IOSR Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (IOSR-JEEE)

e-ISSN: 2278-1676,p-ISSN: 2320-3331, Volume 11, Issue 1 Ver. II (Jan. – Feb. 2016), PP 07-23
www.iosrjournals.org

A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an

Existing 33KV HV-UG Power Cable of a Distribution Network
N.Shanmugasundaram¹, R.Vajubunnisa Begum² S. Abdul Kalam³
¹AssociateProf. Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Bhajarang Engineering College,
Thiruvallur , India.
²Associate Prof .Department of Electronics and Communication Science, JBAS College for Women, Chennai
600018, India
³Assistant Prof. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sri Muthukumaran Institute of Technology,Chennai
600069, India

Abstract: The aim of the analysis is to reduce dielectric losses in HV-UG Cable Distribution network system in
an economical way. Since Residential and Industrial developments are getting faster growth rate, the load
demand also gets varied day by day. Now a days, Load duration hours are also critically changed and resulting
heavy voltage fluctuations that create critical issues in Power Quality, Stability and Security. Due to space and
corridor issues, Over Head Lines are getting replaced with Under Ground Cables in heavily populated
industrial areas for safe and easy transmission. But Long cable Power Transmission generates certain
unavoidable losses but it can be minimized by VAR Compensator and also it helps the system to maintain the
voltage profile within limits. In this paper, the total power loss calculation for 24 hours in the existing network
is investigated and installed suitable VAR Compensator for minimizing the power loss in the Network. In this
research analysis, using ETAP modeling results proved that the total power saving per day was nearly equal to
2471 KW. Hence the practical approach was good agreement.
Keywords: Power cable, Cable Parameters, power factor calculation, VAR compensator, power loss, ETAP
modeling

I. Introduction
High Voltage power cable is widely used in power system industry in all over the world. The effective
application of power cable has extensively increased in the last few decades. At present, the power cable
manufacturing industry provides reliable quality in manufacturing with newly advanced technologies on
considering the increasing load demand and customer satisfaction. The typical life of high voltage power cable
design can withstand 50- 80 years. Most of the power cable and extra high voltage underground - power cable
(EHV-UG Cable) were increasing the failure of fault, the aging of the cable, range of input supply, loading of
the cable, mismatch of load, spacing between conductor wires and touching of the cable. During the operation of
Power cable, the high AC current transmission is not evenly disposed throughout the cable length and cross
sectional area of the cable. Hence the power cable gets loaded with high heat which will be disputed the total
length of the cable and operates quietly in order to calculate sheath circulating loss and sheath circulating eddy
current loss. This assembly is comprised to measure total losses for the Power cable in connection with the
inductive load like induction motor. The non-uniform distribution sheath current, voltage between sheath to
ground and sheath to conductor are significantly affecting the total losses of the power cable, the power cable is
normally covered with the metallic sheath whereas the sheath is coated with high insulating layer to protect and
prevent the cable core from the mechanical damage and moisture. The different factors affecting the sheath
losses in the single core cable are studied in the paper [2]. The electrostatic field is enclosed between the
conductor and sheath have been presented in the technical literature[3].The middle of the power are non-
uniform distribution of power loss and dielectric loss which produced due to the account of proximate effect
are studied in the paper [4]. The dielectric loses or insulation losses are effectively very small and it can be
neglected in the range of more than 66kv [5]. The eddy current losses which present inside the solid toroid are
perfectly calculated [6] under loading conditions, the main heat sources inside the cable such as eddy current
losses and joule losses which are very critical for calculating thermal distribution and capacity of UG cable are
studied in the article [7]. The different factors affecting the losses in the cable due to the circulating current
flowing through the cable sheath. A detailed mathematical calculation is used for the computation of cable
sheath loss found in [8- 10]. The power cable screen sheath of a conductor induced the switching current and
voltage to generate undesirable power loss due to the skin and proximate effect. It is our duty to provide safe
with quality and required uninterrupted quantity of power to a consumer who pays money for electricity. For
that we need power quality in Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution. For Transmission of Power,
OHL takes major role in Long Transmission. However in Urban Areas, Underground cable distribution system
is an alternative solution to distribute electrical energy in the heavy populated cities. This UG cable system
DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 7 | Page
 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

helps the city to view neat, clean and also safe. However, UG-Cable is costlier than underground cable. This
paper mainly focuses the detailed study of the power cable for different losses and practical approaches towards
loss reduction technique are implemented and the results compared using ETAP Simulation

