You are on page 1of 11

*~

IEEE Power Engineering Society

Substations Committee

3124

IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-104, No. 11, November 1985

REVIEW OF ANLYICAL ME[HDS FOR CALCUI.ATING


THE PERFORMANCE OF LARGE GRCIJNDING ELECTRODES
PART 1: THOREICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Tata consulting Engineer


Bombay, India

Dinkar Mukhedkar
Senior member
I.E.E.E.

Mansour Loeloeian

R. Velazquez

R. P. Nagar

Member.) I.E.E.E.
Instituto de Investigaciones
Elec tricas, Cuernavaca,
Mexico

Y. Gervdis

Member, I.E.E.E.

Ecole Polytechnique, Montreal, Quebec,


Canada

Abstract - The equations on the computation of


grounding system performance presented in most of the
papers are based on two basic concepts: the calculation
of the leakage current in di-Eferent linear segments of
a grounding electrode, and the use of these leakage cuirrent values to find the potential at any desired point
around the ground electrode layout. Generally most of
the papers published have not been easy to understand.
They are based on the fundamental electromagnetic conThis paper
cepts and some additional assumptions.
summarizes the analytical review of the different
methods and identifies the differences among them. The
question of applicability and accuracy is discussed in
a companion paper 11].
INTRODUCTION
The conventional methods, based on the simplified
equations, have been extensively used in the past to
determine the performance of the grounding electrodes.
With the growth of number and the size of electric
networks and the increased concern for the safety of
personnel and equipment and their economnic value, it
became essential to develop accurate and versatile methods for solving grounding system problems [2,3]. The
computation of the exact performance of grounding electrodes such as substation grounding grids has therefore
been the subject of many studies during the last decade
[4,5,6,7,8,9]. Today, we have several computer-oriented
powerful methods which can determine the accurate solutions of grounding problems. With some minor exceptions, all of these methods, are based on the fundamental concepts of simplified equations used in the past.
This paper is an attempt to summarize a phase of this
knowledge with reference to basic principles and concepts of the classical methods of analysis. It is hoped
that this will pave the way for a better appreciation
and application of those recently developed techniques
for
computing the performance of large grounding
electrodes.
First the characteristics of the earth as a medium
around grounding electrodes is discussed. Also their
representation in an analysis by the basic electromagnetic field equations and their application to
grounding problems are dealt with. Because these are

83 SM 427-2 A paper recommended and approved by the IEEE Substations Committee of the
IEEE Power Engineering Society for presenta-

tion at the IEEE/PES Summer Meeting, Los


Angeles,California, July 17-22,1983.

Manuscript submitted August 30,1982;made


available for printing May 4,1983.

frequently referred but seldom described aspects of the


analysis for the base of both the classical and the
computer-oriented methods. Next the basic features of
a
the computer-oriented methods are described in
generalized manner. The basic differences amongst them
are discussed with reference to the basic equations. A
list of the symbols is given on page 6 of the paper.
BASIC ELEMENTS OF ANALYSIS

grounding system
The main objective of the
analysis is to compute the expected performance of the
ground electrodes which may form the basis of their
The basic performance of grounding electrodes
design.
is defined by:

impedance/resistance

of the electrode,

(1)

Ground

(2)

Potential differences on the ground surface and


in the earth near the electrode during externally
impressed electromotive forces.

The computed performance of a grounding


depends primarily on:

and

layout of

electrode

the

ground

(i)

Shape, size
electrodes,

(ii)

Characteristics of the earth as conducting medium


around the electrode,

the

(iii) Nature of the impressed electromotive


(magnitude, frequency, waveshape).

force

BASIC APPROACH.
The grounding electrodes can be of any shape and
Most of themn are comprised of linear conductors
size.
and are buried close to the ground surface. Test electrodes used in grounding measurements are installed at
the ground surface and have relatively small physical
They are therefore assuimed to be small
dimensions.
hemisphere or point electrodes. As such, the studies
on these two basic types of electrodes covers almost
all general grounding problems of practical importance.
The earth is represented as a semi-infinite, isotropic, uniform/stratified medium, characterized by its
electrical conductivity (or resistivity). The conduction of currents in the earth is governed by the elecThe spatial
tromagnetic laws applicable to metals.
extent of grounding electrodes is generally very small
as compared to the skin depth at 50-60 Hz power
frequency current flows. As stuch, the propagation time
can be neglected and the performance of the grounding
electrodes during dc and ac power frequency current
flows can be determined by the electromagnetic field
analysis techniques for stationary fields.

0018-9510/85/1100-3124$01.00(1985 IEEE

3125
ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD EQUATIONS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS
The current flow and the potential gradient in the
earth in response to an impressed electromotive force
must satisfy the basic electromagnetic field equations
and various boundary conditions imposed upon by the
The electromagnetic
medium and grounding electrodes.
field equations define basic relationships among the
and
electric potential gradient, current density,
electric field intensity as follows.
The potential gradient at any point P(x,y,z) is:

V)=La

ax

a) + k f
ay

Where r and r' are distances between point P and


current source s and its image s' respectively and r
represents unit vector in radial direction.

The electric
equation (5).

'V o

(2)

The electric current density, defined as a vector


quantity in the direction of the current flow (normal
to equipotential surface), is given by the equation

(3).

