Proceedings of the 15th International Middle East Power Systems Conference (MEPCON’12), Alexandria University,
Egypt, December 23-25, 2012, Paper ID 112.
Mitigation of Magnetic Field under Double-Circuit 220 kV Overhead
Transmission Line
Ossama E. Gouda
Faculty of Engineering,
Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Prof_Ossama11@yahoo.com
Abstract— This paper studies the effect of various mitigation
loop configurations namely: single horizontal mitigation loop
(two conductors), two separated horizontal mitigation loops (four
conductors) and single vertical mitigation loop (two conductors),
on the magnetic field produced by 220 kV double-circuit
overhead transmission line. Also, in this paper a further
reduction in the magnetic field is achieved by inserting properly-
selected capacitors within these mitigation loops. The obtained
results indicate that the reduction in the magnetic field by using
these mitigation loops largely depends on the arrangements and
the locations of these loops with respect to the conductors of 220
kV double-circuit overhead transmission line.
Index Terms— Magnetic Field, Mitigation loop, Double-
Circuit, Transmission lines
I. INTRODUCTION
P ublic concern about magnetic field effects on human
safety has triggered a wealth of research efforts focused on
the evaluation of magnetic fields produced by power lines [1-
4]. Studies include the design of new compact transmission
line configurations; the inclusion of auxiliary single or double
loops for magnetic field mitigation in already existing power
lines; the consideration of series-capacitor compensation
schemes for enhancing field mitigation; and the
reconfiguration of lines to high phase operation [5-7].
However, many of these studies that deal with overhead
transmission lines make use of certain simplifying
assumptions that, inevitably, give rise to inaccurate results in
the computed magnetic field. Ordinary simplifications include
neglecting the return earth currents, neglecting the ground
wires, replacing bundle phase conductors with equivalent
single conductor, and replacing actual sagged conductors with
average height horizontal conductors. These assumptions
result in a model where magnetic fields are distorted from
those produced in reality [8, 9].
There are many methods that can be used to mitigate the
magnetic field under overhead transmission lines, such as:
1) Methods to reduce the current of the OHTL. That can be
done, for example; by increasing the voltage level of the
OHTL, or by the change of one-phase lines to three-phase
lines [10].
2) Methods to compact the configuration of the OHTL [5].
The aim of these methods is to reduce the phase-phase
distance.
3) Methods to move away the phase conductors from the
interest area [10-11]. Due to the decay with distance, the
influence of the magnetic field will be weaker. That can be
done, for example; by increasing the phase-ground clearance,
or by relocate the line.
Adel Z. El Dein
Faculty of Energy Engineering,
Aswan University, Egypt
azeinm2001@hotmail.com
4) Methods to compensate the power field with a
counteracting external field. Passive loop is an example of
these methods, where in this method a passive loop is erected
near to the OHTL, hence a current is induced in this passive
loop [7]. This current creates a magnetic field that partially
cancels the original field.
This paper studies the mitigation of the magnetic field under
double circuits 220 kV OHTL (erected on the same tower).
For double circuits, the choose of the position of the
mitigation circuit is not easy like that for single circuit [12],
where the position of the mitigation loop with respect to the
two circuits is an important factor that affects the induced
current in that mitigation loop, and hence affects the
calculated magnetic field. This paper studies also the effect of
various mitigation loop configurations on the double circuits
220 kV OHTL (erected on the same tower).
In this paper, a matrix formalism of multi-conductor
transmission lines (MTL) model presented by J. A. B. Faria,
and M. E. Almeida [13] is used, where the effects of return
earth currents, ground wire current and mitigation loop current
are taken into account, moreover, actual bundle conductors
and conductors’ sag are considered.
Finally, the optimal design parameters of the mitigation loop
for 220 kV double-circuit overhead transmission line are
obtained.
II. COMPUTATION OF SYSTEM CURRENTS
The MTL technique presented by J. A. B. Faria, and M. E.
Almeida [13] is modified to be applicable for the 220 kV
double-circuit overhead transmission line, with new formula
for the conductors’ sag.
The first step required to conduct a correct analysis consists in
determination of all system currents based on prescribed
phase-conductor currents I p :
 I1 
I 
 2
I 
Ip =  3 (1)
I 4 
I5 
 
