2017 International Symposium on Lightning Protection (XIV SIPDA), Natal, Brazil, 2nd – 6th October 2017.
A Contribution to the Study of Ground Grids Impulse
Impedande, Based on Field Measurements.
Adroaldo Raizer
Federal University of Santa Catarina
UFSC
Florianópolis – Brazil
adroaldo.raizer@gmail.com
Vilson Luiz Coelho, Douglas de Matos Magnus
Faculty SATC
FASATC
Criciúma - Brazil
vilson.coelho@vlc.eng.br
douglasmagnus.eng@gmail.com
Abstract— This paper presents a study about the impulse
impedance of grounding grids based on experimental
measurements performed within a testing field developed for this
purpose. It considers an extensive number of measurement sets
performed in grounding grids with different dimensions and
topologies. The main goal is to evaluate an appropriate procedure
to be employed during field measurements, as well as to verify the
impulse impedance behavior in relation to low frequency ground
resistance and ground grid topology. Field test results show a
strong correlation among important quantities such as impulse
factor, resistance and inductive reactance of an equivalent RL
circuit, and the grids topology. These results may contribute to the
development of a methodology, which aims to adequately estimate
the impulse impedance of grounding grids as a function of the
resistance measured at low frequencies and the grid topology.
Keywords— Ground Grid, Impulse Impedance, Ground
Resistance, Measurement Tests.
I. INTRODUCTION
The voltage surges observed in electrical power systems due
to lightning strokes can contribute annually to great damages for
both consumers and electric utilities. Power supply interruptions
and equipment breakdowns can be quite often observed at this
scenario.
Due to the high complexity of electromagnetic phenomena
caused by the actions of lightning and electric power switching
operations, grounding systems cannot be simply represented by
low frequency grounding resistors (RLF), which still a common
procedure in the design and compliance measurement of
grounding systems. On the other hand, for the proper design of
an electrical structure that can be subjected to considerable
978-1-5090-6053-5/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE 195
Wilson Valente Jr.
Federal Institute of Santa Catarina
IFSC
Itajaí, Brazil
wilson.valente@ifsc.edu.br
current impulse values, such as a transmission or distribution
line or any electrical plant, it is necessary to know the transient
impedance (Z (t)) or the impulse impedance (ZP) [1-7].
The value of the impulse impedance is a very useful
parameter to the design of protection systems. It is possible to
determine the maximum overvoltage that may occur at any
structure to be protected, taking into account the peak discharge
current observed at a given region or point of the electric system.
However, the procedures required for transient impedance
measurement or impulse impedance determination of ground
structures are not easy to implement since they require special
equipment and care.
Thus, results of an extensive number of investigation
considering impulsive currents in different topologies of
grounding systems and also different types of soils / resistivity
can bring important contributions to the study of electrical
systems protection, such as those presented in [5-13].
This paper presents an extensive evaluation concerning
impulse impedance in grounding grids with different dimensions
and topologies. The main goal is to evaluate the proper
procedures to be employed in the field measurements, as well as
to check the impulse impedance behavior in relation to the
ground resistance commonly measured at low frequencies.
II. THEORETICAL BASIS
A. General
The impulse from a lightning stroke is characterized by its
wave shape with a very steep rise in voltage and current followed
by a long tail. The voltage and current rise times to peak (front
time) typically vary between 1 μs to 10 μs for the first stroke,
and from 0.1 μs to 1 μs for the subsequent. Thus, the impulse K 0.6  0.025S (6)
from a lightning stroke comprises both high and low frequency
components and, in this case, the ground potential rise (GPR) is where S is the spacing between the conductors of the grid (m).
dependent on the system impedance, which takes into account Obs.: for cases where r > re consider r = re.
resistance and reactance of the grounding system [4].
In [5] is presented an analytical method to determine the
The transient impedance of a grounding system is the transient performance of grounding grids. In this method, each
relationship between the instantaneous values of the Voltage element of the grounding grid is represented as a pi circuit
(V(t)) on the grounding and the injected current (I(t)). The model, as shown in Fig. l. Comparison of analytical results and
impulse impedance is the ratio of maximum value of V(t) to field results showed good correlation for maximum induced
maximum value of I(t). voltages and impulse impedances. The authors emphasize that
Some studies [5-8] show that impulse impedance depends on the method is only applicable for moderate resistivity values.
the size and shape of the grounding system, soil characteristics L
and magnitude and current waveform. In small systems, the soil
ionization caused by the injection of high current values also
influences on the impulse impedance values [11-14]. G/2
G/2
In the specific case of grounding grids, [5] and [7] conclude
that the impulse impedance depends on the shape and size of the
grid, the electrode spacing, magnitude and current waveform
and soil characteristics.
In [7] the authors present empirical formulas obtained from Fig. 1. Representation of a mesh element [4]
experimentation data to calculate the impulse coefficient (IC) for
square ground grids, with the injection point of current at the B. Transient Impedance Measurement
center or one of the corners. In this study, the authors estimate The transient impedance of an earth ground system can be
that the effect of soil ionization is very small and thus, they do measured by injecting a current or voltage impulse at some point
not consider it. of grounding grid and the current and the voltage waveform are
then measured on a digital recorder simultaneously. Figure 2
The impulse coefficient is the ratio of the impulse impedance
shows a typical setup to perform measurements, using a mobile
to the low frequency ground resistance.
impulse generator. The variations and limitations for leads and
ZP (1) reference ground arrangements remain the same as those for the
IC
RLF fall of potential method (FOP) in low frequencies [4]. However,
to avoid interferences, some additional care must be taken with
According to [7], is possible to estimate the impulse the auxiliary electrode leads. The leads from the voltage and
coefficient of square grounding grids using (2). current electrodes must be separated from each other and from
2.3 the ground. For this, it is possible to use insulating supports.
0.333§¨ r ·¸
IC e © re ¹ (2)
Impulse
generator
where:
r is the equivalent radius of the square grounding grid and is Current
probe
calculated by (3); Voltage probe
Oscilloscope
re is the radius of the effective area of a square metal plate, which ch1 ch2 ZA
represents electrically the grounding grid and is calculated by g
(4). ZG Ground
dA= 3 to 4D
grid dP= 0.62dA
A (3)
r (m)
S Voltage Current
D = the largest diagonal electrode electrode
where A is the square grounding grid area. dimension of ground grid