4f

by

r +

= -

given

is

(5)

the

Therefore, the potential at point P, defined as


the integral of the electric force between ponit P and
an infinitely remote point is given by the equation

(6).

az

The electric field intensity, defined as a vector


quantity in a direction opposite to potential gradient
is given by the equation (2).
= -

intensity

PI

EPJ

Vp =

where 0 is the potential at point P, and I, 3 and k


denote unit vectors in the direction of X, Y and Z
coordinate system.

field

(3)

J=aE

f
r

E dr

IP

or

47

1
+

[.

r'"

(6)

1r

Applications of these concepts to the analysis of


point electrodes buried in a two layer soil are given
in appendix 1.
LINEAR CONDUCTOR
Consider that a linear conductor Is of length L
and radius as is dissipating current I in a homogeneous
soil of electrical resistivity P as shown in figure 2.

These basic equations are used extensively in all


analytical methods.
The case of an infinitely small
electrode, commonly referred to as a point electrode,
and whose physical dimensions do not have any influence
on its grounding performance, is used to illustrate the
application of these quantities because this electrode
may be considered as the basic element of any type of
grounding arranginent.
This will form the basis of
almost the entire analysis.

I'S

ip

POINT ELECTRODE IN HOMOGENEOUS SOIL

Consider that the current source s in figure 1 is


point electrode, dissipating current I in an homnogeneous soil of resistivity P. According to the method
of images, its image, located at distance d equal to
twice the buried depth of the point electrode, will
also dissipate current I' = I. The current density at
any point P due to current dissipated from electrodes s
and its image s' will be given by the equation (4).
a

I
=

47f

I
[ 2r +
r

r'

2. ...

iS

Figure 2: Representation of a linear conductor by point


source current approach.

(4)

By assuming that a linear conductor is a succeof point current sources arranged along the path
described by the linear conductor, the potential Vp
induced at any point P due to the current I dissipated
into the earth by the linear conductor I and its image
may be obtained by either summatiolisor by integrating the potentials produced by the succession of point
current sources. By summation method we have,
ssion

-I-w

Vp= 4 PX j=i;
n
I = z

j=1

I.

r.

I.

r'

ri p

I.

where I. is the current dissipated into

Figure 1:

Point current source buried


soil.

in

homogeneous

(7)

(8)

the earth by
point Jcurrent sources j (j=l,2,....,n) and their
images, located at distances r. and r'
respectively
JP
jP
from the point P.

3126
By assuming a uniform linear leakage current
density over the conductor surface and by considering
that each point current source is a linear element of
length ax, the equation (7) can be written as:

P Iax

V.

__

4irL s

j=l

-I

Jp

r.
Jp

di(x)

r.

By integration method we have,


1
p L
- f5[ 4 ir o
r.

vp =

Jp

r'

JP

dx

where, i(x) represents the distribution of leakage


current density along the length of the conductor. By
assuming a constaat leakage current density over the
conductor length, the equation (10) can be written as:
pI

[-l

4irL s

Vp

+ -1 ]

dx .

(11)

r'

The potential on the surface of a metallic lossless conductor must be constant. As it is difficult to
determine the distribution of linear leakage current
density which can satisfy this boundary condition, the
method of average potential is used for determining a
reasonably accurate value of the potential on the
conductor surface.

If, V(x , a ) is the potential obtained at any


point P(x , a ) on the conductor surface by assuming
uniform linear leakage current density, the average
potential is given by the following expression:
1
=

V(xs, as) dxs

Ls

(12)

The grounding resistance of a linear conductor,


also defined as the ratio of the voltage on the
conductor surface to the current that flows out of it,
is then given by the following equation:
R

sav

(13)

By considering the point P(xk, a) over


the
surface of another linear conductor 'k of length Lk and
radius a, the potential V(x ,ak) induced at this point
due to tle current I dissipated by the linear conductor
s can be determined by using equation (9) or (11).
However, this potential V(xk, ak) will also vary along
the length of the conductot Ik. Average potential is
taken over the surface of the conductor I to satisfy
the equipotential condition. Thus, average potential
induced on the linear conductor Ik due to the current I
dissipated from the conductor X
is given by the
following equation:

Vka = L--k f

V(xk, ak) dxk

ANALYSIS OF COMPLEX GROUNDING ELECTRODES

grounding performance of small linear conducdetermined by calculating the average of the


potentials obtained by assuming uniform linear leakage
tors

The
is

density over the conductor surface. The current


dissipated from different parts of a large grounding
electrode, formed by interconnecting a number of linear
conductors, is seldom uniform [5,6]. However, it is not
current

possible

to obtain an accurate potential distribution


the surface of a conductor or in the earth by the
potential method.
average
Alternative methods of
solving this problem are next reviewed, with reference
to a simple grounding electrode.
on

The accuracy of the results obtained by the


summation method would depend on the number of small
segments into which a linear conductor is sub-divided.
The integration method has no such limitation.

Vsav

(15)

The same basic concepts can be applied to determine R and R


values for linear grounding electrodes
buried in a ' two-layer soil. As in the case of point
electrode (Appendix 1), the solutions will comprise two
basic terms, one representing the primary field effect
and a second one representing the secondary field
effect due to the presence of basement layer.

