IEEE Guide For Accelerated Aging Tests For Medium-Voltage (5 KV 35 KV) Extruded Electric Power Cables Using Water-Filled Tanks

IEEE Guide for Accelerated Aging
Tests for Medium-Voltage (5 kV–35 kV)

Extruded Electric Power Cables Using
Water-Filled Tanks
IEEE Power Engineering Society

Sponsored by the
Insulated Conductors Committee
TM
1407
IEEE IEEE Std 1407™-2007

3 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10016-5997, USA (Revision of
IEEE Std 1407-1998)
15 February 2008
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria. Downloaded on July 13,2021 at 17:15:24 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE Std 1407™-2007
(Revision of
IEEE Std 1407-1998)

Water-Filled Tanks
Sponsor
Insulated Conductors Committee
of the
IEEE Power Engineering Society
Approved 6 December 2007

IEEE SA-Standards Board
Abstract: Accelerated aging tests on extruded medium-voltage cables using water-filled tanks are
addressed. Information on the equipment, cable samples, test conditions, and measurements to
perform the aging tests is provided. Techniques on how to analyze the test data are also included.
The implementation of this guide will allow a better description of the test data obtained by different
laboratories.
Keywords: accelerated aging test, accelerated cable life test (ACLT), cross-linked polyethylene
(XLPE), ethylene propylene rubber (EPR), medium-voltage cable, tank structure, temperature
measurement and profile, test conditions, water-filled tanks
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

3 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5997, USA
Copyright © 2008 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

All rights reserved. Published 15 February 2008. Printed in the United States of America.
IEEE is a registered trademark in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, owned by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Incorporated.
The trademark SuperSMITH belongs to Fulton Findings LLC.
Weibull++ is a registered trademark of ReliaSoft Corporation.
PDF: ISBN 978-0-7381-5352-0 STD95749

Print: ISBN 978-0-7381-5353-7 STDPD95749
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of the publisher.
IEEE Standards documents are developed within the IEEE Societies and the Standards Coordinating
Committees of the IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA) Standards Board. The IEEE develops its standards
through a consensus development process, approved by the American National Standards Institute, which brings
together volunteers representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve the final product. Volunteers are not
necessarily members of the Institute and serve without compensation. While the IEEE administers the process
and establishes rules to promote fairness in the consensus development process, the IEEE does not independently
evaluate, test, or verify the accuracy of any of the information or the soundness of any judgments contained in its
standards.
Use of an IEEE Standard is wholly voluntary. The IEEE disclaims liability for any personal injury, property or
other damage, of any nature whatsoever, whether special, indirect, consequential, or compensatory, directly or
indirectly resulting from the publication, use of, or reliance upon this, or any other IEEE Standard document.
The IEEE does not warrant or represent the accuracy or content of the material contained herein, and expressly
disclaims any express or implied warranty, including any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a
specific purpose, or that the use of the material contained herein is free from patent infringement. IEEE Standards
documents are supplied “AS IS.”
The existence of an IEEE Standard does not imply that there are no other ways to produce, test, measure,
purchase, market, or provide other goods and services related to the scope of the IEEE Standard. Furthermore, the
viewpoint expressed at the time a standard is approved and issued is subject to change brought about through
developments in the state of the art and comments received from users of the standard. Every IEEE Standard is
subjected to review at least every five years for revision or reaffirmation. When a document is more than five
years old and has not been reaffirmed, it is reasonable to conclude that its contents, although still of some value,
do not wholly reflect the present state of the art. Users are cautioned to check to determine that they have the
latest edition of any IEEE Standard.
In publishing and making this document available, the IEEE is not suggesting or rendering professional or other
services for, or on behalf of, any person or entity. Nor is the IEEE undertaking to perform any duty owed by any
other person or entity to another. Any person utilizing this, and any other IEEE Standards document, should rely
upon his or her independent judgment in the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances or, as
appropriate, seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the appropriateness of a given IEEE
standard.
Interpretations: Occasionally questions may arise regarding the meaning of portions of standards as they relate to
specific applications. When the need for interpretations is brought to the attention of IEEE, the Institute will
initiate action to prepare appropriate responses. Since IEEE Standards represent a consensus of concerned
interests, it is important to ensure that any interpretation has also received the concurrence of a balance of
interests. For this reason, IEEE and the members of its societies and Standards Coordinating Committees are not
able to provide an instant response to interpretation requests except in those cases where the matter has
previously received formal consideration. A statement, written or oral, that is not processed in accordance with
the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual shall not be considered the official position of IEEE or any of
its committees and shall not be considered to be, nor be relied upon as, a formal interpretation of the IEEE. At
lectures, symposia, seminars, or educational courses, an individual presenting information on IEEE standards
shall make it clear that his or her views should be considered the personal views of that individual rather than the
formal position, explanation, or interpretation of the IEEE.
Comments for revision of IEEE Standards are welcome from any interested party, regardless of membership
affiliation with IEEE. Suggestions for changes in documents should be in the form of a proposed change of text,
together with appropriate supporting comments. Comments on standards and requests for interpretations should
be submitted to the following address:
Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

445 Hoes Lane
Piscataway, NJ 08854
USA
Authorization to photocopy portions of any individual standard for internal or personal use is granted by The
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., provided that the appropriate fee is paid to Copyright
Clearance Center. To arrange for payment of licensing fee, please contact Copyright Clearance Center, Customer
Service, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA; +1 978 750 8400. Permission to photocopy portions of
any individual standard for educational classroom use can also be obtained through the Copyright Clearance
Center.
Introduction
This introduction is not part of IEEE Std 1407-2007, IEEE Guide for Accelerated Aging Tests for Medium-Voltage
(5 kV–35 kV) Extruded Electric Power Cables Using Water-Filled Tanks.
This guide addresses accelerated aging tests of extruded medium-voltage cables using water-filled tanks.
Information is provided on the equipment, cable samples, test conditions, and measurements to perform the
accelerated aging tests. The guide identifies the critical test parameters and describes techniques for their
measurement and control. The implementation of the techniques will allow test data obtained by different
laboratories at different times to be better compared. Specific test values (e.g., voltage) are given in this
guide, and the range in test values (e.g., maximum temperature) are more limited than stated in the previous
version of this guide.
Notice to users
Laws and regulations
Users of these documents should consult all applicable laws and regulations. Compliance with the
provisions of this guide does not imply compliance to any applicable regulatory requirements. Implementers
of the guide are responsible for observing or referring to the applicable regulatory requirements. IEEE does
not, by the publication of its standards, intend to urge action that is not in compliance with applicable laws,
and these documents may not be construed as doing so.
Copyrights
This document is copyrighted by the IEEE. It is made available for a wide variety of both public and private
uses. These include both use, by reference, in laws and regulations, and use in private self-regulation,
standardization, and the promotion of engineering practices and methods. By making this document
available for use and adoption by public authorities and private users, the IEEE does not waive any rights in
copyright to this document.
Updating of IEEE documents
Users of IEEE standards should be aware that these documents may be superseded at any time by the
issuance of new editions or may be amended from time to time through the issuance of amendments,
corrigenda, or errata. An official IEEE document at any point in time consists of the current edition of the
document together with any amendments, corrigenda, or errata then in effect. In order to determine whether
a given document is the current edition and whether it has been amended through the issuance of
amendments, corrigenda, or errata, visit the IEEE Standards Association Web site at http://
ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/standards.jsp, or contact the IEEE at the address listed previously.
For more information about the IEEE Standards Association or the IEEE standards development process,
visit the IEEE-SA Web site at http://standards.ieee.org.
Errata
Errata, if any, for this and all other standards can be accessed at the following URL: http://
standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/updates/errata/index.html. Users are encouraged to check this URL for
errata periodically.
iv Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.
Interpretations
Current interpretations can be accessed at the following URL: http://standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/interp/

index.html.
Patents
Attention is called to the possibility that implementation of this guide may require use of subject matter
covered by patent rights. By publication of this guide, no position is taken with respect to the existence or
validity of any patent rights in connection therewith. The IEEE is not responsible for identifying Essential
Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope
of Patents Claims or determining whether any licensing terms or conditions provided in connection with
submission of a Letter of Assurance, if any, or in any licensing agreements are reasonable or non-
discriminatory. Users of this guide are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any patent
rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, is entirely their own responsibility. Further information
may be obtained from the IEEE Standards Association.
Participants
The work of preparing this guide was carried out by Task Force A13W of Subcommittee A (Cable
Construction and Design) of the Insulated Conductors Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society.
At the time this guide was submitted to the IEEE-SA Standards Board for approval, the Task Force had the
following members:
John R. Densley, Chair
Mark D. Walton, Vice Chair
Bruce S. Bernstein Carlos Katz Serge Pélissou
Jan-Ove Bostrom Frank Krajick Timothy J. Person
Ray O. Bristol Frank Kutchta Haridoss Sarma
Laurence H. Gross Carl C. Landinger John T. Smith III
Richard A. Hartlein Eric P. Marsden Steve Szaniszlo
John L. Hinkle William M. McDermid William S. Temple
Stanley R. Howell Harry E. Orton Dennis Wedam
The following members of the individual balloting committee voted on this guide. Balloters may have voted
for approval, disapproval, or abstention.
Stan Arnot Randall C. Groves Gary L. Michel

Michael P. Baldwin Richard Harp Jerry R. Murphy
William G. Bloethe Jeffrey L. Hartenberger Michael S. Newman
A. James Braun Wolfgang B. Haverkamp Serge Pélissou
Kent W. Brown Gary A. Heuston Iulian E. Profir
Nissan M. Burstein Lauri J. Hiivala Bartien Sayogo
William A. Byrd David A. Horvath Michael J. Smalley
Tommy P. Cooper Gael Kennedy Jerry W. Smith
John R. Densley Jim Kulchisky John A. Vergis
Donald G. Dunn Chung-Yiu Lam Martin J. Von Herrmann
Mark D. Walton
Gary Engmann Benjamin T. Lanz
William D. Wilkens
Rabiz N. Foda Eric P. Marsden
Timmy S. Wright
Marcel Fortin William M. McDermid Ahmed F. Zobaa
Steven N. Graham John E. Merando
Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved. v
When the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved this guide on 6 December 2007, it had the following
membership:
Steve M. Mills, Chair
Robert M. Grow, Vice Chair
Don Wright, Past Chair
Judith Gorman, Secretary
Richard DeBlasio Richard H. Hulett Narayanan Ramachandran

Alex Gelman Hermann Koch Greg Ratta
William R. Goldbach Joseph L. Koepfinger* Robby Robson
Arnold M. Greenspan John Kulick Anne-Marie Sahazizia
Joanna N. Guenin David J. Law Virginia C. Sulzberger
Julian Forster* Glenn Parsons Malcolm V. Thaden
Kenneth S. Hanus Ronald C. Petersen Richard L. Townsend
William B. Hopf Tom A. Prevost Howard L. Wolfman
*Member Emeritus
Also included are the following nonvoting IEEE-SA Standards Board liaisons:
Satish K. Aggarwal, NRC Representative

Alan H. Cookson, NIST Representative
Don Messina
IEEE Standards Program Manager, Document Development
Matthew J. Ceglia
IEEE Standards Program Manager, Technical Program Development
vi Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.
Contents
1. Overview.............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Scope............................................................................................................................................ 2
2. Normative references ........................................................................................................................... 3
3. Definitions............................................................................................................................................ 3
3.1 Definitions.................................................................................................................................... 3
3.2 Abbreviations and acronyms........................................................................................................ 3
4. Cable materials and design considerations .......................................................................................... 4
4.1 Cable core test.............................................................................................................................. 5

4.2 Cable design test .......................................................................................................................... 6
5. Test specimens ..................................................................................................................................... 6
6. Prior tests and thermal preconditioning of specimens ......................................................................... 7
7. Test structure...................................................................................................................................... 10
8. Temperature ....................................................................................................................................... 13
8.1 Test specimen conductor temperature ....................................................................................... 13

8.2 Water temperature...................................................................................................................... 16
8.3 Ambient temperature in the test area ......................................................................................... 17
8.4 Establishing a temperature profile ............................................................................................. 17
8.5 Monitoring/controlling temperatures during the ACLT ............................................................ 18
8.6 Temperature measurement techniques....................................................................................... 18
8.7 Recommendations...................................................................................................................... 18
9. Water.................................................................................................................................................. 18
9.1 Water nature............................................................................................................................... 18

