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
 I = I1 + I2 + ... + I. + ... Im
J

r--r--r---- I\

Fig. 4. Summation method - Subdivisions of a large electrode

Assume also that the total length of the electrode conductors is L,

then the average h e a r current density inthe electrode is:
i = I/L
f From equation 1, we can write:
Z
i
Fig. 3. Coordinates of electrode j and point M Ij = $ x i d u = g . i d u (61
J

Theelectrode is injecting acurrent Ii in the soil. If the electrode Equation 4, and gives:
length is du then
I = i.du
j J

Thepotentialatapoint M whose coordinates are ~0, YO, + m

C 6. = m
(or k,v,, w0) can be calculated using the method of images (41 or by 1 J
solving directly Laplace equation [ 51. It can be shown then that the
potential at any point located in the top layer of a two layer earth 6,is a numerical factor which takes into accountthenon uniform
st~ctm is given as (figure 2 and 3): currentdistribution in the electrode. If the returncurrentelectrode
location (Location of phase to ground fault) is remote from the elec
dVj= *[*+
p i.du

oj
1+
F
oj
m
E?(++
n=l nJ-
I
yl
nj-
trode, then 6j depends only on the geometrical shape of the electrode
and can be calculated using the matrixmethod [ 6 J . However, inall
practical cases, the worst phase to ground faults to be considered are
faults occuring at the vicinity of a substation. Under this condition the
currentdistribution will be heavier in theconductors which are the
closest to the fault location. ( T h i s has been verified on the scaled down
model. The conductors which were very close to the return electrode
were corroded substantially more than the far ones) [7]. Therefore 6j
must be estimated by the design engineer so as to satisfy equation 8,
electrode configuration and proximity of fault. The following formulae
is proposed to determine 6j.
d .
6.=a 3
J dfj
where,
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- = [(xJ .- xo) 2 + (Yj' YOl2 + c* - (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
1.1.2 Ractical electrode 6 j = l , j = l , . . . m.
Since the potential is a scalar quantity the potential at a point M
1.2.21 Summationmethod of the top layer is the s u m of the potentials due to each element j in-
jecting a current Ij, therefore:

':
If the electrode is large and has a complex geometrical shape(sub-
stations grounding electrode)thenequation 2 can not be used directly.
In order to avoid this difficulty the electrode is divided into small ele-
- 1'
4rrL 1 [ + - m
1
roj
.. .. .
ments 1,2, . ,j, m (figure 4) which can be considered as infintes-
imal. Each
elements
theseof
earth a current Ij such that:
has the same du
length and injects into

253
+-1
'nj+ + k)
nJ+ I
(10)
1.1.22 Integration method

The accuracy of the summation method increases with the number

of subdivisions m made on the electrode. The limit of the summation
will be the integral of the elementary potentialgiven by equation 2.
The following calculations assume:
- theelectrode is made up of linear conductorsinterconnectedto-
gether
- uniform current density in each linear conductor

1.1.221 Case of one horizontal linear conductor

Consider an horizontal linear conductor (figure 5 ) buried ata

depth e in the top layer of the earth. This conductor is located on the
u axis of the uvw coordinate system. The coordinates of the conductor Y
are:
X
t U

f U

' 0'

Fig. 6. Integration method - horizontal conductor

Fig. 5. 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. 7. Integration method - horizontal conductor

Notice that equation 2 can be written as:

Withvs=vp=ws=wp=O;zs=zp=e dv = e (w,) + e (w0 + 2zS)
The u v w axis will always be chosen so that us = 0
Where:
The potential at M (uo, vo, wo) due to an infinitesimal part du of
the conductor (figure6) is given by equation 2. In order to carry out
the integration, the r terms of equation 3 must be expressed as a func-
tion of u,v,w. This is done by transformation of coordinates involving
e (wo) = -
p idu
qsr 2
translation and rotation. It is easy to establish that the x,y,z coordi-
(u-U,) + vo 2+ wo
nates are related to the u,v,w coordinates by the following relations
(figure 6 and 7):
Fl 2
x =u C0.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 +, yo, zo, x, y, z by their values given by

equation 11 (xj is the equivalent of x . . .) and knowing that v = 0,
w = 0, we will obtain: Then,
2 54
 Wf0 =w =0
0

