2446 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO.

4, OCTOBER 2009

Using Modal Analysis to Estimate Received

Signal Levels for a Power-Line Carrier
Channel on a 500-kV Transmission Line
Gregory A. Franklin, Member, IEEE

Abstract—This paper presents the results of a study on the use of Point-wise incident voltage.
modal analysis for estimating received signal levels of a power-line
carrier (PLC) channel on high voltage transmission lines. The Point-wise reflected voltage.
intent of the paper is to serve as a reference. Numerous papers
have been written on modal analysis and signal propagation on Forward-traveling voltage wave.
overhead lines at PLC frequencies. However, for the information
Reverse-traveling voltage wave.
to be put to practical use requires reading numerous references,
including references on transmission line modeling. Therefore, Phase domain voltage.
this paper provides information on transmission line modeling
and modal analysis theory needed for using modal analysis for Modal domain voltage.
an actual calculation of received signal levels with results in the
phase domain, which is the domain in which measurements are Phase domain current.
usually made. Modal analysis is used to calculate modal prop- Phase domain series impedance per unit length.
agation constants, which are used in an equation that directly
relates sending-end voltage to receiving-end voltage utilizing a Phase domain shunt admittance per unit length.
multiphase reflection coefficient. To validate calculations using
the described methods, field tests were performed on an energized Phase domain characteristic (surge) impedance.
500-kV transmission line. Results from these tests in the form of
Phase domain propagation constant.
a comparison of calculated versus measured voltage levels are
provided. Modal domain propagation constant.
Index Terms—Modal analysis, power-line carrier (PLC), trans- Modal voltage transformation matrix.
mission line modeling.
Diagonal matrix consisting of eigenvalues of the
propagation matrix.
NOMENCLATURE:
Conductor depth of wave penetration.
Designates a matrix. Conductor conductivity per unit length.

Designates a diagonal matrix. Ground resistivity.

Designates the transpose of a matrix. Radius of conductor.

