2014 Paris Session

B4-101

http://www.cigre.org

Optimizing the electrical design of the Colombia-Panamá interconnection

A. Villegas, J. Jaramillo∗ A. Clerici, G. Lagrotteria, F. Rizzo

Interconexión Eléctrica Colombia-Panamá S.A. CESI
Colombia Italy

SUMMARY
The interconnection between Colombia and Panamá has been the object, since 2003, of a series of
feasibility studies, cooperation agreements and financing approaches for a project which is intended to be
a great contributor to the electrical markets integration of the Andean and Central America regions.
Both countries have confirmed their interest in developing a power interconnection; Panamá is looking
mainly for a more competitive electrical energy market, a diversified electrical energy matrix, in order to
guarantee the permanent availability of the electrical energy while Colombia wants to exploit its electrical
energy exporting potential. The line is important not only for Colombia and Panamá, but for the regional
integration as well.
HVDC technology was chosen for the development of the interconnection since it offers complete control
over the power flow while decoupling the two networks. Additionally, HVDC lines, towers, and rights-
of-way can be smaller than a comparable AC system, reducing the line’s environmental footprint which is
very critical for this project. Based on several studies of resource planning and regional market pricing
simulations (that take into account the future power supply and demand and also the capacity of the
Central America power interconnection - SIEPAC), it was found that a capacity between 300 and
400MW was optimum to carry the power exchanges between the two systems.
Studies have been performed by the authors for the optimization of the HVDC OHTL and the terminal
stations in order to minimize the investment and O&M costs within a secure and reliable performance of
the planned link. On the base of two different hypotheses for the power transfer (300 and 400MW) the
optimum system voltage and conductor have been chosen in order to minimize the overall cost; all this
within the technical limits defined for voltage drop, maximum conductor temperature and corona effects.
Special attention has been paid on insulation coordination requirements to withstand the operating
voltages, the overvoltages on the sound pole due to a fault on the other pole, the lightning performance
and the surface insulation for the main portion of the line and for the line session close to the sea.
To maximize the reliability of the system, an insulated dedicated metallic return (DMR) has been
considered and placed in an appropriated position in order to minimize the line cost. The insulation study
of the DMR and the adoption of a metallic return transfer breaker (MRTB), to ground temporarily the
neutral of one of the HVDC stations, are reported along with the philosophy of intervention to allow the
minimum interruptions of power transfer in both bipolar and emergency monopolar operation.

KEYWORDS
Optimization-Interconnection-Conductor size-Design voltage-HVDC-OHTL-Metallic-Return-Transfer-
Breaker

1. INTRODUCTION
Interconexión Eléctrica Colombia – Panamá (ICP) is a joint venture between the Colombian state-owned
transmission company ISA and its Panamanian counterpart ETESA, to make viable, design, build, and
operate an electrical interconnection line between Colombia and Panamá, taking into account the
principles of social responsibility and environmental protection