 I 6 
Consider the frequency-domain transmission line matrix
equations for non-uniform MTLs (allowing the inclusion of
the sag effect)
 dV Where; rk denotes the radius of conductor k, yk and x k
− = Z ` (ω , z ) I (2a)
dz denote the vertical and horizontal coordinates of conductor k.
dI Matrix ZE, the earth impedance correction, is frequency
− = Y ` (ω , z )V (2b) dependent complex matrixes whose entries can be determine
dz using Carson’s theory or alternatively, the Dub-Anton
complex ground plane approach [14-16]. The entries of ZE are
Where; Z` and Y` denote the per-unit-length series-impedance defined as:
and shunt-admittance matrices, respectively, V and I are
complex column matrices collecting the phasors associated
(Z E )kk = jω µ o ln1 + Ρ
 
with all of the voltages and currents of the line conductors  (6a)
respectively. 2π   yk
 [Va ]1×n p  µ  ( y + y k + 2Ρ ) 2 + ( xi − x k ) 2 
 [V ]  (Z E )ik = jω o ln i  (6b)

V =
b 1×n p  4π  ( y i − y k ) 2 + ( xi − x k ) 2 
[VG ]1×n 
(3a)
 
[ ]
G

is the complex depth, given by Ρ = ( jωµ o / ρ )

−1 / 2
V
 L 1×nL  Ρ with ρ

 [I a ]1×n p 
denoting the earth resistivity.
Matrix Zskin is a frequency-dependent complex diagonal matrix
 [I ]  whose entries can be determined by using the skin-effect
I =
b 1×n p 

[I G ]1×n 
(3b) theory results for cylindrical conductors [9]. For low-
frequency situations, it will be:
 
[ ]
G

 I 
1×nL 

(Z skin )kk = ( Rdc ) k + jω µ o

L

In equation (3), subscripts a and b refer to the partition of
phase bundles into two sub-conductor sets. Subscript G refers
to ground wires and subscript L refers to the mitigation loop.
Also np, nG, and nL denote, the number of phase bundles, the
number of ground wires, and the number of conductors in the
mitigation loop, respectively, for the Egyptian 220 kV double-
circuit overhead transmission line these values are: np = 2, nG
=1, and nL = 2 or 4 as it is proposed in this paper.
Since the separation of the electric and magnetic fields’ effects
is an adequate approach for quasi-stationary regimes (50 Hz),
where wave-propagation phenomena is negligible and all
system currents are assumed to be Z ( the direction of current
flow) independent. This means the transversal displacement
currents among conductors are negligible or, in other words,
equation (2b) equates to zero and only Z` values are needed to
be calculated. Where the standard procedure for computing Z`
in equation (2a) has been established elsewhere [14-16],
details will not be revealed here and thus only a brief summary
is presented.
Z ` = jωL + Z E + Z skin (4)
(7)
8π
Where; ( Rdc ) k denotes the per-unit-length dc resistance of
conductor k.
Due to the line conductors' sag between towers, yk will be a
function on the distance z between the two towers, also the
entries for L and ZE, defined in equations (5) and (6), vary
along the longitudinal coordinate Z.
The exact shape of a conductor suspended between two towers
of equal height can be described by such parameters; as the
distance between the points of suspension span, d, the sag of
the conductor, S, the height of the lowest point above the
ground, h, and the height of the highest point above the
ground, hm. These parameters can be used in different
combinations [17-18]. Fig. 1 depicts the basic catenary
geometry for a single-conductor line, this geometry is
described by:
z
y k = hk + 2α k sinh 2 ( ) (8)
2α k

The external-inductance matrix is a frequency-independent Where; αk is the solution of the transcendental equation:
real symmetric matrix whose entries are:
2 u k ( hm k − hk ) d k = sinh 2 (u k ) , for conductor k; with
µo 2 yk u k = d k 4α k . The parameter α k is also associated with the
Lkk = ln (5a)
2π rk mechanical parameters of the line: α k = (Th ) k wk where

