baseline misc

7/27/2019 Baseline Misc

1/134

ELECTRICANDMAGNETICFIELDBASELINESURVEY&MODELING

INTERIOR TO LOWER MAINLAND TRANSMISSION REINFORCEMENT PROJECT

BCTCEMF01107, Version 1.0

Prepared for:

BCTransmissionCorporationVancouver, Canada

Prepared by:

AdiseshuNyshadham,Ph.D.

DVT Solutions Inc.

Suite 202, 3740B 11A Street NE

Calgary, AB, Canada T2E 6M6

Email: [email protected]

29 January 2008

DVT Solutions Inc.Specialized in End-To-End System Services

Appendix Q


2/134

Page 1

DVT Solutions Inc.Specialized in End-To-End System Services 29 January 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6

2.0 INTRODUCTION 7

3.0 ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS (EMF) 8

4.0 EVALUATION SITES 9

5.0 METHODOLOGY - FIELD MEASUREMENTS 10

6.0 METHODOLOGY - MODELING 12

7.0 VALIDATION OF ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS MEASUREMENTS 198.0 RESULTS OF ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS MODELING 83

9.0 RESULTS SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 128

10.0 REFERENCES 131

11.0 GLOSSARY OF TERMS 132

Appendix Q


3/134

Page 2


LIST OF TABLES4.1: Study Area Information for Measurements and Modeling 10

5.1: Electric and Magnetic Fields Test Specifications at a Test Location (within ROW) 12

6.1: Modeling Parameters for Study Locations and Circuits 18

6.2: Annual Average Load Parameters for Circuits 18

A2-BSEGMENT

7.1.1: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for A2B Segment: 240m Lateral Profile 24

7.1.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for A2B Segment: 240m Lateral Profile 26



7.1.5: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for A2B Segment: Longitudinal Profile 32

7.1.6: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for A2B Segment: Longitudinal Profile 32

G-HSEGMENT

7.2.1: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for GH Segment: 122m Lateral Profile 37

7.2.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for GH Segment: 122m Lateral Profile 397.2.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for GH Segment: Longitudinal Profile 41

7.2.4: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for GH Segment: Longitudinal Profile 41

J-KSEGMENT

7.3.1: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for JK Segment: 193m Lateral Profile 46

7.3.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for JK Segment: 193m Lateral Profile 48

7.3.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for JK Segment: Longitudinal Profile 50

7.3.4: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for JK Segment: Longitudinal Profile 50

P-QMile109SEGMENT

7.5.1: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: 231m Lateral Profile 56

7.5.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: 231m Lateral Profile 587.5.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: Longitudinal Profile 60

7.5.4: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: Longitudinal Profile 60

R-SSEGMENT

7.6.1: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for RS Segment: 24m Lateral Profile 65

7.6.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for RS Segment: 24m Lateral Profile 67

7.6.3: Modeling of Magnetic Field for RS Segment: Longitudinal Profile 69

7.6.4: Modeling of Electric Field for RS Segment: Longitudinal Profile 69

U-VSEGMENT

7.7.1: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for UV Segment: 237m Lateral Profile 74

7.7.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for UV Segment: 237m Lateral Profile 767.7.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for UV Segment: 145m Lateral Profile 78

7.7.4: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for UV Segment: 145m Lateral Profile 80

7.7.5: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for UV Segment: Longitudinal Profile 82

7.7.6: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for UV Segment: Longitudinal Profile 82

9.1: Predicted Magnetic Field levels with Annual Average Load 129

9.2: Predicted Electric Field levels with Annual Average Load 130

Appendix Q


4/134

Page 3


LIST OF FIGURES

6.1: Tree dimension 15

6.2: Magnetic Field Calculation 16

A2-B

SEGMENT

7.1.1: Top and Side Views of the A2B Study Location 21





7.1.6: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for A2B Segment: Longitudinal Profile 31

7.1.7: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for A2B Segment: Longitudinal Profile 33

G-HSEGMENT

7.2.1: Top and Side Views of the GH Study Location 34

7.2.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for GH Segment: 122m Lateral Profile 36

7.2.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for GH Segment: 122m Lateral Profile 387.2.4: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for GH Segment: Longitudinal Profile 40

7.2.5: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for GH Segment: Longitudinal Profile 42

J-KSEGMENT

7.3.1: Top and Side Views of the JK Study Location 43

7.3.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for JK Segment: 193m Lateral Profile 45

7.3.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for JK Segment: 193m Lateral Profile 47

7.3.4: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for JK Segment: Longitudinal Profile 49

7.3.5: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for JK Segment: Longitudinal Profile 51

P-QMile101SEGMENT

7.4.1: Top View of the PQ 101 Study Location 52

P-QMile109SEGMENT

7.5.1: Top and Side Views of the PQ 109 Study Location 53

7.5.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: 231m Lateral Profile 55

7.5.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: 231m Lateral Profile 57

7.5.4: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: Longitudinal Profile 59

7.3.5: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for PQ Mile 109 Segment: Longitudinal Profile 61

R-SSEGMENT7.6.1: Top and Side Views of the RS Study Location 62

7.6.2: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for RS Segment: 24m Lateral Profile 64

7.6.3: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for RS Segment: 24m Lateral Profile 667.6.4: Modeling of Magnetic Field for RS Segment: Longitudinal Profile 68

7.6.5: Modeling of Electric Field for RS Segment: Longitudinal Profile 70

U-VSEGMENT7.7.1: Top and Side Views of the UV Study Location 71



Appendix Q


5/134

Page 4


LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)



7.7.6: Measurement vs. Modeling of Magnetic Field for UV Segment: Longitudinal Profile 81

7.7.7: Measurement vs. Modeling of Electric Field for UV Segment: Longitudinal Profile 83

A2-BSEGMENT

8.1.1: Top and End View for the Study Location A2B Segment 85

8.1.2: Predicted Magnetic Field of A2B Segment for lowest sag Lateral Profile (225m) 87

8.1.3: Predicted Electric Field of A2B Segment for lowest sag Lateral Profile (225m) 88

G-HSEGMENT8.2.1: Top and End View for the Study Location GH Segment 89

8.2.2: Predicted Magnetic Field of GH Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (289m) 91

8.2.3: Predicted Electric Field of GH Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (289m) 92

I-JSEGMENT

8.3.1: Top and End View for the Study Location IJ Segment 93

8.3.2: Predicted Magnetic Field of IJ Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (631m) 95

8.3.3: Predicted Electric Field of IJ Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (631m) 96

J-KSEGMENT8.4.1: Top and End View for the Study Location JK Segment 97

8.4.2: Predicted Magnetic Field of JK Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (355m) 99

8.4.3: Predicted Electric Field of JK Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (355m) 100

P-QMile101SEGMENT8.5.1: Top View for the Study Location PQ Mile 101 Segment 101

8.5.2: Top and End View for the Study Location PQ Mile 101 Looking towards Tower 7/3 1028.5.3: Predicted Magnetic Field of 3L2 circuit at lowest sag Lateral Profile (226m from 7/3) 105

8.5.4: Predicted Electric Field of 3L2 circuit at lowest sag Lateral Profile (226m from 7/3) 106

8.5.5: Predicted Magnetic Field of 3L2 circuit Longitudinal Profile (28.8m from 3L2) 107

8.5.6: Predicted Electric Field of 3L2 circuit Longitudinal Profile (28.8m from 3L2) 108