∗
jhjaramillo@interconexioncp.com
The line will integrate the Andean Market with the Central American market, expand flows of electricity
through the continent and contribute to the energy security of Mesoamerica –an area comprising part of
México as well as Guatemala, El Salvador, Belize, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panamá-. It will
open up new businesses and opportunities for power generation, distributors and electric sellers in the
whole region, and allow countries to help each other during emergencies.
Recently (June 2013), representatives of the six Central American countries, along with representatives of
the Governments of Belize, Colombia, the Dominican Republic and Mexico, signed a Ministerial
Statement on Electricity Integration in Mesoamerica, in which they recognize their shared interest in
promoting regional energy trade, foment economic growth, increase the competitiveness of countries, and
fight poverty, and reaffirm their commitment to providing all the citizens with access to sustainable,
reliable, and affordable electricity.
As an essential part of the statement, the countries recall the commitment of their Presidents and Prime
Ministers at the Sixth Summit of the Americas in 2012, and their mandate to promote and/or optimize
electrical interconnection and foster the development of renewable energy generation in the Americas,
through the Connecting the Americas 2022 (Connect 2022) initiative launched by Colombia.
Since this initiative is consistent with the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) policies for
developing regional infrastructure, promoting competitiveness, broadening markets and strengthening the
services offered in the Central American markets, the project has been beneficiary of several IADB non-
reimbursable technical cooperations.
The interconnection represents a significant technical challenge, given the special features of the region,
the distance between connection points, and the condition of the systems. Taking into account the
previous facts, high voltage electric power transmission technologies, using both alternating current
(HVAC) and direct current (HVDC), were explored. However, keeping in mind the technical advantages
and the benefits associated with cost, routes and environmental management, HVDC technology was
recommended for the project.
As a result of the studies performed, the
converter station in Colombia was located at
Cerromatoso Substation (500kV) while the
station in Panamá was located at Panamá II
Substation (230kV). A ±450kV bipolar
transmission line, with transfer capacity of 600
MW, was considered to be built from the
beginning while the Colombia and Panamá
converter stations were considered to be
staged. The line will run for almost 600km
Figure 1: Planned route of the transmission line (340km in Colombia and 260km in Panamá).
Initially, the link was planned to operate with monopolar converter stations with a power transfer capacity
in either direction of 300MW. In order to upgrade the transmission link to a transfer capacity of 600 MW,
the HVDC converter stations would be upgraded, in the second phase, to operate in bipolar configuration
for transfer of 600MW.
The self-supporting structures of the bipolar transmission line were dimensioned with two separate poles
each one comprising of a bundle of three ACAR 1200 subconductors. In addition, the towers were
conceived to support two metallic return conductors to provide both a return path for the DC current and
lightning protection. The tower structure was also considered to support an optical ground wire (OPGW)
in the middle of the tower, bellow the metallic return wires and above the poles.
In parallel to the managing company’s studies, the Colombian Commission for the Regulation of Energy
and Gas (CREG), and the Panamanian National Public Services Authority (ASEP), were working on the
adjustments for regulatory harmonization in order to facilitate energy exchanges between Colombia,
Panamá and the regional electricity market (MER) of Central America.
Once the regulators issued the project's definitive regulations and the technical aspects were at an
advanced stage, an auction was planned for August 2012. The offers from generators would have

2
determined if project funding was sustainable for the commercial use of interconnection with acceptable
prices. However, and despite the efforts of the parties involved, the managing company decided to
postpone the auction since it was not possible to reach agreements on some conditions that were essential
for the viability of the project, regarding to financial and socio-environmental aspects.
Nevertheless, the managing company -with the IADB support- decided to develop a strategic review of
the planned interconnection with the aim of reducing uncertainties for participants and to reach more
competitive energy prices and greater business opportunities. The strategic review included the
assessment of the technical aspects of the interconnection susceptible to be optimized. Particularly, it was
reviewed the transfer capacity and the connection points to the national networks.

2. CONNECTION POINT IN COLOMBIA

By the time the strategic review of the project began, it was known that the expansion plan of the
transmission system of Colombia had adopted the electrical reinforcement of the Urabá substation.

Since Urabá is closer to Panamá border, the

Figure 2: Alternative connection point
managing company decided to study the
technical feasibility of changing the
connection point (and thus reduce the distance
from 600 km to 480 km, which would
represent a significant impact on the cost of
the project). However, electrical studies
revealed that, even with the new transmission
reinforcement, Urabá was not robust enough
to allow the desired transfers of power
between the two countries.

This result led to confirm the Cerromatoso substation as the connecting point of interconnection regarding
the Colombian transmission network.

3. TRANSFER CAPACITY
Congestion Rents (USD MM)
Although the interconnection had been designed to achieve at its final 400

stage a transfer capacity of 600MW, the managing company decided 350

to verify the optimum capacity to allow maximum commercial profit. 300
As an important stage of the strategic review, it was simulated the 250
interconnection and the power exchanged, in order to determine the 200
transfer capacity where the congestion rents were maximum. 150
The results of the simulations can be seen in Figure 3, where the rents 100
reach their maximum at 300 MW of capacity and they are slightly 50
lower at 400MW. In spite of the fact that the optimum is reached at 0
300MW, the capacity of 400MW was also considered for the
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

evaluation since the commercial benefit at this capacity is close to the Transfer Capacity (MW)
optimum and the social benefit is greater than the one at 300MW.
Figure 3: Capacity evaluation

4. STUDIES TO DEFINE THE OPTIMAL SOLUTION OF THE INTERCONNECTION

4.1 Generals
The main scope of the optimization study has been to arrive at optimum voltage and optimum conductor
for each of the cases in order to minimize the total costs (investment plus O&M costs) of the complete
interconnection comprised by the two terminal HVDC stations and the Overhead Transmission Line
(OHTL).
Considering the equal design criteria adopted for the various cases, no one of them presents peculiar
O&M or reliability/availability problems. Possible O&M costs (around 3% per year of capital investment)
and energy not delivered do not play a fundamental role in the comparisons among the alternatives and