(10)

dx

Vkav

Rk,s

(14)

Then, the mutual resistance R


between linear
conductors lk and I defined as the'voltage produced on
conductor I due to unit current dissipated from the
conductor k is given by the Following equation:
Si

IEEE STD. 80 METHOD


In this

method,

maximum values of the touch and


which might be produced on the ground
surface of a substation during the flow of ground fault
cu1rrents from a symmetrical grounding grid into
homogeneous earth are calculated by making a number of
simplifying assumptions [3]. Touch and step voltage
values, obtained by simplified equations are multiplied
by the irregularity correction factors to account for
the effect of non-uniform flow of currents
from
different parts of a grounding grid. Advantages and
limitations of this method have been extensively
reviewed and highlighted in several papers [5,9].
Various limitations of this method are presently being
examined by an IEEE committee for the revision/updating
of the present IEEE Std. 80.

step voltages,

C,OMPUTER-AIDED METHODS
Several computer-aided methods have been developed
during the last decade to simulate the grounding
performance as well as to obtain economic designs of
large grounding grids on the basis of realistic
modelling techniques [4,5,6,7,8,9]. The computer-aided
methods can compute potential gradients at any point on
the electrode surface or in the earth surface, thanks
to
its ability to calculate non-uniform flow of
currents from different parts of complex grounding
electrodes. They can be applied to grounding grids and
electrodes of all types of geometric configurations,
buried in either homogeneous or two-layer earth models.
Basic Concepts

Using Green's function concept, a buried electrode


dissipating a current I in the earth will produce at
any point P a potential

V,

ffrG(P,Q)
s

J(Q) ds,

where, J(Q) is the cutrrent density


electrode

surface
such
that
dissipated by this electrode is

I =

ffJ(Q)
s

ds,

at a

the

(16)
point Q on
total

the
cuirrent

(17)

and, G(P,Q) is the Green's function, which in this

case

3127
may be viewed as the potential induced at point P by
unit current flowing away trom the electrode surface at
point Q.

This concept forms the basis for determining the


current distribution and the resulting potentials on an
electrode surface and in the earth. Since it is not
easy to find the Green's function (which may involve
numerical integration in any case), the concept of
electrode segmentation is used in the computer-aided
methods of solving such problems.

Assuming the earth as a linear medium and knowing


that the potential is a scalar quantity, it is justified to assume that the potential induced at any point in
the earth -or on the electrode surface will be the sum
of the potentials resulting from the individual currents associated with each element forming an electrode.
Based on this consideration, a complex grounding elec-

trode comprising linear conductors may be subdivided


into a number of reasonably small segments. The current
density may be considered constant over each segment
(optimum length of a segment as a function of electrode
dimensions and related parameters, if any, has not been
defined thus far). The linear leakage current density
over various segments -is allowed to vary in order to
satisfy the boundary condition that the potential on
the surface of an electrode must be constant.

Thus, a grounding grid dissipating current I from


total conductor length L, may be subdivided into n
straight segments j (j=1,2,...,n) of lengths I. <L.
Therefore, the following relations hold:
its

total conductor length,

total current,

Il

j=1

n
S

R.

For a point P located on the surface of segment i


function G(P,Cd) represents the mutual resistance
between segments i and j, defined as:

Vi

i.

or

where S. is the leakage


factor J[i0I satisfying:

,i=l

VP

-=

l=

j=1
n

j=l

(21)
(22)

i. = i S.
I
I
current density

L =For an electrode
equations (16) and (17)

and

(23)

divided

into

can be written as

G(P,C.)
I.

distribution

1
3s

Ij

[9],

Z R.

j= 1

I.

1,

(24)

can

(28)

i=1,2,...,n

Considering that potential V ,* is induced at the


centre of segment due to the average leakage current Ij
dissipated by the segment j, equation (24), in accordance to Dawalibi-Mukhedkar method [10], can be written
as:

where

actual linear leakage current density,


T.

(26)

= 0 , i *j

n
1

lV.

(29)

i=1,2,...,n

j= 11,

With voltage induced on each segment of the


electrode being expressed by one simultaneous equation,
n simultaneous equations can be written for a grounding
n
into
These are
divided
electrode
segments.
simultaneously expressed in matrix form as:

(20)

Based on these considerations, equation


be written as:

Vi

(19)

=-

Similarly, for a point P located on the surface of


segment j, the function G(P,C.) represents the self
resistance R.
defined as:
J,i
V. (I.)
I
R. . = J
(27)
i IJ
I.

average linear current density,


i

(i-)

V.
R

(18)

I.
I

j=-

the

Segmentation of Electrodes

where, Vp is the potential induced at a point P due to


current I dissipated from the geometrical centre C of
the segment j, and G(P,C.) is the average valueJ of
G(P,Q) on the surface of gegment j.

segments,

(24)

(25)

[VI

[VI

= 1v1,

[I]

{ R. . } an nxn symmetric matrix referred


1,3
to as resistance matrix.

[R][I]

(30)

v2, ...

[II , I

*..

I.]T

Considering that all segments are part of the same


and
electrode
neglecting potential drops in the
segments, it can be assuimed that potentials in all
segments are equal to the electrode voltage rise, Vg
with respect to remote earth, that is:

Vg

Vi =

therefore

(31)

i=1,2,...,n

-1

[I] - Vg [RI

(32)

The potential rise of the grounding electrode is:


V

(33)

g
The grounding resistance R
of the electrode,
for determining the exact magnitudes of
required
currents I., can be calculated by one of the two

following Jmethods:
1.

Calculation

currents
Ij(p.u.)
voltage rise, that is Vg=l,
The
by
solving
equation (32).
grounding
resistance of the electrode is then given by:

corres ponding

of

segment

to unit

3128

R
2.

j=l

3.