µ ( y + y k ) 2 + ( xi + x k ) 2 (Th ) k is the conductor tension at mid-span and wk is weight

Lkk = o ln i (5b)
4π ( yi − y k ) 2 + ( xi + x k ) 2 per unit length of the conductor k.
  ∆V  V  V   ∆VL1 
∆VL =  L1  =  L1  −  L1  =  
∆VL 2  VL 2  near VL 2  far ∆VL1 + Z c I L 

It can be written as:

S∆VL = ∆VL1 − ∆VL 2 = − Z c I L (12)

Where I L is the loop current, and Z c = jX s = 1 /( jωC s ) is

the impedance of the series capacitor included in the loop.
Using equation (12), the fourth equation contained in equation
(9b) allows for the evaluation of the current flowing in the
Fig. 1. Linear dimensions which determine parameters of the catenary
mitigation loop [13].
Consider a mitigation loop of length l, is present, where l is a
multiple of the span length d. The line section under analysis I  (13)
I L =  L  = −YS T SZ La I a − YS T SZ Lb I b − YS T SZ LG I G
has its near end at -1/2 and its far end at l/2. − I L  1424
K La
3 1424
K Lb
3 1424
K LG
3
The integration of equation (2a) from z = -l/2 to z = l/2 gives:

1
Where ; Y =
l/2
Vnear − V far = I ∫ Z `( z )dz
−l / 2
(9a) ( Z c + SZ LL S T )

Taking into account that the conductors belonging to a given

Equation (9a) can be rewritten explicitly, in partitioned form, phase bundle are bonded to each other, and that ground wires
as: are bonded to earth (tower resistances are neglected), that
result in: ∆Va = ∆Vb and ∆VG = 0
∆Va   Z aa Z ab Z aG Z aL   I a 
∆V   Z Z bb Z bG Z bL   I b 
 b  =  ba (9b)
∆VG   Z Ga Z Gb Z GG Z GL   I G 
    
∆VL   Z La Z Lb Z LG Z GL   I L 

The computation of the bus impedance Z in equation (9) is

performed using the following formula:

l/2
Z= ∫ Z `( z )dz
−l / 2
(10)
Fig. 2. Boundary conditions at the near and far ends of the mitigation loop.

The values for Z` are evaluated from equations (4-7) and the By using ∆VG = 0 in the third equation contained in (9b) and
conductors' heights are given by equation (8). The two- using equation (13), the current of the ground wire will be:
conductor mitigation loop is closed and may include or not a
series capacitor of impedance Zc [7]. In any case, the sub- (14)
I G = YG ( Z Ga − Z GL K La ) I a + YG ( Z Gb − Z GL K Lb ) I b
matrix IL in equation (3) has the following form: 144 42444 3 144 42444 3
K Ga K Gb

 I L1   I L  Where:
IL =   =   = ILS
T
(11)
I −
 L2   L I
YG = ( Z GL K LG − Z GG ) −1
[
where; S = 1 − 1 ] Next, by using equations (13 and 14), IL and IG can be
By using the boundary conditions at both the near and far ends
eliminated from equation (9b), yielding the following reduced-
of the line section as shown in Fig. 2, the voltage drop in the
order matrix problem.
mitigation loop will be [13]:
∆Va   Zˆ aa Zˆ ab   I a   z 
I k ( z k − z o + nd ) sinh( k ) − ( y k − y o )
 ∆V  =  ˆ   (15) α
 b   Z ba Zˆ bb   I b  (H x ) k =  
k

dk
Where:  z 
I k ( z k − z o + nd ) sinh( k ) − ( y k + y o + ζ )
α
−  
k
Zˆ aa = Z aa + Z aG K Ga − Z aL ( K La + K LG K Ga ) d `k
Zˆ ab = Z ab + Z aG K Gb − Z aL ( K Lb + K LG K Gb ) I k ( x k − xo ) I k ( x k − x o )
(H y )k = −
Zˆ = Z + Z K − Z ( K + K K )
ba ba bG Ga bL La LG Ga
dk d `k
zk zk
Zˆ bb = Z bb + Z bG K Gb − Z bL ( K Lb + K LG K Gb ) − I k ( x k − xo ) sinh( ) I k ( x k − x o ) sinh( )
αk αk
(H z ) k = +
dk d `k
The relationship between Ia and Ib is obtained from equation [
d k = ( x k − x o ) 2 + ( y k − y o ) 2 + ( z k − z o + nd ) 2 ]3/ 2

∆Va = ∆Vb and by using I a + I b = I p .

