IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques

on Shielded Power Cable Systems

IEEE Power and Energy Society

Developed by the
Insulated Conductors Committee

IEEE IEEE Std 1234™-2019

3 Park Avenue (Revision of
New York, NY 10016-5997 IEEE Std 1234-2007)
USA

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte Biblioteca. Downloaded on May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234™-2019
(Revision of
IEEE Std 1234-2007)

IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques

on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Developed by the

Insulated Conductors Committee

of the
IEEE Power and Energy Society

Approved 21 March 2019

IEEE-SA Standards Board

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte Biblioteca. Downloaded on May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Abstract: Test and measurements, which are performed on shielded power cables to identify
the location of a fault, are described. Whenever possible, the limitations of a particular test and
measurement to locate a fault are provided and recommendations are made regarding specialized
fault-locating techniques. A fault characterization chart is included as an aid to select a fault-locating
technique.

Keywords: arc reflection, cable fault locating, cable testing, grounding, IEEE 1234, safety,
sectionalizing, thumping, time domain reflectometry, (TDR)

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

3 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5997, USA

Copyright © 2019 by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

All rights reserved. Published 28 June 2019. Printed in the United States of America.

IEEE is a registered trademark in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, owned by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Incorporated.

PDF: ISBN 978-1-5044-5691-3 STD23630

Print: ISBN 978-1-5044-5692-0 STDPD23630

IEEE prohibits discrimination, harassment, and bullying.

For more information, visit http://​www​.ieee​.org/​web/​aboutus/​whatis/​policies/​p9​-26​.html.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte Biblioteca. Downloaded on May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Important Notices and Disclaimers Concerning IEEE Standards Documents

IEEE documents are made available for use subject to important notices and legal disclaimers. These notices
and disclaimers, or a reference to this page, appear in all standards and may be found under the heading
“Important Notices and Disclaimers Concerning IEEE Standards Documents.” They can also be obtained on
request from IEEE or viewed at http://​standards​.ieee​.org/​ipr/​disclaimers​.html.

Notice and Disclaimer of Liability Concerning the Use of IEEE Standards

Documents
IEEE Standards documents (standards, recommended practices, and guides), both full-use and trial-use,
are developed within IEEE Societies and the Standards Coordinating Committees of the IEEE Standards
Association (“IEEE-SA”) Standards Board. IEEE (“the Institute”) develops its standards through a consensus
development process, approved by the American National Standards Institute (“ANSI”), which brings
together volunteers representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve the final product. Volunteers
are not necessarily members of the Institute and participate without compensation from IEEE. While IEEE
administers the process and establishes rules to promote fairness in the consensus development process, IEEE
does not independently evaluate, test, or verify the accuracy of any of the information or the soundness of any
judgments contained in its standards.

IEEE does not warrant or represent the accuracy or content of the material contained in its standards, and
expressly disclaims all warranties (express, implied and statutory) not included in this or any other document
relating to the standard, including, but not limited to, the warranties of: merchantability; fitness for a particular
purpose; non-infringement; and quality, accuracy, effectiveness, currency, or completeness of material. In
addition, IEEE disclaims any and all conditions relating to: results; and workmanlike effort. IEEE standards
documents are supplied “AS IS” and “WITH ALL FAULTS.”

Use of an IEEE standard is wholly voluntary. The existence of an IEEE standard does not imply that there
are no other ways to produce, test, measure, purchase, market, or provide other goods and services related to
the scope of the IEEE standard. Furthermore, the viewpoint expressed at the time a standard is approved and
issued is subject to change brought about through developments in the state of the art and comments received
from users of the standard.

In publishing and making its standards available, IEEE is not suggesting or rendering professional or other
services for, or on behalf of, any person or entity nor is IEEE undertaking to perform any duty owed by any
other person or entity to another. Any person utilizing any IEEE Standards document, should rely upon his or
her own independent judgment in the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances or, as appropriate,
seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the appropriateness of a given IEEE standard.

IN NO EVENT SHALL IEEE BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS;
OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE PUBLICATION, USE OF, OR RELIANCE
UPON ANY STANDARD, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE AND
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH DAMAGE WAS FORESEEABLE.

3
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Translations

The IEEE consensus development process involves the review of documents in English only. In the event that
an IEEE standard is translated, only the English version published by IEEE should be considered the approved
IEEE standard.

Official statements

A statement, written or oral, that is not processed in accordance with the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations
Manual shall not be considered or inferred to be the official position of IEEE or any of its committees and shall
not be considered to be, or be relied upon as, a formal position of IEEE. At lectures, symposia, seminars, or
educational courses, an individual presenting information on IEEE standards shall make it clear that his or her
views should be considered the personal views of that individual rather than the formal position of IEEE.

Comments on standards
Comments for revision of IEEE Standards documents are welcome from any interested party, regardless
of membership affiliation with IEEE. However, IEEE does not provide consulting information or advice
pertaining to IEEE Standards documents. Suggestions for changes in documents should be in the form of a
proposed change of text, together with appropriate supporting comments. Since IEEE standards represent a
consensus of concerned interests, it is important that any responses to comments and questions also receive
the concurrence of a balance of interests. For this reason, IEEE and the members of its societies and Standards
Coordinating Committees are not able to provide an instant response to comments or questions except in
those cases where the matter has previously been addressed. For the same reason, IEEE does not respond to
interpretation requests. Any person who would like to participate in revisions to an IEEE standard is welcome
to join the relevant IEEE working group.

Comments on standards should be submitted to the following address:

Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

445 Hoes Lane
Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA

Laws and regulations

Users of IEEE Standards documents should consult all applicable laws and regulations. Compliance with
the provisions of any IEEE Standards document does not imply compliance to any applicable regulatory
requirements. Implementers of the standard are responsible for observing or referring to the applicable
regulatory requirements. IEEE does not, by the publication of its standards, intend to urge action that is not in
compliance with applicable laws, and these documents may not be construed as doing so.

Copyrights

IEEE draft and approved standards are copyrighted by IEEE under U.S. and international copyright laws. They
are made available by IEEE and are adopted for a wide variety of both public and private uses. These include
both use, by reference, in laws and regulations, and use in private self-regulation, standardization, and the
promotion of engineering practices and methods. By making these documents available for use and adoption
by public authorities and private users, IEEE does not waive any rights in copyright to the documents.

4
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Photocopies

Subject to payment of the appropriate fee, IEEE will grant users a limited, non-exclusive license to photocopy
portions of any individual standard for company or organizational internal use or individual, non-commercial
use only. To arrange for payment of licensing fees, please contact Copyright Clearance Center, Customer
Service, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA; +1 978 750 8400. Permission to photocopy portions
of any individual standard for educational classroom use can also be obtained through the Copyright Clearance
Center.

Updating of IEEE Standards documents

Users of IEEE Standards documents should be aware that these documents may be superseded at any time
by the issuance of new editions or may be amended from time to time through the issuance of amendments,
corrigenda, or errata. An official IEEE document at any point in time consists of the current edition of the
document together with any amendments, corrigenda, or errata then in effect.

Every IEEE standard is subjected to review at least every ten years. When a document is more than ten years
old and has not undergone a revision process, it is reasonable to conclude that its contents, although still of
some value, do not wholly reflect the present state of the art. Users are cautioned to check to determine that
they have the latest edition of any IEEE standard.

In order to determine whether a given document is the current edition and whether it has been amended through
the issuance of amendments, corrigenda, or errata, visit the IEEE-SA Website at http://​ieeexplore​.ieee​.org/​ or
contact IEEE at the address listed previously. For more information about the IEEE-SA or IEEE’s standards
development process, visit the IEEE-SA Website at http://​standards​.ieee​.org.

Errata

Errata, if any, for all IEEE standards can be accessed on the IEEE-SA Website at the following URL: http://​
standards​.ieee​.org/​findstds/​errata/​index​.html. Users are encouraged to check this URL for errata periodically.

Patents

Attention is called to the possibility that implementation of this standard may require use of subject matter
covered by patent rights. By publication of this standard, no position is taken by the IEEE with respect to the
existence or validity of any patent rights in connection therewith. If a patent holder or patent applicant has
filed a statement of assurance via an Accepted Letter of Assurance, then the statement is listed on the IEEE-
SA Website at http://​standards​.ieee​.org/​about/​sasb/​patcom/​patents​.html. Letters of Assurance may indicate
whether the Submitter is willing or unwilling to grant licenses under patent rights without compensation
or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair
discrimination to applicants desiring to obtain such licenses.

Essential Patent Claims may exist for which a Letter of Assurance has not been received. The IEEE is not
responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting inquiries
into the legal validity or scope of Patents Claims, or determining whether any licensing terms or conditions
provided in connection with submission of a Letter of Assurance, if any, or in any licensing agreements are
reasonable or non-discriminatory. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the
validity of any patent rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, is entirely their own responsibility.
Further information may be obtained from the IEEE Standards Association.

5
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Participants

At the time this IEEE guide was completed, the F12 Working Group had the following membership:

Rachel I. Mosier, Chair

Martin J. von Herrmann, Vice Chair

Kraig E. Bader Robert W. Hobson Johannes Rickmann

Ettore Bartolucci William E. Larzelere Aron Sexton
Manfred J. Bawart Arie Makovoz Jason Souchak
Dominique A. Bolliger Henning H. Oetjen Peter L. Tirinzoni
Craig G. Goodwin Bruce D. Olson Nijam Robert Uddin
Frank Petzold

The following members of the individual balloting committee voted on this guide. Balloters may have voted
for approval, disapproval, or abstention.

John Ainscough Craig G. Goodwin Bruce D. Olson

Ali Al Awazi Todd Goyette Howard Penrose
Saleman Alibhay Steven Graham Branimir Petosic
Kraig E. Bader Randall Groves Benjamin Quak
Thomas Barnes Jeffrey Helzer Lakshman Raut
Ettore Bartolucci Lauri Hiivala Johannes Rickmann
Earle Bascom III Werner Hoelzl Charles Rogers
Martin Baur John Kay Ryandi Ryandi
Manfred J. Bawart Peter Kelly Bartien Sayogo
Dominique A. Bolliger Yuri Khersonsky Michael Smalley
Kenneth Bow Boris Kogan Jerry Smith
Jeffrey Britton Jim Kulchisky Gary Smullin
Chris Brooks Mikhail Lagoda Kris Sommerstad
Demetrio Bucaneg Jr. Chung-Yiu Lam Gary Stoedter
William Byrd William E. Larzelere Peter L. Tirinzoni
Thomas Campbell Michael Lauxman Nijam Robert Uddin
John Cancelosi Gerald Liskom John Vergis
Robert Christman Arturo Maldonado Martin J. von Herrmann
David Crotty James Michalec Wayne Walters
Frank Di Guglielmo Jerry Murphy Kenneth White
Gary Donner Arthur Neubauer Jian Yu
Michael Newman

6
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 When the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved this guide on 21 March 2019, it had the following membership:

Gary Hoffman, Chair

Ted Burse, Vice Chair
Jean-Philippe Faure, Past Chair
Konstantinos Karachalios, Secretary

Masayuki Ariyoshi John D. Kulick Annette D. Reilly

Stephen D. Dukes David J. Law Dorothy Stanley
J. Travis Griffith Joseph Levy Sha Wei
Guido Hiertz Howard Li Phil Wennblom
Christel Hunter Xiaohui Liu Philip Winston
Thomas Koshy Kevin Lu Howard Wolfman
Joseph L. Koepfinger* Daleep Mohla Feng Wu
Thomas Koshy Andrew Myles Jingyi Zhou

*Member Emeritus

7
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Introduction

This introduction is not part of IEEE Std 1234-2019, IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power
Cable Systems.

Many fault locators are experienced in locating short and open circuits on shielded power cables. Proper
locating of high resistance or intermittent cable faults, which are the majority of the faults on cables with
extruded dielectric insulation, is considered tedious, inconsistent, and time consuming. Therefore, reclosing,
re-fusing, burning, and thumping at unnecessarily high voltage and energy levels, in order to generate an open
or short circuit, are frequently used without consideration of cable and equipment properties. The danger of
activating dormant faults, generating new faults, or damaging utility and customer equipment by improper
locating methods is not always recognized.

By establishing cable fault-locating guidelines and training programs which incorporate recommended cable
fault-locating measurements and techniques, cable owners can realize substantial savings in labor, cable and
equipment replacement, and avoid unnecessary losses from customer outages.

8
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Contents

1. Overview��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13
1.1 General����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13
1.2 Scope�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13
1.3 Purpose����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13

2. Normative references�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13

3. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 14

3.1 Definitions������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 14
3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 16

4. Cable system faults and fault locating������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 16

4.1 Cable system faults����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 16
4.2 Fault-locating overview���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 17

5. Safety�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19
5.1 Safety practices���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19
5.2 Precautions for ac cable systems��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 20
5.3 Grounding������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 20

6. Cable system fault locating����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 21

6.1 Non-network system�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 22
6.2 Network system���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 25

7. Cable system fault-locating techniques����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 29

7.1 General����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 29
7.2 Terminal methods������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 30
7.3 Tracing/locating/pinpointing methods������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 52

Annex A (informative) Bibliography�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 55

Annex B (informative) Cable system fault location in underground residential distribution�������������������������� 57

Annex C (informative) Fault location in network feeders������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 59

Annex D (informative) Fault location on cable systems with metallic shield corrosion��������������������������������� 61

Annex E (informative) Recommended minimum of fault-locating tools������������������������������������������������������� 62

9
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 List of Figures

Figure 1—Models of insulation/shunt cable faults (left) and open-circuit/series cable faults (right)������������� 16

Figure 2—Cable fault location flow chart������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 19

Figure 3—Single system ground at test site���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 21

Figure 4—Non-network and network system fault-locating considerations�������������������������������������������������� 22

Figure 5—Non-network system fault locating����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 23

Figure 6—Network system fault locating������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26

Figure 7—TDR schematic diagram���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 32

Figure 8—TDR basic signatures�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 32

Figure 9—TDR typical display���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 33

Figure 10—Available energy associated with configurations of the thumper internal capacitors������������������� 35

Figure 11—Surge impulse duration curves versus fault ignition curve���������������������������������������������������������� 36

Figure 12—Typical TDR comparison, illustrates fault before and after fault conditioning���������������������������� 37

Figure 13—Surge arc reflection, schematic diagram�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 37

Figure 14—Typical surge arc reflection diagram������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 38

Figure 15—Impulse current method, schematic diagram������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 39

Figure 16—Typical impulse current method measuring diagram������������������������������������������������������������������� 40

Figure 17—Impulse current differential method, schematic diagram������������������������������������������������������������ 41

Figure 18—Typical impulse current differential method������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 41

Figure 19—Decay method, schematic diagram���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42

Figure 20—Typical decay method, measuring diagram��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42

Figure 21—Differential decay method, schematic diagram��������������������������������������������������������������������������� 43

Figure 22—Circuit diagram for Murray bridge method��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 44

Figure 23—Murray bridge method connection diagram for conductor-to-ground fault locating������������������� 46

Figure 24—Circuit diagram for Glaser bridge method����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 47

Figure 25—Glaser bridge method connection diagram for conductor-to-ground fault locating��������������������� 47

Figure 26—Murray bridge method connection diagram for jacket fault locating������������������������������������������� 48

Figure 27—Glaser bridge method connection diagram for jacket fault locating�������������������������������������������� 48

Figure 28—Alternate Glaser bridge method connection diagram for jacket fault locating���������������������������� 49

Figure 29—Connection of four-point voltage-drop measurement for conductor-to-shield faults in ac

systems����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 49

10
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Figure 30—Connection of three-point voltage drop measurement for dc systems����������������������������������������� 50

Figure 31—Voltage-drop method connection diagram for jacket fault locating��������������������������������������������� 51

Figure 32—Connection of four-point voltage-drop measurement for jacket fault pre-location using a
parallel shield as an auxiliary conductor��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51

Figure 33—Jacket fault pinpointing on a cable with two jacket faults������������������������������������������������������������ 53

Figure 34—Coincidence method������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 54

Figure B.1—Example of a TDR display of a faulted URD power cable loop section������������������������������������� 57

Figure C.1—TDR signature of a feeder circuit����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 59

Figure C.2—TDR signature of a fault flashover in a network feeder circuit��������������������������������������������������� 60

Figure D.1—Signature of a cable system with transformers, splice, and metallic shield corrosion���������������� 61

11
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 List of Tables

Table 1—Cable fault categories based on their electrical characteristics������������������������������������������������������� 17

Table 2—Preferred pre-locating techniques��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 17

Table 3—Pre-locating methods for various fault resistance values���������������������������������������������������������������� 28

Table 4—Fault diagnosis from insulation resistance measurements (cable end open-circuited)�������������������� 31

Table 5—Fault diagnosis from conductor and metallic shield resistance continuity measurements
(cable end short-circuited)������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 32

12
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques
on Shielded Power Cable Systems

1. Overview
1.1 General
This document has been developed as a guide for cable fault locating on shielded power cable systems. It
is intended to emphasize those fault-locating techniques which maintain cable integrity, reduce customer
outage time, and consider customer equipment sensitivity. This guide applies to all voltage levels of insulated,
shielded power cable systems.

1.2 Scope
During the lifecycle of shielded cable systems, failures may occur. In most situations, the system operator
locates the failure in order to effect repairs and return the system to operation. Cable fault-locating methods
should be chosen to maximize the effectiveness of the fault-locating procedure while minimizing any
additional damage to the insulation of the cable system.

This guide is intended to be applied to all voltage classes of insulated, shielded power cable systems.

1.3 Purpose
This guide is intended to provide troubleshooting and testing personnel with guidance to safely and quickly
localize a faulted cable section or locate a cable system fault with minimum risk of further damaging
serviceable cables, accessories, and equipment.

2. Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document (i.e., they must
be understood and used, so each referenced document is cited in text and its relationship to this document is
explained). For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the
referenced document (including any amendments or corrigenda) applies.

IEEE Std 400™, IEEE Guide for Field Testing and Evaluation of the Insulation of Shielded Power Cable
Systems Rated 5 kV and Above.1,2

1
The IEEE standards or products referred to in Clause 2 are trademarks owned by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Incorporated.
2
IEEE publications are available from The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (http://​standards​.ieee​.org/​).

13
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

IEEE Std 510™, IEEE Recommended Practices for Safety in High-Voltage and High-Power Testing.

IEEE Std 1216™, IEEE Guide for the Application of Faulted Circuit Indicators for 200 A, Single-Phase
Underground Residential Distribution (URD).

IEEE Std 1727™, IEEE Guide for Working Procedures on Underground Transmission Circuits with Induced
Voltage.

3. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations

3.1 Definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. The IEEE Standards Dictionary
Online should be consulted for terms not defined in this clause.3

aerial installation type: An assembly of insulated conductors installed on a pole or similar overhead structure;
it may be self-supporting or installed on a supporting messenger cable.

bolted fault: A short-circuit cable fault having a resistance value of less than 5 Ω.

branch circuits: A cable system in which independent cables branch out radially from a common source of
supply. See also: radial feed.

breakdown: A disruptive discharge through insulation.

burner or burn set: The test equipment used to convert a high-resistance or intermittent cable fault to a low-
resistance fault.

burning: The process of conditioning a faulted cable by reducing the fault resistance.

cable tray installation type: Cables routed through cable tray systems consisting of ladders, troughs,
channels, solid bottom, and other similar structures.

characteristic impedance: The driving impedance of the forward-traveling transverse electromagnetic wave
of the cable.

conduit installation type: Conduit may be designated as metallic or nonmetallic, such as galvanized steel or
iron pipe conduit, tile conduit, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or polyethylene (PE) conduit, fiberglass conduit, etc.

direct-buried installation type: Cable that is laid in a trench and covered with sand, specially prepared
backfill material, and/or excavated material. Cables can be plowed directly into earth or installed using guided
boring techniques. Precast troughs can be installed just below the surface and cables can be installed within the
trough either by laying or pulling. The troughs are later covered with either solid or ventilated covers.

duct bank installation type: A group of conduits held in a fixed regular configuration. The backfill may
contain reinforcing to protect against damage by outside physical loads.

extruded dielectrics: Cables with polymeric insulation, such as polyethylene (PE), cross-linked polyethylene
(XLPE), tree-retardant cross-linked polyethylene (TRXLPE), ethylene propylene rubber (EPR), etc.

3
IEEE Standards Dictionary Online is available at: http://​dictionary​.ieee​.org.

14
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

flashover: A disruptive discharge through air around or over the surface of a solid or liquid insulation, between
parts of different potential or polarity, produced by the application of voltage wherein the breakdown path
becomes sufficiently ionized to maintain an electric arc.

hipot: An abbreviation for high potential in the context of test equipment.

intermittent fault: An infrequent, non-constant fault that often appears voltage dependent.

laminated dielectrics: Insulating tapes consisting of paper or a combination of paper and a polymer, such as
polypropylene, impregnated with an insulating saturant.

loop feed: A number of tie feeders in series, forming a closed circuit.

network feeder: A primary feeder that supplies energy to a secondary network.

network system: See: network feeder.

non-network system: A primary feeder or cable which supplies energy directly to a consumer.

pinpoint: Locating the exact fault location for excavation and repair.

pre-locate: Locating the general area of a fault as a distance from cable start, end, splice, transformer, change
in cable type, etc. Identifying a faulted section of cable between two transformers, junction boxes, manholes,
etc.

propagation velocity: The velocity at which an electromagnetic signal travels through a cable. Propagation
velocity is usually expressed in feet, yards, or meters per microsecond or as a percentage of the speed of light.
The value of the propagation velocity for any particular cable depends on the (relative) dielectric constant of
the insulation material used; it is assumed to be constant for practical purposes.

radial feed: A cable system in which independent feeders branch out radially from a common source of supply.

reflection coefficient: A measure of how much of an incident wave is reflected back to the source.

shield (metallic type): A nonmagnetic metallic layer applied over the outer nonmetallic semiconducting layer
of an insulated cable. Syn: shealth (metallic type).

shielded cable: A cable in which each insulated conductor or conductors is/are enclosed in a conducting
envelope(s).

shield interrupt: An insulated break installed in a cable metallic shield so as to interrupt the flow of induced
current in the metallic shield. They are typically made at splice locations and used when special bonding (i.e.,
cross-bonding or single-point bonding) is applied to the circuit. Syn: shield break.

submarine installation type: A cable designed and installed for service under water.

surge: A capacitive discharge. Syn: thump.

thumper: In North America, the common term for a capacitive discharge device. See 7.2.5.

3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations

EPR ethylene propylene rubber cable insulation

15
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

PE polyethylene cable insulation

TDR time domain reflectometer/reflectometry, frequently referred to as cable radar in the power industry

TRXLPE tree-retardant cross-linked polyethylene cable insulation

XLPE cross-linked polyethylene cable insulation

4. Cable system faults and fault locating

4.1 Cable system faults
A fault can be described as a spark gap in parallel with a nonlinear resistance. The spark gap-nonlinear
resistance equivalent circuit can be thought of in parallel (shunt) or in series with a cable section, see Figure 1.
Actual faults may be a combination of parallel (shunt) and series faults.

Figure 1—Models of insulation/shunt cable faults (left) and open-circuit/series cable faults
(right)

Cable faults may be categorized as series (open circuit, nonlinear, current-dependent) or insulation/shunt
(short circuit, nonlinear voltage), phase-to-ground or phase-to-phase. Table 1 lists possible fault types based
on their electrical characteristics.

16
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Table 1—Cable fault categories based on their electrical characteristics

Open-circuit or series faults
Insulation or shunt faults
To detect an open-circuit (conductor) or
To detect an insulation or shunt fault, an insulation resistance
series fault, a continuity test is performed.
test is performed. The cable end remains open-circuited.
The cable end remains short-circuited.
Short circuit Open circuit
— Mechanical damage has forced center conductor and metallic — Mechanical damage. Metallic sheath or
shield into contact. conductor is severed; separated splice.
— A low resistance, R < 100 Ω, carbon-metal bridge exists between — Electrical damage. Cable, joints, or
conductor and metallic shield. terminations are blown apart. Note: This
Nonlinear (voltage-dependent) kind of cable system damage is often caused
— Most faults on cables with extruded dielectric insulation when sectionalizing via reclosing or re-fusing
fall into this category; at low voltage, V < 500 V, cable exhibits is practiced.
characteristics of an unfaulted cable; at a voltage, V > 500 V, the Nonlinear (current-dependent)
cable fault flashes over or the cable fault exhibits the — Metallic shield corrosion
characteristics of a nonlinear voltage dependent resistance. — Deteriorating splice or termination
— In submerged cable faults, the shunt resistance changes with — Burnt conductor
applied voltage. — Water-soaked blown-out fault
Flashing, intermittent fault
— Cable will often hold a dc voltage greater than the peak phase-
to-ground voltage.
— Mechanical damage, open termination, or separated splice.
— Through reclosing, conductor is blown apart and the conductor
end is electrically isolated from the far end conductor.
— A non-carbonized hole in the insulation permits a high resistance
or insulating path between conductor and metallic shield.

