IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO.

4, OCTOBER 2011

2659

Inuence of Different Types of Magnetic Shields on the Thermal Behavior and Ampacity of Underground Power Cables
Juan Carlos del Pino Lpez and Pedro Cruz Romero, Member, IEEE
AbstractThis paper analyzes the thermal effects derived from the use of different screen shapes when shielding the magnetic eld generated by underground power cables. A parametric analysis is developed to show the inuence of the geometrical and the electrical parameters of the shield on the maximum temperature achieved by the power cables in order to analyze the impact of this technique on the ampacity of the line. A 2-D nite element approach is employed in this study to verify the performance of different types of screens (horizontal plate, reverse-U, and H-layout) in terms of shielding efciency, overheating of the power cables, and operational costs. Index TermsAmpacity, magnetic-eld shielding, H-layout, horizontal plate, reverse-U, underground cables.

I. INTRODUCTION

ECENT studies have been developed to nd the best method to mitigate power frequency magnetic elds (MF) generated by electrical installations (overhead lines, underground power cables, substations, etc.). These studies are typically focused on either of the following problems: 1) the reduction of the electromagnetic interference (EMI) in sensitive equipment or 2) the management of the social concern about any potential adverse health effects on human beings. In particular, for underground power cables, many technical solutions have been proposed in recent decades. A good review is presented in [1]. One of the most commonly used techniques is that of metallic open screens. Different screen shapes have been studied in depth, especially in terms of the MF mitigation achieved depending on the material and the geometrical parameters of the screen (electric conductivity, thickness, width, etc.). The most extended studies consider the horizontal plate [1][6]; reverse-U [1], [2], [6]; and the H-layout [1], [7], [8]. These screens have proven to be efcient in most situations, with the H-shaped screen as the most efcient. However, one of the main issues when installing additional elements near the power cables is the effect on the maximum temperature at which the power cables can operate, since the ohmic losses induced in the metallic screen can cause an additional temperature rise
Manuscript received December 23, 2010; revised January 22, 2011; accepted May 27, 2011. Date of publication July 11, 2011; date of current version October 07, 2011. This work was supported by the Spanish MCYT under Grants ENE2007-68032-C04-02 and ENE2010-18867). Paper no. TPWRD-00981-2010. The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Seville University, Seville 41092, Spain (e-mail: vaisat@us.es; plcruz@us.es). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRD.2011.2158593

of the shielded conductors, thereby leading to a reduction in the current rating of the line. Consequently, the design of a metallic screen requires careful analysis in order to achieve the desired mitigation level with a minimum inuence on the rating of the whole line. Many studies exist about thermal effects on buried cables which determine the rating of a line (ampacity). Either analytical or numerical techniques [9] are considered, of which the international standard analytical approach (IEC 60287, [10][12]) and the 2-D nite element approach (e.g., [13][15]), constitute the most extended work. However, few studies report coupling magnetic-eld mitigation systems and thermal behavior, such as in [16], where it is described how to compute the heat dissipated by several mitigation devices and its thermal inuence on the ratings of power cables. A number of expressions are suggested in [16] for different techniques, such as conductor management, passive loops, ferromagnetic shielding pipes, and ferromagnetic raceways, most of which are based on the IEC 60287 standard. In contrast, in [16], it is only concluded that in certain situations, plates could be exploited to extract the heat from cables. However, it is complicated to generalize such a result due to the complexity of the problem, which requires the use of numerical techniques (such as the nite-element method (FEM)) to compute the electromagnetic-thermal coupled model for complex screen shapes. Therefore, an in-depth parametric analysis is developed in this paper by means of 2-D FEM models, focusing on the effects of the geometrical and the electrical parameters of the most commonly used screens (horizontal plate, reverse-U, and H-layout) on the shielding efciency and the maximum temperature achieved by the power cables and, hence, their effects on the ampacity of the line. Furthermore, economic factors are discussed in order to clarify which screen shape best meets the criteria for a particular situation [17]. The paper is structured as follows: Section II describes the FEM model employed to solve the electromagnetic-thermal coupled problem. Section III describes the case study used in the parametric analysis. Sections IVVI present the numerical results obtained when three different screen shapes are installed. Section VII presents technical and economical aspects to be considered in the selection process. Finally, Section VIII presents the concluding remarks. II. FEM MODEL It is well known that metallic plates set above underground power cables provide certain MF mitigation levels depending on