[ ]
(15) by making
d k` = ( x k − xo ) 2 + ( y k + y o + ζ ) 2 + ( z k − z o + nd ) 2
3/ 2

Then the following relations are obtained

r
I a = ( K ba + 1) −1 I p (16a)
a x Unit vector in X-direction,
r
a y Unit vector in Y-direction,
I b = ( K ab + 1) −1 I p (16b) r
az Unit vector in Z-direction
Where:
The ζ is the complex depth of each conductor’s image
K ba = ( Zˆ ab − Zˆ bb ) −1 ( Zˆ ba − Zˆ aa ) current which can be found as given in [9, 18].

K ab = ( Zˆ ba − Zˆ aa ) −1 ( Zˆ ab − Zˆ bb )
ζ = 2 Ρ e − jπ / 4
Once IP is given, all of the overhead conductor currents Ia, Ib,
IG and IL can be evaluated, step after step using equations (16), Where:
(14), and (13) respectively.
The net current returning through the earth IE is the Ρ is the skin depth of the earth,
complement of the sum of all overhead conductor currents and ρ is the resistivity of the earth, and
can be given from the following equation: f is the frequency of the source current in Hz

The parameter (N) in equation (18) represents the number of

 np np nG nL

I E = − ∑ ( I a ) k + ∑ ( I b ) k + ∑ ( I G ) k + ∑ ( I L ) k  (17) spans to the right and to the left from the generic one where
 k =1 k =1 k =1 k =1  K=0 as shown in Fig. 1.

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Once all system currents are calculated, the magnetic field The data used in the calculation of the magnetic field intensity
produced by these currents, can be calculated at points one meter above ground level (field points), under
Egyptian 220 kV double-circuit OHTL are presented in table
I.
III. MAGNETIC FIELD CALCULATIONS The phase-conductor currents are defined by a balanced
By using the integration technique [17] the magnetic field, direct-sequence three-phase set of 50 Hz sinusoidal currents,
which is produced by a multiphase conductors (M) and their with one circuit load capacity of 1.2 kA rms.
images, at any field point P(xo,yo,zo) can be obtained by using
the Biot-Savart law as [17-18]:  1 
Ip = 1.2e − j 2π / 3  kA
∑ ∑ ∫ [( H ]
M N d/2
1 r r r
H ( xo , yo , z o ) = ) k a x + ( H y ) k a y + ( H z ) k a z dz k
4π K =1 n = − N − d / 2
x
 e j 2π / 3 
(18)
Where: Fig. 3 shows the calculated magnetic field at one meter above
ground surface under 220 kV double-circuits OHTL of various
phases’ sequences. It is seen that the phase sequence (abc/abc) away from the center of the tower) and under maximum height
has the major value of the magnetic field, hence this phase (point P2 in Fig. 1 and a distance away from the center of the
sequence is considered as a worst case and it will be tower) of the conductors of 220 kV double-circuit OHTL. It is
considered under the mitigation process. noticed that replacing bundle phase conductors with
equivalent single conductor has no effect on the calculated
TABLE I magnetic field, especially, near the ground surface. That can
Characteristics of 220 kV Line Conductors
be explained by table II, which gives the calculated current in
Conductor Radius X- Y- Rdc at
each case by using MTL technique presented by J. A. B.
number (mm) Coordinate Coordinate 35°C
(m) (m) (Ω/km) Faria, and M. E. Almeida [13]. From table II, it is seen that the
a1 13.5 -8.15 15.78 0.05614 calculated current of each equivalent conductor equals nearly
a2 13.5 -10.75 24.98 0.05614 the sum of the currents in its sub-conductors.
a3 13.5 -18.95 35.18 0.05614
a4 13.5 7.85 15.78 0.05614 30

a5 13.5 10.45 24.98 0.05614 P1: Equiv. Cond.

