{"title":"The challenges of sub-optimal substation site selection","authors":"H. Dehbonei","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731287","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731287","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses sub-optimal substation site selection and the challenges of developing an earthing design for the substation and transmission line, as well as the solutions adopted. The site selected was close to a major Telstra exchange and high pressure gas valve, on a system with a high fault capacity, poor soil resistivity and which is connected to a transmission line possessing limited OHEW length. The earthing design identified possible existing LFI issues beyond the project's geographical location. Both gas and water steel pipelines were running parallel to the existing transmission line, over a considerable distance. A detailed analytical model was prepared, which showed the significance of the proximity effect. Risk based and deterministic criteria were compared to establish the best safety criteria for this design. A preliminary site test (using deep electrodes) was conducted to verify soil resistivity test results. The contractor's test readings were found to be inaccurate and were re-done. Follow up testing reflected sound correlation between field and modelled results. To avoid underground asset mitigation, special and cost effective earthing design was adopted. It was discussed and agreed with Telstra and colleagues in the distribution section to minimise transfer voltage via Common Multiple Earth Neutral (CMEN). This case study illustrates that engaging major stakeholders is key to the success of complex projects.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"286 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116205374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Cable link box identification for safe inspection and test access","authors":"James A. Hickey, W. Carman","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731293","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731293","url":null,"abstract":"There are various approved methods for positively identifying underground cables prior to working on the cable remote from its nominated isolation point. However, identification of the cable screen when run separate to the cable core, as is the case with fully cross bonded cables routing through link boxes, is not well defined. When multiple cable screens share a common cross-linking pit, misidentification of cable screens could lead to a dangerous situation, particularly if in-service cable screens are inadvertently earthed, short-circuited or open-circuited. There are various industry accepted methods for cable identification and it is necessary to match the appropriate identification method with the type of cable installed to provide a positive identification prior to working on the cable or cable link box. The DC injection method has proven to be a reliable method for identifying single core cables but is not widely practised throughout the electrical industry.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133784951","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Transmission tower to pipeline arcing","authors":"E. Dick, Kurtis Martin-Sturmey","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731289","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731289","url":null,"abstract":"HV line tower footings must be offset from high pressure pipelines to avoid damage due to arcing. A lightning strike to the tower can form both an ionized path to the pipe and flash over a phase insulator. Fault current to the pipe can then cause wall failure. This Phase 1 study proposes parameters for the testing of soil breakdown for impulses, power frequency and power arc sustainment initiated by lightning. An arc model based on electrical input power and thermal dissipation provides physical insight into the breakdown process, helps optimize test parameters and procedures, and will allow interpolation among a limited number of tests.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115765881","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Transient earth potential rise in gas insulated substations","authors":"E. Dick, A. Naderian, E. Petrache","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731290","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731290","url":null,"abstract":"Switching or dielectric breakdowns within GIS enclosures lead to voltage transients propagating towards the terminations. Amplitudes can range to 2.0 pu with risetimes of under 20 ns. At terminations, one component of the transient continues along the overhead conductor while another propagates back into the station along the exterior of the enclosures. Successive grounding bonds attenuate and shorten the duration of this component. The hazard when touching the enclosure depends on energy dissipated in the body, estimated from the potential squared and integrated over time, divided by an assumed body resistance of 500 ohm. This paper describes tests and models in support of EMTP simulations to review this body energy, as requested by some utilities.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128676468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Resistivity testing for earthing safety","authors":"P. Boys","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731279","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731279","url":null,"abstract":"One of the fundamental building blocks for reviewing, modelling, and predicting the safety of an earthing system is the soil resistivity. To determine the soil resistivity measurements are taken on site. For power system reviews, a number of test methods have been developed, particularly the Wenner and Schlumberger methods. The Wenner and Schlumberger methods use four probes in the ground. Generally the Wenner method is the preferred method, as the set up and understanding of this method is much simpler. We have developed a test method, which only requires one probe to be shifted and gives the same results as the Wenner method. This method takes less time to conduct a traverse, meaning that the testing cost can be reduced, or that twice as many tests can be conducted, giving a wider knowledge of the soil structure across a site. This paper presents the new test methodology. Several case studies are also provided.