×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?
2

IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?

IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?

(OP)
Hi Folks,

I think I may have found an inconsistency in IEEE 242-2001 between the equations Section 9.5.2.4 and Table 9-6.
I hope that I am making a mistake somewhere, and y'all will be able to help point out my error.

Edit: I believe if you follow just the equation for any value of K other than 1, the equation results are way off. For values of k<1, you could overestimate the amount of current the cables could handle by a factor of 2 or more.

Based on the standard, values in table 9-6 are calculated based on the equation shown in 9.5.2.4:
Ie/In % = SQRT(((Te-To)/(Tn-To)-e(-Θ*K))/(1-e(-Θ*K))*((230+Tn)/(230+Te)))*100
Where:
Ie is emergency operating current rating,
In is normal current rating,
Te is conductor emergency operating temperature,
Tn is conductor normal operating temperature,
To is ambient temperature,
K is a constant, dependent on cable size and installation type (see Table 9-5 in IEEE 242-2001),
230 is zero-resistance temperature value (234 for copper, 228 for aluminum),
e is base for natural logarithms.

However, if you plug in the values as indicated the results returned do not equal that of the table.

For example, take first line of table 9-6 calculated for EPR-XLP with Te=130, Tn=90,and To=40
From the table:
k=0.5, %=1136
k=1.0, %=1602
k=1.5, %=1963
k=2.5, %=2533
From Equation as written:
k=0.5, %=2265.49
k=1.0, %=1603.885
k=1.5, %=1311.5
k=2.5, %=1018.061

But, if you change the equation to divide by k instead of multiply by k then it appears to work.
Ie/In % = SQRT(((Te-To)/(Tn-To)-e(-Θ/K))/(1-e(-Θ/K))*((230+Tn)/(230+Te)))*100

From Equation as corrected:
k=0.5, %=1136.859
k=1.0, %=1603.885
k=1.5, %=1962.765
k=2.5, %=2532.281

Does the corrected equation work for y'all?
Did I miss somewhere in the section where is says the inverse of K should be used?
I attached my spreadsheet where I ran my tests.

Thanks,

Chris

RE: IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?

In my opinion, it could be better. However, there are still errors, in any way. If Io will be 88% of In then the error is only 0.1-0.5% for 10-100 sec but 3-7% for 1000 sec and more.

RE: IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?

(OP)
I was using the assumption that the cable was already loaded to full load current, I.e. Io=In.

There maybe other approximation errors,but in case it wasn't clear, the results of the equation as listed cause much higher errors than 10%.
For k=0.5, the equation as written results in overestimating the allowable current by a factor of 2. So 200% error.
I.e. for a cable with a rating of 100 amps, the table estimates it could handle 1136 amps, but the equation says it could handle 2266.
So if you followed only the equation, you would would be overloading the hypothitcal 100 amp cable by over 1000 amps.

RE: IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?

crjohnson, good catch, the revised formula is in agreement with the previous version of IEEE Std 242-1986 (see excerpt below). As a suggestion, Fill free to notify the IEEE committee to correct the error of your finding.

RE: IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?

(OP)
Thanks for the reply cuky2000, and for helping me confirm this.
I was so confused trying to get my spreadsheet to work😀

RE: IEEE 242-2001 - Intermediate Cable Overload Capacity - Equation 9.5.2.4 inconsistent with Table 9-6?

Sorry. I put To=20oC instead of 40.However,k=0.5 to 2.5 it is for cable in air and could be 40oC ambient, K=4 and 6 it is for underground cables then To has to be less-in my opinion.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources