LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT STRAY CURRENT CONTROL:

HOW MUCH WATER LINE PROTECTION IS REALLY NEEDED?

Dale Lindemuth, P.E.

Corrpro Companies, Inc.
7000B Hollister
Houston, Texas 77040
dlindemuth@corrpro.com
David Kroon, P.E.
Corrpro Companies, Inc.
7000B Hollister
Houston, Texas 77040

ABSTRACT
Modern-day DC powered light rail lines are designed with many effective stray current control
features built-in, principally an electrically ungrounded traction power negative return circuit.
This often includes track construction measures intended to establish much higher track-toearth resistances when compared to the streetcars of long ago. This attribute dramatically
reduces stray current leakage to tolerable levels with limited if any negative impact on
underground pipeline corrosion control. Case histories of water pipelines constructed near
light rail lines built within the last nine years are reviewed. Results of field evaluations in
Sacramento, Salt Lake City and Minneapolis are presented. Guidelines for stray current
corrosion protection strategies for ductile iron pipelines are provided.
Keywords: Light rail transit (LRT) line, track-to-earth resistance, ductile iron pipe,
polyethylene encasement, cathodic protection, pipe-to-soil potential, track-to-earth potential.
INTRODUCTION
Since the 1970s, most if not all direct current (DC) powered light rail lines constructed in the
United States have included provisions to control stray traction current directly at the source,
i.e. the transit system. Typically, the primary means of minimizing stray current has been to
maximize track-to-earth resistance. All other factors equal, the higher the track-to-earth
resistance, the lower the level of stray current and resulting stray current corrosion impact on
underground metallic pipelines and other nearby metallic structures.

For street-running embedded track sections, early attempts to electrically isolate the rails from
ground included a poured insulating material immediately around the embedded portion of
each rail to form an insulated trough. Another approach used an insulating material under the
entire track slab. These early rail isolation techniques varied in their effectiveness relative to
achieving a suitable design, good workmanship during construction, and long-term durability.
Achieving the target track-to-earth resistance was often a case of hit or miss.
More recent light rail transit (LRT) lines and extensions to existing lines predominantly use an
electrically high resistant boot for embedded track sections. The formed boot is fitted around
each rail in straight track sections prior to installation of the rail anchors (fasteners) and
placement of the paving. An insulating membrane arrangement (bathtub) under and around
the entire trackway is often used at crossovers, switches, and other special track-work where
the boot design is not suitable.
Specifications for light rail construction acceptance usually require a minimum track-to-earth
resistance after construction is complete. Specified resistances vary from system to system
depending on expected track-to-earth potentials, utility density, soil resistivity, and several
other design considerations. The authors are aware of specifications for different LRT systems
requiring minimum track-to-earth resistances ranging from 50 ohms-1,000 feet to 250 ohms1,000 feet for one track (2 rails) for embedded rail construction. As a point of comparison,
non-insulated older generation streetcar tracks embedded in asphalt or concrete have track-toearth resistances in the 0.1 to 1 ohm-1,000 feet range.
Occasionally, realizing the specified minimum track-to-earth resistance has not been an easy
task. Extensive troubleshooting and correction of construction deficiencies is sometimes
required, particularly for the bathtub configurations. Unfortunately, for many modern-day
transit lines, once the specified resistance is achieved and the construction is accepted, little
ongoing surveillance is performed to determine track-to-earth resistance levels periodically
during operation and maintenance. The authors believe periodic track-to-earth resistance
measurements are an important component of transit system O&M procedures. This facilitates
the reasonable detection and correction of anomalous conditions. It also aids in stray current
control programming as the rail system ages and track-to-earth isolation measures deteriorate.
Effective test procedures and troubleshooting techniques readily exist that can be performed
with little if any disruption to transit operations. Remote monitoring through the transit SCADA
system or other means is also technically viable with a short pay-back period.
This paper presents three case histories where ductile iron water pipelines were included in
the construction of light rail lines built within the last nine years. The pipelines were installed
under and parallel to the LRT lines, typically as a relocation of an existing pipeline because of
a conflict with the transit construction. The primary stray current control and monitoring design
for the pipelines consisted of pipe joint electrical bonding, test stations and polyethylene
encasement (ANSI/AWWA C105/A21.51). Cathodic protection using either galvanic anodes or
an impressed current system was not included.
The LRT tracks in the immediate vicinity of all three case histories are embedded in the street.
The rails are designed to have a high track-to-earth resistance. The insulating rail boot is used
in all cases for straight track sections.

