1

2006 IEEE PES Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition Latin America, Venezuela

Comparative Study between IEEE Std. 80-2000 and Finite Elements Method application for Grounding Systems Analysis
L. M. Coa

III. THE SOFTWARE SPATC program was designed in Inelectra S.A.C.A. for the calculation of the determining parameters in the design of grounding systems. This program was developed under the calculations tool Matlab from Mathworks, Inc. One of the most important characteristics of the SPATC is its capacity to collect the data of the grounding system from a dxf file generated once made the drawing of the ground grid in AutoCAD. The program allows the user to select a dxf file that contains all the data relative to dimensions of the ground grid, offering a graphical interface and avoiding therefore the tedious work of having to introduce this information manually. This characteristic of the program required of a considerable time for the establishment of a pattern within the dxf file that allowed locating the information needed for the SPATC to accomplish the calculations. It was a delicate stage of the process, considering that when drawing up a simple line in AutoCAD, the generated dxf file is an ASCII file conformed by approximately 6 thousand lines of characters. The SPATC (Fig. 1) offers to the user a graphical interface that facilitates the introduction of data for the grounding system simulation, allows in addition to review the obtained results in a organized way, including graphs and a written report with the data and the results of the simulated project.

Index Terms--Ground potential rise, ground resistance, programming, protections, step voltage, touch voltage.

I. NOMENCLATURE Ig tf h Rg hs H
1 2 s

Ground fault current. Fault duration time. Grounding system depth. Ground resistance Surface material thickness. First layer thickness. Uniform soil resistivity. First layer resistivity. Second layer resistivity. Surface material resistivity.

II. INTRODUCTION HE simplified techniques for grounding systems design in substations and transmission lines allow those persons with a basic training in these type of systems, to be able to make this work having no need of the use of more complex calculation tools. However, in some particular cases the results obtained by these means do not reproduce accurately the reality and, in general lines, the system may be oversized to accomplish with the applying norms and recommendations. In some cases, the problems founded in the practice cant be analyzed using simplified techniques without incurring in important errors, so it can be necessary to use more complex calculation algorithms.

L. M. Coa is with Inelectra S.A.C.A., Lechera, Anzotegui, Venezuela (email: luis.coa@inelectra.com).

1-4244-0288-3/06/$20.00 2006 IEEE

Fig. 1. The SPATC.

As it is appraised in Fig. 2, the SPATC allows to directly introduce the data in the initial screen; this screen is conformed by the following parts:

finite element. The transfer resistances, mutual resistances and self-resistances for the segments are represented as VDFs (Voltage Distribution Factors) and the association between the voltage and currents in the conductor segment i, is:
n

Vi
j 1

Rtij I j

(1)

Where: Rtij VDF between segments i and j (self is i = j). Potential at conductor segment i. Vi Ij Current flowing into earth from segment j. n Total segments number. Due to the low resistance of the conductor material, generally it is assumed that the entire ground grid is at the same potential; thus, the voltage of all the segments will be approximately equal, so:

V0

V1 V2 ... Vn
n

And then, the equations for each conductor segment will be as follow:

V
Fig. 2. SPATC main screen.
j 1 n

Rt1 j I j Rt 2 j I j
j 1

A. Suelo (Soil) This panel contains the fields corresponding to the soil model for which is going to make the simulation. It contains the following fields: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Modelo del Suelo (Soil Model). Profundidad del 1er Estrato (First layer thickness). Resistividad del 1er Estrato (First layer resistivity). Resistividad del 2do Estrato (Second layer resistivity). Capa Adicional Superficial (Surface material). Altura (Height). Resistividad (Resistivity).

V
j 1

Rtnj I j

With the equations system above, the value for the potential V is assumed to calculate the currents flowing into earth. Once obtained the currents, other parameters, as the ground resistance, GPR and the surface potential at any point, can be calculated:

B. Datos del Proyecto (Project Data) In this panel the technical data for the simulations are introduced, more ahead that data will be also included in the final report. 1) 2) 3) 4) Nombre del Proyecto (Project name). Corriente de Falla (Ground fault current). Profundidad del SPAT (Grounding system depth). Conductor.

Rg

I1

I2
n

V I 3 ... I n I g .Rg
RtAj I j
j 1

(2) (3) (4)

GPR
VA

C. Resultados (Results) It contains the information referred to the results obtained in the simulation. IV. THE METHODOLOGY The program was based on the method described by Meliopoulos for grounding systems analysis [2]. Basically, it consists on getting the system partitioned into n finite conductor segments and assuming that the current on each one of the segments is uniformly distributed along the

Where RtAj is the VDF (or transfer resistance) between the conductor segment j and point A. Meliopoulos presents VDFs tabulated by transfer resistances, mutual resistances and self-resistance for conductor segments oriented along the three coordinate axes x, y or z [2]. For two-layered soil models the procedure is the same, but the VDFs equations are relatively more complex, due to the multiples images produced by boundary conditions between layers; however, the equations used for these cases start from the same principle described by Meliopoulos [2].

V. THE SIMULATION For effects of validating the results in this document, the cases exposed in the Annex B of the IEEE std 80-2000 were used as a departure point [1], for which there are, next, comparative tables and the corresponding graphs. For the considered cases, the design data are the following ones: Ig = 1908 A. tf = 0.5 s. = 400 .m. = 2500 .m. s hs = 0.102 m. h = 0.5 m A. Square grid without ground rods

grounding system, the maximum limit for touch voltages is violated. Among other graphs offered by the program (Fig. 8), are those of touch voltages contours and the two-dimensions graphs for touch and step voltages in trajectories previously indicated.

Fig. 7. Maximum and real touch voltages for case 1.

Fig. 6. Square grid without ground rods.

These are the obtained results using both techniques.

TABLE I COMPARATIVE TABLE FOR CASE 1

Fig. 8. Graphs contained in the results folder.

Ground resistance GPR

IEEE std 80-2000 2.78 5304 V

SPATC 2.62 4996.22 V

Finally, another of the most important advantages of the SPATC is the possibility of obtaining a written report that contains the data and results of the project, specifying the touch and step voltages with its coordinates and corresponding status.

IEEE Standard 80 method gives in addition results for maximum allowable touch and step voltages, as well as the maximum real voltages in the system for which the calculations are being made. For this example the following results were obtained: Maximum allowable touch voltage Maximum real touch voltage. = = 838.2 V 1002.1 V

For which the SPATC offers the following graph (Fig. 7) that comprises of the set of 7 graphs included in the folder with the project results. In Fig. 7 it is possible to observe how on the corners of the

Fig. 9. Written report segment for the case 1.

B. Rectangular grid with ground rods The following example extracted from the IEEE Standard 80 annexes consists of a mesh that, in this case, includes vertical ground rods (Fig. 10) [1].

C. Equally spaced grid with ground rods in two-layer soil In order to illustrate the simulation of grounding systems for two-layered soil model cases (Which apply to most of the cases in the practice), the B.5 example of the IEEE Standard 80 annexes was used; this arrangement is shown in Fig. 12 [1].

Fig. 10. Rectangular grid with 10 m ground rods.

For which the following results were obtained:

TABLE II COMPARATIVE TABLE FOR CASE 2

Ground resistance GPR

IEEE std 80-2000 2.62 4998.96 V

SPATC 2.25 4298.1 V

Fig. 12. C. Equally spaced grid with ground rods in two-layer soil.

And the results obtained from the calculation of this case are as follows:
TABLE III COMPARATIVE TABLE FOR CASE 3

The results for maximum and real touch voltages calculated for the system, for IEEE Standard 80 are as follows [1]. Maximum allowable touch voltage Maximum real touch voltage = = 838.2 V 595.8 V

Ground resistance GPR

IEEE std 80-2000 1.353 2581.52 V

SPATC 1.359 2592.97

Whereas the results obtained by the SPATC for this second case, are in the following graph (Fig. 11).

It can be observed that, for this case, when the ground resistance value obtained is low, the difference on the results is almost insignificant. This small difference for the ground resistances brings as a consequence a proportional difference between the GPR results for each one of the methods. Additional, the computer program of EPRI TR-10622, applied for this case in the IEEE Standard 80 [1], gives the following results for the critical voltages. Em Es = = 49.66 % of GPR 18.33 % of GPR

Fig. 11. Maximum and real touch voltages for case 2.

While the SPATC offers Fig. 13 as a result to evaluate touch voltages (These are, in fact, the most critical potential differences in a grounding system design) in the simulated system, in addition to the two-dimension graphs for touch and step voltages in trajectories previously specified.

IX. BIOGRAPHY
Luis Coa was born in Barcelona, Anzotegui - Venezuela, on May 24, 1983. He graduated from the Universidad de Oriente. His employment experience includes Inelectra, S.A.C.A. His special field of interest includes programming, grounding systems, digital systems.

Fig. 13. Maximum and real touch voltages for case 3.

VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of S. Meliopoulos for his previously research on this topic. VII. CONCLUSIONS One of the differences between both previously studied methods is the form in which the critical voltages for the calculated system are given. During the development of the SPATC a great importance was paid on knowing not only the value for the maximum real touch voltage in the system, but also these voltages behavior in all the area occupied by the simulated ground grid, since this allows to locate points of special interest on the corresponding planes of the facilities, in such a way that is possible to take the necessary preventive actions at the time of execute a grounding system design. It can be observed in addition, that exists a differences pattern between the results of ground resistance and therefore of GPR; the values given by the method proposed by IEEE Standard 80 are generally more pessimists, even when this factor is not necessarily unfavorable it can take the design to an oversizing. Also it was stated, by means of the simulations, the fact that the most critical touch voltages can be found in the corners for rectangular meshes cases, as observed for case 1 in Fig. 7. Finally it is possible to affirm that the finite elements methods represent without a doubt a very effective instrument for the grounding systems study, since they offer the possibility of making a closest to the reality detailed analysis. In spite of involving more complex algorithms of calculations that requires the use of computational tools, is necessary to consider that, nowadays, needing a computer is not really a limitation. VIII. REFERENCES
[1] [2] IEEE Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding, IEEE Std 80-2000 (Revision of IEEE Std 80-1986). New York, USA. 2000. S. Meliopoulos, Power System Grounding and Transients, Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York, USA. 1998.