1149

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS. VOL. IA-22, NO. 6, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1986

Are Cable Shields Being

Damaged

Faults?

PAUL S. HAMER,

MEMBER, IEEE, AND

Abstract-Simulated ground-fault tests (50-700 A) of various cable,

ground wire, and conduit configurations are made to determine the
proportion of the total ground-fault current carried by the cable metallic
shield. The percentage of the total fault current for the various return
paths is tabulated, along with representative zero-sequence circuit
impedances. General guidelines for protecting cable shields from damage
are presented.

BARRY M. WOOD,

During Ground
MEMBER, IEEE

PHASE A RETURN RETURN

PATH X PATH Y

Fig. 1. Illustration of proximity effect.

separation). Therefore, path Y would carry a greater portion

of the total current.
Medium-voltage cables installed in many 5-kV systems and
in
all systems above 8-kV employ a metallic shield outside the
INTRODUCTION
conductor insulation and usually beneath the outer jacket of the
PETROCHEMICAL plant medium-voltage distribution cable. This shield consists of either a number of small-gauge
systems are usually low-resistance grounded, allowing conductors or a helically wound metal tape several mils thick.
200-2000 A to flow during a solid line-to-ground fault. Since The metallic shield is in contact with a semiconducting
many ground faults initiate in motors, switchgear, or trans- compound and is usually grounded at both ends of a cable run.
formers, the cable, ground wire, and conduit (if metallic) form
A cross section of a typical three-phase cable and conduit
the most direct ground-return path for the fault.
assembly is shown in Fig. 2. Multiple return paths for ground
This paper determines the proportion of ground-fault faults are offered by the "faulted" phase shield, the two
current which is carried by the metallic shield of the cable, the "nonfaulted" phase shields, the ground wire, the conduit, and
ground wire within the conduit, and the conduit itself during a the earth itself. It is assumed for this paper that the cable itself
ground fault. These data are used to answer the question, is not faulted. Instead, a component in the circuit beyond the
"Are cables being damaged during "through" ground cable run is faulted to ground and the cable shields, ground
faults?" The answer to this question needs to be qualified by a wire, conduit system, and earth return the ground current.
feeder cable protection guideline. Such a guideline is preThe Insulated Cable Engineers Association, Inc. (ICEA)
sented later.
has prepared a publication [1] which describes the withstand
limits for metallic shields when subjected to faults. This
GROUND FAULT CURRENT AND PROXIMITY EFFECT
publication contains equations where, given the cable jacket
In an alternating current (ac) circuit, if two return paths of material, shield material, dimensions, and operating temperaequal conductivity are available, the path of lower inductive ture, a graph of time versus current may be drawn. This graph
reactance will carry the higher proportion of the total current. defines the withstand limit for the metallic shield. This curve
This is shown in Fig. 1 by phase conductor A and return paths takes the form of a straight line with a slope of - 2 on a logX and Y. Return path X has a lower circuit inductance (with log plot of time versus current. This represents a constant f2t
phase A) and carries more current than return path Y. The (where I is current in amperes and t is time in seconds) which
"proximity effect" is demonstrated for the physically closer is proportional to energy.
return path.
If current is permitted to flow through the shield for too long
Current flowing through parallel paths divides inversely as a period, the temperature limit defined by the ICEA could be
the impedance (R + jX) of the circuit. For example, if the exceeded. Another perspective on maximum shield withstand
return path X (Fig. 1) is a #2 conductor and return path Y is a temperatures is given in [2], but this is beyond the scope of this
500 MCM conductor, the total impedance of return path Y paper.
may be less than return path X (depending on the physical
Referring to Fig. 2, the return current divides among the
metallic shields, ground wire, and conduit inversely as the
Paper PID 86-6, approved by the Petroleum and Chemical Industry apparent impedances of the paths. Each apparent impedance is
Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society for presentation at the a function of the resistance and self-inductance of the path and
1985 Petroleum and Chemical Industry Committee Technical Conference,
inductances among the metallic shields, ground
Houston, TX, September 9-11. Manuscript released for publication June 29, the mutual
wire, and conduit. A method of calculating these inductances
1986.
P. S. Hamer is with Chevron Corporation, P. 0. Box 5045, San Ramon, is given in [3]. The Appendix at the end of the paper outlines
CA 94583.
B. M. Wood is with Engineering Technology Industries Incorporated, 3470 the general technique.
Intuitively, one may think that most of the ground-fault
Fostoria Way, San Ramon, CA 94583.
IEEE Log Number 8611180.
current returns on the faulted phase shield. This is typically

