Comparison on two transmission line electromagnetic pulse response modeling methods with non-linear loads

被引：0

作者：

Li N. ^{[1
]}

Du Z. ^{[2
]}

Zhang J. ^{[1
]}

Guo J. ^{[2
]}

Xie Y. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] State Key Laboratory of Power Grid Environmental Protection, China Electric Power Research Institute, Wuhan

[2] National Key Laboratory of Power Equipment and Electrical Insulation, School of Electrical Engineering, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an

来源：

Gaodianya Jishu/High Voltage Engineering | 2016年 / 42卷 / 06期

关键词：

EMP response; FDTD; Non-linear loads; Piecewise linearity; SPICE equivalent model method; Transmission lines; TVS;

D O I：

10.13336/j.1003-6520.hve.20160616038

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

To deeply understand the similarities and differences of the different methods, we researched two different modeling methods, based on SPICE equivalent model and FDTD, of transmission line with non-liner load. Taking overhead lines with TVS as an example, we analyzed and compared the advantages and disadvantages of modeling and response calculation of two methods. First of all, we proposed a SPICE equivalent model of transmission lines with non-liner loads and FDTD method using piecewise liner representing non-liner loads. Then, taking the overhead line with non-liner load on ideal ground as an example, we modeled and calculated the two methods. The results showed that SPICE equivalent model and FDTD were both suitable for calculating overhead line electromagnetic pulse response with non-liner load and the results showed compelling consistency. In the process of modeling of the non-standard and non-linear devices, there is no standard non-linear model database in SPICE. By contrast, FDTD is more convenient and effective. Under the condition of the manufacturer providing the SPICE model of devices, the SPICE model method has the advantage of fast calculation and high efficiency. © 2016, High Voltage Engineering Editorial Department of CEPRI. All right reserved.

引用

页码：2003 / 2008

页数：5

共 23 条

[1]

Zhou B., Chen B., Shi L., EMP and EMP Protection, (2003)

[2]

Tesche F.M., Barnes P.R., The HEMP response of an overhead power distribution line, IEEE Power Engineering Review, 9, 7, pp. 80-81, (1989)

[3]

Xu X., America and Japan paying more attention to the threat of EMP, Electronic Technique Reference, 2, 2, pp. 59-60, (2002)

[4]

Wraight A., Prather W.D., Sabath F., Developments in early-time (E1) high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) test methods, IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility, 55, 3, pp. 492-499, (2013)

[5]

Wang Y., Chen Y., Wang Q., Simplified calculation method for transient field of transverse electromagnetic horn antenna used by high-altitude electromagnetic pulse simulator, High Voltage Engineering, 39, 10, pp. 2422-2430, (2013)

[6]

Xie Y., Wang Z., Wang Q., Et al., Calculation of HEMP coupling to aerial multi-conductor transmission lines, Journal of Tsinghua University: Science and Technology, 46, 4, pp. 449-452, (2006)

[7]

Paul C.R., Analysis of Multi-conductor Transmission Lines, (1981)

[8]

Liu S., Liu W., Progress of relevant research on electromagnetic compatibility and electromagnetic protection, High Voltage Engineering, 40, 6, pp. 1605-1613, (2014)

[9]

Meliopoulos A.P.S., Glytsis E.N., Cokkinides G.J., Et al., Comparison of SS-GIC and MHD-EMP-GIC effects on power systems, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 9, 1, pp. 194-207, (1994)

[10]

Foster J.S., Gjelde M.E., Graham W.R., Et al., Report of the commission to assess the threat to the united states from electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack, Critical National Infrastructures Report, (2004)

← 1 2 3 →