4.2 Fault-locating overview

The intent of the following guidance is to reduce high-voltage (HV) stress on service-aged cables, diagnose
faults, and select the fault-locating techniques which offer the most efficient fault-location process and allow
use of the lowest possible voltage in the shortest amount of time. Table 2 lists preferred pre-locating techniques
for the most common types of cable faults. Reclosing or re-fusing and applying the system power are not
acceptable fault-locating methods.

Table 2—Preferred pre-locating techniques

Very high-
Bolted fault, Water- HV
Open voltage
short-circuit soaked flashover
conductors, flashover
faults, low- faults, high- faults, high- Jacket
metallic shield/ faults,
resistance resistance resistance
sheath corrosion intermittent
faults faults faults
faults
Conventional
time domain
X X
reflectometers
(TDRs)
Comparison
and difference X X
TDRs
Surge arc
reflection X X
method
Impulse
current X X
method

Table continues

17
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Table 2—Preferred pre-locating techniques (continued)

Very high-
Bolted fault, Water- HV
Open voltage
short-circuit soaked flashover
conductors, flashover
faults, low- faults, high- faults, high- Jacket
metallic shield/ faults,
resistance resistance resistance
sheath corrosion intermittent
faults faults faults
faults
Burn arc
reflection X X
method
Decay method
voltage X X
coupled
Bridge
X X X
methods

When fault characteristics are conducive to using a simple TDR, faults can be quickly and easily identified and
located. However, many faults are high resistance, limiting the use of a simple TDR approach. In these cases,
methods may be used to lower fault resistance so that other methods can be used, such as TDR, arc reflection,
and ac, dc, or pulse (surge) tracing.

Fault conditioning is a euphemism for burning the cable fault into a low-resistance state. This method can be
destructive to adjacent cables in close proximity to the faulted section and may result in cable system fires near
the fault.

When fault-burning techniques are used, the fault is typically burned to the point that identification of any
possible cause of the fault, other than installation damage, is not possible.

The following flow chart (Figure 2) steps through cable fault-location procedures on shielded power cables.

18
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 2—Cable fault location flow chart

5. Safety
5.1 Safety practices
When testing a cable system, personnel safety and service reliability of the electrical systems are of ultimate
importance. All cable and equipment tests shall be performed on isolated and de-energized systems, except
where otherwise specifically required and authorized. The safety practices shall include, but not be limited to,
the following requirements:

a) Applicable user safety operating procedures

b) IEEE Std 510™, IEEE Recommended Practices for Safety in High-Voltage and High-Power Testing4
c) Applicable state and local safety operating procedures
d) Protection of utility and customer property

While testing, one or more cable ends will be remote from the testing site, therefore:

— Cable ends shall be cleared and guarded.

— Communications shall be maintained with personnel at the remote end at all times.
— Cables shall be de-energized and grounded before testing is begun.

4
Information on references can be found in Clause 2.

19
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

— Any cables and/or conductors not under test shall be solidly grounded during testing.

At the conclusion of high-voltage testing, attention should be given to:

— Special techniques required for discharging cables and cable systems to dissipate any stored energy
that may be present in the cable.
— Grounding requirements for cables to assure that adequate time is given to completely discharge the
trapped charges that can exist in a cable due to dielectric absorption.

5.2 Precautions for ac cable systems

Many cable fault locators and troubleshooters use high-voltage dc as part of their standard fault-locating
procedure. It is known that dc testing may generate additional cable defects in service-aged ac cables with
extruded dielectric insulation, in particular, XLPE. Therefore, dc proof testing of service-aged cables with
extruded dielectric insulation is not recommended. This precaution does not apply to dc cable systems or
paper-insulated cables.

Failure to completely discharge a cable after it has been charged with voltage may result in failure upon re-
energization. Due to trapped charges, which have a long discharge time constant, the residual dc voltage may
cause a failure upon re-energization. See the IEEE Std 400™ omnibus.

Some utility or industrial standards do not yet take into account the potentially damaging effects of dc testing
on extruded cables used in ac systems. If dc testing should become necessary, the cable manufacturer should
be consulted for the maximum dc test value. This restriction does not apply to cables with laminated, oil-
impregnated-paper–type insulation.

There is a key difference between what is considered a dc cable test and an applied dc voltage during fault
locating. As stated, it is not recommended to dc test an extruded cable. Typically when fault locating, a dc
voltage is applied when using the thumper method to determine the breakdown voltage of the fault. This
information is then used to determine the proper thump voltage level to use. This process of setting the thump
voltage takes just a few seconds, as opposed to dc cable testing which is typically a minimum of 15 minutes in
duration. Reducing the thump voltage and the number of times a cable is thumped can also be achieved by one
of the arc reflection methods discussed in Clause 7.

DC voltage sources are also used as part of some fault-locating techniques including the bridge methods,
current tracing methods, metallic shield/sheath, and jacket (oversheath) fault locating. Again, these methods
typically apply a dc voltage less than the peak of the ac operating voltage for a short time duration.

Connected equipment and the cable terminal voltage ratings should be considered before applying a dc test
voltage. Special consideration should be given if there are gas-insulated cable terminations.

When testing a faulted cable, be cautious of induced voltage from parallel transmission circuits. Please refer
to IEEE Std 1727™.

5.3 Grounding

WARNING
Cables can only be considered de-energized and grounded when conductor and metallic shield are connected
to system ground at the test site and, if possible, at the far end of the cable. In general, depending on the
system configuration, all phases shall be grounded, including the tested phase (both before and after testing).

20
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

When fault locating on a defective cable, installation, or system, a single system ground at the test site is
recommended, see Figure 3. The metallic shield(s) of the faulted cable or cable being tested shall be connected
to system ground with a mechanically sound connection. High current magnitudes with fast rise times can
flow during cable fault locating. Short and solid connections are required to reduce the creation of voltage
potential differences between grounding points and the test set. If the metallic shield connection is missing,
deteriorated, or has been removed, it shall be replaced at this time. A safety ground cable shall connect
the instrument case with system ground. All ground connections should be as short as possible. If the test
instrument produces high voltages, the safety ground cable shall be at least a braided or stranded #2 AWG
copper cable. Only after the safety ground cable is in place shall the test cables be connected to the phase
conductor and the metallic shield. The phase conductor-to-ground connection for the cable to be tested may
now be removed.

Should a local ground be advisable or required for the test equipment, the case ground of the test instrument
shall remain connected to system ground in order to maintain an acceptable single ground potential.

All ground connections shall be screw-type connections that cannot accidentally be disconnected.

Figure 3—Single system ground at test site

6. Cable system fault locating

Cable faults vary, and even similar faults may exhibit different symptoms in different environments,
cable systems, cable types, or applications. To be able to more readily diagnose a fault and select the
proper operating procedure, cable fault locating can be divided into non-network and network categories
(see Figure 4). Cable fault-locating procedures in non-network systems can be tailored to a particular problem
and are easily controlled (see Figure 5). In network systems, fault-locating procedures depend on many inter-
related parameters, which make solving a particular problem more complex.

21
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 4—Non-network and network system fault-locating considerations

6.1 Non-network system

A non-network system is a simple, radial-type cable system with limited branching paths or taps. In non-
network systems, verifying cable length, presence of transformers in a loop, short or open circuits, and
metallic shield/sheath corrosion with a TDR are the recommended diagnostic procedures on which to base the
selection of fault-locating tools and methods. It should be the cable fault locator’s ultimate goal to efficiently
restore customer service while maintaining cable and equipment integrity. Procedures for cable fault locating
are listed below (see Figure 5) and techniques for determining the location of the fault are described in
Clause 7.

22
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 5—Non-network system fault locating

6.1.1 Procedure when cables are isolated (sectionalized)

The procedure for locating faults when cables are isolated (sectionalized) is as follows:

a) With a TDR, the cable length and the location of splices should be verified as well as the presence of
metallic shield corrosion.
b) With an insulation resistance tester/ohmmeter, the fault resistance, R, may be measured.
c) If R < 100 Ω, the distance to the fault can be measured with a TDR, the fault’s location pinpointed with
audio frequency (tone) tracing equipment.
d) If R > 100 Ω, a combination of a thumper, HV coupler, and TDR may be used to measure the distance
to the fault. Acoustic and/or electromagnetic detectors will facilitate the verification of the fault’s
location.

6.1.2 Procedure when cable is looped with connected transformers, lightning arresters, etc.

The procedure for locating faults when the cable is looped with connected transformers, lightning arresters,
etc., is as follows:

23
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

a) With a TDR, the cable length and cable landmarks, such as cable start, splices, transformers, cable
transitions, cable end, etc. should be verified.
b) A thumper, HV coupler, and TDR combination should be used to determine the location of the fault
and measure its distance from cable landmarks.
c) It is recommended to isolate the transformers and lightning arresters from the cable before thumpers
are used to pinpoint the fault. If these items are not disconnected, they may mask the presence of a
fault by loading the test source.
d) The precise location of the fault can be verified with acoustic and/or electromagnetic detectors.

6.1.3 Procedure for radial, single-conductor cable system with a few branches

The procedure for locating faults for radial, single-conductor cable sysems with a few branches is as follows:

a) With a TDR cable length and cable landmarks, such as cable start, splices, Y (T)-splices, branch ends,
cable end, etc. should be verified.
b) A thumper, HV coupler, and TDR combination should be used to determine the location of the fault
and its distance from cable landmarks.
c) Branches and the precise location of the fault can be verified with acoustic and/or electromagnetic
detectors.

6.1.4 Procedure for three-conductor submarine, armored, and pipe-type cables

In general, surge arc reflection is limited to fault distances up to 20 km to 30 km. Furthermore, the high
oil pressure in pipe-type cable insulations or water ingress in submarine cables make surge arc reflection
measurements difficult.

The procedure for locating faults for three-conductor submarine, armored, and pipe-type cables is as follows:

a) With a TDR cable length and cable landmarks, such as cable start, splices, cable transitions, cable end,
etc. should be verified.
b) With an insulation resistance tester/ohmmeter the fault resistance, R, should be measured.
c) If R < 100 Ω, the distance to the fault should be measured with a TDR. The fault location can be
verified with audio frequency fault-locating instrumentation, ac or dc current tracers.
d) If R > 100 Ω, a combination of a thumper and/or burner, HV coupler, and TDR should be used to
measure the distance to the fault. The precise fault location can be verified with acoustic and/or
electromagnetic instrumentation.

Complementary techniques:

e) Using a digital TDR will permit comparison of a faulted phase with unfaulted phases and thus simplify
fault locating.
f) Low- or high-voltage bridge methods may be used in combination with a TDR to determine the
distance to a fault.
g) Low- or high-voltage bridge methods can also be used to determine the distance to a fault on all cables
with metallic shield breaks.

24
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

6.1.5 Submarine cable fault locating

Fault locating on submarine cables poses a difficult task to the system operator. Based on standard fault
location equipment and standard operator knowledge, cable faults on submarine cables are difficult and often
unfeasible to locate due to the typical long underwater lengths, inaccessibility of the cable, and the presence of
water which reduces the resistance of the fault and extinguishes the arc. Trained staff and expert knowledge is
of highest importance for fast and efficient fault locating on long submarine cables.

Conditions and methods for cable fault locating on submarine power cables differ significantly from
conventional cable fault locating on buried land cables. Various fault types may appear. The staff and the
equipment need to be prepared to locate short-circuit faults, low-resistance faults, high-resistance faults,
arcing faults, or intermittent faults.

Faults on long submarine cable links are especially prone to reduce the success for most commonly used fault-
locating methods and available equipment. Commonly used pre-location methods like arc reflection may not
provide useful results when the submarine cable is submerged in deep water or below the seabed because it
does not maintain the arcing. Further, these methods are limited by cable length. Classic methods like TDR,
bridge methods, and high-power burning are preferably used for wet faults (i.e., faults where there is water
ingress). Dry faults (i.e., the outer cable jacket remains intact, typically the land side) are successfully located
with decay method and differential decay method. Fault pin-pointing procedures will also significantly differ
from conventional land cable fault location.

Standard fault-locating equipment is not designed for locating faults with such long cable links. Due to these
long lengths, the highest risk has to be considered when discharging the huge amount of energy that can be
stored in the long lengths during test and fault locating. Special fault-locating equipment is needed for a safe
working process.

Experienced system operators will study and develop a preparedness plan that considers all possible steps for
quickly locating and repairing the cable fault. Coordination and logistics of testing are very important with
respect to submarine cables due to the long lead times required to obtain equipment and replacement cables.