0093-9994/86/1100-1 149$01.00 1986 IEEE

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. IA-22, NO. 6, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1986

1150

PHASE
V M ETR

+ ANGLE
TO

IM

E:

NNECTION
AT CABLE
.19

~-CLAMP
_t

Fig. 2. Cross section of a typical cable and conduit

ON CT

--------_

"NON-FAULTED" '
PHASE SHIELDS

,_

tIT
LOW-VOLTAGC J

+
run.

Q
_-------"-------r--+
---------F----___________A_f_

20 FEET

BOLTED
FAULT

HIGH-CURRENT AC

true if the ground fault is from a conductor to its own metallic

shield. However, the tests conducted on the sample cable-

SOURCE

Fig. 3. Test setup.

ground wire-conduit configurations demonstrated otherwise with the 120-V winding connected to the low-voltage source
for through ground faults.
output and the 2400-V winding connected to the phase-angle
CURRENT DISTRIBUTION AND IMPEDANCE TESTS
meter input.
The following configurations were tested.
cable
of
various
made
Previous measurements have been
search
our
literature
but
and conduit configurationis [4], [5],
I) 4/0 AWG copper 15-kV cable (133-percent insulation)
did not reveal any study of cable, ground wire, and conduit
with a 5-mil-thick copper-tape shield.
systems or protection practices commonly employed in indusa) 5-in PVC conduit: 1) without ground wire, 2) with
trial systems with low-resistance grounded systems. We
2/0 AWG copper ground wire, and 3) with #6 AWG
constructed test samples using 20-ft lengths of polyvinylcopper ground wire.
chloride (PVC), rigid-aluminum, and rigid-steel conduit. A
b) 4-in rigid-aluminum conduit: 1) without ground
21-ft long section of three single-conductor 4/0 AWG copper
wire, 2) with 2/0 AWG copper ground wire, and 3)
1 5-kV cables, and a 2/0 AWG copper ground wire (and a #6
with #6 AWG copper ground wire.
AWG copper ground wire for later tests) were tie-wrapped
c) 5-in rigid-steel conduit: 1) without ground wire, 2)
together in a bundle in the configuration shown in Fig. 2. The
with 2/0 AWG copper ground wire, and 3) with #6
tie wraps were employed to fix the -geometry of the cables so
AWG copper ground wire.
that comparison with the Appendix calculations could be
II) 4/0 AWG copper 15-kV (100-percent insulation) with
made.
six #18 AWG shield wires; the tests were the same as
The cable assembly was pulled into each conduit, and a
for I) a, b, and c, except the #6 AWG copper ground
"bolted fault" was simulated at the far end by connecting the
wire test was omitted.
phase A conductor, the metallic shields, the ground wire, and
the conduit together with heavy-gauge wire or braid. One end Voltages, currents, and phase angles were recorded for all
of the low-voltage high-current source was connected to the defined ground return paths (metallic shields, ground wire,
faulted phase conductor, and the other side of the source was and conduit) at each of the fault current levels.
connected to all metallic shields, the ground wire, and the
TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
conduit. When measurements without a ground wire were
The results of the tests are given in Tables I and II. Table I
made, the ground wire was disconnected at the fault end of the
the percentage of the total ground fault current
summarizes
setup.
the
conduit. See Fig. 3 for a diagram of test
return paths at a total fault level of 400 A.
various
the
through
were
and
current
magnitudes
of
voltage
Measurements
quite closely to work done previously [4]
compare
results
The
A
clamp-on
multimeters.
digital
with
peak-holding
made
1000:1 ratio current transformer (CT) was used to allow rapid at higher fault-current levels (5000-10 000 A).
The percentage of current in each path does not vary with
changes in points of measurement. A digital phase-angle meter
the magnitude of the total fault current, except in the case of
was used to measure the phase relationship between the
applied voltage and the return currents. During the measure- the steel conduit. In the case of the steel conduit without an
ments, all currents were applied for a 1.5-s duration spaced 1 internal ground wire the percentage of current returned
min apart with the cable at ambient temperature. Prior to through the conduit ranged from 79 percent at a total fault
taking data, the current was pulsed three times (1.5-s duration) current of 50 A to 64 percent at a total fault current of 570 A
at -min intervals to preheat the shields. Load current was not (for the wire-shield case). This means that the apparent
impedance of the conduit return path increased throughout the
flowing in the cable during the tests.
For each set of data the test set was adjusted to a low current fault current range of 50-570 A.
To investigate the contradiction between our results and that
(50-200 A) and increased in steps to the maximum current
of
a previous paper [6] predicting a decrease in conduit
depending
A,
capability of the low-voltage source (400-700
with increasing current, we set up a temporary loop
impedance
measurements
most
Since
on the total circuit impedance).
4/0 AWG cable within the 5-in rigid-steel
a
step-up
with
single
volts,
a
or
two
one
of
only
voltage
a
source
involved
voltage transformer (VT) was required to obtain accurate conduit. The low-voltage source was connected between the
phase-angle measurements. A 2400:120 ratio VT was used cable and the conduit at the source of the conduit, and the 4/0