Mathematical expressions corresponding to equations (12) and (13) are used in Giao-Sarma's,
Dawalibi-Mukhedkar's, and Meliopoulos' methods to
In the
determine Vj,j and R-,1 respectively.
method developed by Heppe, the self resistance
Rj,j is calculated as a special case of mutual
resistance given by basic equation (15).

4.

the
grounding
In Kouteynikoff's method [8],
electrode is divided into segments, some of which
are further sub-divided into microsegments in such
a way that the self resistance of a segment may be
By
calculated by using the point source concept.
considering that equation (6) does hot provide an

pu
j(p.u.)

nxn
reducing
of
Garrett-Holley method [11]
resistance matrix into an input resistance of the
electrode.

Once the grounding resistance of the electrode has


been determined, its actual potential rise and current
distribution in various segments can be calculated.

The general performance parameters of grounding


grids such as touch, step and transfer voltages are
determined by potential distribution and grounding

accurate value of potential near the point of


of current, Kouteynikoff's method
dissipation
provides a more precise mathematical expression to
determine potentials in the close proximity of an
infinitely smail microsegment of radius a and
length b (see equation I in the companion paper).

resistance of the electrode. The potential produced at


any point P(x, y, 0) on the ground surface is given by:

V(x,

y,

0)

n
V.(x,

y,

0)

1,2,...,n (35)

j=1

where V (x, y, 0) is the potential ptoduced at point


P(x, y,10) by current Ii dissipated into the earth by a
Therefore,
linear segment j of the grid electrode.
touch voltage at any point is given by the following
equation:
E (X, Y, 0)

=V

V(x, y

(36)

0),

and step voltage between points P(x, y, 0) and Q(xl


Y1, 0), where a person's feet may be in contact with
the ground surface is given by:

Es(x

,y,

O)

V(x,

y,

O)

V(x1,

Y1,

(37)

COMPUTER-ORIENTED METHODSS OF COMPUTATION

Mathematically, the resistance Rj,j of a segment


belonging to a large electrode and the grounding
resistance Rg of an isolated linear conductor represent
Similarly, the mutual
the same physical quantity.
resistance Ri,i between two segments i and j of a
grounding electrode and the mutual resistance between
the
same.
two independent linear conductors are
Analytical expressions for linear conductors, derived
by assuming uniform linear leakage current density over
the conductor surface, are therefore commonly used for
segment
linear
determining the performance of a
belonging to a large grounding electrode. Different
mathematical expressions, dependent on methodology, and
the assumptions adopted for their derivation are used
for determining the resistance coefficients of the
corresponding matrix.
The basic expressions of the different methods as
well as additional assumptions made correspond to the
equations of this papet as follows.
1.

2.

Mathematical expressions corresponding to equation


(11) are used in the methods developed by GiaoSarma [4], Dawalibi-Mukhedkar [5,11], Heppe [7],
and Meliopoulos [9], for determining the potential
induced at any point in the earth or over the
conductor surface due to current dissipated from a
linear conductor.
The potential V., , induced on segment j due to
current dissipated by segment i is calculated at
using
the geometrical centre xj;, y , z; by

mathematical expression* corresponding to equation


(11) in the methods developed by Giao-Sarma and
Dawalibi-Mukhedkar.
However, mathematical expressions corresponding to equations (14) and (15)
by Heppe
are used
in the methods developed
and R.
and Meliopoulos for determining V.
iJ
I,1
respectively.

Equation (6) and the equation for the microsegment


then selectively used for determining the
are
and R. ..
coefficients R.
L,J
j,J
The exact current distribution in segment j is
used for calculating the mutual res-istance between
segment j and other segments adjacent to it. The
potential induced due to currents dissipated from
various microsegments of segment j is calculated at
three points on the surface of adjacent segment i, and
the average of this value is taken to be the mutusal
resistance Ri,j. Mutual resistance between the segment
j and distant segments, located at distances greater
is calculated by an equation similar to (6),
than d
[equation (I5) in Kouteynikoff's paper], by considering
that the current is dissipated from the centre of
segment j and potential is induced at the centre of the
distant segment.

Thus, the solution of the integral equations of


current sources is not required in this method of
and R.
determining resistances R.
line

CONCLUSIONS

natural and necessary extension of the


methods of calculating the performance of
grounding electrodes, various computer-oriented methods
developed in recent years have reached that stage of
development, where they can be applied with confidence
the performance of complex grounding
to
compute
electrodes whose number is inultiplying with the rapid
growth of technology.
As

classical

After a conceptual comparison of basic equiations


obtained from the electromagnetic field theory with
those mathematical expressions tused in the different
computer-oriented methods, no major differences are
different
expected during the application of all
methods to practical grounding electrodes.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Tihe authors would like to express their appreciato Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
concil of Canada for their financial assistance.
tion

REFERENCES

[1]

M. Loeloeian, R. Velazquez, D. Mukhedkar, "Review


for
Calculating the
Methods
of
Analyt ical
Performance of Large Grounding Electrodes", Part
11- Numerical Results. Companion Paper Submitted
to IEEE PES Summer Power Meeting, 1983.

