Puesta a Tierra IEEE

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 16

Puesta a Tierra IEEE

© All Rights Reserved

- Ground-rod-Manufacture-250-micron-copper-Ground-rod-Grounding-rods-and-Aerial-Eleveation-rod.pdf.
- Cable Conductor Materials - Open Electrical
- spare_parts
- Mousa the Soil Ionization Gradient Tr PWRD IEEE 1994
- Effect of the Pressure on the Properties_CO2
- Kumar Presentation
- ss
- (27)Calculate No of Plate-Pipe Earthing & Size of Earthing Strip(1.12.12)
- Electrical Conductivity of a Hydroponic Nutrient Solution
- Cable Conductor Materials - Open Electrical
- Chapter 4 - Eddy Current Method1
- Instrucciones de Boma Little Giant Modelo 5-MSP
- Strain Gauge Manual
- Earthing
- SINAMICS_V20_Getting_Started_072012_en-US.pdf
- powergridprotection
- 10leftimg VFD Basics
- 2.2.38 Conductivity
- Windsor Mini Extractor Presto PRS3
- Effect of Lubricants on Warm Compaction Process of Cu-based Composite

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10

1979 2089

Montel Inc. - Sprecher & Schuh Ecole Polytechnique

Montreal, Quebec, Canada Montreal, Quebec, Canada

power systems Engineers, and several recent analytical

Detailed analysis of ground rods and their influ- work on complex electrodes buried in non uniform soils

ence on horizontal ground conductors, such as those [6,7,8,9,10]. The results presented in this paper were

forming grounding grids, is performed assuming a two obtained using a computer program (program MALT) based

layer soil stratification. The study starts with a on the analytical methods described in [6,7,8].

discussion about the adequacy of uniform and two-layer

soils as equivalent models for actual soil structures. The authors believe that, besides the normal de-

Following this, a.typical ground rod is analysed,while lays which exist between the publication of new impro-

it is progressively associated with other ground rods, ved methods and their wide utilisation in practical

and ultimately, with horizontal conductors. The same design, there is another justified reason for such de-

procedure is also applied to an horizontal conductor. lay which is related to the poor knowledge of soil

The results, shown using numerous charts which can be structure at the proposed ground system site. Also,ma-

used conveniently for practical design purposes, lead ny will argue that even if sophisticated equipments

to several interesting conclusions, many of which are and methods are used to determine accurately the soil

new or still unpublished. structure, it is very likely that the investigation

will show that soil has a stratified structure of se-

INTRODUCTION veral layers, not necessarily horizontal. Such a dis-

appointing discovery will upset the hopes of an accu-

Usually, a typical substation ground system will rate design even with two-layer analytical methods.

take the form of a grid of horizontally buried conduc- Therefore, they conclude that uniform soil assumption

tors [1]. This wide use of the grid is due to several is no worse than the two-layer -soil approach, when the

advantages stated clearly in[l]. The main advantage is actual soil has a more complex structure.

due to the fact that a ground system design using a

combination of simple electrodes (such as ground rods) The authors disagree with this previous opinion

may require a connecting network which is in intself because of the following reasons:

so effective that the original electrodes are super-

fluous [2,3]. However, Guide IEEE 80 [1], agrees that a- It is not possible to find an equivalent uni-

ground rods are of particular value when the upper form soil for an actual soil structure except

layer of soil in which the grid is buried is of "much when the actual soil is practically uniform.

higher resistivity" than that of the soil beneath, or

it may become so because of drying out or freezing. b- It is practically always possible to find an

Unfortunately, no analytical expressions or practical equivalent two-layer soil for an actual soil

charts are provided to help the designer to decide structure with almost any degree of complexity.

what length, how many and where the ground rods should

be installed (if they are required). The obvious con- The following section will justify the authors

sequence of this basic uncertainty is two philosophies preceeding assertions.

in grid design. The first one recommends the extensive

use of ground rods in grids (practically one at each 1.0 THE EQUIVALENT SOIL STRUCTURE

cross connection), following thus the recommendations

of [4,5]. The second trend in grid design ignores the The following is valid for power systems groun-

ground rods or, if necessary, a few number of ground ding studies and may not be applicable to other pro-

rods are installed to stabilize grid resistance and blems involving soil.

annihilate the effect of upper layer resistivity in-

crease. In power systems grounding designs the following

quantities must be determined:

The most appropriate method depends clearly upon

the soil structure and resistivities. Until just re- 1- Ground system resistance, R

cently, the published analytical methods were limited 2- Touch (or mesh) voltages, Vt

to simple forms of electrodes buried in uniform or two 3- Step voltages, Vs

layer soils or a combination of analytical and empiri-

cal formulas for more complex type of electrodes loca- Touch voltage is defined as the potential diffe-

ted in uniform soils. In fact, in the American conti- rence between the grid potential rise Eo and the poten-

nent, Guide IEEE 80 [1] was, and still is, the only tial at the soil surface point where a man is standing

practical reference book for ground grid design, des- while touching simultaneously a metallic structure

connected to the grid:

Vt

= E - V =RI - V .............. (1)

into the grid and V is the soil surface potential at

point P. P

F 79 245-2 A paper recommended and approved by the

IEEE Substations Committee of the IEEE Power Engi- Step voltage is the potential difference which

neering Society for presentation at the IEEE PES Winter may exist between two points, P and Q, on soil surface

Meeting, New York, NY, February 4-9 1979 (locations where the feet of a man are in contact with

Manuscript submitted September 1, 178;maae available soil):

for printing December 7, 1978. Vs =V -

Vq ..................... (2)

2090

ground system performance can be completed when its

resistance R and the surface soil potentials VM at va- Grid current I

rious points M, are known.