Designates an identity matrix.
Permittivity of Free Space.
Permeability of Free Space.
Relative permeability of conductor.
Earth complex depth of wave penetration.
Potential coefficient matrix.
Point-wise voltage reflection coefficient.
Receiving-end voltage reflection coefficient.
Sending-end voltage reflection coefficient.
Manuscript received January 13, 2009. Current version published September
23, 2009. Paper no. TPWRD-00947-2008.
The author is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294 USA (e-mail:
gfranklin@uab.edu).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2009.2028475
0885-8977/$26.00 © 2009 IEEE
Frequency in Hertz (Hz).
Frequency in rad/s.
I. INTRODUCTION
W HETHER for planning or troubleshooting, the ability
to estimate power-line carrier (PLC) signal levels
can be very useful. Modal analysis can provide accurate esti-
mates of signal levels on PLC channels. In this paper, modal
analysis is used in the solution of an equation that directly
relates sending-end voltage to receiving-end voltage utilizing
a multiphase reflection coefficient, where the voltages are in
the phase domain (i.e., voltages that would typically be mea-
sured). Information on transmission line modeling and modal
analysis necessary for solving the aforementioned equation are
provided. Additionally, results of field tests on an energized
500-kV transmission line are provided to validate the modeling
methods described.
FRANKLIN: USING MODAL ANALYSIS TO ESTIMATE RECEIVED SIGNAL LEVELS
Fig. 1. Simplified single-frequency PLC system at one end of a transmission
line.
II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF A PLC SYSTEM
PLC signals are classified as radio frequency signals in the
range of 30 kHz to 500 kHz, with typical power levels of 1 W
to 10 W into . As the name implies, the communication
medium is the high voltage transmission line. PLC schemes are
commonly employed by electric utilities for high-speed protec-
tion of transmission lines and transformers in the event of a fault.
Information transmitted by carrier signal is binary and basically
tells a protective device to either trip or don’t trip. There are two
common types of PLC signals.
1) “ON-OFF” keyed (OOK) carrier—Signal is normally off.
2) Frequency shift keyed (FSK) carrier—Guard signal at one
frequency and trip signal at another frequency.
A simplified diagram of a single-frequency PLC coupling
system is shown in Fig. 1. There would be an identical system
on the other end of the transmission line. The system is essen-
tially comprised of a line trap, drain coil with arc gap, line tuning
equipment, and communication equipment. The line trap is ba-
sically a parallel resonant circuit that is tuned to the PLC fre-
quency and thus blocks the signal from being transmitted onto
the bus. The line tuning equipment is comprised of the line
tuner and the impedance matching transformer (IMT). The line
tuner is tuned to form a series resonant circuit with the coupling
capacitor (CC) at the PLC frequency and thus provides a low
impedance path for the carrier signal to the transmission line.
The line tuner consists of either a variable inductance coil alone
or a variable inductance coil in series with a variable capaci-
tance when higher frequency tuning is required. Although not
shown in the figure, another much higher value capacitor is also
in series with the line tuner for preventing power system fre-
quency (60 Hz) signals from saturating the IMT. The IMT pro-
vides impedance matching between the transmission line and
the communication equipment. The drain coil is used to pro-
vide low impedance at power system frequency
to effectively ground the coupling capacitor, while at the same
time provide high impedance at the
PLC frequency. The arc gap across the drain coil provides tran-
sient protection.
III. MULTIPHASE TRANSMISSION LINE MODELING
For multiphase transmission lines, the well-known telegra-
pher’s equations that describe signal propagation along a line
take the form of (1) and (2). The equations have the same form
2447
as for the single-phase transmission line except matrices replace
scalar quantities. One should note however that the order of mul-
tiplication of the and matrices is different for voltage
than for current.
(1)
(2)
In (1) and (2), is the series impedance per unit length matrix
and is the shunt admittance per unit length matrix. is
the propagation matrix, and and are column matrices of
voltage and current phasors.
A. The Shunt Admittance Matrix
For the traditional distributed parameter transmission line
model, the shunt admittance per unit length is:
(3)
Where is the conductance per unit length and is the
capacitance per unit length. In [1], Hedman demonstrates that
at frequencies significantly below 1 MHz, the conductance can
be neglected with negligible error. Thus, at PLC frequencies,
the shunt admittance per unit length can be approximated as
(4)
To calculate the shunt admittance, the capacitance per unit
length must be calculated. The capacitance is most readily
calculated by first calculating the potential coefficient matrix.
The capacitance matrix can then be obtained by inverting the
potential coefficient matrix. The potential coefficients are geo-
metrical factors that relate voltage to charge. Since capacitance
also relates voltage to charge, the potential coefficients are
related to capacitance. In matrix form, the equations are
(5)
(6)
(7)
where is a column matrix of voltage, is a column matrix
of charge per unit length, is a square matrix of potential
coefficients, and is a square matrix of capacitance per unit
length.
1) Calculating the Potential Coefficients: A common method
for calculating the potential coefficients of a system of conduc-
tors over a ground plane is one referred to as the method of im-
ages. In this method, the ground plane is replaced by a system of
imaginary image conductors carrying the negative of the charge
on the real conductors. The image conductors are located the
same distance below the ground plane as the distance of the real
conductors above the ground plane. Thus, the system of image
conductors preserves the boundary conditions of the original
system, which allows the ground plane to be removed from the
calculations. Fig. 2 shows a two-conductor system with the cor-
responding image conductors. Each conductor is modeled as a
line charge distribution and, with the ground plane removed, the
2448 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009

current density is decreased by a factor of and is calculated

as

(12)