0 - x

(16)
I2 0 (wo + 2%) can be obtained by replacing in equation 16 wo by

wo + 2%.
Thus V can be written in a convenient symbolic formas V W
z
Fig. 8. Integration method - non horizontal conductor

Where up, b,vo, wo are related to the xyz coordinates by the follow- 2.1.223 Case of an electrode made of interconnected linear conductors
ing relations:
The potential at a point hj (k, yo, 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
.equation 17. If a linear conductor is indicated by letter j then the total
u = (xo- xs) c o w
0
+ (yo- ys) sinr (18)potential can bewritten as:

When p i , K, I, L, xp, xs, yp, ys, 4, 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. of numbertotalm is the linear conductors
up, b,vo, wo being given by equation 18 for horizontal conduc-
2.1.222 Case of a non horizontal linear conductor tors and by equations 19 and 20 for non horizontal conductors. Thus
the final equation will be a function of the following parameters:
This case is shown in figure 8. The uvw coordinatessystem is
chosen so that the conductor is in the plane UO'V.' The origin of the Pyk,1,L,Xs,Ys,Z ,x ,Y > z ,x ,YO,ZOYQ
S P P P O
uvw coordinates being the point xs,y,, zo (point M in plane uo'v),
thus: which are earth and electrode characteristics.
u = v =o
s s 1.2 Electrode grounding resistance
v =o
P The resistance of ground electrodes can be calculated as follows.
Let a be the radius of the buried electrode conductors and let's calcu-
w
9
=
zs - zo late the potentials Vi at different points in earth located at a distance a
from the centre of a conductor. The resistance of the electrode is then
w Z' - 2
P P O given by:
. N
The potential due to this conductor at the point M (u,,, yo, 0) is
identical to that due to an horizontal conductor on the o'u 'axis at a (22)
point M' (do, v',; 0 ) such that: the new equivalent horizontal con-
ductor characteristics are:
Where:
N is thetotalnumberofpointswherethepotential has been
calculated.
The potential can be calculated either by the summation method
or by the integration method.

ut
P
= d u + (wp - ws) 2 2.3 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,
255
the potential probe electrode must be placed at a suitable position x.
between the ground electrode and the return current electrode, This
required potential probe position depends on the earth layer structure
and the electrode configuration. Itwas then established that in order to
obtain x,,the following equation must beverified (figure 9):

where the mutual resistance Rat,, Rac, RbC are:

Direction I Direction
1 I 3
Direction
2
and Vxy is the potential at point y due to electrode X. The potential Fig. 10. Grounding grid configuration
Vxy Can be also calculated by either the summation method or the
integration method.
Note that the second layer resistivity was chosen such a way that
K = 0.6, which corresponds exactly to the reflexion factor measured on
the scaled down earth model [ 1,71. This condition was essential in
order to satisfy the similarity criteriabetween the real and model
earth [7].
Experimental earth surfacepotentialsmeasurements were also
carried outonthe twolayer earth model scaled downbyafactor
ML = 78.7 (1 inch = 2 meters). The model first layer resistivity (water)
was 20 ohm-meters, thereforetheresistivity scale factor pp = 200/
20 = 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. 9. Fall of potential method in ground resistance measurements to thereal case by the following relation:

'real
-
- 'model x -
Ireal
x
3 pT, (26)
Note that it is assumed that the current return electrode c is small I

enough to be considered as a point source electrode. 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. Therefore, all the measured values were multiplied by:
&
Ired x J ! = - x 100
I model pL 12w0-3 7lo
8.7 = 101.6

Where i is a succession of M points taken on the return current The calculated earth surface potentials and the modified experi-
electrode c. mental values were carried out for the different directions 1, 2 and 3
BySolving equation 23, the value of the required probe position &own in figure 10. The theoretical and experimental results were re-
x,,is determined
together
corded
[ 11. in figures 11, 12 and 13.

3. Example of earth potentialcalculation by thesummation and i n t e 1400. -

egration methods Comparisonwithexperimental measuffments
IdtS.

