IEEE Transactions on Power ApparatusandSystems, vol. PAS-94, no.

2, Match/April 1975

O F " DESIGN OF SUBSTATION GROUNDINGIN A TWO LAYER EARTH STRUCTURE
PART I - ANALYTICAL STUDY
Farid Dawalii Dinkar Mukhedkar
Member IEEE Senior Member IEEE
The Shawinigan Engineering Co. Ltd. Ecole Polytechnique
Montreal, Quebec, Canada Montreal, Quebec, Canada

plex electrode in a two layerearth structure.
The fmt part of the study describes the theoretical basis of the
- Finally, the resistance of large electrodes is determinedfrom the
known expression of the potential. Mutual resistance is determined
programs and compares the two analytical methods of potential calcu-
by a similar process.
lations, the summation and the integration methods. The second part
contains essentially a comparison between the theoretical calculations
1.1 Potential calculation
derived in this paper,experimentalresultsobtainedin scaled down
model [2], and other theoreticalcalculationscurrently used in the
1.1.1 Point source electrode
industry 131. The final part will discuss the efficiency of different usual
electrode configurations and will introduce new configurations.
Consider an infinitesimalelectrode j (pointsourceelectrode)
whose coordinates with respect to the reference axis x,yq are xj, yj, zj.
SYMBOLS
Electrode j is located onthe u axis of acoordinate system uvw
p1 : Firstlayerresistivity(ohm-meters)
(fiw1).
p2 : Second layerresistivity(ohm-meters)
-
K = ( p 2 p 1 )/(p2 + p1) : reflection factor 0
h : Heightof f m t layer(meters)
I : Totalcurrentinjected into earth bytheelectrode(amperes)
i : Average linear
current
density
in
the
electrode (i = I/L),
(Amperes/meter)
L : Total length of the electrode's buried conductors (meters)
Ij : Totalcurrentinjected
(amperes)
intoearth by partj of the electrode t z
W
PIane xoy is the surface
of the earth
ij : Linear current density in part j of the electrode (amperes/meter)
bj : Numerical factor which takes into account the nonuniform Fig. 1. Point source electrode in a two layer earth
linear current density in part j of the electrode
x,y,z : Coordinates relative to the reference axis
u,v,w : Coordinates relative to the axis associated to a part of the elec-

r
trode (meters)
: Distance betweenapointin
earth (meters)
the electrode and a pointin the i-
-f;-;--
m : Number of subdivisions of the electrode
e : Depth of burial ofan horizontallinearconductor of the elee
trode (meters)
a : Angle between the ox axis and the o'u axis (degrees)
p~ : Length reductionfactor
pp : Resistivity reductionfactor.

1. Theoretical study

The theoretical study was carried out according to the following
sequence
- Calculation of earth potential due toa point source electrode

Paper C 74 191-3, recommendedand approved by the IEEE Substations 'J '
Committee of the IEEE PowerEngineering Society for presentation at the IEEE
PESWinterMeeting,NewYork, N.Y., January27-February 1, 1974. This paper
w a s upgraded to transactions status, T 74 191-3, for presentationby title for writ-
ten discussion at the IEEE PES Summer Meeting, Anaheim, Cal., July 14-19, 1974.
Manuscript submitted September 4,1973; made available for printing April9,1974. Fig. 2. Method of images
252

. . .2. d .du oj 1+ F oj m E?(++ n=l nJ- I yl nj- trode.Subdivisions of a large electrode Assume also that the total length of the electrode conductors is L. Since the potential is a scalar quantity the potential at a point M 1. YO. = m (or k. Under this condition the currentdistribution will be heavier in theconductors which are the closest to the fault location. However. Im J r--r--r---. electrode configuration and proximity of fault. therefore: ': If the electrode is large and has a complex geometrical shape(sub- stations grounding electrode)thenequation 2 can not be used directly.21 Summationmethod of the top layer is the s u m of the potentials due to each element j in- jecting a current Ij. Summation method . The conductors which were very close to the return electrode were corroded substantially more than the far ones) [7].1' 4rrL 1 [ + . + I. we can write: Z i Fig..xo) 2 + (Yj' YOl2 + c* . ( T h i s has been verified on the scaled down model. It can be shown then that the potential at any point located in the top layer of a two layer earth 6. If the electrode Equation 4.= [(xJ . (zj-zo)32 I4 d c is the distance between element j and the fault location (effect of fault proximity) Ifwe assume a uniform current distribution in the electrode then 1. I = I1 + I2 + . 6.2 Ractical electrode 6 j = l . a is a constant chosen to satisfy equation 8 d d is thedistance between elementj and center of electrode (effect of electrode configuration) rl nj. Coordinates of electrode j and point M Ij = $ x i d u = g . the worst phase to ground faults to be considered are faults occuring at the vicinity of a substation. i d u (61 J Theelectrode is injecting acurrent Ii in the soil. j = l . . . Each elements theseof earth a current Ij such that: has the same du length and injects into 253 +-1 'nj+ + k) nJ+ I (10) . .1.is a numerical factor which takes into accountthenon uniform st~ctm is given as (figure 2 and 3): currentdistribution in the electrode. m (figure 4) which can be considered as infintes- imal. + m C 6.. In order to avoid this difficulty the electrode is divided into small ele- . + . inall practical cases. 3. 4. then the average h e a r current density inthe electrode is: i = I/L f From equation 1.. . The following formulae is proposed to determine 6j. I\ Fig. then 6j depends only on the geometrical shape of the electrode and can be calculated using the matrixmethod [ 6 J .. If the returncurrentelectrode location (Location of phase to ground fault) is remote from the elec dVj= *[*+ p i.. .2.. m.=a 3 J dfj where.. Therefore 6j must be estimated by the design engineer so as to satisfy equation 8.v. w0) can be calculated using the method of images (41 or by 1 J solving directly Laplace equation [ 51.j. ments 1.du j J Thepotentialatapoint M whose coordinates are ~0. m 1 roj . and gives: length is du then I = i.

