1

Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute

Case Studies on Power Cables
Case study - 1
Quality Management of Distribution Cables
Professor Charles Q. Su
( PhD, Fellow IET, SM IEEE, CIGRE A2 )
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
About the workshop instructor
- Prof. Charles Q. Su
Industrial experience
1970-1973 Operations engineer
1974-1978 HV testing engineer
2002-2006 Chief Technologist, Singapore Power (SPPG) Ltd
Research & teaching experiences
1985 Research Associate, University of Western Australia
1990-1991 Lecturer at University of NSW, Australia
1992-2001 Senior Lecturer & Associate Professor, Monash University
2007-now Professor, Chair of Research Committee (EE)
Petroleum Institute, UAE
Membership of professional organisations
Fellow of IET, Senior Member IEEE (91), member of CIGRE SC A2
(Transformer)
2
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
Ron E James & Q. Su Condition Assessment of HV Insulation in Power System
Equipment - IET Power and Energy Series No.53, April 2008
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
Some important issues in distribution cable
management
Causes of distribution cable failure:
1. Damages (road digging, land movement etc)
2. Manufacture defects (material of quality control problems)
3. Poor workmanship (cable joints and terminals)
4. Insulation ageing (water seepage, water treeing etc)
3
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
Condition assessment of distribution cables
Criterion of condition assessment:
1. The total failure rate.
2. Frequency of a type of failure warrantees root cause
analysis.
3. The consequences of failures.
4. Costs of repair or replacement.
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
Cable insulation ageing in the life span
Bathtub curve - Determined from the failure rate change (a number of
the same insulation samples)
Tw Ts
0
Random or slowly increa sing fa ilure ra te
Bur n-in
peri od
Use ful life period We arout
peri od
Ope rating
life
Fail ure
rate
4
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
Background
There are over 3,700 km of 6.6kV cables in a utility. The average
failure rate from 2000 - 2004 was 30 cables per year.
Serious consequences:
1. In-service failures of 6.6kV cables cause local blackout.
2. Due to the time of failure (e.g. at mid-night) and the possible bad
weather conditions at failure (e.g. thunder storm), restoration of
power supply is difficult and could take many hours.
There was an urgent need to reduce the in-service failures.
AGE PROFILE OF DISTRIBUTION CABLES (2004)
0.35% (13.109 km)
9% (323.093 km)
14% (541.152 km)
25% (954.976 km)
36% (1,349.877 km)
15% (583.758 km)
0
6.6kV
Cable Length
: 3,768.647 km
22kV
Cable Length
: 4,948.379 km
21 25 yrs
16 20 yrs
11 15 yrs
6 10 yrs
< = 5 yrs
6% (288.551 km)
13% (668.678 km)
25% (1,218.271 km)
34% (1,694.035 km)
22% (1,078.844 km)
> 30 yrs
26 30 yrs
21 25 yrs
16 20 yrs
11 15 yrs
6 10 yrs
< = 5 yrs
20 40 60 80 100 (%)
0.07% (2.682 km)
19% beyond the
age of 15
27% beyond the
age of 15
5
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
How to reduce the in-service failures of 6.6kV cables?
A. Cable replacements according to their designed life time?
B. HV tests on all cables to flash out incipient faults? (using DC,
AC or VLF)
C. Replace the type of cable joints of high failure rate?
Which one would you prefer if you are the asset manager?
12 Prof. Charles Q. Su
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Cable (XLPE) Cable (PILC) Joint
Y
e
a
r
Categories of 6.6kV Cable Failures
( 2000-2005 )
39
25%
45
28%
76
47%
* Total 160 failures
6
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
Y
e
a
r
Age Profile of Failed 6.6kV XLPE Cables
( 2000-2005 )
Average age is around 20
Implication: XLPE cable insulation is generally reliable within 15 years.