9.2 Conductor strand blockage ........................................................................................................ 20
10. Voltage............................................................................................................................................... 20
11. Time ................................................................................................................................................... 23
12. Test matrix ......................................................................................................................................... 23
13. Failure ................................................................................................................................................ 24
14. Abnormalities..................................................................................................................................... 25
15. Diagnostics......................................................................................................................................... 27
16. Data analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 28
Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved. vii
17. Final report......................................................................................................................................... 29
18. Conclusions........................................................................................................................................ 30
Annex A (informative) Preconditioning ........................................................................................................ 31
Annex B (informative) Water tanks—Historical information ....................................................................... 34
Annex C (informative) Temperature measurement ....................................................................................... 38
Annex D (informative) Final report............................................................................................................... 40
Annex E (informative) Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 42
viii Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.
Water-Filled Tanks
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This guide is not intended to assure safety, security, health, or environmental
protection in all circumstances. Implementers of the guide are responsible for determining appropriate
safety, security, environmental, and health practices or regulatory requirements.
This IEEE document is made available for use subject to important notices and legal disclaimers. These
notices and disclaimers appear in all publications containing this document and may be found under the
heading “Important Notice” or “Important Notices and Disclaimers Concerning IEEE Documents.”
They can also be obtained on request from IEEE or viewed at http://standards.ieee.org/IPR/
disclaimers.html.
1. Overview
The insulations commonly used in extruded medium-voltage power cables are cross-linked polyethylene
(XLPE), tree-retardant XLPE (TRXLPE), and ethylene propylene rubber (EPR). These materials are known
to gradually deteriorate with time due to the synergistic action of moisture and electrical stress. This
degradation, often referred to as water treeing, causes a reduction in the breakdown voltage and an increase
in the dielectric loss. The degradation can be so severe that failures can occur in service at operating stresses.
The mechanisms of moisture-induced degradation have been studied extensively and it is known that several
mechanisms are occurring. Several accelerated aging tests have been developed to evaluate the long term
performance of cables (Banks, Faremo, Steennis [B4],1 Bartnikas, Densley, Eichhorn [B5], Bartnikas et al.
[B6], Mashikian et al., [B20], Schroth, Kalkner, Fredrich [B25], Steennis and Faremo [B27]). The tests may
be either fixed time, where the cables are aged for a fixed time and then subjected to one or more diagnostic
tests to assess the cable condition, or a time-to-failure test. A problem inherent in all accelerated aging tests
is the choice of test parameters in the test itself. These should contain the deterioration factors causing
service aging and not introduce aging mechanisms that do not occur in service. The diagnostic test must
measure a property representative of service aging. Research has shown that the most important parameters
in tests to evaluate moisture-induced degradation are electrical stress, temperature, water characteristics, and
time.
Two accelerated aging tests have evolved in North America. One, a qualification test, is the accelerated
water treeing test (AWTT) in which lengths of cables are aged in water-filled pipes for 4, 6, and 12 months
and then subjected to a step ac breakdown (ACBD) test, the diagnostic test (ANSI/ICEA S-94-649 and
ANSI/ICEA S-97-6822). The other is a test where cables are aged in water-filled tanks, either for a fixed
time or to failure, i.e., an accelerated cable life test (ACLT) (Lyle [B18], Walton, Smith, Thue [B32]). The
time-to-failure test has the advantage of involving the whole aging process, initiation, growth, and final
failure. The main disadvantage is that the test duration is unknown and there can be considerable time
1
The numbers in brackets correspond to those of the bibliography in Annex E.
2
Information on references can be found in Clause 2.
Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved. 1
IEEE
Std 1407-2007 IEEE GUIDE FOR ACCELERATED AGING TESTS FOR MEDIUM-VOLTAGE (5 kV–35 kV)
between the first and the last failure. Several laboratories have performed and are now performing
accelerated aging tests in tanks (both time-to-failure tests in which the samples are aged to failure and aging
tests in which the samples are aged for fixed time periods followed by a diagnostic test such as a step ACBD
test) using different aging conditions of voltage, temperature, water characteristics, etc. This makes a direct
comparison of the data between laboratories very difficult. The situation is further complicated because the
methods of measuring some of the critical parameters differ significantly. As a result, apparently similar test
conditions can, in fact, be entirely different in two separate test arrangements. An example of this ambiguity
is the temperature measurement. Although a nominal temperature of 90 °C is sometimes used as the
maximum temperature during temperature cycling, the precise location where this temperature is measured
may vary. It may be measured in the length of the cable outside the water or in the length of cable immersed
in the water. If the water temperature is not controlled, however, the temperature of the immersed cable will
depend upon the following:
— Tank size
— Tank shape and material
— Volume of water
— Number of cables in the tank
— Whether the tank is thermally insulated, etc.
This guide directly addresses tank-type accelerated aging tests. Accelerated aging test parameters are
presented that, if reported, will allow test data obtained by different laboratories at different times to be
better compared.
This guide will:

— Identify the critical test parameters and techniques for their measurement and control.
— Review the levels of the test parameters, such as voltage (V), temperature (T), etc. It is not the
intention of this guide to recommend specific test values.
— Identify the test parameters to be included in reports, etc.
— The following will be discussed:
— Test specimens
— Prior tests and preconditioning of specimens
— Test structure
— Temperature
— Water
— Voltage
— Failures
— Abnormalities
— Diagnostics
— Data analysis
— Final report
It must be pointed out that some parameters are interrelated so that a change in one will have an effect on
others (i.e., as already mentioned, the size of the tank could influence the temperature of the cable immersed
in a tank without water temperature control).
1.1 Scope
This guide provides information on the equipment, cable specimens, test conditions, and measurements to
perform accelerated aging tests on medium-voltage cables using water-filled tanks, whether the test be a
2 Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.
IEEE
EXTRUDED ELECTRIC POWER CABLES USING WATER-FILLED TANKS Std 1407-2007
time-to-failure test or a test in which samples are aged for fixed times followed by a diagnostic test such as a
step ACBD test. The guide identifies the critical test parameters and describes techniques for their
measurement and control. The implementation of the techniques will facilitate a comparison of data
obtained by different laboratories.
2. Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document (i.e., they must
be understood and used, so each referenced document is cited in the text and its relationship to this
document is explained). For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the
latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments or corrigenda) applies.
AEIC CS8-07, Specification for Extruded Dielectric Shielded Power Cables Rated 5 through 46 kV.3
ANSI/ICEA S-94-649, Standard for Concentric Neutral Cables Rated 5 through 46 kV.4, 5
ANSI/ICEA S-97-682, Standard for Utility Shielded Power Cables Rated 5 through 46 kV.
ICEA T-24-380, Guide for Partial-Discharge Test Procedure.6
3. Definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. The Authoritative Dictionary
of IEEE Standards Terms [B13] should be referenced for terms not defined in this clause.
3.1 Definitions
3.1.1 abnormality: Any deviation from the preestablished test conditions, including the tolerance limits,
that may affect the outcome of the test.
3.1.2 air failure: A failure in the cable above the waterline but below the termination.
3.1.3 termination failure: A failure in the portion of the cable that does not have a metallic shield covering.
3.1.4 water failure: A failure in the active, shielded cable length that is below the waterline and that did not
occur as a result of mechanical damage.
3.1.5 waterline failure: A failure at the interface between air and the tank water to include the distance of
the total waterline variation.
3.2 Abbreviations and acronyms
ACBD ac breakdown
3
AEIC publications are available from the Association of Edison Illuminating Companies, 600 N. 18th Street, P. O. Box 2641, Bir-
mingham, AL 35291-0992, USA (http://www.aeic.org/). AEIC publications are also available from Global Engineering Documents, 15
Inverness Way East, Englewood, Colorado 80112-5704, USA (http://global.ihs.com/).
4
ANSI publications are available from the Sales Department, American National Standards Institute, 25 West 43rd Street, 4th Floor,
New York, NY 10036, USA (http://www.ansi.org/).
5
ICEA publications are available from ICEA, P.O. Box 20048, Minneapolis, MN 55420, USA (http://www.icea.org/).
6
See Footnote 5.
IEEE
ACLT accelerated cable life test
AWTT accelerated water treeing test
DSC differential scanning calorimetry
EPR ethylene propylene rubber
GMTF geometric mean time to failure
mle maximum likelihood estimators
PD partial discharge
PL polymer or polymer-lined
R conductor resistance
SS stainless steel
tan δ loss tangent (dissipation factor) of insulation
T/C thermocouple
THD total harmonic distortion
TRXLPE tree retardant cross-linked polyethylene
V0 line to ground voltage
VLF very low frequency
ω 2πf where f is the frequency in Hz of applied voltage
XLPE cross-linked polyethylene
4. Cable materials and design considerations
An accelerated aging test in a water-filled tank, whether a time-to-failure test or a fixed aging time test
followed by diagnostic testing such as a step ACBD test, imposes a complex combination of electrical,
thermal, and mechanical stresses on a cable during the aging test program. Since these stresses are applied to
a manufactured cable that, at a minimum, must be a cable core composed of an unfilled conductor
(conductor without strand-filling material to block the ingress of moisture or water), conductor shield,
insulation, insulation shield (and metallic shield), the test inherently evaluates these individual materials as
well as the overall cable structure. The synergistic effects between the various materials are important.
Insulation/shield interface characteristics, variable thermal expansion characteristics, volatile diffusion
rates, ionic contamination, manufacturing process, and many other factors provide for a complex, dynamic
system that is more than a simple sum of the individual parts.
An accelerated aging test in a water-filled tank, whether a time-to-failure test or a fixed aging time test
followed by diagnostic testing, can also be used to evaluate more than just the cable core. Since utilities now
commonly employ moisture blocked conductors, overall jackets, and a variety of different radial and
longitudinal moisture barriers, it is sometimes useful to test complete cable designs. Under these conditions
IEEE
the entire cable design structure is evaluated, including the cable core materials, all moisture barriers jackets,
etc. Once again, the many synergistic interactions between all the cable components ultimately dictate the
performance of the overall cable design.
In this respect, an accelerated aging test in a water-filled tank can be considered both a cable core
performance test and a cable design performance test. For purposes of this discussion, when a cable core test
is performed, the test cable consists only of the minimum components required to make up a shielded cable
design. When a cable design test is performed, the test cable contains all of the components that the cable
would have if placed in service on an electric utility system.
4.1 Cable core test
This is by far the most common use of the accelerated aging test in a water-filled tank to date. When
conducting the cable core performance test, four different aspects of a cable design are addressed.
The first component evaluated is the insulation. It is the component that has to withstand the applied voltage,
and for this test, it is not protected from moisture ingress, a key aspect of the aging process for many
extruded dielectric insulation materials.
The second component considered to have an important effect on cable performance is the conductor shield.
The conductor shield primarily controls the smoothness of the conductor shield/insulation interface, a high
stress region of the design that is critical to achieving acceptable cable performance. Conductor shield
cleanliness is also very important. Some ionic contaminants, which come primarily from the carbon black
used to make the conductor shield conductive, can migrate into the insulation, enhancing sites for water tree
initiation and growth.
The third aspect is the insulation shield. Like the conductor shield, the insulation shield controls the
smoothness of the insulation/insulation shield interface. It also contains carbon black. However, because the
voltage stress at the insulation/insulation shield interface is lower than that at the conductor shield/insulation
interface, the impact of the insulation shield on cable performance is considered to be less significant than
the conductor shield.
The fourth factor in a cable core evaluation test is the manufacturing process used to make the cable. This
includes a multitude of factors including the curing process, extruder and die design and their condition, line
speed, and the cooling process. Among other things, these processes affect void size and density, insulation
morphological characteristics, and residual mechanical stresses in the insulation.
In summary, a cable core material test is generally considered to be a test of the materials used to make up
the core. However, it is also a test of the process used to manufacture the cable and an evaluation of the
synergistic interplay between all of these items. Items evaluated in a cable core accelerated aging test in a
water-filled tank are listed as follows:
a) Insulation
b) Conductor shield
c) Insulation shield
d) Manufacturing processes
e) Synergistic effects between all preceding items
The relative ranking of the listed items is arguable, but the cable core performance test, by its very nature,
evaluates all of these components.
IEEE
4.2 Cable design test
While the accelerated aging test in a water-filled tank is primarily used to evaluate cable cores, it is
occasionally used to evaluate complete cable designs. Since complete cable designs often employ some type
of moisture blocking component(s), they generally age more slowly than cables in a cable core test. The
accelerated aging test in a water-filled tank is ideally suited for evaluating these cables because the test
generally runs for extended periods of time, often several years.
A complete cable design normally incorporates a cable core plus a moisture-blocked conductor and a jacket.
It may also employ the use of additional moisture barriers including water swellable tapes, hydrophilic or
hygroscopic powders, and/or metal laminates. How all of these design characteristics combine to influence
performance is extraordinarily complex. The cable core continues to be the most important portion of the
cable structure. However, once moisture ingress to the core structure is reduced or eliminated by one or
more of the components that make up the cable design, then the dynamics of the aging process can change
significantly. For example, if moisture is no longer present at the conductor, the role of the conductor shield
material may not be as pronounced as it would be if moisture were present. The same is true for the
insulation material. For cable designs that provide for a complete hermetic seal, insulation characteristics
such as water tree resistance may no longer be important.
Because it could take several years before specimens in a cable design test fail, it may be appropriate to
remove specimens from the aging test periodically and conduct diagnostic tests such as ACBD and water
tree counts. This is particularly useful for test programs conducted for the purpose of comparing different
cable designs. Once a comparative performance trend is established, the test can be terminated without
having to age the test specimens to failure.
Whether conducting a cable core test or a cable design test, it is important to know that the accelerated aging
test in a water-filled tank does much more than evaluate the performance of one aspect of a cable
construction. All of the cable components—from the conductor shield to the jacket—are inexorably linked.
This means that performance data should not be associated with one component, but rather with the entire
cable construction.
This document does not make specific test protocol recommendations for a cable design test. However, test
specimens in a cable design test are likely to incorporate components such as jackets and blocked conductors
that impede the ingress of moisture into the cable structure. As a result, specimens in a cable design test will
likely age more slowly than designs in a cable core test. For this reason, it may be desirable to use more
severe test conditions in a cable design test than for a cable core test.
5. Test specimens
Table 1 lists a format for documenting the cable under test and provides example information. The values
listed in Table 1 are compatible with tanks shown in Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3. The cable under test
should conform to AEIC CS8-07.
IEEE
Table 1—Example of cable documentation
Voltage class 15 kV,a 4.4 mm (175 mil) insulation thickness b
Conductor 53.5 mm2 (1/0 AWG) 1350-H19 stranded compressed aluminum a
Conductor shield 0.38 mm (0.015 in) state grade and manufacturer, blend number, and date
of manufacture
Insulation 4.4 mm (0.175 in) state grade and manufacturer, blend number, and date
of manufacture
Insulation shield 0.76 mm (0.030 in) state grade and manufacturer, blend number, and date
of manufacture
Metallic shield ≥ 6 #14 bare copper wires a
Jacket None or identify material, thickness a
Cable extrusion True triple