To offer some justification for using the approximation of (11),

Fig. 2. Two-conductor system with corresponding image conductors.
potential difference calculations become those of potential dif-
ference between points in space resulting from a line charge dis-
tribution. Referring to Fig. 2, the equations for the diagonal and
off-diagonal elements of the matrix for an overhead system
of conductors above a ground plane are given by (8) and (9),
respectively
(8)
(9)
where
• is the height of conductor above ground;
• is the radius of conductor ;
• is the distance from conductor to the image of con-
ductor ;
• is the direct distance from conductor to conductor .
B. The Series Impedance Matrix
The transmission line’s series impedance per unit length con-
sists of two components:
1) the internal conductor impedances, , which is a di-
agonal matrix.
2) the external impedance, . real conductors. In a manner similar to that for calculating the
Thus, the series impedance per unit length is
(10)
1) Internal Conductor Impedance: The internal conductor
impedance is composed of the conductor’s internal resistance
and inductive reactance. From [2], when the depth of wave pen-
etration, or skin depth, is significantly less than the radius of the
circular conductor, the per unit length internal impedance can
be approximated by (11) as
(11)
where is the skin depth, or depth of wave penetration, defined
as the distance inward from the conductor surface to where the
consider the skin depth of an aluminum conductor at the lowest
PLC frequency of 30 kHz. The conductivity of aluminum is
and the relative permeability of
aluminum is . Using (12), the depth of wave pen-
etration is , which is minute compared to the
radius of a conductor used for a high voltage transmission line.
Equations (11) and (12) are based on a solid tubular conductor
and do not account for stranding, which overhead transmission
line conductors will have.
2) External Impedance: The external impedance consists
of aerial and ground (earth) return self and mutual impedances
resulting from mutual inductance between the conductors and
between the conductors and ground. As shown by Carson in
[3], these self and mutual impedances can be divided into two
parts consisting of the impedance with the earth as a perfect
conductor, and a second part that accounts for the additional
impedance imposed by imperfect earth conductivity. This
second part commonly known as Carson’s earth correction
consists of an indefinite integral that is generally evaluated by
taking the first several terms of an infinite series. However,
there is another widely accepted method for accounting for an
imperfect earth that is much simpler than Carson’s integral.
Described in [4], this method is referred to as the “complex
ground return plane”.
The complex ground return plane is a plane of perfect con-
ductivity that replaces the real earth plane and is located at a
complex distance below the physical earth’s surface, where
(13)
With the complex ground return plane located, the method of
images can be used to calculate the self and mutual imped-
ances. Fig. 3 shows a two-conductor system with the corre-
sponding image conductors located below the complex ground
return plane. Each conductor is modeled as a current filament
with the image conductors carrying the negative current of the
potential coefficients for the shunt admittance, the impedances
are then calculated based on differences in flux linkage between
points in space. In the figure, it is important to recognize that the
image conductor is located at a distance of below the
real conductor. In other words, the mirror image is taken about
the complex ground return plane. Referring to Fig. 3, the equa-
tions for the diagonal and off-diagonal elements of the
matrix are given by (14) and (15), respectively. The self-im-
pedances are the diagonal terms and the mutual impedances
are the off-diagonal terms. Also, since is complex, the el-
ements of will have real and imaginary parts in the form
of
(14)
FRANKLIN: USING MODAL ANALYSIS TO ESTIMATE RECEIVED SIGNAL LEVELS
Fig. 3. Two-conductor system with corresponding image conductors located
below the complex ground return plane.
(15)
where
• is the height of conductor above ground;
• is the radius of conductor ;
• is the distance from conductor to the image of con-
ductor including the factor;
• is the direct distance from conductor to conductor .
C. Eliminating Shield Wires From the Analysis
From [5], shield wires may be eliminated from the analysis
when one-fourth of the wavelength of the PLC signal is less than
a tower-to-tower span of the transmission line. Under this condi-
tion, standing waves will not be present on the shield wires and
the potential along the shield wire may be considered constant
and zero, assuming the shield wires are grounded at each tower.
For typical high voltage transmission lines, the shield wires may
be eliminated when analyzing PLC signals with frequencies less
than 250 kHz. As shown in [5], the shield wire elements can be
eliminated from both the series impedance and potential coeffi-
cient matrices by partitioning the matrices into phase conductor
voltages and shield wire voltages as follows:
(16)
(17)
2449
where
(18)
and
• are the phase voltages;