Consider a ground electrode having a complex form

and buried in an heterogeneous stratified soil (figure

1.1). For practical reasons, the ground system is ins-

talled at a small depth, and if vertical conductors

are present, their length seldom exceed 3 to 5m. Con-

sequently the ground electrode will be usually located

in the upper soil layer with, occasionally, a portion

of its ground conductors in the next layer, if any.

Si+l

> P31

P (Pi Pi2 * i)

Figure 1.2

Voltage Drop Between Two Equipotential Surfaces

Thus,assuming a zero potential remote surface S ,,

the grid potential rise Eo is expressed by:

0 i

And the surface potential Vm at point M is:

i+l 0 i

Equations (6) and (7) are valid for any type of

Figure 1.1 soil where the grid is in contact with a maximum of

Ground Electrode in a Heterogeneous Subsoil two-soil layers. This includes obviously uniform and

two-layer soils. These same equations confirm our pre-

vious statements that:

Assume now that a current I flows from grid to a- It is not possible to find an equivalent uni-

ground and that SOp S13,S2, ....Sn are the equipotential form soil (constant resistivity Pi) for an

surfaces which exist in the actual case described in actual heterogeneous soil (p1xpa4).

Figure 1.1. The distance between two consecutive sur- b- In contrast, it is possible to find an equi-

faces Si and Si+l is selected so that one can assume valent two-layer soil for the actual soil (or

Si=Si+l. Surface SO is the electrode's surface and is several two-layer soils which give the limits

at potential Eo with respect to remote ground. The of the actual case results):

line of current (or streamline) i m which runs through

point M at the soil surface causes at M a voltage drop The same grid of Figure 1.1, buried in the equi-

AVM (with respect to SO) expressed by: t valent two-layer soil-(with an upper layer resistivity

of Pi) will have its grounding performance described

AVM = i am /am

PiLmm L ipi = L

m m -P1 ....(3) by equations (6) and (7), with a ' sign where necessa-

mm t

SO ry. Therefore the conditions for the equivalence, as-

Where, suming Ar =Ar', are:

o 0

am is the cross-section of the elementary cy-

lindrical path where ground current density I /st =It/St = A ............... (8)

im (in A/m2) is practically constant - (m2)

0 0

Lm is the length of the preceding path - (m) L'4 = L = BB. .............. (9)

Am is the current density distribution function m m m m

along grid conductors (+m(x,y,z) = 1 if the

distribution is assumed uniform)

St0 is the surface of the conductors which are

P

a

Ar./S Epari/Si =

........ (lo)

in contact with the upper layer of soil A two-layer soil is characterized by its upper

It is the total current flowing out of St.

0

layer resistivity Pi and height h, and the bottom la-

yer resistivity P2 (or the reflexion factor K=[p2-pl]/

Between equipotential surface SO and SI (average [P2+Pl])i

distance between SO and Si = Aro) there is a voltage

drop AVO: AV0 piAr It/S

=

.(4) Thus, each of the equations (8),(9) and (10) will

impose a value of h and K, since Pi has been selected

Between equipotential surface Si and an equipo- equal to the actual upper layer resistivity. If the h

tential surface at infinity S,,0, the voltage drop is: are equal and the K are equal, then a unique two-layer

soil is equivalent to the actual one. If not, then the

i-l =Vi i-l paAriI/Si .................... (5) actual soil grounding performance is in between the

performances of both two-layer soils which give res-

pectively the best and worst results.

Where pai is an apparent resistivity value for the In practice however, the values of A, B or C are

heterogeneous soil located between surface Si and S i+ not known. Therefore, it is not possible to evaluate

(see Figure 1.2). the values of h or K. As a result, it will be necessa-

St1_&O~ .93

2091

ry to study the ground system for a wide range of h for K=0.98 and -0.98 respectively, were practically

and K values. The worst case obtained should be used identical with the uniform soil density curve.

as a reference for the design. A companion paper [11] to

shows that, effectively, there is a worst case which 1007A/m

does not correspond to the extreme values of h or K or

to a uniform soil. '

\ +

s. _

ground system is in contact with the upper layer only, K=-0.98

equation (8) is automatically fulfilled.

K=0.98

'0

-' 200.

Section 1.0, despite the fact that it is not a w

....--K=0.3

complete analytical treatment, has shown the useful-

ness of two-layer soils. In this section the perfor- K=0

mance of a ground rod buried in a two-layer soil will

be analysed, starting first with the rod isolated and 1004 w X

then with additional rods added progressively.

2.1 Single vertical qzound rod

Consider a lOm long ground rod buried in a two-

layer soil at a depth of 0.05 m (rod radius=O.Olm). 0 2 4 6 8 10

The current discharged into the ground by the ground (Soil surface) Rod length (meters)

rod is assumed constant and equal to lOOOA. The cur- Figure 2.2 - Single Rod current densities (h=lm)

rent densities (A/m) along the rod length are obvious-

ly influenced by the upper soil layer height h and the Figures 2,1 and 2.2 lead to the following conclu-

resistivities ratio P1/P2 or, which is equivalent but sions:

more convenient in the discussions, the reflexion fac-

tor K which was previously defined. The rod resistance a-In a uniform soil, the ground rod current density

and the step and touch voltages will also vary with is practically constant except at the tip of the rod

the values of h and K. which has higher current densities. However this tip

effect can be ignored in practice.

In this section we will analyse in detail the in- b-When the rod is in contact with one layer only,

fluence of h and K on the ground rod performance, as- its current densities are practically similar to the

suming that the upper layer resistivity equals 100 Q-m ones which exist in a uniform soil composed of the

(this assumption is maintained throughout the paper). upper layer.