The data from the ductile iron pipeline case histories document the stray current corrosion
control performance of the particular mitigation measures employed. They also aid in
developing stray current corrosion protection design guidelines for new ductile iron pipelines
constructed near light rail transit lines where positive track-to-earth isolation measures are
included.
FIELD EVALUATION PROCEDURES
Battery-powered portable digital dataloggers captured most of the field data. This included
pipe-to-soil potential measurements and pipe current measurements at test stations. Pipe
current measurements used a span of pipe as a calibrated shunt, either a 100-feet long span
with test wires brought into a common test station or by measuring the voltage drop across a
span of pipe between two consecutive test stations. Monitoring periods typically ranged from
one hour to one day depending on location and initial observations.
Where allowed by the transit operator, track-to-earth potential measurements documented this
parameter and related it to stray current effects detected on the ductile iron pipelines. In the
case of the Sacramento and Minneapolis evaluations, the track-to-earth resistance for the
section of LRT line in the immediate vicinity of the study area was determined.
CASE HISTORIES SACRAMENTO, SALT LAKE CITY, AND MINNEAPOLIS
Case History No. 1 - Sacramento, California
Operations for the Sacramento RT light rail transit system commenced in 1987 with an 18mile starter line. Since then, additional lines and extensions have been built, the most recent
being an extension of the Gold Line into the downtown central business district in late 2006.
The total length of the light rail system is currently 37 miles.
As part of the Gold Line extension, a 1,300-feet long section of paralleling 20-inch diameter
and 24-inch diameter riveted steel water pipelines was replaced with a single 42-inch diameter
ductile iron main. The riveted steel pipelines were installed in 1873 and 1903 respectively.
The new ductile iron pipeline crosses under the LRT tracks at two locations. It then extends in
the street perpendicular to the rail line for 800 feet. Figure 1 shows the basic arrangement.
The pipeline crosses the LRT at 7th and 8th Streets.
The new ductile iron pipeline design included polyethylene encasement, pipe joint bonding,
test stations, and pipe insulating flanges at tie-ins. At the onset of construction in 2005, the
pipeline contractor was trained on the proper installation of these materials. Due diligence by
the contractor and by the inspectors resulted in the quality installation needed for effective
stray current corrosion control. Figures 2 through 4 show photographs of the pipe
construction.
Figures 5 and 6 present sample datalogger traces (versus time) for two of the pipe-to-soil
potential measurements. Figure 7 shows pipe current flow (2 locations) and Figure 8 shows a
trace of the track-to-earth potential. Pipe-to-soil potential measurements were made at the
crossings with the LRT and at the end test station 800 feet perpendicular from the LRT line.
These locations typically would be expected to experience the maximum variations
(fluctuations) in pipe-to-soil potential because of transit operations, which the collected data