• are the shield wire voltages;
• are the self-impedance elements of corre-
sponding to the phase conductors;
• are the self-impedance elements of corre-
sponding to the shield wires;
• are the mutual impedance elements of
between the phase conductors and shield wires.
The procedure for reducing the potential coefficient matrix
is the same; however, the potential coefficient matrix has to be
reduced before inverting to obtain the capacitance matrix.
IV. MODAL ANALYSIS
The traditional method for analyzing systems of equations
such as (1) and (2) is that of modal analysis, which is also
known as eigenvalue analysis. Modal analysis diagonalizes the
system matrix, which means the system is transformed from a
coupled system in the phase domain to an uncoupled system in
the modal domain. Applying modal analysis to the transmission
line equations represented by (1) and (2) transforms the coupled
multiphase line in the phase domain into multiple uncoupled
single-phase equivalent lines in the modal domain. These un-
coupled single-phase lines can then be analyzed with traditional
single-phase transmission line equations using modal propaga-
tion constants and modal characteristic (surge) impedances.
A. Mathematical Description of Modal Analysis
Since voltage was the parameter measured in field tests, only
voltage transformations will be considered. Current transforma-
tions are derived similarly; remembering that current is a func-
tion of the product as opposed to voltage, which is a func-
tion of the product.
The modal transformation matrix for voltage is defined as
(19)
Substituting (19) into (1) yields for voltage
(20)
(21)
where
(22)
If the columns of are chosen to be the eigenvectors of
, then from matrix theory, the result of the product of
2450
will be a diagonal matrix with the eigen-
values of on the main diagonal. That is
(23)
The coupled system of equations of (1) becomes a set of uncou-
pled equations of the form of
(24)
where the modal propagation constant is
(25)
The analysis then becomes that of traditional single-phase trans-
mission lines. Descriptions of modal analysis applied to multi-
phase transmission lines can be found in [1] and [6]–[12].
B. Modal Analysis Using the Multiphase Reflection Coefficient
Method
In [10], Wedepohl presents a more concise method of modal
analysis for analyzing signal propagation on multiphase trans-
mission lines by utilizing a multiphase reflection coefficient ma-
trix in conjunction with a matrix function. Wedepohl’s method
proves to be more suitable for analyzing PLC signal propaga-
tion in that the transmission line terminating impedances do not
have to be converted to the modal domain.
1) The Matrix Function: From [13], if a matrix can be diag-
onalized, then polynomial functions can easily be performed on
the matrix in terms of the eigenvectors and eigenvalues. That is,
let be a square matrix and be a matrix whose columns
are comprised of the eigenvectors of , then
(26)
where is a diagonal matrix composed of the eigenvalues of
. As an example, let be a 2 2 matrix, and it is desired
to take the square root of . Then, using the matrix function,
the square root can be found as
2) The Multiphase Reflection Coefficient Matrix: A multi-
phase reflection coefficient matrix was presented by Wedepohl
in [10] and [11]. However, the order of the multiplication for the
matrices was different in the two references. Therefore, to verify
the required order of matrix multiplication, the multiphase re-
flection coefficient matrix at the receiving-end of the line was
derived with the derivation provided in the Appendix, where it
is shown that in the phase domain the multiphase reflection co-
efficient matrix at the receiving-end of the line is
(27)
As shown in [11], the phase domain characteristic (surge)
impedance of the line can be calculated using (28)
(28)
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009
The diagonal elements of are given by (25), and is
the line’s series impedance per unit length given by (10).
3) Equation Relating Sending-End Voltage to Receiving-End
Voltage: In [10], Wedepohl utilizes the matrix function in con-
junction with the multiphase reflection coefficient and presents
equations relating sending-end voltage to incident voltage and
receiving-end voltage to incident voltage. To verify the sequence
of multiplication of the matrices presented by Wedepohl, an
equation directly relating sending-end voltage to receiving-end
voltage was derived and given as (29). Another more practical
reason for deriving an equation that relates sending-end to re-
ceiving-end voltage is that these voltages can be directly mea-
sured in the PLC coupling equipment. The sequence of matrix
multiplication in (29) agrees with that presented by Wedepohl.
The derivation of (29) is presented in the Appendix
(29)
where can be calculated using the matrix function as
(30)
For practical information, and would be voltages
measured on the transmission line side of the IMT of Fig. 1, as-
suming the line tuner is adjusted properly. These voltages would
also be the phase-to-ground voltage levels (for phase-to-ground
coupling) on the transmission line at their respective ends of the
line, again assuming the line tuner is adjusted properly and ne-