The knowledge gained by performing this analysis will c-If the rod is in contact with two soil layers,the

allow us to better understand the behavior of more portion of the rod which is in the lower resistivity

complex forms of electrodes such as multiple driven layer, has the highest current densities. If one of

rods or a combination of rods and horizontal conduc- the soil layers has a much higher resistivity than

tors. the other one, then the rod section which is in the

high resistivity layer can be ignored.

2.1.1 Current Densities d-Very high current densities (soil heating hazard)

may exist at the rod surface if only a small section

Figure 2.1 shows the current density function for of the rod is in contact with a high conductive layer,

an upper layer height h of 5m and various reflexion the other rod part being in a more resistive layer.

factors K. When K is negative the subsoil is more e-Finally, the relationship PkIk = constant, where

conductive than the surface. K=+l corresponds to the Ik is the current density (in A/m) of the rod part

limiting cases of an insulating and metallic subsoil. which is in the layer K (resistivity Pk in Q-m), seems

Current - - - Resistive subsoil to hold reasonably well except at the rod extremities.

density

de

Y, = 500. 0.98

(A/n)

(A/m)

~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ subsoil

~ ~~~

Conductive

o- I

240.

- 1- O -uV. ,o \ -K

h=5m 1-. 0. 9

C 100. 4 9

_____--=_=_: ,#l-0. 5

100, 0.3 < Uniform

0.3 soil

80 0.5 -a10. -

_.98

0

a I i

* . .

0 2 4 6 8 10

(Soil Surface) Rod length (meters)

Figure 2.1 - Single Rod Current Densities (h=5m)

Figure 2.2 is similar to 2.1 but for an upper la-

yer height of lm for heights slightly larger than rod 0.1 1. 10. 100.

length, it was noticed that the effect of the subsoil h, surface layer height (m)

becomes negligible even with extreme values of K (±1).

For instance when h = 12m, the current density curves, Figure 2.3 - Single Rod Resistance

2092

2.1.2 Resistance, "R" Because of the proximity effects between rods (mutual

coupling), the isolated rod current density function

Figure 2.3 gives the ground rod resistance as a (Section 2.1.1) is not always applicable for multiple

function of upper layer height h, for several values driven rods. The following will show to what extent

of the reflexion factor K. Again, it can be noticed current densities are modified by the mutual coupling.

that the soil stratification effect can be ignored if Touch voltage (%)

h is slightly larger than rod length L. This is parti-

cularly true when the subsoil is more conductive than - 80 K=

the surface. As soon as h becomes smaller than L, a

substantial drop or increase of the resistance occurs

suddenly. The resistance increases (K>0) more progres-

sively than when it decreases (K<0). For low values of

h (with respect to L), a further decrease of h has no

effect on the resistance value except when K is posi-

tive and close to 1. Thus a ground rod will be useful

only if it is effectively in contact with a low resis-

tivity subsoil.

2.1.3 Touch Voltages "Vt"

The touch voltage in this case, is defined as the

difference between the rod potential rise (RI) and the

surface soil potential at a distance of lm from the 5 10 20 30

rod. Figure 2.4 shows the touch voltage (in Volts) as Surface layer height (meters)

a function of h, for several values of K. The touch

voltage curves are very similar to the resistance ones Figure 2.5 - Single Rod Touch Voltage in %

(see Figure 2.3). Thus, similar conclusions are appli-

cable. However the volts values are perhaps misleading 2.2.1 Current Densities

because in practice it will not always be possible to

have 1000 A in the rod when its resistance is high. In Each curve of Figure 2.6 represents the current

fact, the term "prospective touch voltage" is probably density along a ground rod of various multiple rod

more adequate. Percent values are also convenient. electrodes, as shown in the figure. These curves were

obtained assuming a uniform soil. The total current of

Figure 2.5 presents the touch voltages in percent the electrode is lOOOn Amperes, where n is the total

of the corresponding grid potential rise. The curves number of rods in the electrode. Thus, the average cu-

show that, when expressed in percent, touch voltages rrent density is 100 A/m.

exhibit a minimum and maximum value (for positive and

negative values of K respectively), when upper layer The current density in one of electrode R2 rods,

height h is in the order of rod length L. The previous is practically identical to the isolated rod current

results show that, assuming a constant rod potential density. This is a logical result, because of symmetry

rise value, the worst touch voltages occur when the and the fact that current density is given in Amperes

subsoil is more conductive than the surface soil. per meter. However the surface current density in A/m2

is not the same as in the single rod case.

100. rry lower currents than the outer rods. The highest

oo .

current densities occur at the corner rods which have

a)

0)

the largest v6lume of rod-free soil. The maximum cur-

to rent density deviation from the single rod case does

not exceed 15%. This value however will increase

co 0

with lower rod separations.