8.5.7: Predicted Magnetic Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 10m from 101/1 109

8.5.8: Predicted Electric Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 10m from 101/1 110

8.5.9: Predicted Magnetic Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 100m from 101/1 111

8.5.10: Predicted Electric Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 100m from 101/1 112

8.5.11: Predicted Magnetic Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 270m from 101/1, w/o 3L2 113

8.5.12: Predicted Magnetic Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 270m from 101/1, w/ 3L2 114

8.5.13: Predicted Electric Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 270m from 101/1, w/o 3L2 115

8.5.14: Predicted Electric Field of PQ Mile 101 segment Lateral Profile, 270m from 101/1, w/ 3L2 116

P-QMile109SEGMENT8.6.1: Top and End View for the Study Location PQ Mile 109 Segment 117

8.6.2: Predicted Magnetic Field of PQ Mile 109 Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (215m) 119

8.6.3: Predicted Electric Field of PQ Mile 109 Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (215m) 120

Appendix Q


6/134

Page 5


LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)

R-SSEGMENT8.7.1: Top and End View for the Study Location RS Segment 121

8.7.2: Predicted Magnetic Field of RS Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (83m) 123

8.7.3: Predicted Electric Field of RS Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (83m) 124

U-VSEGMENT8.8.1: Top and End View for the Study Location UV Segment 125

8.8.2: Predicted Magnetic Field of UV Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (152m) 127

8.8.3: Predicted Electric Field of UV Segment at lowest sag Lateral Profile (152m) 128

Appendix Q


7/134

Page 6


1.0 Executive Summary

Electric and Magnetic Fields measurements are performed at seven study locations: A2B:

PrincetonMerritt HWY 97C (part of AB segment) , GH: Spuzzum , JK: South of Yale, PQ:

Harrison Hot Springs, PQ: Chehalis, RS: Mission, east of Stave Lake and UV: Westwood Plateau.

The site specific Electric and Magnetic Fields models are developed for all seven study locations

and overall are found to be accurate within +2% to 1.3% for Magnetic Field models and +8.0% to

9.7% for Electric Field models.

Using these models, the Electric and Magnetic Fields are calculated for ten locations to determine

the predicted levels using annual average line loads of fiscal 200607 for existing circuits, the

annual average line loads of 201415 with the proposed 5L83 circuit, and the annual average line

loads of 202627 with the proposed 5L83 circuit reaching its maximum load capacity.

The highest Magnetic Field levels within the ROW are found to be at the JK segment (South of

Yale) study location for fiscal 200607: 145.61mG, fiscal 201415: 131.69mG and fiscal 202627:

144.81mG. At the RS segment (Mission East of Stave Lake) the highest Magnetic Field levels at

the edge of the ROW are observed for fiscal 200607: 38.57mG, fiscal 201415:30.06mG and fiscal

202627:35.96mG.

At one hundred meters from the edge of the ROW, the Magnetic Field levels are reduced

significantly for all study locations and the level range is observed to be 0.68 to 3.68mG.

The PQ Mile 101 Harrison Hot Springs study location is unique to the others because there is a

line transposition and a circuit (3L2) crossing under the existing 5L82 circuit. For this special

case, the Magnetic Field levels are observed to be highest at the lowest sag point under the

conductor bundles and within ROW. However, at the 270m lateral crosssection of 5L82, with theresultant effect of 3L2, the Magnetic Field levels are significantly higher from the south edge of the

ROW to 100m. The modeled Magnetic Field values are between 11.10 to 16.0 mG.

The highest Electric Field levels within the ROW are found at the JK segment (South of Yale) study

location for fiscal 200607:15.25kV/m, fiscal 201415:15.70kV/m, and fiscal years 202627:

16.3kV/m. For segment PQ Mile 109 (Chehalis), at the lowest sag point, the highest Electric Field

levels at the edge of the ROW are observed for fiscal 200607:3.28kV/m, fiscal 201415 3.38kV/m

and fiscal years 202627:3.53 kV/m.

At one hundred meters from the edge of the ROW, the Electric Field levels are reduced

significantly for all study locations except PQ Mile 101 and the level range is observed to be0.01kV/m to 0.16kV/m.

For the PQ Mile 101 Harrison Hot Springs study location, the Electric Field levels are observed to

be highest at the lowest sag point under the conductor bundle and within ROW. However, at the

270m lateral crosssection for 5L82, with the resultant effect of 3L2, the Electric Field levels are

significantly higher from the south edge of the ROW to 100m. The modeled Electric Field values

are between 1.12 to 1.39kV/m.

Appendix Q


8/134

Page 7


2.0 Introduction

The British Columbia Transmission Corporation (BCTC) is a provincial Crown corporation

responsible for planning, managing, operating and maintaining most of British Columbias

electrical power transmission and its interconnections with the larger North American grid.

BCTC has initiated environmental studies to assess the potential effects of the construction and

operation of a new 500kilovolt (kV) overhead single circuit steel tower (SCST) high voltage

electric transmission line from the Nicola Substation (NIC), near Merritt, to the Meridian

Substation (MDN), near Coquitlam[1]. The ILM Transmission Project (the Project) would be

approximately 240 km in length, and would parallel and adjoin an existing transmission line right

ofway (ROW) for most of the distance. Approximately 30 km of the line would require entirely

new rightofway. The transmission line and associated facilities would be operated and

maintained by BCTC and owned by BC Hydro.

Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF) are assessed for baseline conditions, and with respect to the

proposed project components are based on the results of measurement, modeling and simulation.

The activities which are undertaken during the Electric and Magnetic Fields Assessment include

the following:

Characterizing the existing environment to describe the existing baseline conditions, including:

o determining through measurement Electric and Magnetic Fields levels associated with

existing sources, including the existing 500 kV transmission lines located in the vicinity of

the Transmission Corridor;

o determining through modeling Electric and Magnetic Fields levels associated with existing

sources, including the existing 500 kV transmission lines located in the vicinity of the

Transmission Corridor based on typical day load data, fiscal 200607 annual average load

data (existing sources);o comparing modeled Electric and Magnetic Fields levels due to typical day load data with

measured Electric and Magnetic Fields levels;

Determining through modeling potential changes in the Electric and Magnetic Fields levels for

the ILM option through modeling using 200607 annual average data (existing sources), fiscal

201415 annual average load data (includes the new line) and fiscal 202627 annual average

load data (includes the new line).

KeyAssumptions:

The Electric and Magnetic Fields baseline survey and modeling assessment described in this

report are based on the following assumptions:

A new 500 kV overhead single circuit high voltage electric transmission line will beconstructed between Nicola Substation near Merritt, BC and the Meridian Substation in

Coquitlam, BC;

The proposed new overhead transmission line, some 240 km in length, will follow existing

electrical transmission rightsofway for approximately 70% of its length (168 km);

Sections of the existing rightofway would need to be widened over a linear distance totalling

approximately 70 km, including acquiring about 30 km of new statutory rightofway;

In addition to the new transmission line, the Project will include:

Appendix Q


9/134

Page 8


o a new 500 kV single circuit termination at NIC including line termination structure,

circuit breakers, 122.5MVAr of reactive compensation, and associated equipment

within the existing substation boundaries;

o a new 500 kV single circuit termination at MDN including line termination structure,

circuit breakers, and associated equipment within the existing substation boundaries;

ando A 500kV series compensation station involving either an expansion of the existing

American Creek or Chapmans capacitor station or the addition of a new capacitor

station at Ruby Creek, or the addition of a new capacitor station at some other point

along the transmission corridor.

