DESIGN OF EHV LINES

PRESENTED BY
THAKUR ANKIT K.(2015PS13)
VINAY KUMAR (2015PS03)

PRESENTED TO
NIRAJ KUMAR CHOUDHARY
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT

CONTENTS
1. Introduction.
2. Design criteria of EHV lines [1].
3. Line insulation design based upon transient
over voltages [2].
4. Significantly reducing cost of transmission
lines [1][3].
5. Conclusion.
6. References.

INTRODUCTION
Two important factors for designing of the EHV lines are given
as
a) steady-state operating limits, and
b) insulation design based upon transient over voltages.
Other criteria associated with transmission lines are
a) transient and dynamic stability, and
b) short-circuit currents and voltages.

DESIGN CRITERIA OF EHV LINES.

In designing of the EHV transmission line the following points are
considered:
1) Determining number of conductors per phase.
2) Appropriate cross section from the viewpoint of short circuit.
3) Determining bundle spacing, GMD and GMR.
4) Calculating the voltage gradient.
5) Calculating critical voltage.
6) The amount of corona losses.
7) Voltage regulation percentage.

DETERMINING NUMBER OF CONDUCTORS

PER PHASE
In high power transmission, to reduce losses and limit the
corona phenomenon, it is needed to increase the number of
conductors per bundle.
The existing 765kV transmission lines show that these lines
are designed to transfer a power of 4000 MVA (or even more),
for which line current is calculated as shown in equation (1)
=

(1)

S= Power transfer in MVA

V= Voltage level of transmission line

APPROPRIATE CROSS SECTION FROM THE

VIEWPOINT OF SHORT CIRCUIT
Conductor cross section is determined according to the rated
current, and then based on the level of short circuit test.
Equations (2) and (3) assess the minimum cross section
required to withstand the heat generated due to the short
circuit
=

.(2)

K=

.(3)
0.24

s: Cross section of conductor (mm)

Isc : Standard short circuit current (A)
t: The persistence time of short circuit current (s)

 K: Constant coefficient related to the conductor material

which is dependent to the following parameters:
W: Specific weight of the conductor (gr/cm3)
C: Specific heat of conductor metal (Calorie/g- )
: The conductor temperature rise ( )
: Specific resistance of the conductor (ohm-m/mm2)

DETERMINING BUNDLE SPACING, GMD

AND GMR
By calculating the GMD and GMR of conductor, the inductance and
the capacitance values of transmission line can be obtained as
2
= ..(4)
(

= 2 10 ln(

4 )

).(5)

: The dielectric coefficient of vacuum which is

8.85*1012 (F/m)
GMD : Geometric mean distance (m)
GMR : Geometric mean radius (m).
Thus, for network frequency f=50Hz in India, reactance and
susceptance values of the transmission line are obtained as
= 2f L..(6)
= 2f C ..(7)

CALCULATING THE VOLTAGE GRADIENT

Voltage gradient around the conductor can play an important role
in the phenomenon of corona and the resulted losses
18
2 1 sin( )
=
[1 +
].(8)

0.02413
=
.(9)
log( )

1 ]1 (10)
]
2sin(180 )

= [ [

: The maximum voltage gradient at the surface of

conductors (kV/cm)
V: Line phase voltage (KV)
n: The number of bundled conductors per phase
r: Radius of conductor (cm)
C: Line capacitance (F/ km)
: Distance from the bundle conductors (cm).

CALCULATING CRITICAL VOLTAGE

In a transmission line, if the applied voltage reaches to the
critical value, the surrounding air begins to be ionized. Corona
losses and communication disturbances to be in a certain
level.
Critical voltage value is a function of the line physical features
and environmental conditions which is calculated as
= (1 + 0.3

298

..(11)

...(12)

= ln( )(13)

 : Critical voltage gradient (kV/cm)

: The threshold breakdown voltage (KV / cm)
r : Radius of conductor (cm)
: Relative density
P : Air pressure (At.)
T : Air temperature (K)
m : Coefficient of conductor surface roughness