1151

HAMER AND WOOD: CABLE DAMAGED DURING GROUND FAULTS?

TABLE I

MEASURED CURRENT DISTRIBUTION DURING 400-A GROUND FAULT TESTS FOR VARIOUS CONDUIT AND GROUND WIRE
CONFIGURATIONSa

Conduit, Cable,
and Metallic Shield Type

4/0 AWG 15-kV cable with tape shield

(5-mil copper)
5-in PVC without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
With #6 AWG ground wire
4-in aluminum without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
With #6 AWG ground wire
5-in steel without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
With #6 AWG ground wire
4/0 AWG 15-kV cable with wire shield
(six #18 AWG)
5-in PVC without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
4-in aluminum without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
5-in steel without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
a

Faulted
Phase Shield

Percent of Total Ground Fault Current

Nonfaulted
Ground
Phase Shields
Wire
(Each)

Conduit

33
9
18
4
4
4
12
6
9

33
7
18
3
2
3
11
5
8

N/A
81
48
N/A
26
8
N/A
55
26

N/A
N/A
N/A
91
67
84
68
35
51

33
9
4
3
14
7

33
7
3
2
13
5

N/A
81
N/A
22
N/A
55

N/A
N/A
92
73
64
31

Sum of currents add to over 100 percent due to phase-angle differences in individual currents.

TABLE II
ZERO SEQUENCE IMPEDANCE (ZO) IN mQ/1000 FT FOR VARIOUS CONDUIT AND GROUND WIRE CONFIGURATIONS AS
MEASURED DURING A 400-A GROUND FAULTa
Conduit
System/Cable Type

4/0 AWG 15-kV cable (three, single conductor)

5-in PVC without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
With #6 AWG ground wire
4-in aluminum without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
With #6 AWG ground wire
5-in steel without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
With #6 AWG ground wire

ZO (mQ/1000 ft)

Cable with Tape

Shield (5-mil Copper)

Cable with Wire

Shield (six, #18 AWG)

460 +j48
130 +j90
260 +j68

440 +j42
140 +j90

90+j62
83 +j60
88+j60

98 +j58
92 +j58

200+j89

210+j96
120+j92

110+j87
160+j79

Cable temperature approximately 20 C; earth-return path not included.