glecting the line tuner losses.
V. COMPARISON OF CALCULATED RESULTS TO
FIELD MEASUREMENTS
Field tests were performed to validate calculations. The tests
consisted of applying a signal at one end of a 500-kV line and
measuring the magnitude of the signal at the other end of the
line using a frequency selective voltmeter. At the sending-end
of the line, the IMT of Fig. 1 was removed from the coupling
circuit and the signal was applied directly to the line-tuning unit.
Thus, the voltage level measured at the terminals of the signal
generator would approximately be the phase-to-ground voltage
level applied to the transmission line, after the series LC unit
was tuned to resonate at the frequency of the test signal. At the
receiving-end of the line, all line tuning equipment was removed
from the phase to which the test signal was coupled so that only
the coupling capacitor, drain coil, and line trap of Fig. 1 re-
mained. The voltage at the receiving-end was measured across
the drain coil, which was approximately the phase-to-ground
voltage level on the line since the drain coil impedance essen-
tially presented an open circuit at the test signal frequency.
The test line had PLC coupling equipment for phase-to-
ground coupling on the center phase and one outer phase.
This arrangement allowed for voltage measurements at the
receiving-end of the line on the phase to which the test signal
was applied as well as another phase, which provided additional
data for validation of calculations. During the tests, the line
was energized. The line has numerous PLC frequencies for
the different protection schemes employed on the line, and
these protection schemes remained in service during the tests,
FRANKLIN: USING MODAL ANALYSIS TO ESTIMATE RECEIVED SIGNAL LEVELS
which was possible due to the two-phase-to-ground coupling
employed.
A. Description of Test Line
The test line was a nontransposed 500-kV transmission line
with a delta configuration as shown in Fig. 4. Referring to Fig. 4,
the line parameters are as follows:
• line ;
• phase conductor spacing ;
• shield wire spacing symmetrically spaced
between outer phase conductors;
• average height of outer phases above ;
• average height of center phase above ;
• average height of shield wires above ;
• phase conductors consist of a 3-conductor bundle
with 18-in triangular spacing. Conductors are Ortolan
1033.5 kcm 45/7 ACSR. The GMR (geometric mean
radius) of the bundle was used for calculations. The GMR
of the bundle is calculated using (31)
(31)
In (31), is the GMR of an individual conductor, and
is the separation between the conductors in the bundle.
Using (31), the GMR for the test line phase conductors was
calculated to be 5.382 in.
• Shield wires are 3/8-inch steel.
B. Comparison of Measured and Calculated Values of
Received Signal Levels Using Modal Analysis
When modeling transmission lines and signal propagation
along the line, difficulties often arise in obtaining accurate data
for the models. In general, the only parameters that are actu-
ally known are the types of conductors, the conductor spacing,
and the line length, which may not be precisely known. Param-
eters such as the average height of the conductors above ground
and the ground resistivity typically vary from span to span de-
pending on terrain and thus can only be roughly approximated.
Another model parameter that is typically unknown is the line’s
termination impedances. The net impedance of the station bus
where a line terminates depends on many factors such as the
size of the station and the number of other lines and equipment
connected at the station. Equipment such as bus conductors, bus
insulators, and circuit breaker and transformer bushings all have
2451
Fig. 4. Configuration of 500-kV transmission line used for tests.
a natural capacitance to ground, which will result in frequency
dependent impedances. As noted in [12], the net bus termina-
tion impedance usually has only resistive and capacitive com-
ponents and will generally be around or less, except at
very small stations. The phase to which the PLC signal is cou-
pled also has the additional series impedance of the line trap,
which depending on the type of line trap can be from to
greater than . The 500-kV test line has wide-
band line traps that present almost purely resistive impedance
to frequencies within their stop-band. The frequency of the test
signal, which was 175 kHz, was within the stop-band of the
line trap. To determine the effects of variations in line termina-
tion impedance, three different termination impedance networks
were used in calculations for comparison, with one termination
network, , being reflectionless. The reflectionless termi-
nation, , is the calculated characteristic impedance for the
500-kV line, which was calculated using (28). The impedance
networks used in the calculations are as shown at the bottom of
the page.
Table I shows the measured voltage levels at the receiving
end of the line and the corresponding calculated voltage levels
for each termination impedance network. In the table:
• Test Phase is the phase to which the test signal was applied.
Phase 1 is an outer phase and Phase 2 is the center phase
as shown in Fig. 4;
2452 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009