Cable extrusion date To be included
Cure process Dry cure
Extrusion run identification Job number, reel number
Cable manufacturer To be included
Cable quality control tests To latest relevant ICEA standard a
Number of specimens in population ≥ 10 a
Specimen total length ≥ 5 m (16 ft) c
Specimen length under water ≥ 3.7 m (12 ft)
Number of cable coils ≥1
Inner diameter cable coil 610 mm (24 in) a
Date water added to tank To be included

Date initial water added to conductor To be included
Start voltage/heat cycles date To be included
Replacement specimen Same type and construction of cable as test specimen if cable heating is
necessary to maintain consistent water temperature a
a
Values or tests in common use according to a survey conducted by the task force.
b
Insulation thickness at point of failure is recommended for reporting in Clause 13, Clause 14, and Clause 15.
c Specimen total length needs to be increased to a minimum of 9.5 m (32 ft) if the residual breakdown strength will be
measured after cable aging.
6. Prior tests and thermal preconditioning of specimens
Prior tests and preconditioning of cable specimens are carried out to assess whether the cable specimens
have defects that cause partial discharges (PD) and to limit the levels of some cross-linking by-products,
which can occur in some cross-linking processes and which are known to affect the electrical properties of
XLPE.
IEEE
PD tests should be performed on the entire reel of cable prior to cutting into test specimens. If there is any
doubt as to whether or not the reel was subjected to a PD test or there is concern about the integrity of the
terminations, it is suggested that PD testing be performed on individual test specimens. The PD test should
be carried out according to ICEA T24-380.
It is well known that the most commonly used chemical cross-linking agent, dicumyl peroxide, produces a
number of cross-linking agent by-products that include acetophenone, cumyl alcohol, α-methyl styrene and
smaller quantities of other by-products. Their formation cannot be avoided, but they are migratory and can
theoretically volatilize from the cable. Residual cross-linking agent by-products may influence the electrical
properties of polymeric insulating materials such as XLPE, TRXLPE, and EPR. The residuals will depend
on the specific chemical reactions, which occur during manufacture, and the rate at which the by-products
subsequently diffuse through the extruded layers. Although the same cross-linking by-products occur in
XLPE, TRXLPE and EPR, the rate of diffusion will differ for XLPE, TRXLPE, and EPR and may vary for
different TRXLPE and EPR formulations. There have been a number of studies of the effects of the
by-products on the short- and long-term electrical behavior of XLPE insulation, and these are summarized in
Annex A.
Silane-cured XLPE does not use dicumyl peroxide as the curing agent and thus contains different cross-
linking by-products. No data are available at this time on the effects of the by-products for silane-cured
insulation and the procedures in this clause may not be applicable to silane-cured XLPE. Also no data are
available in the published literature on the effect of cross-linking by-products on EPR-insulated cables.
Although their effects on the performance of extruded cable insulation are not precisely known, there is
sufficient published data, at least for steam-cured XLPE, to show that an increased concentration of by-
products improves the resistance of the insulation system to water treeing and that the concentration of by-
products in XLPE gradually decreases with time, e.g., the concentration of cross-linking by-products in
15 kV XLPE cable may be less than 100 ppm after 10 years in service and, as a result, may not contribute to
the tree retardancy. However, in accelerated aging tests lasting a year or even longer, if the accelerated
temperature does not drive off the cross-linking by-products, an apparent improved resistance of the
insulation to water treeing could result. Thus the long-term behavior, for the insulation with a low
concentration of by-products, may not be as good as that predicted by the results of the accelerated aging
test. To reduce this possibility the cables are preconditioned in order to reduce the amount of by-products in
the insulation before being subjected to the aging test. The most common form of preconditioning is to
subject the cables to elevated temperatures, either by conductor heating or oven heating, to increase the rate
of diffusion of the by-products from the insulation.
In addition to removing the by-products, elevated-temperature preconditioning can:

— Cause chemical changes in the insulation depending on the temperature employed.
— Cause morphological changes in the insulation due to partial melting and recrystallization.
These changes can also affect the water treeing and long-term behavior and contribute to making
preconditioning and its influence a very complex issue. Although the effects on XLPE are only partially
understood, and the effects on TRXLPE and EPR are understood to a lesser extent, some form of
preconditioning is preferred to reduce the level of by-products as long as the other changes mentioned here
do not alter the mechanism of aging and loss of life. The preconditioning described here is based on limited
measurements on 15kV XLPE cables with no strand blocking (Abdolall [B1], Martin and Hartlein [B19],
Pélissou [B23]) and its aim is to reduce the level of the cross-linking by-products to less than 100 ppm. The
choice of 100 ppm is based upon a limited number of measurements on cables that had been in service for up
to 10 years and may have to be modified as more information becomes available. The procedure may not be
suitable for silane-cured XLPE, TRXLPE, or EPR cables, as no measurements have been made to determine
the level of cross-linking by-products in service-aged cables with these insulations, nor tests performed to
determine the rates at which the by-products diffuse from these types of cables at elevated temperatures. In
view of the unknowns, users should be cautious in interpreting the data.
IEEE
Table 2 lists recommended preconditioning protocols based on test experience at various laboratories. The
consensus opinion of the task force A13W for a preconditioning protocol is 360 h at 90 °C in free air or in a
circulating-air oven (for cable core testing of a common design as well as cable design testing).
Table 2—Preconditioning protocols
List of preconditioning protocols used in different laboratories
1 360 h at 90 °C conductor in free air a (recommended)
2 360 h at 90 °C in circulating-air oven b (recommended)

a
When cable specimens are preconditioned by circulating current in the conductor, the temperature from
specimen to specimen and/or along the cable length will likely vary as much as 10 °C. This variation is a
function of several factors including the orientation of the specimens, the distance between the specimens
and/or coils and adjacent structures, and the location of the specimen and/or coil relative to the group of
specimens being preconditioned.
b Heating cables in a circulating-air oven should reduce the variations in temperature from specimen to
specimen and along the cable length that can occur when specimens are heated by circulating current in
open air. It must be noted that heating in a circulating-air oven subjects the complete cable core to the oven
temperature, unlike conductor heating when the insulation shield will be about 10 °C lower than the
conductor temperature. The higher temperature of the insulation shield could increase the diffusion of
volatile products from the shield into the insulation.
The following procedures have been used to analyze the cross-linking by-products and characterize the
insulation:
a) Analysis of the by-products in the insulation and conductor shield before and after preconditioning
and also after the aging: The residual volatiles are generally liberated from a specimen and
subsequently analyzed either using
1) Solid head-space techniques, e.g., gas chromatography, or
2) A solution (e.g., liquid chromatography), or
3) Thermal desorption techniques or
4) Weight loss during preconditioning.
Of items 1), 2), 3) and 4), the most widely used is item 2), wherein the by-products from a specimen
taken at 1/3 of the insulation thickness from the conductor are extracted using methylene chloride
and analyzed using liquid chromatography. A more efficient procedure is to use the analytical
techniques described in item 5).
5) Analytical techniques, which rely on the direct introduction of volatile components into the
chosen analytical equipment as they are extracted from the solid specimen thereby keeping
specimen handling and errors to a minimum (Groeger et al. [B10]). The same procedures have
been used for TRXLPE and EPR but less information is available. However, the suggested
analytical protocols for by-product detection are not expected to introduce any concerns or
uncertainties that have not already been expressed for XLPE insulation.
b) Characterization of the morphology or structure of the insulation before and after preconditioning
and also after the aging. The morphology may be measured on specimens from the inner 25% of the
insulation wall thickness using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). Prolonged exposure of
XLPE to elevated temperatures below its melting point may introduce an additional peak(s) on the
DSC thermogram. This additional peak(s) is indicative of prior temperature(s) to which the
insulation specimen may have been subjected and is indicative of polymer recrystallization (Groeger
et al. [B10]). This additional peak(s) in the DSC thermogram can be eliminated by heating the
insulation to temperatures above its melting point (~106 °C), for example to 120 °C or 130 °C, and
IEEE
then allowing it to cool to ambient temperature. More sophisticated methods of measuring the
morphology are available (Phillips and Vatansever [B23]).
c) Measurement of the percent gel or extractable at the inner 25% of the insulation wall before and
after preconditioning as defined in ANSI/ICEA S-94-649 and ANSI/ICEA S-97-682.
The purposes of the preceding analyses are to address one of the main concerns about the use of thermal
preconditioning to remove the cross-linking by-products, i.e., the effects of the changes in insulation
morphology that can occur during the preconditioning or cable aging that may influence the mechanism of
aging. It should be noted that changes in morphology and the migration of cross-linking by-products will
also occur during the aging in the tank and that these will depend upon the aging temperature. Thus, until
more information becomes available, it might be useful that, for information purposes only, measurements
be made of the cross-linking by-products and also the morphology of the insulation before and after the
preconditioning, and also after the aging.
Any interpretation of cable test data will be incomplete without the actual details of the location of the
sampling for the cross-linking by-products with reference to the test cable and of the analytical methods
used to measure the by-products. It is therefore suggested to report these two parameters while giving
quantitative information on the concentration of by-products so as to track down the effect of these on cable
aging precisely.
Monitoring of the amounts of by-products in cables before the aging tests may lead to a refinement of the
preconditioning procedure later. For example, levels of one or more by-products could be specified or the
conditions for preconditioning changed in future editions of this guide.
7. Test structure
It should be recognized that tank shape, size, material of construction, water volume and characteristics, and
number of cables in the tank will have a direct influence on important parameters, the cable and water
temperatures, and ultimately on the results of the test. As of the 2007 revision of the guide, recommended
tank material and tank sizes are given. The details of other tank sizes and constructions, which were included
in the previous edition of the guide, are given in Annex B.
Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3 show the recommended tank layout schematics. The tank shape is
rectangular (Figure 1 and Figure 2) or cylindrical (Figure 3.). The rectangular tank sizes allow 10 or 20
specimens plus any control specimens such as a dummy loop used for temperature monitoring. The
cylindrical tank configuration allows up to 10 specimens each 65 m (~210 ft) long to be aged. It also can
accommodate successive failures and re-terminating of the non-failed remnant lengths. There should be
sufficient distance between cable specimens and tank sides, bottom, and other cable specimens to prevent
uneven heating of any individual specimens and to allow adequate circulation of the water.
IEEE
Figure 1—Layout tank type #1
IEEE
It is recommended that stainless steel (SS) tanks be used with the dimensions listed in Table 3.
When data from various tests are compared, the number of cable specimens plus the following tank size
variables should be considered: length, width, height (in the case of generally rectangular shapes or the
appropriate dimensions for other shapes), and depth of water. If a nonrecommended tank construction is
used, the ratio of water volume to submerged cable volume should also be considered. These parameters will
have significant effects on the temperature of the water if the water temperature is not controlled. However,
if the water temperature is controlled, less attention to tank dimensions and structure can be tolerated.
Table 3—Recommended dimensions of SS tanks
Rectangular tanks
10 specimens 20 specimens
Length 1590 ± 60 mm (62.5 in ± 2.5 in) 3175 ± 125 mm (125 in ± 5 in)
Width 1220 ± 150 mm (48 in ± 6 in) 1220 ± 150 mm (48 in ± 6 in)
Height 1220 ± 150 mm (48 in ± 6 in) 1220 ± 150 mm (48 in ± 6 in)
Cylindrical
10 specimens each 65 m (213 ft) long
Diameter 1220 ± 150 mm (48 in ± 6 in)
Height 1220 ± 150 mm (48 in ± 6 in)
IEEE
The tank is made from an inert material (SS). In addition, the specimen mounts, and any other materials
making contact with the water in the tanks should be constructed from suitable inert materials that will not
corrode in the presence of water and will not form an electrolytic cell with any component in the cable
specimen. The tanks are usually grounded. In particular, the tank should not cause the introduction of a
significant level of ion contamination, which can lead to erroneous results.
The type of material contacting the water should be reported. Also, any materials used to insulate the tanks
or used to insulate or retard surface evaporation of the water and their thicknesses should be reported to
allow determination of their impact on water temperature and quality.
8. Temperature
Temperature has been shown in previous studies to play a very significant role as an aging parameter for
some cables in tank-type testing (Lyle [B18]). In order to elevate the conductor temperature to the levels
required for accelerated aging of the cable, current is usually induced into the conductor using a current
transformer. Cable heating occurs due to resistive losses in the conductor. This method of heating is the
common practice and preferred method since cables are heated in this way in actual field use.
Conductor heating may be cyclic or continuous. The usual practice is cyclic heating because this type of
heating more closely simulates the type of heating that a cable would experience in actual service. Current
heating cycles of 8 h on, 16 h off (7 days a week) is the most common practice. It should also be noted that
tests without conductor heating are also performed.
8.1 Test specimen conductor temperature
Since part of each test specimen length is in water and part is in air, the thermodynamics of heating and
cooling the test specimens can be quite complex. For this reason, it is important that the conductor
temperature be monitored in both the water and air portions of the test specimen, preferably at the hottest
spot in both places. Locating these hot spots, should they exist, may take some experimentation. During
ACLT, temperature monitoring is typically accomplished by placing thermocouples (T/Cs) on the conductor
of a dummy cable. The concentric neutral of the dummy cable should only be grounded at one end to avoid
circulating currents. A dummy cable experiences approximately the same heating conditions as the active
cables but has no voltage on the conductor except the voltage necessary to drive current in the conductor.
This condition is complicated if the insulation material of the active specimens has high dielectric losses and
experiences heating due to the application of voltage. To accurately determine what the actual temperature
differences are between the dummy cable and the active cables, a temperature profile must be established
(see 8.4). Figure 4 shows a typical dummy specimen with T/Cs located on the conductor in the air portion of
the specimen, on the conductor at the midpoint of the water section, and on the cable surface in the water.
Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7 show progressively more complex heating control schematics using a
dummy cable. These heating control schematics are only examples. Other control schemes may be
acceptable as long as they provide for reproducible heating of the test specimens.
IEEE
Figure 4—Dummy used for temperature measurement
* Not less than minimum radius.
Figure 5—Typical heating control schematic using manually adjustable