AWG cable was connected directly to the conduit at the far 275 A during our tests, we conclude that the 400-A total fault
end. The resulting impedances, resistance, and reactance are level values listed in Tables I and II represent all cases (PVC,
aluminum, and steel conduits) well from a shield-withstand
plotted as a function of current in Fig. 4.
This figure shows that for the fault-current levels measured evaluation point of view.
Reviewing Table I, very little difference exists between the
using the test setup of Fig. 3 (570 A maximum) and the
of current returned on the faulted or nonfaulted phase
amount
of
current
returned
the
conduit
(64
percent
through
proportion
of 570 A, or 365 A), the peak value of circuit impedance had metallic shields. The return current is essentially dividing
just been passed. Mutual impedance effects may shift the among the metallic shields according to their resistance.
maximum impedance point slightly to the right (Fig. 4) for the Measurements made of the self-impedance of the metallic
actual fault case. Thus we would expect the apparent impe- shield (with respect to the phase conductor enclosed by the
dance of the conduit to decrease at fault-current levels higher shield) for all the configurations resulted in resistance-tothan 570 A. Since the proportion of current returned through reactance ratios ranging from six to 14, validating the
the metallic shield remained constant for fault currents above foregoing statement.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. IA-22, NO. 6. NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1986

1152

35-

.1

IMPEDANCE

. 300
0
LXJ
0~

RES ISTANCE

2S5

(,) .;20-/

REACTANCE

5-

--

1V00

200

300

4UU

bUU

AMPERES

Fig. 4. Circuit impedance, resistance, and reactance of 4/0 AWG cable

within 5-in rigid-steel conduit with conduit as return path (no ground wire).

TABLE III
COMPARISON OF MEASURED CURRENT AND CALCULATED CURRENT WITH 400-A GROUND FAULT FOR VARIOUS CONDUIT AND GROUND WIRE
CONFIGURATIONS"

Conduit, Cable,
and Metallic Shield Type
4/0 AWG 15-kV cable with tape shield
(5-mil copper)
5-in PVC without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
4-in aluminum without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
5-in steel without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
4/0 AWG 15-kV cable with wire shield
(six #18 AWG)
5-in PVC without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
4-in aluminum without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire
5-in steel without ground wire
With 2/0 AWG ground wire

Faulted
Phase Shield
Calculated
Measured

Percent of Total Ground Fault Current

Nonfaulted
Ground
Phase Shields
Wire
(Each)
Calculated
Measured
Calculated
Measured

Conduit
Calculated
Measured

33
8
3
3
12
6

33
7
3
2
11
5

33
7
2
2
12
5

N/A
81
N/A
26
N/A
55

N/A
82
N/A
21
N/A
57

N/A
N/A
91
67
68
35

N/A
N/A
94
76
64
32

33
9
4
3
14
7

33
9
4
4
13
7

33
7
3
2
13
5

33
7
3
2
13
5

N/A
81
N/A
22
N/A
55

N/A
80
N/A
20
N/A
56

N/A
N/A
92
73
64
31

N/A
N/A
93
75
61
32

33
9
4

4
12

a Sum of currents add to over 100 percent due to phase-angle differences in individual currents.

