6th International PhD Seminar on Computational electromagnetics and bioeffects of electromagnetic fields CEMBEF 2012 Jun 28-30, 2012,

, Novi Sad, Serbia

D ATA EXTRACTION FROM MAGNETIC FIELD

MEASUREMENTS
Miodrag MILUTINOV1, Anamarija JUHAS2, Neda PEKARIC NAD3
Abstract: This paper explores how the phase currents in high voltage overhead power line for known conductor geometry can be extracted from the magnetic field measurements. In the case of a single power line and a known geometry the magnetic flux density depends on 6 unknowns: three phase current amplitudes and their phases. The minimum number of the sensors that need to be used to extract these unknowns is explored in the paper. The appropriate matrix whose elements depend on the mutual positions of the sensors and the PL geometry is formed. The positions of the sensors are proved critical to achieve the best stability of the extracted results. In order to investigate stability of the solutions, the matrix condition number is evaluated. In this paper, instead of the real measurements, the magnetic flux densities are calculated in order to relate the extracted data to the magnetic flux density and thus verify the analytical results. Keywords: Inverse magnetic field problem, magnetic field sensors, overhead power lines

Starting from human exposure point of view it is the most important to determine the highest value of the magnetic flux density and to compare it to the reference levels [7], [8]. The most citied reference levels are proposed by ICNIRP in 1998 [7] and adopted by many countries. The European Council in [9] proposed the same reference levels as ICNIRP in [7]. The widely accepted reference level for the magnetic flux density at power frequency (50Hz) is 100T [9]. In 2009 the Republic of Serbia published obligatory document [8] with the reference values more restricted than the European and International recommendations [7], [9]. According to the regulations in Serbia, the reference level for magnetic flux density at 50Hz is 40 T. Reference levels are used to determine the general public exposure levels. Due to the linearity between the magnetic flux density and the currents of the HV PL, and according to the European standard [10], the exposure level can be obtained from the equation (1)
Bmax = Bmeas I max , I meas

INTRODUCTION
Measurements of magnetic and electric field in vicinity of high voltage (HV) overhead power lines (PL) become very important nowadays, particularly in respect to human exposure (See e.g. [1]-[3]). Especially in the last decade, electromagnetic pollution has received enormous attention [4], [5]. Some studies indicate that an excess risk may exist for childhood leukaemia due to the extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic field generated by HV PL [6]. Magnetic field in the vicinity of HV PL depends on conductors geometry (distance between the conductors and the measurement points, as well as conductors mutual positions) and currents (both amplitudes and phases). Some of these parameters vary over time and consequently magnetic flux density varies over time, as well. The greatest variation is due to the fluctuations of the amplitude of the currents. An example of the season variation of a HV PL phase current is illustrated in Fig. 1.
I(kA)

where Bmax is the maximum possible value of the magnetic flux density, Bmeas and I meas is the simultaneously measured values of the magnetic flux density and amplitude of the current, respectively, and I max is the maximum possible amplitude of the HV PL current. Accredited laboratories deal with the electromagnetic (EM) field measurements and calculations in order to determine possible human exposure to the EM field. Typically the equation (1) is used, under assumption that the PL currents are balanced. This is most often correct as the phase currents unbalance is low for the transmission lines [11]. But, if the currents are not ideally balanced or almost ideally balanced it is not possible to apply the equation (1). The laboratories usually obtain the data for the currents amplitudes, I meas , as well as the maximum possible amplitude, I max , from the electric power grid company which owns the HV PL. The electric power grid company in Serbia tracks the data for only one of the three phase currents per power line, and the remaining relevant information remains unknown. The goal of this paper is to proceed with the exploration of the current data extraction using magnetic field measurements started in [12].

time jan feb mar apr may

Fig. 1. - A HV PL phase current amplitude variation over several months period.

