Corona noise on the 400 kV overhead power line -

measurements and computer modeling

A. MUJČIĆ, N.SULJANOVIĆ, M. ZAJC, J.F. TASIČ

University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Digital Signal Processing

Laboratory
Tržaška 25, 1000 Ljubljana, Republic of Slovenia
aljo.mujcic@ldos.fe.uni-lj.si
Phone: +386 1 4768 880
Fax: +386 1 4768 855
Abstract The paper presents an experimental research in the corona noise performed on a 400 kV overhead
power line with a horizontal disposition of conductors. The high-voltage (HV) power line in its role of a
communication channel is a source of different noises characterizing an important feature of this communication
media. The main objective was measuring and modeling the corona noise. Measurements of the Power Spectrum
Density (PSD) and relative corona noise within a power frequency period are presented for different weather
conditions. The algorithm for measuring variations in the corona noise level is described on the basis of noise
samples. The maximum peaks exceed the Root-Mean Square (RMS) noise level by 7.95 dB at foul weather
conditions and by 2.9 dB at fair weather conditions. An appropriate computer model of the corona noise
compliant with the measurement results is proposed.

Keyword: noise measurements, digital power line communication, corona noise, high-
voltage power line.

I. Introduction

The corona noise is caused by partial discharges on insulators and in air surrounding electrical
conductors of overhead power lines. Discharges occur on the three different phase conductors
at different times. The corona noise level is considerably dependent on weather conditions. It
is well known that the effect of the corona noise is particularly strong in foul weather
conditions [1 - 5].
Characterization of the power line noise in international standards is based on the PSD and
average RMS voltage [1, 2]. The corona noise is defined as a voltage or power generated by
dischargers on the power line [5].
Properties of the corona noise are significant for both analogue and digital power line
communications but their influences on decreasing the channel quality are different. The
analogue Power Line Carrier (PLC) modem is tolerant to degradation of the channel quality
caused by the corona noise. Thus, the modeling of this noise was based on the Additive White

1
Gaussian Noise (AWGN) [1,2]. On the other hand, the digital PLC modem depends on the
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR). If SNR is under the minimal required threshold, all services
will drop out simultaneously [2]. The lowest SNR in digital PLC communications appears
when the corona noise has one of the maximum values. Therefore, modeling of the corona
noise is very important as a starting point for investigations into channel coding techniques in
the digital PLC communications. In the analogue PLC communications the corona noise is
considered as AWGN [1]. Its level is described with an average RMS voltage assuming that
the power of the corona noise is equivalent to the white noise. In digital PLC communications
such approach leads to wrong results [2]. From the nature of the corona noise it is clear that
the noise has different value levels within a power frequency period.
Typically, the measurement of the corona noise gives only its average level within an
observed time interval. Our aim was to measure noise levels during a power frequency period
and to model the noise level variations.
The PSD and the ratio of the average RMS voltage at any moment in the period of 20 ms to
the average RMS voltage of the corona noise give a complete description of the noise. The
applied theoretical approach to this measurement is presented in [2]. Our adjustment of this
algorithm for the corona noise measurement was made on the basis of digitally recorded
samples (Section VI). The analysis of the relative corona noise within a power frequency
period was made with recorded equidistant and peak noise samples.
The paper is organized in the following manner. The basic corona noise is described in
Section II. The measurement setup is given in Section III. The measurement of the noise PSD
is presented in Section IV. Section V proposes an approach to the measurement and
calculation of the corona noise variations inside a power frequency period. This section also
addresses corona noise variations inside a power frequency period at foul and fair weather
conditions. Section VI gives an algorithm for a mathematical approximation of the relative
corona and background noise. A model of the corona noise is also presented in this section.
Our conclusions are given in the final part, Section VII.

II. Corona noise

Ionization of air surrounding conductors of the HV power lines caused by electrostatic fields
in these lines generates corona currents in the form of impulse pulses. Corona discharges,
randomly distributed along the HV power lines, inject current impulses into bundle
conductors [3,5]. Discharges on the three different phase conductors occur at different times.