Measurement at the selected site locations are performed using the methods and requirements

described in IEEE Standard 6441994[2] and are performed at one lateral crosssection and

one longitudinal crosssection within the right of way;

Only short term Electric and Magnetic Field assessments through measurements and modeling

are considered in this study;

Potential Electric and Magnetic Fieldsrelated impacts during the construction phase will not

be considered in this study.

3.0 Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMF)

Electric and Magnetic Fields will be generated by overhead transmission lines during its normal

operation. The Electric and Magnetic Fields levels along and in the vicinity of the Project corridor

are affected by the current and voltages of the transmission line. The Electric and Magnetic Fields

levels are sensitive to such variables as operating current and voltages, cable geometry, tower

geometry, conductor type, nearby obstacles, and vegetation.

Electric and Magnetic Fields are invisible lines of force surrounding any wire carrying electricity.They are produced by all household appliances, electric tools, household wiring and power lines.

AC (alternating current) transmission lines produce Electric and Magnetic Fields mainly in the

power frequency of 60Hz.

Electric Field from a power line is caused by the voltage on the conductor, while Magnetic Field is

caused by the electric current flowing through the conductor. The voltage sets up electrical

charges on a conductor, which in turn produce an Electric Field around the conductor. The

electrical current produces a Magnetic Field around the conductor. Since the voltage on a power

line remains more or less constant with time, changes to the power or load demand during a day

will result in changes to the current, and hence the Magnetic Field.

Electric Field increases with an increase in the conductor voltage, while Magnetic Field increases

with an increase in the conductor current. The maximum Electric and Magnetic Fields levels occur

on the ROW, approximately below the conductor at the point where it sags closest to the ground.

The point of maximum sag is usually in the middle of a span between two transmission structures

assuming that the towers are of same height, the bases of the two towers are at the same elevation

and the terrain is flat. The Electric and Magnetic Fields levels decrease rapidly with increasing

distance from a transmission line. Electric Field is easily blocked by vegetation, buildings or other

Appendix Q


10/134

Page 9


obstacles, while Magnetic Field is not significantly affected by most of these objects. Electric Field

is generally measured and expressed in kilovolts per meter (kV/m), while Magnetic Field is

expressed in milligauss (mG) or microteslas (T), where 1 T = 10 mG.

Electric and Magnetic Fields are vectors. The combined Electric and Magnetic Fields levels from

two or more circuits must be summed together vectorially, and not arithmetically. Depending onthe field directions, the vector sum can produce combined levels that are greater or smaller than

those produced by one circuit alone.

4.0 Evaluation Sites

The Electric and Magnetic Field measurements and modeling study will assess the Electric and

Magnetic Field levels within and around populated areas near the proposed overhead

transmission lines. The typical sites where the studies could be performed are within the ROW of

selected sites, residential areas, campgrounds, hospitals, schools, daycares, highways, seniors or

nursing homes, rail lines and pipelines.

The Electric and Magnetic Fields levels along and in the vicinity of the Project corridor are affected

by the current and voltages of the transmission line as well as the parameters related to tower and

cable geometry, conductor type, soil properties, terrain conditions, nearby obstacles, vegetation

etc.

The study areas shown in Table 4.1 below are selected based on the information available that

was related to the existence of features and components of the sociocommunity. The scope of the

proposed study is limited to the modeling of Electric and Magnetic Fields levels at all these study

areas and measurement of Electric and Magnetic Fields levels at nine locations in the seven studyareas.

Table4.1:StudyAreaInformationforMeasurementsandModeling

The rationale for the selection of these study areas for the Electric and Magnetic Fields assessment

is based primarily on a consideration of the existence of features and components along the

Appendix Q


11/134

Page 10


proposed overhead transmission line, as well as having representative sites for different

configurations of the new transmission line in combination with existing transmission lines. The

Electric and Magnetic Field study area boundaries will be limited to the ROW limits of the selected

crosssections based on the guidelines provided by national and international standards [23].

Modeling and simulation are performed to estimate the Electric and Magnetic Fields levels at the

selected study areas and are compared with field measurements. The Electric and Magnetic Field

modeling studies presented in this report address typical and worstcase transmission system

operation scenarios which will include typical day load conditions which will be used to validate

measured field levels at the selected site locations, fiscal 200607 annual average load conditions

(with existing sources), fiscal 201415 annual average load conditions with new line option, fiscal

201415 and with fiscal 202627 annual average load conditions with new line option (when the

line is expected to reach its maximum capacity). The load data that is used for modeling Electric

and Magnetic Fields from the existing sources as well as from the new transmission line is

reviewed jointly with BCTC for data validation.

5.0 Methodology - Field Measurements

The primary purpose of the field assessment is to measure the Electric and Magnetic Fields

generated by overhead power lines using a standard procedure [23]. See Table 5.1 for Electric

and Magnetic Fields test specifications and test points to be applied to typical segments during

field testing.

Electric and Magnetic Field measurements are performed in the freebody configuration using

Enertech EMDEX II Electric and Magnetic Field Survey meters. The Enertech EMDEX II is an

isotropic Magnetic Field meter that also measures and records single axis Electric Field strength.The Magnetic Field measurements can be made in either stationary locations or with a

measurement wheel to provide field vs. distance measurements. The Electric and Magnetic Field

measurements in this study are performed in stationary locations with the device mounted to a

nonconductive tripod.

At each study location the measurements are performed within the area enclosed by two towers

and their respective ROW. After the initial survey of the study location, at a minimum one lateral

and one longitudinal test lines are identified to perform the Electric and Magnetic Field

measurements. The selection of a lateral test line (LTL) is based on the lowest sag information

available from BCTC Engineering, as well as the height measurement data gathered using a Leica

DISTO A5 laser height meter at the study location. The longitudinal test line is selected under thecenter conductor bundle unless terrain conditions under this bundle are not favorable. The

longitudinal test line is selected based on the preliminary modeling performed for each study

location.

Appendix Q


12/134

Page 11


Table5.1:ElectricandMagneticFieldsTestSpecifications(withinROW)

The lateral test line is marked to identify test points at every two meters (2m) under the

transmission line conductor bundles as well as at every five meters (5m) beyond the outer

conductor bundles on both sides of the ROW. On a lateral test line, the test points extend to 50m

(or up to the maximum physically accessible limit) beyond the outer conductor bundles on each

side of the ROW. A total of 11 equally spaced test points are identified along and under the center

conductor bundle between the two towers (or up to the maximum physically accessible limit).

A long term test location is identified under the center conductor bundle between two longitudinal

test points to measure and log the Electric and Magnetic Fields continuously during the entire test

period. These measurements are performed using a second Enertech EMDEX II Electric and

Magnetic Field Survey meter. Temperature, humidity and barometric pressure are also logged

continuously for the entire duration of the field measurements using a T&D Corporations Thermo

Recorder TR73U data logger with measurement accuracies for Barometric Pressure: 1.5hPa, for

Temperature: Average 0.3oC and for Humidity: 5%RH.