Computation of earth surface potentials developed by a ground-

ing grid shown in figure 10 and injecting a current I = 100 amperesinto
earth, was carried out by the two methods mentioned previously. The
',.
-
i.
grounding grid is buried at a depth e = 0.2 meters in the first layer of a \.
two layer earth withthe following characteristics. Direction l ( x = -6 me-
of Height first layer meters : 4
*G
o 400 - ters)

First layer resistance : 200ohm-meters

Second layer resistivity : 800 ohm-meters
a

200 - ---.-e
-- merimental results
I n t e g r a t i o n method
Summation method

Thus the reflexion factor K is:

K = B800 - 200
~ ~ 0 .+ 6 ~ ~
256
 4. Conclusion

Accurate analytical calculations can be used in grounding design

for any practical electrode buried in the fmt layer of a two layer earth.
Two different techniques can be used (summation or integration) and
they lead to comparable results.
The next step of this study will consist in a detailed comparison
of the theoretical calculations of potentials, grounding resistance and
VI
c,
600 - .
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 ...
-4
;rt 400 - -
-.-.-
Fxperimental results
I n t e g r a t i o n method
configurations and new optimum configurations.

c,

3 200
- Summation method ACKNOWLEDGMENT
0
a Theauthors wouldlike to express their appreciation tothe
National Research Council of Canada and the Department of Energy,
-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. The authors would like to thank
Figure 12. the management of the ShawiniganEngineering Company Limited,
Montreal, Quebec, for their cooperation.

REFERENCES

[ 11 F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar, Ground electrode resistancemeas-

urement in non uniform soils, ZEEE Trunsuctions puper # T-73-
361-3.
[2] D. Mukhedkar, Y. Gervais, F.Dawalibi,Modelling of potentid
distribution around a grounding electrode, IEEE Trunsuctions
pa#er # T-734324.
[31 Guide for safety in alternating current substation grounding,
IEEE # 80.
. [4] J. C. Maxwell, A treatise on electricity ahd magnetism,Vol. 1,
Direction 8 (x = 2 meters) Dover Publicutions, New York 1954 (Book).
Experimentalresults
[SI S. Stefanesco, M. Schlumberger, Sur la distribution dlectrique
potentielle autour dune prise de terre ponctuelle dans un terrain
I n t e g- r a t i o n method
_._ ._ B couches horizontales homoghes et isotropes, Journul de Phy-

t.......
-14
-10 4 -L
Summation method

2 6 10
14
[6]

171
sique et Radium, Vol. 1, Sene VII, No. 4, 1930, pp. 132-140.
T. N. Giao, M. P. Sarma, Effect of two layer earth on the electric
fieldnear HVDC electrodes, IEEE Transactions, Vol.PAS-91,
No. 6, November 1972, pp. 2356-65.
F.Dawalibi, Etude sur modsle riduit duneprise de terre dans
un sol non homoghe, MS Thesis,Ecole Polytechnique, Mon-
Y (meters) treal 1972.
Figure 13.

3.1 Comparison and discussion

Figures 11, 12, 13 show clearly the close agreement between the
theoretical and measured values. It can be noticed particularly that:
a) the theoretical and expefimental results do not differ by more than
10%. This is within the accuracy of the experimental apparatus used
for the potentialmeasurements.
b) the measured. potential values at the perimeter of the electrode are
higher than those calculated. Without taking into account the preckion
limits of the apparatus, this may be caused by one or more of the
following.
- Inequality of depth in the electrode cbnductors
- Non uniform current distribution in the electrode
- Modelswall effect which is more importantonthe perimeter
conductors.
However, due to the inaccuracy of the medurements which are
random phenomenas, no reasonable attempt can be made in order to
determine which of the previous causes was the predominant factor.
c) the summation method gives always lower values than the integra-
tion method, which is logical. The summation curve will confound with
the integration curve when a great number of subdivisions of the elec-
trode is accomplished. (Theoretically, an infinite numberof subdivisions
is required).
Discussion
J. George Sverak (United Engineers and Constructors Inc., Philadelphia,
Pa.): Tlie Authors deserve a high credit for their thoroughinvestigation
of analytical methods suitable for a computerized treatment of ground-
ing calculations.
We are particularly pleased with the verification of the earth sur-
face potential curves demonstrated in Figures 11, 12 and 13. The com-
parison of theoretical and measured values included in this part of the
paper has been of considerable interest to us, as we have been studying
similar problems on our computer forsome time.
In our opinion, the demonstrated potential curves are significant
not only for a better understanding of the subject, but implicitly they
are extremely valuable for effective optimizing of the ground electrode
configurations.
Until recently, common knowledge about the behavior patterns of
ground potential curves was as vague as Figure 1 below, which in fact is
adopted from IEEE Guide No. 80/1961, presently under revision.
Undoubtedly, the difficulty of providing a series of tedious calcu-
lations was deemed impractical for further investigation of this phe-
nomenon in many past studies.
However, it canbe demonstratedthatforthe most common
ground grid arrangements using equally spaced conductors, the earth
potential c w e patterns shown in Figure 1 hold onlyfor grounding
systems consisting of a few conductors buried in low-resistivity soil.
For instance, Figure 2 shows such a longitudinal potential profile
of six eqUally spaced conductors, which are a fundamental part of the
Manuscript received February 15, 1974.
 I
I
I