II. Cable Losses Calculation:

Figure 1 Power cable structure

The numerical AC power losses of a single layer and double layer in the power cable between
conductors are calculated by FEM-based models. The offset DC current does not contribute to the power losses
in AC when total currents become lesser than the critical currents. The power losses depend on the magnitude
of the AC quantity are proved in the literature [11]. An underground power cable is constructed by a dielectric
material sheath inside the conductor. Hence the electric current flows the power cable gets energized by voltage
and current due to the large capacitance effect between the conductor to conductor and conductor to sheath that
produced a heat around the power cable. The sheath eddy current losses are inversely proportional to sheath
resistance, and cable conductor resistivity, the conductor spacing is proportional to the conductor current in the
UG power cable whereas the sheath circulating losses are directly proportional to the conductor spacing and
current flowing through the conductor. The thermal effect increases throughout the power cable whereas the
generation and dissipation of heat along the power cable leads to different losses for which occurred, are known
as conductor losses, dielectric losses and sheath losses.[11 12]. Dielectric losses are occurred in the power cable.
It is classified as Voltage-dependent and current-dependent components.

2.1 Voltage-Dependent Power Losses

The supply voltage is applied across a perfect dielectric which leads no dielectric loss in
practice. Then the perfect dielectric cannot produce dielectric losses in the AC power cable which are
proportional to phase voltage, frequency, capacitance to neutral and power factor. Voltage-dependent
power losses are caused by polarization effects within the main insulation and is calculated by
Watts/Km (1)
Where
V0 = Operating voltage in KV
ω = Angular frequency
C0 = capacitance to neutral in µF/km
While in the three core power cable, the dielectric losses are 3PD in watts. The dielectric power loss
factors tan δ is varied from cable insulations which dependent on supply frequency, temperature and
supply voltage

2.2 Current-Dependent Power Losses

The current-dependent losses are basically dependents on Ohmic conductor losses and sheath losses
which includes sheath eddy current loss and sheath circuit loss. These losses are accounted through skin effect
and proximity effect.

2.2.1. Ohmic conductor losses

The ohmic losses depend on the ac current flowing through the power cable, the resistance of the
conductor material and temperature effect of the cable conductor. The ohmic losses or variable losses are
calculated by R I2. The conductor resistance R stated for 200C (R0) must be converted to the operating
temperature θ of the cable:

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 8 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

(Ω/km) (2)
Where
α= 0.0393 for Copper
α= 0.0403for Aluminium
The conductor cross-section and admissible DC resistances at 200C 22(R0) corresponds to the standard series
pursuant to IEC 60228.

2.2.2 Sheath losses

The UG power cables are equipped with metal sheaths or screens that must be earthed adequately.
Sheath losses occurred through the cable mainly the Circulating currents in the system and Eddy currents in the
cable sheath which applicable only for tubular types power cable. The sheath currents are caused by induced
sheath voltage. The ac current flowing through cable conductor and sheath, for which the EMF induced by each
end of the cable are bounded from closed loop. It cuts magnetic line of flux in the sheath and depends upon the
spacing between the sheath return path current through the earth. The sheath of a single-core cable is bonded to
earth or to other sheaths at more than one point, where a current flows in the sheath due to the EMF induced by
the AC. conductor current by „transformer‟ action. This is because the sheath and return path to each end of the
sheath is bonded to form a closed loop cut by the flux associated with the current in the conductor. The
magnitude of the flux which cuts the sheath is dependent on the size of the loop which in turn, is dependent on
the spacing between the cables or between the sheath and the mean return path of the current through the earth
or other medium. The total sheath losses in the power cable are calculated to measure the sum of the sheath
current losses and sheath eddy current losses.
The sheath current losses per phase are calculated as

(3)

The sheath Eddy current losses per phase are calculated as

W/Km (4)
The sheath total losses per phase are calculated as

W/Km (5)
Where

I =conductor current in amps

ω=2 multiplied by frequency
dm = mean diameter of the sheath (m)
D = distance between cable center (m)
Rs= sheath resistance (Ω/km)

The voltage induced in the sheath is

Where I = Conductor current (A)

The mutual inductance M between conductor and sheath is
given by
 2D 
M = 0.2 loge   (mH/km) (6)
 dm 
The sheath current (Is) is calculated from the below equation

(7)

Where Rs is the sheath resistance (Ω/km). The sheath current losses per phase is given by