At each test point the Electric and Magnetic Field was measured for a minimum period of 3

minutes, with all the data time stamped using the local time. The Electric Field data is collected

repeatedly every 5 seconds during the 3 minute minimum time period. Magnetic Field data iscollected repeatedly every 3 seconds during this time period. The Magnetic Field measurements

are performed at all the test points in both the lateral and longitudinal test lines. After completion

of the Magnetic Field measurements, Electric Field measurements are performed at all test points

in a test line. At each test point and for each field, the height of the center conductor bundle is

measured using a Leica Geosystems DISTO A5 laser height meter with an accuracy of 1.5mm,

carefully recording the local time of these measurements. At each test point, the ground elevation

Appendix Q


13/134

Page 12


is measured, using CanMeasure NAL 20 survey automatic level meter having a leveling accuracy

of 1.25cm, relative to the test point under the center conductor bundle on the lateral test line.

The key precautions followed during the field measurements to minimize measurement

uncertainty are as follows:

At each test point the measurements are performed over a 3 minute window and the local time

is recorded on the data sheet during the measurements to facilitate later review of the datatogether with the recorded substation line voltage and load data;

Distance between operator and Enertech EMDEX II meter is maintained at a minimum of 3m to

minimize any possible data errors due to proximity effect;

Observer is located in the region of the lowest field strength while performing the Electric

Field measurements;

Measurements are performed to obtain the maximum Electric Field levels;

The distance between the meter and permanent objects is maintained at ~3 meters or more to

ensure sufficient measurement accuracy of the ambient perturbed field. In the case that

objects are closer, corrections were made to the measured data to account for the shielding

effect; The distance between the Enertech EMDEX II meter and permanent magnetic objects should

not be less than 1 m in order to accurately measure the ambient perturbed field;

Measurements are performed at a height of 1m above the ground level.

The Enertech EMDEX II meter was factory calibrated to provide a typical accuracy of +/1% [4] for

Magnetic Field and +/4% for Electric Field [5].

The Enertech EMDEX II is an isotropic Magnetic Field meter that also measures and records single

axis Electric Field strength. The Magnetic Field measurements can be made in either stationary

locations or with a measurement wheel to provide field vs. distance measurements. The Electric

Field measurements will be performed in stationary locations with the device mounted to a nonconductive tripod and has an independently determined relative error of 3%[6]. To minimize

measurement uncertainty, the Enertech EMDEX II meter was verified before it was placed in use

for the first time using a 4 square coil system of equal size designed by Merritt et al.[7] with

reported uniformity accuracy of better than 0.2% for the size of a 30cm cube. When it is found

that the test meter is performing within the factory specified accuracy, it is subsequently used for

Electric and Magnetic Field measurements. The EMDEX II meter is reverified using the 4 square

coil system to verify its performance within the factory specified accuracy after the completion of

field measurements at a given study location.

6.0 Methodology - Modeling

The EMFWorkstation 2.51 from Enertech Consultants is a modeling and simulation tool used forElectric and Magnetic Fields calculations and complemented by inhouse modeling expertise using

SES Enviro 2006, MATLAB and MATHCAD. Enertech Consultants has licensed the

EMFWorkstation from the EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). The EMFWorkstation

provides a tool to model Electric and Magnetic Fields produced by electric power lines and

substations as well as modeling the exposure to these fields. In the EMFWorkstation, several EPRI

EMF programs, reference materials, and utilities/tools are combined into a single workstation

environment. The EMFWorkstation package includes EXPOCALC, RESICALC, and other modules.

Appendix Q


14/134

Page 13


EXPOCALC3.5[8-9]

The EXPOCALC 3.5 module calculates Electric and Magnetic Fields over a two dimensional area. It

has the unique ability to perform Electric Field shielding calculations from objects such as

transmission towers, buildings and trees.

ElectricFieldComputationalMethod

The Electric Field computational method used in EXPOCALC is based on the twodimensional

charge simulation method. The general relationship used to calculate the charges on a

multiconductor system is presented in matrix form in Eq. 6.1:

[Q] = [P]-1[V] (6.1)

Where: [Q] is a column vector of the linear charge on each conductor;[V] is a column vector of the potentials of the conductors;[P]-1is the inverted matrix of the Maxwell potential coefficients of the conductors.

A set of image conductors is used with charges opposite those of the transmission line. The actual

conductors and their images are characterized by real and imaginary voltages and diameters. Forbundled conductors, a single conductor with an equivalent diameter is used.

The Electric Field vector is characterized as a rotating ellipse. The Electric Field calculations used

in EXPOCALC to determine the maximum value of this rotating ellipse are at 1 m above ground,

which is the IEEE [2] recommended measurement location.

In this method, the following assumptions are made:

The earth is a perfect conductor;

There is no free charge in space;

The permittivity of air is equal to free space permittivity;

The ground plane is flat; The conductors are infinitely long and parallel to the ground;

The ground plane is replaced by parallel image conductors;

There is no shielding by objects.

ModelingwithObjectShieldEffect(RowofTrees)

Grounded objects (like a tree or row of trees) can significantly lower the Electric Field by means of

shielding. To account for the shielding effect in EXPOCALC, the algorithm uses the following

general form in Eq. 6.2:

Es=Eu-KE0 (6.2)

Where: Es = Electric Field at a point with correction for shielding;Eu=unperturbed field at the point without any shielding effects;K =shielding factor (accounts with distance of shielding object and object type and

dimensions);

E0= Electric Field that would have existed at center of shielding object.

Appendix Q


15/134

Page 14


Figure6.1:Treedimension

The shielding factor K for a row of trees in Eq. 6.3:

(6.3)

Where: h =height to center of crown;r=radius of crown (w/2);x =distance from the tree.

MagneticFieldcomputationalmethod

The Magnetic Field of a line is produced by the current through the line. The Magnetic Field of

transmission lines is calculated using a twodimensional analysis assuming parallel lines over a

flat earth. For many purposes, it is entirely adequate to consider conductors in free space withoutany images, as this often gives a closer approximation to ground level fields than assuming a

perfectly conducting earth

The basic equation for calculating the Magnetic Field of a long, straight wire is derived from

Ampere's Law and given in Eq. 6.4:

H = i/(2r) (6.4)Where: H = Magnetic Field (A/m);

i = value of electric current in wire (Amperes);r= distance between wire and point of interest (meters).

The fundamental unit for the Magnetic Field intensity, H, is the Ampere per meter (A/m). To use

the magnetic flux density, B in milligauss (mG), the relationship between H and B is given in Eq.(65).

B = H (65)

Where: B = Magnetic Flux Density (Gauss);H = Magnetic Field (A/m);

= Permeability constant used for both air and ground (4 x 107Henry/m).

(Note: an additional constant (106) is also included in this term for the conversion to mG.)

)h

ln()h

x(

K2

1

2

2

2

+

=

Appendix Q


16/134

Page 15


As with the Electric Field calculation in EXPOCALC, the maximum calculated value of Magnetic

Field is returned to the program.

In this method, the following assumptions are made:

The earth is a perfect conductor;

The ground plane is flat; The conductors are infinitely long and parallel to the ground;

There is no shielding by objects.

SUBCALC2.0[10]

SUBCALC 2.0 models the Magnetic Field in and around transmission lines, as well as transmission

and distribution substations. In addition to transmission lines, primary distribution lines, and

underground cables, substation equipment such as buses, circuit breakers, power transformers,

air core reactors/wave traps and capacitor banks can be included as part of the model for

calculating Magnetic Fields.