THE AMOUNT OF CORONA LOSSES

The main disadvantage of corona phenomenon is the resulted
losses which may be increased to ten times on rainy or snowy
days. In a typical EHV transmission line, the losses can be of a
significant amount.
There are two methods for calculating corona losses. One of
these methods is presented by Peek which is given as
=

241

+ 25

: Corona losses (kW / km)

V : Operating voltage (kV)
: Critical voltage (KV)
r : Radius of conductor (cm)
D : Conductor spacing (cm)

105 ..(14)

 Studies show that when corona losses are low, the mentioned
equation has no good accuracy, and at this situation using
Peterson method would has good accuracy as
=

1.1106104

f 2 ..(15)

[ln( )]2
: Corona losses (kW / km)
r : Radius of conductor (cm)
F : Corona factor
Peeks formula gives better results when frequencies are
between 25 and 120 Hz.
The ratio (V/Vo) > 1.8.

VOLTAGE REGULATION PERCENTAGE

Voltage regulation percentage is the change of voltage from
zero to the rated voltage divided to the nominal value which is
expressed as.
% =

100(16)

VR%: Line voltage regulation percentage

: Sending end voltage (kV)
: Receiving end voltage (kV)
is the line rated voltage and is obtained in long
transmission lines as follows.

=
..(17)

 : The sending end current (A)

: The receiving end current (A).
Values of A, B, C and D are obtained from above equation.
= cosh( )
= sinh( )
=

where,

sinh( )

D = cosh( )
=
=

LINE INSULATION DESIGN BASED

UPON TRANSIENT OVERVOLTAGES
Here we will discuss the important topic of selection of long
airgap clearances required between
(a) conductor to ground, and
(b) conductor to conductor to withstand
(i) switching surges,
(ii) power-frequency voltage, and
(iii) lightning.
The magnitudes of over-voltages and the probability of their
occurrence is an individual characteristic of a system so that
no fixed designs can be given in this discussion, but only the
guiding principles can be illustrated through examples.

 The principles upon which insulation levels are selected are

only two:
1) A knowledge of all relevant properties of overvoltages
which a system might experience; and
2) A knowledge of insulation characteristics for all types
of voltages to which it will be subjected.
A design evolved for a given tower-window can only be
considered preliminary which will have to be checked and
modified suitably in an e.h.v. laboratory by conducting actual
tests on a tower mock-up.
Here we will discuss about:
a. Discussion of Rod-Plane Gap Design
b. Conductor-tower, conductor-ground and conductorconductor clearances.

DISCUSSION OF ROD-PLANE GAP

DESIGN
The basis for selection of air-gap clearance between any given
type of electrode geometry can best be understood by
relating it or comparing it with the design of a rod-plane gap,
which shows the lowest flashover and withstand voltage of
any type of electrode geometry.
We illustrate the procedure by
a) selecting a range of positive switching-surge magnitudes
from 1.8 p.u. to 3 p.u. on a 400 kV and a 750 kV system,
b) then using two representative formulae to calculate the
required rod-plane gap length d.

CONDUCTOR-TOWER, CONDUCTOR-GROUND
AND CONDUCTOR-CONDUCTOR CLEARANCES
Paris's Formulae for these cases are used which are as follows:
Critical Flashover voltage(50% flashover voltage)=500* * 0.6 kV
where = gap factor which is always greater than 1
d= clearance between the conductors or electrodes

where,

50 =

=
(13)

0.85,

kV.(18)

= Standard deviation of flashover voltage

= withstand voltage
= Ks (crest line-to-ground voltage of system)
Ks = Switching Surge magnitude in p.u.
For Conductor-Tower: 50 = 1.3 50 for rod plane
= 650 0.6 (19)

 For this case, the gap factor is 1.3.

Conductor-Ground: The required conductor-tower clearance
d for the anticipated switching-surge magnitudes, the
minimum clearance from conductor to ground will be
= 4.3 + 1.4 , metres.......................(20)
Phase-to-Phase Clearance. This is also described by a 'gapfactor' whose value is 1.8.
Thus, 50 = 900 0.6 (21)
However, in this case, the switching surge is between phases
which is not equal to 3 phase-to-ground magnitude of
switching surge.
These must be determined by experiments carried out on
models or digital computer calculations.