variable transformer
IEEE
Figure 6—Typical heating control schematic using a temperature controller
Maximum conductor temperatures of ambient to 90 °C have been used in tank tests. In some cases, this
conductor temperature is measured on the section of the cable specimen in air, and in other cases, it is
measured on the section of cable specimen in water. The conductor temperature of the active test specimen
in water is the critical temperature; the conductor temperature of the active test specimen in air is of
secondary importance. However, care should be taken to prevent overheating in this portion of the test
specimen. With water in the conductor, no portion of the active test specimen conductor should exceed
100 °C.
The time-temperature profile of the active test specimen in water is a critical parameter in ACLT protocols.
Examples of some time-temperature profiles are shown in Figure 8 and Figure 9. It is not the purpose of this
guide to recommend a particular profile. The conductor temperature profiles, which are used in ACLT
protocols, should not be strictly defined as there is still much to learn in developing a reliable ACLT.
Different types of cable insulations behave differently in the ACLT for the same test conditions. Typically
used test temperatures are listed in Table 5 and Table 6 in Clause 12.
Figure 7—Typical heating control schematic using a

programmable logic controller (PLC)
IEEE
Figure 8—Time temperature profile
Figure 9—Time temperature profile
8.2 Water temperature
Throughout the tank, the water temperature should be uniform at any given time. This is most often
achieved by circulating the water in the tank and making provisions for evenly distributing the circulated
water. If some form of water circulation is provided and multiple temperature measurements have been
made at different locations in the tank to insure a uniform distribution of the circulated water, only one
temperature probe in the water tank should be necessary for monitoring purposes. Hollow plastic spheres or
expanded polystyrene sheets are often used on the water surface to insulate it from the surrounding air and to
minimize water evaporation, and aid in water temperature control.
Water temperature may or may not be controlled. In order to maintain a consistent water temperature profile,
cooling or heating may be required during the test cycle. Where water temperature is not controlled, the
IEEE
water temperature simply rises and falls with the conductor heat cycles. In this case the water temperature
will depend on tank size, shape, water volume, number of cable specimens, etc.
8.3 Ambient temperature in the test area
Ambient temperature in the test area should be monitored and recorded. If the tank water temperature is not
controlled, it is desirable to control this variable as a means of achieving a more repeatable time-temperature
profile.
8.4 Establishing a temperature profile
On cable constructions that use insulation materials with low dielectric losses, it is possible to establish
accurate temperature profiles by setting up a tank with cables of the same construction (not the actual ACLT
specimens) and applying heating load cycles without the application of high voltage. This allows T/Cs to be
placed on the conductors of the active specimens, which would normally be energized during the ACLT. It
is important that temperature profiles be established for the following:
a) Active test cables
1) Conductor temperature in water and air
2) Cable surface temperature in water and/or air
b) Dummy cable, if used for temperature monitoring and control
1) Conductor temperature in water and air
c) Water
d) Ambient air
The temperature of the conductor will vary between the water level and the stress cone and could be higher
under the stress cone. Dummy cables used for temperature monitoring and control may not experience the
same heating currents as active test cables due to losses in the iron core used to isolate the dummy cable
from the high-voltage source. These losses can result in slightly different conductor temperatures on the
dummy cable and the active test cables. These temperature differences are known to be very small and can
be determined while establishing the temperature profiles.
Conductor heating currents in both the active test cables and the dummy test cable (if used) should be
measured and recorded while establishing the temperature profiles since these currents have a direct
relationship to conductor temperatures. These currents should be periodically compared to the conductor
heating currents measured during the ACLT as a means of verifying that no significant changes have
occurred since the temperature profiles were established. All conductor heating currents should be measured
with a true RMS meter.
For cables exhibiting high dielectric loss (V2ωC tan δ) characteristics (measured and calculated under test
conditions), the energized cables will run hotter than an unenergized dummy cable in the same tank.
Dielectric heating can also occur in tests conducted at ambient temperature. For these cases, an additional
correction factor or adjustment is required to ensure the energized cable is at the specified test temperature.
One simple and practical method to achieve temperature control is to lower conductor loss (I2R) by an
amount equal to the dielectric loss calculated from the actual measured cable characteristics. If dielectric
heating is significant during tests at ambient temperature, cooling of the water may be necessary.
IEEE
8.5 Monitoring/controlling temperatures during the ACLT
Once the temperature profiles have been established and the actual ACLT cable specimens have been placed
into the tank and energized with the application of high voltage, it is important that the temperatures at the
following locations be monitored and/or controlled:
a) Active test cables
b) Dummy cable if used for temperature monitoring and control
1) Conductor temperature in water and/or air
c) Water
d) Ambient air
It is intended that there should be excellent correlation between the values measured during the ACLT
testing and those values obtained from the temperature profile measurements.
8.6 Temperature measurement techniques
Accurate measurements of conductor temperature or cable surface temperatures with T/Cs require that
proper techniques for preparation and mounting of the T/Cs be used. Several techniques given in Annex C
have been developed for the preparation and mounting of T/Cs. These techniques are in use at several
laboratories throughout North America.
8.7 Recommendations
The common practices and recommended test temperatures are listed in Table 4.
9. Water
Water is one of the primary test parameters in ACLT tank-type testing. Since moisture in the insulation and
shield materials, and its ability to transport ions, is linked to cable aging as manifested through water tree
formation (Pélissou [B22], UNIPEDE-DISCAB [B30]), careful control and monitoring of the water quality
are essential during the test.
9.1 Water nature
In tank-type aging tests, water is used to fill the tank and the interstitial spaces of the specimens’ inner
conductor and to make up evaporative losses from both the tank and the conductor. Both deionized water
and tap water have been used by different laboratories but no systematic comparison has been carried out on
identical cable specimens in the same laboratory. Tap water contains different ions and impurities depending
on its source and even the time of year so that it would be expected that it would have a significant influence
on the test results. Deionized water contains less ions and impurities but tends to become “contaminated”
with time during a test (see Figure 10). Thus, even with tests using deionized water, the nature of the water
does not remain constant with time, and it is not known how much these variations affect test data.
Equipment to deionize the large volumes of water, particularly if several tanks are used, adds to the cost of
testing and has to be maintained regularly. Until the results of comparative studies of the effects of deionized
versus tap water are known, it is preferred that the water for the tank and the conductor be tap water.
Table 4—Recommendations on test temperature
Parameter/variable Common practice(s) Recommendation (proposal)
Test area ambient air temperature (°C) — 25 when the tank water is controlled — Control and report test area ambient air temperature
— 35 when the tank water is not controlled — 25 (± 5) or 35 (± 5)
Tank water temperature (°C) — Allowed to rise and fall with conductor heat — Allowed to rise and fall as a function of conductor
cycle temperatures for tests on cables within a laboratory
— Continuously controlled at a predetermined — Continuously control at 50 (± 2) for comparative tests
value between laboratories a
Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.