demonstrates. The pipe current measurements were taken at intermediate locations where
stray current flow along the pipeline is usually the greatest.
The polarity used for the pipe-to-soil potential dataloggers for each case history was such that
a positive potential change on the traces (with respect to absolute zero) indicates possible
stray current corrosion (anodic effects). A negative potential change indicates the transitgenerated stray current may be reducing pipe corrosion rates during the particular event
(cathodic effects).
The magnitude-time relationship for the potential and current measurements in Figures 5
through 7 are characteristic of a pipeline being influenced by a DC powered transit line. These
patterns are similar to those for the LRT track-to-earth potentials (Figure 8), indicating a
definite cause and effect relationship. Track-to-earth potentials typically vary throughout the
day with a predictable signature as traction power demands fluctuate. The fluctuations are
effected by transit vehicle acceleration and deceleration, and the number and location of
vehicles on the system, among other influencing factors. The track-to-earth potential
variations and the resulting stray current effects on nearby structures are caused by the
combined operation of transit vehicles along the entire rail system, not just the vehicles
operating in the immediate vicinity. The track-to-earth potentials represent a portion of the
total voltage drop developed in the running rails because of propulsion current through the rails
between the transit vehicles and the traction power substations.
As shown in Figures 5 and 6, maximum corrosive or protective variations are in the 0.03 to
0.05 volt range. Pipe current (Figure 7) is bi-directional with a typical maximum variation in
either direction of approximately 0.05 to 0.10 ampere. When analyzing transit generated stray
current effects on a pipeline or other structure, it is important to recognize that an individual
peak effect (e.g. potential or current) has a very short time duration. This is illustrated by the
expanded trace in Figure 9 that shows a 5-minute portion of the same pipe-to-soil potential
recording in Figure 5. Any given positive or negative peak in pipe-to-soil potential lasts less
than 10 seconds.
To better assess the stray current corrosion impact on pipelines, time weighted average values
of pipe-to-soil potential and pipe current are calculated. The time weighted average values
allow the dynamic (time varying) conditions to be related to interference effects caused by a
constant source of stray current, e.g., an impressed current cathodic protection system. The
horizontal lines in the potential and current traces in Figures 5 through 7 and 9 show the time
weighted values. This is also true for the data discussed later for the Salt Lake City and
Minneapolis case histories.
For the Sacramento ductile iron pipeline, the following time weighted average interference
effects are calculated:

Pipe-to-soil potential change, corrosive or protective no more than 0.007 volt.

Pipe current less than 0.015 ampere with the predominant direction westward away
from the LRT.

While the evaluation of the Sacramento water pipeline shows the LRT is causing stray current
interference, the magnitude and time varying nature of this interference is inconsequential to
pipe service life, provided there is no significant increase. Time weighted average variations in

pipe-to-soil potential would typically have to exceed 0.05 to 0.10 volt before raising a concern
relative to long-term pipe reliability. In such cases, further field investigation would be
appropriate to determine the corrosion control significance of the measured effects.
It is worth noting that a very low track-to-earth resistance, less than 1 ohm-1,000 feet, was
measured during the field testing for an approximate 1,000 feet long section of the LRT rails
near the two crossings with the water pipeline. These data were obtained during the early
morning hours when LRT vehicles pass through the area on a reduced schedule. The
minimum track-to-earth resistance for construction acceptance for the Sacramento RT (Gold
Line Extension) is 200 ohms-1,000 feet for embedded rails. Troubleshooting has been
undertaken subsequent to the water line evaluation to determine the cause of the out-ofspecification condition and establish a suitable course of action. For the particular water
pipeline evaluated, the insignificant stray current influences will be reduced even further once
corrective action is taken. The very low-level stray current effects on the water line
demonstrate the value of the selected stray current control measures, even under extreme,
anomalous conditions.
Case History No. 2 Salt Lake City, Utah
With the first phase opening for revenue service in 1999, the current total length of the TRAX
light rail system in Salt Lake City is 23 miles. Major sections of the TRAX rails are embedded
in the street. The construction specifications included a minimum track-to-earth resistance of
250 ohms-1,000 feet for acceptance of the embedded track.
Ductile iron water piping totaling over five miles was included in the TRAX construction. The
stray current corrosion control system of choice for much of the piping along the Sandy/Salt
Lake LRT line consisted of polyethylene encasement, pipe joint bonding and test stations. The
Sandy/Salt Lake line has been in service since 1999. The data discussed here was obtained
in October 2006, seven years after construction.
The pipe-to-soil potential traces in Figures 10 through 12 typify conditions along the
polyethylene encased and electrically continuous sections of ductile iron pipe that parallel and
cross straight track construction where the insulating rail boot was used. Pipeline test stations
for these measurements as well as other measurements in Salt Lake City are all within 50 feet
of the LRT tracks, often within 20 feet. The transit generated fluctuations vary from virtually
non-existent (Figure 10) to no more than a time weighted average of 0.01 volt (Figure 12).
Pipe current measured at one location (Figure 12) exhibited a total variation of 0.38 ampere.
The equivalent time weighted average current is 0.06 ampere. Similar to Sacramento (Case
History No. 1), the very low-level stray current effects are of little corrosion consequence,
provided there is no significant increase.
Figures 13 and 14 present pipe-to-soil potential traces near switch tracks that use an insulating
bathtub arrangement to increase track-to-earth resistance. While still considered tolerable,
the pipe-to-earth potential variations at these locations are notably greater than those
measured along the straight track sections (Figures 10 through 12). The maximum variations
occur near an embedded T track where the Sandy/Salt Lake LRT line connects to the
University Line. In this case, time weighted average corrosive and protective variations in
pipe-to-soil potentials of 0.034 volt and 0.042 volt are calculated respectively (Figure 14). A
records review indicates this condition was first detected in 2002. Experience suggests the