0885-8977/$26.00 2011 IEEE

2660

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2011

the geometrical parameters of the screen, (width, thickness, separation from mitigated line), [1]. However, two important issues derived from the electrical and thermal properties of the material used in the screen must be considered. First, there are losses induced into the screen which can cause an additional temperature rise in the conductors, since these losses are distributed nonuniformly in the screen, and are concentrated close to the power cables. Second, electrical conductivity is naturally associated with thermal conductivity and, hence, the plate itself can contribute toward the evacuation of heat from the cables. Therefore, the management of these two opposing effects in screen design becomes a keystone, since the MF mitigation achieved must be maximized without overheating the power cables. This is analyzed in this paper for three typical screen shapes, (horizontal plate, reverse-U, and H-layout), applied to a three-phase underground cable system. An in-depth parametric analysis is developed to show the inuence of the electrical and the geometrical parameters not only on the MF mitigation achieved, but also on the maximum temperature presented in the phase conductors. Hence, this analysis shows the impact of these parameters in the ampacity of the line. However, the complex geometrical shape of the screens requires nite-element method software for a suitable modeling of the coupled electromagnetic-thermal model, in order to compute either the mitigated magnetic eld or the temperature of the power cables. A. EM Problem Maxwells equations must be solved in order to compute the mitigated magnetic eld. This is performed by means of an FEM model based on the following assumptions: 1) The cables are straight and innitely long, thereby rendering the problem 2-D. 2) All materials have constant electrical properties, with the exception of conductive materials (conductors and screens), whose electrical conductivity is temperature dependent (1) and are the where is the unknown temperature, and conductivity and the temperature coefcient of the material C, respectively. at 3) The electrical conductivity of mother soil is ignored. The shielding efciency of the screen is computed at one point situated at 1 m above ground surface (Fig. 1). For a better understanding, this is carried out in terms of the reduction factor index (RF), dened as the ratio between the resulting (root sum square) nonmitigated and mitigated magnetic elds (2) where is the magnetic eld generated by the phase currents, is the mitigated eld. and Furthermore, the ohmic losses generated by the power cables and the screens are also computed, since they will be used as the heat input for the thermal problem.

Fig. 1. Underground phase conductors, screen, and trench dimensions.

B. Thermal Problem Some assumptions have to be made for the thermal problem in order to evaluate the heat ow in the complete system as follows. 1) Since power cables are straight and innitely long, end effects can be disregarded, and the heat transfer problem can be formulated in two dimensions on the - plane. 2) The temperature gradient in the soil at great distance (15 m) from the cables is zero. 3) Power cables are directly buried in homogeneous soil and, hence, heat is transferred by conduction through only cable components, the screen, and the soil. 4) All materials have constant thermal properties, including the thermal resistivity of the soil, since no moisture migration is considered. 5) As stated in the IEC 60287 standard, ground surface is assumed to be an isotherm at soil temperature (Kennellys hypothesis), and the effect of radiation and convection is not considered. As a consequence, the associated steady-state heat transfer equation in systems of two dimensions can be expressed [18] as (3) where is the rate at which energy is generated, per unit volume, by the cables and the screens (computed in the electromagnetic problem), is the unknown temperature, and is the thermal resistivity of each material. Equation (3) is solved by using a nite-element software package with thermal capabilities (Comsol) [19], which is able to solve the temperature eld for certain heat input rates. However, the ampacity of a shielded cable must be iteratively computed for a range of electrical currents until the maximum temperature of the conductors reaches its highest admissible value. Between iterations, the temperature-sensitive elements, such as the electrical conductivities of the conductors and the screens, must be continuously corrected for the newly calculated temperature.