6.2 Network system

6.2.1 General

Network cable systems form the backbone of most three-phase underground distribution systems in areas
of high load density that require maximum reliability. A network cable system is characterized by circuits
with multiple branches and service taps. Network cable systems are often installed within a conduit/manhole
system. Network transformer primaries are interconnected either directly through terminations or through
sets of disconnect switches. The secondaries of network transformers are often paralleled. Each transformer
secondary can be isolated via a network protector to remove it from the test circuit.

25
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 6—Network system fault locating

6.2.2 Safety consideration

Network cable systems require additional procedural steps for safety. Because the secondaries of transformers
can be tied to a common bus, a primary cable could be energized via a faulty network protector. To avoid back-
feeding transformer primaries and cable, all network protectors shall be locked in the open position. After
verifying the status of all protectors, the primary cables shall be checked for voltage and shall be grounded.
Fault-locating equipment may then be connected.

6.2.3 Fault-locating parameters

In network systems, fault-locating efforts often will require more than one fault-locating method (see
Figure 6). In a specific network, to select the right tool, several factors should be considered and weighed:

a) The overall circuit length, number of branches, and the number of connected transformers will
determine the effectiveness of a fault-locating method. For efficient fault locating with TDR
techniques, more than one access point should be available in each network circuit. Typically the fault-
locating process is started at the substation, from where the network feeder is departing. The biggest
advantage of using a TDR is obtained in most cases by applying it to the feeder segment between the
substation and the first network transformer because it represents in many cases the longest point-to-
point cable segment in the network. As a general rule, one access point for every three to four branches
is desirable. The potential benefit of all active TDR techniques is often negatively affected by:

26
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

1) An increasing number of branches and as a result the number of cable splices, causing attenuation
and dispersion of the TDR pulse, ultimately rendering it useless
2) The combination and magnitude of downward reflections (Y splices) and upward reflections
(branch ends), making it very difficult to assign specific reflections to distinct points in the
network circuit
Ideal conditions for TDR measurements can be obtained if the branches can be isolated.
b) Direct access to the defective cable is necessary for effective use of TDR, surge and burn arc reflection,
surge (current) pulse, and voltage decay techniques. An impedance mismatch (identified as a large
negative reflection at the connection point many times seen when connecting to a laminated cable)
between test equipment and test object will limit or prevent the use of TDR techniques. Depending
on the type of network transformers employed, it might be possible to connect the fault-locating
equipment via an auxiliary port at the transformer.
c) Whenever possible, the fault resistance should be measured using an insulation resistance tester/
ohmmeter combination, preferable in both modes: phase-to-phase and phase-to-ground (see e)
below). It is recommended to perform this test as the very first test, especially if no identification of the
faulted phase and reliable information on the cable type/construction and the insulation are available.
d) The total capacitance and impedance of the cable system limits the effective use of surge generators
commonly called thumpers. When using a surge arc reflection method, a surge generator or thumper
with internal capacitance significantly higher than the cable capacitance is necessary in order to
exceed the breakdown voltage of the cable fault.
It is important to estimate or measure the total capacitance of the cable being tested to properly size
the energy and capacitance rating of surge generators. The total capacitance and the impedance of a
shielded cable act as a load on the capacitive discharge device or thumper. In order for the thumper
to produce sufficient voltage to break down the cable fault, the ratio between the capacitance of the
thumper and the capacitance of the cable should be known. If the ratio between thumper and cable
is 1:1, then the output voltage of the thumper presented to the cable will be approximately half the
charging voltage of the thumper. If the ratio is 10:1, the output voltage of the thumper impressed on
the cable will be approximately 90% of the charging voltage. This assumes the cable is a lumped
capacitance, which it is not. Oversizing the stored energy of a thumper may result in additional damage
to the faulted cable in another location.
If the thumper energy and capacitance rating is much less than the cable, for example when thumping
very long runs of cable, the voltage efficiency may be so low that a voltage high enough to break down
the fault cannot be produced. In this case, continued thumping can “pump up” the charge in the cable
being tested. After many discharges of the thumper in this condition, the cable may eventually break
down, but instead of just the energy from the thumper going into the fault, all the stored energy in the
cable will go into the fault, too. Transient waves from this breakdown may potentially cause doubling
of the voltage, leading to damage of the equipment or to the operator.
The rating of the thumper energy or capacitance and operating voltage should be the minimum value
that can still break down the fault.
At the completion of thumping a cable, the test system should have a discharge resistance suitable
for absorbing the energy of the capacitance in the thumper and of the cable. If a cable has not broken
down and the thumper has “pumped up” the cable, the energy in the cable may exceed the rating of
the test set discharge resistor. Care should be taken in testing long lengths of cable to assure that the
energy rating of the discharge resistor of the test system can withstand the energy from the highest
capacitance to be tested at the highest test voltage according to the following Equation (1):

E = 1 CV 2 (1)
2

27
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

where

E is the energy dissipated by the test system (J or W·s)

C is the capacitance of the cable being tested plus the internal capacitance of the thumper (F)
V is the voltage rating of the test system, in this case the highest voltage to which the thumper can be
charged (V)
e) The type of cable insulation restricts the use of burning (i.e., fault conditioning) and dc test voltages.
Oil-paper-insulated cables often are subjected to burning in order to reduce the fault resistance for
ease of identification. Burning of solid dielectrics usually does not result in a reduced fault resistance
because extruded materials may melt and reinsulate the conductor. More importantly, burning of
cables with solid dielectric insulation even for relatively short periods of time may lead to ignition
of insulation causing fires in manholes or ducts. In general, burning should only be applied to paper-
insulated cables or cables submerged in water. Burning of cable faults should be monitored with a TDR
if possible, thus minimizing burning time and possible further damage. Many networks are composed
of mixed cables types: XLPE, EPR, and laminated cable may be spliced together. Laminated cables
may be “belted” three-sector-type cables or three individual metallic shielded cables. Before trying to
burn mixed cables, perform an insulation test on all three phases: phase-to-phase and phase-to-ground
(6 tests), followed by a low-current, HV breakdown test. By applying both tests, the question whether
laminated and “belted” cables are involved can be answered, which also provides the information
whether burning is necessary. Steady-state burn arc reflection with an ac or dc burn set capable of
maintaining an arc current of 4 A to 5 A at a voltage of at least a few hundred volts can also be very
effective in locating a faulted laminated cable section with a TDR. There are more details about this
described in Clause 7.
f) Transformer primary connections should be considered when selecting a cable fault-locating
method in situations where the cables cannot be isolated. Delta-connected primaries will cause
unwanted paths and reflections for TDR equipment. A grounded unfaulted phase and grounded wye-
connected primaries will eliminate the use of fault-locating methods using dc equipment.

6.2.4 Methods to be used for network systems

6.2.4.1 Tracer methods

The lack of direct access to a faulted cable, a large number of branches, and transformers which cannot be
disconnected will not permit the selection of TDR or bridge-based fault-locating methods. This is due to
unwanted paths and reflection points for TDR-type equipment. Therefore, ac, dc, or pulse (surge) tracing
methods are used to identify a faulted cable section. In tracer-type cable fault location “walking the route” and
entering manholes to locate an audible or electromagnetic signal is necessary. They are, however, labor and
time intensive.

6.2.4.2 Terminal methods

When direct access to a faulted cable exists and TDR and bridge-type fault-locating techniques are possible,
the measured fault resistance value will suggest which fault-locating method(s) to attempt first. Table 3 may be
used as a guide for preferred techniques.

Table 3—Pre-locating methods for various fault resistance values

Ohmmeter test Megohmmeter
R < 100 Ω 100 Ω < R < 10 MΩ R >> 10 MΩ
Surge arc reflection Voltage breakdown test
TDR (direct, comparison, and Burn arc reflection Surge or burn arc reflection
difference methods) Impulse current method Impulse current method (direct and
Bridge methods Fault conditioning, TDR comparison differential)
Bridge methods Decay method (direct and differential)

28
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

The 100 Ω threshold in Table 3 relates to the threshold below which TDR can be applied. 100 Ω is approximately
10 times the characteristic impedance of the line.

A multimeter (typically using a 1.5 V to 9 V internal voltage source) can be used to measure the fault resistance.
Typical multimeters are only adequate to determine whether the resistance is below or above 100 Ω; typical
multimeters are neither adequate to determine whether the fault is above or below 10 MΩ, nor to determine
whether the fault is a flashing-type fault.

A megohmmeter is useful to determine the fault resistance in the higher resistance ranges. Note that many
megohmmeters are not able to measure lower resistances (i.e., indicating 0 kΩ, meaning less than 1 kΩ, but
not 0 Ω), which may require the use of a multimeter as described above.

For detecting flashing faults, a high-voltage source offering adequate test voltage is required to determine
the voltage breakdown. Most higher-resistance faults (i.e., > 100 Ω) are also flashing faults under adequate
applied voltage.

The 10 MΩ listed in Table 3 is chosen as an arbitrary dividing point, as it is a good upper threshold for the
bridge method. However, it is not intended as a precise dividing point for high-resistance faults, as most high-
resistance faults are non-linear over applied voltage.

In the case 10 MΩ is measured at a test voltage of 10 kV, there will be a 1 mA fault current, so none of the
methods listed except the bridge method will be able to pre-locate the fault, as a higher voltage will be needed
to create an arc at the fault. If a 100 MΩ fault is measured at 10 kV, there will be a 0.1 mA fault current, and so
again a higher voltage is needed for fault arcing.

Therefore, for high-resistance faults in the megohm range, the breakdown voltage tends to be the more
important characteristic. Methods such as arc reflection, impulse current, and the decay method cause the fault
to manifest as a flashing fault due to the creation of a temporary arc at the fault location.

NOTE—TDR direct, comparison, and difference, surge and burn arc reflection, impulse current, and decay methods are
available in the majority of power utility TDRs and HV couplers. It is important to ensure that such equipment, with the
exception of the decay method, meets the capacitance requirement of a network circuit as stated in item d) of 6.2.3. Except
for the direct TDR measurement, where telecommunication TDRs are applicable, all other methods require power TDRs
that can be triggered (either with adjustable trigger delay or a multi-shot feature) and have pulse width suitable for long
cables.5

7. Cable system fault-locating techniques

7.1 General
By eliminating re-closing, re-fusing, and unnecessary or excessive thumping, cost savings will be realized due
to reduced stress on service-aged cable insulation, cable accessories, transformers, and customer and utility
equipment. The following paragraphs describe various cable fault-locating devices and techniques.

5
Notes in text, tables, and figures of a standard are given for information only and do not contain requirements needed to implement this
standard.

29
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

7.2 Terminal methods

7.2.1 Sectionalizing

7.2.1.1 General overview

The differences in methods to sectionalize cable loops should be evaluated from a number of different aspects,
including technical, business, and asset management. Operations personnel expect a reliable identification of
the faulted cable segment; asset-management groups want to avoid additional damage to the system as a result
of the procedure itself; and the business side is largely driven by reduced outage minutes (i.e., a lower system
average interruption duration index [SAIDI] or consumer average interruption frequency index [CAIDI]).
Sectionalizing is typically used for power restoration and supports pre-locating the fault.

7.2.1.2 Destructive methods of sectionalizing

Both of the following methods involve “closing in” on the cable fault and have been proven to be very
destructive. Neither method is preferred.

The cut and try method involves actual cutting or separation of a length of cable to isolate the faulted section.
The cut sections are then individually tested. The method is repeated until the section of cable containing the
fault is identified and removed. This is a very crude and costly method.

The sectionalizing by re-fusing method is still used today on underground residential distribution URD loops.
Portions of a cable loop are isolated, and then a primary fuse is closed. If the fuse opens, then the next fuse is
closed until the faulted section is isolated. Due to switching surges and fault currents, damage to customer and
utility equipment (bushings, splices, elbows, etc.) and cable is likely. Note that loadbreak elbows should never
be used to close in on potential faults.

7.2.1.3 Non-destructive methods of sectionalizing

The following three methods are preferred for sectionalizing.