1.) and knowing that v = 0.zs=zp=e dv = e (w.uniform current density in each linear conductor 1. 6.w -v s h + xs y = u s ~ + v c o s Y + y s + 1 z =w+zs z = z = e S P The total potential at point M due to theconductor is: by replacing in equation 3 +. This conductor is located on the u axis of the uvw coordinate system. 2 54 .v. w = 0. yo.w. Integration method . x.1. zo. 7.horizontal conductor Fig. The coordinates of the conductor Y are: X t U f U ' 0' Fig. wo) due to an infinitesimal part du of the conductor (figure6) is given by equation 2.221 Case of one horizontal linear conductor Consider an horizontal linear conductor (figure 5 ) buried ata depth e in the top layer of the earth.z coordi- (u-U.) + e (w0 + 2zS) The u v w axis will always be chosen so that us = 0 Where: The potential at M (uo.22 Integration method The accuracy of the summation method increases with the number of subdivisions m made on the electrode.1. Integration method . .w coordinates by the following relations (figure 6 and 7): Fl 2 x =u C0. The limit of the summation will be the integral of the elementary potentialgiven by equation 2. y.theelectrode is made up of linear conductorsinterconnectedto- gether . Horizontal linear conductor (Top view) 0 X I x y z system I vu w system I description (UsJ vsJ ws) (xsJ YsJ zs) Origin c +W (UpJ vpJ (xpJ YpJ extremity Fig. we will obtain: Then. This is done by transformation of coordinates involving e (wo) = - p idu qsr 2 translation and rotation. z by their values given by equation 11 (xj is the equivalent of x .v. 5. In order to carry out the integration. the r terms of equation 3 must be expressed as a func- tion of u.) + vo 2+ wo nates are related to the u. vo. . It is easy to establish that the x.horizontal conductor Notice that equation 2 can be written as: Withvs=vp=ws=wp=O. The following calculations assume: .y.

Integration method .Xs. 4. xs. Let a be the radius of the buried electrode conductors and let's calcu- w 9 = zs .1. yp... The resistance of the electrode is then w Z' .ZOYQ S P P P O uvw coordinates being the point xs. 0) is identical to that due to an horizontal conductor on the o'u 'axis at a (22) point M' (do. The potential can be calculated either by the summation method or by the integration method. 8.x (16) I2 0 (wo + 2%) can be obtained by replacing in equation 16 wo by wo + 2%. yo. wo are related to the xyz coordinates by the follow.YO.equation 17. ut P = d u + (wp .3 Ground resistance measvrements (mutual resistance) In a previous paper [ 1 ] it was shown that when carrying out field and the new point M' chrdinates are: ground resistance measurement by using the fall of potential method.xs) c o w 0 + (yo.222 Case of a non horizontal linear conductor tors and by equations 19 and 20 for non horizontal conductors. If a linear conductor is indicated by letter j then the total u = (xo. of numbertotalm is the linear conductors up. 255 . b.non horizontal conductor Where up. L.1. N The potential due to this conductor at the point M (u.Ys. zp and u are known (earth and Where electrode d a h ) equation 17 gives the potential V ateachpoint M L is thetotallength of buriedconductors o9 (x09 %I.y. zo late the potentials Vi at different points in earth located at a distance a from the centre of a conductor. u = v =o s s 1.vo. I. ys) sinr (18)potential can bewritten as: When p i .2 Electrode grounding resistance v =o P The resistance of ground electrodes can be calculated as follows.x .223 Case of an electrode made of interconnected linear conductors ing relations: The potential at a point hj (k.. The uvw coordinatessystem is chosen so that the conductor is in the plane UO'V. thus: which are earth and electrode characteristics. v'. b.1.Z .L. yo. zo (point M in plane uo'v).' The origin of the Pyk. zo) at the top layer will be the UD = (XD' x ) cow S + (yD- * ys) sinrr - sum of the potentials due to each linear conductor as calculated by . K.ws) 2 2.Y > z . 2. xp.x . Wf0 =w =0 0 Y 0 . Thus V can be written in a convenient symbolic formas V W z Fig.vo.. 0 ) such that: the new equivalent horizontal con- ductor characteristics are: Where: N is thetotalnumberofpointswherethepotential has been calculated. Thus the final equation will be a function of the following parameters: This case is shown in figure 8.2 P P O given by: . ys. wo being given by equation 18 for horizontal conduc- 2.