TABLE I
MEASURED AND CALCULATED VOLTAGE LEVELS AT RECEIVING-END OF LINE

Fig. 5. Equivalent circuit of a single-phase transmission line.

Treating a single-phase line as a special case of the multiphase

• Term. Imp. identifies the impedance network that was used line and expressing (32) using matrix notation yields
to calculate the receiving-end voltage level;
• is the sending-end voltage applied to the test phase;
• is the calculated receiving-end voltage level on Phase (33)
1;
• is the measured receiving-end voltage level on Phase where
1;
• is the calculated receiving-end voltage level on Phase
2; (34)
• is the measured receiving-end voltage level on Phase (35)
2.
For all cases, the ground resistivity used in the calculations was which yields
-m, and the test signal frequency was 175 kHz.
As shown in Table I, the reflectionless terminating impedance (36)
produced the least accurate results, which could be expected
since the actual line termination was far from being that of Now, a point-wise reflection coefficient can be defined as
the characteristic impedance of the line. However, the other
two termination impedances resulted in good estimates of the (37)
received signal levels, even on the phase to which the test signal
was not directly applied. For reference, the calculated line Or after rearranging
series impedance matrix, shunt admittance matrix, and modal
propagation constants for the 500-kV line are provided in the
(38)
Appendix.
(39)

VI. CONCLUSION Applying the matrix property to

results in
Based on the comparison of calculated and measured values,
modal analysis using a multiphase reflection coefficient pro-
vided reasonably accurate estimates of received signal levels for (40)
a PLC channel on a 500-kV line, even though several of the
model parameters such as ground resistivity, average conductor Using the matrix function and taking the inverse of the eigen-
height, and line terminating impedance could only be roughly values of
approximated.
(41)

APPENDIX Thus

Derivation of Multiphase Reflection Coefficient and Equa- (42)

tion Relating Sending-End Voltage to Receiving-End Voltage:
Fig. 5 shows a typical equivalent circuit of a single-phase trans- At the receiving end of the line and the receiving-end
mission line. From [2], the traveling-wave solution for voltage voltage reflection coefficient is
is

(32) (43)
FRANKLIN: USING MODAL ANALYSIS TO ESTIMATE RECEIVED SIGNAL LEVELS 2453

From [14], the incident and reflected voltages can be expressed sending-end voltage reflection coefficient is .
in terms of receiving end quantities as But, in (48)

(44)

The last steps are to arrange the receiving-end voltage in

(45)
terms of and , and arrange the sending-end voltage
in terms of and . Then, the receiving-end voltage can
Substituting (44) and (45) into (43) yields be expressed in terms of the sending-end voltage and the re-
ceiving-end reflection coefficient.
At the receiving end of the line and from (36)

(50)
(51)

And using the matrix property ap- Thus

plied to results in
(52)
(53)
(54)