In SUBCALC 2.0, the Magnetic Field of transmission lines is calculated using a threedimensionalanalysis and it is able to model crossing lines over a flat earth. The program allows the results to

be viewed as 3D and contour maps. Profile plots can also be used which show the magnitude and

phase angle of the Magnetic Field components along a userdefined traverse.

SUBCALC models a complex array of line segments and treats each segment as a finite current

filament. The Magnetic Field produced by each filament is calculated and then summed to obtain

the total Magnetic Field in the model world. A coordination system with a power line Lis shownas Fig 6.2.

Figure6.2:MagneticFieldCalculation

Appendix Q


17/134

Page 16


To obtain the Magnetic Field due to each line segmentdL (finite filament), SUBCALC uses the Biot

Savart Law. The BiotSavart Law states in Eq. 6.6:

(6.6)Where: H=the Magnetic Field intensity and has units of ampere per meter (A/m). From this the

magnetic flux density B, also referred to as the Magnetic Field H, is obtained from Eq.65.

To determine the contribution to the Magnetic Field of each segment in the model at a specified

pointP in Fig. 62, SUBCALC uses the equation after integrated as follows:

(6.7)

The EMFWorkstation software models the Electric and Magnetic Fields from the transmission

lines in a given study area based on the following key information:

Information related to study area such as ROW distances on either side from the outer

conductor of the existing and new transmission lines [11], type of shielding objects, their

dimension and location with angle of orientation (information gathered from the preliminary

site visits);

Information related to existing and new transmission lines such as attach point heights,

minimum sag and location, spacing between all conductor bundles, number of conductors in

each bundle, conductor diameter, conductor spacing within the bundle, line to line voltage for

each phase, line load angle, line load current for each phase and tower to tower distance

(span);

The shielding objects are assumed to be either a single tree or row of trees or a vertical

cylinder or a Box or a combination including description of object model, model inputs, and

model verification.

The key study location and circuit related parameters required for modeling Electric and Magnetic

Fields for fiscal 200607, 201415 and 202627 are provided by BCTC Engineering group and are

summarized below in Table 6.1. Assumed conductor heights for the new circuit were based on

existing conductor heights at these locations.The circuit related annual average load parameters

are also computed from the load data provided by BCTC Engineering group for these fiscal years

and are presented below in Table 6.2.

Appendix Q


18/134

Page 17


Table6.1:ModelingParametersforStudyLocationsandCircuits

Table6.2:AnnualAverageLoadParametersforCircuits

Appendix Q


19/134

Page 18


KeyAssumptions:

The EMFWorkstation software is used to model the Electric and Magnetic Fields of the

transmission lines using the following key assumptions:

All the existing circuits such as 5L81, 5L82, 5L41 and 3L2 in the given study areas are modeled

as FLAT configurations. In the case of the PQ Mile 101 location, the 5L82 circuit has a

transposition configuration and accordingly this location was modeled using the transpositioninformation provided by BCTC Engineering group;

The terrain is assumed to be flat and perfectly conducting for Fiscal 200607, 201415 and

202627 prediction studies of Electric and Magnetic Fields modeling;

The new 500 kV circuit (5L83) is modeled as DELTA configuration except at the PQ Mile 101

study location. At this location 5L83 is modeled as FLAT configuration;

Fiscal 200607, 201415 and 202627 Magnetic Field modeling predictions EXPOCALC 3.5 was

used for all study areas except PQ Mile 101 where the SUBCALC 2.0 was used due to the

crossover configurations of the transmission lines;

Fiscal 200607, 201415 and 202627 Electric Field modeling predictions, as well as measured

data validation EXPOCALC 3.5 was used for all study locations; The load phase angles for 5L83 circuit are assumed to be 0, 240, and 120 for phases A, C, B

respectively.

The UV study location is also used to validate the EXPOCALC 3.5 and SUBCALC 2.0 modeling

accuracies. The modeled data was compared to the measured data and there is good agreement

between the two modules. Subsequently SUBCALC 2.0 is used to model the Magnetic Field for all

study areas measurement data validation.

To minimize the study location Electric and Magnetic Field model uncertainty and to improve the

Electric and Magnetic Fields modeling accuracy, the following information is gathered: elevation

information is measured at each test point along with themeasured heights for all the conductorbundles, maximum measured field levels are determined from the 3 minute measurement time

window, maximum line voltage and load current during the same measurement time window are

used. Based on the internal studies performed on the modeling accuracy of Electric and Magnetic

Fields, for the test points under the conductor bundles it is necessary to consider the elevation

profile of the terrain, and for the test points away from the outer conductor bundles only

conductor bundle height corrections are sufficient. For Electric Field model validation, the

shielding effect due to objects is used to correct for the effect of objects in the respective study

locations.

Using the method described above, each study locations Electric and Magnetic Fields

measurements are verified using modeling with an accuracy of +/2% for Magnetic Field and +/10% for Electric Field. This is better accuracy than industry standard practice.

Appendix Q


20/134

Page 19


7.0 Validation of Electric and Magnetic Fields Measurements

Appendix Q


21/134


22/134

Page 21


KeyObservationsoftheStudyLocation:

Towers 14/4 of 5L81 and 5L82 are both located high on a hill. The conductors drop down

over uneven terrain and across a 4 lane highway (97C) to towers 15/1. Towers 15/1 reside in

an area surrounded by trees and with some low ground areas full of water. The tree line

around towers 15/1 began approximately 340 m from towers 14/4. On each side of the

highway there is a ~10' high fence. A single phase power pole circuit with a fiber line on itbisects under both 5L81 & 5L82 to the east of the highway. A drainage conduit is located

under the road just to the outside of the outer conductor on 5L82. The land was relatively dry

with only short native grasses growing on it. The trees that occupied the area from 340 m to

the towers 15/1 prevented any measurements under the conductor bundles for this 140 m

long region. There were no trees to either side of the ROW over the remaining study area. The

lateral test line at 240 meters from Towers 14/4 was relatively smooth prairietype land. The

lateral test line at 315 meters was hard packed soil from a recent road construction upgrade

that resurfaced the highway and added this area as a highway shoulder.

Significant amounts of moisture in the air and drizzle was present during the Electric Field

measurements at the 240m lateral test line.

DescriptionofResults:

The Electric and Magnetic Field measurements at the 240m lateral test line and the 315m lateral

test line from tower 14/4 as well as the longitudinal measurements under the right outer

conductor bundle of 5L82 were performed using the procedure described in section 6.0. In Figure

7.1.2 and Table 7.1.1, the measured vs. modeled Magnetic Field levels are presented in a chart and

a tabular format for the 240m lateral test line. The estimated maximum and minimum Magnetic

Field levels beyond both sides of the ROW are presented. Field measurements in these regions

were not performed due to vegetation and terrain conditions. The MAX Magnetic Field curve data

is calculated using the maximum load current as well as the minimum heights measured from all

conductor bundles during the time of the actual field study for the lateral test line. Similarly, the

MIN Magnetic Field curve data is calculated using the minimum load current as well as maximum

heights measured from all conductor bundles during the time of the actual field study for the

lateral test line. The measurements and modeled Magnetic Field data are presented as a function

of the distance from the center of the 5L82 circuit to 200m on either side. In the same figure, the

separation distance of other circuits (5L81), ROW boundaries on either side of the circuits as well

as 25m, 50m, 75m, and 100m locations on either side of the circuits from the edge of the ROW are

also marked.