6 Where i is a succession of M points taken on the return current The calculated earth surface potentials and the modified experi- electrode c. thereforetheresistivity scale factor pp = 200/ 20 = 10. merimental results I n t e g r a t i o n method Summation method Thus the reflexion factor K is: K = B800 . The model first layer resistivity (water) was 20 ohm-meters.. the value of the required probe position &own in figure 10. Simulation criteria study [71 shows then that the potential meas- ured values on a model having reduction factor p~ and pp are related Fig. Fall of potential method in ground resistance measurements to thereal case by the following relation: 'real - . 10. Computation of earth surface potentials developed by a ground- ing grid shown in figure 10 and injecting a current I = 100 amperesinto earth. 200 ~ ~ 0 . grounding grid is buried at a depth e = 0. Note that the second layer resistivity was chosen such a way that K = 0. The potential Fig. RbC are: Direction I Direction 1 I 3 Direction 2 and Vxy is the potential at point y due to electrode X. This condition was essential in order to satisfy the similarity criteriabetween the real and model earth [7]. which corresponds exactly to the reflexion factor measured on the scaled down earth model [ 1. was carried out by the two methods mentioned previously. 2 and 3 BySolving equation 23. Example of earth potentialcalculation by thesummation and i n t e 1400.7 (1 inch = 2 meters). 3.is determined together corded [ 11.2 meters in the first layer of a \. Direction l ( x = -6 me- of Height first layer meters : 4 *G o 400 . The theoretical and experimental results were re- x. Grounding grid configuration Vxy Can be also calculated by either the summation method or the integration method. Experimental earth surfacepotentialsmeasurements were also carried outonthe twolayer earth model scaled downbyafactor ML = 78.. - i. If this can not be achieved then Rac must be calculated as follows: The model electrode was injectingcurrent a 1 = 125 mA the in earth. between the ground electrode and the return current electrode. ters) First layer resistance : 200ohm-meters Second layer resistivity : 800 ohm-meters a 200 . mental values were carried out for the different directions 1.6. This required potential probe position depends on the earth layer structure and the electrode configuration. all the measured values were multiplied by: & Ired x J ! = .x 100 I model pL 12w0-3 7lo 8. 9.'model x - Ireal x 3 pT. Rac.the following equation must beverified (figure 9): where the mutual resistance Rat.7 = 101. Itwas then established that in order to obtain x. 12 and 13. ---. two layer earth withthe following characteristics. - egration methods Comparisonwithexperimental measuffments IdtS.71. in figures 11. The '.+ 6 ~ ~ 256 ...the potential probe electrode must be placed at a suitable position x. Therefore. (26) Note that it is assumed that the current return electrode c is small I enough to be considered as a point source electrode.-e -.