re K U t f (m) (4)
Fig. 2. Test setup for transient impedance measurements

where: III. EXPERIMENTAL FIELD TESTS

ρ is the apparent soil resistivity (Ω.m);
A. General
tf is the wave front time (μs); All tests were performed in a testing field with 4 ground grids
K is a constant, calculated by (5) and (6), for the current injection of different geometries, according Fig. 3 and Tab. 1. This testing
point at the center and the corner respectively. field is located in a non-urban area of Santa Catarina Island, free
of interference, and with a lot of space for the location of the
K 1.45  0.05S (5) auxiliary electrodes used in the measurements.

196
 The predominant soil in this place is the SM (Indiscriminate
Mangrove Soil), commonly composed of hydromorphic quartz
sands, hydromorphic podzol and organic soils. Therefore, the
moisture of this soil is strongly influenced by the tides and
rainfall. The average rainfall for this region is 160mm/month.
Measurements performed in a dry period (90 mm/30 day) show
a resistivity profile equal to 1060 Ω.m, up to 4 meters deep and
from this depth, the resistivity is 210 Ω.m.
Cable: 95 mm2
measurement points. This issue was fully discussed an addressed
in [15] and [16].
Thus, in addition to the measurements with dA > 3D,
measurements with dA # D were also performed. In this case the
correct measurement values can be obtained by using the Extent
Tagg method [15] and PRED (Polynomial Regression from
Database) method [16]. The goal is to investigate the
applicability of these methods in obtaining the transient and
impulse impedance.