University of Novi Sad, Dept. of energetic, electronic and telecommunications, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 6, 21000 Novi Sad, SERBIA 1 e-mail: miodragm@uns.ac.rs, 2 e-mail: ajuhas@uns.ac.rs, 3 e-mail pekaric@uns.ac.rs

6th International PhD Seminar on Computational electromagnetics and bioeffects of electromagnetic fields CEMBEF 2012 Jun 28-30, 2012, Novi Sad, Serbia

EXTRACTION METHOD
Assume that the three phase currents of the same HV power line are in the form of phasors
j 2 (2) = I 1 I1= e j 1 , I 2 I= , I 3 I 3e j 3 . 2e

At any point n in the vicinity of the power line, the x component of the magnetic flux density can be expressed as a linear function of the currents (3)
Bn , x =bx1 (n) I 1 + bx 2 (n) I 2 + bx 3 ( n) I 3

The system (7) has a unique solution if and only if the determinant of the system is a non-zero. Once the system is solved for the six unknowns, the respective amplitudes of the currents are easily obtained from the first three unknowns. From the remaining three unknowns only the cosines of the relative phases can be determined. Hence, based on six isotropic magnetic flux density measurements, it is not possible to determine whether the sequence of the currents is positive or negative. Due to variation of the currents, the measurements need to be done simultaneously. Using only one magnetic field sensor the magnetic flux density cannot be measured at the different points at the same time. The simultaneous measurement at several points can be done with wireless magnetic field sensors (WMFS) [13], [14]. The WMFS are part of the SEMONT system based on the wireless sensor network technology and intended for the broadband, remote, automated and permanent monitoring of the EM fields in the real-time [15]-[18]. It generally includes measurements of the overall field strength in the entire frequency range of the non-ionizing radiation, but for the HV PL, the 50Hz is the dominating component.

The corresponding magnetic flux density vector can be obtained as a vector sum of x, y and z components. The expression for the squared resultant magnetic flux density at the measurement point n is (4)
2 2 Bn = an1I12 + an 2 I 2 + an 3 I 32 + 2an 4 I1I 2 cos( 1 2 ) +

+2an 5 I 2 I 3 cos( 2 3 ) + 2an 6 I 3 I1 cos( 3 1 ).

The coefficients ani , i = 1,,6, are real and depend only on the geometry of the power line and the position of the measurement point n (Fig. 2). The equitation (4) can be interpreted as an linear equation in terms of the six real unknowns,
2 = u ( I12 , I 2 , I 32 , 2 I1I 2 cos( 1 2 ),

POSITIONS OF THE SENSORS

In the authors previous work [12] it was explained that the uncertainty in the measurements of the magnetic flux density changes the right hand side of the system (6). Hence, we analyse the sensitivity of the solution in respect to the measurement uncertainty. As a measure of the sensitivity of the solution of the system of linear equations in respect to errors in the data a condition number [19] is used. The condition number is defined as (8)
cond( = A) A A1 .

(5)

2 I 2 I 3 cos( 2 3 ), 2 I 3 I1 cos( 3 1 )).

Fig. 2. - Cross-section of the power line, with the positions of the conductors and the sensors ( B1 B6 ).

The six sensors located in the plane perpendicular to the power line introduce a set of 12 unknowns into the function (8). In order to keep the number of the parameters low, the x and y -positions of the sensors (Fig. 2) are assumed as (9)
xs = ( x1 ,0, x1 , x1 ,0, x1 ) and ys = ( y1 , y2 , y1 , y3 , y4 , y3 ).

In order to determine all six unknowns, a minimum of six equations is required. The system of linear equations can be written in the matrix form as (6) where
a11 a16 A= , a61 a66
Au = b,

The positions defined by (9) introduce 5 unknowns into the function (8) (as a contrast, in [12] the positions of the sensors introduced only 3 unknowns). So, the function cond( A) is evaluated in the five-dimensional space of the parameters x1 , and y1 to y4 . Assuming that the phase conductors are straight lines situated at the same heights of 10 m above the ground level, separated 10 m from each other, as shown in Fig. 2, the

(7)

u T = (u1 ,, u6 ), b T = ( B12 ,, B62 ).