which is logical.PAS-91. potential c w e patterns shown in Figure 1 hold onlyfor grounding tion method. potential values at the perimeter of the electrode are face potential curves demonstrated in Figures 11. Gervais. N. the earth c) the summation method gives always lower values than the integra. Conclusion Accurate analytical calculations can be used in grounding design for any practical electrode buried in the fmt layer of a two layer earth.rt 400 . 3 200 . [2] D. . IEEE Transactions. Maxwell.. F. 3. ground grid arrangements using equally spaced conductors. . grounding resistance and VI c.Ecole Polytechnique. which in fact is adopted from IEEE Guide No. In our opinion. Without taking into account the preckion paper has been of considerable interest to us. Philadelphia. F._ B couches horizontales homoghes et isotropes”.‘ [4] J. This is within the accuracy of the experimental apparatus used ing calculations. Figure 13.. pp. 80/1961. “A treatise on electricity ahd magnetism”. Stefanesco. We are particularly pleased with the verification of the earth sur- b) the measured.Dawalibi. D. presently under revision. IEEE # 80. Manuscript received February 15.Model’swall effect which is more importantonthe perimeter ground potential curves was as vague as Figure 1 below. Montreal. November 1972._ . 1.-. 12 and 13. for their cooperation.r a t i o n method _. “Sur la distribution dlectrique potentielle autour d’une prise de terre ponctuelle dans un terrain I n t e g. M.. . 4. The next step of this study will consist in a detailed comparison of the theoretical calculations of potentials. 1974. Y. Summation method ACKNOWLEDGMENT 0 a Theauthors wouldlike to express their appreciation tothe National Research Council of Canada and the Department of Energy. Schlumberger. The com- parison of theoretical and measured values included in this part of the higher than those calculated.Non uniform current distribution in the electrode Until recently. Direction 8 (x = 2 meters) Dover Publicutions. No.. it canbe demonstratedthatforthe most common determine which of the previous causes was the predominant factor. Giao. due to the inaccuracy of the medurements which are lations was deemed impractical for further investigation of this phe- nomenon in many past studies. M. pp. Sene VII. “Effect of two layer earth on the electric fieldnear HVDC electrodes”. -14 -10 4 -L Summation method 2 6 10 14 [6] 171 sique et Radium. Mukhedkar. of six eqUally spaced conductors.Vol. IEEE Trunsuctions pa#er # T-734324. for the potentialmeasurements. Mukhedkar. common knowledge about the behavior patterns of . Vol. Journul de Phy- ’””t.): Tlie Authors deserve a high credit for their thoroughinvestigation a) the theoretical and expefimental results do not differ by more than of analytical methods suitable for a computerized treatment of ground- 10%. Vol. It can be noticed particularly that: J. 132-140. 6. No.. conductors.‘ Direction 2 (x = -2 meters mutual resistances with the experimental and conventional [3] calcu- lated values and a study of the efficiency of usual grounding electrode 2 . this may be caused by one or more of the similar problems on our computer forsome time. Dawalibi.. ’-4 . [31 “Guide for safety in alternating current substation grounding”. 1930. Quebec. which are a fundamental part of the trode is accomplished. REFERENCES [ 11 F. C. Experimentalresults [SI S. -14 -10 -6 -2 2 6 10 14 Mines & Resources of Government of Canada for providing the neces- Y (meters) sary fmancial support of the work. 12. Pa.Dawalibi. the management of the ShawiniganEngineering Company Limited. Mon- Y (meters) treal 1972. . Sarma. following. an infinite numberof subdivisions is required).“Modelling of potentid distribution around a grounding electrode”.. “Ground electrode resistancemeas- urement in non uniform soils’’. as we have been studying limits of the apparatus. 2356-65.- Fxperimental results I n t e g r a t i o n method configurations and new optimum configurations. no reasonable attempt can be made in order to However. The authors would like to thank Figure 12. Figure 2 shows such a longitudinal potential profile the integration curve when a great number of subdivisions of the elec. Two different techniques can be used (summation or integration) and they lead to comparable results. Undoubtedly. random phenomenas. For instance.. but implicitly they . MS Thesis.Inequality of depth in the electrode cbnductors are extremely valuable for effective optimizing of the ground electrode configurations. c. New York 1954 (Book).. the difficulty of providing a series of tedious calcu- However. P. 4. “Etude sur modsle riduit d’uneprise de terre dans un sol non homoghe”. The summation curve will confound with systems consisting of a few conductors buried in low-resistivity soil. 600 . George Sverak (United Engineers and Constructors Inc. 13 show clearly the close agreement between the theoretical and measured values. (Theoretically. - -. 1. the demonstrated potential curves are significant not only for a better understanding of the subject.1 Comparison and discussion Discussion Figures 11. ZEEE Trunsuctions puper # T-73- 361-3. T.

but often assures only their better utilization. of course. T.95 kV for the un. B.66 kV.*++*++ . It is veryeasy to achieveareverse effect.++++** *+*++++*+*+++++++ ..Figure 4 of their paper being prepared.++++++ covering soil with resistivity below 75 meter-ohms.66 kV. +. I I I . given as 3.. 2.++++++ ++++++++*++* . demonstrates this point. since ourcomputer programcan besetto optimize the .++*+** grounding griddesigned to meet the usual safety requirements at a . Gross et al. Also. since to-date the Guide deals exclusively with equal spacing and uni- gressively worse conditions toward the center. # However.85 = 1. Therefore. 258 . the middle portion of the grid appears to be overdesigned.++++++ will meet a touch voltage limit of 1.+++++* ++++++**++**+* There are severalinteresting facts to be observed. 8. an Last but not least.+++++* ++++++** value only for the mesh rectangle nearest to the perimeter.++++++ . 2. 68 and No..+++++* .+**+*+ ++++++++ .++++** *+*+++ he will often economize the design by assuming that.. .a different picture emergeswhen the soil resistivity is 7w++++++ increased to the value of 150 meter-ohms.++~~~::~+++ unequal spacing technique seems to be desirable. this condition has been successfully met in . 13..+++**+ givendesign.n * + * + + + +I. say.++++++ . ....++++++ .+++*++ Figure 1 . practical approach which can be successfully applied in most cases..++++++ 85% of this value can be expected for theremaining meshes toward the .. + ++++ +++ ** ** + *+*++ +++*+*++ approach previously used.+++ ..+*++++ +**++*+*+++ . .34 2. .+++*** ow++*+++ .++++++ 1..n . Unexpectedly. .++++*+ However..+++++* 4 e + * + + + * safety requirements established by an engineer designing this system by .. For the above conditions. the resulting grounding system will meet all the .++*+++ +*++***+* First.++++*+ Anticipated ground current carried by the grid is 10 kA.++++++ +*++*++++ . . +++w +* .95kV t o . Figure 3.++*++* conventional methods. having also available an advanced integration method .++++++ .++++*+ ..*+* .. and utilizing of some kind of .++++*+ perimeter show the mesh voltage well above the required safe limit.X.++++++ +++++++++++ As it can be observed. ++ +* ++ ** It++++* .. [ 101 for the pioneering application work done respectively.5 meters.++++++ meshes by additional conductors. a word of caution fmt: 1. with pro.*+++++ established in (1 l).++++++ +++++++ .++++++ .16 -87 81 . Dangerous touch We believe that the Authors will c o n f m this or similar concepts voltages can appear in the center portion of a grounding grid as a result for the optimum grounding electrode configurations in the second part of even moderate. and the depth of burial is 0. * Obviously.++++*+ ground grid itself consists of 6 X 4 conductors covering the rectangular st++++++ area of 70 X 50 meters. the forgoing discussion As shown..++++*+ voltage of inner meshes will nowhere exceed the safe value of 1. reference should be made to J. (asopposed to the equal spacing of 6. 80.++++ 1.+. but uncoordinated changes in spacing.++++++ center.*++++* .. meters for thirteen conductors).66 kV/.. Figure 2 sarily guarantee a significant reduction in the number of conductors. the attempt to lower the number of meshes from 13 to was brought out in the hope that the Working Group presently revising 9 by a gradual increase of spacing toward the center. 8. with regard to IEEE Guide No. .++++++ +++++++*+++*+++*+u Figure 2. not only the nearest.++*++* .1 YFTEPS Second. 6. Increasing availability of computers presently seems Finally. 6. based on our experience.+++++* ++++++ grounding design on the basis of standard grounding calculations as ..++*++* . 15...*+++++ .. and more dense pattern of grid conductors was used... (1111 . The .+++*++ .+. a grounding grid with equal spacing of conductors may not be the best solution in many cases. . no more than . 80.3 seconds..1-46 X. .+.. but several meshes close to the .. produced unsafedesign. in the method of images and utilizing of integration methods.. the same as designing a grounding system which .+++** . *. while hoping thatthetouch . the safe limit for . 69 give the touch voltage . form soil concepts. .82 kV. he st+++*** + + + + + + + + + + + + + * + 4 + will realize that equation No. d e .++++++ On one hand.+ . ++ +* *++++ ++ + clearing time 0..++++++ .++++** 1 M U V YU typical 138/23 kV substation switchyard with a crushed stone layer.I ++++++++++ 1. 13.resultingin touch voltages much lower thanthe safe value for these center meshes.++*+++ ++****++*++++u . . .X. the fault .. and 3 meters.++++++ .++++* spite the fact thatthe design limit waslowered from 1. . in order to show that the unequal spacing technique is a to justify such a request. the unequal spacing technique does not neces.16 relating them to the unequal spacing and multi-layer ground techniques. readily accepting the necessity to subdivide only the corner . ++* Zl3 KV UU :++- On the other hand. Zaborsky 191 optimal solution for the given example is shown in Figures Sa and 5b and E. it is easy to evaluate the effectiveness of the simplified . this Guide will extend and generalize the equations of the Appendix.++++++ corrected meshesclose to perimeter..+++++* **++++*++* If the engineer follows the procedures of IEEE Guide No. +* ++ *++++* ** +++++++ +++++++** touch voltage inside the switchyard is approximately 1. .+++++* 6 C + + + + + + This is.++++++ 16.+*+++* which can be employed to produce the potential profie plotof the .