2
When even the voltage on a particular phase is high enough, a corona burst occurs and a noise
is generated. This discharge and the resulting noise occur primarily on the positive power line
voltage wave. Therefore, the investigation of the corona noise in digital PLC communications
has to deal with positive corona because of the small amount of the negative corona [3].
Although conductors are designed to minimize corona discharges, surface irregularities
caused by damage, insects, raindrops or contamination may locally enhance the electric field
strength sufficiently high for corona discharges to occur [3,5].
The corona noise level generated by overhead power lines suffers from various parameters
such as:
Atmospheric conditions,
Line length,
Average value of altitude,
Size of conductors and their configuration,
Type of connection,
Bundle conductor composition,
Voltage gradient, and
Ground resistance.
The corona generated currents change with atmospheric and also environmental conditions
that cannot be defined accurately and are uncertain in nature. To deal with these generated
currents, it is appropriate to represent it with a probabilistic model, which takes into account
uncertainties of the above-mentioned parameters. Apart from atmospheric conditions, which
have a predominant influence on the corona noise level and vary during the time, there are
also some other factors that also affect the level of the noise PSD but they are almost constant
in any weather condition and normal operation of the power line.
Because of the nature of the corona noise, the HV power line as a communication channel
does not represent an AWGN environment.

III. Measurement setup and methodology

III.I. Measurement setup

A basic setup for the noise measurement is shown in Fig. 1. The PLC Line Trap Units (LTUs)
are connected in series with the power line to contribute a correct transmission and reception
of the power line carrier signals. The LTU impedance for the power line frequency is high and
for the industrial frequency it is very low. A coupling circuit is used to connect the

3
measurement equipment to the HV power line and to protect the equipment from being
damaged because of the 400 kV/50 Hz signal. Functions of the coupling device for noise
measurement shift the noise from the power line into the measurement equipment, match
impedances and electrical insulation between the HV power line and the measurement
equipment.

Fig. 1. Setup for the corona noise measurements

The corona noise measurements were conducted at a substation on 3-phase, 50 Hz, 400 kV
power line with a horizontal disposition of conductors. This type of the power line is common
and can be found all over Europe. Noise measurements on this HV power line were made
with an existing coupling circuit infrastructure for two-phase connection. Corona noise
measurements were conducted with band pass filters shown in Fig 1. Amplitude
characteristics of the four selected filters with a 3 dB bandwidth are depicted in Fig 2. The
selection of central frequencies and bandwidths are discussed in Section IV.

4
Fig. 2. Amplitude characteristics of the applied bandpass filter with:
a) central frequency 199 kHz and bandwidth 22 kHz
b) central frequency 274 kHz and bandwidth 20 kHz
c) central frequency 273 kHz and bandwidth 34 kHz
d) central frequency 280 kHz and bandwidth 90 kHz

III.II. Measurement methodology

Within our investigation into the corona noise we measured:

PSD,
Average RMS voltage at the filter output of a given bandwidth, and
Variations in the RMS voltage within a power frequency period.
The spectrum/network analyzer HP 3589A was used for estimation of the noise PSD and
measurements of interference from external sources. The measurements were conducted at
fair and foul weather conditions using the spectrum/network analyzer at the input of a
bandpass filter (Fig. 1) with 100 averages and a bandwidth of 1 Hz. The noise power level
for different bandwidths was calculated by using the following expression [1]

 ∆f 
PNf1 = PNf 2 + 10 log  1 

 ∆f
 2  (1)

5
where:
PNf
1 - noise power level with bandwidth ∆f1
PNf
2 - noise power level with bandwidth ∆f2.
The average RMS voltage was measured with the Fluke 199C Scope meter and verified with
calculated values obtained with recorded samples (Section IV).
To measure variations in the RMS corona noise within a power frequency period, waveform
need to be recorded. This was done with the Fluke 199C Scope meter. The meter was
controlled by a personal computer that also collects and stores all the measured data. The
stored waveform points are samples of the measured signal and they are defined by the time
and amplitude value consisting of a sequence of measured points. We have measured a single
waveform consisting of:
equidistant waveform samples and
sequence of minimum and maximum waveform points of noise samples.