.........
2.34 2.n
* + * + + + +I..
(1111
.++++++
1.n
.....1-46
X.....X.....X.....I
++++++++++
1.16 -87 81

.++++++
.+++**
.*+*
.+++
.. +++w
+*
.. ++ +* ++ **
It++++*
.*++*++
.++*++*
.+++*++
Figure 1 .++++++
.+++*++
.+*++++ +**++*+*+++
.++++** *+*++++*+*+++++++
.++++*+
.+++***
ow++*+++
.++*+**
grounding griddesigned to meet the usual safety requirements at a .++++++
.++++** 1 M U V YU
typical 138/23 kV substation switchyard with a crushed stone layer, .++++++
covering soil with resistivity below 75 meter-ohms. .++++*+
Anticipated ground current carried by the grid is 10 kA, the fault .. ++ +* *++++ ++ +
clearing time 0.3 seconds, and the depth of burial is 0.5 meters. The
.*++++*
.++++*+
ground grid itself consists of 6 X 4 conductors covering the rectangular st++++++
area of 70 X 50 meters. For the above conditions, the safe limit for
.. +* ++ *++++* ** +++++++
+++++++**
touch voltage inside the switchyard is approximately 1.66 kV. .++*+++ ++****++*++++u
.+++++* ++++++**++**+*
There are severalinteresting facts to be observed. .++*+++ +*++***+*
First, since ourcomputer programcan besetto optimize the .+**+*+ ++++++++
.+++++* ++++++
grounding design on the basis of standard grounding calculations as .*+++++
established in (1 l), the resulting grounding system will meet all the .+++++*
4 e + * + + + *
safety requirements established by an engineer designing this system by .++*++*
conventional methods. .++++++
.++++++ 16.1 YFTEPS
Second, having also available an advanced integration method .+*+++*
which can be employed to produce the potential profie plotof the .++*++*
.+++**+
givendesign, it is easy to evaluate the effectiveness of the simplified .. +
++++
+++ ** ** + *+*++
+++*+*++
approach previously used. .+++++* **++++*++*
If the engineer follows the procedures of IEEE Guide No. 80, he st+++*** + + + + + + + + + + + + + * + 4 +
will realize that equation No. 68 and No. 69 give the touch voltage .++++++ ++++++++*++*
.+++++* ++++++**
value only for the mesh rectangle nearest to the perimeter. Therefore, .++++** *+*+++
he will often economize the design by assuming that, say, no more than .+++++*
.++++++
85% of this value can be expected for theremaining meshes toward the .++++++
center, readily accepting the necessity to subdivide only the corner .*+++++
.++++++
meshes by additional conductors. .+++++*
6 C + + + + + +
This is, of course, the same as designing a grounding system which .++++++
will meet a touch voltage limit of 1.66 kV/.85 = 1.95 kV for the un- .++++++
.++++++
corrected meshesclose to perimeter, while hoping thatthetouch .++++*+
voltage of inner meshes will nowhere exceed the safe value of 1.66 kV. .++++++ +++++++
.++++++ +++++++++++
As it can be observed, this condition has been successfully met in .++++++ +++++++*+++*+++*+u
Figure 2. .++++++ +*++*++++
.++++*+
However,a different picture emergeswhen the soil resistivity is 7w++++++
increased to the value of 150 meter-ohms, Figure 3. .++++++
.++++++
On one hand, not only the nearest, but several meshes close to the .++++*+
perimeter show the mesh voltage well above the required safe limit, d e .++++++
.++++*
spite the fact thatthe design limit waslowered from 1.95kV t o .++++
1.82 kV, and more dense pattern of grid conductors was used. ++* Zl3 KV UU
:++-
On the other hand, the middle portion of the grid appears to be
overdesigned,resultingin touch voltages much lower thanthe safe
value for these center meshes. .. +. .+ .+.+. *. *
Obviously, a grounding grid with equal spacing of conductors may
not be the best solution in many cases, and utilizing of some kind of
..+..++~~~::~+++
unequal spacing technique seems to be desirable. #
However, based on our experience, a word of caution fmt:
1. Unexpectedly, the unequal spacing technique does not neces- Figure 2
sarily guarantee a significant reduction in the number of conductors,
but often assures only their better utilization.
2. It is veryeasy to achieveareverse effect. 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, but uncoordinated changes in spacing.Figure 4 of their paper being prepared.
demonstrates this point. Also, with regard to IEEE Guide No. 80, the forgoing discussion
As shown, 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, given as 3, 6, 8, this Guide will extend and generalize the equations of the Appendix,
13, 15, 13, 8, 6, and 3 meters, (asopposed to the equal spacing of 6.16 relating them to the unequal spacing and multi-layer ground techniques,
meters for thirteen conductors), produced unsafedesign, with pro- since to-date the Guide deals exclusively with equal spacing and uni-
gressively worse conditions toward the center. form soil concepts. Increasing availability of computers presently seems
Finally, in order to show that the unequal spacing technique is a to justify such a request.
practical approach which can be successfully applied in most cases, an Last but not least, reference should be made to J. Zaborsky 191
optimal solution for the given example is shown in Figures Sa and 5b and E. T. B. Gross et al. [ 101 for the pioneering application work done
respectively. in the method of images and utilizing of integration methods.
258
 STATIOl BROUlD POTEITIALPROFILE CLOT