The two worst cases overall are three conductors without a

ground wire in PVC conduit and three conductors with a small
#6 AWG ground wire in PVC conduit. Neither case is
considered practical since normal procedure is to include a
large ground wire (at least 2/0 AWG size) where PVC conduit
is used. The worst case for shield protection in the practical
sense is the 5-in steel conduit without a ground wire.
Significant impedances may develop on the rigid-steel conduit
return path due to arcing at coupling joints when high fault
currents associated with solidly grounded systems occur [7].
This condition would divert more current to the metallic shield
paths. However, a maximum of 14 percent of the total groundfault current can be expected to flow in the metallic shield for
fault currents below approximately 2000 A.
COMPARISON OF TEST AND CALCULATED CURRENT DIVISION
The current distribution in the various ground-return paths
may be calculated by solving a set of simultaneous loop

equations. The elements of the matrix consist of self- and

mutual-impedance terms. The general matrix and the equations for the matrix elements are given in the Appendix.
To check the test results, the equations were solved for a
400-A ground fault (details are given in the Appendix). The
results of the calculations are compared with the test values in
Table III. The currents calculated for each path agree with the
test results within a few percent.
During the testing, a three-phase load current was not
flowing in the cable. To determine if load current affects the
ground-fault return path current distribution, 200 A of threephase load current with a 400-A ground fault superimposed on
phase A was simulated in the matrix model. Table IV
compares the distribution of currents for the 400-A ground
fault with and without a three-phase load current for the case
of PVC conduit with a 2/0 AWG ground wire. This shows that
the effect of three-phase load current on the ground-fault
return path-current distribution is small.

HAMER AND WOOD: CABLE DAMAGED DURING GROUND FAULTS?

1153

TABLE IV

CALCULATED FAULT CURRENT DISTRIBUTION FOR 4/0 AWG 15-kV

CABLE WITH WIRE SHIELD AND 5-IN PVC WITH 2/0 AWG GROUND
WIREa
0
]
[1

Condition
No load
200-A Load

Percent of Total Ground Fault Current

Ground
Phase B
Phase C
Faulted
Phase Shield
Shield
Shield
Wire

9
10

7
8

7
7

0.8

OT+AE-R F-EEDERS

SECONO

CABLE

4 )0

FEEDER NO.2

4 -SFCN

DISTRIBUTION SUBSTATION

80
81

0.1 SECONO
OTHER FEEDERS

Sum of currents add to over 100 percent due to phase-angle differences in

individual currents.
a

GUIDELINES FOR PROTECTION

A representative distribution system is shown on the oneline diagram of Fig. 5. A distribution substation is fed by cable
from a lineup of main switch gear. The ground-fault protective
relays are shown in the figure.
In case of malfunction of the first protective device, such as
the 5OG for feeder cable 1, the backup device 251G must
clear the fault before the cable metallic shield is damaged.
Since the operating time of 25 1G at the maximum ground fault
is 0.4 s and approximately 0.1 s must be added for circuitbreaker operating time, the cable metallic shield must be able
to withstand its portion of the total ground fault of 1000 A for
0.5 s. Assuming the cable is 4/0 AWG in rigid-steel conduit
without ground wire, the shield must be able to withstand 14
percent of 1000 A (140 A) for 0.5 s. Similarly, feeder cable 2
must be able to withstand 140 A (assuming one cable per
phase) for 1.3 s.
Examining Fig. 6, a typical withstand limit curve for a 4/0
AWG cable with a wire shield is shown, and the cable has no
difficulty withstanding this duty. It will remain in the safe
operating temperature region at 140 A for well over 100 cycles
(1.7 s). Only if the total ground fault current for this case
exceeds 3800 A does feeder cable 2 approach its limit of 530 A
for 1.3 s. Feeder cable 1 is still in the safe region at this fault
level. The following guidelines are recommended for protecting feeder cable shields from damage.
1) The percentages given in Table I are valid for 5-mil-thick
copper-tape shields and six #18 AWG wire shields. These are
typical of many installations and are applicable in most cases.
The fault current distribution for different cable configurations
and shield sizes can be calculated as shown in the Appendix.
2) A loose ground connection at the shield termination at
either end of a cable run will affect the current distribution in
the shields. These terminations must be made secure.
3) For PVC conduit, normal practice is to include a ground
wire inside the conduit. For higher-level total ground fault
currents (exceeding 1000 A) and solidly grounded systems, it
is recommended that a ground wire be run inside metallic
conduits. This is especially true for systems using rigid-steel
conduit as the return path. Without ground wires within the
conduit, sparking at couplings [7] may occur during faults
with the resulting risks for conduits routed through hazardous
locations [8]. The use of a ground wire also reduces the
proportion of ground fault current returning through the shield

MAIN SWITCHGEAR

OCR

AMBLE FEEDER

NO .1

Fig. 5. Sample distribution system showing ground fault protective relays

(times shown are relay operating times at maximum fault of 1000 A).