. .++++++- 6AZKVMAX TOUCH-TWGROU1ID SURFACE POTENTIAL vvl 1 . . .'++++++++++++++ + ++ + t + + + + L + + + * + . . . ++ ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + e + + + + + + + . .. . . . . ..62 1. . .+++++++++++++++ 4 b + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + . .. .+++++++++++++++ . . . . . . . .+++++ . .+++++++++++++++ . .+++++++ .. .+++++++++++++++ . . .35 2. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + g+ $ + + + +++ ++++'+* .+++++++++++++++ . . . A .+++++++++++++++ + + + ++ . . .. .. . STATIOl BROUlD POTEITIALPROFILE CLOT LIMITS OF Y .+++++++++++++++ . . ..+++++++++++++++ . . .+++++++++++++++ +++++++ . . . . .19 I . . .++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ . .+++++++++ s c + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + . .Cb x... . .+++++++++++++++ . .+++++++++++++++ . . . . . .A a..+++++++++++++++ . . . + + + + + . ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + + . .++++++++++++++++ ++ . . . . . .+++++++++++++++ ...+++++++++++++++ .. A .58 3. .. .+++++++++++++++ . . 1. .+++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ . .139 XV TOUCII-TO-BI)OVID SUIFACE POTnTIAL IKV1 L I A I T S OF X-AXIS : 0... . . . . . .73 IYII .+++++++++++++++ . . '+ ++ ++ +++++ + + a*+++++++++++++++ . ++ +++ +++ +++ ++++++ + + x*- .96 1. . . + + + + . . .++++++++++++++++ . . . . . + . .++++++++ ~ 181 KV DESIGN LIMIT ..++++++++++++++ KV 124 SAFE LlYlT . . . .++++++++++++++++++ . . .. . . + + + ' + + + + + + * I " ..M 2.+++++++++++++++ . ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++++++++ + zc+++++++++++++++ . . . . + + + + + + ro2uvwu ..++++++++ . .. .12 "+++++++++++++++ I I 1.' A.+++++++++++ . . . . .+++++++++++++ 7 6 + + + + + + + + + + .. . . . .+++++++++++++++ 5 e . . .. . . . .+++++++++++++++ +++++ . .. ..+++++++++++++++ + + ++ ttf ftt Figure 3 Figure 4 259 . .. . . ++ ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + A ' + + + . . . + + +++ . .+ + + + + + U -I 9mm ... . ++ ++ +++ +++ ++++++ ++ + + . .. .++++++++++++++++ + + + + + + + + + + .+++++++++++++++ . .~. . . . .. L . .++++++++++++++++ _I .++ . . .Kb R V 11..+++++++++++++++ 6 METERS ... . .13Kvy*x . .& &. .+++++++++++++++ -..++++++++++++++++ .+++++++ . .++++++++++++++ .++++++++++++++++++++++ ... .~. * . . . . ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ 27- .++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++++ < * . . . . . ... . . . .+++++++++++++++ .64 . & . .++++++ .+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ 3METERS .++++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ .A X I S : 8. . . . . . . .+ + + + + + + + + + + + . .. .+++++ . . . .. . . . .+++++++++++ . . . .+++++++++++++++ . ..+++++++ . . .++++++++++++ I d 6 KV DESIGN LlYlT .+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ . .++++++ . . . .. TETPRS s9.+++++++++++++++ . ..+++++++ . .+++++++++++++++++ .. . . .. .. ..++++++++++++ . . . .. .. . .. . . sc++++++++++++ +++ ++++++u . . .++++++ .++++++++++++++++++ . . .. .+++++++++++++++~ ~ + + + + + + + + + t .+++++++++++++++ .+++++ . . . . .+++++++++++++++ ..039 YV X-STEP : I. . . . . . .++++++++++* . + + + + + + + + + + + + A + + . . . . + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + . . .x)nt *+++++++ .+++++ .+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ . . .. . .+++++++++++++++++++ .80e METERS Y-STEP : . .+++++++++++ ..+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + .A . .81 I- .+++++++++++++++ 4:-++++++++ . 3.+++++++++++++++ I * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + . ..+++++++++++++++ . . . .I . . . .+++++++++++++++ . .. .58 I. .+++++++++++++++ . . . ..+++++++++++++++ . .. . .. .00e YITER 6-54 5-56 4. .. .+++++++++++++ 2. .+++++++++++++++ .. + + + + .+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ . . ..+++++++++++++++ . L . .