cause of the increased stray current effects is likely related to a less than desired track-to-earth
resistance for the special T track construction. It is quite possible the condition existed since
the T track was constructed in 2001. This points out the need for adequate track-to-earth
resistance testing during the construction phase to correct deficiencies before transit service
begins.
Figure 15 shows a pipe-to-soil potential trace for a ductile iron water main along the TRAX
University Line. This pipeline was constructed in 2001 and included a bonded dielectric
coating, pipe joint bonding, and test stations. Transit caused corrosive and protective
variations in pipe-to-soil potential are 0.011 and 0.014 volt respectively. At face value, there is
no discernible difference in stray current corrosion control performance when compared to the
polyethylene encased ductile iron pipelines discussed elsewhere in this paper. The primary
difference is the notably greater cost for the dielectric coating. Work by Kroon (Kroon, 20052)
indicates the dielectric coating typically represents a capital and life cycle cost increase of
more than 10% when compared to the pipe alone without corrosion control. In contrast, the
increased cost associated with polyethylene encasement is less than two percent.
Case History No. 3 Bloomington, Minnesota (suburb of Minneapolis)
Opened for service in 2004, the Hiawatha light rail line in the greater Minneapolis area is 12
miles long. It provides service between downtown Minneapolis, the Minneapolis/St. Paul
International Airport, and the Mall of America in Bloomington. A minimum track-to-earth
resistance of 200 ohms-1,000 feet was specified for construction acceptance of the embedded
track. A review of the construction records indicates excellent (high) resistances at that time
for embedded track, typically in the 500 to 1,000 ohms-1,000 feet range. A track-to-earth
resistance in excess of 600 ohms-1,000 feet was measured for a 1,700-feet long section of
LRT system in the immediate area of the pipeline measurements
The predominantly ductile iron water pipeline system included in this case history is operated
by the Bloomington Utilities Department. The piping evaluated parallels and crosses
embedded track near the Mall of America. Pipe construction along the LRT in Bloomington
included polyethylene encasement, pipe joint bonding, and test stations for stray current
control and monitoring. The Bloomington Utilities Department standard of construction for
ductile iron pipe outside the transit corridor includes pipe joint bonding for electrical thawing of
service laterals during the very cold winter months.
Figures 16 through 18 present potential and current traces for three locations included in this
case history. Figure 16 shows the pipe-to-soil potential traces at the three locations. Also
shown in this figure is a power neutral (electrical ground) to soil potential trace at Location No.
3. Figure 17 is a trace of pipe current. Figure 18 shows the track-to-earth potential
measurements.
Once again, the pipe-to-earth potential data and the pipe current data indicate stray currents
from transit operations have inconsequential effects on pipe corrosion rates. Referencing
Figure 16, corrosive and protective pipe-to-soil potential fluctuations are both typically less
than 0.01 volt. The limited monitoring period precludes an accurate calculation of the time
weighted average potential changes. As shown in Figure 17, measured variations in pipe
current are generally less than 0.2 ampere with a time weighted average value of 0.048
ampere.