P1: Sub. Cond.
a6 13.5 18.65 35.18 0.05614

Magnetic Field Intensity (A/m)

P2: Equiv. Cond.
b1 13.5 -7.85 15.78 0.05614 P2: Sub. Cond.
b2 13.5 -10.45 24.98 0.05614 20
b3 13.5 -18.65 35.18 0.05614
b4 13.5 8.15 15.78 0.05614
b5 13.5 10.95 24.98 0.05614
b6 13.5 18.95 35.18 0.05614
10
G 5.6 0 40 0.6196
L 11.2 - - 0.1283

12
0
abc/abc
abc/cab Distance from the center of the tower (m)
10
Magnetic Field Intensity (A/m)

abc/bca Fig. 4. Effect of replacing bundle phase conductors with equivalent single
conductor
8

Fig. 5 shows the effect of the ground wire in values of the

6
calculated magnetic field under mid-span and under maximum
height of the conductors of 220 kV double-circuit OHTL. It is
4 noticed that with the ground wire taken in consideration, there
is a slight reduction in the calculated magnetic field. This
slight reduction is due to the induced current in the ground
2
wire.
Mitigation loop forms a loop circuit around substantially the
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
entire transmission line or a portion thereof, and is positioned
such that a current is induced therein by the magnetic field
Distance from the center of the tower (m) produced by the alternating currents in the transmission line.
Such induced current is tuned by the series capacitance to
Fig. 3. Magnetic field under maximum conductor’s heights of 220 kV double- produce an optimized cancelling magnetic field, thus reducing
circuit OHTL of various phases’ sequences
the net magnetic fields created by the power lines along a
Fig. 4 presents the calculated magnetic fields produced by right-of-way.
both bundle phase conductors and equivalent phase single
conductor under mid-span (point P1 in Fig. 1 and a distance

TABLE II
Calculated currents of each phase sub-conductors and of its equivalent single conductor of 220 kV double-circuit
Calculated current Phase A Phase B Phase C
Equivalent Sub. a Sub. b Sum Equivalent Sub. a Sub. b Sum Equivalent Sub. a Sub. b Sum
Conductor Conductor Conductor
Circuit 1 1200 588.632 610.903 1199.535 -600 -335.266 -264.051 599.317 -600 -333.188 -265.284 -598.471
+j24.192 -j20.767 +j3.425 +j1039 +j536.506 +j503.306 +j1039.812 -j1039 -j514.798 -j526.073 -j1340.871