LIMITS OF Y - A X I S : 8.Kb R V 11.139 XV

TOUCII-TO-BI)OVID SUIFACE POTnTIAL IKV1 L I A I T S OF X-AXIS : 0. TETPRS s9.80e METERS
Y-STEP : .039 YV
X-STEP : I.00e YITER
6-54 5-56 4.58 3.M 2.62 1.64 .Cb
x..~..~..x)nt
*+++++++
.++++++
.++++++-
6AZKVMAX
TOUCH-TWGROU1ID SURFACE POTENTIAL
vvl 1
.+++++++
.+++++++++
.+++++++++++++
2.35 2.73
IYII ......... ......... .........I .........
3.12

"+++++++++++++++
I I
1.96 1.58
I.... ..... .........
1.19
I
.81
I-
.++++++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ 3METERS
. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ,,13Kvy*x .+++++++++++++++~ ~ + + + + + + + + +

t
.++++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ +++++++
.++++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++
I * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + .+++++++++++++++ 6 METERS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+++++++++++++++ +++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + + + + + + + + + + + + A + +
.'++++++++++++++ + ++
+ t + + + + L + + + * +

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+++++++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.+++++++++++++++
.. + + + ' + + + + + + *
I " - + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + +
.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++
.. ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++++++++ +
zc+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++
.. ++ ++ + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + A ' + + +

.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++
.+ + + + + + + + + + + +
.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++
. ++ ++ +++ +++ ++++++ ++ + +
.++
.+++++++++++++++
,+++++++++++++++
.. ++ ++ ++ ++ ++
27-

.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .. '+ ++ ++ +++++ + +
a*+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .. ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + +
.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .. ++ ++ + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + e + + + + + + +
.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ -... ++ +++ +++ +++ ++++++ + +
x*-

.+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ . + + +++
. + + + +
.+++++++++++++++
4 b + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
.+++++++++++++++ .. + + + +
. + + + +
+ +
ro2uvwu