Track-to-earth potentials (Figure 18) vary between +20 volts (stray current discharging from
the rails) and -20 volts (stray current accumulating on to the rails). The magnitude and bipolarity nature of the track-to-earth potentials are typical of an LRT system and do not indicate
any readily apparent operational irregularities.
Referencing Figure 16, the power neutral-to-soil potential trace (Loc. 2PN Power Neutral)
exhibits variations that are five times greater than the corresponding pipe-to-earth potential
variations at the same location (Loc. 2 Pipe). Typically, power neutral connections are more
sensitive to stray current influences as they represent a composite of effects because of the
extensive, distributed electrical neutral/grounding system. As such, power neutral-to-soil
potential measurements often provide a good first glance assessment of stray current effects
on the underground infrastructure.
The exemplary, inconsequential stray current impact on the Bloomington water lines is
consistent with satisfactory findings reported for the natural gas distribution system in the area
(Beggs and Fitzgerald 20053). The effective control of transit generated stray current is
attributed to proactive design and construction efforts for the transit system and for the
underground utilities. The gas company continues to monitor their facilities for stray current.
This includes permanent, buried clamp-on ammeters placed around the pipe at strategic
locations. Instrument wires from the ammeter clamps are routed to test stations used for
periodic surveillance and connected to a portable meter when measurements are made.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Stray currents emanating from DC powered light rail lines can be effectively minimized to
inconsequential levels by establishing and maintaining a high track-to-earth resistance,
which is practical to achieve. Track designs should be based on in-service conditions
expected over the life of the rail system, including the effects of moisture accumulating on
the track surface during rain events, snowstorms, etc.
2. The three case histories discussed in this paper demonstrate the effective use of
polyethylene encasement and pipe joint bonding for controlling and monitoring transit
generated stray current corrosion on underground ductile iron pipelines. These findings are
consistent with water line evaluations by others for the LRT in Portland, Oregon
(Greenberger 20054).
3. Data obtained in Salt Lake City indicate no discernible difference in the stray current
corrosion control performance of polyethylene encased ductile iron pipe when compared to
ductile iron pipe installed with a notably more expensive bonded dielectric coating.
4. Stray current corrosion control measures for ductile iron pipelines should be determined
based on project specific considerations. This includes the anticipated levels of stray
current leakage from the transit system over the desired life of the pipeline, O&M
procedures and commitment, and soil corrosivity. A holistic approach is best when defining
cost effective corrosion control measures, taking into account stray current impacts and
natural, galvanic corrosion rates.

5. For modern-day LRT systems that employ an effective means of isolating the rails from
ground, the minimum corrosion protection measure for ductile iron pipe should be
polyethylene encasement.
Project specifications and inspection practices should
adequately cover this item to avoid out-of-specification materials and assure a quality
installation.
6. Pipe joint bonding of polyethylene encased ductile iron pipe allows for stray current
monitoring, if deemed appropriate by the designer and pipeline operator. Cathodic
protection further reduces pipe corrosion rates and is completely compatible with
polyethylene encasement. The synergistic use of these two corrosion control strategies is
well proven based on several years of experience in highly corrosive soils (Lindemuth and
Kroon 20075, Horton et al 20056, Bell and Romer 20047).
7. While polyethylene encasement, with or without pipe joint bonding and cathodic protection,
is the stray current corrosion control method of choice for ductile iron pipelines near new
LRT lines, it may not be appropriate in all cases. This is particularly true when high levels
of stray earth currents exist or can be expected, e.g. older streetcar systems such as those
in Philadelphia and Boston. Again, stray current corrosion control measures should be
determined based on project specific considerations and analyses.
8. Utility operators should play an active role in the planning and design stages of new LRT
systems to assure adequate provisions are included in the construction to maintain stray
current levels to a practicable minimum. Master agreements between the utilities and the
transit agencies should include appropriate language to protect the utility infrastructure from
transit generated stray current over the life of the rail system. Utility operators should be an
integral part of the transit system design review process, including having stray current
corrosion control input for relocated utility facilities.
9. Once an LRT system begins service, utility operators should be cognizant of the need for
some reasonable level of stray current control surveillance. The extent of this surveillance
depends heavily on the in-service level of track-to-earth resistance maintained by the
transit agency.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the following agencies for their wholehearted support of and
participation in the stray current corrosion control evaluations summarized herein:

City of Sacramento Department of Utilities

Sacramento Regional Transit District
Salt Lake City Public Utilities
Utah Transit Authority (TRAX)
City of Bloomington Utilities
Metro Transit, Minneapolis/St. Paul Metro Area