VI. PSD of the HV power line noise

Similarly as signals, the noise too can be described in a spectral domain. Because of its
random nature, it is usually defined in terms of PSD that can be used as a measure of a
continuous broadband noise and discrete peaks. PSD measures distribution of the
noise power with frequency. Therefore, the noise PSD represents an average noise level
in the frequency domain. In practice, we can only measure PSD in a finite band.
Fig. 3 shows the noise level measured at high frequency cable in a substation. Results of the
noise PSD measurements made at fair weather conditions are given in Fig. 3a. Using the same
approach, the noise PSD was measured also at foul weather conditions. The obtained results
are given in Fig. 3b.
From Fig. 3 we can see that the following is characteristic for the measured PLC channel:
corona noise;
interference with other power line carriers (the highest peaks are in Fig. 3a).
Foul weather conditions significantly affect the corona noise. The noise level at such
conditions is approximately 15 dB above the level at fair weather conditions (Fig. 3b). Also
observed from Fig. 3 is that the corona noise PSD decreases with the increasing frequency.
With the obtained measurement results average levels of the background noise and spectral
components caused by other noise sources existing on the observed power line can now be
determined.

6
Fig. 3. PSD of the noise measured at a high-frequency cable at
fair weather (a) and foul weather conditions (b)

To know how the frequency content changes over the period of the industrial frequency,
which is not possible from PSD investigations into the corona noise should be envisaged in
the frequency band with no spectral components from other sources of interference such as
for example PLC systems, radio navigation systems and broadcast radio stations. Therefore,
to determine the corona noise behavior during a power frequency period, appropriate filters
are needed. The selection of the central frequency and bandwidth of such filters depends on
PSD of an actual power line and a transfer function of both the coupling circuits and the LTU
(Fig. 1a). The filtered signal is composed of a continuous background and corona noise.

V. Dependence of the corona noise on the voltage of power

frequency

The average RMS voltage UNRMS is computed by squaring the instantaneous voltage of noise,
integrating over the desired period, and taking the square root:

T
1
U NRMS = ∫ (u N (t ) )2 dt [V ] (2)
T0

7
We compared the RMS measurements made with the Fluke 199C Scope meter and the values
calculated from the measured waveform. The average RMS of this estimation at fair and foul
weather conditions is presented in Table 1.
The RMS computation of the corona noise gives the average power carrying capability. The
RMS measurement of a random noise value requires a large number of samples and a long
averaging time to allow for an accurate estimate. From the nature of the corona noise
described above, we can conclude that noise level within a power frequency period isn’t
constant. Our objective is to describe these changes. Variations in RMS of the corona noise
voltage within a power frequency period can’t be obtained using equation (2). Such stochastic
process can be described as a white noise with a variable variance or RMS within a power
frequency period [2].
Table 1
No. Central Fair weather Foul weather
frequency conditions conditions
of the filter Bandwidth
[kHz] [kHz] V [mV] V [dBV] V [mV] V [dBV]
1 199 22 15 -36.6 163 -15.7
2 274 20 17 -35.4 142 -17
3 273 34 24 -32.4 208 -13.7
4 280 90 32 -29.8 360 -8.8

We analyzed a single waveform consisting of equidistant waveform samples and a sequence

of minimum and maximum waveform points of noise samples. The maximum or minimum
noise samples (positive and negative peaks) exceed the noise power average value. An
average excess increases with the length of time over which the peak is observed. The aim is
to obtain the ratio of the average RMS voltage at any moment within a 20 ms period to the
average RMS voltage of the corona noise by applying the classical approach using equation
(2). The average RMS voltage at any given moment in a 20 ms period is obtained by
averaging samples from successive periods of the industrial frequency at a corresponding
sample location (Fig. 4) (e.g. sample 1, M+1, 2M+1…N-M+1).
Our analysis of the relative corona noise within a power frequency period was made with
Matlab on captured data. The stored data comprise a sequence of N samples for each filter
and information of applied sample rate Fs. The N samples may be subdivided into

N
L = int   (3)
M 

8
blocks composed of

M = TFS = 20 ⋅ 10 −3 ⋅ FS (4)

samples per power frequency period T.

Thus, the blocks are represented as
u Nk ( n ) = u N ( k + nM )
(5)
n = 0 ,1,..., M − 1 k = 0 ,1,..., L − 1,

A graphical illustration of these segments is shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. Relative corona noise algorithm

The relative corona noise as a ratio of the average RMS voltage at any given moment in a 20
ms period to the average RMS voltage is defined as
L −1

∑u
i =0
2
Nk (i )

k
U NRMS = L k = 0,1,....M − 1 . (6)
N −1

∑u
i =0
2
N (i )

N
where N is number of samples, L number of power frequency periods and M is number of
samples per power frequency period T.
Equation (6) gives variations in the RMS noise voltage within a power frequency period.
Fig. 5 shows relative corona noise variations within a power frequency period for different
bandwidths of the receiving filters and foul weather conditions. The amplitude characteristics
of the used filters are presented in Fig. 2. As seen from Fig. 5, the relative corona noise has
three peaks and represents the corona noise contributions from three conductors [2,4]. The

9
relative corona noise is normalized where one unit corresponds to the average RMS noise
voltage.