.+++++++++++++++ .+++++
.+++++++++++++++ .+++++
.+++++++++++++++ .++++++
.+++++++++++++++ 4:-++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++
,+++++++++++++++ .++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++
s c + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + .+++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .+++++
.+++++++++++++++ .+++++
.+++++++++++++++ . + + + + +
.+++++++++++++++ 5 e - + + + + + + U
-I 9mm
.+++++++++++++++ .++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
sc++++++++++++ +++ ++++++u .+++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .++++++++++++++ KV 124 SAFE LlYlT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .++++++++++*
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++ .++++++++++++ I d 6 KV DESIGN LlYlT
.+++++++++++++++++ < * - . L .& &. A . & .A a. A . * .' A. L . + .A . . .
.++++++++++++++++
_I

.++++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++ .+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++++ . + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + g+ $ + + + +++ ++++'+*
.+++++++++++++
7 6 + + + + + + + + + +
.++++++++
~ 181 KV DESIGN LIMIT .+++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++ + + + ++
.+++++++ .++++++++++++++++ + + + + + + + + + + ,
.+++++++ .++++++++++++++++ ++
.++++++++ .+++++++++++++++ + + ++

ttf ftt

Figure 3 Figure 4

259
V U l Y C SPACII1
mwqw 1161 - I.5W

.IH
4.32 3.11 3.11 2.e 1.88 1.21 .66 a .m
1M11.........1......,.,1.........1.........1.........1.........1 I#.yI
c++++++++++.++++ .sm
.+++++++++++++++ n.m
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5e.m
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4w.m
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .m
.++++++++++++++++++++u wn
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w .m
...............................
.++++++++++++++++++++++++u
I1 1.m
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1s.m
I c + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + u
.++++++++++++++++++++++++u
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. ~ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + u
.+++++++++++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.++++++++++++++++++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 c + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ~ + + + +
.++++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.++++++++++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++++++++++u
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.++++++++++++++++++++++++
se+++++++++++++++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 I KV SAFE k D
EW LIMIT
.++++++++++++++++++++++-
,++++++++++++++++++++++
. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,+++++++++++++++++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++++++++ 9 1
4 e - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b
. + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + b
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. + + * + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b
.+++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
oI1IyIZED u*Qy* WAaUG
160 m n o y SUIL 7 7
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
S C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + b
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ILuPt P A l l R l OF A I D C A Q P IS I3 X
,+++++++++++++++++++++++ 8:
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ a I o c o m m M U In x NI ..................jni, s1.1
x
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++u A
.*++++++++++++++++++++++++++
.++++++++++++++++++++++++
a10 a m m SIM RATIO USED...............
I D S P A C I ~ P . m m m SIZE IM x WI
TOTU PRID C WO IC mn LeeIH 1111
........ t
...................
X
1.IS9
1.143
1241.464
.+++++++++++++++++++++++ T O T U LP8211 OF ROO a ECnoDCS IMI................ 1m.m
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T O T U LLIBTH or SIRIED C M I W C T ~1111.............
~ C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + U u u e a or RODS .................................1311.484
.P.8 . M
.++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,++++++++++++++++++++++++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.++++++++++++++++++++++
T C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + U
..........................
.+++++++++++++++++++
.* ++ ++ +& +&+&+ *+&+ a+ *+ &+ &+ +* &+ +&
. . .

f.. I
Figure 5a

mean
no. SPACIIB
IMI

REFERENCES I
2
2.Qt
2.m
3 1.55 6
J. Zaborszky, Efficiency of Grounding Grids with Nonuniform 4
5
1.51
I .as
Soil, IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 74, 6 1.lU
pp. 123G1233, December, 1955. 1 I.1N
8 1.8)
E. T. B. Gross, B. Thapar,Grounding Grids for High-Voltage 9 I.HI
Stations, Part IV - Resistance of Grounding Grids in Nonuni- I1
11
1.556
2.61
form Soil, IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 81, I2 0.682
pp. 782-788, October, 1963.
IEEENo. 80/March 1961, Guide for safety in Alternatine m
Current Substation Grounding, American Institute of Electrical
Engineers, New York, 1961. Figure 5b
260
A. B. Purdy (Appalachian Power Co., Roanoke, Va.) and W. J. Lyon
(American Electric Power Service Corp., Canton, Ohio): Mr. Mukhed-
kars potential calculations appear to be very thorough and inclusive.
This allows the calculation of ground resistance for all types of elec
trodes in a two-layer earth structure. His fall of potential method in
ground resistance measurementsagrees with our field fidings.
We have been tryinga simplified equationforgroundmat re-
sistance in a two-layered earth structure:
tion between the substation and the current electrode. In such a case,
whats the authorsopinionabout the correctprocedure? Have the
authors made any comparison between the results obtained with the
two methods? If so, what were the result? Finally, I would like to know
how the authors choose the distance between the ground grid and the
current electrode.