E

H upper

160 2 mid 'curves

, I * e *~'.N7~*. lower

R5 R9 t

1. -

4-i

120 '

,2.~~~~~

' i 5, _ ;,i=, :=

-ea 80

0.1 4-i ..A --:

**..& I '*u, R5 * -- -- - R2

a) * * Rl

0. 1 1. 10. 100. $4

P 40'

h, surface layer height (m) 0

Figure 2.4 - Single Rod Touch Voltage

Uniform Soil --__0 R3

Location on ground rod (meters)

Multiple driven rods connected in parallel is a

frequently used combined electrode. The behavior of Figure 2.6 - Multiple Driven Rods Current Densities

each rod of the ground bed is influenced by the other

rods. The potentials at any point of soil or rod sur- Figure 2.7 shows similar results but in the case

face, is given by the sum of all the potentials produ- of two-layer soil (upper layer height h=5m) and elec-

ced by each rod. This procedure is accurate only if trode R9. The conclusions are the same as in the pre-

the current densities along each rod length are known. vious uniform case. However the deviations from the

2093

isolated rod case are larger in the low conductivity sistivity Pi (which is assumed lOOQ-m) but also a

layer than in the more resistive one. function of h (upper layer height) and P2 (subsoil re-

?I x * - ,-

2~-I

(h=5m) K=O.9 sistivity) or, *which is equivalent since Pi is kept

constant, reflexion factor K instead of P2.

i11 3

>: K=0.9

> 240 The current densities were calculated for various

cn reflexion factors K and several heights h. Figure 3.1

0

corresponds to h = lm. Other cases with different va-

~0 lues of h are not shown in this paper. However the im-

portant results obtained are included in the following

sw 16 paragraph which summarizes the observations made after

careful analysis of the current density curves. These

should be compared with the previous ones made for a

ground rod (Section 2.1.1).

a-In a uniform or two-layer soil, the horizontal

0 2 6 48 10 conductor current density is practically constant ex-

Location on ground rod (meters) cept at the extremities where high current densities

exist. This extremity effect can not be ignored in

Figure 2.7 - Current Densities in Multiple Driven Rods practice without serious sacrifice in the results ac-

2.2.2 Resistance and Touch Voltages curacy.

b-When the horizontal conductor is buried in the

Table 2.1 gives the values of ground resistance first layer of a two-layer soil, the current densities

and touch voltage (at the soil surface point which is are different from the uniform soil values. If the

on the square diagonal line and at equal distance subsoil is more resistive than the surface one, then

from the corner and center rod) for: uniform soil and the extremity current increases (center decreases)

electrodes Rl to R9 and electrode R9 in various two- with the value of K. When K is negative (low resisti-

layer soils. vity subsoil), the opposite effect is observed and the

trend is towards uniform current densities when K ap-

Rl proaches -1. Note however that current densities cor-

2Om x2Om R2 R3 R5 R9 responding to conductive subsoils depart proportiona-

Electrode ''|

I

t _-.--X

*g lly less from the uniform soil currents, than in the

case of high resistivity subsoils.

Type r..L. ..i4 c-If the conductor is buried in the subsoil (h<.5m)

the current density curves are practically identical

Resistance 11.85 6.43 4.52 3.01 2.16 to the uniform soil curve regardless of K values. How-

ever as soon as h becomes larger than O.5m (conductor

in upper layer), the current density curves for vari-

Voltage ( 84.7 72.0 68.2 59.1 40.8 ous K start to spread on both sides of the uniform

soil curve (Figure 3.1). The amplitude of the devia-

a- Uniform Soil tions reaches very quickly a maximum (h=0.6m), remains

constant for 0.6<h<2.Om, and the reverse phenomena

Ref lexion Uniform starts again as h increases (for large values of h the

Factor K -0.9 -0.5 Soil 0.5 0.9 soil is practically uniform. Therefore all curves will

be confounded with the uniform one). For h5m the de-

Resistance 0.169 0.926 2.16 4.21 8.69 viations were small enough to be neglected (h=lOz).

d-Finally, no simple mathematical expression was

found to describe the current density as a function of

x,y,z,l ',h and Z.

Voltage ( 51.1 .47.4 40.8 31.8 19.3 K= -;

b- R9 in Two-Layer Soil (h=5m) 80 0.0 I

0.98

Table 2.1

-.- -0.98

4:

ux

0 75

u

3.0 HORIZONTAL CONDUCTOR AND GROUNDING GRID

We will proceed in this section as in the prece-

=~~ ~~~~~~~~

'v :

conductor (length L=30m; radius=O.Olm) buried at a c-

I I_ -L

depth Z of 0.5m in a two-layer soil, will be analysed

in detail. Following this, several horizontal conduc-

tors will be added progressively, forming thus what is 0 6 12 18 24 30

usually called a grounding grid. Location on conductor (meters)

3.1 Single Horizontal Conductor Figure 3.1 - Single Horizontal Conductor Current

Densities (h=lm)

The current discharged into the ground by the ho- 3.1.2 Resistances, "R"

rizontal conductor is constant (1OOOA). Because of the

presence of two distinct layers, the ground conductor Figure 3.2 gives the horizontal conductor resis-

behavior is not only a function of the upper layer re- tance as a function of h and for several K values. The

2094

abrupt decrease (or increase) of the resistance value vities of this thin layer. (The original soil or sub-

corresponds to the passage of the conductor from upper soil resistivity is assumed 1000-m).

layer into the subsoil. Note the considerable influ-

ence of the subsoil, even with h values several times

conductor length, especially when K is positive and

close to 1 (poor conductive subsoil).

o 1.=0.98

100.

4)

o

S

4--i

0

> 10.

Cd .Z

0

H

N

-0.9.

He

$4

1. -0.

1.-.

o z=05m

0 z=0. 5m

0.1.

-0.98) 0. 1-

Surface layer height h (meters)

Surface layer height hi (meters)

Figure 3.2 - Single Horizontal Conductor Resistance

Figure 3.3 - Single Horizontal Conductor Touch Voltage

3.1.3 Touch Voltages, "Vt"

The touch voltage is defined as the difference

between the conductor potential rise and the surface

soil potential at a lm distance from conductor extre-

mity (in line with conductor). Figure 3.3 gives the

touch voltages in Volts (versus h and K). Figure 3.4

is similar but with the touch voltages expressed in

percent of conductor potential rise for the convenient'

reason given in Section 2.1.3.

