21, rue dArtois, F-75008 PARIS

B1-209

CIGRE 2012

http: //www.cigre.org

DYNAMIC THERMAL MODELING OF INSULATED CABLES

F. M. Echavarren* and L. Rouco
Universidad Pontificia Comillas
SPAIN
A. Gonzlez
Gas Natural Fenosa
SPAIN

SUMMARY
Modelling of insulated cables has received considerable attention in recent years. Since installation
and maintenance of insulated cables facilities are expensive, design and operation should be optimized
to maximize current rating. The current rating of a insulated cable depends on the maximum
temperatures that core and sheath can support. As a consequence, the dynamic behaviour of insulated
cables becomes an important issue for planning and operation of insulated cables facilities. The usual
methodology used to compute either steady state or dynamic current rating in underground
installations is based on electrical and thermal analogy based models. The thermal-electrical analogy
consists of considering each layer of each cable as a thermal resistance and a thermal capacitance, and
heat sources as current sources.
This paper presents a method to model the dynamic behaviour of insulated cables from a thermal point
of view. The proposed model is based on a radial partition of the cable. Each annular layer obtained is
represented by thermal resistances, which connects it with their adjacent layers, a capacitance, which
represents the thermal inertia, and a current source, representing the different heat sources of the
installation. The model also considers the heating mutual influence between different insulated cables.
The non conductive (convection and radiation) heat transfer models, such as ducts or galleries, are
computed using empirical approximations and they are adapted to conductive heat transfer equivalent
models by using equivalent thermal conductivities. In addition, a full electric model of the installation
is considered to obtain accurate sheath currents depending on the type of sheath grounding system has
been selected. The resulting model is a linear electric circuit which is solved using eigen analysis. In
addition, superposition can be applied to deal with dynamic load profiles since the resulting electric
circuits are linear.
The performance of the method is illustrated in 20 kV and 45 kV installations used by Gas Natural
Fenosa (GNF). Results presented compare the different critical times, i.e., the time to reach maximum
allowed temperature, depending on the number of lines in the installation, the grounding system and
the type of emplacement.

KEYWORDS
Insulated cable Dynamic Current Rating - Dynamic Conductive Heat Transfer