 We can now work out the conductor-tower and conductor-ground

clearances for the switching surge values ranging from 1.8 p.u. to 3 p.u. for
the 400 kV and 750 kV lines.

These are carried out according to the formulae:

Conductor-Tower. = (50
where,

50 =

1.667 , metres
650)

=
0.85, kV.(22)
(13)

= Standard deviation of flashover voltage

= withstand voltage
= Ks (crest line-to-ground voltage of system)
Ks = Switching Surge magnitude in p.u.

p.u.
Withstand
Value
voltage
= 343

400 kV line

50

Withstand
voltage
= 612.4

750 kV line

50

1.8

617.4

710

1.8

1102

1267

4.71

2.0

686

789

2.14

1225

1408

5.62

2.2

754.6

868

2.51

1347

1549

6.59

2.4

823.2

947

2.9

1470

1690

7.61

2.6

892

1026

3.31

1592

1831

8.7

2.8

960.4

1104

3.75

1715

1972

9.85

3.0

1029

1188

4.2

1837

2113

11.08

Table 1:.Rod-Plane Gap Clearance Based on Switching

Surges for kg=1 and =5% [2]

Figure 1: Conductor-tower and Conductor-ground clearances

required [2]

Figure 2: Conductor-conductor clearance [2]

SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING COST OF

TRANSMISSION LINES
For construction of a 765 kV single circuit transmission line
with 6 conductors per phase about 200 feet permitted
distance is required, while for a 400kV two circuits
transmission this value is about 150 feet.
Thus, for transmitting the equal electric power by 400 kV
power transmission line, it is required to have three 400 kV
transmission lines of two circuits or six single-circuit
transmission line. In this case, the permitted distance is
increased 450 feet (2.5 times) for two-circuit line and 900 feet
(4.5 times) for single-circuit line.
By the voltage reduction the problem of permitted distance is
resolved. Given the importance of construction of high
voltage lines, it is clear that this will result in lower costs

Figure 3: Comparison between 345kV and 765 kV permitted

distance with equal transmission capacity [3]

Figure 4: Comparison between 132kV and 765 kV

permitted distance with equal transmission capacity [3]

Parameters Calculated

400 KV

765 KV

Power handling capacity

680 MW

2980 MW

No. of Circuit

8 Single Circuits
4 Double Circuits

2 Single Circuits
1 Double Circuits

Total current

7.2169kA

3.7735kA

Current per circuit

0.91kA

1.89kA

Resistance for 800km

0.031*800 = 24.8

0.0136*800 = 10.88

Power Loss per circuit

3*24.8*(0.912) =
61.61MW

3*10.88*(1.892) =
116.59MW

Total loss

492.88MW

233.18MW (46.7%)

Loss/km

616.1KW

291.48KW

Table 2: Comparison of parameters for 400kV and 765kV [3]

From The Table, we can conclude that:

The power handling capacity of single circuit 765 kV system is
four times than a single circuit 400 kV system.
Total power loss in 765 kV system is only 46.7% as that of
power loss on 400 kV system.
The no of circuit required to transfer the same amount of
power are four times in 400 kV than 765 kV, increases RoW
(Right of Way) & spacing.

CONCLUSION
Given the growing need for electrical energy, appropriate
measures are essential to overcome the problems of electric
power transmission lines, reducing permitted distances,
increasing network reliability from the view point of less
outage, power loss reduction especially corona losses,
communication disturbances reduction and many other
issues.

REFERENCES
1) Aydin Sakhavati, Mostafa Yaltagiani, Shirin Saleh Ahari,
Seyed Mahdi Mahaei, 765 kV Transmission Line Design
(Electrical Section), International Journal of Electrical and
Computer Engineering (IJECE), Vol.2, No.5, October 2012,
pp. 698-707.
2) Rakosh Das Begamudre, Extra High Voltage AC
Transmission Engineering, New Age International
Publishers, Third Edition, 2006.
3) Abhilash A. Netake, P. K. Katti, 765kV Transmission Line for
Capacity Enhancement , International Conference on
Multidisciplinary Research & Practice.

THANK YOU