100- Z-U.i' -0.98

The observations made in 2.1.3 are still applica-

ble here. However a curious phenomena, not observed in 90 0.9

the case of a ground rod, occurs when Vt is given in %. 80~ ~ -*-.. -0.3

For large values of K (K>0.7) and values of top layer

height h lower than grid depth z, Vt in % is greater 60-_

than the uniform soil constant value. When h decreases

further (h=0, uniform soil), Vt drops back to the ex- j (K=0.0) 0.3 _ _

pected uniform value. This phenomena occurs also with 40 Uniform

grounding grids but with a smaller intensity (examine 20j- soil

attentively Figure 3.11 of Reference [11]). A ground

conductor buried in one soil layer with a thin high L-A I ~~.8I A a I t I i I 2 IIAII 1

often created intentionally in power substations where Surface layer height (meters)

a thin coating of gravel is added on top of finished Figure 3.4 - Single Horizontal Rod Touch Voltage

grade (above grounding grid) in order to increase al-

lowable touch potentials [1]. Thus one may legitima-

tely think that this practice is wrong because touch

voltages in % are increased following the addition of

gravel. However, a closer analysis of the problem and

Figure 3.5, show that this is fortunately not true. 3.2 Grounding Grids

The addition of a thin gravel layer will not in- Grounding grids of the "meshed" type as used in

crease the resistance value (or potential rise value) practice are analysed in detail in [11]. In this sec-

significantly (see Figure 3.2). Therefore the actual tion we will confine the discussions to the combina-

touch voltage in Volts increases proportionally to the tions of parallel horizontal conductors buried in a

% increase of Vt, generally a moderate increase. In uniform soil at a depth z=0.5m. Starting with a single

contrast, the maximum permissible touch voltage, which conductor, several other identical conductors are ad-

is a function of the top surface layer [1], is increa- ded progressively.

sed considerably. The net result of the addition of a 3.2.1 Current densities

thin gravel layer is consequently an increase of safe-

ty. Figure 3.5 shows clearly the influence of a thin Figure 3.6 shows the current density variations

layer on touch and step voltages for various resisti- when horizontal conductors are progressively intercon-

2095

nected. Everything being equal, the observations made ess. Examination of Figures 4.1 and 4.2 (also Fi-

in Section 2.2.1 for ground rods are also valid for 3.2 of Reference [11] shows mainly that:

this case. The effect of the two outer cross-conduc-

tors of electrode HC4-(not considered in 2.2.1) can be Ground rods are good "fault current discharge"

observed in this figure. These cross-conductors ,ctors, even in uniform soils. This is confirmed

damp significantly the high conductor edge current eir average current density values which are al-

densities. The same phenomena occurs also in "meshed" double the horizontal conductors ones, and by

type grid, but the damping effect is less effective at ,ctor No. 1 current density curve (electrode SR3)

the grid edges than at its center [1lJ. ,lacks symmetry because of the large damping ef-

of the corner rod.

16 40 -

voltage d rods are practically null. This behavior, when

Touch red to the multiple driven rods results shown in

> 12 a 30- voltage e 2.6, proves that the ground rod drains current

o {

-- the grid and injects it back into soil at a grea-

"I.. I.-

av a

4-0

--.-

j 0.i2I ,epth.

All outer conductors, vertical and horizontal

00 < 20- _ "", 200m higher current densities than the inner ones.

a 0

I

I

N P2=1000-M

4 ~Curve

Uniform

ut4 .0U soil ] _ Z ~30m ~~ ~~

3AJ

3 |- - (upper)

4W 4 - 0

E-

10- (K=0.0)

0

30m

-s_> _ _

30m

~ _ _

30m

~~

~ (lower)

I- ,. )

Hl H4 HC4

** * * .- 1 _ j ~_L_ ___L__ -60

1. -.6 -.2 .2 .6 1. Uniform Soil

Figure 3.5 - Effect of a thin layer ,

3.2.2 Resistarace and Touch Voltages U 40*

voltage valuess (calculated at the center line halfway = 20-

between the tV wo outer conductors) for various electro- = Location on conductor (m)

des (H1,H2,H3,,H4,HC4 and G4) buried in a uniform soil.

15 30

30m x 30m Hi H2 H3 H4 HC4 G4

Figure 3.6 - Current Densities of Horizontal

Electrode - Conductors Arrangement

Type _- __ _____ i i

1 A\- e 5

Resistance 5.85 3.50 2.61 2.12 1.76 1.6E __ 2 een 9

SR2&SR5&SR9

An

iou-

I-I >,20m , -

%

1 60-

"v,w -"

' SE2, 1

., SR25,2

Table 3.1 C

'0

4.0 MULTIPLE DRIVEN RODS CONNECTED VIA A GROUND GRID vC 40'

a) ' <v SR9,1

It is not possible to present in a short paper wl--

3.4

the results of the numerous possibilities of grid-rods

combinations and two-layer soil structures. Consequen-

0 20. K= 0. SR5 2

tly, this section will be restricted to a four mesh

grid buried in a uniform or two-layer soil (h=5m, with 4 8 12 16 20

A A I

-O.9<K<O.9) at a depth z=0.5m. The grid edge dimension I i

is 20m. Location on conductor (meters)

Figure 4.1 - Rods and Grid - Grid Currents

4.1 Current Densities

Power station ground grids are usually designed 4.1.2 Effect of Subsoil

for maximum potential rise of lOkV. Thus,assuming an

a

average power system ground fault current of 2MkA, the The effect of soil structure is shown using the

grid resistance must be less than 0.5Q. Consequently, current density curves of Figures 4.3 and 4.4. These

the power network ground fault magnitude is determined figures confirm several observations made previously

by system impedances and a moderate variation of grid in Sections 2.0, 3.0 and 4.1.2. Figure 4.4 should be

resistance will not have any significant effect on the compared with 2.7. The main conclusions of this analy-

grid current. For this reason, in this section, the sis are:

grid current is lOkA regardless of the number of rods

connected to the grid. a-The rod drainage effect observed previously for

uniform soils, exists also when soil is stratified,

4.1.1 Ground Rods-Grid Conductors Mutual Effects even when the subsoil is less conductive than the top

layer.