Fig. 5. Relative corona noise at foul weather conditions for filters of Fig. 2
a) central frequency 199 kHz and bandwidth 22 kHz
b) central frequency 274 kHz and bandwidth 20 kHz
c) central frequency 273 kHz and bandwidth 34 kHz
d) central frequency 280 kHz and bandwidth 90 kHz

There are two important observations concerning the obtained results. Firstly, the relative
corona noise changes with the voltage of the power frequency during a 20 ms period whereas
the relative corona noise retains the same shape. Secondly, the ratio between the three peak
values of the corona noise envelope doesn’t vary with the central frequency and the selected
filter bandwidth.
The same results are obtained from the ratio of the average RMS voltage of peak
measurements at any moment in a 20 ms period to the average RMS of the peak
measurements obtained by a classical approach. Fig. 6 shows variations in the corona relative
noise based on peak measurements at foul weather conditions. If we use a peak detector to
measure the noise, then the average RMS noise level will be lower than the RMS peak level.

10
The relative corona noise is the ratio between the RMS voltages at any moment to the average
RMS voltage that is calculated using all received samples. Thus, the difference between the
average power of peak measurements and the average power of sampled measurements is
eliminated in the relative corona noise.
RMS of the corona noise depends on the power frequency voltage resulting in a burst of short
trains of impulses with a fundamental burst repetition frequency 150 Hz [1-4]. From our
measurements we established that the maximum peaks exceed RMS noise level by
20 log( 2.5 ) = 7.95 dB . (7)
From these results we can conclude that an instantaneous power peak during the occurrence
of corona impulses can cause bit or burst errors in data transmission.

Fig. 6. Relative corona noise at foul weather conditions using peak detection
a) central frequency 199 kHz and bandwidth 22 kHz
b) central frequency 274 kHz and bandwidth 20 kHz
c) central frequency 273 kHz and bandwidth 34 kHz
d) central frequency 280 kHz and bandwidth 90 kHz

11
Relative corona noise variation within a power frequency period at fair weather conditions is
presented in Fig. 7. We can see three peaks that represent the ratio of the maximum voltage
peak to the average RMS of the corona noise.
Our measurement results show that during fair weather conditions the effect of the corona
noise is small and maximum peaks exceed the average RMS noise level by
20 log( 1.4 ) = 2.9 dB . (8)
The average noise level at fair weather conditions is smaller than the average noise level at
foul weather conditions. The maximum level of the corona noise at fair weather is smaller
than the minimum level of the corona noise at foul weather. Therefore, fair weather results are
not crucial when a design of a digital PLC modem is considered.

Fig. 7. Relative corona noise at foul weather conditions using peak detection
at fair weather conditions:
a) central frequency 199 kHz and bandwidth 22 kHz
b) central frequency 274 kHz and bandwidth 20 kHz
c) central frequency 273 kHz and bandwidth 34 kHz
d) central frequency 280 kHz and bandwidth 90 kHz

12
VI. Modeling of the corona noise

Before envisioning hardware implementation, suitability of all algorithms in communication

systems must be proven by computer simulations. The overhead HV power line as a
communication channel can be modeled as a time varying frequency-dependent channel [2,6-
8]. Modeling of a power line channel requires an appropriate model of the corona noise. The
first step is modeling a relative corona noise by a mathematical function.
The dependence of an instantaneous corona noise voltage to 50 Hz power frequency can be
approximated by three cosine signals with a period T1=1/(3*50) seconds and amplitude U i max
[2]
U i max   2π  
Ui( t ) = 1 − cos t  0 < t < T1 . (9)
2   T1 

Voltage U i max represents a maximum RMS value on a particular phase of a power line. Fig. 8a
shows an approximated relative corona noise voltage in the time domain for the center phase
to the outer phase coupling of a 400 kV line.
From the known dependence of an instantaneous corona noise voltage on the 50 Hz power
frequency the average RMS value is defined as [2]
3 1 T1 2
U Nrms = ∑ ∫ U i ( t ) dt (10)
i =1 3T1 0

Note the difference between the measurement results and the approximated dependence of the
relative corona noise. The equation (9) doesn’t include the continuous background noise. To
allow for comparability with the measurement results and appropriate modeling of the
background noise, U min is added in equation (9)

U i max − U min   2π  
Ui( t ) = 1 − cos t  + U min 0 < t < T1 . (11)
2   T1 

Fig. 8b shows the approximated relative corona noise voltage over time for the center phase to
the outer phase coupling of a 400 kV line with included background noise U min . This level
can be determined from the relative corona noise obtained by measurements.