DEL PINO LPEZ AND ROMERO: INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MAGNETIC SHIELDS

2661

TABLE I PARAMETERS OF THE POWER CABLES (COPPER)

TABLE II PARAMETERS (AT 20 C) FOR THE VARIOUS MATERIALS USED IN THE SCREENS

Fig. 2. Evolution of RF and the maximum temperature of the phase conductors ( ) with the screen-line distance (plates of 1-m width and 3-mm thickness).

pacity of the line. This is described in the following sections for the example shown in Fig. 1. A. Distance Between the Line and the Screen III. CASE STUDY To illustrate the thermal behavior shown by different open screen shapes when mitigating the magnetic eld generated by underground power cables, the case of a 132-kV underground three-phase cable system (Fig. 1) is analyzed. In this example, the phase conductors have a cross-section of 630 mm , with the electrical and thermal parameters shown in Table I. Power 25 cables are placed in at formation with a separation of 1.25 m. Trench dimensions cm, and buried at a depth of are 1 m and 1.5 m. On the other hand, the values of the thermal resistivity and and the temperature of the soil are C [8]. In this situation, the ampacity of the line is about 961 A when there is no screen installed, in accordance with the IEC 60287 standard, since the permissible operating temperaC (cable insulation is XLPE). Therefore, this ture is value will be considered as the current owing through the line in the parametric analysis. Moreover, two conductive materials are employed in the screens: aluminium and copper. Their electric and thermal parameters are shown in Table II. The following sections present and discuss the results obtained from the parametric analysis of the selected screen shapes when applied to the present case study, focusing on those aspects which directly inuence the cable ampacity and the total cost associated with each screen shape. IV. HORIZONTAL PLATE The simplest arrangement to shield the magnetic eld is to install a at plate directly above the cables when they are in at formation (Fig. 1). The effectiveness of this conguration depends on the plate thickness and width, and the proximity at which it is installed from the power cables [1]. However, all of these parameters affect the temperature of the conductors and, hence, it is crucial to separately evaluate their inuence in order to establish the dimensions and location of the screen which achieve the best shielding efciency without limiting the amIt is well known that higher currents are induced into the plate if it is situated close to the line, thereby providing better MF mitigation levels. This is shown in Fig. 2, where the evolution of RF (at the point of interest) is represented with the screen-line distance when using aluminium or copper plates of a width of 1 m, and with a thickness of 3 mm. However, the closer the screen, the higher the induced ohmic losses are, which, in turn, increases the maximum temperature achieved by the phase con, as shown in Fig. 2. Here, it is also shown that ductors the limiting temperature of 90 C is exceeded when plates are close to the power cables. In this particular case, copper plates are less restrictive, as they could be installed closer than aluminium plates (minimum distance of 0.13 m for copper plates versus 0.23 m for aluminium plates). Consequently, it is clear that, given a plate material and the dimensions of the screen, a minimum screen-line clearance must be set in order to prevent overheating of the power cables. However, this clearance can reduce the shielding efciency. B. Screen Dimensions Since the screen-line clearance is a crucial limiting factor, the dimensions of the screen must be carefully selected in order to preserve minimum shielding efciency without limiting the ampacity of the line. To this end, Fig. 3 shows the evolution of with the screen width when plates with a thickness RF and of 3 mm are installed at 0.1 m above the power cables. As can be seen, not only are better MF mitigation results obtained when the screen width increases, but overheating of the conductors also decreases. In this particular case, although the screen is so close to the line, it is possible to keep the temperature of the power cables lower than 90 C if copper plates of 1.3-m width are installed. This also leads to higher efciency levels. However, the screen width is limited by the trench dimensions and, hence, this parameter cannot be set as freely as desired. On the other hand, the thickness of the plate also has a signicant effect on the temperature of the cables, as can be obfor difserved in Fig. 4, where the evolution of RF and ferent thicknesses of the screen is represented (considering alu-

2662

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2011

Fig. 3. Evolution of RF and the maximum temperature of the phase conductors ( ) with the screen width (plates with a thickness of 3 mm situated 0.1 m above the power cables).

Fig. 5. Evolution of RF and the ampacity of the line with the thickness of the screen (plates of 1-m width situated 0.1 m above the power cables).