.Qt 2.++++++++++++++++++++++- . . . 4w. .lU pp. .. . . ...+++++++++++++++++++++++++ ..m 3 1. .. ... . . . .. . . .+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b .1. . .. . . .m .IS9 1. .. .. . .. .1 x . . . ... . . . .+++++++++++++++++++ ... . . .. . . . .5¶1 I .. .++++++++++++++++++++u wn . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. ..++++++++++++++++++++++++++ . . .. . . T O T U LLIBTH or SIRIED C M I W C T ~1111. .++++++++++++++++++++++++u . . . . . . . Gross. . . . . I Figure 5a mean no. . .. .. .m .. . . . . . . .1.21 . . .. . ... . . . .. ... . . .. . . .+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ .m .” IEEE Trans. . . .8) E.. .. . . October.8 . . .. .. .. .. . .jni. 6 1. .. . . .... .++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ .” IEEE Trans. 1m.++++++++++++++++++++++++++u .5W . . . X 1. . .. . . . .. . .. .yI c++++++++++. .. . . . . .. . . . .... . .. . . .+++++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . . . . . . .. .. s1. . . ..++++++++++++++++++++++++ 9 1 4 e . . . . . I2 0. . .. .++++++++++++++++++++++ T C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + U . .m 1M11. .. . .* ++ ++ +& +&+&+ *+&+ a+ *+ &+ &+ +* &+ +& ... .. . . . . . . . ... . . ... . . . . . .. . . . Figure 5b 260 . . IEEENo. . 80/March 1961.. . .+++++++++++++++++++++++ . .... ..1311.. . . . . . .+++++++++++++++++++++++++ . .+++++++++++++++++++++++ . .. . . ~ C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + U u u e a or RODS . . . . . f. . . . . . ..“Grounding Grids for High-Voltage 9 I. .. . . . .. . . ... . . . . .. . . . . .. . ..+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . 1s. SPACIIB IMI REFERENCES I 2 2. . . . . . .. .. .+++++++++++++++++++++++ T O T U LP8211 OF ROO a ECnoDCS IMI. ... .. . ... .. . . .. .1.. . . . . . . . . .. .1N 8 1.. Thapar..Resistance of Grounding Grids in Nonuni.. .55 6 J.. .. . .” American Institute of Electrical Engineers. ...+++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . ... .. .. . . ..+++++++++++++++++++++++ 8: . .. . ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + u . . .. . . .. . .1 I#. 1 I.. . . .++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . . . . . . . . . . ..61 form Soil..++++++++++++++++++++++++ se+++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . ..P. . . .. .. . . . . . ..m I c + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + u . . .+++++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . . . . . S C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b . . + + * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b .. ..++++ ’ . . . . . . . . ...+++++++++++++++++++++++++ .IH 4.. . ... . . . . . 74. . . . .. . . .. . . .+++++++++++++++ n. . T. . . . . . . “Guide for safety in Alternatine m Current Substation Grounding. .. . . .. t . . .. .++++++++++++++++++++++++ a10 a m m SIM RATIO USED. . . 123G1233. . . . . Power Apparatus and Systems. ... .. ..e 1. . . ..m . . . . .... .1. . .32 3. . .. . ..V U l Y C SPACII1 mwqw 1161 . . . .. . 782-788. . .. ... “Efficiency of Grounding Grids with Nonuniform 4 5 1. . . . December. Power Apparatus and Systems. . . Vol. . .. . . . . .. m m m SIZE IM x WI TOTU PRID C WO IC mn LeeIH 1111 . ... . . .. . .. . B. . . . 81.. . ..m . .. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b . . . . . .. . . . .++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . . ..HI Stations. . . .. I1 11 1. .11 3. . .. . . . .. . . .88 1. B. + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + b ..464 .as Soil. . ... .. . ... . . . . . . .+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ a I o c o m m M U In x NI . .++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 I KV SAFE k D EW LIMIT . . . I D S P A C I ~ P . . . . . .. . oI1IyIZED u*Qy* WAaUG 160 m n o y SUIL 7 7 .. .m .484 . .. 1963. .. . . . . .m . . .... . .. Part IV .1.++++++++++++++++++++++++ .. . . . . . w . .. . . ... . . .143 1241. .682 pp.. ILuPt P A l l R l OF A I D C A Q P IS I3 X .+++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . .++++++++++++++++++++++++ .. .++++++++++++++++++++++++u I1 1.11 2... . . . . . .. New York... . . . . ..++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 c + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ + + + + .66 a . . . . .. Vol. ... . ..sm ... . .. . . . . . . . M .. . .. .++++++++++++++++++++++ . .. . . . . ..556 2. . .. .. . . Zaborszky. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. ... . .. I.. 5e. .. .. .+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++u A . 1955.. . . .. .. ..*++++++++++++++++++++++++++ . . . . ... .. 1961. . . .. . . . . .