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 9 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

2
2
I 2 X m Rs
Is Rs = 2 2
(watt/km) (9)
Rs + Xm
2
I 2 X m Rs
Is2Rs = 2
(watt/km) (10)
Z S
ZS= sheath impedance of the cable (Ω/km)
= sheath current in amps
Rs= sheath resistance Ω/km

III. Power Cable Parameter Calculation:

3.1. Cable Inductance
The inductance (L) of a 3-core cable comprises two parts such as the self-inductance of the conductor
and the mutual inductance between the conductor to conductor. The inductance is given by

L = K + 0.2 loge (mH/km) (11)

K = constant relating to the conductor formation (table 1)
S = axial spacing between conductors within the cable (mm),
Or axial spacing between conductors of a trefoil group
of single-core cables (mm), or = 1.26 phase spacing
for a flat formation of three single-core cables (mm)
d = conductor diameter for a shaped designs or the diameter of
an equivalent circular conductor (mm)
For 2-core, 3-core and 4-core cables, the inductance obtained from the formula should be multiplied by 1.02 if
the conductors are circular or sector-shaped and by 0.97 for 3-core oval conductors.
Table 1 Typical values for constant K for different stranded conductors (at 50 Hz)[29]

Table 1
Number of wires in conductor K
3 0.0778
7 0.0642
19 0.0554
37 0.0528
61 and over 0.0514
1 (solid) 0.0500
Hollow-core conductor, 12 mm duct 0.0383

3.2. Cable Impedance

In this method, the cable impedance parameter is calculated from the following formula
 Der 
Z selfimpedanceconductor  Rdc  Rer  jk ff log    / km
 GMR pc  (12)
6
1000 (17.8e )
Rdc   cu  2
/m
S cu  
d
n  
2 (13)
Rer    f / km
2 4

k ff  0.173522 f  / km
GMR pc  r. exp(  r / 4)
Der  1650  cu / 2f m
 cu  17.8e 9  / m
Zsp is the self-impedance of the phase conductor

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 10 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

RDC is the dc resistance of the phase conductor,

Rer is the resistance of the earth return path,
Kff is the frequency factor
GMRpc is the geometric mean radius of phase
conductor,
r is the radius of the conductor
µr is the relative permittivity of the conducting
material.
f is the frequency in Hertz
Der is the distance of equivalent earth return path,
 cu is the resistivity of phase conductors
n is the number of strands in the phase conductors
f is the nominal frequency of the cable,
d is the diameter of one strand in meter
 Der 
Z selfimpedancescreen  Rx  Re  jK ff log   / km
 GMRx  (14)
1000
Rx    / km
s
r r
GMRx  ext int
2
Where
Zss is the self-impedance of the screen conductor.
Rx is the dc resistance of the phase screen conductor
GMRx is the geometric mean radius of phase screen insulator ρ is the resistivity of the conductor,
rext is the external radius of phase and screen insulator, rint is the internal radius of the phase to screen
insulator The mutual impedance between the phase and screen is calculated as follows
D 
Z mutualphas escreen  Rer  jk ff log  er ( / km)
 Dn  (15)
Where
Zps is the mutual impedance between the phase and screen conductor Dn is the distance between the
phase conductor and mean radius at phase screen insulator.

The mutual impedance for n phase conductor is calculated as shown below where n is greater than one
 D 
Z mutualpha sec onductor  Rer  jk ff log  er  / km
 GMD  (16)
1 d xy
n
GMD  n

Where
Zxx is the mutual impedance between the phase conductors,
n is the total number of conductors.
GMD is the geometric mean distance of the phase conductor set to all other conductors. It is
represented by a symbol Dm. Dm is the Distance between the phase conductor and set of cables.

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 11 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

3.3. Cable Capacitance Calculation

Figure 2 cable capacitance coupling

Fig Three core capacitance model

Medium voltage and high voltage cable may be single-core cable with an earthed metallic layer around
the core or 3-core cable with an earthed metallic screen around each core. In both cases, the electrostatic field is
constant within the earthed screen and is substantially radial. Power cable capacitance between conductor to
conductor and conductor to sheath are calculated as follows
C cs  Capacitance between conductor to conductor
C cc  Capacitance between conductor to sheath
The potential of the star point terminal is nearly equal to zero. The equivalent capacitance between the star point
and core is C CN  3C cc the capacitance of the each conductor to neutral
C N  C CS  3C cc (17)
CB C A
CCC   (18)
2 6
CA
CN 
3 (19)
C C C  C C
C N  A  3 B  A   3 B  A
3  2 6  2 6 (20)
The capacitance between conductor 1, 2, and third conductor to sheath is
CCC CCS 3CCC CCC 1
 CCC      3CCC  CCS 
2 2 2 2 2 (21)

