Abstract
This work was supported by the Spanish Government under the R+D initiative INNPACTO with reference IPT- 2011-1447-920000 and Spanish R+D initiative with reference ENE2013-42720-R. The authors of this article would also like to acknowledge Viesgo for its continuous support to the dynamic ampacity rating line of investigation.
Highlights
Three cups mechanical 0-50 m/s 0.5 m/s Not provided 0.5 m/s Two dimensional ultrasonic 0-60 m/s Not provided 0.01m/s 2% @ 12m/sDynamic ampacity rating is one of the solutions available to improve the static rating of an overhead line at relatively low cost.The dynamic rating is very sensitive to the wind speed as seen in the equations provided by Cigre [1] and IEEE algorithms [2,3].This sensitivity makes the choice of the anemometer an important matter not to be taken lightly [4,5].This paper shows the advantages of the ultrasonic anemometers over those based on mechanical elements by comparing the differences in the ampacity calculated using both technologies
The comparison will be held at different wind ranges in order to expose the weaknesses of mechanical devices at low speed
After a closer analysis of the data, the mean square error of the ampacity measured with the mechanical anemometer with respect to the ultrasonic device proves the poor specifications of the first under 1 m/s and especially under 0.5 m/s (Table 2)
Summary
Three cups mechanical 0-50 m/s 0.5 m/s Not provided 0.5 m/s Two dimensional ultrasonic 0-60 m/s Not provided 0.01m/s 2% @ 12m/sDynamic ampacity rating is one of the solutions available to improve the static rating of an overhead line at relatively low cost.The dynamic rating is very sensitive to the wind speed as seen in the equations provided by Cigre [1] and IEEE algorithms [2,3].This sensitivity makes the choice of the anemometer an important matter not to be taken lightly [4,5].This paper shows the advantages of the ultrasonic anemometers over those based on mechanical elements by comparing the differences in the ampacity calculated using both technologies. Dynamic ampacity rating is one of the solutions available to improve the static rating of an overhead line at relatively low cost. The dynamic rating is very sensitive to the wind speed as seen in the equations provided by Cigre [1] and IEEE algorithms [2,3]. This sensitivity makes the choice of the anemometer an important matter not to be taken lightly [4,5]. This paper shows the advantages of the ultrasonic anemometers over those based on mechanical elements by comparing the differences in the ampacity calculated using both technologies. The comparison will be held at different wind ranges in order to expose the weaknesses of mechanical devices at low speed.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