* Francisco.Echavarren@iit.upcomillas.es

1. INTRODUCTION
Modelling of insulated cables has received considerable attention in recent years. This fact is due to
the expansion of urban areas, where overhead power lines are not only unviable, but also socially
rejected. Since installation and maintenance of insulated cables facilities are expensive, their design
and operation should be optimized to maximize their current rating. The current rating of a insulated
cable depends on the maximum temperatures that core and sheath can withstand. These maximum
allowed temperatures are not only function of the active power losses of the core and sheath but also
of the active power losses of the others cables of the installation. The dynamic behaviour of insulated
cables is an important issue for planning and operation of insulated cables facilities. Thermal dynamic
analysis provides valuable information such as the maximum time a cable withstands an overload, or
how the core and sheath temperatures evolve under a variable load profile.
The usual methodology used to compute either steady state or dynamic current rating in underground
installations is based on electrical and thermal analogy based models [1]. The thermal-electrical
analogy consists in considering each layer of each cable as a thermal resistance and a thermal
capacitance, and heat sources as current sources. The thermal resistance is defined as the materials
ability to impede heat flow. Similarly, the thermal capacitance is defined as the materials ability to
store heat. The different layers between the conductor and the environment are considered as a series
thermal resistances circuit, with shunt capacitors and current sources. Heat flows associated with the
active power losses of the cable through this series circuit. Heat flow through a thermal resistance
raises the temperature gradient between the two sides of the thermal resistance. Besides, heat flow
injected into capacitors varies with temperature through time. The sum of the temperature gradients
determines the total temperature difference between the environment and the conductor.
Steady state current rating computations can be addressed using finite element models [2] or
continuous conductive heat transfer models [3]. However, the steady state discrete thermal model,
proposed by Neher and McGrath in [4], is the most widely used for insulated cables current rating
computation. This technique is the foundation of IEEE and IEC standards on steady state current
rating computation of cable systems [5, 6]. For dynamic current rating computation, most of the
authors propose models based on the thermal-electrical analogy [7-9]. From these models, IEC
standards have been established [10].
This paper presents a method to model the dynamic behaviour of insulated cables from a thermal point
of view [11]. The proposed model is based on a radial partition of the cable. Each annular layer
obtained is represented by a couple of thermal resistances, which connects it with their adjacent layers,
a capacitance, which represents the thermal inertia, and a current source, representing the different
heat sources of the installation. The model also considers the heating mutual influence between
different insulated cables. The non conductive (convection and radiation) heat transfer models, such as
ducts or galleries, are computed using empirical approximations and they are adapted to conductive
heat transfer equivalent models by using equivalent thermal conductivities. In addition, a full electric
model of the installation is considered to obtain accurate sheath currents [12] depending on the type of
sheath grounding system has been selected. The resulting model is a linear electric circuit which is
solved using eigen analysis [13, 14]. In addition, superposition can be applied to deal with dynamic
load profiles since the resulting electric circuits are linear.
To check the performance of the method, a set of actual underground installations have been analyzed.
Since the accuracy of the model was illustrated in [3] compared with finite elements models, the
results presented are focused in comparing critical times under overload. The set includes 20 kV and
45 kV installations. For each installation, a current step has been applied, thus the time evolution of
corresponding conductor and sheath temperatures has been obtained. The results presented are critical
times, i.e., the time till the conductor or the sheath reaches its maximum allowed temperature.
Different critical times are compared depending on the number of lines in the installation, the
grounding system and the type of emplacement.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the transient conduction problem and the
electrical and thermal analogy. Section 3 describes the model proposed in the paper for dynamic
behaviour of insulated cables. Section 4 includes the resolution of the mathematical model built up
using the model of the installation described in section 3. In the section 5, results on the thermal
dynamic analysis of a set of actual installations are presented. Finally, section 6 concludes the paper.

2. TRANSIENT CONDUCTION AND ELECTRIC ANALOGY

There are three physical mechanisms for heat transfer: conduction, convection and radiation [15].
Conduction is described by Fouriers law and establishes that heat flow is proportional to temperature
spatial gradient. Convection of heat occurs in moving fluids (air, water, etc.) and obeys Newtons
Law; therefore for insulated cables will only appear in the air space inside the ducts and at the surface
of the earth. Finally, radiation is described by the Stefan-Boltzmann Law, saying that the heat flow is
proportional to the difference of the temperatures to the fourth, thus for insulated cables will only
appear between cables and ducts, and between environment and cables placed on galleries.
The main energy transfer mechanism in insulated cables installations is conductive heat. The problem
of dynamic conductive heat transfer is defined by both the energy balance equation (cT/t = -q)
and the Fouriers law (q = -kT), where q represents the heat flux vector, qv the volumetric
distributed heat source, T the temperature and k, and c are the thermal conductivity, the density and
the specific heat capacity of the solid, respectively. Combining both equations, the heat diffusion
equation is obtained [15]:

q
1 T

= 2T + v
t
k

(1)

where represents the thermal diffusivity of the solid. The heat diffusion equation (1) is a
non-homogeneous partial differential equation which only has explicit solutions for a small set of
geometries and boundary conditions [16, 17]. In the case of insulated cables systems, the complicated
geometry prevents the exact solution of the heat diffusion equation (1). Hence there exist two main
numerical approaches in literature: finite element models and the based on thermal-electrical analogy.
This second approach is the base of the model presented in this paper. Avoiding longitudinal
coordinate, Figure 1 depicts a differential control volume per unit length 2rdr for conduction
analysis along the radial coordinate, and its equivalent differential electric circuit. Q represents radial
heat and \U and ^U are per unit radial thermal resistance and capacitance, respectively. The heat
source dQv is the differential internal heat source. The per unit radial capacitance ^U(r) is obtained
expanding the energy balance equation into polar coordinates and neglecting angular coordinate.
Considering Kirchhoff's current law in the equivalent differential electric circuit of Figure 1, energy
balance equation is reformulated and the per unit radial capacitance ^U(r) is worked out:
dQ + dQv = 2 cr dr

T
T
= C U (r ) dr
C U (r ) = 2 cr
t
t

(2)

The per unit radial resistance \U(r) is obtained expanding the Fouriers law into polar coordinates and
neglecting angular coordinate. Considering Kirchhoff's voltage law in the equivalent differential
electric circuit of Figure 1-a, Fouriers law is reformulated and the per unit radial resistance \U(r) is
a)

b)

Figure 1: Thermal electrical analogy: a) in a differential cylindrical layer, and b) in the different layers of a cable
2

worked out.

dT = Q

dr
1
= Q RU (r ) dr RU ( r ) =
2 kr
2 kr

(3)

Therefore thermal capacitance and resistance of such a finite layer will be the result of integrating (2)
and (3) over the bounding radii of that layer.

3. MODELING OF INSULATED CABLES INSTALLATIONS

This section describes the model proposed in the paper for dynamic behaviour of insulated cables. The
following subsections include the modelling of the different conductive and non-conductive layers of
the cable, and the electric model of the installation.

3.1 Conductive Layers

Figure 1-b depicts the representation of the electric equivalent circuits corresponding with the
conductive layers of a insulated cable. In the case of conductors and sheaths, the thermal resistance is
negligible. As a consequence, only shunt capacitors and heat sources are considered. In addition, as
only shunt elements are considered, a unique node is enough to represent each layer (Figure 1-b). The
corresponding step heat sources QCv and QSv depend on their corresponding active power losses
variation:
QCv = RC ( I C2 I C2 0 ) ; QSv = RS ( I S2 I S20 )

(4)

In case of the insulation and the jacket, no heat sources are considered, only thermal resistance and
capacitance. Thus both of them are divided into a concrete number of layers. Each layer is represented
by a scheme, with thermal capacitance and resistance obtained integrating (2) and (3) over the radii
of the layer. Figure 1-b depicts that the thermal resistance connects both nodes, while thermal
capacitance is halved and placed at both nodes of the layer.
Finally, in case of the soil, the model is equivalent to the insulation or the jacket. However, the soil is a
semi-infinite solid, whereas the train of schemes must consider a finite number of layers. Therefore,
the thermal network must extends out to such a radius in the soil that, at that radius, the temperature
increase reaches only a given small value at the end of the duration considered for the transient
analysis. This maximum radius (i.e., the penetration depth) can be estimated assuming that the cable is
a constant heat source. Hence, the maximum radius rMAX considered for the soil modelling is worked
out from the next equation:

TMAX =

Qcable
4 kS

rMAX
Ei

4 S tMAX

(5)

where kS and S are the thermal conductivity and the diffusivity of the soil, and Ei(x) represents the
exponential integral function. An interpretation of rMAX from (5) is that the temperature increase at rMAX
for a total heat step from the cable Qcable will be less than TMAX at tMAX.

3.2 Non-conductive Layers

Most of layers in a cable system present conductive heat transfer. However, sometimes there exist
some layers where convective and/or radiation heat transfer models are necessary. The convection and
radiation heat transfer models are computed using empirical approximations and they are adapted to
conductive heat equivalent models or using equivalent thermal conductivities. In addition, diffusivity
of the air is much greater than of insulation or soil, thus no capacitances are considered for the
non-conductive layers modelling.
Cables located in galleries require a special nonlinear model due to heat convection and radiation
transfers to the environment. Standards [5, 6] provide an expression to obtain an equivalent thermal
3

resistance between cable surface and the environment inside the gallery. This expression is function of
a factor defined by the cable configuration and other cables proximity, the external diameter of the
cable and the temperature gradient between cable surface and the environment inside the gallery.
Defining Q as the total heat transfer from the cable to the environment inside the gallery, the
temperature gradient Ts can be worked out as a non-linear function of Q. This non-linear expression
will be employed to evaluate the ratio of Ts and Q, obtaining an equivalent thermal resistance to be
placed between the outside surface of the cable and the environment.
Cables located in ducts or pipes require special non-linear models due to heat convection transfers
between cables and the air inside, and the ducts or pipes and the air inside. Standards [5, 6] include
expressions to obtain equivalent thermal resistances of those heat convection transfers. To implement
those convection models to the dynamic model, the thermal resistances obtained with the Standards
expressions are considered as thermal resistances of a conductive heat transfer tubular geometry, thus
the value of an equivalent thermal conductivity is worked out. Finally, the duct is modelled as the
insulation and the jacket.

3.3 Electric Model

The dynamic response of conductor and sheath temperatures in insulated cables is closely related to
the active power losses of core conductors. However, the sheath active power losses also play a key
role in the dynamic behaviour of insulated cables. The sheath current of a cable depends on not only
the current through its corresponding conductor, but also on the conductor and sheath currents of the
rest of the cables in the installation. In addition, sheath currents depend on the grounding system of
each cable. To obtain accurate sheath currents, the model presented in the paper includes an electric
model of the installation.
The electric model of the installation consists of an impedance matrix which defines the conductor and
sheath voltage drops as a linear function of the conductor and sheath currents. The impedance matrices
include electrical resistances, and self and mutual inductances. The relationship between conductor
currents and sheath currents is worked out using the impedance matrix and adding additional
conditions depending on the grounding system of each cable.

In case of a single-point grounding system, the corresponding sheath current is zero.

In case of a both-ends grounding system, the corresponding sheath voltage drop is zero.
In case of a cross-bonding grounding system, not only the corresponding sheath voltage drop is
zero, but also the corresponding terms of the line in the impedance matrices must be balanced.

Consequently and by managing the impedance matrices properly, the final result will be a linear
relationship between conductor currents and sheath currents.

4. INSULATED CABLES INSTALLATIONS MODEL RESOLUTION

4.1 System Model
Once all the layers of the installation have been defined, the resulting model is a train of discrete
electrical circuits, as Figure 2 shows. To obtain the differential equations system that governs that
model, Kirchhoff's current law is considered at each node k:
Qv , k = C k

dTk
+ G k 1,k (Tk Tk 1 ) + G k ,k +1 (Tk Tk +1 )
dt

(6)

where G = 1 R represents the thermal conductivity of the corresponding layer. Applying (6) at each
node of the circuit, a system of first order linear ordinary differential equations is obtained, thus can be
solved analytically using eigen analysis.

Figure 2: Discretization of the thermalelectric analogy model.

4.2 Mutual Thermal Influence

The dynamic thermal response of conductors and sheaths are mainly influenced by their corresponding
currents. However, current through other conductors and sheaths play a key role, mainly in the case of
corresponding conductor current remains constant in time. To determine the dynamic thermal
influence of a cable on the temperature of the conductor or the sheath of another cable, it would be
necessary to study the thermal dynamic behaviour of a cable under an outer heat source.
Unfortunately, this partial differential equations system is almost unsolvable. Therefore, some
assumptions have to be made to simplify the problem. In this case, the simplification consists of
considering the area where the influenced cable is placed as the influenced cable is not there.

4.3 Variable Load Profile

To analyze variable load profiles, superposition is applied. For a sequence in time of currents injected
into the cables, each period is analyzed separately. After that, all transient temperature responses
obtained are summed to obtain the complete behaviour of the cable temperatures under the variable
load profile defined.

5. RESULTS
In this section, thermal dynamic analysis is carried out in two different insulated cable installations.
Both installations have been considered with different grounding systems, number of lines and type of
emplacement (directly buried, duct, gallery, etc.). Since the accuracy of the model was illustrated in
[3] compared with finite elements models, the results presented are focused in comparing critical times
under overload. For each scenario, a current step such the 120% of the rating is reached has been
applied, thus the dynamic responses of conductor and sheath temperatures are obtained. Defining
critical time as the time needed to reach the maximum allowed temperature, the different critical times
are compared.