IV. Calculation Of Sending End And Receiving End Voltages (In Terms Of Real Powers In
transmission Line)

Figure 4 Single line diagram

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 12 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

Figure 5 Vector Diagram

VR= Voltage at receiving end,

VS=Voltage at sending end,
RL=Line Resistance,
XL=Line Reactance,
ZL=Line Impedance,
IL= Line current,
θ = phase angle between V and I at R End
δ= phase angle between VRE andVSE

VSE2= + (22)

(23)

= (24)

(25)

(26)

(27)
Hence the arithmetic difference between sending end and receiving end is given below

(28)

If R resistance of the line neglected (29)

(30)

When X>>R, (31)

The power flow between sending end and receiving end terminal is calculated by a transmission angle .The
reactive power is determined by difference between sending end and receiving end voltage

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 13 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

V. Gauss-Seidel Method Of Algorithm

Load flow studies involve solution of the equation

(32)
Eliminating the ln in the above equation (32)

For each node n = 1 to r (33)

(34)
Calculate V *n
*

V *nk Y
* *
n 1 (35)
Y V S
r
   
* n nk k n
V n * * *
Y k 1Y nn
k  n 1
nn V nY nn
(36) *

V *k p 1Y nk Y nkVk* p
* *
n 1

V
* p 1
   *
P r

*
 n
*
n
Y k 1 Y nn
V npY k  n 1
nn
nn

V * voltage at n node, V n 1 voltage at p+1 node

n n
(37)
At p+1th iteration cycle (36) can be evaluated. Qn can be calculated from Eqn.( 37) by adding with the voltage
magnitudes

= (38)
Eqn (38) is solved for Qn and this value is substituted into Eqn. (37) to give the improved estimate for the
generator node voltage

VI. Indian Power System Standard:

Voltage variations occur in the power grid is due to the mismatch in the reactive power between
MVAR-demand and MVAR-available. Any variations in the parameters of voltage and frequency below the
operating limits considered as unhealthy for power grid and restoration steps will be taken to make the power
grid healthy in Electrical Power System Network. The range of operating frequencies and voltages are given in
the tables.

Table 2 Indian Frequency Permissible limits

S. No. HZ-Normal Hz-min Hz-max
1 50Hz 49.2Hz 50.3Hz

Table 3 Indian Steady State Voltage Permissible limit:

KV-Normal KV-Max KV-Min
S. No.
(kV rms) (kV rms) (kV rms)
1 765 KV 800 KV 728 KV
2 400 kV 420 KV 380 KV
3 220 kV 245 KV 198 KV
4 132 kV 145 KV 122 KV
5 110 KV 121 KV 99 KV
6 66 KV 72 KV 60 KV
7 33 KV 36 KV 30 KV

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 14 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

VII. Method Of System Analysis:

The above method of system analysis is carried out by a world well known and recognized software of
ETAP USA. The systematic calculation has done from the bottom level of the project preliminary study like
visiting the proposed 132/33KV substation and also along the root marking of all the cables to study the soil
resistivity. The geographical data collection of various temperatures and also rain recorded in particular site
location which is based on the above data. The following design activity carried out is as follows .Preparation of
load schedule, estimation of power demand and design of the single line diagram (SLD) for sizing the
transformer breaker cable etc. Project Designing in ETAP Load Flow Analysis was done at four Levels

Figure 6

VIII. Result And Discussion

Indian standard has fault current level limitation in various voltage levels. The Fault current level for
LV -0.440KV system is 50KA for 1 second, the Fault current level for 3.3kv and 6.6 KV system are approved as
40KA. Moreover the Fault current level for 11kv ,33kv and above are strictly restricted only upto 25 KA The
impartment equipment involved in this project is shown in SLD. Since isolator circuit breaker and other
protective device are not contributing in the circuit operation for this analysis, those devices are completely
discarded. Our main aim of research is to minimize the losses in the major power system elements like cable,
transformer and load so that our power system SLD has been simplified as per the requirement of technical
paper submission. The technical parameter/dated/equipment /element required for analysis of the system is
tabulated as follows