3129
r,r :
s,'S :
1

,r

P. G. Laurent,"Guide sur le Calcul, l'Execution et


la Mesure des Prises de Terre", Revue Generale de
l'Electricite, Vol. 81,No. 7/8, pp. 455-467 (Jul/Aug. 1972), and No. 9, pp. 563-572 (Sept. 1972).

G(P,Q):

[3]

IEEE, "Guide for Safety in Substation


IE-EE std. 80-1976.

i .:

[4]

T. N. Giao, M. P. Sarma, "Effect of a two Layer


Earth on the Electric Field near HVDC Ground
Electrodes.", IEEE Transaction on Power Apparatus
and Systems, Vol. PAS-O1, No. 6, pp. 2356-2365,
November 1972.

V(x,a):

D. Mukhedkar, "Optimum Design


of
in
a two Layer Earth
Grounding
Structure", Parts I, II and III. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol.
PAS-94, No. 2, pp. 252-272, March/April 1975.

R:
g
R. :

[2]

[5]

16]

[7]

[8]

[9]

Grounding",

Substation

J. G. Sverak, "Optimized Grounding Grid Design


Using Variable Spacing Technique", IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-95,
No. 1, pp. 362-374, January/February 1976.

R. J. Heppe, "Computation of Potential at Surface


Above
an Energized Grid or other Electrode,
Allowing for Non-Uniform Current Distribution",
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems,.
Vol. PA.S-98, No. 6, pp. 1978-1989, Nov./Dec. 1979.

"Numerical Computation
Grounding Resistance of Substations and
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and
Vol. PAS-99, No. 3, pp. 957-965, May/June

of

the

Towers",
Systems,

[10] J. Nahman, S. Skuletich, "Irregularity Correction


for

Mesh

i (x) :

L.:

P., I':

sav

(v),
potential induced at point P (V),
electric potential gradient (V),
electric soil resistivity (Q2.m).
reflexion factor.

Vp:

P=K(-):
K-

APPENDIX
Point Electrode in a two Layer Soil Model

Consider that the current source in figure 3 is a


point electrode, located in the ip layer of a two
layer soil model, dissipating current I. In accordance
to method of images, the currents di sipated by the
source and its images produce a't point P, a potential:

1980.

A. P. Meliopoulos, R. P. Webb, E. B. Joy, "Analysis of Grounding Systems", IEEE Transactions on


Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol.
PAS-100, No.
3, pp. 1039-1048, March 1981.

Factors

x,y,z:

F. Dawalibi,

P. Kouteynikoff,

unitary radial vectors,


current source and its image,
coordinates of point P (m),
Green's function representing the potential
induced at point P by a unit current at point
Q (V),
average leakage current density of a segment (A/m),
potential at any point over a conductor surface (V),
distribution of leakage current density (A),
conductor segment element (m),
linear conductors,
unitary vectors in X,Y,Z coordinate system,
self resistance to ground of a linear conductor (Q),
mutual resistance between two linear conductors (Q2),
average potential along a linear conductor

P
I

4f
1

co

n=l

K
Kn [(

and Step Voltages of Grounding

n-

~ 1r

r
+

r'f n-

r'
+

rn+

\
+

-)J J

(38)

r' n+

Grids", IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and


Systems, Vol.
PAS-99, No.
1, pp.
174-180,

January/February 1980.

rn+

[11] F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar, "Multi Step Analysis of


Interconnected

Grounding
Electrodes",
IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol.
PAS-95, No. 1, pp. 113-119, January/February 1976.

[12]

H. J. Holly,
"Calculation
of
Substation
Grounding
System Resistance Using
Matrix Techniques", IEEE Transactions on Power

Apparatus

and

Systems, Vol.

PAS-99, No.

2008-2011, September/October 1980.

[131

2nH _ _

D. L. Garrett,

5, pp.

M. Loeloeian, "Etude Comparative de Differentes


Methodes de Calcul de Mise a la terre", M. Sc.
Thesis, Ecole Polytechnique, April 1982.

HP

GLOSSARY OF SYMBOLS
a:

d:
h:
H:
i:

I:
J:
L Lk
L:s'
P:

r,,r':

P2

conductor radius (m),


distance between the source and its image (m),
electric field intensity (V/m),
conductor buried depth (m),
first layer heigth (m),
average leakage current density (A/m),
current leakage into earth (A),2
electric current density (A/n ),
total length of a linear conductor (m),
total length of ground electrode (m),
observation point,
distances between
observation (m),

current sources and

point of

2nfH

Figure 3: Point current source and the


point located in the top layer.

observation

3130
Considering the different options available due to
the location of the source and the point P, the following cases must be analyzed.

1.

Source and point located in the same layer:

(i) top layer (figure 3),


1
1 1 {,
2
4t I +y+(h-)
41T x +y +(h-z)

x+y(hz

rUnI
+

n=l

|x +y +(2nH+h-z)

+2+(2nHhz)2

P]H

2+y2 +(2nH+h+z)2

+x +y
y2 +(2nH-h+z)

J
2J2

P,
P2

(39)