Figure 4.1 shows the horizontal conductor current b-When the subsoil has a very low resistivity, the

densities when lOm long ground rods are connected pro- electrode's current is almost entirely discharged by

gressively to the grid. Figure 4.2 shows the ground the rod parts which are in contact with the subsoil.

rod current density while the previous operation is in c-The outer conductors still carry higher current

2096

densities than the inner ones. However, the differen- S3 SRI SR2 SR5 SR9

ce is negligible for low resistivity subsoils but con-

siderable (with respect to uniform soil case) when the Electrode

surface layer has the lowest resistivity value. Type_

Resistance 2.58 __ 2.28 2.00 1.81

Touch *

Voltage (%) 35.0 __ 31.0 25.0 21.0

a- Uniform Soil

Reflexion Uniform

Factor K -0.9 .-0.5 Soil (0.0) 0.5 0.9

Resistance 0.164 __ 1.81 3.50 7.78

(Q) __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Touch *

Voltage(% 350

_ -13.4

_ 210 1.

6.6

66

Table 4.1

Location on ground rod (meters)

b-In uniform and two-layer soils, horizontal inter-

Figure 4.2 - Rods and Grid - Ground Rods Currents connections between ground rods improves considerably

the touch voltages. Ground resistances, however, are

not reduced significantly.

c-When subsoil has a high resistivity value, ground

rod contribution is minimum and touch voltage is prac-

tically determined by the horizontal conductors. If

1 the subsoil resistivity is low compared to the surface

ii

one, then a considerable decrease of electrode's resis-

Z 80 - tance is experienced. However touch voltages are still

reduced significantly by the horizontal conductors.

,W

O

a)

60 -

a_ 1 2 5 .3

W 40 - 3 SR9 ". K=-0.9

only 4

200

20 a)

20n -

-W

1

a- -- ----= K=-O. 9

A

.

2 "XU) 150

4 8 12 16 20 a)

Location on conductor (meters) JJ

'0

Figure 4.3 - Electrode SR9 -

Two-Layer Soil (h=5m) 4) K=0.9 ,.' 'J > K

5 =0.03

p 100 /5 K=0. 0

horizontal conductors connecting the ground rods toge-

ther. Comparison of the two tables lead to useful in-

formations about ground rods effects on ground grids:

a-In uniform soils, a square ground system made of 6 8 10

vertical rods is more advantageous than the equivalent Location on ground rod (meters)

square grid made of horizontal conductors. This is ob-

vious when electrodes R9 and S3 are compared. Despite Figure 4.4 -

Electrode SR9 -

Two-Layer Soil (h=5m)

the fact that R9 total conductor length is only 90m

( 120 m for S3 ), its resistance is almost 18% lower

than S3 resistance. The touch potentials, expressed in

Volts (Vt%xRxI) are similar with a slight advantage CONCLU$IONS

to R9.

Simple forms of electrodes such as ground rods or

In large substations, it is not very practical horizontal conductors, when buried in a two-layer soil,

to drive long rods. Thus, multiple driven rod electro- exhibit a complex behavior which can not be described

des would be a practical solution for small distribu- accurately by simplified mathematical expressions. The

tion substations where the subsoil can be easily pene- combination of ground rods and horizontal conductors,

trated by ground rods. is thus, still more complex to analyse.

2097

ted problem and the main conclusions or achievements

obtained are as follows: 1- "Guide for safety in alternating current substa-

tions grounding, IEEE Standard #80, 1961.

a- The usefulness of two-layer soil as an equivalent

model for actual heterogeneous soils was confir- 2- P.G. Laurent, "Les bases generales de la technique

med and the inadequacy of uniform soil equivalent des mises a la terre dans les installations 6lec-

models was proved. triques", Bulletin de la Societe Francaise des

Electriciens, 7ieme serie, Tome 1, no. 7, July 1951

b- Ground rods arrd horizontal conductors were analy- pp. 368-402.

sed extensively and several charts, valid for

uniform and two-layer soils, have been included 3- S.J. Schwartz, "Analytical expression for the re-

and may be used advantageously for design purpo- sistance of grounding system", AIEE Transactions,

ses. Vol. 73, part III-B, 1954, pp. 1011-1016.

c- It was shown that ground conductors current den- 4- C. Jensen, "Grounding principles and practice, II-

sities are influenced by soil characteristics, Establishing grounds", Elec. Eng., Vol. 64, Februa-

conductor location and its interconnections with ry 1945, pp. 68-74.

other conductors, and conductor direction with

respect to the vertical. 5- W.R. Bullard, "Grounding principles and practice.