From (34), so
After simplifying, becomes
(55)
(46)
At the sending end of the line and from (36)
At the sending end of the line and the sending-end
voltage reflection coefficient is (56)
(57)
(47) (58)
(59)
Or, after substituting (43) into (47)
(60)
(48)
From (34), so
Or, in terms of the sending-end impedance
(61)
(49)
Or, after substituting (48) into (61)
Of interest is the sequence of matrix multiplication for .
For the single-phase case, the traditional definition of the (62)
2454 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 24, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009

Rearranging to get [2] J. A. Edminister, Schaum’s Outline of Theory and Problems of Elec-
tromagnetics, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993, vol. I, pp.
237–241.
(63) [3] J. R. Carson, “Wave propagation in overhead wires with ground return,”
Bell Syst. Tech. J., vol. 5, pp. 539–554, 1926.
[4] A. Deri, G. Tevan, A. Semlyen, and A. Castanheira, “The complex
And as shown previously, so earth return plane: A simplified model for homogenous and multi-layer
earth return,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-100, no. 8, pp.
(64) 3686–3693, Aug. 1981.
[5] N. Watson and J. Arrillaga, “Power systems electromagnetic transients
simulation,” in IEE Power and Energy, ser. 39. London, U.K.: Inst.
Now the receiving-end voltage can be expressed in terms of the Elect. Eng., 2003, pp. 123–142.
sending-end voltage and the receiving-end voltage reflection co- [6] G. E. Adams, “Wave propagation along unbalanced high-voltage trans-
mission lines,” AIEE Trans., pt. III (Power App. Syst.), vol. 78, pp.
efficient by substituting (64) into (55) to obtain 639–647, Aug. 1959.
[7] L. O. Barthold, “Radio-frequency propagation on polyphase lines,”
IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-83, no. 7, pp. 665–671, Jul.
1964.
(65) [8] M. C. Perz, “Natural modes of power line carrier on horizontal three-
phase lines,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-83, no. 7, pp.
679–685, Jul. 1964.
where can be calculated using the matrix function as [9] M. C. Perz, “A method of analysis of power line carrier problems on
three-phase lines,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-83, no. 7,
pp. 686–691, Jul. 1964.
(66) [10] L. M. Wedepohl, “Electrical characteristics of polyphase transmission
systems, with special reference to boundary value calculations at power
Calculated Parameters for 500-kV Line: Using the trans- line carrier frequencies,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 112, no. 11, pp.
2103–2112, Nov. 1965.
mission line modeling methods described in Section III, the cal- [11] L. M. Wedepohl, “Application of matrix methods to the solution of
culated line series impedance and shunt admittance matrices travelling-wave phenomena in polyphase systems,” Proc. Inst. Elect.
with shield wires eliminated, and the modal propagation con- Eng., vol. 110, no. 12, pp. 2200–2212, Dec. 1963.
[12] IEEE Guide for Power-Line Carrier Applications, IEEE Std. 643-2004,
stants for the 500-kV line are as follows for a frequency of 175 Jun. 2005.
kHz—see the equation at the bottom of the previous page. And, [13] P. M. Derusso, R. J. Roy, and C. M. Close, State Variables for Engi-
using , the modal attenuation constants are neers. New York: Wiley, 1965, pp. 232–285.
[14] D. A. Conner, Electromagnetic Dynamics, 1st Unified Draft. Birm-
as follows: ingham, AL: Univ. Alabama, 1987, pp. 9-5–9-32.
• ;
• ; Gregory A. Franklin (M’03) received the B.S.E.E., M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. de-
grees from the University of Alabama at Birmingham in 1996, 1997, and 2005,
• . respectively.
From 1997 through 2006, he was with Southern Company, Birmingham,
working in the area of substation protection and control. In 2007, he resigned
REFERENCES from Southern Company as a Senior Engineer to join the faculty of the
[1] D. E. Hedman, “Propagation on overhead transmission lines, parts I Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of Alabama at
and II,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-84, no. 3, pp. 200–211, Birmingham.
Mar. 1965. Dr. Franklin is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Alabama.