Prof. Charles Q. Su The Petroleum Institute
Age Profile of Failed 6.6kV Cable Joints
( 2000-2005 )
Average 28 years
Implication: Cable joint can fail at any time due to mainly poor workmanship, as
well as bad quality of materials and insulation ageing
7
15 Prof. Charles Q. Su
EXISTING MAINTENANCE TESTS
for 6.6kV cables
Megger measurement
- Resistance
- Comparison between phases
Polarization index (R
10
/R
1
)
16 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Effectiveness of Megger Test
Detect the leakage caused by terminal
contamination (surface crapping resistance)
Water seepage to the joint
Insulation deterioration (ageing), especially
paper/oil cables
8
17 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Megger Test Alone Is Not Conclusive
For example:
Water tree contamination (before electric tree
is established)
Bubbles and unbridged cracks in XLPE or
epoxy insulation
18 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Failures of cables with high megger readings
Case (1)
For example, cable A:
Megger readings 1G/1G/1G on 16 Nov 2005
The circuit failed on 17 Nov 2005 at 6:14am
Also, in this utility a number of 6.6kV cables of
high megger reading failed in the past.
9
19 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Case (2)
A 66kV XLPE cable under a bus stop failed;
It was found that the failure was due to an
early damage caused by sinking an earthing
rod;
Lost about 1/3 of the XLPE insulation
20 Prof. Charles Q. Su
A close look
10
21 Prof. Charles Q. Su
A surprise
It was found that the bus stop was built five years
before the failure.
So, after the bad damage, the poor cable survived
five more years before its insulation broke down;
More surprisingly .
Its insulation resistance was measured three times
during the five years, always giving high megger
readings!
22 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Why megger tests could not detect the
incipient fault (damage)?
XLPE insulation has a very large volume
resistivity of 10
16
.cm.
The damage did not bridge the insulation.
Water trees do not affect insulation
resistance before electric treeing is
established across the electrodes.
11
23 Prof. Charles Q. Su
How to use megger tests effectively?
Comparison of megger readings between
phases;
Trend analysis;
Stability of insulation resistance reading
under dc high voltage.
Add polarisation index measurement in the
analysis (PI = R
10min
/ R
1min
)
Prof. Charles Q. Su
ACTION PLAN VLF tests on selected cables
Selection criteria
Cables with seram joints (more frequent failures)
First leg feeders (important)
Megger readings VLF test is carried out if :
1. M < 50 M or
2. 50 M < M < 200 M and K > 1.5 or
3. 200 M < M < 1000 M and K > 5
Where M is the minimum megger reading for the three phases and K
the ration between the maximum and minimum phases.
12
Prof. Charles Q. Su
VLF tests voltage and time duration
For cables less than 10 years old, 2Uo for 15 minutes
For cables older than 10 years, 1.7 Uo for 20 minutes
These test voltages and time are in line with the new IEEE
Standard on VLF tests IEEE Std 400.2TM 2004. The
IEEE/EPRI/CEA and other world engineering bodies
recommended test level for MV extruded cables is two to
three times line to ground voltage for 15-60 minutes.
Initial VLF Test
Flowchart
Note: M is the minimum megger
reading of the three phases
13
28 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Incipient Faults Averted by VLF Tests
(May 2003 Dec 2005)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2003 2004 2005
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

f
a
i
l
u
r
e
s
29 Prof. Charles Q. Su
VLF Tests on 6.6kV Cables
(May 2003 to Dec 2005)
Total Circuits Tested Failed During VLF Tests
(incipient faults averted)
540 97
100% 18%
14
Statistics of 6.6kV Cable Failures between 2000-2005
( Total 160 cable and joint failures )
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Year
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

f
a
i
l
u
r
e
s
Before 2004, the cable failure rate was around 30 per year.
In 2005, it dropped to 12, about 1/3 yoy
31 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Why Cable Still Fails after Passing VLF Test?
Total Circuits
Tested
Failed During
VLF Tests
Failed in Service
after VLF Tests
540 97 20
100% 18%
3.7%
15
32 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Profile of the 20 Cables Failed After VLF Tests
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
XLPE PILC Joint
17
2
1
33 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Age Profile of XLPE Cables Failed After VLF Test
(Average 19.5 Years)
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Y
e
a
r
16
34 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Why Cable Fails After VLF Test? ...
The possible causes:
More than one defects.
Bad water tree contamination.
VLF test time is too short.
Electrical Tree Grow During VLF Tests
(In case of two large water trees)
Cable sheath
Conductor
XLPE
insulation
1. Star VLF test at 1.7Uo which may initiate electrical treeing on some large water trees.
No electrical treeing is triggered on small water trees.
2. The electrical trees start to grow until the largest one bridges across the insulation and
causes flashover.