IV- System Grounding", Elec. Eng., Vol. 64, April

d- A curious phenomena was observed when the subsoil 1945. pp. 145-151.

has a high resistivity and an horizontal conduc-

tor is buried below a thin surface layer. The 6- F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar, "Optimum design of sub-

touch voltage, instead of increasing continuously station grounding in two-layer earth structure",

up to the uniform soil value (when upper thick- part I, II, & III, IEEE Transactions, Vol. PAS-94,

ness is decreased to zero), exceeded the previous No. 2, March/April 1975, pp. 252-272.

value significantly before decreasing again tow-

ards the uniform soil value. 7- F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar, "Multi-step analysis of

interconnected grounding electrodes" IEEE Transac-

e- The current density "damping" effects of cross- tions, Vol. PAS-95, No. 1, January/February 1976,

conductors and the current "drainage" effects of pp. 113-119.

ground rods on horizontal conductors were shown

clearly and are believed to be new concepts not 8- F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar, "Transferred earth po-

previously reported or, at-least, insufficiently tentials in power systems", IEEE Transactions, Vol.

discussed and described. PAS-97, No. 1, January/February 1978, pp. 90-101.

f- Last but not the least, multiple driven electro- 9- T.N. Giao, M.P. Sarma, "Effect of two-layer earth

des are shown to be, everything being equal, more on the electric fields near HVDC electrodes", IEEE

effective than equivalent ground grids made of Transactions, Vol. PAS-O1, No.6, November 1972, pp.

horizontal conductors. This is true even when 2346-65.

soil is uniform. However,when subsoil resistivity

is high, the horizontal conductors are more ef-

fective because they reduce significantly the 10-J. Sverak, "Optimized grounding grid design using

touch voltages. variable spacing technique", IEEE Transactions,

Vol. PAS-95, January/February 1976.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors express their appreciation to the Na-

tional Research Council of Canada for providing the 11-F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar, "Parametric analysis

necessary financial support of the work. The authors of grounding grids". Companion paper submitted for

also acknowledge the cooperation and facilities offe- presentation at the IEEE PES winter meeting, New-

red by Ecole Polytechnique and Montel Inc. York, 1978.

2098

D. Mukhedkar, for photograph and biography please see page 728 of F. Dawalibi and D. Mukhedkar: We would like to thank Mr. Wehling

the May/June 1979 issue of this TRANSACTIONS. for his interest in our paper and for his encouraging comments. Mr.

Wehling questions are answered in the sequence they are raised in his

Farid Dawalibi, for photograph and biography please see page 1667 of discussion.

the September/October 1979 issue of this TRANSACTIONS. The theory which is the analytical basis of MALT program permits

the analysis of grounding electrodes buried in two-layer soils. The elec-

Discussion trode may be in contact with both layers, (partially buried in the first

layer). Therefore, the equations are valid for any grounding electrode

J. Wehling (United Power Association, Elk River, MN): The authors buried in two-layer soil regardless of the way it is in contact with both

have made a valuable contribution to our understanding of the overall layers.

performance of a grounding system in this paper as well as in earlier We fully agree with Mr. Wehling conclusion related to table 4.1

related papers. Because of the complexities involved, most earlier results. As pointed out by Mr. Wehling, when the bottom layer has a

studies have not attempted to analyze the combined effects of a groundlower resistivity than the top one, the addition of ground rods which are

grid which utilizes ground rods extending into a soil of differing in contact with this bottom layer, reduces significantly the grid

resistivity. While many areas of the world may contain formations resistance and as a consequence the potential rise and the touch voltages

which make it infeasible to drive ground rods very deeply, there are are also greatly reduced.

other areas where it is possible to go as deep as 34m (111 ft.) with good In several of our previous publications we already have compared

the theoretical results with experimental ones. We have also compared

results. This paper gives the engineer a better understanding of the ef-

fect of these variables on the important design parameters of a grid. our results with measurements conducted by others. In all cases we have

The authors have developed generalized equations to show the obtained satisfactory agreement. However, we have not made yet any

comparisons when the electrode is simultaneously in contact with both

behavior of a grounding grid in two layer soils. It is not completely clear

layers. The reason is mainly because this will require that the reduced

from the analysis (Section 1.0) or Figures 1.1 and 1.2 whether the grid

scale model be made of two stable liquids of different resistivities.

itself is in actual contact with soils of two resistivities as might be the

case with deep grounding. Do the authors feel the equations retain their However, Mr. C. J. Blattner (1) has made some comparisons with

a real life installation (including ground rods in contact with the bottom

generality if the electrode is indeed in contact with soil of one resistivity

only? layer). Our predictions were in good agreement with his measurements.

The results given in Table 4.1 are particularly interesting in that REFERENCE

they show the effect upon Touch Voltages of adding ground rods to the

grid. It can be seen that even though the listed Touch Voltage is 35% (1) Discussion by Mr. C. J. Blattner of "Parametric analysis of

(for K = -0.9), the addition of rods still result in a lower Touch grounding grids" IEEE paper F 79 243-7, IEEE PES winter

Voltage when multiplied by the corresponding IR drop of the grid. meeting, Feb. 1979.

Finally, have the authors had the opportunity to confirm their

results by scale model tests as they have with their earlier analysis?

Manuscript received February 26, 1979. Manuscript received April 23, 1979.