REFERENCES
1. American Water Works Association. Polyethylene Encasement for Ductile Iron Pipe
Systems, ANSI/AWWA C105/A21.5, AWWA, Denver CO
2. D. Kroon. Life Cycle Cost Comparisons of Corrosion Protection Methods for Ductile Iron
Pipe. CORROSION 2005, paper no. 05037. (Houston, TX: NACE International, 2005)
3. J. Beggs, J. Fitzgerald. Stray Current Testing on Gas Distribution Piping Following StartUp of a New Light Rail Transit Line. CORROSION 2005, paper no. 05248. (Houston, TX:
NACE International, 2005)
4. S. Greenberger. Parametric Stray Current Monitoring and Mitigation for Electric Rail Stray
Current. CORROSION 2005, paper no. 05249. (Houston, TX: NACE International, 2005)
5. D. Lindemuth, D. Kroon. Cathodic Protection of Pipe Encapsulated in Polyethylene Film.
CORROSION 2007, paper no. 07040. (Nashville, TN: NACE International, 2007)
6. M. Horton, D. Lindemuth, G. Ash. Ductile Iron Pipe Case Study: Corrosion Control
Performance Monitoring In A Severely Corrosive Tidal Muck. CORROSION 2005, paper
no. 05038. (Houston, TX: NACE International, 2005)
7. G. Bell, A. Romer. Making Baggies Work for Ductile Iron Pipe. ASCE Pipelines-2004
Conference, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston VA

FIGURE 1 Sacramento Water Main Layout

FIGURE 2 Sacramento Water Main Construction 42 Diameter Ductile Iron

FIGURE 3 Sacramento Water Main Construction, Pipe Joint Bonding

FIGURE 4 Sacramento Water Main Construction

Proper Materials For and Installation of Polyethylene Encasement is a Must!

PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL CHANGE (VOLT)

0.05
8th Street at Transit Line 21+00

0.04

Time Weighted Corrosive (+) Potential Change +0.003 Volt

Time Weighted Protective (-) Potential Change -0.003 Volt

0.03
0.02
0.01
0
-0.01
-0.02
-0.03
-0.04
-0.05

3:00 PM

6:00 PM

9:00 PM

12:00 AM

3:00 AM

6:00 AM

9:00 AM

FIGURE 5 Sacramento Water Main Potential, 8th Street at Transit Line

0.05

PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL CHANGE (VOLT)

5th Street 10+00

0.04
0.03

Time Weighted Corrosive (+) Potential Change +0.007 Volt

Time Weighted Protective (-) Potential Change -0.005 Volt

0.02
0.01
0.00
-0.01
-0.02
-0.03
-0.04
-0.05

12:00 AM

3:00 AM

6:00 AM

9:00 AM

12:00 PM

3:00 PM

FIGURE 6 Sacramento Water Main Potential, 5th Street

6:00 PM

0.15
6th Street 13+00
7th Street at Transit Line 18+00

PIPE CURRENT (AMPERE)

0.10

Time Weighted Average (+) Current Westward +0.014 Ampere

Time Weighted Average (-) Current Eastward -0.012 Ampere

0.05

0.00

-0.05
7th Street

6th Street

-0.10

-0.15
3:00 PM

9:00 PM

3:00 AM

9:00 AM

3:00 PM

9:00 PM

3:00 AM

FIGURE 7 Sacramento Water Main Current

TRACK TO EARTH POTENTIAL (VOLT)

8th Street Transit Rails 21+00

6
4
2
0
-2
-4
Connection to rail temporarily
removed to allow LRT to pass (typ.)

-6
-8

10:00 AM

10:30 AM

11:00 AM

11:30 AM

12:00 PM

FIGURE 8 Sacramento Track-to-Earth Potential

12:30 PM

0.05

8th Street at Transit Line 21+00

PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL CHANGE (VOLT)

0.04

Time Weighted Corrosive (+) Potential Change +0.003 Volt

Time Weighted Protective (-) Potential Change -0.003 Volt

0.03
0.02
0.01
0
-0.01
-0.02
-0.03
-0.04
-0.05

5:05 PM

5:06 PM

5:07 PM

5:08 PM

5:09 PM

5:10 PM

FIGURE 9 Sacramento Water Main Potential, 8th Street at Transit Line (Zoom)

PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL VARIATION (VOLT)