3
therefore the comparisons among the cases under consideration have been done through the Total Present
Cost of the transmission system that is derived as the sum of two cost items:
Total present cost=investment cost + capitalized cost of losses
The corona losses have been evaluated but not considered for the optimization procedure which has taken
care only of the joule losses. The investment cost (overnight cost i.e. excluding financial burdens) is given
by the sum of the total investment costs for the converter stations plus the total investment costs for the
OHTL. From the preliminary computations it came out that the technical limits (mainly corona effects
and voltage drops) impose in some cases the minimum conductors section which are not therefore those
that minimize capital investment + capitalized cost of losses.
− The capitalized costs of losses are calculated starting from the sum of the converter stations losses plus
the transmission line losses both at rated power.
− The total losses at rated power are multiplied by the Equivalent Hours of Losses (EHOL) and by the
per unit costs of losses to give the total cost of losses in USD/year.
− This value is finally actualized to a reference year considering years of discount and the discount rate.
− The values considered for the calculation of the cost curves are: capitalized cost of losses = 80$/MWh,
discount rate = 10%, years of discount = 30. For the converter station losses a 0.7% of the rated power
per terminal has been considered at full load.
− The data relevant to the energy exchange forecast of the interconnection are summarized in the
following tables. It has been agreed to consider these values as constant for all the years of analyses
(30 years).

Energy [GWh/y] Load factor 1 [%] EHOL 2 [h]

Pn = 300MW 1829.246 69.6% 5029
Pn = 400MW 2270.295 64.8% 4536
Table 1: Updated data on energy exchange for 300MW and 400MW
The optimization and voltage selection have been performed in the following cases: 300MW – 600km
and 400MW – 600km. The following voltage levels to be considered in the final analyses have been
selected:
− 200kV, 250kV, 300kV for the 300MW and 600km
− 200kV, 250kV, 300kV, 350kV for the 400MW and 600km

4.2 Basic assumptions for the definition of OHTL main characteristics

The key factors interacting between them and affecting the dimensioning of the DC OHTL’s are:
− The climatic and environmental conditions (winds, temperature, contamination, keraunic level,
altitude above sea level, type of land crossed, etc.);
− The mechanical, electrical and thermal behaviour of the conductor;
− The appropriate shielding and clearances to tower/ground/buildings of the conductors in order to
minimize transient and permanent faults connected to insulation failures and to match security criteria
(and all of this has been dealt in a special insulation coordination study);
− The environmental impacts in terms of soil gradient, Radio Interference (RI), Audible Noise (AN);
− The possible total voltage drop at maximum ambient temperature;
The experience obtained in the design and operating results for HVDC, EHVDC and UHVDC lines has
produced in the last four years important technical documents/papers which are available now and allow a
better environment for the definition of the main characteristics for OHTL. In addition to IEC and EN
Standards for OHTL’s the following CIGRE’s publications have been considered:
− CIGRE Brochure 388 – Impacts of HVDC Lines on the economics of HVDC projects – JWG
B2/B4/C1.17 – August 2009;
− CIGRE Brochure 473 – Electric field and ion current environment of HVDC overhead transmission
lines - JWG B4/C3/B2.50 OK

1
Load factor is the total transferred energy divided by the theoretical energy at peak power for 100% of time
2
Equivalent Hours of Losses (EHOL) are defined as the hours to work at peak power to get the global actual losses