6th International PhD Seminar on Computational electromagnetics and bioeffects of electromagnetic fields CEMBEF 2012 Jun 28-30, 2012, Novi Sad, Serbia

parameters x1 , and y1 to y4 . take values in the range 1 < x1 15m in steps of 1m and 0.5m y1 ,, y4 ymax , in steps of 0.1m. The minimum condition number, in respect to parameter x1 , calculated in this way is shown in Fig. 3, where the three different curves address the three different maximum values, ymax . From the results presented in Fig. 3 it can be concluded that system becomes more stable with increasing the range of the sensor heights.

the output variables. The mean value is equal to the arithmetic mean, whereas the low and the high values are bounds of the shortest 95% coverage interval for output variable.
0.025

0.02

Low

Mean

High

0.015
PDF

0.01

0.005

0 420

430

440

450 460 Jacina struje [A]

470

480

490

Fig. 4. - The probability density function of the current I2. Fig. 3. The minimum condition number obtained for the different values of parameter x1.
0.04

PDF

Refining the search around the local minimum with parameter 7 < x1 9m in steps of 0.1m, and 1m y1 , , y4 8m, in steps of 0.1m, the corresponding x and y -positions of the sensors with the minimum condition number of 37 are
= x1 8.1m, = y1 1.0m, = y2 4.2m, (10) = y3 6.1m, = y4 6.4m.

0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01

Low

Mean

High

NUMERICAL VALIDATION
In order to verify the proposed procedure, first we calculate the magnetic flux density magnitudes Bn and the coefficients ani , n = 1, , 6 and i = 1, , 6, at all six measurement points. It is assumed that the conductors are parallel to the ground. The values of the magnetic flux densities at all six points are calculated with the a priori known currents and the positions of the conductors, applying Biot-Savart low. Next, using (6) we solve the system to obtain the currents and the relative phases. We also test the sensitivity of the proposed method in sense of the measurement uncertainty of the sensors. The simulation of the real measurements was performed introducing the uncertainty into analytically calculated values of the magnetic flux densities. The sensitivity of the extracted data was analyzed under assumption that the phase currents are I 1 = 500 e j0 A , I 2 = 450 e j2 3 A and I 3 = 550 e j2 3 A. Further, to the measurement uncertainty of the magnetic flux densities we assigned a random number from the interval 0 to 3%. The results shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 present probability density function of the output variables based on M = 106 trials. Please notice the marks mean, low and high in Figs. 4 and 5 for the values of

0.005 0 -0.7

-0.6

-0.4 -0.5 cos(psi12)

-0.3

-0.2

Fig. 5. - The probability density function of the cosines of the phase shift between the currents I1 and I2.

For the example analysed in this paper, using the input uncertainty of 3%, the shortest 95% coverage interval of the currents is 9.26% of the mean value for the amplitudes of the current I 2 . In the case of the cosines of the relative phases the coverage interval is about 70% of the mean value. These coverage intervals are obtained from the sensors which positions are determined applying minimum condition number explained in the previous section. Our future work will be based on the assumption that one of the currents is known (obtained by Electric Power Company) and that the currents are mutually shifted exactly by 2/3. The authors expect that under these assumptions it will be possible to increase the stability of the solution or to reduce the number of the sensors.

6th International PhD Seminar on Computational electromagnetics and bioeffects of electromagnetic fields CEMBEF 2012 Jun 28-30, 2012, Novi Sad, Serbia

CONCLUSIONS
For the known geometry of the three phase power line, a minimum of six simultaneous magnetic flux density isotropic measurements is needed in order to determine the currents. Hence, a set of six wireless magnetic field sensors (WMFS) can provide enough information to populate the column vector of the magnetic flux densities in the equations. Starting from these six equations it is possible to determine the amplitudes of the currents and the cosines of relative phases. It cannot be determined whether the sequence of the currents is positive or negative. The positions of the sensors play important role in stability of the extracted data. The positions of 6 sensors in the plane perpendicular to the HV PL introduce 12 unknowns. The stability of the system and the output results depends on the geometries which include mutual positions between the conductors and the sensors. Therefore the task was to find the positions of the sensors while achieving the best stability. The stability was tested using the condition number. Under some restrictions explained in the section 3, the minimal condition number was found to be 37. For the example analysed in this paper and the magnetic flux density measurement uncertainty of 3%, the shortest 95% coverage interval of amplitudes of the currents is 9.26% of the mean value. In the case of the cosines of the relative phases, the shortest 95% of the coverage interval is about 70% of the mean value.