(ii) bottom layer (figure 4),

VP

x2+y2+(2H-h-z)2

+(1-K 2 )

n=0 |

Kn
'2+ (2H

2+) J

x2+y2+(2nH+h+z)2

~~~+

Figure 5:

(40)
(ii)

Point current source in the bottom layer and


the observation point in the top layer.
Source
bottom

in the
layer

top

layer

and

point in the

In this case the expression is similar to (4f)


except for a change in the factor P2(1-K), for
which the same becomes- P(1+K), this two last
terms are equal [7J.

Figure 4:
2.

Point current source and the observation


point located in the bottom layer.

Source and point located in different layers.


(i) Source in the bottom layer and point in
top layer (figure 5),

P I

the

Vp
V = ~ 2_(-K)
(4 1K
n=0
+

2
2
2
x+y
+(2nH+h+z)

2 2
n+z 2
+(2nH+h-z)
4X-+y

,)

3131

Discussion
J. Nahman (University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Yugoslavia): The authors
are to be congratulated for a very thorough and readable comparative
review of different computer oriented methods in grounding system (GS)
analysis, being a necessary step in further improvement and development
of these methods. The discusser would like to supply some information
on another computer approach for handling GS in nonuniform soils [D1]
being used for GS design of several (sub) stations in the discusser's country. This method is concepted for modeling GS composed of straightline conductors in an arbitrary configuration, buried in a two-layer soil,
with conductors, generally, lying in both layers. The conductors are subdivided into segments, each segment lying entirely in a soil layer. The
basic expressions are same as (25) and (31) to (33) but used in a slightly
different form [D2].
[1]

Vg

Vp

(DI)
(D2)
(D3)

[RI [I]
[l]T[I]

=
=

[Rp]T[IJ],

[1] denoting n-dimensional column vector of units and entries of ndimensional column vector [Rp] being mutual ground resistances of GS
segments and point P.
By solving (DI) to (D3) the following expressions are obtained [D2]
Rg = ([1]T[R]-l[lJ)-l
Vg = Rg I
[If = AR]-1 Il]Vg

(D4)
(D5)

(D6)

As evident from (D4), Rg can be determined as inverse of the conductance obtained by summing all the entries of [Ri-1. This is another way
to obtain Rg, similar to (35). Since [Rl is a symmetrical matrix with
dominating diagonal entries, its inversion is easily performable for a rationally selected n.
The major difference between the method being reported in this discussion and the methods reviewed are in the approaches used for evaluating
the mutual resistances of GS segments with a point P and the self and
mutual resistances of the segments. Each segment is modeled with a thin
ellipsoid of revolution about the segment axis, end-points of the segment
being the foci of the ellipsoid and the shorter axis of the ellipsoid being
equal to the conductor diameter d. Such a model corresponds to the
assumption of uniform leakage current density along the segment axis.
Using this model, mutual ground resistance of a segment j and a point
P is

jp

V j (s)

(D7)

Ij

Vjp(s) being potentials at point P due to the segment images, s designating


the general index of images. The summation in (D7) is truncated at the
s-value for which the relative contribution of s-th image to Rjp value
can be taken as negligible. In general

D
4

VIy
I-

ln

-J
1

-D

+ e
-

()d

4 Xt;Jd

tj

D>
+
D-j +

tj

X2m

t~f"

d2

D being the sum of the distances of segment j or its image end-points


to point P. The second of inequalities in (D8) denotes that point P belings to segment j and, thus, will have segment j potential. Mutual

resistance of segments j and k is calculated as the average value of mutual


resistances of segment j with several, say m, points on segment k
distributed equidistantly along this segment. Parameter m has to be
adopted priorly as an input data for the computer program. One point
per meter of segment k suffices in the most practical cases, as shown
by comparative calculations. In a further version of the program, Rj,k
is determined by an iterative procedure in course of which parameter
m is gradually increasing until the desired accuracy of Rj,k is achieved.
The procedure starts with one point in the middle of segment k, the second iteration step uses three points, the third one seven points, q-th
step using m(q) = 2q -1 points. The points are equidistantly spaced, new
points added at each step halving the segment parts between the adjacent points of the previous steps (Fig. Dl). The Rj,k value after q iteration steps,
-

(q)
.-___________

_______

~.

(2)

-.

(1)

(3)
Fig. DI Points on segment k used at succeeding
iteration steps: . = points from previous steps,
x = points introduced as new at the step (2)

(q)

denoted Rj,k, is calculated as

(q)

Rj,k = (m

(q-1)

(q-l)

(q)

Rj,k + AR

)/m

(q)

(D9)

AR(q) being the summ of mutual resistances of segment j with the points
of segment k introduced as new at step q. The iteration procedure stops

(q)

(q-1) (q)

when Rj,k - Rj,k)/Rj,k < E, E being a sufficiently small number, say e


= 0.03. The iterative procedure described accelerates significantly the
calculations since using for mutually distant segments and images only
a few points. Due to the segment model applied in the method presented,
a good accuracy in the GS analysis is achieved when whole conductor
parts between adjacent joints or even few such parts are taken as
segments. The end-point coordinates of segments are the only data on
the GS configuration needed for the procedure.
REFERENCES

lD 1 ] J. Nahman, "Digital Calculation of Earthing Systems in

Nonuniform Soil," Archivf.Elektrotechnik, vol. 62, pp. 19-24,


1980.
[D2] J. Nahman, and S. Skuletich, "Resistances to Ground and Mesh
Voltages of Ground Grids," Proc. IEE, vol. 126, pp. 57-61, 1979.
Manuscript received July 27, 1983.

J. G. Sverak (Gibbs & Hill, New York): One appreciates the authors'
effort toward a better understanding of the computer-based analytical
methods. Yet, what they have done hardly qualifies as an impartial review