Table 4
Utility(or)Grid
Input voltage 33kv
FAULT current 25KA
Short circuit MVA 5716
X/R ratio 14

Table 5
Transformer
Primary Input voltage 132kv
Secondary output voltage 33kv
Reactive power 16mva
X/R ratio 18.6
Impedance 8%

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 15 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

Table6
Power cable
Cable model 3core
Conductor size 120sqmm
Conductor material Copper
Cable capacity 36 kv
Insulation XLPE
Distance 10km

Table 7
Load parameter
Type of load Motor 15mva
Power 12 mw
Reactive power 9 mva
Power factor 80%
Current rating 262.4A
Locked rotor current 650%
X‟‟D 15.3%
Type of connection Delta

The above mentioned data were entered in ETAP and the different study cases were analysed. The worst
and best scenario wizards are generated in ETAP. Load flow analysis were carried out under the following four
impartment worst scenarios based on the different loading conditions and 24 Hours Events Recorded . Motor
Operated on OLTC was provided in transformer for AVR and also Shunt Compensator provided for
compensating losses at light load and peak load conditions. The table (8) gives the Comparative Analyses
statement for 24 Hours. Table (9) Shows Loss analysis calculation for four event and Table (10) indicates the
total loss calculation analysis for 24 Hours. Figure (11) shows the Power loss comparison in the entire network
system with and without compensator. Figure (12) shows the total Power loss variation in transformer with and
without compensator. Figure 13 shows the total Power loss in line bus 3 with and without compensator.Figure14
shows the Power loss variation in cable with and without compensator Figure 15 shows the Power loss in the
comparison line bus 2 with and without compensator

8, 1 Analyzing Very Worst conditions and Selecting for 4 Worst scenarios

EVENT NO 1
NIGHT 1AM

Figure 7with and without Compensator

Event-1 occurs at Night 1.00 am ETAP Model is recorded

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 16 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

Without compensator
BUS 1 Sending End KV is found 110% of 132KV (145.2KV)
BUS2 Sending End KV is found 100.08%0f33KV (33.026KV)
BUS 3 Sending End KV is found 98.88% 0f 33KV (32.63KV)
Loading End is found only 40% of 15MVA. (6MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in Transformer
0.009MW + j0.163MVAR and cable losses are recorded 0.059MW - j0.601MVAR

With compensator Capacitor bank added 2.33 MVAR

BUS1 Sending End KV is found 110% of 132KV (145.2KV)
BUS2 Sending End KV is found 100.07%0f 33KV(33.023KV)
BUS3 Sending end KV is found 99.12% 0f 33KV (32.70KV)
Loading End is found only 40% of 15MVA. (6MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in Transformer
0.006MW + j0.119MVAR and cable losses are recorded 0.042MW- j0.614MVAR

EVENT NO 5
MORNING at 5AM

Figure 8 with and without Compensator

Event-5 occurred at 5am in the morning for which ETAP Model was recorded

Without compensator
BUS 1 Sending End KV is found 100% of 132KV (132.2KV)
BUS 2 Sending End KV is found 100.02%0f 33KV (33.06KV)
BUS 3 Sending End KV is found 97.86% 0f 33KV (32.29KV)
Loading End is found only 70% of 15MVA.(10.5MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in Transformer
0.029MW + j0.576MVAR and cable losses are recorded0.191MW - j0.509MVAR

With compensator Capacitor bank added 5.1 MVAR

BUS 1 Sending End KV is found 100 % of 132KV (145.2KV)
BUS 2 Sending End KV is found 99.99%0f 33KV (32.96KV)
BUS3 Sending End KV is found 98.31% 0f 33KV (.32.44KV)
Loading End is found only 70 % of 15MVA.13.5MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in Transformer
0.02MW +j0.367 MVAR and cable losses is0.127MW - j0.552MVAR

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 17 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

EVENT NO8
MORNING at 8AM

Figure9 With and without Compensator

Event- 8 occurs atmorning 8.00am ETAP Model is recorded

Without compensator
BUS 1 Sending End KV is found 90% of 132 KV (118.8KV)
BUS 2 Sending End KV is found 95.47 %0f 33 KV (31.50KV)
BUS3 ending End KV is found 92.03 % 0f 33KV (30,36KV)
Loading End is found only 90% of 15MVA. (13.5MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in
Transformer 0.054MW +j1.012 MVAR and cable losses is0.357MW - j0.339MVAR