One method of sectionalizing involves dc testing of the cable section using hipot sticks or portable dc test sets
with several mA of output current. The hipot sticks make use of rectified system line-to-ground voltages. In
this method, the rectified voltage is applied to the cable to be tested. While the cable charges, a current will
flow. The current will stop flowing when the cable has charged. If the cable has a fault, the current continues
to flow. However, cable systems with leakage currents comparable to the available current from the rectifier
may appear to have a fault when none exists. Additionally, the rectified voltage applied is lower than the peak
of the operating voltage. This can result in false negative results and, in situations when dealing with “burnt in
the clear” faults can also cause a false negative. Furthermore, the method is very time consuming. Since most
transformers in URD loops are grounded wye, primaries should either be disconnected (stood off/parked)
before testing a cable segment, or the fuse in every transformer should be removed. This sectionalizing method
is still very popular since little personnel training is required, however it is very time consuming, and it is
sometimes difficult to interpret the current and/or voltage readings correctly.

A second method of sectionalizing uses faulted circuit indicators. Fault indicators are devices which sense
the magnetic field produced by the fault current. They have been used by utilities for decades and can be
a great help in pre-locating the section of cable with the fault. With fault indicators, very little personnel
training is required. In addition, fault-locating efforts are minimal if the section of cable is in a conduit and will
categorically be replaced when it is suspected to be defective. A major drawback to the use of fault indicators
is cost because, for best efficiency, every device on the circuit needs to be equipped with a fault indicator prior
to the fault. In addition, installation and maintenance costs should be considered, and also the hours of labor
required to check the devices. Curbside installed transformers are easier to deal with than backlot installed
ones. Refer to IEEE Std 1216™ for more information about faulted circuit indicators.

30
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

A third method of sectionalizing is arc reflection. All other methods described in 7.2.1.2 and 7.2.1.3 have in
common that in order to identify the faulted cable segment, one has to move from transformer to transformer,
and when employing any dc methods, to electrically isolate the equipment from the cable being tested; arc
reflection eliminates this time disadvantage. Arc reflection sectionalizing benefits from the TDR fault-locating
method in combination with the automatic identification of transformers. Transformers serve as landmarks
to identify the cable segment containing the fault. The advantages of this method are twofold. The biggest
advantage is that it eliminates the need to go from transformer to transformer, reducing the time to switch
customers back on after isolating the faulted segment. In addition, it exposes the loop system to a very small
number of low-energy HV surges in combination with the pulses sent out by the TDR. Typically, the entire half
loop can be evaluated in one step, from one vantage point without removing any transformer fuses and without
disconnecting any elbows.

7.2.2 Insulation resistance

An insulation resistance tester or an ohmmeter may be used as a diagnostic tool when cable fault locating,
depending on the value to be measured. At insulation resistance test voltage levels of 500 V dc to 10 000 V dc
or ohmmeter test voltage levels of 1.5 V dc to 9 V dc, a cable fault can be categorized. Table 4 explains how
cable faults are diagnosed from insulation resistance measurements.

Table 4—Fault diagnosis from insulation resistance measurements (cable end open-
circuited)
R Problem Solution
R > 10 MΩ High-resistance fault Use an HV fault-locating technique such as arc
reflection, impulse current, or voltage decay
Disintegrated metallic shield With a TDR, the exact problem can be
Separated splice determined and the appropriate fault-locating
Open conductor procedure and technique selected
100 Ω < R < 10 MΩ Destroyed and burnt cable section Use an HV fault-locating technique or a bridge
Conductive path between conductors technique for three-conductor cables
Water-soaked fault
R < 100 Ω Low-resistance fault, or bolted fault With a TDR, the exact problem can be
Grounds connected determined and the appropriate fault-locating
Transformer connected procedure and technique selected
NOTE—These values are relative values and not meant to be absolute.

7.2.3 Conductor and metallic shield resistance

The dc loop resistance measurement of the conductor and metallic shield is to identify if there is an interruption
or corrosion issue. The conductor resistance measurement is a loop resistance, either conductor-and-conductor
or conductor-and-metallic shield, typically. Table 5 explains how cable faults are diagnosed from conductor
resistance measurements. Connections should be as short as possible and low resistance.

31
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Table 5—Fault diagnosis from conductor and metallic shield resistance continuity
measurements (cable end short-circuited)
R Problem Solution
R > 1 MΩ Open conductor With a TDR, the exact problem can be
Separated splice or termination determined and the appropriate fault-
Missing metallic shield or sheath locating procedure and technique selected
10 Ω < R < 1 MΩ High resistance series fault Measure fault resistance: use an HV
fault-locating technique or a bridge
technique for three-conductor cables
Metallic shield corrosion With a TDR, the exact problem can be
Corroded termination or splice determined and the appropriate fault-
Corroded or burnt conductor locating procedure and technique selected
Water-soaked, burnt cable section
R < 10 Ω Proof of continuity With a TDR, the continuity can be confirmed

7.2.4 Time domain reflectometry

Time domain reflectometers (TDRs) transmit pulses of short time duration into the cable to be tested. The
elapsed time of a transmitted pulse traveling the entire length of a cable and the pulse reflections produced
by deviations from the homogenous structure of the cable are displayed on a display screen. Any changes in
impedances from reflecting surfaces, cable start, joints, splices, transformers, faults, changes in cable type, as
well as cable end, are shown in time sequence.

Figure 7—TDR schematic diagram

When the propagation velocity of a pulse through a cable is programmed into a TDR, the distance between
cable start and any discontinuity or irregularity can be determined from the reflection-time display. A TDR’s
digital readout provides distance to the fault, as well as cable length measurements.

32
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 8—TDR basic signatures

REQUIREMENTS. At least two parallel conductors (including conductors and/or metallic shield) in close
proximity must be present in order for the TDR to work properly. Certain metallic shield/sheath types can
affect the TDR functionality, especially when corroded or modified. This is particularly applicable with tape-
shielded cables. Tape-shielded cables, even when in relatively new condition, have an ability to severely
attenuate and disperse high-frequency TDR signals, making any method using TDR technologies very
ineffective. In addition, unjacketed cables where the metallic shield has corroded away also can inhibit this
method. The magnitudes of the pulse reflections produced by deviations from the homogeneous structure of
the cable are determined by the reflection coefficient. See Equation (2).

( Z − Zo )
r= (2)
( Z + Zo )
where

r is the reflection coefficient

Z is the impedance value electrically describing cable start, joints, splices, faults, changes in cable
type, as well as cable end (Ω)
Zo is the cable’s characteristic impedance (Ω)

For insulation/shunt cable faults on metallic shielded cables where the fault impedance, Z, is in parallel with
the characteristic impedance, Zo, the reflection coefficient derives from Equation (2) to be:

−Z o
r= (3)
(2 Z + Z o )

Insulation/shunt cable faults between center conductor and metallic shield with resistance values much
greater than the characteristic impedance of the cable have small reflections, see Equation (3), and cannot be
distinguished from reflections of naturally occurring cable irregularities.

33
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 9—TDR typical display

RECOMMENDATION. TDRs make it possible to “see into” a cable to locate cable faults and identify cable
landmarks or characteristic impedance changes such as splices, transformers, joints, and cable transitions, in
addition to locating the cable start and the cable end. TDRs are well suited to locate series cable faults, such as
broken conductors, metallic shield corrosion, separated splices, open-circuit cable ends, etc. TDRs may also
be used to locate insulation/shunt cable faults with resistance values of less than ten times the characteristic
impedance of the cable to be tested.

With a TDR alone it is not possible to locate faults with resistance values greater than ten times the
characteristic impedance or high-voltage and intermittent cable faults. Auxiliary equipment and techniques
should be used to convert high-resistance and intermittent insulation/shunt cable faults temporarily into low-
resistance (flashover) faults, which can be located with a TDR or digital oscilloscope.

High-voltage TDR techniques, sometimes informally referred to as high-voltage radar, are as follows:

a) Surge arc reflection

b) Burn arc reflection
c) Impulse current (current coupled) method
d) Decay (voltage coupled) method

For multi-conductor cable systems, differential high-voltage TDR-based techniques can be used.

7.2.5 Capacitive discharge (thumping)

Thumpers, capacitive discharge devices and HV surge generators are alternate terms for an HV device that
has sufficient voltage and energy to breakdown a fault site and may also generate an audible thump at the
location of a cable fault, depending on the amplitude and duration of the pulse. A thumper is characterized by
its voltage and energy rating. The energy rating is calculated according to Equation (4).

E = 1 CV 2 (4)
2

34
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

where

E is the energy rating of the thumper (J or W·s)

C is the internal capacitance of the thumper (F)
V is the voltage rating of the thumper, in this case the highest voltage to which the thumper can be
charged (V)

The internal capacitor in a thumper is discharged into the faulted cable periodically via an electronically
operated or manually set spark gap. This capacitive discharge is intended to break down the cable fault and to
cause an audible noise at the fault, or to provide a sufficient arc current for arc reflection measurement.

When the voltage surge exceeds the fault breakdown voltage, a flashover occurs. The fault location may be
verified by tracing the electromagnetic signal generated by the arcing and/or by listening for the acoustical
signal created by the thump associated with every flashover. For cable fault locating, thumpers should be
selected by the cable system operating voltage and with a sufficient energy for the length of cable being
tested. To reduce the use of unnecessary high voltage when fault locating, thumpers with selectable internal
capacitance can be employed. Selectable capacitance (sometimes called controlled energy) thumpers can be
adjusted to minimize the voltage applied and still produce a cable breakdown voltage of sufficient amplitude.

Figure 10—Available energy associated with configurations of the thumper internal

capacitors

Figure 10 shows various configurations of a selectable capacitance thumper which allows high surge energy
at appropriate surge voltage. For example, surging at 8 kV with a 1.95 μF (1000 J at 32 kV) capacitor would
produce just 62 J of surge energy. If the capacitor is reconfigured to 31.2 μF, the full 1000 J of energy is
provided at 8 kV surge voltage. A similar calculation can be done for a single-stage surge capacitor with
7000 J at 32 kV (not pictured). If the surge voltage needs to be reduced to 8 kV due to the rated voltage of a
faulted cable, then only 434 J of energy is provided. This example demonstrates why a selectable capacitance
thumper is preferable to a single-stage capacitance thumper. By selecting the appropriate range, a maximum
amount of energy, and therefore noise, can be delivered to the fault location at a minimum of voltage.

35
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Since the main purpose of the thumper pulse, as described in Figure 10, is to cause a fault in the cable to arc
and breakdown, it is important to not only have enough voltage, but also have enough energy in the pulse to
cause this breakdown to occur. Since energy relates to the duration of a pulse, and the duration of the thumper
pulse is derived from the amount of capacitance provided by the thumper, the larger the capacitance selected,
the longer the duration and higher the energy of the resulting pulse. In the example shown in Figure 11, simply
selecting the highest voltage output setting (in this case 32 kV) does not result in the fault arcing over—that
is, it does not meet the ignition curve of the fault in this example. While selecting the 8 kV range (additional
capacitance) does result in the fault arcing over, albeit at a lower applied voltage.

Figure 11—Surge impulse duration curves versus fault ignition curve

REQUIREMENTS. A thumper does not give the location of a fault; this is done by using a thumper with a TDR
or acoustic detection devices. The TDR gives a distance value. To find a fault and locate it precisely, the entire
cable installation needs to be correctly mapped/traced. Since cable fault characteristics, cable construction,
and soil condition greatly influence the thump’s loudness, the fault location can easily be missed without
mapping. When metallic shield corrosion exists, finding the fault location is difficult.

RECOMMENDATIONS. It is recommended to use a thumper with a TDR to pre-locate the fault by arc
reflection method and then pinpoint the fault with acoustic and/or electromagnetic instruments.

7.2.6 Fault conditioning

Using an ac (power frequency or VLF) or dc (by burn-down set or thumping) supply of sufficient voltage
and current output, a high resistance or intermittent fault can temporarily or permanently be converted into
a low-resistance fault. First, arcing is induced at the fault point, and then current flow is maintained until,
through charring or metal fusion, a permanent low-resistance path at the fault location is created. If burning is
continued, the cable may finally burn apart.

REQUIREMENTS. The change from lead-paper to solid dielectric-type cables and modern splicing
technology has imposed limitations on burning. Space charge build-up and multiple flashovers during burning
may activate dormant faults or generate new defects. The benefits and disadvantages associated with burning
in order to generate a short or open circuit should be carefully weighed. Fire damage to the cable and equipment
are high risks.

36
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

RECOMMENDATIONS. Burning was originally used to permanently change high resistance and
intermittent cable faults into short or open circuits which could then be pre-located with TDRs or bridges and
pinpointed with acoustical, coincidence, electromagnetic, or current or voltage gradient-type devices. Today’s
applications for burning should be limited.

a) When burning is used on lead-paper, pipe-type, water-soaked or submarine cables, a TDR should be
connected across the cable, see 7.2.8. Monitoring the burning of the cable with a TDR will pre-locate
the distance to the fault at the instant the fault breaks down, thus minimizing burning time and current.
See Figure 12.
b) On large capacitance cables, burn sets may be used to quickly charge the cable until it arcs over and the
cable fault can be pre-located with the decay or impulse current methods.
c) On all cable types, burning may be used to reduce the breakdown voltage of a fault to within the range
of a thumper.