TABLE II. MEASUREMENTS OF RLF (Ω)

0,5 m
e2 e1
Ground dA d P /d A
d A /D
Grid (m) 0.2 0.4 0.6
56 4.0 11.6 12.4 13.6
l1
1
14 1.0 10.3 13.9 18.9
l2 38 3.4 29.1 32.0 33.7
2
11 1.0 27.9 35.6 47.0
38 3.7 49.9 53.0 54.9
3
11 1.1 47.7 56.3 68.2
Fig. 3. Ground grid - Implanted model 38 5.4 64.7 69.6 71.3
4
7 1.0 47.7 70.3 97.3
TABLE I. GROUND GRIDS DIMENSIONS
Ground l 1 l2 D e1 e2 TABLE III. MEASUREMENTS OF ZP(Ω)
Grid (m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
1 10 10 14.14 2.5 2.5 Ground dA d P /d A
d A /D
2 5 10 11.18 2.5 2.5 Grid (m) 0.2 0.4 0.6
3 2.5 10 10.31 2.5 2.5
56 4.0 33.3 43.9 45.6
4 5 5 7.07 2.5 2.5 1
14 1.0 23.6 27.0 30.6
B. Test Setup and Equipment 38 3.4 32.0 36.8 40.5
2
In order to evaluate also the measurement technique, it was 11 1.0 35.3 38.4 40.9
used the setup present in Fig. 1, but with different distances 38 3.7 51.6 55.9 59.4
between auxiliary electrodes and the measured earth (dA, dB). 3
11 1.1 52.4 56.0 59.4
Equipment used in the testing were the following: 38 5.4 67.1 71.8 75.4
4
x Portable Voltage impulse generator, 1.2 u 50 μs 7 1.0 45.1 55.8 67.8
waveform, maximum voltage up to 6kV.
x Oscilloscope with 350 MHz bandwidth, real-time TABLE IV. MESUREMENTS OF RT (Ω)
sampling rate up to 5 GS/s.
d P /d A
x Voltage probe for floating voltages up to 5,600 V (DC Ground dA
d A /D
+ ACpk), bandwidth up to 50 MHz. Grid (m) 0.2 0.4 0.6
x Current probe, CC up to 50 MHz band, maximum 56 4.0 12.3 16.4 13.5
current, 15A CC and 50 A peak. 1
14 1.0 8.5 12.3 18.7
x Digital and automatic earth meter, 3½ digit display, 38 3.4 28.3 30.5 30.8
resolution 0.01 Ω, maximum resistance 20 k:. 2
11 1.0 23.0 31.0 43.4
C. Tests Results 38 3.7 47.1 49.8 51.9
3
Tables II to IV show values of low frequency resistance 11 1.1 40.6 48.9 60.9
(RLF), impulse impedance (ZP) and tail resistance (RT). RLF 38 5.4 62.6 65.6 69.5
values were measured with the earth meter and Zp and RT 4
obtained from the setup of Fig.1, however, with different values 7 1.0 39.1 59.1 82.7
for dA and dP. Figures 4 to 7 show current and voltage curves for the tests
The measurement procedure suggested by [4], and with dA > 3D and dP = 0.6dA, for all grounding grids. The voltage
presented in section II-B, is usually not feasible for operational and current curves of the tests has been recorded in csv format,
reasons or for useful practices in urban substations, mainly due and all measures were performed in a dry period, with rainfall
to the extension of leads and physical obstacles at the around 110mm/30 day.

197

Fig. 4. Voltage and current curves for grid 1, dA = 56 m, dP = 0.6dA
IV. ANALISYS OF RESULTS
A. Measurement Methodology
Regarding the measurement methodology, Tab. V and VI
show low frequency resistance and impulse impedance values
obtained from 3 methods: Extended Tagg (ExTagg), PRED and
that suggested by IEEE Std. 81 (IEEE81) [4] or FOP with dP =
0.62dA and dA > 3D. The two first methods can be used when
there is not sufficient space for application of dA > 3D, in RLF
measures.
Considering the IEEE81 Standard method, as the correct
method, the efficiency of the other two methods in obtaining RLF
can be confirmed when using reduced distances for the current
electrode. Table V shows values obtained by ExTagg and PRED
very similar to those of the IEEE81 method. The mean error in
these measures was 6% for ExTagg and 3% for PRED.
However, the efficiency of these methods is not confirmed in
obtaining the impulse impedance, mainly because both were
developed to obtain only resistance estimates. In this case, the
maximum error reached is about 43% for PRED and 35% for
ExTagg, which makes it unfeasible to the complete impedance
estimate considering the reactance effects.

