Substation Construction Efficiency Question

[elegier]

I am currently near the end of the design process for a new 115kV/34.5kV substation and my customer want to implement a design that will make the wiring of the substation more efficient and I would like opinions on whether this has been done before and if this is a good idea.

My customer wants to install military grade amphenol connectors on the cabinets of the various substation equipment and at the control building to make the installation of the cables in the field more efficient. They want to do this for all control, CT, PT, and power cables. The breakers, etc would arrive on site with the amphenol connectors prewired and the control building components (relays, AC and DC load centers, etc.) would be wired to amphenol connectors in a box on the outside of the building. They would order the cables with the matching amphenol connetors of the appropriate length so that they could just plug them in on both ends.


My major concerns are:

1) Using this for a CT circuit which could be opened under load. They are looking into seeing if they can find self shorting connectors.

2) Doing this adds additional points of failure (crimping the wire to the amphenol pins and sockets and the male to female connection itself)

3) Moisture ingress causing corrosion issues

Has anyone seen this done before and any other comments would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

 

[MD84]

I have never seen that done. I have seen amphenol connections for equipment that is intended to be plugged and unplugged periodically and used temporarily.

I would agree with your points of concern. The opening iwf a CT would be a high risk hazard. I would stick with the typical terminal block marshaling cabinet design. I would prefer the solid connection of a fork or ring terminal fastened to a terminal block screw. Rings for CT circuits.

 

[zbang]

I don't do HV but I do design portable systems, and I also agree with the concerns. Unless there's some other factor, like a very shortened installation time, I can't really see much positive. Sure, could have factory-made cables, but they'll all be custom ($$$) and if there's an installation problem you have to have a spare or order another. Likewise, who's going to install & test the equipment-mounted connectors? More $$$.

If you want to simplify the installation, look at custom-bundled cable for the LV parts; that'll save a bit on pulling.

 

[mgookin]

Is the owner an electric utility or a unit of government (DOD)?
Is this written into specs or was it a phone call and they want you to consider/ analyze the suggestion?

P.S. Welcome to the forums.

 

[Tony S]

I would be very reluctant to use what is basically a plug in connector for not just CT’s but any safety system.

I have had bad experiences of this method of connection thanks to a German company supplying industrial gas burners using them.

 

[Ingenieur]

has it ever been done before?
the is probably a reason

perhaps for a portable substation (like emergency disaster use or military), but a permanent fixed one?
seems like it's adding complexity

 

[Smart $]

Sounds to me like efficiency is being used as an excuse. As mentioned, you'd have to wire up the mating connectors on both ends before you could install the custom-made in-between cables. Exactly what is the time and cost savings compared to running conductors from and to the original terminals... and how often is this wiring replaced?