Figure 12—Typical TDR comparison, illustrates fault before and after fault conditioning

Additional applications for burn sets are: ground-fault detection of pressurized oil-filled cables or pipes, cable
identification, and tracing.

7.2.7 Surge arc reflection

Surge arc reflection permits locating of faults in power cables at the lowest possible HV levels with minimum
risk to serviceable cable. With a surge generator, high resistance or intermittent cable faults can temporarily be
converted into faults having resistance values much less than the characteristic impedance. Combining a TDR
with the surge generator permits the location of the temporarily low-resistance faults. A coupler isolates the
TDR from the HV pulses and ensures that the high-frequency test pulses sent into the cable by the TDR are not
short-circuited by the surge generator.

37
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 13—Surge arc reflection, schematic diagram

During the first phase of the measurement, the TDR pulses are not reflected by the high resistance or intermittent
fault and only cable start, joints, splices, transformers, irregularities, and cable end are visible. In the second
phase, the surge generator is switched on. The surge pulse amplitude is made just high enough to break down
the fault and generate arcing at the fault location. The TDR pulse will be reflected by the arc and an image of
the temporary low-resistance fault, a negative deflection, will indicate the fault location on the display. Once
arcing ceases, the fault reverts back to its high-resistance state. A comparison of the cable with and without
HV applied is observed. During the intervals between arcing, when the surge generator is in the charge mode,
the reflected image of the cable, start to end, is displayed with all inherent cable landmarks. During arcing, the
high-resistance fault is converted to a low-resistance state and the negative deflection is overlaid on the low-
voltage display. The fault location is easily determined, not only as a distance in feet, yards, or meters from the
beginning or the end of the cable, but also in relation to the other landmark reflection points. See Figure 14.

Figure 14—Typical surge arc reflection diagram

REQUIREMENTS. Arc reflection cannot be used where a flashover between conductors cannot be established
(conductor to ground faults). Cable faults on laminated cables and faults under water may have intermittent
fault breakdowns and that may be difficult to capture with a TDR. Long cables with very lossy insulation and
radial cable systems with many branches may absorb the surge energy and the reflected TDR pulses. This is
why the temporary low-resistance state of the fault may not be located. Surge arc reflection cannot be used on
cables with fault current interrupters in the metallic sheath (sheath gaps). Tape-shielded cables or cables with
corroded neutrals can also inhibit the use and effectiveness of this method as described in 7.2.4.

38
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

RECOMMENDATIONS. For cables with extruded dielectric insulation, the application of surge arc reflection
may be limited by cable system parameters, such as cable length and number of branches. URD cable systems
are typically short and non-branched, and therefore the application of surge arc reflection is typically not
limited. Since surge arc reflection is the simplest and quickest of the HV TDR techniques, it should be tried
first.

For cable faults under water or in very long cables, an advanced multi-impulse arc reflection method may help
to increase the likelihood that the TDR will detect the flashover. Fault conditioning can also be conducted by
repetitive thumping, thus eventually drying the fault and allowing for an arc reflection measurement.

7.2.8 Burn arc reflection

Burn arc reflection is frequently used on HV cable faults where a surge-generated flashover cannot be observed
with a TDR. These faults frequently occur on lead-paper, submarine, and water- or oil-soaked cables and
pressurized oil-filled pipes. Arcing is induced at the fault point and a sufficient current flow, usually 4 A to
5 A, is then maintained to sustain arcing. The arcing is monitored with a TDR, which is connected to the cable
through an HV coupler. The distance to the fault is measured using standard TDR techniques. Current tracing
is usually used to verify the location of the fault.

REQUIREMENTS. The burn set should be capable of ionizing the fault and maintaining a burn current of at
least 4 A to 5 A.

RECOMMENDATIONS. The application of burn arc reflection is an excellent adjunct to surge arc reflection.
Conditioning of a cable fault may be monitored and the distance to the fault recorded when the fault reaches
a low-resistance state. The time to identify an approximate fault location is generally less than five minutes.

7.2.9 Impulse current method (also surge pulse reflection)

The impulse current method permits locating high resistance and intermittent cable faults. It is a surge
generator technique and not a TDR technique, even though TDRs are frequently used as reflection-time
display terminals (transient recorder).

Figure 15—Impulse current method, schematic diagram

The surge generator sends an HV pulse into the faulty cable where it produces arcing at the fault location.
Part of the HV pulse energy is reflected to the cable start where it is reflected back into the cable by the low
impedance of the surge capacitor. The signal bounces back and forth until all its energy is dissipated. This
process can be observed by coupling a synchronized monitoring instrument, such as a digital oscilloscope or
TDR, to the cable. The spacing of the reflections displayed on a screen is a measurement of the distance to the
fault.

39
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 16—Typical impulse current method measuring diagram

REQUIREMENTS. It should be understood that the impulse current method is not a direct TDR technique
and has a different purpose. While a TDR pulse width may be as narrow as 10 ns (although typically more like
50 ns), providing excellent resolution and accuracy of the measurement, surge pulse widths are determined by
the following:

a) The surge generator

b) The characteristic impedance of the cable
c) The coupler characteristics
d) The fault

The accuracy of the measurement often depends on the skill of the operator.

A major limitation of the impulse current method lies in the method’s inability to distinguish between the
fault and naturally occurring reflection points such as wye-splices, cable transitions, metallic shield corrosion,
fault current interrupters, etc. Since the method cannot distinguish between reflection points, this reduces the
effectiveness of this method. A delay between the application of the high-voltage pulse and the fault ionization
ignition may make interpretation more difficult. See Figure 16.

Tape-shielded cables or cables with corroded neutrals can also inhibit the use and effectiveness of this method
as described in 7.2.4.

RECOMMENDATION. The impulse current method is a good back-up technique for surge arc reflection. It
can be used on cable faults where an arc between conductor and metallic shield cannot be established (splice
to ground faults) and on long and highly attenuating cable runs where a TDR pulse has insufficient energy to
produce a reflection-time display.

40
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

7.2.10 Impulse current differential method

The impulse current differential method is used for high-resistance faults and flashing faults. For this method,
one unfaulted cable is required as a reference and as such, this method can be used on three-phase ac cables
and bipolar dc cables. As the pulse voltage of a thumper is simultaneously applied to the faulted and unfaulted
cable, a differential current coupler or two single couplers are installed on both cables.

Figure 17—Impulse current differential method, schematic diagram

To start, at the near end, a pulse is applied simultaneously to the two cables, and the couplers detect and cancel
all common mode reflected pulses such as from splices that are at the identical location. However, the reflected
pulse from the faulted phase is recorded. Next, the far ends of the cables are connected together by a jumper
and the test is repeated. This time the reflected pulse from the arcing fault now returns to the couplers via both
cables, reaching the coupler first on the faulted cable and then later on the unfaulted cable. The two echograms
are superimposed and the distance to the fault is determined from the far end of the cable. See Figure 18.

Figure 18—Typical impulse current differential method

This method works well on long cables and offers accurate location results as the ionization time delay does
not cause an inaccuracy. The method has also been successfully used on T-branched medium-voltage cables.

41
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

However, for breakdown faults and intermittent faults on long submarine cables, the differential decay method
is the best option.

7.2.11 Decay method

The decay method permits locating of high-resistance and intermittent cable faults where the fault breakdown
voltage is greater than the maximum available surge generator voltage or where the cable capacitance
approaches or exceeds a thumper’s capacitance.

A dc test set or burner will continuously charge the cable until the fault arcs over. At each arc-over, a traveling
wave is generated which reflects back and forth between cable start and fault until its energy is dissipated. This
process can be observed by coupling a synchronized monitoring instrument, such as a digital oscilloscope or
a TDR, to the cable.

Figure 19—Decay method, schematic diagram

The spacing of the reflections displayed on a screen is a measurement of the distance to the fault. The decay
method is applied on flashing faults. For fault locations on very long cables the differential decay method can
be more effective.

Figure 20—Typical decay method, measuring diagram

42
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

REQUIREMENTS. The dc source should have sufficient current capacity to be able to charge the cable
to a voltage sufficient to initiate a flashover at the fault. The decay method is not applicable on high- and
low-resistance faults. Tape-shielded cables or cables with corroded neutrals can also inhibit the use and
effectiveness of this method as described in 7.2.4.

RECOMMENDATIONS. The decay method can be used on cable faults where an arc between conductor and
metallic shield cannot be established with a thumper. When the energy released at the arc-over is sufficiently
high (400 J to 1000 J), the cable fault can also be pinpointed acoustically. On three-conductor cables, all three
phases may be connected in parallel to increase the total fault-locating capacitance.

WARNING
During dc application, a large amount of energy may be stored in the cable. The dc source should be equipped
with an adequate discharge device for safe discharge of the stored energy.

7.2.12 Differential decay method

The differential decay method is used for detecting breakdown faults and intermittent faults. Depending on
the dc source, it may be used for test voltages up to 100 kV or higher. This method is preferably used on long
and extra-long cables. It is applicable on straight cables, T-branched MV cables, as well as on HV cables. This
is the method that provides the best results for cross-bonded cable systems and extra-long, high-voltage, dc
cable links. The differential decay method offers easy interpretation, good accuracy, and a unique cable length
capability. The method offers very accurate location results as the ionization time delay does not cause any
inaccuracy.

Figure 21—Differential decay method, schematic diagram

For this method, two cables are required, the faulted and an unfaulted cable, and both are fitted with current
couplers which are connected in a differential mode. A high-voltage dc source is used to energize both cables
and when an arc develops at the fault, a pulse is generated that travels along the faulted cable and will be
detected by the coupler and displayed by the TDR device. A second measurement is required where both
cables are linked at the far end by a jumper cable allowing the fault pulse to propagate in both the faulted
and unfaulted cables to the coupler. The two echograms are superimposed and the distance to the fault is
determined from the far end of the cable. The fault distance diagram is comparable to Figure 18.

7.2.13 Bridge methods

7.2.13.1 General

Bridge methods are among the earliest forms of cable-fault location. They have been very successful in
locating faults on laminated cables where faults had been “conditioned” to be an open or a bolted fault. Various

43
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

bridges are in use today. A bridge is usually known by the name of the person who invented it or used it first.
The best known fault-locating bridge is probably the Murray loop.

In order to use a bridge fault-locating method, fault resistance and continuity should be measured.

a) With an insulation resistance tester, the conductor-to-metallic sheath (ground) or the conductor-to-
conductor resistance is measured. If this resistance is in the hundreds of megohms, the fault should be
conditioned with a burn-set to lower the fault resistance value, preferably in the ohm or low kilohm
range.
b) With an ohmmeter, the resistance of the loop created by the faulted conductor and an unfaulted
conductor connected together at the far end is measured.

If cable continuity and a low fault resistance exist, a dc bridge can be used to measure the distance to the fault.
If the continuity test shows an open circuit, a TDR should be used to locate the fault. (Note that in the past a
capacitance bridge would have been used instead of a TDR to locate open-circuit faults.)

7.2.13.2 DC bridge methods

7.2.13.2.1 Murray cridge method

The Murray bridge measures the distance to a low-resistance fault by joining one unfaulted conductor with
a faulted conductor, applying a dc voltage to the conductors, and adjusting two variable resistors until a
galvanometer placed across the joined conductors is nulled. (See Figure 22.) From the known cable lengths
and a ratio of adjusted variable resistors, the distance to the fault can be calculated. The Murray bridge method
can be applied to conductor-to-ground (metallic shield) faults, conductor-to-conductor faults, and also jacket
faults (metallic shield-to-ground faults). The method may be used where other TDR-based methods are
limited, such as for jacket faults, multi-branched cables, cables with corroded neutral, and cables with tape
shield.

Figure 22—Circuit diagram for Murray bridge method

where
R1 is the variable balance bridge resistor connected to the unfaulted cable (Ω)

44
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

R2 is the variable balance bridge resistor connected to the faulted cable (Ω)
R3 is the conductor resistance of the unfaulted cable plus the conductor resistance of the cable
from the far end of the faulted conductor to the fault (R3 = R3a + R3b + R3c) (Ω)
R4 is the conductor resistance of the faulted cable between the near end and the fault (Ω)

The bridge is balanced when Equation (5) is satisfied.

R1 R 2
= (5)
R3 R4

The value of the unknown resistance, R4, is proportional to the fault distance as shown in Equation (6).