Circuit 2 1200 600.651 598.908 1199.559 -600 -239.825 -362.44 602.265 -600 -275.813 -323.121 -598.934
-j3.616 +j6.906 +j3.29 +j1039 +j457.168 +j576.97 +j1034.138 -j1039 -j509.511 -533.206 -j1042.717
To mitigate the magnetic field produced by 220 kV double-
circuit OHTL, by using mitigation loop (active or passive), the
selection of the position of that mitigation loop is not simple
as usual with any single-circuit of a flat configuration [12].
To study the effect of the arrangement and the position of the
mitigation loop with respect to the conductors of 220 kV
double-circuits OHTL, three cases are considered in this paper
as follows:
1-First case: one mitigation loop is erected in a horizontal
configuration and exactly at the center between the two
circuits. Fig. 6 shows the 220 kV double-circuits OHTL with
the suggested horizontal mitigation loop
2-Second case: two mitigation loops are erected on the tower,
one under each circuit. Fig. 7 shows 220 kV double-circuits
OHTL with the suggested two horizontal mitigation loops
3-Third case: one mitigation loop is erected in a vertical
configuration between the two circuits. Fig. 8 shows 220 kV
double-circuits OHTL with the suggested Vertical mitigation
loop.
30
Magnetic Field Intensity (A/m)
20
10
0
0 10 20
Distance from the center of the tower (m)
Fig. 5. Effect of ground wire on the calculated magnetic field
Fig. 6. 220 kV double-circuits OHTL with the suggested horizontal mitigation
loop
As was mentioned before, the goal of this paper is to mitigate
the magnetic field everywhere under OHTL and not only at a
specified region. Hence, optimal design parameters (spacing
between conductors and height of each conductor), which give
maximum magnetic field mitigation are obtained for each
mitigation loop of these three cases. From many calculations
carried out in this paper, it is found that the optimal design
parameters for each case are as that presented in Table III.
Further reduction can be obtained in each case of these three
cases by inserting an appropriately chosen series capacitor in
the mitigation loop. In order to determine the optimal
capacitance Cs of the capacitor to be inserted in the mitigation
loop, the magnetic field intensity will be calculated at point
one meter above ground surface and under one circuit (10 m
from the center of the tower), considering different values of
Zc where Zc=jXs, with the reactance Xs varies from -2Ω to 0.
Fig. 9 shows the graphical results of the effect of the reactance
Xs, inserted in the mitigation loop of third case, on the
calculated magnetic field intensity under mid-span and under
maximum height of the conductors of 220 kV double-circuit
OHTL.
P1:Cond+GW
P2:Cond+GW
P1:Cond
P2:Cond
30 40 50
Fig. 7. 220 kV double-circuits OHTL with the suggested two horizontal
mitigation loops
Fig. 8. 220 kV double-circuits OHTL with the suggested Vertical mitigation
loop
 Table III makes the slight reduction in the calculated magnetic field as
Optimal design parameters for the three cases shown in Fig. 5.
Case Number 1 2 3
Otherwise, when this mitigation loop is erected in a horizontal
Spacing 30 m 18 m 20 m
between For each loop
configuration and closed to one circuit, that results in
conductors mitigation of the magnetic field under this circuit only as
Height 10 m 15.78 m 22.49 m shown in Fig. 10. Fig. 10 shows the effect of the mitigation
For lower loop of first case when placed under one circuit of 220 kV
conductor double-circuits OHTL and had optimal design parameters on
30 the calculated magnetic field. Where the mitigation loop is
P1 placed under only one circuit of the 220 kV double-circuits
P2 OHTL its optimal design parameters are different than that
Magnetic Field Intensity (A/m)

25
presented in table IV. The optimal design parameters are as
follow: spacing equals 15 m, height equals 15 m, and optimal
20 capacitor equals 9.095 mF. Fig. 10 shows the effect of the
mitigation loop of first case when it is located under the center
of the right circuit of the 220 kV double-circuits OHTL on the
15
calculated magnetic field. It is seen that there is a reduction in
the magnetic field under the right circuit of the 220 kV
10
double-circuits OHTL.
30

5
− 2 − 1.5 − 1 − 0.5 0
Magnetic Field Intensity (A/m)
Xs (Ohm)
Fig. 9. The effect of the reactance Xs of the mitigation loop of third case, on 20
the calculated magnetic field intensity
From many calculations carried out in this paper, it is found
that the optimal capacitor value for each case is as that
presented in Table IV. 10
Table IV
Optimal Capacitor for the three cases
Case Number 1 2 3
Optimal 5.305mF 5.305mF 4.897mF
Capacitor 0
− 40 − 20 0 20 40

Distance from the center of the tower (m)