With compensator Capacitor bank added 7.09 MVAR

BUS 1 Sending End KV is found 90 % of 132 KV (118.82KV)
BUS2 Sending End KV is found 99.07%0f 33KV (32.69KV)
BUS 3Sending End KV is found97.03%0f 33KV (32.O9KV)
Loading End is found only 90% of 15MVA. (13.5MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in
Transformer 0.033MW + j0.622MVAR and cable losses are 0.215W - j0.482MWAR

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 18 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

EVENT NO 19
MORNING at 19 PM

Figure 10 with and without Compensator

Event–19occured at 19.00 pm in the evening for which ETAP Model was recorded

Without compensator
BUS 1Sending End KV is found 90% of 132KV (118.8KV)
BUS 2Sending End KV is found 94.85 %0f 33KV (31.18 KV)
BUS3Sending End KV is found 91.53 % 0f 33KV (30.20KV)
Loading End is found 100 % of 15MVA.(15MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in Transformer
0.069MW + j1.284MVAR and cable losses is0.451MW - j0.268MVAR

With compensator Capacitor bank added 8.055 MVAR

BUS 1 Sending End KV is found 90 % of 132KV (118.8KV)
BUS 2 Sending End KV is found 98.96 %0f 33KV (32.65KV).
BUS 3 Sending end KV is found 96.68 %0f 33KV (31.94KV)
Loading End is found only 100% of 15MVA. (15MVA). At this moment, the losses are recorded in Transformer
0.042MW +j0.773MVARand cable losses are 0.267MW - j0.0445MVAR

Table: 8 Comparative Analyses statement 24 Hours

With out-Compensator With- Compensator
Event MW PF
Bus1 Bus2 Bus3 Bus1 Bus2 Bus3
kV% kV% kV% kV% kV% kV%
1 110 100.8 98.8 110 100.7 99.12 4.9 0.851
2 108 99.98 98.39 108 99.85 98.64 6.3 0.839
3 106 100.1 98.27 106 100.3 98.94 7.3 0.834
4 102 102 100.3 102 100.4 98.52 8.2 0.83
5 100 100.2 97.86 100 99.99 98.31 8.6 0.829
6 98 100.3 97.48 98 100.3 98.23 11.1 0.823
7 104 100.1 97.15 104 99.9 97.77 11.8 0.822
8 90 95.47 92.52 90 99.07 97.03 11.2 0.821
9 95 99.83 97.02 95 99.73 97.7 11.1 0.823

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 19 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

10 96 99.95 96.97 96 100.1 98.01 11.8 0.822

11 95 99.83 97.02 95 99.75 97.73 11.1 0.823

12 93 98.72 95.71 93 100.3 98.22 11.8 0.821

13 90 95.47 92.52 90 99.07 99.03 11.2 0.821

14 90 99.83 97.02 90 99.8 97.79 11.2 0.823

15 90 94.98 91.73 90 98.97 96.74 12.2 0.819
16 90 94.91 91.63 90 98.95 96.69 12.3 0.819
17 90 94.85 91.53 90 98.96 96.68 12.5 0.819
18 90 94.85 91.53 90 98.96 96.68 12.5 0.819
19 90 94.85 91.53 90 98.96 96.68 12.5 0.819
20 95 100 96.88 95 99.62 97.35 12.4 0.821
21 98 99.99 97.02 98 100.3 98.13 11.8 0.822
22 100 100.3 97.53 100 99.7 97.66 11.1 0.823
23 105 99.97 97.48 105 99.78 97.97 9.9 0.826
24 110 100.3 98.42 110 99.87 98.48 7.2 0.834

Table:9 Losses calculation Analyses

Event Event KV SendingReceiving End Transformer Loss with Transformer Loss Cable Loss Cable Loss with
No Hours End % Loading out compensation compensation with out ompensation
compensation
1 1 110% 40% 0.009MW + 0.006MW + 0.059MW - 0.042MW -
Hours (145.2KV) (6MVA) j0.163MVAR j0.119MVAR j0.601MVAR j0.614MVAR
5 5 100% 70% 0.029MW + 0.02MW + 0.191MW - 0.127MW -
Hours (132KV) (10.5MVA) j0.576MVAR j0.367MVAR j0.509MVAR j0.552MVAR
8 8 90% 90% (3.5MVA) 0.054MW + 0.033MW + 0.357MW - 0.215W -
Hours (118.8KV) j1.012MVAR j0.622MVAR j0.339MVAR j0.482MVAR
19 19 90% 100% 0.069MW + 0.042MW + 0.451MW - 0.267MW -
Hours (118.8KV) (15MVA) j1.284MVAR j0.773MVAR j0.268MVAR j0.0445MVAR
Table 10 Total losses calculation analysis for 24 Hours

