Conductor Modelling Update 2608 G Succi B Bordini

Conductor Modelling Update 26/08 G. Succi, B. Bordini, D. Baffari

Model Framework: Cable + Connection joints. Joint Cable Joint 1 mm 1 2 . . . 40 20 cm 5 cm 90 cm Region Low R part in Joint Central cable 5 cm 20 cm Inter-strand R

12. 0 Results 1200 I = I (x) – Broken (s 1) I = I (x) – (s 3 & s 39) Charge at ramp end “Relaxation” during plateau I = I (x) – Adjacents (s 2 & s 40) Relaxation during plateau I = I (x) – s 4 & others No significant change at ramp end 1700

Results Voltage extraction ΔV = V(x=0. 25 m) – V(x=1. 15 m) ΔV Broken strand: the “high” ΔV (∼ 55 n. V) is because of the current transfer to the adjacent strands. Adjacent strands: ΔV < 0, caused by the current discharge during plateau (inductive effect). Crossing strands: all around very few n. V, then they decay over time.

Results What if we decrease the distance of the “voltage taps” ? ΔV (Δx = 40 cm) ΔV(Δx = 90 cm) s 1 is the only to experience a significantly different voltage when voltage taps are closer to the breakage.

Considerations & Next steps 1. A much higher ΔV is generated across s 1 rather than in the other strands. As a consequence, V taps between the broken and the other strands would still give a high ΔV. Instead, a combination of V taps just between non-broken strands would give very low, but even <0 values. 2. A much higher ΔV is generated across s 1 compared to the other strands. Thus, V taps between the broken and the other strands would still provide a high ΔV. Instead, a combination of V taps between the non-broken strands would give very low, but in some cases, even < 0 values.