TABLE V. RLF (Ω) FOR IEEE81, EXTAGG AND PRED METHODS

Ground d A R LF (Ω)
d A /D
Grid (m) IEEE81 ExTagg PRED
56 4.0 13.6 12.6 13.5
1
Fig. 5. Voltage and current curves for grid 2, dA = 38 m, dP = 0.6dA 14 1.0 14.7 14.5
38 3.4 34.1 34.1 33.7
2
11 1.0 36.7 37.2
38 3.7 55.4 55.2 55.0
3
11 1.1 59.2 58.4
38 5.4 72.2 72.7 72.6
4
7 1.0 83.6 72.8

TABLE VI. ZP (Ω) FOR IEEE81, EXTAGG AND PRED METHODS

Ground d A Z p (Ω)
d A /D
Grid (m) IEEE81 ExTagg PRED
56 4.0 47.72 50.01 47.19
1
14 1.0 30.95 27.20
Fig. 6.Voltage and current curves for grid 3, dA = 38 m, dP = 0.6dA
38 3.4 41.10 40.37 40.28
2
11 1.0 40.69 38.28
38 3.7 59.97 59.15 59.43
3
11 1.1 58.53 56.25
38 5.4 75.96 75.31 76.49
4
7 1.0 62.63 56.70
B. Transient Impedance
The analysis of the transient impedance behavior is based on
figures 8 to 13 and Tab. VII. In these, the grounding grid
indicated as 1A (Fig. 9) is the own grid 1, but in different
moisture/resistivity condition. Figures 8 to 12 show the behavior
of voltage V(t), current I(t) and transient impedance curves Z(t).
Impulse impedance Zp is indicated as a straight line. The values
Fig. 7. Voltage and current curves for grid 4, dA = 38 m, dP = 0.6dA are in p.u. of the maximum values of each quantity.

198
 V(t) I(t) Z(t) Zp V(t) I(t) Z (t) Zp
p.u. p.u.
1.2
1.2
1 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0.0
0 1 2 3 4 t (μs)
5 0 10 20 t (μs)
30

Fig. 8. Voltage, current, transient impedance and impulse impedance Fig. 12. Voltage, current, transient impedance and impulse impedance
Grounding grid 1 Grounding grid 4

V(t) I(t) Z(t) Zp Figure 13 shows all transient impedance curves compared to
p.u.
1.2 each other. Table VII shows several quantities resulting from the
analyses of the measured and calculated curves.
1
0.8 Z1(t) Z1A(t) Z2(t)
0.6 Z3(t) Z4(t)
100
(Ω)
0.4
0.2 80
0
0 1 2 3 4 t (μs)
5 60

Fig. 9. Voltage, current, transient impedance and impulse impedance

Grounding grid 1A 40

V(t) I(t) Z(t) Zp 20

p.u.
1.2
1 0
0 1 2 3 t (μs)
4
0.8
0.6 Fig. 13. Transient impedance (Z(t)) for all grounding grids 1, 1A, 2, 3 and 4
0.4
TABLE VII. QUANTITIES OBTAINED FROM MEASUREMENTS ANALYSIS
0.2
Ground
0 1 1A 2 3 4
0 5 10 15 t (μs)
20 Grid
R LF (Ω) 13.6 7.8 34.1 55.4 72.2
Fig. 10. Voltage, current, transient impedance and impulse impedance
Grounding grid 2 R T (Ω) 12.5 10.4 30.8 50.6 65.1
Z P (Ω) 47.7 23.7 41.1 60.0 76.0
V(t) I(t) Z(t) Zp
p.u.
1.2 Z S (Ω) 37.9 16.0 39.3 59.4 75.2
1 IC 3.51 3.05 1.20 1.08 1.05
0.8 t (I p ) (μs) 0.95 1.87 4.0 3.9 6.4
0.6 t (V p ) (μs) 0.64 1.33 3.3 3.7 6.7
0.4 ∆t (μs) 0.31 0.54 0.7 0.2 -0.3
o
0.2 ϴ () 43.3 36.54 19.1 3.9 -3.7
0 f (kHz) 388.4 187.97 75.8 67.2 37.2
0 10 20 t (μs)
30
R eq (Ω) 37.87 15.97 39.27 59.38 75.19
Fig. 11. Voltage, current, transient impedance and impulse impedance X eq (Ω) 35.68 11.83 13.59 4.02 -4.93
Grounding grid 3
Z eq 52.0 19.9 41.6 59.5 75.4