R 2 ×R3
R4 = (6)
R1

For Murray bridge measurements, the calculation of distance-to-fault is obtained from Equation (7).

R2
L x = 2L (7)
R1 + R 2
where

L x is the fault distance from the near end to the fault (m or ft)
L is the length of the entire cable section, from near end to the far end (m or ft)
2L is the loop distance formed by two cable lengths

REQUIREMENTS. Even though modern fault-locating bridges often are microprocessor based and calculate
and display the distance to the fault in feet or as a percentage of the total cable length, it should be understood
that the measurements are often time consuming. Special attention should be given to these factors:

a) All bridge methods require at least one unfaulted conductor in addition to the faulted cable, unless the
measurement can be performed on both ends simultaneously (e.g., a cable on a reel or a URD loop
system).
b) Access to both cable ends is required.
c) Contact resistances and connecting wire resistance should be much less than the conductor resistance.
d) Variations in resistance of the faulted conductor should be considered.
e) Stray dc and ac currents in the ground and on the cable will affect the measurement.
f) An unstable fault resistance will affect the measurement.
g) The actual conductor length, not the “point-to-point above ground” cable length, should be known.
h) Multiple faults will distort the measurement.
i) The fault needs to be resistive—not a spark-gap type fault.
j) URD transformers need to be disconnected.

An effective pre-locating method optimizes the amount of time and work required to locate a fault or isolate a
faulted cable span.

45
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

RECOMMENDATION. Bridge techniques are excellent fault-locating tools after TDR-based techniques
have been exhausted. If the fault is a bolted fault or the fault resistance is low, a low-voltage bridge should
be used. If the fault has a high resistance value to ground, a) a high-voltage dc bridge can be used to establish
current flow and overcome the high resistance value of the fault, or b) a high-voltage burn set may first be used
to convert the fault to a lower resistance state.

Figure 23—Murray bridge method connection diagram for conductor-to-ground fault

locating

Figure 23 shows the classic connection diagram for a Murray bridge. It is directly applicable if the center
conductors have equal cross-sections. For unequal cross-sections of the unfaulted conductor, a conversion
factor may be used to calculate an equivalent loop length.

A modern Murray bridge offers automatic calculation of the fault distance based on entering of cable data such
as cable length, section length, and its cross-section, and the conductor material. The resulting measurement
may reach a high accuracy of greater than 0.5% of cable length.

The Murray bridge method has been successfully used for fault locating on long high-voltage, dc cable links
where only two main conductors are available.

7.2.13.2.2 Glaser bridge method

The Glaser bridge method is a variant where two unfaulted return conductors are used. This method offers
very accurate measuring results even when the unfaulted conductor size or resistance is different than the
faulted conductor.

46
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 24—Circuit diagram for Glaser bridge method

Figure 25—Glaser bridge method connection diagram for conductor-to-ground fault

locating

Figure 25 shows the classic connection diagram for a Glaser bridge.

For Glaser bridge measurements, the calculation of distance-to-fault is obtained from Equation (8).

R2
Lx = L (8)
R1 + R 2
where

L x is the fault distance from the near end to the fault (m or ft)
L is the length of the entire cable section, from near end to the far end (m or ft)
R 1 is the conductor resistance of the unfaulted cable plus the conductor resistance of the cable from the
far end of the faulted conductor to the fault (Ω)
R 2 is the conductor resistance of the faulted cable between the near end and the fault (Ω)

47
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

7.2.13.2.3 Murray bridge method for jacket fault locating

Both the Murray and Glaser bridge methods are commonly used for locating jacket faults. Since the fault
current returns through the ground in lieu of an adjacent metallic shield or conductor, the TDR method is not
applicable.

Figure 26—Murray bridge method connection diagram for jacket fault locating

Figure 26 shows the classic connection diagram of the Murray bridge for jacket fault locating. It is applicable
where the return metallic shields have equal cross-sections. This method is also useful for jacket fault locating
on long, high-voltage dc circuits, although the cable design is often sectionalized for jacket tests and fault
locating. This method offers the highest accuracy in the range of 0.5% of section length.

7.2.13.2.4 Glaser bridge method for jacket fault locating

Figure 27 shows the classic connection diagram of a Glaser bridge for jacket fault locating. It is applicable
even with unequal metallic shield cross-sections on the adjacent cables (e.g., K2 and G2). It is often used for
jacket fault locating on high-voltage cables where the center conductors are not accessible.

Figure 27—Glaser bridge method connection diagram for jacket fault locating

48
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 28—Alternate Glaser bridge method connection diagram for jacket fault locating

Figure 28 shows an alternate connection diagram of a Glaser bridge for jacket fault locating. The return loop
is formed by two center conductors. This method is preferably applied where two jackets are faulted; it is also
applicable with unequal return conductor cross-sections. Even with unequal cross-section of the return line,
the Glaser bridge may reach a highest accuracy of better than 0.5% of cable length.

7.2.13.3 Voltage drop method

7.2.13.3.1 General

Another version of bridge measurement is the voltage drop method, used to calculate the distance to the fault.
See Figure 29.

Figure 29—Connection of four-point voltage-drop measurement for conductor-to-shield

faults in ac systems

Instead of balancing the bridge, a constant current is fed into the branches of the bridge arrangement and the
voltage drop, over the particular section of the faulty wire, is measured. For the first voltage-drop measurement,
current is fed in at one end of the cable—the near end—followed by a second voltage-drop measurement
from the remote (far) cable end. For this procedure, two unfaulted auxiliary conductors are needed. By using
this four-point set-up, there is a reduced influence from the jumper at the remote end and connection leads.
Calculation of distance-to-fault is obtained from Equation (9).

49
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

VN
L N =L× (9)
VN +VF
where

LN is the distance from the beginning (i.e., the near end) to the fault (m or ft)
L is the length of the entire cable section, from the beginning to the remote end (m or ft)
VN is the voltage drop measured on the faulted cable, between the near end and the fault (V)
VF is the voltage drop measured via the unfaulted cable between the far end and the fault on the faulted
cable (V)

The advantage of the four-point voltage-drop method is that the auxiliary conductors can be totally different
conductor sizes/resistances than the faulted conductor. In case of very high-resistive faults, the accuracy is
reduced as the current through the fault is limited and impresses only a few µV voltage drop on the unfaulted
conductor. The measuring device should have a sufficiently high output voltage, high resolution, and good
noise filtering.

In the case of dc systems, only two conductors are available and a four-point measurement is not possible;
therefore, the following procedure is used. The constant current is fed only from one end and RN is obtained by
the measured VN and IN. See Figure 30. The distance-to-fault can be calculated by RN and the known specific
cable conductor resistance. It is important to use a temperature correction factor. A second measurement for
confirmation of the fault distance from the remote cable end is recommended.

Figure 30—Connection of three-point voltage drop measurement for dc systems

Calculation of distance-to-fault is obtained from Equation (10).

RN
L N =L× (10)
R total
where

L N is the distance from the beginning (i.e., the near end) to the fault (m or ft)
L is the length of the entire cable section, from the beginning to the remote end (m or ft)
R N is the resistance on the faulted cable, measured between the near end and the fault (Ω)
R total is the known specific conductor resistance of the entire length of cable, to be obtained from the
data sheets of the cable (Ω)

7.2.13.3.2 Voltage-drop method for jacket fault locating

The pre-location of jacket faults can also be easily done by using the voltage drop measurement method.
Figure 31 shows the connection diagram using two main conductors as auxiliary conductors.

50
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Figure 31—Voltage-drop method connection diagram for jacket fault locating

For the first voltage-drop measurement, current is fed to the shield of the faulty cable at one end of the cable—
the near end—followed by a second voltage drop measurement from the remote (far) cable end. By using
this four-point set-up, there is a reduced influence from the jumper at the remote end and connection leads
(Figure 31 only). Calculation of distance-to-jacket-fault is obtained from Equation (11).

VN
L N =L× (11)
VN +VF

In case the main conductors are not accessible to be used as auxiliary conductors (HV cable systems), the
shield of a parallel cable can be used. Variations in return conductor resistance as well as the jumper resistance
has to be considered for this application. Figure 32 shows the connection diagram.

Figure 32—Connection of four-point voltage-drop measurement for jacket fault pre-location

using a parallel shield as an auxiliary conductor

Calculation of distance-to-jacket-fault for this configuration is obtained from Equation (12).

VN
L N =2L× (12)
VN +VF

51
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

7.3 Tracing/locating/pinpointing methods

7.3.1 General

When tracing or locating a faulted cable or pinpointing a fault, a transmitter sends a signal into the cable.
A receiver senses the amplitude, frequency, changes in magnitude, or response of the transmitted signal. A
skilled person can interpret the measurements and identify cables, locate cable routes and depth of cables,
and pinpoint cable fault locations. Many different signals are used. They are classified as high voltage or
low voltage and audio frequency (tone), radio frequency or dc. The signals can be continuous, pulsed, or
high-voltage surges. The detection methods can be grouped into galvanically and magnetically coupled and
acoustic methods, as well as their combinations. Many methods are available and their successful use most
often depends on the operator’s skill. The following subclauses describe the principle of the major methods.

7.3.2 AC and DC current tracing

Tracing methods using ac or pulsed dc currents may well be the oldest cable fault-locating techniques. A low-
or high-voltage, ac source, or dc surge voltage source is connected between the faulted cable and earth ground.
Current will flow through the conductor, the fault, and back to the source through the parallel combination
of outer cable conductor and ground. An antenna placed directly above the cable will sense a magnetic field,
which is proportional to the magnitude of the current flowing toward the fault. Once the fault point is passed, a
drop in conductor current is detected. In a duct/manhole system, the method is excellent for verifying a faulted
cable span.

A variation is the metallic sheath pick method. A sensitive instrument (galvanometer) is used to measure the
direction and magnitude of the metallic sheath current. A reversal of the metallic sheath current’s direction
frames the fault.

The tracing current methods are very often used for long feeder circuits with multiple branches and when
transformers cannot be isolated. The ac or dc current sources are usually quite large, the sensing devices
specialized.

Both methods are very different in their approach.

a) Acoustic tracing methods are very popular since they require minimal training. The acoustic method
purely relies on picking up the noise from the thump and there is no systematic path to success.
b) Electromagnetic tracing methods are predictable and can be applied in a systematic manner, which
ultimately will locate the fault. They require an understanding of the outgoing current flow and the
return current flow and training is involved. Tracing the electromagnetic signal from either a surge
generator or pulsed current source, also referred to as “current chasing” or “ballistic pick-up,” is more
reliable compared to the acoustic method. One of the most important prerequisites required to trace
the electromagnetic signal is the network bonding quality, especially splice bonding in manholes.
With good bonding in place, two measurements can be done, the first one by placing the “horseshoe”
coil on the cable in the manhole and observing the direction and intensity of the magnetic signal
(will drop off in the manhole beyond the fault), and secondly measuring the metallic sheath current
with what are called “picks.” Provided there is good bonding in the manholes, the direction of the
metallic sheath current within the faulted section between the two closest manholes will be opposite.
The metallic sheath current method will clearly identify/confirm the faulted segment.

It was stated above that the tracer methods are time and labor intensive. When using the electromagnetic
signal method compared to the acoustic method, it is not required to open every manhole. Only the manholes
containing branches are opened in order to determine which branch shows active current flowing during the
operation of the surge generator or pulsed current source.

52
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

7.3.3 Audio and radio frequency methods

Audio (tone) and radio frequency tracing methods are very similar to ac or dc current tracing methods. A
frequency generator, typically in the range of 60 Hz to 200 kHz, is connected between the cable conductor and
metallic shield. A current path for the signal is provided by the conductor, fault, and metallic shield. Additional
paths exist through the earth. The magnetic field generated by the injected current is detected with a tuned,
directional antenna. Depending on the polarization of the antenna with respect to the cable route and cable,
either a null or peak signal is detected directly above the cable. The measurements of signal changes, especially
in the null reading, are used for splice locating, metallic shield corrosion detection, and the location of faults
which will not give an acoustic signal (i.e., will not “thump”).

7.3.4 Jacket fault locating

Jacket fault locating (often referred to as sheath fault location outside of North America), earth gradient, and
voltage gradient methods of fault locating can only be used on direct buried cables. A pulsed dc source—
often a hipot, burner, or a thumper in a low-energy configuration—forces a current through the fault and
surrounding ground back to the source. The current through the ground establishes an earth potential, which
can be measured with a voltmeter. The voltmeter indication changes polarity when one walks beyond the fault.
When the voltmeter probes are positioned equal distances from the fault, the indication is zero. Figure 33
demonstrates this method.