potential probes until we obtain three measured values within 10% of available. we In my company we have been using a method of calculating the will not be able to discuss his comments on a quantitative base.UHV transmission systems and the escalation in copper price justify ured and calculated values is in general very poor. This is one Manuscript received February 13. our values by 50% to correct for the sistance in a two layer earth.) Farid Dawalii and Dinkar MukbedLar: The discusser’s comments add rm = radius of equivalent hemispherical electrodes considerably to the meaningfulness of the paper and are sincerely a p Using Mr. we will Sometimes it’s necessary to place the current electrode at a very large compare briefly different formsof electrodes and show the performance distance from the substation to obtain the desired result. I would like to know trodes in a two-layer earth structure. 80. 192 . How- grid resistance proposed by J. In such a case. Mukhedkar’s values: preciated. Canton. what’s the authors’opinionabout the correctprocedure? Have the kar’s potential calculations appear to be very thorough and inclusive. step and touch potentials can be com- the two methods? We are beginning research to detennine the causes pared to the safe values. We are teristics of the soil are uniform to the current electrode. Sverak encouragements and A f o m De Oliveira E Silva (Cemig. J. Such studies are only practical when computer programs are. Sverak computer program. 261 . For better under- standing of the procedure used reference is made to paper T-73-361-3 or reference 1 of this paper. Silva that we are aware of Dr. railways) which enter or run close to the station. the step potential at the perimeter of the station will be tre- and fault currents are inthe 10’s of thousands of amperes. Especially with extreme are. 1974. tance is large. When t h i s dis.85meters o d . J. Purdy (Appalachian Power Co. the authors are assuming that the charac. 1974. methods of calculation in a field where the agreement between meas. etc.B. Unequal spacing We measure the grid resistance by placing the current electrode at between conductors may save copper however it should be applied with acertain distance from the substation and varying the position of the care. Another problem which may beof importance is the high potential rise of the substation and its consequence on communication circuits or other circuits (pipelines. for non uniform soils and/or complex electrodes.1974. substation size. We agree completely with him for the necessity of revising to compliment the authors for the presentation of new and more exact IEEE guide no. We would like to inform Mr.. including both the methods of measurement and final form of the electrode will depend on many parameters such as calculation and this paper will be of great value for us. undoubtedly hazardous Special investi- gations ofnew forms of electrodes may be necessary. what were the result? Finally. the of the discrepancies. We have been tryinga simplified equationforgroundmat re- sistance in a two-layered earth structure: R =-(-)+ 27r rm p z2n . current electrode. authors’ made any comparison between the results obtained with the This allows the calculation of ground resistance for all types of elec two methods? If so. Manuscript received February 7. Endreny’s work and we did not compare our results with his work.7. Since we do not have details of Mr. When carrying out the measurement by the fall of potential meth- rm plate = .A. Sometimes the discrepancy between the calculated and measured portant step in groundingdesign is calculation of earth surface potential. In part I1 and 111. We would normally increase. lr . My comments will more exact methods for groundingdesign. mendously high and therefore. Gross’s work is referred in part I1 & 111. The actual trend for increased short circuit levels. what is your opinion as to the gradients that will Small stations which experience heavy faults should be designed exist external to the station grid duringfaultconditions. we agree almost completely with his conclusions.if the potential profiie inside the station is when station sizes in industrial plant areas are very small (2Om X 2Om) kept flat. B. in ground electrodedesign earth change from a plateto the equivalent hemisphere. We are particularly pleased with Mr. T.. surfacepotentialandgrandient is of prime importance and toour We hope Mr. Purdy & Lyon seems very This agrees verywell with the calculated and measured values attractive for a preliminary and quick estimation of ground grid r e given. (American Electric Power Service Corp. (+ rm+h h = height of first layer (4 ft. Brazil): I would like comments. special condition where computercalculations could beextremely valuable. In making the measurement with the potential probe at a fixed Much more work is still necessary before one can understand per- distance from the substation. Lyon tion between the substation and the current electrode. Mukhedkar can give us a simplified method useful for knowledge there is no simplified formula which gives reliable results approximating results. the characteristics of the soil will certainly suffer avaria.fectly all the influence of the numerous parameters involved.still investigating in this field. Va. Optimization of the electrodes will follow. otherwise oversizing the electrode is necessary if safety must their mean value. Sverak.) and W. Mr. of each under the same conditions. be reached. Professor E. as pointed out by Mr. and adopt this mean value as the ground resistance. faultcurrent. His fall of potential method in how the authors choose the distance between the ground grid and the ground resistance measurementsagrees with our field fidings. we assumed a two layer earth and used our computer program to Using this value: detennine the exact position of the potential probe. Endreny. The most im- ago. Simplified formula proposed by Messrs.Have the authors made any comparison between When this quantity is known. of Ontario Hydro. Roanoke. some years ever. Even. Ohio): Mr. Manuscript received November 20.However. be limited to the ground grid resistance calculation and measurement. Be10 Horizonte. Mukhed. value is very large. Mukhedkar. earth resistivities.