— Report actual temperatures
Conductor heating — Cyclic — No change

— 8 h on 16 h off
— 7 days a week
Conductor temperature in water (°C) — 30, 45, 60, 75, 90 — 30 (± 5), 45 (± 5), 75 (± 5) for tests within a laboratory
— For comparative tests between laboratories:a 75 (± 5)
— Report actual temperatures
Conductor temperature in air (°C) — 30, 45, 60, 75, 90 — Not to exceed 100
— Report actual temperature
EXTRUDED ELECTRIC POWER CABLES USING WATER-FILLED TANKS
Temperature control and monitor points Cond. in air/cond. in water/tank water — Control tank water for comparative tests between
— Control/monitor/monitor laboratories, otherwise monitor
— Control/monitor/control — Control mid specimen conductor in water for all tests
— Monitor/control/monitor — Monitor conductor temperature in air at mid position
— Monitor/control/control between waterline and stress cone
— Use dummy cable from the length extruded for the test for
control and monitor
Test cable surface (jacket/shield) temperature (in water) — Monitor shield temperature for tests on core and jacket
temperature for tests on cable design
a Use other temperatures as necessary.
19
Std 1407-2007
IEEE
IEEE
If deionized (charcoal prefilter, in addition to cation and anion resin beds) water is initially used for the tank
and the conductor, it should have a resistivity not less than 1000 Ω−m. Since the deionized water quality can
be significantly affected by electrical breakdown and the insertion of new cable specimens, the deionized
water in the tanks should be changed totally or partially when the resistivity is less than 250 Ω−m. If a new
cable is inserted after a breakdown, it should be of the same type as the cable under test.
Based on the data shown in Figure 10 for six tanks over a period of more than 36 months, it is recommended
that, for either tap or deionized water, the tank water be checked by monitoring the pH and resistivity
monthly. Ion nature and concentration can play a role in the life of cables in the ACLT. These records will
allow variations within a tank and between tanks to be tracked as a function of time, and ultimately could
help to explain particular specimen failures.
Furthermore, a minimum water/cable volume ratio of 40/1 or greater should be fixed and maintained during
the aging period, as it influences the impurity concentration, the frequency of water changes, and the time/
conductor/water/ambient temperature characteristics. The water/cable volume ratio should also be
monitored and recorded. To keep the water volume constant, refilling can be performed automatically by
means of a floating valve to a control level of ± 13 mm (0.5 in), using water similar to that initially used. The
water should be circulated continuously to avoid hot spots, within a temperature variation of ± 2 °C, to
ensure uniform aging.
9.2 Conductor strand blockage
To make sure all interstices are filled, a filling water pressure of 70 kPa to 200 kPa (10 psi to 30 psi) should
be applied at one end of each cable specimen. Pressurization for filling or checking for strand blockage
should only be done when the water temperature is ≤ 45 °C. Since water corrodes the strands over time,
particularly those made from aluminum (Luzzi [B17]), they should be checked for blockage when the cable
is at room temperature using water at a sufficient pressure. Pressures up to 200 kPa (30 psi) may be used. If
no water flow is observed within 5 min the corrective actions listed in Clause 14 should be investigated. If
frequent blockages are occurring, more regular checks should be considered.
It is cautioned that if the water quality changes, be it tap water, deionized water, or controlled ion salt water
(e.g., 0.1 normal NaCl), the ACLT results can change. Different aqueous solutions can yield different ACLT
results, even though all other conditions are equal. This is because different ions can penetrate into the
insulation wall at different rates and can induce different aging and failure results.
10. Voltage
Voltage stress is a critical parameter for the aging process and is required, along with water, for water tree
growth. Its level, stability, and quality are all important parameters that must be regulated and recorded. It
should be noted that water tree initiation and growth are a function of localized electric stresses that cannot
be directly measured.
The values of the test voltages arrived at by consensus of the working group based on testing experience are
as follows:
a) As a materials test on typical cable designs using time-to-failure ACLT, the prevailing test voltage is
4 times rated voltage to ground (4V0).
b) As a materials test on typical cable designs using fixed aging time(s) in the tanks followed by a
diagnostic test such as a step ACBD test, the prevailing test voltage is 3 times rated voltage to
ground (3V0). By reducing the test voltage, the cable samples are less likely to fail during the
designated aging time, thus making more cable samples available for the diagnostic measurement at
the completion of the designated aging time.
IEEE
Figure 10—Tank water resistivity and pH for six tanks as a function of time
These recommendations are not unanimous. There was concern that testing at 4V0 resulted in electrical
stresses that were too high and had the potential of introducing failure mechanisms that may not be
encountered in the field. However there were similarities in the Weibull shape parameter for time-to-failure
test results generated at voltage stresses of 4V0, 3V0, and 2V0. This indicated a similar failure mechanism at
the three test voltages.
With regard to testing reduced wall cables, the limit on the maximum average test stress for any cable design
should be 12 kV/mm. In Europe the typical accelerated stress for medium-voltage cables is 5 kV/mm.
The voltage is applied between the cable conductor and the metal shield or neutral wires. One end of the
neutral of each cable is connected, either directly or through a fuse, to the high-voltage circuit ground. The
voltage level should be controlled to within at least ± 5% and be free from substantial harmonic content.
Harmonic content of the test voltage can be specified by total harmonic distortion (THD), but the overall
effects of harmonics on the aging of the specimens have not been investigated. The average voltage stress
IEEE
level chosen is left to the individual, but is usually between 2 kV/mm and 8 kV/mm. The relationship to
rated line to ground voltage may be preferred, between 2V0 and 4V0. It must be noted that while aging may
be accelerated using above normal voltage stresses, too high a stress might introduce a mechanism of aging
that would not occur at normal stress. It is important that the voltage measuring equipment be calibrated
regularly, preferably at least once a year. Also the voltage should be continuously monitored regularly for
several days to ensure the voltage variation is within ± 5%. The monitoring should include weekdays and a
weekend. As an example, if the aging is assumed to follow an inverse power law model (Vnt = constant)
with an exponent n of 4, a voltage variation or error in calibration of ± 5% will result in a time variation of
± 20%. If the voltage is controlled to ± 3%, the time variation will be reduced to ± 12%. If the voltage
exponent n is 6, voltage variations of ± 3% and ± 5% will result in time variations of ± 18% and ± 30%
respectively. Thus limiting the voltage variations to ± 3% is preferred. Typically used test temperatures and
voltages are shown in Table 5 and Table 6 in Clause 12.
Interruptions to the test voltage are needed for the maintenance of water levels, etc., and also necessary
when specimens fail. The duration of an interruption must be minimized by having replacement specimens
available and methods to detect a failed cable in place before startup. The time and duration of the
interruptions should be recorded. Damage to the specimen during failure can be limited by providing a high
source impedance power supply, or alternatively, an overcurrent trip device in the circuit. For example, the
neutral of each test cable may be connected to the high-voltage circuit ground through a fuse (~2 A) to
facilitate identification of a failed cable.
Voltage frequency is usually specified as either 50 Hz or 60 Hz. Extensive tests have been done up to 8 kHz,
but frequencies higher than 50 Hz or 60 Hz require expensive power supplies that must be protected against
surges when specimens fail as the output stages of the power supplies are vulnerable to damage. For these
reasons, no tank tests are currently performed at high frequency in North America. Different results may
occur when different frequencies are used.
In some test procedures, voltage surges are introduced intentionally during an aging program to simulate the
effects of lightning impulses and switching surges that occur during the service life of an underground cable
(Hartlein, Harper, Ng [B11], Katz, Seman, Bernstein [B15]). Surges can occur unintentionally when cable
specimens fail due to the test circuit setup. If the aging test area is located near a potential site of external
surge sources, the test setup should be checked for voltage transients. The magnitude, wave shape, number,
and frequency of intentionally applied impulses or surges should be accurately recorded.
It should be noted that dc voltage has also been applied during aging studies and has been shown to
influence cable life (Srinivas, Bernstein, Decker [B26]). If dc voltage is used in the test procedure, the test
method should be noted, e.g., voltage level, time of application, and time of grounding. DC hipot testing is
not recommended in ACLT tests.
Termination of the cable specimens should receive special consideration as normal stress cones will be
overstressed during the aging and could lead to premature failure. An over-designed cable termination
system should be considered to provide adequate stress relief at the expected high-voltage level for the
duration of the test program. Premature stress cone failures are expensive and time-consuming.
Diagnostic tests (see Clause 15) using high voltages may be carried out both before and after the aging test.
These tests should be performed as soon as possible after the specimen is removed from the aging test
program as voltage relaxation can change the result obtained. The specimens should be stored in water to
reduce drying. Test voltage measurements should be made on the high voltage side with a suitable divider,
continuously monitored and displayed.
IEEE
11. Time
Both timer days (timer hours that the test voltage was on divided by 24) and the total number of daily 8 h
heat cycles (only count heat cycle if the desired temperature was maintained for a minimum of 4 h) must be
specified.
12. Test matrix
As mentioned earlier, two of the most significant cable aging parameters are conductor temperature in the
water and voltage stress. Because of the complex nature of accelerated aging tests on extruded dielectric
cables, this guide does not specify these or any other test parameters. However, in an effort to allow a
comparison of test results developed at two different laboratories, a matrix of commonly used test voltages
and conductor temperatures in the water is provided in Table 5 and Table 6. The values were selected to
cover test parameters typically used by cable researchers. They are also broad enough to allow for a wide
variety of aging conditions. It is not intended that a cable be evaluated by subjecting lengths to all test
conditions but that laboratories select one (or more) set(s) contained in the tables. In time, a specific set of
test conditions may evolve that could then be acceptable as a standard. This set of conditions might be
different for each particular insulation system, i.e., the accelerated test conditions for XLPE may not be the
same as those for TRXLPE or EPR.
Table 5—Designation of common conductor temperatures in the water and voltage test
conditions—ACLT (time-to-failure tests)
Designation of test conditions

Test voltage
30 °C or ambient 45 °C a 60 °C a 75 °C a
V0 b 1/30 1/45 1/60 1/75
2V0 2/30 2/45 2/60 2/75
3V0 3/30 3/45 3/60 3/75
4V0 4/30 4/45 4/60 4/75

a Conductor temperatures in air may be higher.
b Line to ground voltage (8.7 kV for 15 kV cables).
The voltages are applied between the conductors and the neutrals of the cables. The temperature is generally
the maximum conductor temperature achieved during the 8 h “current-on” period when load cycling is used.
To reliably compare test results from different laboratories, the two laboratories should use the same test
protocol. This includes not only the same test voltage and the maximum test temperature, but also the same
temperature profile during a load cycle if load cycling is used. That is, the curve of time versus temperature
should be the same for both laboratories. The temperature gradient across the insulation should also be the
same for both laboratories. A reliable comparison of test results is only possible if both laboratories subject
test specimens to the same test parameters.
IEEE
Table 6—Designation of common conductor temperatures in the water and voltage test
conditions—Fixed time tests followed by diagnostic testing
such as an ACBD test
Designation of test conditions

Test voltage
30 °C or ambient 45 °C a 60 °C a 75 °C a
V0 b 1/30 1/45 1/60 1/75
2V0 2/30 2/45 2/60 2/75
3V0 3/30 3/45 3/60 3/75

a Conductor temperatures in air may be higher.
b Line to ground voltage (8.7 kV for 15 kV cables).
13. Failure
The following information is considered critical for a thorough test evaluation. Also, in Table 7 a list of
codes is provided to facilitate reporting the data. It is important that the locations of the failures be reported
since the cables may have seen different temperatures at different locations in the tank. The method of
locating the failure should also be reported.
Table 7—Code designations
Failure codes Type
A In air
T Termination
WL At waterline
W In water
D Removed for diagnostics
C Censored from data analysis, but should be reported and used in

conjunction with one of the above
M Mechanical damage
Abnormality codes See Clause 14
Measurements
t Insulation wall thickness at failure
R1 Radius under insulation
R2 Radius over insulation
L Active cable length (shielded cable length)
IEEE
Suggested information to report on each specimen in test evaluation:

Position in tank
Time under voltage
Number of current cycles
Test days, i.e., time in water
Type failure (A, T, WL, W, D, C, M)
Abnormalities
Measurements (t, R1, R2, L)
14. Abnormalities
A normal test consists of applying voltage of a specific magnitude and with temperature cycling, if used,
applied at the same time to specimens immersed in a tank. Although this type of testing is intended to
accelerate cable aging, a single evaluation can go on for months and even years before it is completed. Thus,
it is expected that an evaluation will have a number of abnormalities (see the definition in Clause 3).
Historically, many abnormalities have not been reported with the test results because their significance was
not clearly known. At the same time, not reporting abnormalities could be viewed as censoring of
information by those who want the opportunity to form independent conclusions on the meaning of the
results. The user may choose to censor the abnormal failures, but they must be reported. The user may
provide data analysis with or without these failures.
Abnormalities may be classified in four groups with respect to the effect on the outcome of the test.
— Class I. These result in immediate specimen failure (e.g., termination failure) [see item a) in
following list].
— Class II. These seriously affect the test outcome, but do not result in immediate specimen failure
(e.g., excessive temperature fluctuations) [see item b) in following list].
— Class III. These have a minimal effect on the test outcome (e.g., minor temperature fluctuations) [see
item c) in following list].
— Class IV. These specimen failures are physical or statistical outliers (e.g., failures that occur due to a
different mechanism than expected, and failures that are not expected or explainable) [see item d) in
following list].
Experience shows that the following abnormalities and corrective actions have occurred during past tank
tests:
a) Class I (result in immediate specimen failure)
Abnormalities
— Termination failure (includes stress cone failure)
— High-voltage test specimen conductor connector failure
— Waterline failure7
— Air failure7
— Failure at cable support point
Corrective action options
1) Log failure as abnormality; reterminate specimen (or splice); continue test; perform failure
analysis; analyze statistically to determine if it is an outlier.
2) Log failure as abnormality; reterminate (or splice); continue test.
7 If there are three or more failures of this type, they may be analyzed separately.
IEEE
3) Log as failure; treat as censored data value in analysis; replace with dummy
specimen;8 continue test.
4) Log failure as abnormality; treat as censored data value in analysis; remove specimen and start
new specimen.
5) Analyze data to determine how long a “hot” connection may have been affecting aging
conditions; then follow the previous steps 1, 2, 3, or 4.
6) Log failure as abnormality; remove specimen and start new specimen; perform failure analysis;
analyze to see if outlier.
b) Class II (seriously affect the test outcome)
Abnormalities
— Extended periods (> 2 h) above or below temperature tolerance for the entire sample before any
failures have occurred, or for specific specimens remaining after failures have occurred.
— Extended periods (> 24 h) above or below voltage tolerance for the entire sample before any
failures have occurred, or for specific specimens remaining after failures have occurred.
— Blocked conductor strands for any specimen.
1) Terminate test.
2) Adjust number of completed load cycles, but do not change test days. It has been shown that if
the timer days and the load-cycling days do not differ by more than ± 10%, the analysis is not
affected.
3) Adjust the number of test days but do not change the load-cycle days. It has been shown that if
the timer days and the load-cycling days do not differ by more than ± 10%, the analysis is not
affected.
4) Quantify abnormality and report with results.
5) Remove entire sample population or specimen and start new sample population or specimen.
6) Remove conductor blockage with pressure up to 2 atm (30 psi) with the cable at room
temperature. If unable to remove blockage, treat blocked specimens as deletions in statistical
data analysis.
c) Class III (minimal effect on the aging outcome)
Abnormalities
— Tank water level outside tolerance.
— Short periods (< 2 h) beyond temperature tolerance.
— Short periods (< 24 h) beyond voltage tolerance.
1) Log length and magnitude of abnormality.
8 This dummy specimen is not the same dummy cable that has T/Cs embedded in it for conductor temperature control and monitoring
(see 8.1). A dummy specimen should be used to fill vacated slots in tanks that do not employ water temperature control, since each
sample in the test population is in fact a heating element during the conductor load cycle. In order to maintain the same temperature
profile on each of the remaining test samples in the population for the duration of the ACLT, a failed sample should be replaced with a
dummy specimen of a similar construction and length as the failed sample. This dummy is not considered a part of the original
population since no water is injected into the strands to reduce the probability of a failure. Replacement of failed cables with dummy
specimens in water temperature controlled tanks should not be necessary in order to maintain the same temperature profile on each of
the remaining test samples in the population for the duration of the ACLT.
IEEE
d) Class IV (outliers)
Abnormalities
— Very early (obvious) outlier. Less than 10% of expected mean, geometric mean or characteristic
time to failure or mean breakdown strength.
— Early outlier. Not obvious at first, but after data analysis, it is shown to be an outlier.
— Late outlier (time to failure).
1) Analyze for cause. If cause found, replace with new specimen.
2) Analyze for cause. If cause found, replace with dummy specimen. 9
3) Analyze for cause. If cause not found, replace with new specimen.
4) Analyze for cause. If cause not found, replace with dummy specimen. 9
5) Outliers should be deleted from data analysis (and should be noted), but should not be deleted
from the reported data that accompanies data analysis. Data censoring consists of two possible
actions; deleting outliers (statistical or physical), or suspending data values. Deleting actually
means not using that value in the statistical data analysis. Suspended values are used in the data
analysis. The effect of suspensions is to optimistically overestimate the scale (mean) parameter
of the distribution. The effect of a deletion is to accurately estimate the scale parameter, but
widen the confidence bounds of the data set distribution by reducing the population size,
thereby increasing the possibility of passing the hypothesis test in a comparative data analysis.
15. Diagnostics
The following are commonly used evaluation or diagnostic techniques:

— Time-to-failure
— Fixed-time of aging followed by ac dielectric strength assessment
— Truncated population time to failure with ac dielectric strength assessment on remaining specimens
Other diagnostic tests that may be used are impulse breakdown tests (Katz, Seman, and Bernstein [B15]) and
water tree counts (ANSI/ICEA S-94-649 and ANSI/ICEA S-97-682).
When ac dielectric strength is a part of the evaluation, the breakdown strength of unaged cables should also
be measured and the statistical parameters calculated. A 5 min step-rise test is commonly used (ANSI/ICEA
S-94-649 and ANSI/ICEA S-97-682) that starts at 4 kV/mm (100 V/mil) and increases in 1.6 kV/mm (40 V/
mil) steps each 5 min duration, until failure of the insulation occurs. The 1.6 kV/mm (40 V/mil) step should
be based on the design insulation wall thickness [e.g., a 4.4 mm (0.175 in) design wall equals 7 kV steps].
The ACBD test failures should be reported as having been removed from the tank for diagnostics (failure
code D), as previously described in Clause 13. This guide recommends the following information be
reported on ACBD test failures:
— kV step in which failure occurred.
— Time between removal of tank test voltage from specimen and start of voltage for ACBD test.
— Time between removal of specimen from tank water and start of voltage for ACBD test.
9 See Clause 14 for explanation of dummy specimen.
IEEE
— Thickness of insulation at point of failure.