In Figure 7.1.4 and Table 7.1.3 the measured vs. modeled Magnetic Field levels in a chart format

and a tabular format are presented for the 315m lateral test line. The measured vs. modeled

Electric Field levels for 240m and 315m lateral test lines are presented in Figure 7.1.3/Table 7.1.2and Figure 7.1.5/Table 7.1.4 respectively. The measured vs. modeled longitudinal profile of

Magnetic and Electric Fields are presented in Figure 7.1.6/Table 7.1.5 and Figure 7.1.7/Table

7.1.6, respectively.

All measurements performed at this study location are found to be in good agreement with the

calculations using study location specific models and are within +/ 2% for Magnetic Field and +/

10% for Electric Field.

Appendix Q


23/134


24/134

Page 23


Table7.1.1:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforA2-BSegment:240mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


25/134

Page 24


Figure7.1.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforA2-BSegment:240mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


26/134

Page 25


Table7.1.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforA2-BSegment:240mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


27/134

Page 26


Figure7.1.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforA2-BSegment:315mLateralProfile

Appendix Q


28/134

Page 27


Table7.1.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforA2-BSegment:315mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


29/134

Page 28


Figure7.1.5:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforA2-BSegment:315mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


30/134

Page 29


Table7.1.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforA2-BSegment:315mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


31/134

Page 30


Figure7.1.6:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforA2-BSegment:LongitudinalProfile

The MEAN Curve represents the trend line fitted with polynomial of order 6 for modeled Magnetic

Field at every measured longitudinal test point using its respective measured parameters.

MEAN Curve: 4E12x6 + 6E09x5 3E06x4 + 0.0009x3 0.0904x2 + 2.4937x + 160.56.

The MAX / MIN Curve represent the trend line fitted with polynomial of order 6 for modeled

Magnetic Field at every measured longitudinal test point using its respective measured MAX and

MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 4E12x6 + 6E09x5 3E06x4 + 0.0009x3 0.0904x2 + 2.4937x + 170.85.

MIN Curve: 4E12x6 + 6E09x5 3E06x4 + 0.0009x3 0.0904x2 + 2.4937x + 151.03.

Appendix Q


32/134

Page 31


Table7.1.5:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforA2-BSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Table7.1.6:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforA2-BSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Appendix Q


33/134

Page 32


Figure7.1.7:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforA2-BSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

The MEAN Curve represents the trend line fitted with polynomial of order 6 for modeled Electric


MEAN Curve: 3E13x6 + 5E10x5 3E07x4 + 6E05x3 0.0066x2 + 0.244x + 2.9555.


Electric Field at every measured longitudinal test point using its respective measured MAX and

MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 3E13x6 + 5E10x5 3E07x4 + 6E05x3 0.0066x2 + 0.244x + 3.7255.

MIN Curve: 3E13x6 + 5E10x5 3E07x4 + 6E05x3 0.0066x2 + 0.244x + 2.0655.

Appendix Q


34/134

Page 33


Site2:SPUZZUM: SegmentG-HTower479/1-479/2

TOPVIEW

SIDEVIEW

Figure7.2.1:TopandSideViewsoftheG-HStudyLocation

Appendix Q


35/134

Page 34



The circuit 5L41 from Tower 479/1 rises upwards to Tower 479/2.

There is significant tree, shrub and foliage growth that was leveled/mulched by a Hydro Axe.

This left the ground heavily covered with mulch and fallen timber. The land was cleared

(~55%) within the ROW from Tower 479/1 to a distance of approximately 175m. The

remaining 150m of span was not cleared because the Hydro Axe could not manage theelevation change from the 175m point up to Tower 479/2. This uncut region was heavily

forested and prevented any measurements from being performed.

A cemetery is located just outside of the ROW on the Northwest side. The cemetery is

surrounded by a ~1m chain link fence.

The soil was very dry.

A lateral test line was established at 122m from Tower 479/1 and extended from the cemetery

fence all the way to 50 m under the canopy of trees along the Southwest side of the ROW.

The trees along the ROW were located ~15m from the outer conductor bundles.

Description

of

Results:

The Electric and Magnetic Field measurements at the 122m lateral test line from tower 479/1 as

well as the longitudinal measurements under the center conductor bundle of 5L41 were

performed at this location using the procedure described in section 6.0. In Figure 7.2.2 and Table

7.2.1 the measured vs. modeled Magnetic Field levels are presented in a chart and a tabular format

for the 122m lateral test line. The estimated maximum and minimum Magnetic Field levels

beyond both sides of the ROW are presented. Field measurements in these regions were not

performed due to vegetation and terrain conditions. The MAX Magnetic Field curve data is

calculated using the maximum load current as well as the minimum heights measured from all


MIN Magnetic Field curve data is calculated using the minimum load current as well as the

maximum heights measured from all conductor bundles during the time of the actual field studyfor the lateral test line. The measurements and modeled Magnetic Field data is presented as a

function of the distance from the center of the 5L41 circuit to 200m on either side. In the same

figure, ROW boundaries on either side of the circuits as well as 25m, 50m, 75m, and 100m

locations on either side of the circuits from the edge of the ROW are also marked.

The measured vs. modeled Electric Field levels for the 122m lateral test line is presented in Figure

7.2.3 and Table 7.2.2 respectively. The measured vs. modeled longitudinal profile of Magnetic and

Electric Fields are presented in Figure 7.2.4/Table 7.2.3 and Figure 7.2.5/Table 7.2.4, respectively.


calculations using study location specific models and are within +/ 2% for Magnetic Field and +/10% for Electric Field.

Appendix Q


36/134

Page 35


Figure7.2.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforG-HSegment:122mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


37/134

Page 36


Table7.2.1:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforG-HSegment:122mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


38/134

Page 37


Figure7.2.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforG-HSegment:122mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


39/134

Page 38


Table7.2.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforG-HSegment:122mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


40/134

Page 39


Figure7.2.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforG-HSegment:Longitudinal

Profile



MEAN Curve:6E10x5 + 4E07x4 8E05x3 + 0.0053x2 + 0.0165x + 40.504.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 6E10x5 + 4E07x4 8E05x3 + 0.0053x2 + 0.0165x + 51.264.

MIN Curve: 6E10x5 + 4E07x4 8E05x3 + 0.0053x2 + 0.0165x + 31.231.

Appendix Q


41/134

Page 40


Table7.2.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforG-HSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Table7.2.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforG-HSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Appendix Q


42/134

Page 41


Figure7.2.5:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforG-HSegment:Longitudinal

Profile



MEAN Curve: 1E11x5 + 1E08x4 2E06x3 + 0.0002x2 0.0032x + 0.4088.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 1E11x5 + 1E08x4 2E06x3 + 0.0002x2 0.0032x + 0.6488.

MIN Curve: 1E11x5 + 1E08x4 2E06x3 + 0.0002x2 0.0032x + 0.2543.

Appendix Q


43/134

Page 42


Site3:SouthofYALE:SegmentJ-KTower489/3-489/4

TOPVIEW

SIDEVIEW

Figure7.3.1:TopandSideViewsoftheJ-KStudyLocation

Appendix Q


44/134

Page 43



Site was located in a higher mountainous region. The area was partially cleared (~60%) with

a Hydro Axe. The land from Tower 489/3 to ~180m was covered in heavy forest and a steep

grade that prevented us from performing any measurements in this area.