4
− CIGRE Brochure 518: Outdoor Insulation in Polluted Conditions: Guideline for Selection and
Dimensioning – Part 2: The DC Case – Working Group C4.303 – December 2012
With reference to the climatic and environmental conditions, the following has been considered:
− Maximum altitude: 500m; Minimum ambient temp.: 5°C; Average ambient temp.: 27°C; Maximum
ambient temp: 40°C; Wind velocity (50 year return 30-sec): 27.8-m/s, (150 year return 10 min): 30.5
m/s; Keraunic level: 100 TD (Thunderstorm Days/year).
For the conductors, the ACAR type has been selected on the basis of the previous studies and of local
experience. It has been assumed not to exceed the conductor ampacity at rated power at maximum
ambient temperature of 40°C and to have a surface gradient less than 25kV/cm.
The Joule losses have been evaluated in average ambient temperature of 27°C while a maximum voltage
drop of 10% of rated voltage has been considered with conductor at 80°C (max ambient temperature of
40°C).
For a preliminary outline of suspension towers the following parameters has been considered:
− Average span: 500m; Wind span: 550m; Maximum single span: 700m; Weight span (min ÷ max):
350÷700 m; Ruling span: 350 ÷ 600 m.
The sag/tension calculation gives the following main data:
− Sag parameter: EDS Æ 1750m, at 80°C Æ 1450m;
− Average span sag at 80°C: 21.5m Maximum single span sag at 80°C (700m): 42.3m
With reference to the environmental impacts, the following limits have been considered: Soil gradient less
than 40kV/m, Radio Interferences (RI) less than 42dB (at 30m), Audible noise (AN) less than 42dB (at
30m);
According to ICP data, 230kV AC lines in Panamá in operation since many years and close to the sea
have 14 caps and pin conventional insulators type ANSI 52-5 with a creepage path of 11.5 inches. This
provides a creepage distance (CD) of 17.8mm/kV Line to Line and about 31mm/kV Line to Ground
(defined as USCD) as recent approaches consider. From authors experience it can be derived a creepage
distance in DC of about 50-55-mm/kV corresponding to a Salt Deposit Density (SDD) of 0.1mg/cm2.
In light contaminated areas, considering specific conditions of rains for great portion of the year, a SDD
of 0.05mg/cm2 is considered safe, providing a USCD for DC 300kV line equal to 46mm/kV. The 50-
55mm/kV can be respected with anti-fog DC composite insulators having the same string length.

In case of very light contamination, the 46mm/kV can Nominal voltage 300kV 250kV
be reduced to around 35mm/kV. The required Min clearance
clearances based on authors experience and in 0.8m 0.7m
for operating voltage
accordance with CIGRE Brochure 388 are shown at Min clearance
1.2m 1.1m
right. for switching overvoltage

The two towers outlines for 300kV and two for 250kV are illustrated in Figure 4.

Conservatively the pole spacing

suggested is 13.1 m for the 300kV and
11.9 m for the 250kV tower (the
voltage levels which resulted the
optimum ones for 400MW and
300MW respectively).
Figure 4: proposed tower outlines for
300 kV 250 kV 250kV and 300kV with DMR in the
31 Insulators 120 kN 26 Insulators 120 kN
Creepage Length 13,795 In Creepage Length 11,570 In tower body
4.3 Definition of the OHTL costs and converter station costs
The actual optimization of the economic basic span of the OHTL has been based on the previous studies
on the ±450kV line and an average span of 500m has been considered. For the definition of the OHTL
costs, a detailed cost analysis of materials, erection, civil works, engineering costs, and social costs was

5
performed. For the metallic return one conductor passing through the body of the tower has been initially
considered to reduce costs with respect to the original ±450kV line.
Based on the Consultant experience on OHTL, the line costs per unit length were derived in accordance
with this equation: Cost=A+K1*Vn + K2*SAll, where:
− A: term that represents costs not strictly connected to the dimensioning of the line( e.g. electric
studies, permits, environmental and social costs, etc.,) and therefore can be considered fixed costs;
− K1 and K2: are coefficient related to local costs and number of sub-conductors per pole;
− V is the rated voltage of the line; n is an appropriate exponent related to clearances to tower
− SAll is the total aluminum section of one pole;
Figure 5 provides an indication of the
line cost per km as function of the
Aluminum conductor pole section.
For the converter stations, the
adopted costs have been based on
budgetary quotations from the main
manufacturers.
The results of the optimization
studies for the two different power
levels of 300MW (base case) and
400MW are reported in Figure 6. The
values are indicated as % of the total
present cost for the optimum solution
relevant to the base case.

Figure 5: OHTL investment costs per km in % of the selected line

for the 300MW case, (1) – 300kV, (2) – 250kV, (3) – 200kV

N.B. the curves are truncated in correspondence of the min section to comply with the technical limits and to the max section considered (ACAR1200) to avoid twin conductors
Figure 6: Results of the optimization

The following table summarizes the selection of the optimal voltage and pole section for the 2 power
levels.

6
 (In % of the total present cost of optimum solution for 300MW)
Table 2: summary of the optimal voltage/pole section for each case
It can be seen that the minimum total present cost for the 300MW is given by a DC voltage of 250kV and
a pole section of 700mm2 (single conductor). However, due to the small difference of the total present
costs with respect to the minimum section of 607mm2 and the lower initial investment costs, the 607mm2
pole section has been selected.
For the 400MW case, the minimum total present cost is given by a DC voltage of 300kV and a pole
section of 910mm2 (single conductor).

4.4 Dedicated metallic return (DMR) and its protection

In order to minimize transient and permanent reduced transfer capacity of the interconnector both in
normal conditions (2 DC poles in operation) and in possible monopolar emergency operation at half
power with only one DC pole in operation, a special study has been performed on the DMR.
For both the cases of 300MW and 400MW, in order to reduce the costs of the OHTL, a single Metallic
Return conductor positioned inside the tower body has been preliminary considered with additional
ground wires (grounded at each tower) of reduced size with respect to the previous ±450kV design. For
the ground wires, two optical ground wires (OPWG) were suggested to maximize the reliability of the
communication facilities.
Theoretically the insulation of the DMR should withstand a DC voltage equal to the voltage drop in
monopolar operation (less than 20kV in this case) and therefore one insulator should be sufficient.
However, to minimize the number of the DMR back-flashovers, a minimum number of 4 or 5 120kN
discs in V configuration have been considered and an air gap to the tower web of 76cm has been proposed
(see Fig.4). The air gap determines the lightning performance (back flashover rate) of the DMR. The
tower width does not allow higher gap. To increase the gap to 1.5m a tower head modification should be
introduced, with increased costs.

A possible alternative solution to split the DMR in 2 different conductors

placed on the arms of the towers has been also envisaged to increase the
reliability in case of a damage to a single DMR conductor (see sketch at
right for 250kV tower). The negligible over-cost of this solution, if any,
can be repaid by the increased reliability.
Extensive lightning performance studies have been performed and the
summary of main results is reported in the following tables. Fig. 7: DMR alternative
solution
Various cases have been analysed for the 300kV and 250kV line and here are reported the results relevant
to the best position of the GW’s to avoid direct strokes and to minimize back-flashovers on the poles.

Two poles with air gap 5m (without arcing horns) BFO for DC poles: 0.34 faults / 100km / yr
Two poles with air gap 4.65m (with arcing horns) BFO for DC poles: 0.42 faults / 100km / yr
Two poles with air gap 5m + one DMR - air gap 0.76m BFO for DMR only: 28.18 faults / 100km / yr
Two poles with air gap 5m + one DMR - air gap 1.50m BFO for MR only: 4.96 / 100km / yr
Table 3: lightning performance for the proposed 300kV line

Two poles with air gap 4.15m (without arcing horns) BFO for DC poles: 0.5 faults / 100km / yr
Two poles with air gap 4.15m + one DMR - air gap 0.76 m BFO for DMR only: 25.82 faults / 100km / yr
Table 4: lightning performance for the proposed 250kV line

Arcing horns and grading rings on pole insulator strings and DMR strings have not been specified; this
taking care in DC lines the repartition of voltage on the insulator strings is due to resistances and in case

7
of fault to ground due to insulation failure, the maximum short circuit current (after around 1 cycle
transient) is almost the nominal DC current (≈0.7kA) that is not dangerous for the insulator surface.
Moreover, especially on the DMR, grading rings imply the increase of the flashover rate.

Proposed philosophy for the metallic return operation

For the tower head geometry and insulation levels defined, looking at the worst 300 kV case (with a 76
cm air gap selected for the DMR), the DMR has around 28 faults/100km/year due to back-flashovers that
for the 600 km line means around 180 DMR back flashovers/year.
The proposed philosophy for the metallic return operation, with respect to its line to ground (LG) fault
current extinction in case of back-flashover (BFO) is presented as follows. The proposed conceptual
scheme, reported in Figure 8, foresees a Metallic Return Transfer Breaker (MRTB)3 to be placed in the
station with non-grounded neutral point of the bipolar converter.