— Location of failure along cable.
Along with the destructive tests previously noted, nondestructive tests may also be employed as a diagnostic
tool. However, these are not as common or widely used at present as diagnostic techniques during
accelerated aging tests, as are the destructive ACBD or impulse tests, or water tree analysis previously
described. Both global and non-global diagnostic tests can potentially be employed (i.e., determining the
properties of the entire cable length in the tank or determining the condition of the cable at specific
locations). Global tests are represented by capacitance and/or tan delta measurements using power
frequency or very low frequency (VLF, e.g., 0.1 Hz) (Kuschel et al. [B16], Thärning et al. [B29]), or a range
of frequencies (dielectric spectroscopy) (Hvidsten et al. [B12]). These tests require that care be taken to
isolate the cable being measured from other cables in the tank. If such tests are being considered they should
be performed at the start of the aging and at regular intervals during the aging. At least three voltage levels
(e.g., 0.5V0) up to the aging voltage, are recommended (Densley [B8]). In addition both off-line PD
measurements and online signal measurements including PD may also be employed.
16. Data analysis
The reporting of failures and their codes has already been discussed. This clause will deal with how reported
failure data is to be analyzed. Failure data generated from the accelerated life test is often analyzed using a
probability distribution such as the Weibull or lognormal (Abernathy [B2], Nelson [B21]). The analysis may
be done manually, but it is recommended that a computer program be used for the calculations (Abernathy
[B2], Nelson [B21]). Two packages are widely used.10 For data sets where the population size is < 20, the
distribution used should be the Weibull. However, a distribution analysis to determine the “best-fit”
distribution should be performed and is readily available in the recommended software packages. If the plot
of the data is done manually, then the analysis of the data with the distribution (Weibull or lognormal)
providing the largest value of the coefficient of determination (r2) is the proper distribution. Acceptable data
fits to distributions are characterized by “r2” values > 0.90. However, when comparing two or more data
sets, the distributions must all be identical. The lognormal distribution should be considered if the fit with
the Weibull distribution is poor, i.e., if the r2 value of the regression of the Weibull distribution is < 0.9.
Typically, most failures occur in the section of cable submerged in water (failure code W). However, some
failures also occur at the waterline (failure code WL), in the air (failure code A), or in the termination
(failure code T). There may also be failures that occur due to mechanical damage (M). Any combination of
these failure types may be included in the statistical analysis. However, all of these failure codes should be
treated as suspensions, as they did not occur in the area of the specimen that has water in the conductor
strands and outside of the cable specimen, the desired and intended failure location. Also, specimens
removed for destructive diagnostic testing (D), such as ACBD or impulse breakdown testing, should be
included in the analysis as suspensions, using the aging times at which they were removed from the test.
Failures that are determined to be physical outliers (failed due to some other reason than the intended failure
mechanism) or statistical outliers (early or late failures, also known as perpetual survivors) should be
deleted from the data analysis. These outliers should have also been reported in the data report and should be
noted in the data analysis.
When reporting failure test results, it is very important to identify all failure types included in the data
analysis. This is easily accomplished through the use of failure code(s) A, W, and WL.
10 Fulton Findings LLC SuperSMITH™ and ReliaSoft's Weibull++®. This information is given for the convenience of users of this
guide and does not constitute an endorsement by the IEEE of these products. Equivalent products may be used if they can be shown to
lead to the same results.
IEEE
It is important to include termination failures (failure code T) in the statistical analysis, because this implies
that the specimen section in the preferred failure location was capable of surviving beyond the time of the
termination failure and would have failed at a later time.
The following information should be reported in the data analysis:

a) The characteristic life (or scale parameter), referred to as eta (η) or alpha (α) for the Weibull
distribution in the literature, and defined as the time or value at which 63.2% of the specimens have
failed. Alternatively, the geometric mean time to failure (GMTF), defined as the time or value at
which 50% of the specimens have failed, and referred to as MuAL (µ-mean antilog). Both scale
parameters are usually calculated by a computer program or can be read from their cumulative
distribution function plots.
b) The shape factor of the Weibull distribution, usually given as β, and defined as the slope of the
plotted line. The shape factor of the lognormal distribution, usually given as SigF, and also defined
as the slope of the plotted line. Both of these distribution shape parameters are usually calculated by
a computer program, or can be calculated from their cumulative distribution function plots
c) The number of specimens tested, and suspended, if any.
d) The number of deletions (outliers), if any.
e) The two-sided 90% confidence limits for the entire set of failure times of the plotted line.
f) The goodness of fit, as calculated by the coefficient of determination, r2.
g) The plot of the data.
The analysis should be reported as “complete” if all the specimens of the test population have failed and are
included. The analysis should be reported as “censored” if some specimens have not yet failed or if
abnormalities are included. In the latter case it is essential that a computer program be used, and that the
method of analysis giving the least bias in the results is used. Although the method of maximum likelihood
estimators (mle) is statistically correct and does handle the censored data case, it is best suited for specimen
sizes > 50. The method of linear regression (LR, X on Y) is the method that gives the least bias for data sets
with small specimen sizes (i.e., < 50). The general thinking is that LR is best for 80% of cases, and mle for
20%. Therefore it is important not to rule out the mle method, but LR should be the initial default method.
Many techniques for statistically analyzing lifetime data with Weibull statistics exist. Some of these may be
found in Abernathy [B2] and Nelson [B21].
17. Final report
The final report should contain all the important data about the test conditions and the results. An example of
the typical information to be included is given in Annex D.
Although it is preferred that the test conditions be reported in full (e.g., 4V0, 75 °C and deionized water) they
sometimes are reported in an abbreviated form. As the most important parameters are voltage magnitude,
maximum temperature of the conductor in the water, and the water characteristics, these three parameters
could be arranged as follows:
X/Y where X is the ratio of the test to the rated voltages, Y is the temperature in °C. For example
4/75 would represent the test conditions of 4V0 at 75 °C. Alternatively, the temperatures could be
assigned digits for specific values (e.g., 45 °C could be represented by 1, 60 °C by 2). If salts are
added to the water, the concentration in grams per liter could be included, for example 4/75/5 would
represent 4V0, 75 °C and 5 g/l water solution.
IEEE
18. Conclusions
The guide discusses the typical test parameters to be controlled in a tank test to accelerate the aging of
medium-voltage extruded power cables due to water trees. It also describes techniques to control and
measure these parameters.
In the first edition of this guide it was not possible to recommend specific test conditions. In this second
edition it has been possible to narrow the range of recommended test parameters such as tank type and size,
voltage, and temperature.
Following the recommendations ensures that aging tests performed in different laboratories according to a
specific set of aging conditions will be conducted having well-controlled critical parameters and will result
in the cables in the laboratories being subjected to the same test conditions. In addition, following the
suggestions for the test specimens, tank type and size, preconditioning, and data analysis should also
maintain a high degree of consistency in the data between laboratories. Unusual aging conditions that can
affect the test results have been discussed along with relevant data to be included in a test report.
IEEE
Annex A
(informative)
Preconditioning
Preconditioning of test specimens, see Clause 6, is carried out to limit the concentrations of cross-linking
by-products, which can affect the aging of XLPE cables. Although there will be similar cross-linking by-
products in TRXLPE and EPR cables, not enough is known about the effects of by-products on these types
of cables.
The most commonly used chemical cross-linking agent, dicumyl peroxide, produces a number of cross-
linking agent by-products that include acetophenone, cumyl alcohol, α-methyl styrene, and smaller
quantities of other by-products. Methods for by-product analysis and data for new and aged cables have
been reported (Damon, Huang, Johnson [B7], Groeger et al. [B10]).
Residual cross-linking agent by-products can influence the electrical properties of polymeric insulating
materials such as XLPE, TRXLPE, and EPR. The residuals will depend on the specific chemical reactions,
which occur during manufacture and the rate at which the by-products subsequently diffuse through the
extruded layers. In carefully controlled experiments on XLPE molded slabs and ribbons, removed from
cables, the short-term 60 Hz breakdown strength increased but the impulse breakdown strength decreased
with increased concentration of by-products (Damon, Huang, Johnson [B7], Eichhorn [B9], Wartusch and
Wagner [B33], Yan et al. [B34]). The ACBD strength of XLPE increased between 10% and 15% when the
by-products were present up to 2% but decreased when the by-product concentrations exceeded 2% (Yan et
al. [B34]). This study also showed that mixtures of the volatile by-products gave synergistic results. The
electrical and water treeing resistance was improved by the presence of by-products (Ashcraft [B3],
Wartusch and Wagner [B33]). Szaniszlo [B28] has shown that the ACBD strength of TRXLPE 25 kV cables
decreased with increasing acetophenone content (contrary to conventional XLPE).The ACBD strength did
not show a good correlation with another by-product, dimethylbenzyl alcohol. Although this discussion is
not intended to be a comprehensive literature review, the results show that the influence of the by-products
on breakdown strength is quite complex.
Limited data are available on the effects of by-products on the long-term behavior of either molded slabs or
cables. Controlled tests to examine the long-term effects are difficult to carry out due to the already
mentioned migratory nature of the by-products. An examination of new and service-aged steam-cured
XLPE cables showed that the acetophenone level decreased from approximately 3000 ppm to 40 ppm during
the first two years of installation and that very little (< 15 ppm) remained after 8 to 10 years (Martin and
Hartlein [B19]). The loss of by-products also occurred when a cable was stored on the reel. It was concluded
that the loss of acetophenone would be expected to increase the water tree growth rate. In another study of
steam-cured XLPE cables that had failed after 6 to 13 years in service at six utilities (Pélissou [B23], Katz et
al. [B14]) organic volatiles and halos were present in many of the cables. The total organic levels in the aged
cables were < 100 ppm. Although the levels of acetophenone were < 10 ppm, the levels of the cross-linking
agent, dicumyl peroxide, were found to be variable, typically < 20 ppm but up to 70 ppm in one cable after
11 years in service. The halo contained several thousand ppm of water. The ACBD strength was lower in the
cables with halos.
The most common form of preconditioning is to subject the cables to elevated temperatures to increase the
rate of diffusion of the by-products from the insulation. For example, after heating the conductor of steam-
cured 15 kV cables by circulating current to 90 °C ± 2 °C for 500 h in an open atmosphere, the amounts of
acetophenone and α-methyl styrene were reduced to less than 10 ppm and cumyl alcohol to less than
100 ppm (Abdolall [B1]).
IEEE
The effects of three types of thermal preconditioning on dry-cured 15 kV XLPE cables aged in tanks have
been studied (Walton, Smith, Thue [B30]). The preconditioning procedures were as follows:
a) Cyclically heat the conductor to 90 °C for 8 h on and 16 h off for 120 h.
b) Heat the conductor to 60 °C continuously for 120 h.
c) Heat the conductor continuously until the temperature of the insulation shield reaches 110 °C and
immediately switch off the conductor heating current.
The results are shown in Table A.1.
Table A.1—Results of preconditioning tests on 15 kV XLPE cables aged in tanks
GMTF in days
Age of cable (–90, +90% confidence limits)
Type of preconditioning after
Treatment
treatment extrusion Aged at 4V0
(months) Aged at 3V0 and
and
75 °C a(3/75)
90 °C a (4/90)
None (i.e., fresh cable) 2 64 (56, 74) 386 (366, 406)
A 90 °C on conductor cycled 8 h 60 45 (40, 50) 264 (214, 325)

on 16 h off for 120 h
B 60 °C on conductor continuous 60 46 (37, 57) 321 (309, 333)

for 120 h
C Insulation shield to 110 °C 54 103 (85, 124) 325 (284, 371)

then immediate cool down
a Maximum temperature during load cycling.
Preconditioning treatment A subjected the cables to a total 40 h at 90 °C, 120 h at 60 °C for the cables in
treatment B, while the conductor temperature in treatment C was not measured but was probably
significantly greater than 110 °C for a short time (on the order of minutes). Neither the amounts of cross-
linking by-products nor the morphology were measured before or after the preconditioning. Treatments A
and B would be expected to yield different insulation morphologies. Melting and recrystallization will occur
through part of the cable insulation wall thickness. Treatment C probably resulted in a temperature at the
conductor in excess of 130 °C for a short time; this could lead to diffusion of species into or out of the
shields into the insulation in addition to morphological changes, the rearrangement of crystalline
imperfections, and relaxation of the insulation. Complete melting of the entire wall was probable as the
temperature reached 110 °C; hence re-melting and recrystallization of the entire wall occurred, in contrast to
procedures A and B.
Preconditioning treatments A and B yielded similar values of GMTF for the 4/90 conditions. Although there
was a 20% difference under 3/75 conditions, there was considerable scatter in the data, particularly for
treatment A. Without knowledge of the amounts of the cross-linking by-products or the morphologies, it is
difficult to interpret the results with respect to the effects of the cross-linking by-products or morphology.
The results demonstrate that there is a wide variation in GMTF as the preconditioning procedure is changed
for XLPE, and therefore great care is required in applying a preconditioning procedure. Good temperature
measurement and control are essential. The effect of such temperature variations on TRXLPE and EPR is
not currently known.
The recommended preconditioning protocols, listed in Table 2 in Clause 6, are 360 h at 90 °C in free air or
in a circulating-air oven (for cable core testing on a common design as well as cable design testing).
IEEE
Table A.2 lists a number of other preconditioning protocols that have been used in previous tank testing
efforts at various laboratories.
Table A.2—Preconditioning protocols
List of preconditioning protocols used in different laboratories
1 No preconditioning (as received)
2 72 h at 75 °C conductor in free air a