Figure 33—Jacket fault pinpointing on a cable with two jacket faults

The voltage probes are sensing the ground voltage potential. When approaching the fault, the indicator voltage
increases. Above the fault, the indicator voltage crosses the zero and indicates voltage reversal when passing
the fault. This method is easy to apply even on cables with multiple jacket faults.

53
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

7.3.5 Acoustic methods

Turning the thumper on and listening for the thump in the ground is the most popular pinpointing technique.
Traffic cones, shovel handles, stethoscopes, etc. have been used when searching for the elusive pop in the
ground. Geophones, directional acoustic detectors, and ground microphones facilitate fault pinpointing and
are preferred listening devices.

7.3.6 Coincidence methods

A capacitor (thumper) is discharged into a faulted cable. An electromagnetic detector traces the thumper pulse
down the cable. An acoustic detector detects the audible thump caused by the flashover. In the vicinity of the
fault, the magnetic transition wave is used to start a timer, and the acoustic signal to stop it. The measured
elapsed time is an indication of the distance to the fault. The operator is directly above the fault when the
elapsed time between flashover and thump is a minimum. Figure 34 demonstrates this method.

Figure 34—Coincidence method

The coincidence method combines the electromagnetic and the acoustic signal, offers accurate fault
pinpointing, and is also applicable for cables in conduits.

54
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Annex A
(informative)

Bibliography
Bibliographical references are resources that provide additional or helpful material but do not need to be
understood or used to implement this standard. Reference to these resources is made for informational use
only.

[B1] Accredited Standards Committee C2-2017, National Electrical Safety Code® (NESC®).6,7

[B2] Almonte, R. L., “URD cable fault locating for the 1990’s,” Forty-Second Annual Power Distribution
Conference, Austin, TX, 24 Oct. 1989.

[B3] Bascom, E. C. III, D. W. Von Dollen, and H. W. Ng, “Computerized underground cable fault locating
expertise,” Proceedings of IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conference, Chicago, IL, pp. 376–382,
Apr. 1994.

[B4] Bascom, E. C. III, M. J. von Herrmann, and T. Zhao, “Power cable failure modes and fault location
methods, practices and strategies,” Transactions of the IEEE T&D Conference, Apr. 2014.

[B5] Bawart, M., “Fault location on long submarine power cables and offshore wind farms,” IEEE PES
Insulated Conductors Committee, Pittsburgh, PA, 29 Apr. 2013.

[B6] Bawart, M., “Fault location on Australia’s longest HVDC submarine cable system, Basslink,” IEEE PES
Insulated Conductors Committee, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 6 Apr. 2016.

[B7] Bawart, M., and M. Marzinotto, “Fault location on long submarine power cables,” IEEE PES Insulated
Conductors Committee, St Petersburg, FL, 14 Nov. 2012.

[B8] Bawart, M., M. Marzinotto, and G. Mazzanti, “Challenge of fault location on long submarine cable
systems,” Jicable 9th International Conference on Insulated Power Cables, Versailles, France, June 2015.

[B9] Bawart, M., M. Marzinotto, and G. Mazzanti, “A deeper insight into fault location on long submarine
power cables,” B1-201. CIGRE, 2014.8

[B10] Bawart, M., M. Marzinotto, and G. Mazzanti, “Diagnosis and location of faults in submarine power
cables,” IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 24–37, 2016.

[B11] EPRI, “Underground cable fault location reference and application guide: 2017 update,” EPRI, vol.
3002010061, p. 21, November 2017.9

[B12] IEEE Std 4™, IEEE Standard for High-Voltage Testing Techniques.10,11

[B13] IEEE Std 80™, IEEE Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding.

6
National Electrical Safety Code and NESC are both registered trademarks and service marks of The Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Inc.
7
The NESC is available from The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers at http://​standards​.ieee​.org/​.
8
CIGRE publications are available from the Council on Large Electric Systems (http://​www​.e​-cigre​.org/​).
9
EPRI publications are available from the Electric Power Research Institute (http://​www​.epri​.com).
10
The IEEE standards or products referred to in Annex A are trademarks owned by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Incorporated.
11
IEEE publications are available from The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (http://​standards​.ieee​.org/​).

55
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

[B14] IEEE Std 141™, IEEE Recommended Practice for Electric Power Distribution for Industrial Plants
(IEEE Red Book™).

[B15] IEEE Std 400.1™, IEEE Guide for Field Testing of Laminated Dielectric, Shielded Power Cable
Systems Rated 5 kV and Above with High Direct Current Voltage.

[B16] IEEE Std 400.2™, IEEE Guide for Field Testing of Shielded Power Cable Systems Using Very Low
Frequency (VLF) (less than 1 Hz).

[B17] IEEE Std 1617™, IEEE Guide for Detection, Mitigation, and Control of Concentric Neutral Corrosion
in Medium-Voltage Underground Cables.

[B18] IEEE Std C37.114™, IEEE Guide for Determining Fault Location on AC Transmission and Distribution
Lines.

[B19] Jensen, C. F., C. L. Bak, and U. S. Gudmundsdottir, “Online travelling wave-based fault location on
crossbonded ac cables in underground transmission systems,” B1-210. CIGRE, 2014.

[B20] Kuffel, E., W. S. Zaengl, and J. Kuffel, High Voltage Engineering, Fundamentals, 2nd Ed. Oxford,
England: Pergamon Press, 2000.

[B21] Xie, F., S. Robson, A. Haddad, and H. Griffiths, “Travelling wave fault location methods in 11 kv multi-
branch distribution networks,” 19th International Symposium on High Voltage Engineering, Pilsen, Czech
Republic, Aug. 23–28, 2015.

56
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Annex B
(informative)

Cable system fault location in underground residential

distribution
One technique to troubleshoot underground residential distribution (URD) loops uses a self-contained,
portable, battery operated time domain reflectometer (TDR)/thumper device which enables technicians to
respond to a reported outage, isolate a faulted cable span or locate a fault with one or two capacitive discharge
surges, and quickly restore electrical service.

In a typical URD power outage, part of a development is without electrical service. Any number of transformers
may be affected by the outage.

To explain this technique of cable fault location, see Figure B.1. Assume transformer 1 (hook-up) is the most
convenient access point at which the test equipment can be connected. The cable end at transformer 5 is
parked, which is the open point in the circuit, and that is why it does not appear in the trace. Assume that a
cable fault exists at the cable end either below the transformer or in the elbow. Transformers and lightning
arresters need not be disconnected in the cable system to be tested.

Figure B.1—Example of a TDR display of a faulted URD power cable loop section

Using an arc reflection technique, the cable system signature is recorded; the open cable end appears as a
positive pulse deflection. A single high-voltage (HV) pulse is now discharged into the cable. When the fault
flashes over, the TDR will record the flashover as a temporary short circuit to ground; the typical signature of a
short circuit is a negative pulse deflection. A comparison of low-voltage and high-voltage traces indicates the
location of the fault where the two signatures depart from each other. The distance to the fault is displayed by
the TDR as 550 m, as shown in the example trace in Figure B.1.

On the primary side, transformers act as very large shunt impedance with respect to the HV surge and do
not interfere with the measurement. On the secondary side, the transformed surge voltage will be small in
comparison to the nominal ac voltage.

In this technique of cable fault location, customer service is restored in a short time with minimum work-
hours and the least amount of stress on customer and utility equipment. Checking fault indicators, isolating

57
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

transformers, and disconnecting lightning arresters are unnecessary. A faulted cable section or the fault can
be identified with one or two thumps. Cable section replacement or fault repair can be performed when work
schedules permit.

58
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Annex C
(informative)

Fault location in network feeders

C.1 Fault tracing
Tracing ac or pulsed dc currents along cable routes to locate a fault requires access to the cable along the cable
route. Manholes and vaults are entered and cables are identified. This is very time intensive. Measurements
on a shielded cable are made on both sides of a ground bond. A current coupler is placed around the shielded
cable to measure the sum of conductor and metallic sheath currents. The current in the metallic sheath going to
ground is also separately measured. By comparing the sum of the conductor and metallic sheath current with
the metallic sheath current measurement, the field operators can determine whether the fault location is further
along the cable.

The use of an electromagnetic detector with digital signal processing instrumentation to improve the sensitivity
of the equipment may allow tracing a capacitive (thumper) discharge from the surface along the cable route.
This would reduce the time required to identify the probable fault location.

When locating a fault on a network feeder, the field operator should calibrate the test set with respect to the
available thumper discharge or fault flashover voltage of the cable being tested near the substation. Using a
feeder map, the operator determines the location of the feeder branches. Measurements are then made near
the Y (T) branch points. A comparison of these measurements with the original calibration measurement
determines if the fault is ahead, behind, or associated with a different branch. Good feeder bonding and
grounding are necessary for this method to work. The method requires that there are no metallic ducts and a
thumper capacitance that is larger than the feeder capacitance.

C.2 Time domain reflectometer (TDR)–assisted fault location

In order to use TDR-assisted cable fault location on network feeders it is essential that an optimum impedance
match between high-voltage (HV) test cable and the faulted cable to be tested exists. Before using the TDR/
thumper/burner combination for fault locating network feeder circuits, base line feeder signatures should be
recorded with the TDR in order to establish hook-up requirements, propagation velocities, and network feeder
landmarks such as Y (T) splices and various cable ends. Figure C.1 shows an example.

Figure C.1—TDR signature of a feeder circuit

59
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

A good impedance match at the hook-up point allows the TDR pulse to enter and exit the cable to be tested.
Four splice signatures are clearly visible. One Y (T) splice is identified 724 m from the hook-up point, a second
Y (T) splice at 887 m. The furthest distance, 1743 m, on the feeder is verified by open and short-circuiting a
cable end. Should a failure occur on this feeder section, a reasonable confidence level will exist, therefore the
fault can be located using a TDR technique. The pre-recorded cable signature can be made available to the
fault locator as an addition to the feeder map.

NOTE—Training courses, manufacturers’ application notes, and TDR operating manuals may be consulted for impedance
matching when fault locating shielded power cable systems.

In Figure C.2 an open cable end is visible at 2666 m. A 12 kV thumper discharge into the cable causes a fault
flashover at approximately 1554 m from the hook-up point. Since the location of a Y (T) splice, 1328 m from
the hook-up site, is known, the distance to the fault is measured as 225 m from the Y (T) splice location. The
exact fault location will be verified with electromagnetic, acoustic, or coincidence locators.

Figure C.2—TDR signature of a fault flashover in a network feeder circuit

60
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Annex D
(informative)

Fault location on cable systems with metallic shield corrosion

When metallic shield corrosion is suspected in a cable system, a time domain reflectometery (TDR) signature
of the cable will help establish severity and extent of the corrosion problem.

Figure D.1—Signature of a cable system with transformers, splice, and metallic shield
corrosion

In Figure D.1, two areas of metallic shield corrosion can be seen. In the cable section between transformer 1
and transformer 2, the corrosion seems negligible; a splice at 94 m and transformer 2 at 175 m can be
identified. Between transformer 1 and transformer 2, a cable fault could quickly be located with a thumper/
TDR technique. This is not so in the cable section between transformer 2 and transformer 3. Metallic shield
corrosion is severe. Transformer 3 is not visible in the reflectogram. A thumper/TDR technique may work if
the fault is within 56 m from transformer 2, but most probably not if the fault is beyond 81 m from transformer
2. Therefore, the fault-locating equipment should now be moved to the transformer 3 location to establish the
extent of corrosion from transformer 3 toward transformer 2.

If no flashover fault can be recorded between the conductor and the remaining metallic shield, it should be
assumed that the fault discharges into the surrounding earth. Audio (tone) frequency tracing and step voltage
techniques may have to be used to locate the fault. Fault excavation based solely on acoustic measurements is
not recommended.

61
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 IEEE Std 1234-2019
IEEE Guide for Fault-Locating Techniques on Shielded Power Cable Systems

Annex E
(informative)

Recommended minimum of fault-locating tools

Cable fault locator consisting of:

— Digital time domain reflectometer (TDR) with cable signature storage

— High-voltage (HV) coupler
— Thumper

Insulation resistance/continuity tester

Cable tracer and locator

Electromagnetic/acoustic listening device

Measuring wheel

62
Copyright
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte © 2019
Biblioteca. IEEE. All
Downloaded onrights reserved.
May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE
standards.ieee.org
Phone: +1 732 981 0060 Fax: +1 732 562 1571
© IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Del Norte Biblioteca. Downloaded on May 22,2024 at 14:36:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.