Fig. 4. Evolution of RF and the maximum temperature of the phase conductors ) with the thickness of the screen (plates of 1-m width situated 0.1 m ( above the power cables).

minium or copper plates of 1 m width installed 0.1 m above the cables). Although a greater thickness of the screen clearly leads to better MF mitigation efciency, it also decreases the maximum temperature achieved by the phase conductors. This effect is especially signicant when using copper plates, since a minimum thickness of 4 mm is needed to prevent overheating of the cables when using this material, while aluminium plates require a minimum thickness of 8 mm. Furthermore, increasing the thickness of the screen can even cool power cables below their initial temperature when there is no screen installed (e.g., a 15-mm copper screen leads to a maximum temperature of the phase conductors of 85 C; lower than the initial value of 90 C). Taking all of this into account, it can be concluded that it is possible to limit overheating of the power cables by increasing the screen dimensions. This allows us to reduce the screen-line clearance in order to attain higher efciency levels. C. Ampacity and Screen Cost Previous parametric analyses clarify the need for a carefully designed screen which does not limit the ampacity of the line. Hence, certain dimensions of the screen can be xed in order to simplify the design process. For example, in the case shown in Fig. 1, the screen width is limited by the trench width. By considering this and taking into account the results shown in

Fig. 3, it is clear that a screen of 1-m width is the best option. Moreover, it is also possible to x the screen-line clearance in order to maximize the shielding efciency of the screen. Thus, a good choice can be 0.1 m. In this situation, only an ampacity analysis as a function of the thickness of the screen is required, as shown in Fig. 5, where the evolution of the ampacity of the line (in from the initial value of 961 A) with this parameter is represented, together with the RF achieved when these values of limiting current are circulating in the line. As can be observed, increasing the thickness of the screen not only leads to better RF levels, but also to higher ampacity levels, since it exceeds the initial value of 961 A by about 4% if copper plates of a thickness of 12 mm are considered. In this particular case, this is only possible when using values of thicknesses higher than 4 mm and 8 mm in copper and aluminium plates, respectively. Therefore, it is possible to design a screen which maximizes its shielding efciency and provides cooling effects on the shielded section of the line. In this way, the ampacity of the entire line is not limited by the presence of the mitigation device. It can also be observed in Fig. 5 that there are some situations in which aluminium plates can provide RF and ampacity values similar to those of copper plates, although higher values of thickness are required (e.g., both a 9-mm-thick copper screen 6.8 and amand 12-mm-thick aluminium screen have RF pacity of approximately 102%). This point, combined with the higher cost of copper, suggests that aluminium plates can be a good choice. However, its lower electric conductivity causes higher induced losses into the screen. Therefore, it may be of interest to study which material is the best option in terms of RF and cost. This is shown in Fig. 6 for the situation analyzed in Fig. 5, in which the evolution of RF and the total cost of the screens are represented for a thickness range at which the ampacity is more than 100% in Fig. 5 (from 4 mm and 8 mm in copper and aluminium plates, respectively), when shielding a line length of 100 m. The total cost of the screens includes material and operational costs over a period of 30 years, derived from the screen losses for a line current equal to its ampacity (961 A). The results shown in Fig. 6 have been obtained in a similar way to those of the IEC 60287 standard states for the cost of cables: price reference for a 1 m 2 m 3 mm plate, 556 Euro for copper and 97 Euro for aluminium, energy price:

DEL PINO LPEZ AND ROMERO: INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MAGNETIC SHIELDS

2663

Fig. 6. Evolution of RF and the total cost of the screen with the thickness of the screen (plates of 1-m width situated 0.1 m above the power cables) for a line current equal to its ampacity (961 A).

Fig. 8. Evolution of RF and the maximum temperature of the phase conductors ( ) with the vertical height of the reverse-U screen (1 m wide and 3 mm thick, situated at 0.1 m above the cables).

Fig. 7. Reverse-U shape above a at conguration line.