of the state of art of computerized grounding analysis (Part I), or as
a reasonably complete summary of principal computer algorithms and
their performance characteristics (Part II), which probably many a reader
has hoped to find. However, I feel that this paper can stimulate a useful
discussion, to which I would like to contribute the following points:
1 . The idea to review the analytical methods for calculating large grounding electrodes on computer is generally plausible; its execution by
the authors leaves a lot to be desired. It appears that, short of sending a sample problem to those parties whose methods have been selected as the potential candidates for such a review, it is genuinely difficult to obtain a meaningful and truly unbiased comparison. The fact
is that the authors have ended with comparing the DawalibiMukhedkar's method to two other methods and neglected a number
of other equally viable methods known from the literature; [15, 16,

171.

2. The decision to omit any comparison of the computation time and


memory requirements, constitutes a serious drawback that diminishes
the practical value of Part II. In my opinion, once Harrington [14]
described the method of moments to such a detail as showing the
calculation of the capacitance of a rectangular plate, the extension
of this method for the purposes of calculating grounding grids by
Sarma and others, has been more or less a straightforward application problem. This is to say, the main challenge has been in the programming area, in utilizing the known theoretical concepts within
constraints of a computer time and memory. In this respect, Heppe
must be credited with shedding a light on the problem of calculating
the "infinite" reflection series effectively, and describing the related
analytical aspects in detail and with a lucid clarity. Ironically, in this
paper he pays a price for having been more explicit about his programming approach than others, namely in comparison to the three-

3132

part Mukhedkar-Dawalibi's paper [5] preceding [7], or to the far more

[20] E. B. Joy, A. P. Meliopoulos, and R. P. Webb, "Analysis Techni-

sketchy Meliopoulos et al. [9], published later. For instance, after


reviewing the "new set of equations" and decoding the different symbols used, the only difference between Heppe's Eq. (A-6) and Eq.
(13) of Part II, is the order in which the individual terms are derived; if Heppe's terms are numbered consecutively from to 7, then
Eq. (13) shows the same terms in a 1-2-3-6-4-5-7 sequence. And, as
it is admitted in the last sentence of Part II, Eq. (14) produces "a
similar Equation to that given by Heppe," too. So would the authors
be more specific about the remaining equation left, and perhaps
demonstrate numerically the suggested catastrophic effect of roundoff errors associated with the j1Ul term of Heppe's Eq. (A-l 1)?
Anyway, a correction of some typographical errors in equations of
[7], is available in the March/April issue of PAS-99, No. 2, on page
535.
3 . In view of the above facts, it might have been more appropriate to
speak about Heppe's algorithm or Dawalibi-Mukhedkar's computer
program, rather than their "methods." For example, neither Heppe,
nor Crawford and Griffith [15], Robertson and Valentino [16],
Nahman [17], etc., have ever shown in their papers any inclination
to equate the programs they developed with a method of their own.
In fact, one can sense an ultimate programming purpose even behind
such an original refinement as Kouteynikoff's micro-segmentation:
Although he seemingly creates a nearly unwarranted complication,
his program is bound to be more efficient computationally than the
other two. Of course, this important aspect is all but lost on Part
II. No matter what, there is a certain parallel with the development
of power-flow computer programs two decades ago: one can use
Newton-Raphson, Gauss-Seidel, or similar techniques, to assure a
reasonably close numerical convergence process toward the theoretically known solution of the problem case by case. The concrete results
of Part II support this view point: Unless the question of computational efficiency is addressed, it hardly matters by which technique
one gets the work done.
4. Finally, as the chairman of the IEEE Working Group 78.1, "1983
Revision of Std. 80," I must also comment on the authors' assessment of the past and present efforts in updating the IEEE method.
It is very misleading to say that "Advantages and
limitations of this
method have been extensively reviewed and highlighted in several
papers [5,9]", without giving any reference written in the eighties.
Speaking about the era of [5, 9], including my own [6]: "Briefly
discussed with hardly any attempt to examine the roots of the problem" would have been a more candid description. R. P. Keil summarizes that period succinctly in his article [18]: ". In the 1970's,
papers were begipning to appear in the literature which questioned
not only the unknowns of the Guide, but also the theories and techniques developed in the Guide. It became vogue to write papers dismissing the value of the Guide." Indeed, had the contribution of these
papers been as good as the authors seem to indicate, the Working
Group would
havve lved a much easier life during the past five years,
and there would have been less of a need to initiate and participate
in three EPRI research projects [19, 20, 21], or to write [22] and [23],
with [22] being directly related to the outcome of EPRI RP-1494-2.
And, though unrelated to the EPRI-sponsored studies, ultimately
[23] has already laid the foundations for a revised IEEE method,
and the developed equations are now part of the IEEE document
P80/D1, currently balloted by the Substation Committee; [24].

ques for Power Substation Grounding Systems", EPRI research


project RP-1494-2, Final Report, July 1982.
[21] D. G. Casten, R. Caldecott, "Substation Grounding Scale Model
Tests", EPRI research project RP-1494-3, Interim Report, May
1983.