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 20 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

Figure 11 Total Power loss with and without compensator

Figure 12 Power loss in Transformer With and without compensator

Figure 13 Power loss comparision after and befor compensator bus no 3

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 21 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

Figure 14 Power loss in cable With and without Compensator

Figure 15 Power loss comparision after and befor compensator bus no 2

IX. Conclusion:
This Paper described the total Power loss compensation in the UG/HV Power cable. The power Loss
was increased in the light load scenarios. Based on the analysis, the power loss in UG/HV 33KV long power
cable was reached at the lowest level by optimizing the reactive power compensation.
The ETAP SLD simplified in different approaches for an efficient technique to compute total power
losses. Which are effectively calculated for 24 hours in different peak and worst loading conditions. The total
losses are calculated with and without compensator for a 10kM long three core 33KV XLPE UG power cable.
The proposed methodology has been verified as bus 1, bus2, and bus3 for 24 hours in loading the power cable.
The total power losses were calculated and also tabulated. The four methods of scenario event have been
analyzed and predicted the losses in the research paper. Based on the description, it was investigated with and
without adding the compensator on the load side. The total power losses were recorded as 7678 kW without
compensator and with compensator was 5207 kW. The total power was saving per day equal to 2471 kW. The
ETAP simulated results were compared with 24 hours measured data. It was shown good agreement for both
practical and simulated measurements.

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 22 | Page

 A Practical Approach of Reducing Dielectric Losses and Calculation of an Existing 33KV HV-UG…