0.1 Euro/kWh, discount rate: 5%, energy cost rate: 2%, and demand charge: 0.03 Euro/W.year. As Fig. 6 shows, the total cost associated with copper screens is always much higher than the cost associated with aluminium screens. Therefore, as mentioned before, aluminium screens can provide results similar to those of copper screens, but at a much lower cost. For example, it is possible to provide an RF of 6.8 either with a 9-mm-thick copper screen or a 12-mm-thick aluminium screen, but the cost of the copper screen is about twice the total cost associated with the aluminium screen (96,115 Euro; versus 44,595 Euro;). Hence, it can be concluded that aluminium screens are the better choice, given the fact that only plates with a thickness higher than 8 mm can be used without reducing the ampacity of the line. V. REVERSE-U Since the reverse-U shape (Fig. 7) is an evolution of the horizontal plate, similar results to those given for the horizontal plate are shown for the behavior of RF and for the temperature according to the variations in the geometrical parameters. Nevertheless, there is a new parameter to be analyzed: the vertical height of the screen. This is shown in Fig. 8 for a 1-m-wide screen with a thickness of 3 mm installed at 0.1 m above the cables, where the evolution of RF and the maximum temperature are represented as a achieved by the phase conductors function of this parameter. It is easily observed that RF improves when the vertical height increases from the original situation of a horizontal plate (when the vertical height is zero), but it seems to stabilize at a certain value. Furthermore, the maximum temperature in the shielded line decreases although its effect is less pronounced than in the other geometrical parameters. Consequently, there is no need to increase this parameter indenitely. In this particular case, it can be set at 300 mm, as limited by the maximum depth of the trench. In the same way, the screen width can be set at 1 m, as introduced in the case of the horizontal plate. By considering this

Fig. 9. Evolution of RF and the ampacity of the line with the thickness of the screen (1 m wide and 300 mm high situated at 0.1 m above the cables).

scenario, an ampacity analysis can be developed as a function of the thickness of the screen. This is the case shown in Fig. 9, in which the evolution of the ampacity with this parameter is represented when a 1-m-wide and 300-mm-high plate is situated 0.1 m above the power cables. Fig. 9 also includes the RF achieved when these values of the ampacity are owing through the line. The behavior shown in Fig. 9 is similar to that observed in the case of the horizontal plate, where it is possible not to limit the ampacity of the line using thicknesses of 4 mm and 7 mm for copper and aluminium screens, respectively. However, as observed in the case of the horizontal plate, aluminium screens can be more practical than copper screens, since they are much cheaper and can also provide similar RF levels without limiting the ampacity of the line. This is shown in Fig. 10, where the evolution of RF and the total cost of the screens are represented for a thickness range at which the ampacity is more than 100% in Fig. 9, when mitigating a 100-m line length. As a result, aluminium is also the best choice when using reverse-U-shaped screens. VI. H-LAYOUT The H-layout (Fig. 11) can be considered as a development of the reverse-U screen, where the vertical plates are enlarged over the horizontal plate, forming an electrical circuit that is closed at each extremity of the shielded area.

2664

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2011

Fig. 10. Evolution of RF and the total cost of the reverse-U screen with the thickness of the screen (1 m wide and 300 mm high situated at 0.1 m above the cables) for a line current equal to its ampacity (961 A).

Fig. 12. Evolution of RF and the maximum temperature of the phase conductors ( ) with the horizontal plate width (horizontal plate situated 0.1 m above the power cables; vertical plates separated by 1.2 m and 1 m high; all plates are 3 mm thick).

Fig. 11. Heat ux lines through an H-layout (plates of 0.8-m width and 15-mm thickness; horizontal plate situated at 0.1 m above the cables; vertical plates separated by 1 m). Fig. 13. Evolution of RF and the maximum temperature of the phase conduc) with the length of the vertical plates (horizontal plate 0.8 m wide tors ( and situated 0.1 m above the power cables; vertical plates separated by 1 m; all plates are 3 mm thick).

As observed in the previous screen shapes, the resulting H section also plays an important role in the heat transferred from the power cables. Nevertheless, in this case, the dissipation effect is especially signicant since the H-layout acts like a radiator. This is shown in Fig. 11, where heat ux lines are represented for a particular case. It can also be observed that ux lines are diverted into the vertical plates and brought to colder areas of the mother soil. Therefore, an in-depth parametric analysis should be performed in order to explore all possibilities. A. Geometrical Parameters The complex geometry of this structure requires the analysis of a signicant number of geometrical parameters. However, the results obtained from the analysis developed in previous sections can be applied to this situation. In particular, the inuence of the thickness of the plate and the screen-line distance on the maximum temperature achieved by the power cables is very similar to those observed in the horizontal plate and the reverse-U congurations, except for the MF mitigation levels achieved. Increasing both magnitudes improves the shielding efciency of the screen and reduces the temperature of the cables. Nevertheless, there are important geometrical parameters to be studied, such as the horizontal plate width, which is shown in Fig. 12, where the evolution of RF and with this parameter is represented when the vertical plates are 1 m high and are

separated by 1.2 m, and all plates are 3 mm thick. As can be observed, increasing this horizontal plate width has cooling effects on the power cables and improves the MF mitigation achieved. However, the plate width has a limited effect on the reduction, which stabilizes from a certain width value. Hence, there is no need to greatly increase the horizontal plate width to improve RF. Nevertheless, the inuence of this parameter in the temperature of the cables is directly related to the presence of a gap between the horizontal plates and the vertical plates, since this gap is a high thermal-resistivity area that is crossed by the heat ux lines that pass from the horizontal plate to the vertical plates. Therefore, the results shown in Fig. 12 can also be related to the reduction of this gap. Furthermore, the dimensions and location of the vertical plates should be studied, such as their length and their position relative to the horizontal plate, since their separation is limited by the trench dimensions. In this sense, Fig. 13 shows the with the length of the vertical plates, evolution of RF and by transforming a reverse-U screen, with vertical plates of 0.5-m height, into an H-layout screen by means of enlarging

DEL PINO LPEZ AND ROMERO: INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MAGNETIC SHIELDS

2665

Fig. 15. Evolution of RF and the ampacity of the line with the thickness of the screen (all plates 0.8 m wide; vertical plates separated by 1 m resting on the bottom of the trench and horizontal plate situated at 0.1 m above the cables). Fig. 14. Evolution of RF and the maximum temperature of the phase conduc) with the portion of the length of the vertical plates below the hortors ( izontal plate (horizontal plate 0.8 m wide and situated 0.1 m above the power cables; vertical plates separated by 1 m and 1 m high; all plates are 3 mm thick).

its vertical plates over the horizontal plate. As observed in Fig. 13, this action reduces the temperature of the cables and simultaneously increases the shielding efciency of the screen. However, the magnitude of the latter seems to be limited from a certain vertical height, and depends on the material employed in the screen. The location of the vertical plates relative to the horizontal plate may be of interest. Therefore, Fig. 14 shows the evolution with the length of the portion of the vertical of RF and plates which are at a lower level than the horizontal plate. This is performed with vertical plates of 1 m in height, separated by 1 m, that are initially situated on top of the horizontal plate and are then moved down. It can be observed how this action increases the temperature of the cables, and reaches a maximum RF when the vertical plates are approximately centred with the horizontal plate. This result is of great signicance, since it shows how vertical plates must be installed. Furthermore, this result, combined with the trench maximum depth, limits the height of the vertical plates. B. Ampacity and Screen Cost By taking into account the results obtained in the parametric analysis, and considering the trench dimensions of the studied case (Fig. 1), an H-layout screen made of three 0.8-m-wide plates, with the vertical plates separated by 1 m and resting on the bottom of the trench, and the horizontal plate situated 0.1 m above the power cables, can be considered as the best choice. In this situation, since an ampacity analysis depends solely on the thickness of the plates, Fig. 15 is given, where the evolution of the ampacity is represented for the previously dened H-layout, together with the RF achieved when those values of the ampacity are owing through the line. From Fig. 15, it can be concluded that the ampacity is not limited when using plates with a minimum thickness of 4 mm in the case of copper, and 6 mm in the case of aluminium. Furthermore, the ampacity can also be increased since the H-layout has a signicant cooling effect on the power cables.

