec - Four Conductor 1000V.pdf
[16] Fluke Inc., Fluke i1000s AC Current Probe. [Online]. Available:
http://en-us.fluke.com/products/all-accessories/fluke-i1000s.html
[17] National Instruments, NI-9220 Voltage Input Module. [Online].
Available: http://www.ni.com/pdf/manuals/373920a 02.pdf
[18] R. H. Bishop, Learning with LabVIEW. Prentice Hall, 2014.
[19] R. Fourer, D. M. Gay, and B. W. Kernighan, AMPL: A Modeling
Language for Mathematical Programming. Cengage Learning, 2002.
[20] R. H. Byrd, J. Nocedal, and R. A. Waltz, “KNITRO: An integrated pack-
age for nonlinear optimization,” in Large-scale Nonlinear Optimization.
Springer, 2006, pp. 35–59.
Guangchao Geng (S’10-M’14) received his B.S. and Ph.D. degrees in
electrical engineering from the College of Electrical Engineering, Zhejiang
University, Hangzhou, China, in 2009 and 2014, respectively.
Currently, he is a research assistant professor at College of Electrical
Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. Before joining Zhejiang
University, he conducted research at Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, United States and Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB,
Canada. His research interest includes power system measurement and power
system dynamics.
Xiangguo Yang (M’17) received his B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in
communication and information systems from Wuhan University, Wuhan,
China, in 2004, 2006 and 2013, respectively.
Since 2013, he has been a lecturer at the School of Energy and Power
Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, China. Currently, he
is a post-doctoral fellow at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. His research interest
includes non-conventional sensor system and power quality monitoring.
Yang Gao is pursuing her B.S. degrees in electrical engineering at the
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta,
Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Currently, she works as a co-op research assistant at the Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB,
Canada. Her research interest includes signal processing and data analytics.
William Hammond is pursuing his B.S. degrees in mechanical engineering at
the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton,
AB, Canada.
Currently, he works as a co-op research assistant at the Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB,
Canada. His research interest includes mechanical design and 3D printing.
Wilsun Xu (M’90-SM’95-F’05) received the Ph.D. degree from the University
of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, in 1989.
He is currently an NSERC/iCORE Industrial Research Chair Professor
with the University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. His research inter-
ests include power quality, power disturbance analytics, and power system
measurements.