Regarding to the configuration of the first case, and from
P1: Cond+GW
many calculations carried out in this paper, it is noticed that:
P1: Cond+GW+ML SC
each circuit of the 220 kV double-circuits induces a current in P1: Cond+GW+ML Opt. C
that mitigation loop. But due to the position of the mitigation P2: Cond+GW
loop with respect to the two circuits, these currents canceled P2: Cond+GW+ML SCC
each other, that results in a slightly effect of the mitigation P2: Cond+GW+ML Opt. C
loop. That can be explained according to the results indicated Fig.10 Effect of the mitigation loop of first case on the calculated magnetic
in table V. Table V shows the value of the induced current in fields under mid-span and under maximum height of 220 kV double circuit
the mitigation loop (ML) of optimal design parameters, when OHTL
it is provided with an optimal series capacitor (Opt.C) and But according to the configuration of the second case, and
when it is short-circuited (SC), that for each case of the three from many calculations that are carried out in this paper, it is
cases. noticed that: by using this configuration, the induced current
Table V by each circuit does not cancel each other. Also, as shown in
Mitigation loop induced currents Fig. 11, with this configuration the mitigation of the magnetic
Case 1 2 3 field is not everywhere around the conductors but it is only at
Number
Isc (A) 0.496-j0.031 108.063+j152.702 265.853+153.70i a specific region specified by the outer border of the
mitigation loops.
IOpt.C (A) 1.015+j0.168 105.364+j391.539 328.154+j693.406
IG without -17.01+136.87i -17.01+136.875i -17.01+136.875i
The third suggested configuration, where one mitigation loop
ML is erected in a vertical configuration between the two circuits,
IG with ML 17.032-137.06i 17.678-j141.958 42.143-58.411i is an efficient one, where this method uses only two
SC conductors and gives a significant mitigation of the magnetic
IG with ML 17.109-137.068i 22.065-j146.563 -41.856+64.469i field. Fig. 12 shows the comparison between the calculated
Opt. C
magnetic field intensity values result from the conductors ,
ground wires and short circuit mitigation loop; and from the
From table V, it is seen that the induced current in the
conductors, ground wires and mitigation loop with capacitance
mitigation loop of the first case is very small. Also, this table
of optimal value at optimal height and spacing that under mid-
gives the value of the ground wire induced current, which
span and under maximum height of 220 kV double circuits
OHTL. It is noticed that there is a significant reduction in the
calculated magnetic field everywhere under 220 kV double-
circuits OHTL by using this configuration of the mitigation
loop.
30
Magnetic Field Intensity (A/m)
20
10
0
0 10 20
Distance from the center of the tower (m)
Fig.11 Effect of ground wire and mitigation loop of second case (as shown in
Fig. 7, where two mitigation loops are erected on the tower, one under each
circuit) on the calculated magnetic fields under mid-span and under maximum
height of 220 kV double circuits OHTL.
30
Magnetic Field Intensity (A/m)
20
10
0 2003.
0 10 20
Distance from the center of the tower (m)
Fig.12 Effect of ground wire and mitigation loop of third case (as given in Fig.
8, where one mitigation loop is erected in a vertical configuration between the
two circuits) on the calculated magnetic fields under mid-span and under
maximum height of 220 kV double circuits OHTL.
V. CONCLUSIONS
The effects of the mitigation loops on the magnetic field of
220 kV double circuits OHTL are investigated in different
cases. The effects of the currents in the sub-conductors of each
phase bundle, the currents in the ground wires, the currents in
the mitigation loop, and also the earth return currents; on the
magnitudes of the magnetic field of 220 kV double-circuits
OHTL are investigated by the matrix formalism of multi-
conductor transmission lines (MTL) technique. Furthermore,
the effect of the conductor’s sag on the calculated magnetic
field is studied.
The position of the mitigation loop with respect to the two
circuits is an important factor that affects the induced current
in that mitigation loop, and hence affects the magnetic field.
For each case of the three suggested cases in this paper, there