-J
(2)
z

cr-

T.

1100

T
(I)
I

100

11.1.

'i I's"t-

1
10
TIME (CYCLES @ 60 HZ)

11

M.1110

100

BASED ON ICEA P-4S-482, 1979

8SC INITIIAL, 200'C RESULTING
SHIELD TEMPERATURE

Fig. 6. Shield short-circuit capability; 15 kV; 100-percent insulated; six #18

AWG wire shield.

and eliminates concern over corroded or loose couplings and

bushings.
CONCLUSION
Contrary to intuition, ground fault current for through faults
does not predominantly return on the shield of the faulted
phase of a cable. Current divides inversely as the magnitude of
the impedances of the ground return paths. The portion of
ground fault current for through faults returning on the cable
shields divides almost equally among the three cable shields.
The impedances of the cable shields routinely used in industry
are relatively high compared with other ground return paths
such as ground wires within conduits or the conduit itself.
For ground fault levels under 1000 A and conventional
operation times of ground protective relays, cable metallic
shields are not being damaged during ground faults. For
ground fault magnitudes exceeding 1000 A a ground wire
should be included within metallic conduits to provide a
reliable low-impedance ground return path for the fault
current.
APPENDIX

Using the methods given in [3], the fault current distribution

between the various return paths is calculated and compared to
the test results. The equivalent circuit for the general case is
shown in Fig. 7.
This circuit includes provisions for load impedance and

1154

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. IA-22, NO. 6, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1986

where

LOAD
ZL

conductor resistance,
GMR conductor geometric mean radius in inches,
earth resistivity in meter ohms,
p
f
frequency in cycles/s.
Next we find that

RCN

zL

ZSA,SA, ZSB,SB, Zsc,sc=Rs+O0.18+j (0.0529

IrT-,ZVL

+IC

g
* loglo

Q/1000 ft

where Rs is the shield resistance and Dl is the average radius

of the shield in inches, and

EARiTH

EPATH

X
Vp/f
+0.2335
DI

Fig. 7. Equivalent circuit for fault current distribution calculations.

ZCD,CD=RC+ 0.018 +j (0.0529

V-lneutral grounding impedance. The appropriate loop equations

9/1000 ft
* log1o D2 + 0.2335
are written with earth return being used in each case to
D2
complete the loop. These equations are presented in the
where Rc is the conduit resistance and D2 is the radius of the
following matrix:
EA
EB

EC

0
0

0
o

ZA,A

ZA,B

ZAGC

ZA ,SA

ZA,SB

ZA,SC

ZA ,GW
ZA ,CD

ZA,B
ZB,B
ZB,C
ZB,SA
ZB,SB
ZB,SC
ZB,GW
ZB,CD

ZA,C
ZB,C
zC,C

ZC,SA
ZC,SB

zC,SC

ZC,GW
ZC,CD

ZA ,SA
ZB,SA
ZC,SA
ZSA ,SA
ZSA ,SB
ZSA ,SC

ZSA,GW
ZSA,CD

ZA ,SB
ZB,SB
ZC,SB
ZSA ,SB
ZSB,SB
ZSB,SC
ZSB,GW
ZSB,CD

ZA,GW
ZB,GW
ZC,G W
ZSA ,G W
ZSB,GW
ZSC,GW
ZGW,GW
ZG W,CD

ZA,SC
ZB,SC
ZC,SC

ZSA,SC
ZSB,SC
ZSC,Sc

ZSC,GW
ZSC,CD

ZA ,CD
ZB,CD
ZC,CD
ZSA ,CD
ZSB,CD
ZSC,CD
ZGW,CD
ZCD,CD

IA
IB

IC

ISA

'SB

'SC

IGW
ICD

where
self-impedance with earth
for the phase conductor,
ZSA,SA, ZSB,SB, ZSC,SC self-impedance with earth
for the cable shield,
self-impedance with earth
ZGW,GW
for the ground wire,
self-impedance with earth
ZCD,CD