5.1 20 kV Installations
The first cable system studied consists of cables RHZ1-2OL (S) 12/20 1x240 KAl+H16 at 20 kV. The
grounding system considered is both ends. Two different emplacements are considered: Duct directly
buried and gallery. The former consists of the three phases grouped in trefoil under one duct with a
diameter of 160 mm, buried at a depth of 680 mm. In case of more than one line, separation between
terns is 200 mm. Figure 3 details those emplacements.
Different starting currents of operation have been taken into account. As maximum allowed
temperatures, 90C has been considered for conductors and 85C for sheaths. Table 1 shows the
current rating IMAX of each configuration considered, and the critical times obtained from an initial
current of 70% and 90% of the corresponding current rating IMAX. Current ratings in Table 1 have been
worked out the continuous models algorithm described in [3]. It is important to remark the fact that in
Table 1 results on gallery are equal considering either one or two lines in the installation. This fact is
due to the mutual thermal influence between lines in a gallery is negligible. From Table 1 it can be
seen that when the installation is located in free air (gallery), the current rating is greater than in the
case of a buried installation. However, the critical time is lower. Therefore, the free air emplacement
5

a)

b)

c)

Figure 3: Emplacements details for 20 kV installations: a) duct directly buried (one line), b) duct directly buried (two
lines), and c) gallery

allows carrying more power through the cables, but in case of overload, the buried emplacement takes
more time to reach its maximum allowed temperature.
Table 1: 20 kV installations critical times

IMAX [A]

Lines Emplacement

Duct directly buried

Gallery
Duct directly buried
Gallery

1
2

370
463
313
463

Critical Time [min]

from 70% of IMAX from 90% of IMAX
46.5
27.0
29.6
12.2
76.5
43.5
29.6
12.2

As an example, Figure 4 depicts temperature behaviour for the two lines duct directly buried
emplacement, considering a starting point of 70% of IMAX. Figure 4-a corresponds with conductor
temperatures and Figure 4-b with sheath temperatures. As Figure 4 shows, the critical time of
76.5 minutes is defined by the sheath temperatures (maximum allowed temperature of 85C). This fact
is due to the both ends grounding system, since it implies high sheath currents and thus a great heat
dissipation in the sheaths.
b)

80

85

75
Temperature (C)

90

phase R
phase S
phase T

70
65
60

Temperature (C)

a)

phase R
phase S
phase T

80
75
70
65
60
55

55
0

10

20

30

40

50
60
Time (min)

70

80

90

100

10

20

30

40

50
60
Time (min)

70

80

90

100

Figure 4: Temperatures behaviour for the 2 lines duct directly buried scenario (from 70% of IMAX): a) conductors and
b) sheaths.

5.2 45 kV Installations
The second cable system studied in this section consists of cables RHZ1-2OL (S) 26/45 1x400
KCu+H165 at 45 kV. Three grounding systems have been considered: both ends, single point and
cross bonding. For this second installation, four different emplacements have been studied: Duct under
backfill, duct directly buried, directly buried and gallery. In this case, the emplacements under duct
consist of one duct with a diameter of 160 mm per cable, in trefoil disposition and buried at a depth of
1012 mm. For the directly buried emplacement, the depth is 858 mm. In case of more than one line,
separation between terns is 600 mm.
6

As in previous section, different starting currents of operation have been taken into account. As
maximum allowed temperatures, 90C has been considered for conductors and 85C for sheaths. Table
2 shows the current rating IMAX of each configuration considered, and the critical times obtained from
an initial current of 50% and 70% of the corresponding current rating IMAX. Current ratings in Table 2
have been also worked out the continuous models algorithm described in [3]. Finally, as in Table 1,
results on gallery are equal considering either one or two lines in the installation due to the mutual
thermal influence between lines in a gallery is negligible.
Table 2: 45 kV installations critical times

Lines Emplacement

Duct under backfill

Duct directly buried
Directly buried
Gallery
Duct under backfill
Duct directly buried
Directly buried
Gallery

IMAX [A]
507
494
604
730
446
432
536
730

Both Ends
Critical Time [min]
from 50% from 70%
25128.0 10262.5
42576.0 17912.5
3072.0
1325.0
69.0
53.3
19440.0 10325.0
34128.0 18487.5
8184.0
4125.0
69.0
53.3

IMAX [A]
725
709
688
814
649
630
618
814

Single Point
Critical Time [min]
from 50% from 70%
17568.0
6400.0
29328.0 11037.5
2664.0
1100.5
68.0
52.0
14544.0
6962.5
25344.0 12350.0
6768.0
3112.0
68.0
52.0

As in the 20 kV installations, Table 2 shows that the free air emplacement allows carrying more power
through the cables, but in case of overload, the buried emplacement takes more time to reach its
maximum allowed temperature. Considering only buried installations, the directly buried has greater
current ratings. However, the critical times are much greater in the case of installations under duct.