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116980986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Case study for assessment of high risk earthing on distribution assets","authors":"James Goodger, G. Carleton, Bill Tocher","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731291","url":null,"abstract":"Electrical power utilities typically base distribution earthing design on a standard design philosophy. Utilities will apply either common or separately earthed standard designs to suit a set of criteria that is aimed at achieving the safest and most manageable earthing configuration for the distribution network. Unfortunately the method of implementation of these standard designs has resulted in common earthed substations which generate significant earthing risk throughout distribution networks, higher than most Australian Standards would recommend. This paper identifies the recommended assessment techniques and correct testing methods that have been proven in analysing a high risk distribution network in a Tasmanian township. The case demonstrates the required mitigation strategies and future design considerations for the area to control risk to as low as reasonably practicable, and also highlights the need for power utilities to consider nonstandard designs in order to responsibly manage the changing distribution network.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"61 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126768995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Lightning protection of substations using EMT modelling","authors":"T. Daly, Bradley Wilksch","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731284","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731284","url":null,"abstract":"IEEE Std. 998-2012 is an industry standard guideline for designing lightning protection systems for high voltage (HV) substations. It describes the use of an Electrogeometric model (EGM) for design and provides an equation for the approximation of the allowable stroke current. The stroke current is used to determine a strike distance for the substation lightning protection system. The allowable stroke current equation is a function of the surge impedance of the busbar and the Basic Insulation Level (BIL) of the equipment. The equation does not take into account the substation's surge arresters which will limit the overvoltages within the substation. This report discusses how an Electromagnetic Transient (EMT) model can be used to estimate an allowable stroke current through consideration of the substation plant and arrangement. An example is provided to show how an EGM and an EMT model can be combined to calculate a striking distance that meets designed Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF).","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127968554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"What are the chances of that? a primer on probability and poisson processes for earthing designers","authors":"I. Griffiths, D. Woodhouse, B. Pawlik","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731292","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731292","url":null,"abstract":"Earthing design methodologies based around risk are growing in importance as they provide a better way to allocate limited resources and funding. Appropriate application of these processes requires the earthing engineer to have a sound comprehension of probability theory, upon which the processes are built. This paper reviews the basics of Poisson processes and the statistical methods and probability distributions used in their analysis. Examples and explanations are provided of how Poisson processes are used in the context of earthing, including lightning protection, to model the occurrence of power system faults and interactions with the general public. Particular attention is given to some counter-intuitive aspects that may lead a designer, ignorant of the subtleties of probability theory, to draw incorrect conclusions, potentially resulting in over-engineering or even irresponsible designs.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116136796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Is deterministic design risk free? how design options differ between deterministic & risk based processes","authors":"M. Bale, W. Tocher","doi":"10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731276","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DTEC.2016.7731276","url":null,"abstract":"Australian Standards are adopting quantitative risk assessment as the means for establishing design targets for earthing systems. This practice is novel to Australia but there are clear indications that the practice will be adopted in Europe and the USA within the next decade. This emergence does not alleviate the apprehension designers have in adopting the new practice, as the old practice of comparing calculated hazards with a fixed limit is somehow reassuring. This paper explores what differences exist between the 'deterministic' design practices outlined in standards such as IEEE Std 80 and EG-1 and 'risk methods' outlined in standards such as EG-0 and AS/NZS2067. Deterministic design using empirically derived safety limits can falsely imply risk elimination with a binary assessment of safety. Risk based design acknowledges is that risk is only ever reduced, not eliminated. Furthermore, this paper proposes that risk based design is a more flexible and transparent platform, upon which to base earthing designs and that reliance on empirical methods can be a threat to sound decision making and a due diligence defence.","PeriodicalId":417330,"journal":{"name":"2016 Down to Earth Conference (DTEC)","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116070957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