No electrical tree is initiated on small water trees and
defects
Electrical trees are initiated at large water trees
17
Initial and Modified VLF Test Criteria
Note: M is the minimum megger reading of the three phases
37 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Electrical Tree Growth under Different Voltages
(IEEE Standard)
Voltage Tree Growing Speed
( mm/hour )
50Hz 1.7
0.1Hz
Cos-rectangular
7.8
0.1Hz Sine 12.3
Implication: The VLF test time should be sufficiently long.
18
6.6kV Cable Failures in 2005
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
Y
e
a
r
5 PILC
Ave Age = 30
4 XLPE
Ave Age = 22
3 Joints
Ave Age = 6
39 Prof. Charles Q. Su
HV Oscillating Wave Tests
Energise cable by DC voltage source.
After the voltage reaches a certain level, discharge
through an inductor to ground.
A damped oscillating voltage is established which may
last for a few mini-seconds.
Detect partial discharges and dielectric dissipation factor
during OW tests.
Locate PDs using PD mapping techniques.
19
40 Prof. Charles Q. Su
PD mapping under OW tests.
Some defects, especially those in cable joints,
could be detected by PD mapping
Detector sensitivity is not better than 100pC at
site in noisy environment
Not suitable for the detection of defects in XLPE
insulation (very low PD level, normally <50pC)
Cannot detect water tree if no electrical tree is
triggered
41 Prof. Charles Q. Su
PD MAPPING TEST RESULTS
20
42 Prof. Charles Q. Su
PD MAPPING TEST RESULTS
43 Prof. Charles Q. Su
PD MAPPING TEST RESULTS
21
Prof. Charles Q. Su
Selection consideration:
Recommended by standards
From utilities experiences
TEST VOLTAGES
FOR 6.6KV AND 22KV XLPE CABLES
Prof. Charles Q. Su
Test Standards for 6.6kV and 22kV XLPE Cables
IEC Standard 60502-2: 2005
Power cables with extruded insulation and their accessories for
rated voltages from 6 kV up to 30 kV
European Standard CELENEC HD 620 S1 and HD 621 S1
IEEE Standard 400.2-2004
IEEE guide for field testing and evaluation of the insulation of
shielded power cable systems using VLF
EPRI report RP 3392-01/CEA 200-D-780A (1996)
Trial guide for high voltage 0.1Hz tests on power cable systems
in the field
22
Prof. Charles Q. Su
IEC RECOMMENDED ELECTRICAL TESTS
( For new 22kV cables after installation )
AC 50/60Hz 1.7 Uo for 5 minutes
or
24 hours under system voltage *
AC 50/60Hz test voltage and time are
determined by agreement between the
purchaser and the contractor
Other test methods (VLF, OW etc) are
under consideration
* IEC Standard 60502-2: 2005
Power cables with extruded insulation and their accessories for rated voltages from 6
kV up to 30 kV
EUROPEAN STANDARD
(for PE and XLPE cables from 6kV to 36kV)
Frequency Test voltage
(rms)
Test time
0.1 Hz 3 x Uo 60 minutes
50 Hz 2 x Uo 60 minutes
European Standard for cable after laying test CENELEC HD 620 S1 AND 621 S1
15 European countries signed the harmonization document 620 S1 and 621 S1 in 1996
23
VLF test voltage and duration
adopted by some utilities in North America
Age of cable Test voltage (RMS)
6.6kV 22kV
Newly installed 12kV (3.1Uo) 38kV (3.0Uo)
1~10 years old 9.5kV(2.5Uo) 32kV (2.5Uo)
10~30 years old 6.5kV(1.7Uo) 22kV (1.7Uo)
Note: 1. Test duration is always 15 minutes. 2. The data is from HV Inc, America.
IEEE Standard 400.2-2004
IEEE guide for field testing and evaluation of the insulation of
shielded power cable systems using VLF
System Voltage
rms in kV
Acceptance Test
rms or (peak)
Maintenance Test
rms or (peak)
5 10 (14) - 3.5Uo 7 (10) 2.4Uo
8 13 (18) 2.8Uo 10 (14) 2.2Uo
15 20 (28) 2.3Uo 16 (22) 1.85Uo
25 31 (44) 2.15Uo 23 (33) 1.6Uo
35 44 (62) 2.2Uo 33 (47) 1.6Uo
Test duration : 60 minutes
24
Prof. Charles Q. Su
RECOMMENDATIONS
(for 6.6kV and 22kV cable after laying tests)
Insulation resistance test at 5kV
- Purpose: detect poor workmanship and joint/terminal
insulation leakage
VLF tests at 2Uo RMS for 60 minutes
- Purpose: flush-out insulation defects. If failed during
VLF test, after repair the cable should be VLF tested again
regardless of the insulation resistance.