6. CONCLUSIONS
This paper has presented a method to model the dynamic behaviour of insulated cables from the
thermal point of view. The model is based on the thermal-electrical analogy, thus each annular layer of
the cable is modelled by a thermal resistance, a thermal capacitance and a current source. Non
conductive heat transfer models are also considered using equivalent thermal conductivities. In
addition, a full electric model of the installation is considered to obtain precise sheath currents,
depending on the type of sheath grounding system has been selected.
The resulting model consists of a linear electric circuit, directly solved using eigen analysis. Dynamic
thermal influence of a cable on the temperature of the conductor or the sheath of another cable is also
considered. In addition, since the resulting electric circuits are linear, superposition theorem has been
applied to deal with dynamic load profiles.
In order to check the performance of the method, a set of actual underground installation has been
analyzed, considering different grounding systems, numbers of lines in the installation and different
emplacements. Results obtained shows that the free air emplacement allows carrying more power
through the cables, but in case of overload, the buried emplacement takes more time to reach its
maximum allowed temperature. In the case of buried installations, the directly buried has greater
current ratings than under duct installations, but with much lower critical times.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] V. Pashkis and H. Baker, "A Method for Determining the Steady-State Heat Transfer by Means
of an Electrical Analogy", ASME Transactions, vol. 104, pp. 105-110, 1942.
[2] T. J. R. Hughes, The Finite Element Method Linear static and Dynamic Finite Element
Analysis, Dover Publications, 2000.
7

[3] F. M. Echavarren, L. Rouco, E. Navarro, J. P. Fernndez, and A. Gonzlez, "Computation of the

Current Rating in Underground Installations with Multiple Cables", presented at CIGRE session
2008, Paris, France, Aug, 2008.
[4] J. H. Neher and M. H. McGrath, "The Calculation of the Temperature Rise and Load Capability
of Cable Systems", AIEE Transactions Part III - Power Aparatus and Systems, vol. 76, pp. 752772, Oct 1957.
[5] IEC Standard 60287, "Electric Cable - Calculation of the Current Rating", 2004.
[6] IEEE Standard 835, "IEEE Standard Insulated cable Ampacity Tables", 1994.
[7] G. J. Anders, Rating of electric Insulated cables: Ampacity Computations for Transmission,
Distribution, and Industrial Applications, IEEE Press / McGraw Hill, 1997.
[8] CIGRE Committe 21, "Computer Method for the Calculation of the Response of Single-Core
Cables to a Step Function Thermal Transient", Study Committe 21 Paper, 1977.
[9] J. H. Neher, "The Transient Temperature Rise of Buried Cable Systems", IEEE Transactions on
Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. 83, pp. 102-114, Feb 1964.
[10] IEC Standard 60853, "Electric Cable - Calculation of the Cyclic and Emergency Current Rating
of Cables", 1994.
[11] F. M. Echavarren, L. Rouco, and A. Gonzlez, "Dynamic Thermal Modeling of Isolated Cables",
presented at 17th Power System Computation Conference (PSCC'11), Stockholm, Sweden, Aug
2011.
[12] T. A. Short, Electric Power Distribution Handbook, CRC Press, 2004.
[13] E. Kreyszig, Advanced Engineering Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, 1979.
[14] J. W. Demmel, Applied Numerical Linear Algebra, SIAM, 1997.
[15] F. P. Incropera, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, John Wiley & Sons, 1990.
[16] R. Haberman, Applied Partial Differential Equations, Prentice-Hall, 1987.
[17] W. E. Boyce and R. C. DiPrima, Elementary Differential Equations and Boundary Value
Problems, John Wiley & Sons, 1986.