The cleared land was covered in heavy mulch, roots, trees stumps and timber. The terrain was

very uneven and difficult to establish level measurement areas. Tall evergreens lined the ROWedges and were situated ~1015m from the outer conductors.

A Lateral line was established at 193m from Tower 489/3. This line was hand cleared of the

larger branches. There was a thick layer of mulch across the land and an inaccessible 2 meter

wide gulley that crossed between the CCB and ROCB. Measurements were extended from 10 m

outside the ROCB to 15 outside the LOCB.


The Electric and Magnetic Field measurements at the 193m lateral test line from Tower 489/3 as

well as the longitudinal measurements under the left outer conductor bundle (LOCB) of 5L41

were performed at this location using the procedure described in section 6.0. In Figure 7.3.2 and

Table 7.3.1 the measured vs. modeled Magnetic Field levels are presented in a chart and a tabular

format for the 193m lateral test line. The estimated maximum and minimum Magnetic Field levels






maximum heights measured from all conductor bundles during the time of the actual field study

for the lateral test line. The measurements and modeled Magnetic Field data is presented as a

function of the distance from the center of the 5L41 circuit to 200m on either side. In the same

figure, ROW boundaries on either side of the circuits as well as 25m, 50m, 75m, and 100mlocations on either side of the circuits from the edge of the ROW are also marked.

The measurement accuracy for Magnetic Field at this study location is estimated to be +1.5% and

3.9% which is a significant departure from +/2% established at other locations. Further review

of the lateral test line elevation measurement data and long term Magnetic Field measurement

data indicated that measurements are accurate within +/ 2%. However, the load data used for

modeling the Magnetic Field profile showed significant variations which are not consistent with

the Magnetic Field data from long term measurements.

The measured vs. modeled Electric Field levels for the 193mm lateral test line is presented in

Figure 7.3.3 and Table 7.3.2 respectively. The measured vs. modeled longitudinal profile ofMagnetic and Electric Fields are presented in Figure 7.3.4/Table 7.3.3 and Figure 7.3.5/Table

7.3.4, respectively.


calculations using study location specific models using duly corrected line load data based on the

long term measurements and are within +/ 2% for Magnetic Field and +/ 10% for Electric Field.

Appendix Q


45/134

Page 44


Figure7.3.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforJ-KSegment:193mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


46/134

Page 45


Table7.3.1:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforJ-KSegment:193mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


47/134

Page 46


Figure7.3.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforJ-KSegment:193mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


48/134

Page 47


Table7.3.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforJ-KSegment:193mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


49/134

Page 48


Figure7.3.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforJ-KSegment:Longitudinal

Profile



MEAN Curve: 1E10x5 1E07x4 + 5E05x3 0.0104x2 + 1.1318x + 8.8431.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 1E10x5 1E07x4 + 5E05x3 0.0104x2 + 1.1318x + 19.0331.

MIN Curve: 1E10x5 1E07x4 + 5E05x3 0.0104x2 + 1.1318x + 0.0631.

Appendix Q


50/134

Page 49


Table7.3.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforJ-KSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Table7.3.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforJ-KSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Appendix Q


51/134

Page 50


Figure7.3.5:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforJ-KSegment:Longitudinal

Profile






MIN parameters.



Appendix Q


52/134

Page 51


Site4:HARRISONHOTSPRINGS:SegmentP-Q101Tower101/1-101/2

Figure7.4.1:TopViewfortheStudyLocationP-QMile101Segment

Appendix Q


53/134

Page 52


Site5:CHEHALIS: SegmentP-QTower109/1-109/2

TOPVIEW

SIDEVIEW

Figure7.5.1:TopandSideViewsoftheP-QMile109StudyLocations

Appendix Q


54/134

Page 53



The land between Towers 109/1 109/2 was ~95% cleared with a Hydro Axe.

There were some trees stumps remaining and a lot of mulch on the ground.

To the north the ROW was lined with tall evergreens ~20m from the outer conductor bundle.

To the south the ROW was lined with brush, tall grass and weeds. The terrain was relatively

flat with the exception of the Tower 109/1 which was located up on a rock plateau ~15m high

that extended out ~40m from its base.

The weather was hot and dry.

A Lateral line was established at 231m from Tower 109/1. The area here was relatively flat

and clear of heavy mulch. A measurement point 20m outside the ROCB was established near

the ROW tree line. A ditch of bush and fallen trees prevented a 15 m test point on this side of

the conductors. The lateral line was extended to a maximum of 20 meter outside the LOCB.

Bush, trees and grass prevented establishing it a further distance.


The Electric and Magnetic Field measurements at the 231m lateral test line from Tower 109/1 aswell as the longitudinal measurements under the center conductor bundle of 5L82 were



for the 231m lateral test line. The estimated maximum and minimum Magnetic Field levels






maximum heights measured from all conductor bundles during the time of the actual field study

for the lateral test line. The measurements and modeled Magnetic Field data is presented as afunction of the distance from the center of the 5L82 circuit to 200m on either side. In the same

figure, ROW boundaries on either side of the circuits as well as 25m, 50m, 75m, and 100m

locations on either side of the circuits from the edge of the ROW are also marked.


7.5.3 and Table 7.5.2 respectively. The measured vs. modeled longitudinal profile of Magnetic and

Electric Fields are presented in Figure 7.5.4/Table 7.5.3 and Figure 7.5.5/Table 7.5.4, respectively.




Appendix Q


55/134

Page 54


Figure7.5.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforP-QMile109Segment:231mLateralProfile

Appendix Q


56/134

Page 55


Table7.5.1:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforP-QMile109Segment:231m

LateralProfile

Appendix Q


57/134

Page 56


Figure7.5.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforP-QMile109Segment:231m

LateralProfile

Appendix Q


58/134

Page 57


Table7.5.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforP-QMile109Segment:231m

LateralProfile

Appendix Q


59/134

Page 58


Figure 7.5.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforP-QMile109Segment:

LongitudinalProfile



MEAN Curve: 2E05x3 + 0.0059x2 0.121x + 56.52.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 2E05x3 + 0.0059x2 0.121x + 65.458.

MIN Curve: 2E05x3 + 0.0059x2 0.121x + 47.476.

Appendix Q


60/134

Page 59


Table7.5.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforP-QMile109Segment:

LongitudinalProfile

Table7.5.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforP-QMile109Segment:

LongitudinalProfile

Appendix Q


61/134

Page 60


Figure 7.5.5:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforP-QMile109Segment:

LongitudinalProfile



MEAN Curve: 1E06x3 + 0.0004x2 0.0147x + 0.86.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 1E06x3 + 0.0004x2 0.0147x +1.065.

MIN Curve: 1E06x3 + 0.0004x2 0.0147x + 0.712.

Appendix Q


62/134

Page 61


Site6:MISSION,EastofStaveLake:SegmentR-STower128/4-129/1

TOPVIEW

SIDEVIEW

Figure7.6.1:TopandSideViewsoftheR-SStudyLocation

Appendix Q


63/134

Page 62



The ROW between 128/4 and 129/1 was covered in a heavy growth of trees, shrubs and

plants.

The area was not cleared as originally planned.

A forestry road bisected the segment very close (~24m) to tower 128/4.

Lateral profile measurements were performed on the road, no longitudinal profile testing was

done because the growth prevented access under the lines.