are optimal locations and optimal loop impedance for which
the mitigation will be most effective.
Finally the passive loop conductor design parameters, for 220
kV double-circuit OHTL, are obtained for the three suggested
cases of the mitigation loop.
REFERENCES
[1] M. A. Stuchly and S. Zhao," Magnetic Field-Induced Currents in the
P1:Cond+GW
P1:Cond+GW+ML SC
Human Body in Proximately of Power Lines" IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, Vol. 11, No. 1, January 1996, pp. 102-108
P1:Cond+GW+ML Opt C
P2:Cond+GW [2] A. A. Hossam-Eldin, " Effect of Electromagnetic Fields from Power
P2:Cond+GW+ML SC Lines on Living Organisms" 2001 IEEE 7th International Conference on
P2:Cond+GW+ML Opt C Solid Dielectrics, June 25-29,2001, Eindhoven, the Netherlands , pp.
438-441
[3] Y. H. Siudeni, J. Zhang and B. Yang "A 3-D Impedance Method to
Compute Current Induced in Human Body Exposure to Power Lines",
2005 IEEE International Symposium on Microwave, Antenna,
Propagation and EMC Technologies for Wireless Communications
Proceedings, pp. 470-473
[4] H. Karawia, K. Youssef and A. Hossam-Eldin "Measurements and
Evaluation of Adverse Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields from
30 40 50
Low Voltage Equipments" MEPCON 2008, Aswan, Egypt, March 12-15
,PP. 436-440.
[5] A. A. Dahab, F. K. Amoura, and W. S. Abu-Elhaija "Comparison of
Magnetic-Field Distribution of Noncompact and Compact Parallel
Transmission-Line Configurations" IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 2114-2118, July 2005.
[6] J. R. Stewart, S. J. Dale, K. W. Klein "Magnetic Field Reduction Using
High Phase order Lines" IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 8,
P1:Cond+GW+ML Opt C No. 2, April 1993, pp. 628-636.
P2:Cond+GW+ML Opt C [7] K. I Yamazaki, T. Kawamoto, and H. Fujinami "Requirements for
P1:Cond+GW+ML SC Power Line Magnetic Field Mitigation Using a Passive Loop
P2:Cond+GW+ML SC Conductor" IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 15, No. 2, April
P1:Cond+GW 2000, pp. 646-651
P2:Cond+GW [8] R. G. Olsen and P. Wong, “Characteristics of Low Frequency Electric
P1:Cond and Magnetic Fields in the Vicinity of Electric Power Lines” IEEE
P2:Cond Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 7, No. 4, October 1992, pp. 2046-
2053.
[9] R. D. Begamudre,”Extra High Voltage AC. Transmission Engineering”
third Edition, Book, Chapter 7, pp.172-205, 2006 Wiley Eastern
Limited.
[10] F. Kiessling, P. Nefzger, J. F. Nolasco, and U. Kaintzyk, “Overhead
Power Lines, Planning, Design, construction”, Springer; 1th. Edition,
30 40 50
[11] Celozzi, S. and F. Garzia, “Active Shielding for Power-Frequency
Magnetic Field Reduction using Genetic Algorithms Optimization”, IEE
Proceedings - Science, Measurement and Technology, Vol. 151, No. 1,
2–7, Jan. 2004.
[12] Ade Z. El Dein, “Electrical Engineering and Applied Computing”,
Book, Ch. 6 “Mitigation of Magnetic Field under Overhead
Transmission Line”, published by Springer 2011, ISSN 1876-1100,
Volume 90, 2011.
[13] J. A. B. Faria, and M. E. Almeida "Accurate Calculation of Magnetic-
Field Intensity Due to Overhead Power Lines with or without Mitigation
Loops with or without Capacitor Compensation" IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, Vo. 22, No. 2, April 2007, pp. 951-959
[14] T. Noda, "A Double Logarithmic Approximation of Carson’s Ground-
Return Impedance", IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 21, No.
1, January 2005, pp. 472-479
[15] A. Ramirez, and F. Uribe," A Broad Range Algorithm for the Evaluation
of Carson’s Integral", IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 22,
No. 2, April 2007, pp. 1188-1193
[16] R. Benato, and R. Caldon," Distribution Line Carrier: Analysis
Procedure and Applications to DG", IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 22, No. 1, January 2007, pp. 575-583
[17] Adel Z. El Dein, "Magnetic Field Calculation under EHV Transmission
Lines for More Realistic Cases", IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
VOL. 24, NO. 4, PP. 2214-2222, October 2009.
[18] A. V. Mamishev, R. D. Nevels, and B. D. Russell "Effects of Conductor
Sag on Spatial Distribution of Power Line Magnetic Field" IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 1571-1576, July
1996.