You are on page 1of 11

21, rue dArtois, F-75008 PARIS

http : //www.cigre.org

B3-204

CIGRE 2012

Applying IEC 60865 on Low tension Inter-plant Spans in EHV Switchyards

D. VAUGHAN, B. ROONEY, G. ADAMCZEWSKI


Entura
Australia

SUMMARY
IEC 60865- 1: 1993-09 Short Circuit Currents Calculation of effects [2] covers a method to
determine short-circuit forces for bundled conductors in substations. The standard is specifically
written around bundled conductors of a circular configuration (2.3.3.1) and even spacer distribution
across the span.
This paper describes methods and considerations for calculating pinch forces due to short circuit
currents on conductor spans at low tension (< 1.5 kN) and short spans (< 10 m) with uneven spacer
distribution along the span in a flat bundle configuration. It is intended for readers with some
familiarity with IEC 60865 1 and the physics of conductor suspension.
The paper describes the analysis undertaken to determine why design practices such as short spacer
intervals, reduced span tensions and closer sub-conductor spacing are effective in reducing the shortcircuit forces experienced by switchyard equipment. The findings of this analysis suggest a number of
design practices which either eliminate ambiguity in application of IEC 60865--1 [2] or allow a more
correct calculation of short-circuit forces by adjusting the assumptions within IEC 60865--1 [2].
Included is a discussion around the acceptability of applying these techniques and that the adjustments
considered are a legitimate application of IEC 60865--1 [2].
In summary, the paper presents the approach that Entura has adopted to optimise substation layouts
and mitigate the forces acting on existing equipment based on detailed modelling and examination of
IEC 60865 and the physics of bundled conductors under short-circuit conditions.

KEYWORDS
Slack span Pinch force Flat spaced bundled conductors Bending stiffness

1.

BACKGROUND

Entura, the consulting arm of Hydro Tasmania, recently prepared designs for a number of utilities for
both new and existing 500 kV and 220 kV AIS switchyards that utilise flexible, multiple subconductor, flat-spaced, inter-plant connections. In each case the utility required the installation to be
capable of withstanding increased fault currents arising from changed system conditions, the
maximum level ranging up to 63 kA.

donald.vaughan@entura.com.au

In preparing the designs, IEC 60865--1 [2] Short Circuit Currents Calculation of Effects, Cigr
Brochure 105 The Mechanical Effects of Short-Circuit Currents in Open Air Substations (Rigid and
Flexible Busbars) and Brochure 214 The Mechanical Effects of Short-Circuit Currents in Open Air
Substations - Part II were reviewed for applicability. The investigation identified that adoption of IEC
60865--1 [2] can lead to very conservative calculation of pinch forces when considering slack
spans. Also, IEC 60865- 1 [2] specifically notes that it is only applicable to bundled conductors in
circular configuration, whereas the inter-plant connections adopted by the utilities were in triple or
quad flat configuration, posing an additional problem.
In order to calculate the forces acting on conductors in flat configuration and minimise the degree of
conservativeness in the calculations, Entura embarked on a thorough investigation of the practices in
the existing bays. It was quickly determined that it was difficult to reconcile the requirements of IEC
60865--1 [2] and the arrangements in the existing bays. Thus a first-principle approach was adopted
in an attempt to better understand the assumptions underlying IEC 60865--1 [2] and its applicability
to the specific design problem.
Most of the investigations undertaken were for brown-field sites where the layout of equipment and
mechanical loading limits of equipment and structures have been pre-determined. The constraints
with respect to clearances, access arrangements, equipment types, conductor types, fault levels, and
equipment ratings imposed a very tight design problem with very few degrees of freedom.

2.

PINCH FORCES

The limitations in applying IEC 60865--1 [2] relate to the calculation of pinch forces in flat conductor
configurations at low static tension. There are papers that propose that pinch forces are greatly
reduced by arranging spacers close together on a span [4]. These references do not state why this
reduces pinch forces but anecdotal evidence indicates it is because the sub-span can be treated as a
rigid member and hence no pinch forces are generated. Furthermore, a particularly important factor is
the equivalent dynamic spring rate of the hardware connections, support insulators and apparatus [4].
The differences in spring rate or spring constant for spans of varying sags were investigated and
showed significant variation. It was demonstrated that the spring constant can be between 20 and 200
times lower than the 105 Nm-1 proposed in IEC 60865-1 [2].-1 if the spring constant of the slack
conductor is included in the calculation of span spring constant.
A comprehensive literature search led to the conclusion that, in an overall slack span with varying subspan lengths, demonstration of the following effects will support the premise that short sub-spans
alleviate pinch forces:
The resistance to bending of the conductor over short sub-spans is sufficient to resist the force
of attraction due to the short circuit currents;
The tensions across a span resolves to, at worst, the maximum tension in any one sub-span;
Pinch forces predicted by IEC 60865--1 [2] do not arise if the span is at such a low tension
(i.e. is slack) such that the reduction in length during pinch is less than the initial excess sag in
the span.
IEC 60865--1 [2] does not already include these effects in its consideration of pinch forces.

3.

NOMENCLATURE

Where possible the nomenclature of IEC 60865--1 [2] is used in discussion and equations.
Additional terms and abbreviations of note are as follows:
I
Area Moment of Inertia
Sub-span
Length of a conductor span between spacers or between equipment and spacer

4.

ASSUMPTIONS

The following assumptions were adopted for the analysis.

4.1

Approximation to Parabolic shape in horizontal axis

Where a uniform force of attraction is applied between the sub-conductors the resulting displacement
of the sub-conductors has been approximated assuming a parabolic shape. In reality the shape will be
more complex than this as the force will not be uniform along the length of the sub-conductor due to
the changing proximity of the other sub-conductors.

4.2

Treatment of Inertia

The inertia of the sub-conductors is ignored when calculating pinch forces, in accordance with the
approach adopted in IEC 60865--1 [2].

4.3

Flexural Stiffness

We are interested in the flexural stiffness under short-circuit conditions and so we must consider that
each strand in the sub-conductor will also be subject to forces of attraction within the sub-conductor
itself. These forces will act to reduce the ability of the strands to move relative to each other and
hence increase the flexural stiffness from the minimum condition. Reference [5] shows that an untensioned conductors flexural stiffness is closer to the minimum whereas sub-conductors under
tension can approach 70 -90 % of the maximum value. We have chosen 70% as a conservative value.
This is reasonable given:
The spans in question are at relatively low tensions; and, conversely
The situation under which we are interested in the flexural stiffness is in a dynamic situation
where the forces of attraction between strands of the sub-conductor effectively increase the
friction within the sub-conductor, increasing the flexural stiffness.

5.

APPLICATION OF REVISED CALCULATION

In reviewing current accepted practice against IEC 60865--1 [2] it is clear that there can be no direct
application of the standard to flat-bundles of greater than 2 sub-conductors. Additionally it is not clear
that the introduction of shorter intervals between spacers to reduce pinch forces is supported by the
standard calculations. The following sections describe how IEC 60865-1 [2] can-1can be applied or
adapted to calculate resultant pinch forces for configurations that are not considered in the Standard.

5.1

Flat Configuration

The forces of attraction in a flat bundle configuration are different than those in a circular bundle.
These forces can be calculated by comparing the components of the forces of attraction on each subconductor for the two arrangements.
as

as

F12

F12

F13
F14

F14

F13

Circular Bundle

Flat Bundle
Figure 5-1
Flat vs Circular bundles

The forces on the subject sub-conductor in the circular bundle are given by:

It can then be shown that the average force on a sub-conductor for the flat bundle is given by:

Equation A
This analysis ignores any of the scaling factors applied for calculation of Fv, the force of attraction, by
IEC 60865--1 [2]. These scaling factors will affect the absolute but not the relative result. However,
the magnitude of the force must be considered with the distance over which the sub-conductors can be
stretched.
The distances over which the sub-conductors must move in the flat bundle case are much greater than
in the circular bundle case.
as

as

F12

F12

F13
F14

F14

F13
as/2

3as/2
Flat Bundle

Circular Bundle
Figure 5-2
Distance over which pinch operates

This has a large effect on the amount of displacement applied to the sub-conductors under pinch.
Figure 5-3 compares the relative curvatures for the inner and outer sub-conductors of the flat bundle
and the circular bundle sub-conductor.
Comparison of Parabolae under pinch for Circular and Flat Bundles

0.14

Distance away from centre of bundle (m)

0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
0.00E+00

5.00E-02

1.00E-01

1.50E-01

2.00E-01

2.50E-01

3.00E-01

distance along sub-span (distance from spacer) (m)


Flat bundle Outer sub-conductor

Circular bundle sub- conductor

Flat bundle Inner sub-conductor

Figure 5-3
Shape of sub-conductors under pinch

Note that the displacements are substantial for the flat case since all the sub-conductors are attracted
into the middle of the spacer, which is effectively 1.5 times the spacing from the normal position of
the outer sub-conductors. The circular bundle attracts to a point in the middle of the bundle which is
just over a half of the spacing.
Table 5-1
Example ofelongation due to pinch, for as=70 mm
Sub-conductor

Distance from
spacer to Clash
(mm) 1

Horizontal
Distance to
Clash (mm) 2

Elongation/subconductor 3 (mm)

Circular

90

33 (as/2-d/2)

31

Outer flat

318

88 (3as/2-d/2)

65

Inner flat

110

18 (as/2-d/2)

This suggests that the pinch force will be higher in the flat bundle case and that the smaller subconductor spacing is advantageous for minimising pinch forces in flat bundles. A simple summation of
the elongations shows that pinch is high for the flat bundle than for the circular since 2(65 +8) > 4x31.

5.2

Short Spacer Intervals and Bending Stiffness

The design practice of introducing multiple spacers into a span to reduce pinch is in widespread use
yet is unsupported by direct application of IEC 60865--1 [2].
Pinch forces eventuate due to the contraction of a span caused by the displacement of the subconductors in that span as the force of attraction due to the short circuit current flowing through the
sub-conductors acts on them.

y0(x)

as

y0

x
l, length of span
Figure 5-4
Sub-conductors under pinch conditions
Figure 5-4 shows the pinch phenomena. For a flat bundle Figure 5-4 is in plan view. IEC 60865-1 [2]
calculates the contraction and hence the force applied to the connectors based on the change in length
of the span due to the deformation of the sub-conductors. The standard is quite sophisticated and takes
into account sub-conductor clashing and other non-linear effects.
1

x axis in Figure 5-4


y axis in Figure 5-4
3
Assuming no spacers on the span. That is, this elongation applies to the curvatures in Figure 5-4 but for two
ends.
2

IEC 60865--1 [2] does not consider the bending effect. This bending effect will resist the force of
attraction that causes the sub-conductors to deform and hence reduce the net pinch force experienced.
Ignoring bending stiffness is a conservative assumption and is reasonable where sub-spans are long
relative to the conductor diameter. However, in sub-spans that are as short as 10-20 times the
conductor diameter, this assumption is limiting because bending can be a very significant
factor.

Figure 5-5
Deflection due to electromagnetic force of attraction during short circuit fault when considering
bending force alone
Figure 5-5 shows the deflection due to short circuit electromagnetic forces of attraction considering
the bending resistance of the conductor for a range of sub-span lengths. This shows that for short subspans (less than about 0.80 m), bending stiffness alone will limit deflections (and for shorter sub spans
eliminate pinch forces).
Simple beam calculations can be used to calculate the effect of bending stiffness (see Figure 5-6). The
distributed force is the EMF generated by the short circuit, as calculated by the standard, Fv.

Fv/l

where

Figure 5-6
Plan view of a single sub-conductor (other sub-conductors in bundle not shown) between two simple
supports (or spacers) subject to pinch force and causing bending of the conductor
The deflection of the beam (sub-conductor) caused by the load, for short sub-spans when subconductors do not clash is within the elastic limits and small angle assumptions of this model.
The use of bending in the calculation of deflection is inherently less conservative than IEC 60865--1
[2] but still applies some conservatism:

Simple supports are assumed. In reality, the supports would be fixed (crimped at a support or
continuous at a spacer). A beam with fixed supports will bend less than a simply supported
beam under the same load. Thus, the deflection is conservative.
That tension can be calculated after bending has been used to determine deflection. In practice
the tension would reduce the deflection, thus the tension calculated from the bending
deflection calculation is conservative.
This method can be used to show that the design practice of short spaced sub-spans is effective in
reducing pinch forces since most of the energy applied to the sub-conductors during the short-circuit
will be taken up in bending rather than moving the sub-conductors.

5.3

Low Span Tensions

Another assumption that is inherent in IEC 60865--1 [2] is that the pinch force is calculated based on
the tensile elongation of the conductor and elastic deformation of the supports. Again this is an
acceptable assumption for long, high tension spans. It is extremely conservative for inter-plant spans
which are often short and slack.
In practice, the need for this tensile elongation is negated by introducing slack into the span such that
the conductor does not pull taut under the pinch force. That is, the sub-conductor length deformation
and hence shortening of the overall conductor length can be accommodated within the distance
between the two supports and hence without the need to stretch the sub-conductors.
CIGRE Brochure 105 [4] highlights the importance of the spring rate or constant in the calculation of
pinch forces.
Figure 5-8 illustrates the capacity for the span to absorb changes in conductor length without
appreciable changes in tension. It should also be noted that at high sags the spring constant of the span
is very low when compared with the IEC 60865--1 [2] recommendation of 105 Nm-1.
Figure 5-8 shows that in this example the span could contract by up to 140 mm without appreciable
increase in tension.

Figure 5-7
Example of slack span spring constant and tension as conductor length decreases
(5m span, 500 N static tension)

Figure 5-8
Example of slack span spring constant and tension as conductor length decreases
(5m span, 500 N static tension)
This analysis allows for a reduction in the spring constant of the supports when using IEC 60865--1
[2] where pinch shortening of the conductor does not shorten the conductor to the extent that it is
shorter than the distance between the supports.

5.4

Treatment of uneven sub-spans within a larger span

The tensions across the entire span equalise to no more than the highest tension in any sub-span.
If we apply IEC 60865--1 [2] to one sub-span at a time (it cannot be applied to all at once because of
the different sub-span lengths), we determine a different value of tension for each sub-span.
Considering equilibrium of the system, each sub-span must have the same tension.
If we treat each spacer as a point at which forces add, we can see in Figure 5-9 (situation A) the forces
across the spacer add and resolve in one direction, resulting in a movement of the spacer in the
direction of the larger force (see situation B). Note that, due to the difference in lengths of the subspans, the tension increase on one side is greater than the tension decrease on the other. In this way an
equilibrium tension will result across the span and be applied to the end supports.
Therefore, we have assumed that the greater of the sub-span tensions will apply across the whole span.
This introduces a further safety margin into the analysis.
A
1.5 kN 1.5 kN 15 kN

15 kN

Separately calculated
tensions
Approaching equilibrium

B
10 kN

10 kN 13 kN

13 kN

Equilibrium

C
12 kN

12 kN

12 kN

12 kN

Figure 5-9
Balancing of tensions across a span where uneven sub-span section tensions exist

6.

DISCUSSION

This analysis has come about because of a need to calculate short-circuit pinch forces for conductor
spans between switchyard equipment such as post insulators, isolators and circuit breakers. Typically
these pieces of equipment can be arranged close to each other with low tensions on the conductors.
We have also encountered flat bundled conductor (triple and quad). Applying IEC 60865-1 [2] to
these situations has led us to question some design practices of the past and to consider altering our
design practices to facilitate calculating pinch forces, thus helping to ensure that the installations are
safe.
The analysis outlined in the previous section essentially represents an adaptation of IEC 60865-1 [2] to
cover a greater range of practical scenarios that may be encountered during a switchyard design. At
all times we have endeavoured to remain as faithful as possible to the techniques of IEC 60865-1 [2]
in our application of any techniques derived from that analysis. This has proved beneficial in terms of
client acceptance but also in terms of modifying our design techniques such that the use of many of
these techniques is now not required as we design in such a way as to remove the need to apply them.
Our analysis has allowed us to understand under what circumstances the greatest short-circuit force
will be derived from the pinch mechanism and when the largest force will be due to other short-circuit
forces. This then removes the need for spurious forces being calculated that may be misleading.
An example of this approach is shown in the following example. Figure 6-1 shows three different
span configurations:
1) A flat, low tension span;
2) An uneven, low tension span; and
3) A low tension dropper.

2
1

Figure 6-1
Example spans for short-circuit calculation
This reveals three different scenarios each requiring variation from IEC 60865-1 [2] to avoid overly
conservative outcomes for the calculation of pinch forces.

In span (1) we would need to revise the spring constant in the calculation of pinch force since the span
slackness is likely to mean that the shortening of the span under pinch will not pull the span taut and
hence the pinch force applied to the supports will be smaller than IEC 60865-1 [2] would otherwise
calculate.
Span (2) shows uneven static tensions on the end supports. If the static tension and length of the span
is based on the higher static tension then the pinch force will be significantly higher than it is in
reality. There are two methods that may be applied in this situation. The first would be to assume that
the span is in fact as if it were twice the length with the midpoint at the height of the lower support
(the dotted line shows the half span). This enables a simple application of the static tension as per (1)
and then a calculation similar to that used for span (1) can be used to calculate the resultant pinch
force. This will give slightly higher pinch forces than the second method where the span can be
effectively split in two at the turning point of the conductor. The spring constant would then be
calculated for each half-span and the maximum applied in the IEC 60865-1 [2] calculation.
Span (3) is essentially untensioned. The pinch forces for these droppers are not likely to be significant
when compared with the tensile forces. The pinch force can still be calculated as for (2) but the
apparent low static tensions generally lead to a low result.
It can be seen that the method adapts and builds on the methods used in IEC 60865-1 [2], maintaining
the rigour associated with the standard and maintaining an appropriate level of conservativeness.
This method has been applied to green-field designs as well as assessment of existing installations.
Some care needs to be used when considering the reduction of the spring constant. The slackness of a
span is often not sufficient to allow the reduction in spring tension and so the pinch forces remain
significant. This is especially true for horizontal spans where there are critical ground clearances. It is
in these situations where the designer can fall back on short sub-spans between spacers or perhaps
smaller sub-conductor spacing to try and reduce pinch forces.

7.

SUMMARY

Our analysis demonstrates that slight variations in the approach outlined in IEC 60865--1 [2] can
provide more flexibility in design practice when considering pinch forces. These variations relate to:
1) Consideration of the effect of flat-spaced conductors;
We have shown that the geometric differences between circular and flat bundled
configurations of sub-conductors can affect the magnitude of the forces of attraction and
hence the magnitude of pinch forces present in a bundled conductor. Designers should
consider the geometry and forces carefully when applying IEC 60865--1 [2].
2) Consideration of bending stiffness on short sub-spans;
We have demonstrated the application of bending forces to the calculation of pinch forces on
short sub-spans ( 1 m) reduces the observable pinch force.
3) Consideration of the effect of slack spans;
Our investigations, using a number of modelling techniques, lead to the conclusion that, for
slack spans, the Resultant spring constant of both supports of one span, S, of 105 Nm-1 as
proposed in IEC 6085-1 should be refined to provide a more accurate calculation of the
resultant pinch forces exerted on the switchyard equipment under short circuit conditions.
4) Consideration of uneven lengths of sub-spans.
We have demonstrated that uneven tensions across spans resolve to an equilibrium tension
across the span. An element of conservatism can be added here by assuming that the resultant
tension is equal to the maximum sub-span tension across the span.
Analysis of the pinch force and a comparison of the geometries of quad, triple flat and circular
conductor configurations lead to an adaptation of the IEC 60865--1 [2] methodology for flat
configurations.

10

The method used in our designs modifies the IEC 60865--1 [2] approach in four main ways:
1) Consideration of bending forces;
2) Short span or varying sub-span lengths;
3) Flat configuration as opposed to circular bundle configuration; and
4) Low tension spans.
We have shown that calculation of pinch forces for flat bundles is heavily dependent on the
sub-conductor spacing and can lead to greater pinch forces being applied than for circular bundles.
This effect however is more than compensated for by the reduction in pinch force that is evident when
considering slack spans and the shortening in overall conductor length that can be applied without
appreciable increase in span tension.
These four demonstrations allow the calculation of pinch forces for short circuited, stranded conductor
bundles using an approach consistent with IEC 60865--1 [2].

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] W. Meyer, G. Herold, E. Zeitler, Short-circuit currents calculation of effects the second
edition of IEC publication 865, in 6th International Symposium on Short-circuit currents in power
systems Liege 6-8 September 1994, Report 2.1.
[2] IEC Publication 60865-1, Short-circuit currents Calculation of effects, Genve: IEC, 1993.
[3] Australian Standard AS 1531-1991 Conductors Bare Overhead Aluminium and Aluminium
Alloy, AS Committee E/L, Overhead Lines, 10th June 1991
[4] CIGRE SC 23 WG 23-11, Brochure 105 The Mechanical Effects of Short-Circuit Currents in
Open Air Substations (Rigid and Flexible Bus-bars) Volume 1 : An updated revision of the
CIGRE brochure of 1987, April 1996
[5] McConnell, KG, Zemke,WP, The measurement of flexural stiffness of multi-stranded electrical
conductors while under tension, in Experimental Mechanics Vol 20, No 6, Springer Boston,
June 1980.

11

You might also like