- Ground-rod-Manufacture-250-micron-copper-Ground-rod-Grounding-rods-and-Aerial-Eleveation-rod.pdf.Загружено:Amiableimpex
- Cable Conductor Materials - Open ElectricalЗагружено:Herman Damanik
- spare_partsЗагружено:PaThMaTi
- Mousa the Soil Ionization Gradient Tr PWRD IEEE 1994Загружено:Shostak Ira
- Effect of the Pressure on the Properties_CO2Загружено:Alfredo Ruiz Meza
- Kumar PresentationЗагружено:Tamara Trejos
- ssЗагружено:Suraj Shukla
- (27)Calculate No of Plate-Pipe Earthing & Size of Earthing Strip(1.12.12)Загружено:Jignesh Parmar
- Electrical Conductivity of a Hydroponic Nutrient SolutionЗагружено:Alexandre Vieira
- Cable Conductor Materials - Open ElectricalЗагружено:Khairul Ashraf
- Chapter 4 - Eddy Current Method1Загружено:vibinkumars@gmail.com
- Instrucciones de Boma Little Giant Modelo 5-MSPЗагружено:humbertoudg
- Strain Gauge ManualЗагружено:mac9pap
- EarthingЗагружено:Bertrand Russell
- SINAMICS_V20_Getting_Started_072012_en-US.pdfЗагружено:Ko J Yar
- powergridprotectionЗагружено:Kumar
- 10leftimg VFD BasicsЗагружено:ibiceng
- 2.2.38 ConductivityЗагружено:Mulayam Singh Yadav
- Windsor Mini Extractor Presto PRS3Загружено:Nestor Marquez-Diaz
- Effect of Lubricants on Warm Compaction Process of Cu-based CompositeЗагружено:MÔNICA SUEDE S. SILVA
- Electrical engineering materialsЗагружено:Yakini Prabakar
- acЗагружено:Deepa Kapadia
- earthchecks.docЗагружено:Nicholas Shelton
- 2009_Impulse Efficiency of Ground Electrodes.pdfЗагружено:Srihari Mandava
- GroundingЗагружено:Rio Sitanggang
- Part III Post Test Solutions1Загружено:Kim Greenith Lyn Enales
- s Tr Earth Lightning Gen (Rev.0 2009)Загружено:Abhinav Sinha
- GNPD 03-00-1 ITP 03019 2 Attach.01_Control Panel Installation Inspection_2Загружено:pepenapao1217
- 2- Calculation o f Single Earthing Rod ResistanceЗагружено:Mohamed Taleb
- Deltapower.pdfЗагружено:Vinh BLO

- LABORATORIO POLITÉCNICO.pdfЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Soil Resistivity Data Computations Single and Two Layer Soil Resistivity Structure and Its Implication on Earthing DesignЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Fundamental of Short Range FM-RadarЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Fundamental of Short Range FM-RadarЗагружено:hroark1
- Depth MapaЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Influence of GroundЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- HEPPE.pdfЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- PALMER- INTEGRAL.pdfЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Resistivity TanqueЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Depth brasil.pdfЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Two Layer Soil GroundingЗагружено:Nadeem Khalid
- NigerЗагружено:Rezi
- Two Layers Soil Stratification Using NumericalЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- 3156391 OE TechnicalArticle Reliability 2010Загружено:Pankaj Kamble
- Dawalibi-Earth-Resistivity.pdfЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- ThaparЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Earth electrode testingЗагружено:Hasith Liyanage
- 17referenciesЗагружено:Miker Roca Torres
- IEEE EndrenyiЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- WITS - Final - Research Report-689839Загружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Strategy for Renewable EnergyЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- XieЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- 30% Y 50%Загружено:Raul Marihuan González
- densidad corriente, DawalwyЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Zohdy 1989Загружено:Raul Marihuan González
- Grounding GuidelinesЗагружено:charleselitb92
- Efect of Neutral Grounding Methods on the Earth FaultЗагружено:Raul Marihuan González

- Spectrum_flyer_2019_v6.pdfЗагружено:amitsaga
- Embedded Motion Enet on Micro800 PlcsЗагружено:magtrol
- emc1Загружено:lokeshchoudhary1988
- InfoSet QueryЗагружено:Anonymous 0v9zwXz6hF
- RESUMEЗагружено:Sunny Lam
- System Analysis and Design Summary's and QuizsЗагружено:Nathan
- TcEnTrainingЗагружено:ajmervin
- Improving Final Product QualityЗагружено:Ems-Electra Srl
- Exp_10Загружено:Ranjith Tamil Selvan
- c5 manualЗагружено:Relu Matei
- Ricoh & Providers' Council Member Benefits InfoЗагружено:Massachusetts Council of Human Service Providers
- Modelling, Simulation and Control of Utility Grid Integrated Solar Photovoltaic System Using MatlabЗагружено:Anonymous vQrJlEN
- X2 InterfaceЗагружено:bushrayahia9561
- Fusion S4 Rom [JB] (Cherry Mobile Flare S100)Загружено:mcdale
- fc500kd0eЗагружено:mohamedwaly
- Migrat Pp034 Pt eЗагружено:Bruno Gonçalves Freitas
- Example Digital Storytelling Lesson PlanЗагружено:cdominguez0105
- AlphaWireless Product Catalogue 23-2-15 V4Загружено:piterpz
- 3.Data Modeling ToolsЗагружено:kumar.sena4633
- Big Data Needs Anonos BigPrivacy®Загружено:Anonos
- Best practices, lessons learned from compressor session paid expenses several times over.docxЗагружено:abdulyunus_amir
- Beast-Men and Gods-By OssendowskiЗагружено:Sohrab
- Strategic Alliances Between LENOVO and IBMЗагружено:SumedhAmane
- 709 Whats New in Core Ml Part 2Загружено:Const Vass
- ProjectЗагружено:Jogesh Fulsunge
- Count Rnc Count Tr Hw PartЗагружено:sinasabikona
- Detego ExpressЗагружено:OsmarFernando PatiñoTorres
- Android-System-Development.pdfЗагружено:Amitav Shaw
- Copy of BSC Survey Royal TowerЗагружено:Stefanus Enggar Pradipta
- Brown - RFID Hacking Live Free or RFID Hard SlidesЗагружено:Vikram Keshari Soren