[22] E. B. Joy et al., "Graphical Data for Ground Grid Analysis",
IEEE paper 83 WM 102-1, (to be printed).
[23] J. G. Sverak, "Simplified Analysis of Electrical Gradients Above
a Ground Grid I - How Good is the Present IEEE Method?",
IEEE paper 83 WM 104-7, (to be printed).
[24] IEEE Document P80/D1, "Guide for Safety in a-c Substation
Grounding", Draft of June 1, 1983, Parts I-IV, by Working Group
78.1 of the Distribution Substation Subcommittee (under ballot).

REFERENCES

vvis: We are grateful to Professors Nahman and Salamon for their discus-

[14] R. F. Harrington, "Matrix Methods for Field Problems", IEEE


Proceedings, Vol. 55, No. 2,

[15] L. E. Crawford and M.

[16]
[17]

pp.

13&149, February 1967.

S. Griffith," A closer look at the Facts


of Life in Ground Mat Design", IEEE Trans. on Industry Applications, Vol. IA-15, No. 3, pp. 241-250, May/June 1979.
N. C. Robertson, A. R. Valentino, "Step Potentials Near a BuriedWire Grounding Electrode", IEEE Paper A79-402-9.
J. Nahman, "Digital Calculation of Earthing Systems in
Nonuniform Soil", Archiv Fur Elektrotechnik, Vol. 62, pp. 19-24,

1980.

R. P. Keil,
[18] Subs

"The History and Future of IEEE-80, Guide for


tation
Grounding",presented at EPRI Workshop on High-

Voltage Power-System Grounding, Atlanta, GA, May 12-14, 1982.


[19] F. Dawalibi, "Transmission Line Grounding", Volumes 1-2, EPRI
research project RP-1494-1, Final Report, October 1982.

Manuscript received August 27, 1984.


E. P. Dick (Ontario Hydro, Toronto, Ontario): The subject of this paper
appears from the introduction to be a review of computational methods
for analyzing grounding system performance. This is timely since the
gap between the theoretician and the utility designer needs to be reduced. The former believes designs should be optimized (customized) for
each station while the latter resists (prudently) using a computer program or service which is not understood. The former may also be
overlooking the economy of design standardization. It is interesting to
follow the progress of the new IEEE 80 which seems to stop just short
of promoting customized use of computational methods. From this
perspective, a review paper needs to be written to a wide audience.
In the discusser's opinion, the non-specialist may have trouble with
several concepts in this paper. For example, near equation(17) the subject of conductor segmentation is introduced as an approximation to the
Green's function. Could the authors introduce Green's functions to the
reader? A summary of the assumptions made by various computer programs would be helpful:
a) are conductor segments filamentary or cylindrical,
b) is the current density along a segment constant, linearly varying,
higher order or concentrated at one point,
c) is the potential for a segment taken at the segment center, from
a uniform average, from the Neumann integral or from the
analytical solution for a cylinder,
d) does the matrix solver use inversion, iteration, or partial reduction (multi-step)?
Conclusions regarding the expected tradeoffs between accuracy and efficiency for these options would be appreciated.
Could the authors also comment on the following:
a) why was "impressed electromotive force" used in place of "ground
current"? When should frequency and waveshape be considered?
b) should equations (1) to (3) be described as "electrostatic" rather
than "electromagnetic"?
c) is equaiton (9) based on a uniform or linear leakage current density?
d) is Appendix 1 original? Other references appear to show the last
part of equation (42) as (2nH-h + Z)2. If so, the last sentence of
the paper needs correction.
Manuscript

received August 18, 1983.

R. P. Nagar, R. Velazquez, M. Loeloeian, D. Mukhedkar, and Y. Ger-

sion. Their discussion has enhanced the quality of our paper. Their
method of calculating the mutual resistance by modeling each segment
by a thin ellipsoid of revolution about the segment axis completes the
review of the different methods (equation D7 of the discussion). The
authors have also provided detail algorithm for calculation of the mutual
resistances (Rj,k) by their method which is very useful.
The authors would like to thank Mr. E. P. Dick for his discussion.
We do not think that it is necessary to introduce Green's function. The
following assumptions were made for the different computer programs:
a) The conductors are considered filamentary in Heppe's and
Dawalibi-Mukhedkar's methods, where as in Kouteynikoff's
method they are considered as cylindrical.
b)Ove rive
a
egmen
n
nt the currentdensityconsidered constant
in Heppe's and Dawalibi-Mukhedkar's methods, while in Kouteynikoff's method it is considered constant on the surface of the
individual microsegment.
g

is

3133
c) In Dawalibi-Mukhedkar's method the potential of a segment was
considered at the center of the segment. In Heppe's method the
potential of a segment was derived from a uniform average potential from the Neumann integral, whereas in our case we used a
direct analytical integration as shown below:

fin(m+nu+.u)4du
2.k2 - (u-mn1 ) ln(m+nu.7+kk2 )-u
+ .-l.incu+$u2ok2)
2+in
) k-m tan (I+n)(u+u+k2
l-n
1-n
L2( 1-n2)k2_mk2

)+M

In Kouteynikoff's method the potential of a segment was calculated


by assuming the conductor as cylinder.

d) We used iteration method for matrix solving.


e) "Impressed electromotive force" was used to give a generalized
expression. The frequency or waveshape should be taken into consideration for the computation of transient impedences.
f) Equations (1) to (3) are the basic equations used in electrical
engineering and they are part of the basic electromagnetic
equations.
g) Equation (9) is based on linear leakage current density.
h) The appendix I is not original. The term (2nH + h-z) of our paper
was taken from reference [7].
We would like to thank Mr. Dick for correcting the English and the
typographical errors. We would also refer readers to the discussion of
Part II of this paper for related information.
Manuscript received November 5 , 1984.