R =-(-)+
27r rm p z2n
- (+
rm+h
h = height of first layer (4 ft.) Farid Dawalii and Dinkar MukbedLar: The discussers comments add
rm = radius of equivalent hemispherical electrodes considerably to the meaningfulness of the paper and are sincerely a p
Using Mr. Mukhedkars values: preciated. We would like to inform Mr. Silva that we are aware of Dr. J.
Endrenys work and we did not compare our results with his work.
192 - When carrying out the measurement by the fall of potential meth-
rm plate = - lr
- 7.85meters o d , we assumed a two layer earth and used our computer program to
Using this value: detennine the exact position of the potential probe. For better under-
standing of the procedure used reference is made to paper T-73-361-3
or reference 1 of this paper.
Simplified formula proposed by Messrs. 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. We would normally increase. our values by 50% to correct for the sistance in a two layer earth.However, in ground electrodedesign earth
change from a plateto the equivalent hemisphere. surfacepotentialandgrandient is of prime importance and toour
We hope Mr. Mukhedkar can give us a simplified method useful for knowledge there is no simplified formula which gives reliable results
approximating results. for non uniform soils and/or complex electrodes.
Mr. Mukhedkar, 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. Especially with extreme are. Even,if the potential profiie inside the station is
when station sizes in industrial plant areas are very small (2Om X 2Om) kept flat, the step potential at the perimeter of the station will be tre-
and fault currents are inthe 10s of thousands of amperes. mendously high and therefore, undoubtedly hazardous Special investi-
gations ofnew forms of electrodes may be necessary. This is one
Manuscript received February 13, 1974. special condition where computercalculations could beextremely
valuable. Another problem which may beof importance is the high
potential rise of the substation and its consequence on communication
circuits or other circuits (pipelines, railways) which enter or run close
to the station.
We are particularly pleased with Mr. Sverak encouragements and
A f o m De Oliveira E Silva (Cemig, Be10 Horizonte, Brazil): I would like comments. 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. 80. The actual trend for increased short circuit levels,
methods of calculation in a field where the agreement between meas- UHV transmission systems and the escalation in copper price justify
ured and calculated values is in general very poor. My comments will more exact methods for groundingdesign.
be limited to the ground grid resistance calculation and measurement. Since we do not have details of Mr. Sverak computer program, 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. How-
grid resistance proposed by J. Endreny, of Ontario Hydro, some years ever, we agree almost completely with his conclusions. The most im-
ago. Sometimes the discrepancy between the calculated and measured portant step in groundingdesign is calculation of earth surface potential.
value is very large.Have the authors made any comparison between When this quantity is known, step and touch potentials can be com-
the two methods? We are beginning research to detennine the causes pared to the safe values. Optimization of the electrodes will follow, the
of the discrepancies, 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. faultcurrent, earth resistivities, substation size, etc. 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. Such studies are only practical when computer programs are,
potential probes until we obtain three measured values within 10% of available, otherwise oversizing the electrode is necessary if safety must
their mean value, and adopt this mean value as the ground resistance. be reached. In part I1 and 111, as pointed out by Mr. Sverak, we will
Sometimes its 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. of each under the same conditions.
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, the authors are assuming that the charac- fectly all the influence of the numerous parameters involved. We are
teristics of the soil are uniform to the current electrode. When t h i s dis- still investigating in this field.
tance is large, the characteristics of the soil will certainly suffer avaria- Professor E. T.B. Grosss work is referred in part I1 & 111.
Manuscript received February 7,1974. Manuscript received November 20, 1974.

261