If necessary*, oscillating wave and PD mapping tests could be
carried out at the following peak voltages: 1 Uo, 1.5 Uo and 2 Uo.
- Purpose: detect and locate defective joints and insulation
weakness
* Criteria of PD level to be determined
Prof. Charles Q. Su
VLF and OW PD mapping tests flow chart
25
Prof. Charles Q. Su
NEW DIAGNOSTIC TESTS
( maintenance tests )
DC component in AC leakage current
- water tree detection
Propagation characteristic spectroscopy
- LV pulse attenuation versus frequency
- For insulation ageing detection
- Can apply to in-service cables
AC superposition test (101Hz)
- Detect the 1 Hz component
- Detect water tree
58 Prof. Charles Q. Su
SUGGESTIONS
Apply VLF tests to old PILC cables (age>20)
For XLPE cables
if 200M<M<1000Mand the ratio between the highest and
lowest phases is <5, dont do VLF test.
If M>1000M, dont do VLF test.
If age > 15, dont do VLF test.
PD mapping may be used on important cable circuits
to detect joint defects
26
59 Prof. Charles Q. Su
CONCLUSIONS
VLF Test has been successful in reducing 6.6kV
cable failures and should be used according to
the total insulation condition of the cable and
joint assets.
Review the test procedure and failures every two
years.
Some defects, especially those in cable joints,
could be detected by PD mapping, during either
VLF or OW tests.
60 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Case study - 2
Failure Analysis of a 230kV/200MVA
Transformer-Cable Termination
Professor Charles Q. Su
( PhD, Fellow IET, SM IEEE, CIGRE A2 )
Training Course for Continuous Education
27
61 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Background
A new installation of transformer and cable
termination
The failure of yellow phase terminal occurred only 10
days after commissioning
The failure caused an explosion and fire
The transformer/cable terminal box was destroyed
The transformer was significantly damaged
About a quarter of the city was blackout
62 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Case study - 3
Three 230kV Cables Failed After Only 3 Years
Operation - Caused by a Design Problem
Professor Charles Q. Su
( PhD, Fellow IET, SM IEEE, CIGRE A2 )
Training Course for Continuous Education
28
63 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Background
230kV 2000 mm
2
XLPE cable, circuit length 7.2 km
Installed in the middle of 2000 by a consortium of
three manufacturers
Loading was around 40% of rating
F1 failed on 12 September 2003
Only three years new
Serious impacts to customers due to voltage dips
Investigators of OEM insisted that the cable was damaged
64 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Background cont
On 6 June 2004, another cable F3 failed
Again, serious impacts to customers
In June 2004, off-line PD measurement was carried
out on feed 2 (F2)
Large partial discharges (>100pC) were detected and located
A 10m long cable was cut and sectionised
Burnt damages to water swellable tape and semicon screen
were found.
29
65 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Questions
Are the failures due to mechanical damage?
Are they isolated failures?
If not due to cable damages, what are the
possible root causes?
How to prevent the recurrence of the type of
failures
66 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Case study - 4
230kV Cable Joint Failures Due to
Poor Workmanship
Professor Charles Q. Su
( PhD, Fellow IET, SM IEEE, CIGRE A2 )
Training Course for Continuous Education
30
67 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Background
Failures of two 230kV XLPE cable joints during HV ac
commissioning tests. The cable and joints were made
by different manufacturers. The cable joints were
rubber pre-moulded joints.
Cable Joint A: circuit I, Red phase, joint bay 5/6:
PDs were detected under 1.1Uo, PD inception voltage
120kV (0.9 Uo).
In Red phase, circuit II, joint bay 2/3: The joint failed
at 27kV (0.2 Uo) during HV ac tests.
69 Prof. Charles Q. Su
Wrong position the gripping shield
is shifted out of the semi-conductive
electrode, as shown by the
corresponding mark left on the
internal wall of the rubber moulding
The mark on the internal wall of
EPR rubber moulding