The ROW edges were lined with tall evergreens at ~20 m outside of the conductor bundles.

The ground was dry and hard.

The weather was hot and clear.

A Lateral line was established at 24m from Tower 128/4. The line was on a forestry roadway

and extended beyond the ROW edges under the tree canopies. An extended distance of 30

meters was available to the South side of the conductors and a distance of 50 meters to the

North side.


The Electric and Magnetic Field measurements at the 24m lateral test line from Tower 128/4 were

performed at this location using the procedure described in section 6.0; however, the longitudinal

measurements under any conductor bundle of 5L82 were not performed as the access to the site

under the conductor bundles is very difficult due to the density of trees. In Figure 7.6.2 and Table


for the 24m lateral test line. The estimated maximum and minimum Magnetic Field levels beyond

both sides of the ROW are presented. Field measurements in these regions were not performed

due to vegetation and terrain conditions. The MAX Magnetic Field curve data is calculated using

the maximum load current as well as the minimum heights measured from all conductor bundles

during the time of the actual field study for the lateral test line. Similarly, the MIN Magnetic Fieldcurve data is calculated using the minimum load current as well as the maximum heights

measured from all conductor bundles during the time of the actual field study for the lateral test

line. The measurements and modeled Magnetic Field data is presented as a function of the

distance from the center of the 5L82 circuit to 200m on either side. In the same figure, ROW

boundaries on either side of the circuits as well as 25m, 50m, 75m, and 100m locations on either

side of the circuits from the edge of the ROW are also marked.


7.6.3 and Table 7.6.2 respectively. The modeled longitudinal profile of Magnetic and Electric

Fields are presented in Figure 7.6.4/Table 7.6.3 and Figure 7.6.5/Table 7.6.4, respectively.




Appendix Q


64/134

Page 63


Figure7.6.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforR-SSegment:24mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


65/134

Page 64


Table7.6.1:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforR-SSegment:24mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


66/134

Page 65


Figure7.6.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforR-SSegment:24mLateralProfile

Appendix Q


67/134

Page 66


Table7.6.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforR-SSegment:24mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


68/134

Page 67


Figure7.6.4:ModelingofMagneticFieldforR-SSegment:LongitudinalProfile



MEAN Curve: 4E06x3 0.0005x2 + 0.5657x + 43.87.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 4E06x3 0.0005x2 + 0.5657x + 53.98.

MIN Curve: 4E06x3 0.0005x2 + 0.5657x + 35.27.

Appendix Q


69/134

Page 68


Table7.6.3:ModelingofMagneticFieldforR-SSegment:LongitudinalProfile

Table7.6.4:ModelingofElectricFieldforR-SSegment:LongitudinalProfile

Appendix Q


70/134

Page 69


Figure7.6.5:ModelingofElectricFieldforR-SSegment:LongitudinalProfile



MEAN Curve: 3E08x3 6E05x2 + 0.0207x 0.1906.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 3E08x3 6E05x2 + 0.0207x 0.0606.

MIN Curve: 3E08x3 6E05x2 + 0.0207x 0.3306.

Appendix Q


71/134

Page 70


Site7:WESTWOODPLATEAU:SegmentU-V,Tower153/5-154/1

TOPVIEW

SIDEVIEW

Figure7.7.1:TopandSideViewsoftheU-VStudyLocation

Appendix Q


72/134

Page 71



The land beneath the lines was relatively flat.

The ROW edges were lined with tall evergreens and deciduous trees ~1015m from the

conductor bundles for most of the segment length on both sides.

The entire ROW was covered with a mix of tall grass, shrubs and bush.

The overall area wasnt cleared/mowed but a pathway provided a slight clearing at 237 meters

where lateral measurements were taken. At the time of the measurements the weather was

overcast with some periods of rain.

This lateral allowed measurements to be taken to a 50m distance outside the ROCB, through a

small tree canopy and out to a paved parking lot.

A second lateral crosssection was made by hand clearing a location 145 meters. Vegetation

growth prevented measurements beyond 10m of the outer conductors. At the time of the

measurements the weather was overcast with some periods of rain.

Significant amounts moisture in the air and drizzle was present during the Electric Field

measurement at the 237m lateral test line.


The Electric and Magnetic Field measurements at the 145m and 237m lateral test lines from

Tower 153/5 as well as the longitudinal measurements under the center conductor bundle for

Magnetic Field and 5m away from left outer conductor bundle of 5L82 for Electric Field were



for the 237m lateral test line. In Figure 7.7.4 and Table 7.7.3 the measured vs. modeled Magnetic

Field levels are presented in a chart and a tabular format for the 145 m lateral test line. The

estimated maximum and minimum Magnetic Field levels beyond both sides of the ROW are

presented. Field measurements in these regions were not performed due to vegetation and

terrain conditions. The MAX Magnetic Field curve data is calculated using the maximum loadcurrent as well as the minimum heights measured from all conductor bundles during the time of

the actual field study for the lateral test line. Similarly, the MIN Magnetic Field curve data is

calculated using the minimum load current as well as the maximum heights measured from all

conductor bundles during the time of the actual field study for the lateral test line. The

measurements and modeled Magnetic Field data is presented as a function of the distance from

the center of the 5L81 circuit to 200m on either side. In the same figure, ROW boundaries on

either side of the circuits as well as 25m, 50m, 75m, and 100m locations on either side of the

circuits from the edge of the ROW are also marked.

The measured vs. modeled Electric Field levels for 237m and 145m lateral test lines are presented

in Figure 7.7.3/Table 7.7.2 and Figure 7.7.5/Table 7.7.4, respectively. The measured vs. modeledlongitudinal profile of Magnetic and Electric Fields are presented in Figure 7.7.6/Table 7.7.5 and

Figure 7.7.7/Table 7.7.6, respectively.




Appendix Q


73/134

Page 72


Figure7.7.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforU-VSegment:237mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


74/134

Page 73


Table7.7.1:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforU-VSegment:237mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


75/134

Page 74


Figure7.7.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforU-VSegment:237mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


76/134

Page 75


Table7.7.2:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforU-VSegment:237mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


77/134


78/134

Page 77


Table7.7.3:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforU-VSegment:145mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


79/134

Page 78


Figure7.7.5:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforU-VSegment:145mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


80/134

Page 79


Table7.7.4:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforU-VSegment:145mLateral

Profile

Appendix Q


81/134

Page 80


Figure7.7.6:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforU-VSegment:Longitudinal

Profile



MEAN Curve: 7E06x3 + 0.0008x2 + 0.4234x + 148.87.



MIN parameters.

MAX Curve: 7E06x3 + 0.0008x2 + 0.4234x + 159.83.

MIN Curve: 7E06x3 + 0.0008x2 + 0.4234x + 139.91.

Appendix Q


82/134

Page 81


Table7.7.5:Measurementvs.ModelingofMagneticFieldforU-VSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Table7.7.6:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforU-VSegment:Longitudinal

Profile

Appendix Q


83/134

Page 82


Figure7.7.7:Measurementvs.ModelingofElectricFieldforU-VSegment:Longitudinal

Profile






MIN parameters.



Appendix Q


84/134

Page 83


8.0 Results of Electric and Magnetic Fields Modeling

Appendix Q


85/134

Page 84


Site1:PRINCETON-MERRITTHWY97C:SegmentA2

baseline misc

Documents