高电压技术2016，Vol.42Issue(3)：966-972,7.DOI:10.13336/j.1003-6520.hve.20160310012
特高压同塔双回交流输电线路采用(8+2)分裂导线与常规导线电晕特性对比
Corona Characteristic Comparison of (8+2) Bundled Wire and Normal Wire Applying in UHV AC Double-circuit Transmission Line on the Same Tower
摘要
Abstract
The 8×630 mm2 bundle conductor is currently employed in Chinese 1 000 kV UHV double-circuit transmission lines, and the sub-conductor number of bundle conductor plays an important role in electromagnetic environment.To further reduce the conductor cross-section so as to improve engineering economy without exceeding the electromagnetic environment requirements, we investigated the radio frequency interference(RI), audible noise(AN), and corona ioss(CL) of (8+2)×400 mm2 compared with normal 8×630mm2 and 10×400 mm2 bundle conductors.Firstly, we used the finite element method to study the optimization arrangement position of 2 sub-conductors of (8+2)×400 mm2 bundle type.Secondly, we calculated RI, AN, and CL of above bundle types with different prediction methods.Finally, we tested RI, AN, and CL of above conductors by UHV corona test cage.The calculation and experimental results show that it is rational that the arrangement position of 2 sub-conductors with (8+2)×400 mm2 bundle type is at the bottom of the bundle.In terms of RI and AN, (8+2)×400 mm2 wire is about 2 dB less than common 8×630 mm2 wire, which is hardly different from 10×400 mm2 wire.The total cross-sectional area of (8+2)×400 mm2 wire is smaller, which is of some engineering promotion value.关键词
特高压交流同塔双回线路/无线电干扰/可听噪声/电晕损失/(8+2)分裂导线/电晕笼Key words
UHV AC double-circuit line on the same tower/radio frequency interference/audible noise/corona loss/(8+2) bundled wire/corona test cage引用本文复制引用
谢辉春,崔翔,刘华钢,陈豫朝..特高压同塔双回交流输电线路采用(8+2)分裂导线与常规导线电晕特性对比[J].高电压技术,2016,42(3):966-972,7.基金项目
国家重点基础研究发展计划项目(973计划)(2011CB209402-3).Project supported by National Basic Research Program of China(973 Program)(2011CB209402-3). （973计划）
