Extended Bandwidth Spread Spectrum Time Domain Reflectometry Cable Test for Thermal Aging, Low Resistance Fault, and Water Detection
In 2022, researchers at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) used the Accelerated and Real-Time Environmental Nodal Assessment (ARENA) cable and motor test bed to characterize spread spectrum time domain reflectometry (SSTDR) and compare the responses of an SSTDR instrument to those of a frequency domain reflectometry (FDR) instrument. Results showed both techniques could detect and locate cable anomalies such as phase-to-phase low resistance and shorts, thermal insulation damage, mechanical insulation damage, and the presence or absence of water in some conditions. The SSTDR tests used a commercial instrument provided by LiveWire Innovations Inc. This commercial instrument performed tests at 6, 12, 24, and 48 MHz bandwidth. The results of these tests were compared to FDR tests where bandwidths could be extended up to 1.3 GHz, although the best responses for cable tests were from 100 to 500 MHz. Lower bandwidth signals can propagate better along the cable while higher bandwidths have higher resolution for impedance change reflections allowing more precise indication of location and separation of anomalies. The 2022 research found that FDR responses were clearer than SSTDR and speculated that a higher bandwidth SSTDR could more successfully detect and locate cable anomalies. One advantage of the SSTDR system investigated was that it was designed for energized online use up to 1,000 volts, which may be a significant advantage for nuclear power plant use. The LiveWire SSTDR instrument is an established product in the rail and aircraft industry and updating the SSTDR hardware parameters is difficult to justify without more conclusive testing. Therefore, a software adjustable laboratory SSTDR instrument was developed by PNNL and was used to test extended bandwidth SSTDR cable tests. Within the ARENA test bed, 42 cable conditions were tested with the PNNL SSTDR, FDR, and the LiveWire SSTDR—each operating at four different bandwidths. Observations and conclusions regarding the relative performance of the three instruments over different bandwidths are note below. Responses of the PNNL SSTDR (at 50 MHz) and the LiveWire SSTDR (at 48 MHz) were similar. The PNNL SSTDR higher frequency bandwidths behaved as expected showing sharper peaks and higher noise. This validated the PNNL SSTDR as a reasonable implementation of the SSTDR technology. Lower bandwidth SSTDR responses (particularly 6 and 12 MHz) may have increased value for use within longer cables but were not particularly effective at identifying anomalous cable behavior in the 100 ft cables tested here. The higher bandwidths of the PNNL SSTDR (50, 100, 200, and 400 MHz) did not provide substantially clearer cable reflectometry responses, but having the higher frequency responses available did add to the cable test evaluation. Strong responses to shorts and low impedance faults between phases were particularly evident in the higher bandwidth PNNL SSTDR and the FDR data. Measurements were repeatable, with similar responses obtained from a thermally aged cable for tests taken a month apart. Signal noise was affected in the unshielded cable by the local in-tray cable arrangement including proximity to metal edges and rungs of the cable tray. Foam isolation of the cable from the tray metal reduced in both FDR and SSTDR responses. Cable condition monitoring in nuclear power plants will likely benefit from both more informative off-line testing methods and from the development of on-line methods for continuous monitoring of cables in use. The LWRS-funded ARENA test bed was a valuable resource for this development and direct comparison of nuclear electrical cable condition monitoring technologies. Test results are targeted to guide industry advancement of testing and monitoring tools for cable aging management.