4 50 h at 75 °C, followed by 150 h at 90 °C conductor in free air a
5 50 h at 90 °C, followed by 150 h at 130 °C conductor in free air a
6 110 °C instantaneous at insulation shield
8 120 h (8 on/16 off) at 90 °C conductor in free air a
10 120 days AWTT

a When cable specimens are preconditioned by circulating current in the conductor, the
temperature from specimen to specimen and/or along the cable length will likely vary as
much as 10 °C. This variation is a function of several factors including the orientation of the
specimens, the distance between the specimens and/or coils and adjacent structures, and the
location of the specimen and/or coil relative to the group of specimens being
preconditioned.
Heating cables in a circulating-air oven should reduce the variations in temperature from specimen to
specimen and along the cable length that can occur when specimens are heated by circulating current in open
air. It must be noted that heating in a circulating-air oven subjects the complete cable core to the oven
temperature, unlike conductor heating when the insulation shield will be about 10 °C lower than the
conductor temperature. The higher temperature of the insulation shield could increase the diffusion of
volatile products from the shield into the insulation.
IEEE
Annex B
(informative)
Water tanks—Historical information
When accelerated aging testing of medium-voltage cables began in the 1980s, several types and sizes of
tanks were used and described in the first edition of this guide. This annex gives a summary of the different
tanks that have been used and are still in use. The recommended tank material is stainless steel and the
dimensions are listed in Table 3 in Clause 7.
Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3 in Clause 7 show several tank layout schematics that are in use. They
provide a reference for the following paragraphs on tank structure in this annex. It should be noted that not
all elements shown in the schematics will necessarily be used for all test setups. In Table B.1 and Table B.2,
capitalized letters in parentheses refer to elements in the schematics.
The tank structure is as follows:
— Tank shape. The typical reservoir shape is rectangular, but others such as cylindrical, as shown in
Figure 3, are in use. Tank shape should be reported.
— Tank size. The tank used should be large enough to accommodate at least 10 cable specimens or a
single cable equivalent in length to 10 specimens plus any control specimens such as a dummy loop
used in induced current heating/temperature monitoring. There should be sufficient distance between
cable specimens and tank sides, bottom, and other cable specimens to prevent uneven heating of any
individual specimens and to allow adequate circulation of the water.
When data from various tests are compared, the number of cable specimens plus the following tank
size variables should be considered: length, width, height (in the case of generally rectangular
shapes or the appropriate dimensions for other shapes), and depth of water. Where necessary
because of unusual shape or design, the ratio of water volume to submerged cable volume should
also be considered. These parameters will have significant effects on the temperature of the water if
the water temperature is not controlled. However, if the water temperature is controlled, less
attention to tank dimensions and structure given in Table B.1, Table B.2, and Table B.3 can be
tolerated.
Table B.1 lists nominal size and shape parameters currently in use in North America.
Table B.2 lists the commonly used dimensions of tanks and materials to be used according to their
shapes (Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3).
— Materials of construction. In general, the inner tank surface, the specimen mounts, and any other
materials making contact with the water in the tanks should be constructed from suitable inert
materials that will not corrode in the presence of water and will not form an electrolytic cell with any
component in the cable specimen.
— The type of material contacting the water should be reported. Also, any materials used to insulate the
tanks or used to insulate or retard surface evaporation of the water, and their thicknesses, should be
reported to allow determination of their impact on water temperature and quality.
Typical materials of construction in current use are shown in Table B.3.
IEEE
Table B.1—Nominal tank sizes
Typical tank shapes and sizes (metric units)
Layout tank
1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3
type
Tank dimensions (mm)
Length 1500 1650 3000 1500 1550 1650 2100 2100 3250 1220 a
Width 1220 1350 1220 1220 890 1120 1070 1220 1220 1220 a
Height 1050 1500 1220 980 910 980 1220 1220 1220 1220
Specimen to tank spacing (mm)
Side (HS) 300 25 230 75 50 65 75 25 305 40
End (TS) 125 75 220, 38 65 50 75 130 100 —

430 b
Bottom (VS) 150 130 50 230 140 130 75 25 305 0
Specimen to specimen spacing (mm)
(SS1) 130 59 220 115 115 140 140 130 145 0
(SS2) — — — 340 340 420 420 380 — —
Water depth 900 1170 1170 915 810 915 1140 915 1120 1220
Typical tank shapes and sizes (English units)
Layout tank 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3
type
Tank dimensions (in)
Length 60 65 120 60 61 65 84 84 125 48 a
Width 48 53 48 48 36 44 42 48 48 48 a
Height 42 60 48 39 36 39 48 48 48 48
Specimen to tank spacing (in)
Side (HS) 12 1.0 9.0 3.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 1.0 12 1.5
End (TS) 5.0 3.0 8.5, 1.5 2.5 2.0 3.0 5.0 3.9 —
17 b
Bottom (VS) 6.0 5.0 2.0 9.0 5.5 5.0 3.0 1.0 12 0
Specimen to specimen spacing (in)
(SS1) 5 2.5 8.5 4.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5 5.7 0
(SS2) — — — 13.5 13.5 16 16 15 — —
Water depth 36 46 46 36 32 36 45 36 44 48
a Tank shape reported as cylindrical, length and width = diameter.
b Tank to specimen spacing reported as different for each end.
IEEE
Table B.2—Commonly used materials and tank dimensions
Tank details Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
Length (mm) [in] ≥ 1140 [≥ 45] ≥ 1500 [≥ 60] ≥ 840 [≥ 33]
Width (mm) [in] ≥ 800 [≥ 30] ≥ 800 [≥ 30]
Height (mm) [in] ≥ 910 [≥ 36] ≥ 910 [≥ 36] ≥ 910 [≥ 36]
Side spacing (HS) (mm) [in] ≥ 50 [≥ 2] ≥ 50 [≥ 2] ≥ 50 [≥ 2]
End spacing (TS) (mm) [in] ≥ 75 [≥ 3] ≥ 50 [≥ 2]
Bottom spacing (VS) (mm) [in] ≥ 50 [≥ 2] ≥ 50 [≥ 2] ≥0
Specimen spacing 1 (SS1) (mm) [in] ≥ 50 [≥ 2] ≥ 50 [≥ 2] ≥0
Specimen spacing 2 (SS2) (mm) [in] ≥ 75 [≥ 3]
Water depth (mm) [in] ≥ 800 [≥ 30] ≥ 800 [≥ 30] ≥ 800 [≥ 30]
Tank material SS or PL a SS or PL a SS or PL a
Tank insulation Water resistant Water resistant Water resistant
Insulation thickness (IT) (mm) [in] ≥ 25 [≥ 1.0] ≥ 25 [≥ 1.0] ≥ 25 [≥ 1.0]
Specimen mount Polymeric Polymeric Polymeric
Surface cover Polymeric Polymeric Polymeric

a SS = stainless steel; PL = polymer or polymer lined.
IEEE
Table B.3—Commonly used construction materials for tanks
Inner tank surface Tank insulation

Specimen
Surface cover
Thickness Thickness mounts
Material Material
(mm) [in] (mm) [in]
1 Stainless steel 2.2 [0.087] Foam 25 [1.0] Acrylic sheets Polymer spheres
2 Stainless steel 0.8 [0.03] Fiberglass 75 [3.0] PVC pipe Acrylic sheets
racks
3 Vinyl liner Concrete struc- 150 [6] conc. Fiberglass Expanded

ture with sand sides and racks polystyrene
on bottom and bottom
foam on sides 150 [6] sand
bottom only
4 Stainless steel 3.2 [0.125] Redwood 41 [1.63] Acrylic sheets Polymer spheres
8 Stainless steel 5 [0.19] Foam 51 [2.0] Polypropylene Polycarbonate
9 Polyethylene 8 [0.32] Fiberglass 38 [1.5] None Expanded

polystyrene
10 Polyethylene Fiberglass None Polymer spheres
11 Galvanized 1 [0.04] Foam 38 [1.5] Fiberglass Polymer spheres