0.03

0.02
S. Temple at W. Temple, At Downtown End Of TRAX

0.01

0.00

-0.01

-0.02

-0.03
11:00 AM

1:00 PM

3:00 PM

FIGURE 10 Salt Lake City Water Main Potential, South Temple

5:00 PM

0.03
PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL VARIATION (VOLT)

Main at 100S, Parallel To TRAX

Time Weighted Average Corrosive (+) Potential Variation +0.003 Volt

0.02

Time Weighted Average Protective (-) Potential Variation -0.003 Volt

0.01

0.00

-0.01

-0.02

-0.03
10:00 AM

12:00 PM

2:00 PM

4:00 PM

FIGURE 11 Salt Lake City Water Main Potential, Main at 100S

PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL VARIATION (VOLT)

0.03
Time Weighted Average Variation In Pipe Current = 0.06 Ampere (0.38 Ampere Peak)

0.02

0.01

200W at Fayette Avenue, Parallel to TRAX Sandy Line

Time Weighted Average Corrosive (+) Potential Variation +0.001 Volt
Time Weighted Average Protective (-) Potential Variation -0.009 Volt

0.00

-0.01

-0.02

-0.03
1:00 PM

2:00 PM

3:00 PM

4:00 PM

5:00 PM

FIGURE 12 Salt Lake City Water Main Potential, 200W at Fayette Avenue

0.30
PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL VARIATION (VOLT)

200W at 700S, Parallel to TRAX Sandy Line

Time Weighted Average Corrosive (+) Potential Variation +0.021 Volt

0.20

Time Weighted Average Protective (-) Potential Variation -0.023 Volt

0.10

0.00

-0.10

-0.20

-0.30
9:00 AM

12:00 PM

3:00 PM

6:00 PM

9:00 PM

FIGURE 13 Salt Lake City Water Main Potential, 200W at 700S

0.3
PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL VARIATION (VOLT)

Main at University (400S), at TRAX Switch Track, Northeast Corner

Time Weighted Average Corrosive (+) Potential Variation +0.034 Volt

0.2

Time Weighted Average Protective (-) Potential Variation -0.042 Volt

0.1

0.0

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3
9:00 AM

11:00 AM

1:00 PM

3:00 PM

5:00 PM

FIGURE 14 Salt Lake City Water Main Potential, Main at University

12:00 AM

0.30
PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL VARIATION (VOLT)

University Blvd. at 1100E, Parallel to TRAX University Line

Time Weighted Average Corrosive (+) Potential Variation +0.011 Volt

0.20

Time Weighted Average Protective (-) Potential Variation -0.014 Volt

0.10

0.00

-0.10

-0.20

-0.30
3:00 PM

9:00 PM

3:00 AM

9:00 AM

FIGURE 15 Salt Lake City Water Main Potential, University Blvd. (Dielectric Coating)

PIPE TO SOIL POTENTIAL VARIATION (VOLT)

0.03
LOC. 2PN
Power
Neutral

LOC. 3
Pipe

0.02
LOC. 2
Pipe

0.01
LOC. 1
Pipe

0.00

-0.01
LOC. 1 - Crossing LRT Near Mall of America - Pipe

-0.02

LOC. 2 - Crossing LRT at American Boulevard - Pipe

LOC. 3 - Paralleling LRT at I-494 - Pipe
LOC. 2PN - American Boulevard - Power Neutral

-0.03
6:00 AM

9:00 AM

12:00 PM

3:00 PM

FIGURE 16 Bloomington Water Main Potentials

6:00 PM

0.30

PIPE CURRENT (AMPERE)

LOC. 3 - Paralleling LRT at I-494

Time Weighted Average Current +0.048 Ampere

0.20

0.10

0.00
10:30 AM

10:35 AM

10:40 AM

10:45 AM

10:50 AM

10:55 AM

11:00 AM

FIGURE 17 Bloomington Water Main Current

20

RAIL TO EARTH POTENTIAL (VOLT)

LOC. 3
Rail

LOC. 1
Rail

15
10
5
0

LOC. 3 - At I-494
LOC. 1 - Near Mall of America

-5
-10
-15
-20
3:30 PM

4:30 PM

FIGURE 18 Bloomington Track-to-Earth Potential

5:30 PM