Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 33 subscribers
  • Views 854 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in

Wonder if there's any paper justification regarding HV/LV armoured cable earthing?

Marcus Ting

In short, armoured cable earthing is to mitigate stray current induced within the cable, but we were told that rule of thumb practice (compliant to IEC) is that 3C TCWB cables shall be earthed at both ends, while 1C TCWB cables shall be earthed at 1 end. Why is 1C TCWB cables earthed only at 1 end? Because if the 1C cables are laid in trefoil arrangement, isn't it resemble 3C arrangement too? My guess is that it is a minimum requirement to earth at 1 end for 1C TCWB cables, where earthed at both ends are totally fine, Eg. cables for instruments are earthed at both ends due to highly sensitive equipment they have. 

I'm still looking around for written justification, any input or discussion will help significantly

P.S Edited from SWA to TCWB to clear the clouds.

I have found the source in ABS 4-8-4/21.7.2 "Single Conductor Cables" (iii) The cable armoring (to be non-magnetic) or any metallic protection (non-magnetic) is to be earth at mid span or supply end only;

Is there any clarification for earthing at supply end only?

Parents
  • 0

    Because if the 1C cables are laid in trefoil arrangement, isn't it resemble 3C arrangement too?

    Not entirely. With 3x 1-core cables each individual conductor is surrounded by the armour, whereas with a 3 core cable, the three conductors have a single armour around all of them - so in the 3C cable instance the magnetic fields from each core get a chance to cancel each other out before inducing any current in the armour, whereas with 3x 1C cables the current is induced in each of the three armours - and then we have the harder problem of having to cancel out the currents (by interconnecting the ends and having currents flowing around everywhere, generating heat).

    Generally the problem is reduced by using non-ferrous armouring (not steel) on single core cables, but not entirely eliminated, as even with copper "armour" you still have what's in effect a rather inefficient 1:1 single-turn transformer.

       - Andy.

  • 0 in reply to AJJewsbury

    Hi Andy, thanks for the input. I believe I've misunderstood my source, you are right, it shall be of non-magnetic amoured for 1C cables. 

Reply Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines