Grounding Tutorial

Substation Ground System

Design & Standard IEEE 80
Terry Klimchack

Revised 03/10/14
 ERICO has met the standards and requirements of the Registered
Continuing Education Providers Program. Credit earned on completion of
this program will be reported to RCEPP. A certificate of completion will be
issued to each participant. As such, it does not include content that may
be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by NCEES or
RCEPP.”
 Copyrighted Materials

This educational activity is protected by copyright laws. Reproduction, distribution,

display and use of the educational activity without written permission of the
presenting sponsor is prohibited.

Copyright ERICO International Corporation, 2014

 Presentation Outline

• Grounding System Design Theory

• Grounding System Design Example
• Grounding System Components
• Questions
Grounding System Design
Theory
 Today’s Challenges
• Power plans and substations are operating past their original
design service life
• Engineers and designers are faced with rising fault currents
requirements
 Theoretical Conditions
(Assumes Homogeneous Environment)
 Actual Field Conditions
(Non-Homogeneous Environment)

Illustration of substation ground potential rise equipotential lines

Wenner’s or Four Pin Method
SOURCE CURRENT
METER

VOLT
METER

EARTH SURFACE

l
a a a h
ρ1
ρ2

4πaR
V ρ= = 2πaR
R= 1+
2a
−
a
I a 2 + 4l 2 a2 + l 2
Fall of Potential Method or 3PM

SOURCE CURRENT
METER

VOLT
METER

EARTH SURFACE

62% D VOLTAGE PROBE CURRENT PROBE h ρ1

ρ2
l

2πlR 2πlR
V ρ= ≅
R= 8l 2l
ln( ) − 1 ln( )
I d a
Principle: RE 3pole
Maximum Theoretical Accuracy
LEAD LENGTH MAXIMUM THEORETICAL
ACCURACY

2L 50%

4L 75%

8L 87.5%

16L 93.7%

32L 96.8%

L= radial ground mat dimension

Basic Shock Situation
 Touch Potential
• Touch Potential is the potential difference
between GPR and the surface potential at the
point where a person is standing, while at the
same time having hands in contact with a
grounded structure
• Touch Potential is controlled by proper bonding
and protective systems, such as personnel safety
mats.
 Touch Potential
• 1,000A Fault current
• 5Ω Ground resistance
5,000 V
• Touch potential due to
voltage gradient
2,500 V
• Resistance of body:
1,000 Ω (IEEE® 80)

2.5A Current
2,500V

IEEE is a registered trademark of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
 Touch Potential

No protection Same potential as tower

 Step Potential

• Step Potential is the difference in surface

potential experienced by a person’s feet bridging
a distance of 1m without contacting any other
grounded surface.

• Step Potential is controlled by properly designed

ground electrode system (grid) or the use of wire
mesh.
 Step Potential

50% Voltage Drop Same potential between

between feet feet
 Tolerable Voltages
Touch Voltage Step Voltage

Estep 50 = (1000 + 6Cs ⋅ ρ s )

0.116
Etouch 50 = (1000 + 1.5Cs ⋅ ρ s )
0.116
ts ts

Estep 70 = (1000 + 6Cs ⋅ ρ s )

0.157
Etouch 70 = (1000 + 1.5Cs ⋅ ρ s )
0.157
ts ts
Where
Estep is the step voltage in V
Etouch is the touch voltage in V
Cs is determined from figure or equation
ρs is the resistivity of the surface material in Ω-m
ts is the duration of shock current in seconds
If no protective surface layer is used, then Cs =1 and ρs = ρ.
 Dalziel’s Equations

Tolerable Body Current Limits

0.116
IB = for 50 kg body weight
ts
0.157
IB = for 70 kg body weight
ts

ts time in seconds
Body Current Versus Time
C-Curves (Cs versus hs)

 ρ
0.09 1 − 
 ρs 
Cs = 1 −
2hs + 0.09

Cs = surface layer
rerating factor
hs = thickness of the
surface material
 Conductor Equations

 TCAP ⋅10 − 4   K o + Tm 
where I = Amm 2   ln 
α ρ
 c r r   o a
t K + T
I is the rms current in Ka
Amm2 is the conductor cross section in mm2
Tm is the maximum allowable temperature in oC
Ta is the ambient temperature in oC
Tr is the reference temperature for material constants in oC
αo is the thermal coefficient of resistivity at 0oC in 1/oC
αr is the thermal coefficient of resistivity at reference temperature Tr in 1/oC
ρr is the resistivity of the ground conductor at reference temperature Tr in µΩ-cm
Ko 1/αo or (1/αr) - Tr in oC
tc is the duration of current in s
TCAP is the thermal capacity per unit volume from table 11-1, in J/(cm3·oC)
Ultimate Current Carrying Capabilities of
Copper Conductors
Currents are RMS values, for frequency of 60 Hz, X/R = 40
Current in kilo-amperes

Cable Nominal 6 cycles 15 cycles 30 cycles 45 cycles 60 cycles 180 cycles

Size, Cross (100 ms) (250 ms) (500 ms) (750 ms) (1 s) (3 s)
AWG Section,
mm2
#2 33.63 22 16 12 10 9 5

#1 42.41 28 21 16 13 11 7

1/0 53.48 36 26 20 17 14 8

2/0 67.42 45 33 25 21 18 11

3/0 85.03 57 42 32 27 23 14

4/0 107.20 72 53 40 34 30 17

250 126.65 85 62 47 40 35 21
kcmil

350 177.36 119 87 67 56 49 29

kcmil
Grounding System Design
Example
Substation Design Flowchart
 Step 1 - Parameters
• Ground fault current to the grid on 13 kV bus =
3,180 A.
• Fault duration tf = 0.5 s
• Soil resistivity ρ= 400 Ωm
• Wet crushed rock resistivity ρs = 2.500 Ωm
• Thickness of crushed rock hs = 0.1 m
• Depth of grid burial h = 0.5 m
• Available grounding area 70m x 70m
• Area occupied be the grid 4,900 m2
 Step 1 - Parameters

Current deviation factor Sf = 0.6

Step 2 – Fault Current & Conductor Size

Ignoring the station resistance, the symmetrical ground fault

current on 115 kV

E
I0 =
3 ⋅ R f + ( R1 + R2 + R0 ) + j ( X 1 + X 2 + X 0 )

3I 0 =
(
(3) 115,000 3 ) = 3180 A
3(0 ) + (4.0 + 4.0 + 10.0 ) + j (10.0 + 10.0 + 40.0 )
Step 2 – Fault Current & Conductor Size
For the 13 kV bus fault, the 115 kV equivalent fault impedances must be transferred to the 13 kV side of
the transformer. It should be noted that, due to the delta-wye connection of the transformer, only the
positive sequence 115 kV fault impedance is transferred. Thus
2
 13 
Z1 =   [4.0 + j10.0] + 0.034 + j1.014 = 0.085 + j1.142
 115 
Z 0 = 0.034 + j1.014

3I 0 =
(
(3) 13,000 3 ) = 6,814 Amps
3(0) + (0.085 + 0.085 + 0.034 ) + j (1.142 + 1.142 + 1.014 )
Decrement factor Df is approximately1.0; thus, the rms asymmetrical fault current
is also 6814 A
Conductor size
Akcmil = I ⋅ K f tc

Akcmil = 6.814 ⋅ 7.06 0.5 = 34.02kcmil = 34.02kcmil

The 34.02 kcmil is approximately #4 AVG. To increase service life 2/0 is recommended.
Step 3 – Step and Touch Potentials

For 0.1 m (4 in) layer of surface material, with a wet

resistivity of 2500 Ω·m, and for an earth with resistivity of
400 Ω·m.
 ρ 
0.091 −  0.091 − 400 
Cs = 1 −  ρs  =  2500  = 0.74
Reduction factor
2hs + 0.09 2(0.102) + 0.09

E step 70 = (1000 + 6C s ρ s )0157

. / t s = [(1000 + 6(0.74 )2500 )]0.157 0.5 = 2686.6

Etouch 70 = (1000 + 1.5Cs ρ s )0.157 / t s = [(1000 + 1.5(0.74 )2500 )]0.157 0.5 = 838.2
 Step 4 - Initial Design
Assume a preliminary layout of 70 m × 70 m grid with equally spaced conductors,
with spacing D = 7 m, grid burial depth h = 0.5 m, and no ground rods. The total
length of buried conductor, LT, is 2 × 11 × 70 m = 1540 m.
 Step 5 -Determination of Grid
Resistance
For L = 1540 m, and grid area A = 4900 m2, the resistance is

1 1  1 
Rg = ρ  +  1 + 
 T
L 20 A  1 + h 20 / A 

 1 1  1 
R g = 400 +  1+   = 2.78 ohms
1540 20 ⋅ 4900  1 + 0.5 20 4900  

Step 6 - Maximum grid current Ig
Given from Step 2 – Df = 1.0, and Sf = 0.6

Ig
Sf = IG = Df ⋅ Ig
3 ⋅ Io

Though the 13 kV bus fault value of 6814 A is greater than the 115 kV
bus fault value of 3180 A, The wye-grounded 13 kV transformer
winding is a “local” source of fault current and does not contribute to
the GPR. Thus, the maximum grid current is based on 3180 A.

IG = D f ⋅ S f ⋅ 3 ⋅ I0

I G = (1)(0.6)(3180) = 1908 A
Step 7 - Ground Potential Rise GPR
Now it is necessary to compare the product of IG and Rg, or
GPR, to the tolerable touch voltage, Etouch70

GPR = I G ⋅ Rg
GPR = 1908 ⋅ 2.78 = 5304 volts

Since GPR = 5,304 V far exceeds Etouch70 = 838 V (determined

in Step 3) as the safe value, additional design evaluations are
necessary.
 Step 8 - Mesh Voltage
Km =
1   D2
⋅ ln  +
( D + 2 ⋅ h)
2
−
h  Kii  8 
+ ⋅ ln 
2 ⋅ π  16 ⋅ h ⋅ d 8⋅ D ⋅d 4 ⋅ d  Kh  π (2 ⋅ n − 1)  

1 1
K ii = = = 0.57 h 0.5
(2 ⋅ 11) Kh = 1+ = 1+ = 1.225
(2 ⋅ n )
2 2 11
n
h0 1 . 0

Km =
1   72
+
(7 + 2 ⋅ 0.5)
2
−
0.5  0.57  8 
2π
ln 
⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅
+ ln 
π ( ⋅ − )   = 0.89
  16 0. 5 0 . 01 8 7 0 . 01 4 0. 01  1 .225  2 11 1  

nb = 1 for square grid

2 ⋅ LC 2 ⋅ 1540
na = = = 11 nc = 1 for square grid n = na ⋅nb ⋅nc ⋅nd = 11 *1 *1 *1 = 11
Lp 280 nd = 1 for square grid
and therefore
K i = 0.644 + 0.148 ⋅ n = 0.644 + 0.148 ⋅ 11 = 2.272

ρ ⋅ IG ⋅ Km ⋅ Ki 400 ⋅ 1908 ⋅ 0.89 ⋅ 2.272

Em = = = 1002.1volts
LC + LR 1540
 Step 9 - Em vs. Etouch
• The mesh voltage 1002.1 V is higher than the
tolerable touch voltage 838.2 V. The grid design must
be modified.
• There are two approaches to modifying the grid
design to meet the tolerable touch voltage
requirements:
– Reduce the GPR to a value below the tolerable touch
voltage or to a value low enough to result in a value of Em
below the tolerable touch voltage
– Reduce the available ground fault current
 Modified Design
In this example, the preliminary design will be modified
to include 20 ground rods, each 7.5 m (24.6 ft) long,
around the perimeter of the grid.
 Repeating Step 5
• Using Equation for LT = 1540 + 20 • 7.5 = 1690 m, and A =
4900 m2 yields the following value of grid resistance Rg:

1 1  1    
Rg = ρ  + 1 +  = 400 1 + 1 1 + 1  = 2.75ohms
 T
L 20 A  1 + h 20 / A  1690 20 ⋅ 4900  1 + 0.5 20 4900 


• Steps 6 and 7. The revised GPR is (1908)(2.75) = 5247 V,

which is still much greater than 838.2 V.
 Repeating Step 8
Km =
1   D2
⋅ ln  +
( D + 2 ⋅ h)
2
−
h  Kii  8 
+ ⋅ ln  
2 ⋅π   16 ⋅ h ⋅ d 8 ⋅ D ⋅ d 4 ⋅ d  K h  π (2 ⋅ n − 1)  

h 0.5
Kii = 1.0 with rods Kh = 1+ = 1+ = 1.225
h0 1.0

1   72 (7 + 2 ⋅ 0.5)
2
0.5  1.0  8 
Km = ln  + − + ln    = 0.77
2π   16 ⋅ 0 .5 ⋅ 0 .01 8 ⋅ 7 ⋅ 0. 01 4 ⋅ 0 .01  1. 225  π (2 ⋅ 11 − 1)  

ρ ⋅ I ⋅ Km ⋅ Ki 400 ⋅ 1908 ⋅ 0.77 ⋅ 2.272

Em = G
= = 747.4volts
     7.5 
LC + 1.55 + 1.22 ⋅   ⋅ L 1540 + 1.55 + 1.22 150
Lr
  R 
 L2x + L2y   70 + 70 
2 2
  

The step voltage has not been calculated yet, the new values of Ki, Es, LS, and Ks
have to be also calculated. Note that the value for Ki is still 2.272 (same as for
mesh voltage).
 Final Design
Ks =
1 1
+
1
+
π  2 ⋅ h D + h D
1
1 − (
0 . 5 n −2 
)
=
1 1
+
1
+
 π  2 ⋅ 0.5 7 + 0.5 7
1
(
1 − 0 .5 ) = 0.406
11− 2 

ρ ⋅ IG ⋅ K s ⋅ Ki 400 ⋅ 1908 ⋅ 0.406 ⋅ 2.272

Es = = = 548.9 volts
0.75 ⋅ LC + 0.85 ⋅ LR 0.75 ⋅ 1540 + 0.85 ⋅ 150
• Step 9: Em vs. Etouch. Now the calculated corner mesh voltage is lower than
the tolerable touch voltage (747.4 V versus 838.2 V), and we are ready to
proceed to Step 10.
• Step 10: Es vs. Estep. The computed Es is well below the tolerable step
voltage determined in Step 3 of the initial design. That is, 548.9 V is much
less than 2686.6 V.
• Step 11: Modify design. Not necessary for this example.
• Step 12: Detailed design. A safe design has been obtained. At this point, all
equipment pigtails, additional ground rods for surge arresters, etc., should be
added to complete the grid design details.
 Other Areas of Concern
• Substation Fences
Fence grounding is of major importance because the
fence is usually accessible to the general public.
The NESC requires grounding metal fences used to
enclose electric supply substations having energized
conductors or equipment.
• Gravel
New studies are available on the Resistivity of various
crushed gravel
Fence and Gate Jumpers
Same Design Parameters
Using Software
Computer Software Calculations
Single Phase Voltage or Current Source Accept
Single Phase Current Source (3.18 kA) Cancel

First Node Name Circuit Number 1

SOURCE A
Source Type
Voltage Source Current (kA)
Current Source 3.18 kA
Phase Angle
Source Frequency
0.0 Degrees
60.0 Hz

Second Node Name

SOURCE N
WinIGS - Form: IGS_M112 - Copyright © A. P. Meliopoulos 1998-2013
 Computer Software Calculations
Reduction Factor - IEEE Std80 (2000 Edition) Update Close
Standard
IEEE Std80 (1986)
Ref 1 (see Help)
IEEE Std80 (2000)

Native Soil
Upper Layer Resistivity
400.0
Layer Resistivity
2500
Layer Thickness (m)
0.1000
k Factor
-0.7241
Reduction Factor
0.7406
WinIGS - Form: GRD_RP02 - Copyright © A. P. Meliopoulos 1998-2013
Computer Software Calculations
Computer Software Calculations
 Comparison of Design Results
Manual Software

E touchperm = 838 V E touchperm = 839 V

E touchdesign= 747 V E touchdesign= 669 V
E stepperm = 2,687 V E stepperm = 2,689 V
E stepdesignma x= 549 V E stepdesignma x= 755 V
E stepdesign = 67 V

The values listed above assume insulated layer of gravel

Grounding System Components
 Connectors

• Mechanical (compression, bolted, wedge)