Fig. 16. Evolution of RF and the total cost of the H-layout with the thickness of the plates (all plates 0.8 m wide; vertical plates separated by 1 m and resting on the bottom of the trench and horizontal plate situated at 0.1 m above the cables) for a line current equal to its ampacity (961 A).

As observed in the cases of the horizontal plate and the reverse-U screens, copper can provide better mitigation levels than aluminium with the same thickness. However, RF values of about 35 can be achieved by either using 5-mm-thick copper plates or 8-mm-thick aluminium plates, although the increase in the ampacity is lower for aluminium than that observed when copper is used. Hence, it still remains unclear whether copper plates are the best option. To clarify this point, Fig. 16 shows the evolution of RF and the total cost of the screens over a period of 30 years of operation for a range of thicknesses in which the ampacity is more than 100% in the case shown in Fig. 15 when mitigating a power cable of 100 m in length. As a result, aluminium can also be considered to be the best choice when using the H-layout. VII. SELECTION PROCESS As observed throughout this paper, although some of the screens that have been studied can provide signicant MF mitigation levels, the cost associated with each solution can be the main factor toward the selection of the best conguration. Hence, it may be of interest to select the screen layout in terms of the effectiveness/cost ratio, dened as selection index RF Total cost(Euro) (4)

2666

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 26, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2011

Fig. 17. Selection index of the horizontal plate, reverse-U and H-layout screens for various thicknesses of the screen.

Fig. 18. Selection index and RF of the horizontal plate, reverse-U and H-layout screens for various values of the current through the mitigated line.

In this way, the conguration with the best balance between shielding efciency and cost can easily be determined. Taking into account the results obtained in the previous sections, the following congurations are analyzed using this index: horizontal plate of 1 m width, situated at 0.1 m above the power cables; reverse-U screen of 1-m width and 350-mm height, situated at 0.1 m above the power cables; H-layout screen composed of plates of 0.8-m width, whose vertical plates are separated by 1 m and the remainder are on the bottom of the trench, and whose horizontal plate is situated at 0.1 m above the power cables. For this scenario, Fig. 17 shows the values of SI for various screen thicknesses. It can be observed that the H-layout screen is always the best choice in terms of RF and cost, independent of the value of the thickness of the screen. In fact, from Fig. 17, it can be derived that the best efciency/cost ratio for the horizontal plate and the H-layout screen is when screen plates of 12-mm thickness are used, while the reverse-U screen requires plates of approximately 15-mm thickness. While bearing this in mind, it is also important to verify the performance of these congurations when the current through the power cables changes, since a signicant reduction in the load level of the line may lead to better performance in one of the cases studied here over the others. To this end, Fig. 18 presents the evolution of SI and RF for different values of the load level of the line. As can be seen, all of the congurations studied continue providing similar values of RF when the current changes, although SI increases as the current decreases, the reason is that lower losses are induced into the screen, thereby signicantly reducing the total cost, whereas RF remains almost constant. In fact, it is clear that the H-layout screen is always the best option, even if the load level of the line has drastically decreased. VIII. CONCLUSION The shielding efciency and the thermal behavior of three different screen shapes (horizontal plate, reverse-U, and H-layout) have been studied when mitigating the magnetic eld generated by underground power cables. This is performed by means of a nite-element method (FEM) electromagnetic-thermal coupled