MRTB MRTB

Figure 8: Conceptual scheme and DMR fault to ground with one pole out of service
Bipolar operation:
Under bipolar operating condition just before the fault, the following situations may occur:
1. A fault occurring only on the DMR due to BFO (very likely) can be managed forcing to zero the
current in the DMR by means of proper control of the terminal stations.
2. In case of transient fault on one pole due to BFO (very rare), also the DMR loses its insulation to
ground. To eliminate the fault it is necessary to temporarily block the faulted pole letting the current
flowing temporarily through the DMR fault. The blocked pole will ramp back to the previous power
level and, if the pole “reclosure” is successful, the situation returns to n°1 i.e. the ground current in
the DMR is extinguished by means of effective bipolar control.
3. In case of permanent fault on one pole, after the transient, the load current in the fault location is
divided into two parts. One part goes into the ground (Ig in Figure 8) and the other part in the other
portion of the DMR (Iload – Ig in Figure 8) depending on the values of the resistance of the remaining
path of the DMR (R2) and the resistance of the station grounding (Rsg). To avoid a possible long
duration of LG currents, the closing of the MRTB, connected between the isolated neutral of the
relevant HVDC station and ground (see Figure 8), practically bypasses to ground the current
previously flowing in DMR forcing the extinction of the arc on the DMR. The great success of this
solution relies on a low value of earth resistance of the HVDC stations ground mats (Rsg) (i.e. << 1
ohm). A temporary current in the ground (for few seconds) is unavoidable while 50% of the
transmitted power (or 60% with special overload of HVDC stations) continues to flow without
interruption.

Monopolar operation:
In case of permanent monopolar operation with one OHTL pole out of service e.g. for maintenance, in
case of a back flashover on the DMR, the LG fault current is extinguished with the closing of the MRTB
without losing the transmitted power.

3
It is called here MRTB adopting the terminology commonly used for similar equipment in classic bipolar HVDC scheme
where a temporary use of ground electrode instead of the DMR is foreseen.

8
The monopolar power flow is lost temporarily in case of transient fault on the sound pole followed by
successful “reclosing”. In case of unsuccessful re-closure the transmission is permanently lost.
A DMR LG fault detection system is needed and must be prescribed in the specs of the HVDC stations
along with the above mentioned MRTB and philosophy of interventions.
The grounding system resistance of the converter stations shall be specified to be compulsory at most
equal to 0.1Ω or less for the reasons explained above.

5. CONCLUSIONS
− The development of the Colombia-Panamá interconnection plays an important role not only for the 2
involved countries but also for the integration of the Andean and Central America electrical systems.
− The series of simulation studies performed to optimize the congestion rents have shown their
maximum in the range of 300 to 400MW for the transfer capacity of the interconnector.
− An HVDC solution has been considered for both easy/fast power flows control, decoupling of the 2
national systems and less environmental impacts.
− The new studies and preliminary design of the interconnector for a transfer capacity of 300 or 400
MW along with the new design criteria approach for the OHTL may bring substantial savings in the
initial wheeled kWh cost with respect to the previous project in 2 steps at +/- 450kV DC with final
transfer of 600MW.
− For a transfer capacity of 300MW the optimum choice is a bipolar HVDC line at +/-250kV with a
607mm2 ACAR pole conductor while for 400MW the best is +/-300kV with a 910 mm2 conductor.
− The adoption of a DMR combined with a MRTB, connected between the neutral point and ground of
one DC station, allows increasing the reliability/availability of power transfer while minimizing the
time of flow of possible ground currents.
− Next step to arrive at final decision for the bidding procedures of the OHTL and the HVDC stations is
a series of economic/financial analysis already under implementation to show the profitability of the
interconnection in the new envisaged solutions

6. BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] ICP Road Map and Strategic Review of the project. 2012-2013
[2] Ministerial Declaration about the progress of Mesoamerican Energy Integration and Trade in Low
Carbon Electricity. Washington, DC, June 28, 2013
[3] ±800kV, 3000MW HVDC Champa- Kurukshetra transmission line with Dedicated Metallic
Return (DMR) – key design consideration – GRIDTECH 2013 – 4th International Exhibition and
conference, 3-5 April 2013, New Delhi;
[4] Fault protection of metallic return circuit of Kii channel HVDC system - Hara, S. ; Hirose, M. ;
Hatano, M. ; Kinoshita, S. ; Ito, H. ; Ibuki, K. - IEE CONFERENCE PUBLICATION, 485; 132-
137, 7th International Conference on AC-DC Power Transmission

7. AKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors appreciate the great contributions of Mr. M. Barbarito for OHTL towers optimizations.