199
 As mentioned in section III-C, RLF was obtained from In order to evaluate the behavior in the same graph,
measurements with earth meter, whereas ZP and RT were quantities are and p.u. based on the maximum values and related
extracted from the impedance curves. ZS is the impedance for to the radius of an equivalent hemispheric grounding. The
dI/dt = 0, i.e. when I(t) reaches the peak value. IC is the impulse correlation coefficients between the different quantities and the
coefficient as defined by (1). ∆t is the current delay in relation radius of the equivalent hemisphere were higher than the other
to the voltage, or t(Ip) minus t(Vp). ϴ is the lagging angle options, such as grid area, conductor length or R/ρa factor of the
considering t(Vp) in 90o. f is the frequency considering the Sverak formula [17].
period as 4ut(Vp). Req=ZS, and Xeq=Requtan(ϴ) represent the
In general, all the quantities presented a strong correlation
equivalent impedance of the grounding grid, Zeq = Req+ jXeq .
with the topology of the grids. However, it is necessary to
The first analysis is related to the method suggested by [7], consider the small amount of grounding grid types.
for determination of the impulse coefficient. Considering the
excitation in one of the corners, Fig. 14 shows the impulse V. CONCLUSIONS
coefficients behavior as a function of the grounding grid area, As far as the measurement method is concerned, it is
obtained from method suggested by [7], (IC[7]) and concluded that the distance between the auxiliary current
measurements according to [4], (ICm). In this case, it is noticed electrode and the grounding to be measured, interferes
that the error between measured and calculated values is very significantly in the results. During the measurement procedures,
great (around 60%) for grids greater than 50m2. it was also found that special care must be taken with the
electrode leads in order to avoid interference in the
ICm IC[7] measurements. The methodology presented in [18] may be the
4 solution for measurements in places with little availability of
space.
3 As for the measurement results, It was observed a strong
correlation between the quantities obtained from the impedance
2
curves and the topologies of the grids submitted to the tests.
In the continuity of this work, a number of parametric
1
analysis considering different grounding topologies and
dimensions will be explored. Numerical simulation using finite
element method (FEM) software can be employed, in order to
0 supply the analytical calculations with a significant amount of
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 data. Additional measurements can also be performed to
Grid Area (m2) validating the simulation results within the field tests.
The existing simplified method for estimating the impulse
Fig. 14. Comparison between the impulse coefficients, obtained from impedance [7] was not effective, at least for the grids tested,
measurements and by the method suggested by [7]
whose dimensions are lower than those used in the experiments
implemented by the author (square meshes greater than 100 m2).
In order to evaluate the behavior of the impulse coefficient
and an equivalent RL circuit for the grids tested, some charts Despite the utility of a simplified methodology for
were plotted as shown in Fig. 15. estimating the impulsive impedance of grounding meshes, it is
understood that measurement is the best option. Thus, according
ϴ IC Req/Rlf to this understanding, compact and portable pulse generators
1.2
p.u. with several waveforms and peak voltage values are being
y = 0.17e0.51x developed and tested.
1 R² = 0.89
REFERENCES
0.8 [1] M. Telló, G.A.D. Dias, A. Raizer, H.D.A. Almaguer, T.I.Mustafa, V.L.
Coelho, Aterramento Impulsivo, Edipucrs, Porto Alegre, 2008.
y = 1.16ln(x) - 0.41
[2] V.L. Coelho, "Análise do Desempenho de Redes Aéreas de Distribuição
0.6 R² = 0.98 de Média Tensão Frente à Ação das Descargas Atmosféricas".
Florianópolis, 2010. Doctor Tese - Universidade Federal de Santa
0.4 Catarina.
y = 0.10e0.69x [3] A. Raizer, et al "Plataforma computacional de análise de sistemas de
0.2 R² = 0.93 aterramento em linhas de transmissão", ANEEL, Programa de Pesquisa e
Desenvolvimento Tecnológico do Setor Elétrico Brasileiro, Projeto
CEEE/AT/2006-9928431, Final Report, Brasília, 2009.
0 [4] IEEE Std. 81-2012., “IEEE Guide for measuring earth resistivity, ground
0 1 2 3 rh (m)
4 impedance, and earth surface potentials of a grounding system,” IEEE
Power and energy Society. New York, December 2012.
Fig. 15. Correlation coefficients for ϴ, IC and Req/RLF as a function of the [5] M.Ramamoorty, M.M.B. Narayanan, S.Parameswaran, and
equivalent radius of the hemisphere, rh D.Mukhedkar, “Transient perforhance of grounding grids”, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 4, No. 4, October 1989