[6]

[7]

[8] [9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
[18]

This work was partially supported by Project TR32055 with Serbian Ministry of Science and Technology.

[19]

ICNIRP, Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric and magnetic fields (1 Hz-100 kHz), Health Physics, vol. 99, pp. 818-836, Dec. 2010. ICNIRP: Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz), Health Physics, vol. 74, pp. 494-522, April 1998. Serbian national rulebook on non-ionizing radiation limits (in Serbian), Sl. glasnik RS br. 104/2009, Dec. 2009. Council Recommendation on the Limitation of Exposure of General Public to Electromagnetic Fields (0 to 300GHz), Official Journal of the European Communities, 1999. EN 504013:2008, Basic standard on measurement and calculation procedures for human exposure to electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (0 Hz - 300 GHz). J. Swanson, Magnetic fields from transmission lines: Comparison of calculations and measurements, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen. Transm. Distrib., vol. 142, Sep. 1988, pp. 481486. M. Milutinov, A. Juhas, N. Pekaric-Nad, Power line currents data extraction from magnetic field measurements, 17th Int. Symposium on Electrical Apparatus and Tehnologies, SIELA 2012, Bourgas, Bulgaria, May 2012. W. Dargie and C. Poellabauer, Fundamentals of Wireless Sensor Networks: Theory and Practice, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2010. T. J. Dishongh and M. McGrath, Wireless sensor networks for healthcare applications, Artech House, ISBN-13: 978-159693-305-7, 2010 N. Djuric, M. Prsa, K. Kasas-Lazetic, Serbian System for Remote Monitoring of Electromagnetic Fields, 4th Int. Conf. on modern Power Systems, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, May 17-20, Acta Electrotehnica, pp. 140-142, 2011. N. Djuric, M. Prsa, K. Kasas-Lazetic, Information Network for Continuous Electromagnetic Fields Monitoring, Int. Journal of Emerging Sciences, Special Issue, Selected Best Papers of the PES 2011, Dec. 2011, pp. 516-525. M. Milutinov, N. uri, B. Vukobratovi, Sensor network for power lines magnetic field monitoring, 16th Int. symposium on power electronics, Novi Sad, Serbia, Oct. 2011. Narda Safety Test Solution: Multi-band area monitor AMB 8057 Operating Manual. G. H. Golub, C. F. Van Loan. Matrix Computations. 3rd ed. Baltimore. USA, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996.

REFERENCES
[1] Robert G. Olsen, Electromagnetic fields from power lines, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Washington State University Pullman, WA 99164-2752 G Mazzanti, Evaluation of Continuous Exposure to Magnetic Field From AC Overhead Transmission Lines Via Historical Load Databases: Common Procedures and Innovative Heuristic Formulas, Transactions on power delivery IEEE, vol. 25, no. 1, Jan. 2010. M. Benes, M. Comelli and R. Villalta, ELF field in the proximity of complex power line configuration measurement procedures, Radiation Protection Dosimetry 118 (3), 2006 T. Penick, Possible health effects of power line electric fields, EE368 Electrical Power Transmission and Distribution, April 1999. S. Borjanovic, S. Jankovic and Z. Pejovic, ECG Changes in Humans Exposed to 50 Hz Magnetic Fields, J Occup Health 2005; 47: 391396.

[2]

Miodrag M. Milutinov was born in Zrenjanin, Serbia in 1976. In 2001 he graduated from the Faculty of Technical Sciences in Novi Sad and enrolled at the PhD studies at the same Faculty. Currently, he is an Assistant at the Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Serbia. Anamarija Juhas graduated from the University of Novi Sad, Serbia, in 1990. She completed her MS thesis in 1994 at Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Belgrade. She defended her PhD thesis at University of Novi Sad in 2009. Her research interests include the EM exposure, EMF measurements and signal analysis. Neda Pekaric Nadj graduated from the University of Novi Sad, Serbia, in 1978. She completed her MS and PhD thesis at the University of Belgrade in 1981 and 1984 respectively. Currently she is professor at University of Novi Sad. Her research interests are Numerical electromagnetics and Electromagnetic compatibility.

[3]

[4]

[5]