Reference
[1]. B. Novák1, L. Koller1 and I. Berta1 “ Loss reduction in cable sheathing”. European Association for the Development of Renewable
Energies,Environment and Power Quality (EA4EPQ) Granada (Spain), 23th to 25th March, 2010
[2]. Osama ElsayedGouda,“AdelAbd-eltwabFarag“Factors Affecting the Sheath Losses in Single-Core Underground Power Cables
with Two-Points Bonding Method” International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE) Vol. 2, No. 1, February
2012, pp. 7~16 ISSN: 2088-8708
[3]. Abdel-Slam M., Anis H., El-Morshedy A, Radwan R “High Voltage Engineering Theory and Practice” “ by Marcel Dekker, Inc.,
New York, 2000
[4]. NikšaKovač, George Anders, Fellow, IEEE, TomislavKilić, Member, IEEE “Sheath Loss Factors Taking into Account the
Proximity Effect for a Cable Line in a TouchingFlat Formation” 2013 IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery
[5]. S. K. Kanikella, “Electric field and thermal properties of dry cable usingF EM,” TELKOMNIKA, Vol. 11, pp. 2217-2230, May
2013.
[6]. DARIUSZ KOTERAS “Calculation of eddy current losses using the electro dynamic similarity laws “Archives Of Electrical
Engineering Vol. 63(1), pp. 107-114 (2014)
[7]. F. De León, “Major factors affecting cable ampacity,” Power Engineering Society General Meeting, IEEE, pp. 6, 2006
[8]. G.J Anders,Rating of electric power cable, NewYork, IEEEPress 1997
[9]. G.J Anders “Rating of electric power cable in unfavorable thermal environment” New Jersey IEEE Press/Wiley,2005
[10]. J.S.Barret and G.J Anders “Circulating current and hysteresis losses in screen, sheath and armour with IEC standard
287‟‟IEEE.Proc.sci.Meastechnicalvol 144no 3pp101-110 may 1997
[11]. Y.H. Ma, J. Xu, Z. Yao, Z.Y. Li, Z. Jin, Z. Hong, and K. Ryu „‟A Study on AC Losses of HTS Pentagonal Conductors Consisting
of 2G Wires Carrying DC Offset Transport Current‟‟ 1051-8223
[12]. Chae-Kyun Jung*, Jong-Beom Lee† and Ji-Won Kang** “Sheath Circulating Current Analysis of a Crossbonded Power Cable
Systems”Journal of Electrical Engineering & Technology, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 320~328, 2007
[13]. IEC 62067, “Power cables with extruded insulation and the accessories for rated voltages above 150kV, Test methods and
requirements”
[14]. Dong Dai, Mingli Hu, Ling Luo “Calculation of Thermal Distribution and Ampacity for Underground Power Cable System by
Using Electromagnetic-Thermal Coupled Model”2014 Electrical Insulation Conference, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 8 to 11
June 2014
[15]. IvicaStevanovic´, Bernhard WunschGian Luigi Madonna StanislavSkibin “High-Frequency Behavioral Multiconductor Cable
Modeling for EMI Simulations in Power Electronics” IEEE Transactions On Industrial Informatics, Vol. 10, No. 2, May 2014
[16]. B. Wunsch, S. Skibin, and I. Stevanovic´, “Per-unit-length parameter extraction for lossy multi-conductor power cables,” in Proc.
EPEPS,San Jose, CA, USA, Oct. 27–30, 2013, pp. 1–4.
[17]. B. Wunsch, I. Stevanovic´, and S. Skibin, “Improved accurate high frequency models of multi conductor power cables exploiting
symmetries,” in Proc. EMC Europe, Brugge, Belgium, Sep. 2–6, 2013, pp. 332–337
[18]. Ken Kuen-Faat Yuen, and Henry Shu-Hung Chung “A Low-Loss “RL-Plus-C” Filter for Overvoltage Suppression in Inverter-Fed
Drive System With Long Motor Cable” IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO. 4, APRIL 2015
[19]. Yongchun Liang, Zhongjie Wang, Jianye Liu, Xiaoyun Sun “Reduction of Eddy Current Losses in Power Cable Systems Based on
Phase Optimization” 978-1-4244-4813-5/10/$25.00 ©2010 IEEE
[20]. W.Rueger, G.Hosemann, “Improvement of Ampacity of Parallel Singlecore Cables by Uninsulated Additional Conductors”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol.5, No.1, pp.33-39, January 1990
[21]. Karady, et.al.,“ A Novel Magnetic Field Management Method for Underground Power Cables”, Electric Power System Research,
Vol.31,No.2, pp.103-110, November 1994
[22]. H. Al-Khalidi, A. Kalam“Reduction in Sub-transmission Loss Using Underground Power Cables” 2008 Australasian Universities
Power Engineering Conference (AUPEC'08)
[23]. 23] R.D. Roservear, “Power cables in 21st century energy development,” Power Engineering Review, IEEE, 20(9), p. 8-10, 2000.
[24]. R. Kyoung-Soo, “An approach to allocate real power losses of transmission lines to individual loads,” TENCON 99. Proceedings
ofthe IEEE Region 10 Conference, 1999.2008
[25]. Jin Geun Kim, A.-Rong Kim, Daewon Kim, Minwon Park, In-Keun Yu, Jeonwook Cho, Ki-DeokSim,Seokho Kim, Jun Kyoung
Lee, and Young-Jin Won “Development of a PSCAD/EMTDC modelComponent for AC Loss Characteristic Analysisof HTS
Power Cable” IEEE Transactions On Applied Superconductivity, Vol. 20, No. 3, June 2010
[26]. Danish Khan, Muhammad Rafiq, Syed FurqanRafique, Idris Khan and Farukh Abbas “Comparison of transmission losses and
voltage drops of GIL(Gas Insulated transmission line ) and overhead transmission lines” 16th International Power Electronics and
Motion Control Conference and Exposition
[27]. N.Shanmugasundaram ,Dr.S.ThangavelR,VajubunnisamBegum ''Modeling Of Three Core Power Cable To Estimate Coupling
Parameters With Overshoot Voltage In Induction Motor- Drives System Using Matlabsimulink '' International Journal of Applied
Engineering Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.29 (2015)
[28]. N.Shanmugasundaram, Dr.S.Thangavel, R.Vajubunnisabegum “Methodology for High Frequency Modeling of Power Cable to
Estimate Reflection phenomenon in Long Fed ASD Induction Motor Drive System” International Journal of Applied Engineering
Research, ISSN 0973-4562 Vol. 10 No.5 (2015)
[29]. G.F Moore and B. C. Ltd, ElectricCables Handbook:Blackwell Science, 1997.
[30]. C.L.Wadhwa, Electrical Power Systems: New Age International, 2006

DOI: 10.9790/1676-11120723 www.iosrjournals.org 23 | Page