200
[6] R. Velazquez and D. Mukhedkar, “Analytical modeling of grounding
electrodestransient behavior,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-
103, no. 6, pp. 1314–1322, Jun. 1984.
[7] B.R. Gupta, B. Thapar, “ Impulse impedance of grounding grids” IEEE
Trans. on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-99, No. 6 Nov/Dec
1980.
[8] P. Chowdhuri, “Impulse impedance tests on laboratory model ground
electrodes”, IEE Proc. – Gener. Transm. Distrib. Vol. 150, No. 4, July
2003.
[9] S. Visacro, R Alípio, M.H.M. Vale and C. Pereira, “The Response of
Grounding Electrodes to Lightning Currents: The Effect of Frequency-
Dependent Soil Resistivity and Permittivity”, IEEE Transactions On
Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 53, No. 2, p.401-406, May 2011.
[10] S. Visacro, R Alípio, Frequency Dependence of Soil Parameters:
Experimental Results, Predicting Formula and Influence on the Lightning
Response of Grounding Electrodes, IEEE Transactions On Power
Delivery, Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 927-934, April 2012.
[11] J. Wang, A.C. Liew, M. Darveniza, "Extension of Dynamic Model of
Impulse Behavior of Concentrated Grounds at High Currents", IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 20, No. 3, July 2005.
[12] S. Sekioka, M.I. Lorentzou, M.P. Philippakou, and John M. Prousalidis,
"Current-Dependent Grounding Resistance Model Based on Energy
Balance of Soil Ionization", IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
vol.21, n°1, January 2006.
201
[13] T.K. Manna and P. Chowdhuri, “Generalised equation of soil critical
electric field EC based on impulse tests and measured soil electrical
parameters”, IEEE Trans. Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 1, No. 5,
September 2007.
[14] V.L. Coelho, L.F. Venturini, A. Piantini, H.A.D. Almaguer, R.A. Coelho,
W.C. Boaventura, J.O.S. Paulino and P.L. Nosaki, “Soil Resistivity
Behavior under High Current Density Values Using the Energy Balance
Method”, 2015 International Symposium on Lightning Protection (XIII
SIPDA), Balneário Camboriú, Brazil, 28th Sept. – 2nd Oct. 2015.
[15] A. Raizer, V.L. Coelho, W. Valente Jr., C.I. Cardoso, “Contribution to
Tagg's Methodology in the Resistance Measurement of Earth-electrode
Systems at Reduced Distances”, International Symposium on Lightning
Protection (XIII SIPDA), Balneário Camboriú, Brazil, 28th Sept. – 2nd
Oct. 2015.
[16] A. Raizer, W. Valente Jr.,V.L. Coelho, “Development of a new
methodology for measurements of earth resistance, touch and step
voltages within urban substations”, Electric Power Systems Research,
Available online 22 January 2017.
[17] IEEE Std. 80-2013, “IEEE Guide for Safety in AC Substation
Grounding”, IEEE Power and energy Society. New York, May 2015.
[18] A.B. Lima, J.O.S. Paulino, W.C. Boaventura, M.F. Guimarães, “Transient
Ground Impedance Measurement Using a Very Short Current Lead”,
International Symposium on Lightning Protection (XII SIPDA), Belo
Horizonte, Brazil, October 7-11, 2013.