steel with racks
vinyl liner
IEEE
Annex C
(informative)
Temperature measurement
The techniques given in C.1 and C.2 for preparation and mounting of T/Cs are a compilation of those used at
several laboratories throughout North America.
C.1 Conductor temperature measurements using thermocouples
a) Lab A. To measure the temperature of the conductor of the dummy specimen, commercially
available SS-sheathed, Type T or Type K T/Cs are used. The sheaths have a 0.5 mm (20 mil) outside
diameter and are electrically isolated from the T/C junction located at the end of the SS sheath
(ungrounded).
To attach the T/C to the conductor, a hole is drilled perpendicular to the cable axis down to the
conductor. A specimen piece of cable is often used to gauge the correct drilling depth. The drill bit
diameter is approximately 0.53 mm (21 mil). The end of the T/C sheath is coated with a high-
temperature heat sink compound, which is commonly used as a heat sink compound for solid state
electronics.
The T/C sheath is then placed into the hole down to the conductor. A small bend is put in the sheath
such that the sheath rises about 2.5 mm (0.10 in) above the cable surface at the drilled hole. It
immediately bends back down to the cable surface. Silicone tape is wrapped around the cable over
this bend, placing a constant inward force on the sheath, keeping it in good contact with the
conductor. The silicone tape should be applied so that the T/C is held securely in place but not so
tight that the cable deforms during load cycling.
b) Lab B. Cost effective unsheathed T/Cs can be fabricated from Type J (note that unsheathed Type J
can corrode in water) or Type T T/C wire. T/C wires with 20 AWG to 24 AWG solid conductors
seem to be well-suited for the fabrication of T/C junctions, which can be used to measure conductor
temperature. The tips of the T/C wires are usually joined together by a specially built T/C welder
that utilizes a capacitive-discharge technique. To locate the T/C junction next to the cable conductor,
a 6.3 mm (0.25 in) diameter plug of insulation shield + insulation + conductor shield material is
removed using a sharp coring tool. The T/C wires are bent at a 90° angle near the junction so that the
junction can be placed flat against the conductor surface that was exposed by removing the plug.
The same plug of insulation shield + insulation + conductor shield material is then replaced and held
in place by wrapping self-amalgamating tape around the power cable. A multi-purpose room-
temperature vulcanized (RTV) sealant may also be used to seal any gaps around the top of the plug
prior to the application of the tape. To insure that the T/C junction is making contact with the
conductor, an ohmmeter is used to check continuity between each T/C wire and the cable conductor.
Several T/Cs are mounted on the conductor surface in close proximity to the measurement area as a
means of determining when a particular T/C is no longer functional. It is also important to remember
that the conductor temperature will not always be the same along its length. To establish accurate
temperature profiles, several T/Cs should be installed along the length of the conductor.
c) Lab C. Prepare the T/C junctions by welding the tips of the T/C wire (usually Type J). Smaller T/C
wires at the point of temperature measurement will disturb the measurement area the least. Being
careful not to drill into the conductor, drill four small holes into the insulation separated by 90°
along the circumference of the cable. The T/C junctions are placed into these small holes. The T/C
junctions should be firmly seated against the conductor. On stranded conductors, two adjacent outer
wires can be slightly separated so that the T/C junction can be placed between the wires. Once the
T/Cs are in place, machined plugs of polyethylene with the same diameter as the drilled holes are
IEEE
placed over the T/Cs, and the plugs are then secured by taping them in place. Another set of T/Cs
located 60 cm to 90 cm (2 ft to 3 ft) away, and mounted in the same manner as the first set, should
also be monitored to insure the integrity of the temperature measurements.
C.2 Outside cable surface temperature measurements using thermocouples
a) Lab A. To measure the temperature of the insulation shield or jacket, a welded bead is made on a
Type T or a Type K T/C. The bead is then soldered to a small square of copper tape. The copper tape
is typically 13 mm × 13 mm × 0.13 mm (0.5 in × 0.5 in × 0.005 in) thick. Heat sink compound is
applied to the side of the copper tape opposite the T/C and placed against the insulation shield or the
jacket. It is then held in place with silicone tape. The silicone tape should be applied so that the T/C
is held securely in place but not so tight that the cable deforms during load cycling.
b) Lab B. To measure the temperature of the insulation shield or jacket, commercially available SS-
sheathed Type T or Type J T/Cs are used. The sheaths are electrically isolated from the T/C junction
located at the end of the SS sheath (ungrounded). These SS-sheathed T/Cs are secured to the
insulation shield or jacket with self-amalgamating tape.
c) Lab C. To measure the temperature of the insulation shield, a welded bead is made on a Type T or a
Type J T/C. The bead is then soldered to the center of 25 mm × 25 mm (1.0 in × 1.0 in) square of
copper tape. The copper square is then laid flat on the insulation shield and secured with tape. To
measure the insulation shield surface temperature on a jacketed cable, a window is first cut in the
jacket by folding back a small flap of the jacket material. The copper tape square with the T/C is
then laid flat on the insulation shield surface and the flap of jacket material is replaced and secured
with tape.
Several of these T/Cs are usually secured around the circumference of the cable in at least three
different locations along the length of the cable.
IEEE
Annex D
(informative)
Final report
The following information should be included in the test report.
D.1 Test specimens
Table 1 of this guide gives information on the test specimens, cable construction, extrusion conditions,
number of specimens to be tested, test specimen geometry, etc. The items in Table 1 should be included in
the report, if they are available.
D.2 Prior tests and preconditioning
The report should contain the results of cable quality control tests and the details of the preconditioning
tests. Any abnormalities, as described in Clause 14, should be included.
D.3 Test structure
A schematic of the tank layout should be given (see relevant clause of guide for examples). The details of
the tank should be tabulated. A typical example is shown as follows.
Tank details
Length (mm)
Width (mm)
Height (mm)
Side spacing (mm)
End spacing (mm)
Bottom spacing (mm)
Specimen spacing 1 (mm)
Specimen spacing 2 (mm)
Water depth (mm)
Tank material
Tank insulation
Insulation thickness (mm)
Specimen mount
Surface cover
IEEE
D.4 Temperature
The report should contain a figure indicating where the temperatures are measured in the test specimen and
the water and also how it is controlled. A figure of the temperature profile showing the variation of
temperature with time for startup and at least one stable temperature cycle should also be included. The
maximum and minimum temperatures of the test specimen and the water should be tabulated, including
tolerances. It is important to list any abnormalities, as described in Clause 14.
D.5 Water
The water characteristics, in the tank or in the cable conductors, and any properties measured (e.g.,
resistivity, pH, ion content) should be included. The frequency of monitoring the water (e.g., weekly,
monthly, or quarterly) in each tank, the water/cable volume ratio and the tolerance on the water level, the
water characteristics used to maintain the levels in the tank and cable conductors, and the use of water
circulation in the tank should be stated. Any abnormalities in the condition of the water, either in the tank or
in the cable conductor, should be listed.
D.6 Voltage
The amplitude and frequency of the voltage should be included along with the THD. Voltage interruptions,
both scheduled and unscheduled, should be reported. Details of transients, if measured, should also be
included along with any abnormalities, as described in Clause 14.
D.7 Results and data analysis
The data should be analyzed using the Weibull or lognormal distributions and presented either graphically or
in tabular form or both. The analysis should include the characteristic time to failure, the shape parameter,
and the 90% confidence limits. Data excluded from the analysis due to an abnormality such as termination
failure, etc., should be mentioned.
IEEE
Annex E
(informative)
Bibliography
[B1] Abdolall, K., “Design of an Accelerated Aging Test for Polymer Insulated Distribution Cables,”
Conference Record of 1990 IEEE International Symposium on Electrical Insulation, Toronto, Canada, 1990,
pp. 343–347.
[B2] Abernathy, R., “The New Weibull Handbook,” Dr. R. Abernathy, 536 Oyster Road, North Palm Beach,
FL 33408-4328, 1993.
[B3] Ashcraft, A., “Water Treeing in Polymer Dielectrics,” Kabelitems, No. 152, 1979, pp. 5–11.
[B4] Banks, V. A. A., Faremo, H., and Steennis, E. F., “An Accelerated Aging Test on the Basis of 500 Hz
for Water Treeing in Cables,” Proceedings Fourth International Conference on Insulated Power Cables
(Jicable), June 25–29, 1995, pp. 347–356.
[B5] Bartnikas, R., Densley, R. J., and Eichhorn, R. M., “Accelerated Aging Tests for Polymer Cables
Under Wet Conditions,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWD-6, pp. 929–937, 1991.
[B6] Bartnikas, R., et al., “Accelerated Life Testing of Wet Cable Specimens at Frequencies above 60 Hz,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-99, pp. 1575–1585, 1980.
[B7] Damon, D. H., Huang, S. J., and Johnson, J. F., “Electric Strength of XLPE Cable Insulation
Containing Controlled Amounts of the Volatile Products of the Cross-linking Reaction,” 1990 Annual
Report, Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomenon, 1990, pp. 398–404.
[B8] Densley, J., “Aging and Diagnostics in Extruded Insulations for Power Cables,” Fifth International
Conference on Conduction and Breakdown in Solid Dielectrics, 1995, pp. 1–15.
[B9] Eichhorn, R. M., “Organic Residues in Polyethylene Insulation Cross-linked with Dicumyl Peroxide,”
Conference Record 1972 IEEE Underground Transactions Conference, 1972, pp. 282–285.
[B10] Groeger, J. H., et al., “Surmounting Difficulties in the Application of Diagnostics for Characterization
of Aged Polymeric Cable Insulation,” 1990 CIGRE, Paper 15/33-09, 1990.
[B11] Hartlein, R., Harper, V. S., and Ng, H., “Effects of Voltage Surges in Extruded Dielectric Cable Life
Project Update,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWD-8, No. 2, 1994, pp. 611–619.
[B12] Hvidsten, S., et al., “Condition Assessment of Water Treed Service Aged XLPE Cables by Dielectric
Response Measurements,” 2000 CIGRE, Paper 21-201, 2000.
[B13] IEEE 100, The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms, Seventh Edition. New York:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
[B14] Katz, C., et al., “Emergency Overload Characteristics of Extruded Dielectric Cable Operating and
130 °C and Above,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-103, No. 12, pp. 3454-
3463, December 1984.
IEEE
[B15] Katz, C., Seman, G. W., and Bernstein, B. S., “Low Temperature Aging of XLPE and EP Insulated
Cables with Voltage Transients,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWD-10, No. 1, 1995, pp.
34–42.
[B16] Kuschel, M., et al., “Diagnostic Techniques for Service-Aged XLPE-Insulated Medium-Voltage
Cables,” Fourth International Conference on Insulated Power Cables, (Jicable), 25-29 June, 1995, pp. 504–
508; also published in REE, Special Issue, Vol.1, Aug.1996, pp.66–72.
[B17] Luzzi, G. J., “Gas Pressure Build-up in Aluminum Conductor Cable,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 101, No. 6, 1982, pp. 1697–1699.
[B18] Lyle, R., “Effect of Testing Parameters on the Outcome of Accelerated Cable Life Test,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 3(2), 1988, pp. 434–439.
[B19] Martin, M. A., and Hartlein, R. A., “Correlation of Electrochemical Treeing in Power Cables
Removed from Service and in Cables Tested in the Laboratory,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus
and Systems, Vol. PAS-99, 1980, pp. 1597–1605.
[B20] Mashikian, M. S., et al., “Water-Treeing Propensity Tests of Materials and Cables in the United
States,” CIGRE Paper 15/21-02, 1992.
[B21] Nelson, W., Accelerated Testing. John Wiley, 1990.
[B22] Pélissou, S., “Effect of water on the performance of XLPE insulation,” Proceedings of the 3rd ICSD
Conference, 1989, pp. 432–6.
[B23] Pélissou, S., “Relation Between the Halo and Water Trees in XLPE Cables,” 1988 Annual Report,
Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomenon, pp. 101-108, 1988.
[B24] Phillips, P. J., and Vatansever, A., “Crystallinity in Chemically Crosslinked Low Density
Polyethylene,” Polymer, Vol. 30, p. 710, 1989.
[B25] Schroth, R. G., Kalkner, W., and Fredrich, D., “Test Methods for Evaluating the Water Tree
Behaviour of Extruded Cable Insulations,” CIGRE Paper 15/21–01, 1990.
[B26] Srinivas, N. N., Bernstein, B. S., and Decker, R. A., “Effects of DC Testing on AC Breakdown
Strength of XLPE Insulated Cables Subjected to Laboratory Accelerated Aging,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, Vol. PWD-5, No. 4, 1990, pp. 1643–1651.
[B27] Steennis, E. F., and Faremo, H., “State of the Art of Water Tree Testing on Cables—The
Development of an Accelerated Aging Test,” 1992 CIGRE, Paper 15/21–03, 1992.
[B28] Szaniszlo, S., “Breakdown Characteristics of TRXLPE,” Minutes of 95th meeting of IEEE Insulated
Conductors Committee (ICC), Spring 1994, Reno, NV, pp. V-6, and V-C-1-V-C-4.
[B29] Thärning, P., et al., “High Voltage Dielectric Response Analyser for Cable Diagnostics,” 1993
Annual Report, Conference on Electrical Insulation and Dielectric Phenomenon, 1993, pp. 745–752.
[B30] UNIPEDE-DISCAB, “International Cable Fault Statistics on Synthetically Insulated MV Cables,”

CIRED Conference, Vol. 1, 1989, pp. 200–206.
[B31] Walton, M. D. “Aging of Distribution Cables in Controlled Temperature Tank Tests,” EPRI
Technical Report TR 108405-V2, August 1997.
IEEE
[B32] Walton, M. D., Smith, J. T., and Thue, W. A., “Accelerated Aging of Extruded Dielectric Power
Cables, Part 1: Control and Monitoring Methodology,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 7(2),
1992, pp. 596–602.
[B33] Wartusch, J., and Wagner, H., “About the Significance of Peroxide Decomposition Products in XLPE
Cable Insulation,” Proceedings, 1976 IEEE International Symposium on Electrical Insulation, Montreal,
Canada, 1976, pp. 219–223.
[B34] Yan, S., et al., “Electric Strength of XLPE Containing Acetophenone and Other Volatile Substances,”
Conference Record, 1990 IEEE International Symposium on Electrical Insulation, pp. 305-308, 1990.

IEEE Guide For Accelerated Aging Tests For Medium-Voltage (5 KV 35 KV) Extruded Electric Power Cables Using Water-Filled Tanks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

IEEE Guide For Accelerated Aging Tests For Medium-Voltage (5 KV 35 KV) Extruded Electric Power Cables Using Water-Filled Tanks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE Guide For Accelerated Aging Tests For Medium-Voltage (5 KV 35 KV) Extruded Electric Power Cables Using Water-Filled Tanks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE Guide for Accelerated Aging

Tests for Medium-Voltage (5 kV–35 kV)

IEEE Power Engineering Society

IEEE IEEE Std 1407™-2007

IEEE Guide for Accelerated Aging

Approved 6 December 2007

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Copyright © 2008 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

The trademark SuperSMITH belongs to Fulton Findings LLC.

Weibull++ is a registered trademark of ReliaSoft Corporation.

PDF: ISBN 978-0-7381-5352-0 STD95749

Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

Laws and regulations

Updating of IEEE documents

iv Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.

Current interpretations can be accessed at the following URL: http://standards.ieee.org/reading/ieee/interp/

Stan Arnot Randall C. Groves Gary L. Michel

Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved. v

Richard DeBlasio Richard H. Hulett Narayanan Ramachandran

Satish K. Aggarwal, NRC Representative

vi Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.

2. Normative references ........................................................................................................................... 3

4. Cable materials and design considerations .......................................................................................... 4

4.1 Cable core test.............................................................................................................................. 5

5. Test specimens ..................................................................................................................................... 6

6. Prior tests and thermal preconditioning of specimens ......................................................................... 7

8.1 Test specimen conductor temperature ....................................................................................... 13

9.1 Water nature............................................................................................................................... 18

11. Time ................................................................................................................................................... 23

12. Test matrix ......................................................................................................................................... 23

13. Failure ................................................................................................................................................ 24

16. Data analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 28

Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved. vii

Annex A (informative) Preconditioning ........................................................................................................ 31

Annex B (informative) Water tanks—Historical information ....................................................................... 34

Annex C (informative) Temperature measurement ....................................................................................... 38

Annex D (informative) Final report............................................................................................................... 40

Annex E (informative) Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 42

viii Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved. 1

This guide will:

2 Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved.

ICEA T-24-380, Guide for Partial-Discharge Test Procedure.6

3.2 Abbreviations and acronyms

Copyright © 2008 IEEE. All rights reserved. 3

ACLT accelerated cable life test

AWTT accelerated water treeing test

DSC differential scanning calorimetry

EPR ethylene propylene rubber

GMTF geometric mean time to failure

mle maximum likelihood estimators

tan δ loss tangent (dissipation factor) of insulation

THD total harmonic distortion

TRXLPE tree retardant cross-linked polyethylene

V0 line to ground voltage

VLF very low frequency

ω 2πf where f is the frequency in Hz of applied voltage

XLPE cross-linked polyethylene