ZA,A, ZB,B, ZC,C

for tho fvnrli

return

conduit in inches (magnetic effects for steel conduit are not

included). Finally, we have

return

Zjj=O0.0128+] (0.0529

return
return

* loglo

D,J

+0.2335

9/1000 ft

is the distance between the center of conductor i and

mutual reactance betwee-In the i-th where Dij
conductor in inches.
of
center
the
and j-th conductors plus impedance
the phase A, B, and C conductor selfthat
Notice
of the earth return wheire the i, J'
will
impedances
normally be equal and that the phase A, B,
terms are appropriate coimbinations
shield self-impedances will be equal. In
conductor
and
C
of A, B, C, SA, SB, SC GW, and
andaddition, since the distance between conductor centers and the
CD.
distance between the shield centers are equal, the mutual
impedance terms conductor-to-conductor and shield-to-shield
Note that
will also be equal. Finally, the mutual terms associated with
conduit will be equal, since each conductor is represented
the
;29
ZA,A, ZB,B, ZC,C, ZGW,GW=RcN+0.018+j (0.05
at the center of the conduit.
To include the neutral grounding resistor (RN) in the matrix,
value of the resistor is added to elements ZA,A, ZB,B, ZC,C,
the
Q/1000
ft
02335
log
ZA,B, ZA,C, and ZB,C. This is evident from writing the loop
Z..

1155

HAMER AND WOOD: CABLE DAMAGED DURING GROUND FAULTS?

equations and observing that the current flow in the neutral

resistor is IA + IB + IC.
To include the load impedance (ZL) in the matrix, 2ZL is
added to elements ZB,B and ZC,c, and ZL is added to element
ZB,c. Again, this is evident from writing the loop equations
and observing that the current flowing in ZL in phase A is IB +
IC-

thank T. Rose of Electro-Test Inc. for providing technical help

on the test setup and for patiently allowing us to use his lab
space for several weeks during the testing.
REFERENCES
[I] Short Circuit Performance of Metallic Shields and Sheaths of
Insulated Cable, 2nd ed., ICEA Pub. P45-482, South Yarmouth, MA,