model, which shows that, in some situations, selected screens act as a radiator, thereby evacuating the heat generated in the power cables. A parametric analysis has been developed for the selected congurations, concluding that not only do the geometrical parameters of the screens have signicant effects on the shielding efciency, but also on the ampacity of the shielded line, especially due to the distance between the horizontal plate and the power cables. Other geometrical parameters, such as the thickness of the plates, can be the main factor for the limitation of the adverse thermal effects on the conductors when the screen dimensions are restricted by the geometrical constraints, and may even lead to cooling effects on the shielded section of the line, thereby increasing the potential ampacity. In all of the cases under study, the cost associated with the induced losses has also been considered, and it can be concluded that aluminium screens boast a better efciency/cost ratio than do copper screens. Finally, the main features of the screens are analyzed in order to clarify which screen shape should be selected as the best candidate, given a particular situation, such as the efciency/cost ratio and its evolution with the load level through the line. REFERENCES
[1] CIGRE Working Group C4.204, Guidelines for mitigation techniques of power-frequency magnetic elds originated from electric power systems, TB-373, 2009. [2] L. Hasselgren and J. Luomi, Geometrical aspects of magnetic shielding at extremely low frequencies, IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 409420, Aug. 1995. [3] A. Canova, A. Manzin, and M. Tartaglia, Evaluation of different analytical and semi-analytical methods for the design of elf magnetic eld shields, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. , vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 788796, May/Jun. 2002. [4] A. S. Farag, M. M. Dawoud, and I. O. Habiballah, Implementation of shielding principles for magnetic eld management of power cables, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 48, pp. 193209, 1999. [5] M. DAmore, E. Menghi, and M. S. Sarto, Shielding techniques of the low-frequency magnetic eld from cable power lines, presented at the IEEE Int. Symp. Electromagn. Compat., Boston, MA, Aug. 1822, 2003. [6] O. Bottauscio, M. Chiampi, and A. Manzin, Numerical analysis of magnetic shielding efciency of multilayered screens, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 40, no. 2, pt. 2, Mar. 2004. [7] A method for applying a magnetic shielding along an AC power line, , Eur. patent application EP 1598911 A1.

DEL PINO LPEZ AND ROMERO: INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MAGNETIC SHIELDS

2667

[8] A. Gille, V. Beghin, G. Geerts, J. Hoeffelman, D. Limans, and K. Van Gucht, Double 150 kV link, 32 km long, in Belgium: Design and construction, Paris, France, CIGRE Rep. B1-305, 2004. [9] D. J. Swafeld, P. L. Lewin, and S. J. Sutton, Methods for rating directly buried high voltage cable circuits, Inst. Eng. Technol. Gen. Transm. Distrib, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 393401, 2008. [10] Electric Cables- Calculation of Current Ratings-Part 1: Current Rating Equations (100% Load Factor) and Calculation of Losses-Section I: General, IEC 60287-1-1, 2002. [11] Electric Cables-Calculation of Current Ratings-Part 2: Thermal Resistance-Section I: Calculation of Thermal Resistance, IEC 60287-2-1, 2007. [12] Electric Cables-Calculation of Current Ratings-Part 3: Section and Operating Conditions-Section 1: Reference Operating Conditions and Selection of Cable Type, IEC 602873-3-1, 1997. [13] J. H. Neher and M. McGrath, The calculation of the temperature rise and load capability of cable systems, AIEE Trans., vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 752772, Oct. 1957. [14] D. Mushamalirwa, N. Germany, and J. C. Steffens, A 2-D nite element mesh generator for thermal analysis of underground power cables, IEEE Trans. Power Del, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 6268, Jan. 1998. [15] F. Len and G. J. Anders, Effects of backlling on cable ampacity analyzed with the nite element method, IEEE Trans. Power Del, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 537343, Apr. 2008.

[16] P. Maioli and E. Zaccone, Thermal design of HV electric systems with EMF mitigation devices, presented at the Int. Colloq. Power Frequency Electromagn. Fields ELF EMF, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2009. [17] J. C. del Pino, Contributions towards underground power cables magnetic eld shielding (in Spanish), Ph.D. dissertation, Elect. Eng. Dept., Univ. Seville, Seville, Spain, 2010. [18] G. J. Anders, Rating of electric power cables. Ampacity computations for transmission, distribution and industrial applications. New York: IEEE, 1997. [19] Comsol Multiphysics. 1998-2010. [Online]. Available: www. comsol.com Juan Carlos del Pino Lpez received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Seville, Seville, Spain, in 2010. Ccurrently, he is a Lecturer at the University of Seville, Seville, Spain. His primary areas of interest are magnetic-eld mitigation and motor drive control.

Pedro Cruz Romero (M06) received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Seville, Seville, Spain, in 2000. Currently, he is an Associate Professor. His primary areas of interest are magnetic-eld mitigation, electrical machines modeling, and drives.