13
Fig. 8. Model of the relative RMS noise voltage dependence on time within a power frequency period: with no
background noise (a) and with background noise b)
The background and corona noise can be synthesized by filtering the white noise source and
multiplying it by function U ( t ) which describes its dependence on the power frequency. The
influence of weather conditions is represented by a separate block average RMS and ratio of
three peaks. The average RMS and the ratio of the three peaks block have two outputs. The
first output is the average RMS of the corona noise which multiplies samples of the white
noise. The second output holds values of relative corona noise amplitudes U i max on a
particular phase for the block dependence on the power frequency.
The noise-shaping filter can be described by
1
H( z ) = n
. (12)
1 + ∑ ai z − i
i =1

The parameters of the shaping filter can be determined from a measured noise signal using a
parametric AR estimator.

Fig. 9 Generation of the background and corona noise

14
VII. Conclusions

In this paper we present results of our investigation into the relative corona noise dependence
on the power frequency voltage in HV power line communications. Our approach was based
on results of our measurements, as well as those of statistical analyses of the captured data
and modeling at different weather conditions.
By measuring PSD we determined the various types and levels of noise sources existing on
the power line. We established that the relative corona noise describes the corona noise
behavior during a power frequency period.
From results of our measurements and those of statistical analyses we can conclude that the
corona noise cannot be described as a white noise with a constant variance. The results of our
measurements which were conducted at foul and fair weather conditions, show that the
character of the corona noise is similar to the one of the Gaussian noise with a variable
variance during a power frequency period. The statistical analyses prove that the signal-to-
noise ratio varies during a power frequency period at all weather conditions but is higher at
foul weather conditions than at fair weather conditions. As a consequence of the SNR
variations the probability of error is also variable and considerably affects the reliability of
digital communications. Burst errors in digital PLC communications are possible when the
envelope of the corona noise occupies one of the maximum values. Based on thus attained
results, a computer model of the corona noise is proposed (Fig 9).
These attained results are very important as they provide solid basis for investigation into
channel coding techniques in the digital PLC communications.

Acknowledgement

The authors of the paper wish to acknowledge the support of the Ministry of the Economy of
the Republic of Slovenia and Iskra Sistemi while performing this work under the project
“Digital Power Line Carrier Communications”.

References

1. INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION, IEC REPORT (1980) Planning of (single-sideband)

power line carrier systems. Geneva
2. CIGRE STUDY COMMITTEE 35 Working Group 09 (2000) Report on Digital Power Line Carrier.

15
3. P. Sarma Maruvada (2000) Corona performance of high-voltage transmission lines. Research Studies Press Ltd.
Philadelphia
4. An American National Standard (1980) IEEE Guide for Power-Line Carrier Applications. The Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. New York
5. S Cristina, M. D’Amore (1985) Digital Analytical Method for Calculating Corona Noise on HVC Power Line
Carrier Communication Channels. IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-104, No. 5, pp 1018-
1024
6. N.Suljanović, A Mujčić, M Zajc and J F Tasič (2003) Power line tap modeling at power-line carrier frequencies
with radial-basis function network. Engineering Intelligent Systems vol.11, No. 1, pp 9-17
7. MUJČIĆ, Aljo, SULJANOVIĆ, Nermin, ZAJC, Matej, TASIČ, Jurij (2002) Detection of nonlinearities in
communication channel phase characteristics. Proceedings of the eleventh International Electrotechnical and
Computer Science Conference ERK 2002, ISSN 1581-4572,pp 175-178, Portorož, Slovenia.
8. SULJANOVIĆ, Nermin, MUJČIĆ, Aljo, ZAJC, Matej, TASIČ, Jurij (2002) Tapped power-line modelling with
radial function network. Proceedings of the eleventh International Electrotechnical and Computer Science
Conference ERK 2002, ISSN 1581-4572, pp 171-174, Portorož, Slovenia.

16