1979.
To examine different configurations, the appropriate neutral [2] Aug.
"Optimization of the design of metallic shield-Concentric conductors
and/or load impedances are added, and the equations which do
of extruded dielectric cables under fault conditions," Electric Power
Res. Inst., Palo Alto, CA, EL-3014, Res. Project 1286-3 Final Rep.,
not apply are deleted. Solution of the matrix then gives the
1983.
current distributions. For example, consider a 400-A ground [3] Apr.
D. R. Smith and J. V. Barger, "Impedance and circulating current
fault on phase A of the 4/0 AWG cable with 2/0 AWG ground
calculations for UD multi-wire concentric neutral circuits," presented
at the Underground Distribution Conf., Detroit, MI, Sept. 27-30,
wire in aluminum conduit and no load. The neutral grounding
1971.
resistor (RN) is added to the elements indicated earlier. Since [4] C.
Landinger and L. D. Cronin, "Fault tests on embedded copper wire
phase conductors B and C are open-circuited with zero current,
and copper tape shielded single conductor cables," presented at the
IEEE PES Winter Meeting, New York, NY, Jan. 28-Feb. 2, 1973.
the elements relating to phase conductors B and C are removed
[5] M. A. Martin, D. A. Silver, R. G. Lukac, and R. Suarez, "Normal and
from the impedance matrix (rows and columns two and three).
short circuit operating characteristics of metallic shielded solid dielecThe matrix can then be solved to give the current distribution.
tric power cable," presented at the IEEE PES Summer Meeting and
EHV/UHV Conf., Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 15-20, 1973.
The current distributions for a 400-A ground fault with
[6] A. J. Bisson and E. A. Rochau, "Iron conduit impedance effects in
various conduit/ground wire configurations are calculated by
ground circuit systems," presented at the AIEE Winter General
computer. The conductor resistance, dimension, and geometMeeting, New York, NY, Jan. 18-22, 1954.
ric mean radius data were obtained from the cable manufactur- [7] R. H. Kaufmann, "Some fundamentals of equipment-grounding circuit
design," presented at the AIEE Summer and Pacific General Meeting,
er's literature. Measured values were used for the tape shield
Los Angeles, CA, June 21-25, 1954.
resistance and the aluminum conduit resistance. For calcula- [8] National Electrical Code 1984, NFPA Standard 70-1984, National
Fire Protection Association, 1983.
tions with the steel conduit the effect of resistance dominates
the current distribution through the conduit. Thus the magnetic
and saturation effects on inductance were neglected for
Paul S. Hamer (S'70-M'74-S'78-M'79) received
purposes of these calculations. The resistance of the steel
the B.S.E.E. degree from the Virginia Polytechnic
conduit also varies with current as shown in Fig. 4. The
Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, and
measured conduit resistance at 125 A was used for calculations
the M.S.E.E. degree from Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR, in 1972 and 1979, respectively.
with the 2/0 AWG ground wire, and the resistance at 225 A
He joined Westinghouse Electric Corporation in
was used for calculations without the 2/0 AWG ground wire.
1972 and held positions as a Service Engineer for
Since the test setup did not include an earth return path, the
the Large Generator Department and as an Industrial Power Systems Engineer and Resident Engiresistance and reactance terms for the earth return were made
neer for the Industry Services Division. Since 1979
sufficiently large so that the earth current was negligible. The
he has been with the Chevron Corporation Engiresults of the calculations and comparison with the measured neering Department where he is currently a Staff Electrical Engineer.
Mr. Hamer is a Registered Electrical Engineer in California.
values are presented in Table III.
A 200-A resistive load was added to the model for the case
of the 4/0 AWG conductor with wire shield and 2/0 AWG
Barry M. Wood (M'73-M'79) received the
ground wire in PVC conduit. The results of these calculations
B.S.E.E. degree from Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and comparison with calculations without the load represented
and State University, Blacksburg, VA, and the
M.S.E.E. degree from the University of Pittsburgh,
are given in Table IV.
PA in 1972 and 1978, respectively.
Pittsburgh,
In summary, the calculated data agree well with the
From 1972 to 1977 he was employed by Wesmeasured data. This paper deals specifically with 4/0 AWG
tinghouse Electric Corporation, Pittsburgh, as a
Power Systems Engineer. In 1978 he joined Mccables and resistance grounded systems. However, the calcuGraw Edison Company, Canonsburg, PA, as a
lation methods shown can readily be applied to investigate
Senior Power Systems Engineer, and in 1981 he
shield currents for other cable sizes, cable configurations, and
joined Electro-Test, Inc., San Ramon, CA, as a
Senior Electrical Engineer. He is currently a Supervisory Electrical Engineer
neutral grounding methods.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to thank Anaconda-Ericsson Inc. for
providing the cable samples for these tests and for technical
information used in preparing this paper. They also wish to

with Engineering Technology Industries, Inc. (a subsidiary of Electro-Test,

Inc.), San Ramon. His specialty is engineering analysis of electrical power
systems.
Mr. Wood is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of California
and in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Past Chairman of the IEEE
Oakland-East Bay Industry Applications Society Chapter and the IEEE
Oakland-East Bay Section.