– Rely on surface contact and physical
pressure to maintain connection

• Exothermic
– Molecular bond

51
 Comparison: Mechanical vs.
Exothermic Connectors
Molecular Bond Mechanical Connection

Apparent Contact Surface Actual Contact Surface

Molecular bonds guarantee uniform conductivity across the entire cross section of the
conductor.
 Connectors

2000 Edition
Exothermic Connections - Rated the same as the conductor - 1083 °C
Brazed Connections - 450 °C based on copper based brazing alloys melting
at 600 °C
Pressure Connectors - 250-350 °C
Bolted Connectors - 250 °C
2000 Edition
Connectors meet IEEE 837, IEEE Standard for Qualifying Permanent
Connections Used in Substation Grounding
 National Electrical Grounding
Research Project (NEGRP)

• 18 different types of buried

grounding electrodes
• Layout and electrode selection
was similar for each site to
facilitate direct comparison of
data
• Measurements were originally
taken bi-monthly
• See report for complete
summary
 Mechanical vs. Exothermic

Compression Mechanical Exothermic

55
NEGRP Study - After 10 Years in the
Same Soil Conditions
Mechanical Mechanical

Compression Exothermic

56
•Exothermic - heat producing reaction
⇒Cu Oxide + AL -> Copper + Al Oxide
⇒Reaction Temperature at 4500° F

•Copper to numerous other metals

⇒Steels; Stainless; Cast, Ductile, & Wrought Iron; Brass; Bronze
⇒Provides Maintenance Free Molecular Bond
57
Exothermic Process

58
Exothermic Welding Reaction

59
Exothermic Welds in Grounding
Typical Substation Connection
Applications

60
Connector “A”, Connector “B”, Type “L”, #1
#2 CYCLE #8
CYCLE #4

Connector “B”, Type “C”, #1 CADWELD® TAC2V2V, #2

CYCLE #10 CYCLE #57

61
 Advantages of Exothermic
Connections
• Provides a molecular bond between
conductors
– Ensures equal current sharing between
conductor strands
• Current carrying capacity equal to or
exceeding conductor ampacity
• Permanent
– Will not loosen or corrode or increase in
resistance
– Will last longer than conductors

62
 IEEE Std 837 - 2002
Mechanical Tests Sequential Tests
• Four Tests
– Classified As Sequential Tests Sequential Tests

Mechanical or Tests for Above Grade and

Below Grade Connectors
For Below Grade
Connections
For Above Grade
Connections

Sequential.
Current Current
Temperature Temperature

• Four Samples of Cycling Cycling

Each Connector Tensile Tests

Electromagnetic
Force Withstand

Must Pass Each

Test
Freeze- Freeze-
Thaw Thaw
Test to Qualify
Acid Salt-Fog
Pass if Test Values Pass if Connector
are Greater Than Resistance Increase
Minimum Pullout is No Greater than
and There is No 50% and There is No
Visible Movement Visible Movement
Pass if Connector Resistance Does Not
Increase 150% Over Intial Measurement

IEEE is a registered trademark of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
 IEEE Std. 837 - 2002
• Mechanical Tests
– Test 1 - Mechanical Pullout:
• The Connector Pullout Values Shall Meet Minimum Pullout Values With
No Visible Movement of the Pre-marked Conductor With Respect to the
Connector
– Conductors Can Not Move Under Load of 2225 N for Sizes up to 4/0 AWG

• Mechanical Tests
– Test 2 - Electromagnetic Force Withstand:
• (3) Surges, 0.2 Second Each
• The Connection Shall Remain Intact With No Visible Movement of the
Pre-marked Conductor With Respect to the Connector
• The Resistance of the Connection Shall Not Increase by More Than 50%.

IEEE is a registered trademark of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
 IEEE Std 837 - 2002
• Sequential Tests 3 and 4
– Current-thermal Cycling
• 25 Cycles at 350° C
– Freeze-thaw
• 10 Cycles; -10° to +20° C for 2 Hours
– Nitric (Acidic) and Salt Spray (Alkaline)
• Nitric - 10% HNO3 Solution (Volume)
• CU - Reduce Control Conductor Cross Sectional Area 80% of
Original
– Salt Spray (Per ANSI/ASTM B117-85)
– Fault Current (3 Surges)
• 90% Symmetrical RMS Fusing Current for 10 Seconds

IEEE is a registered trademark of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
 IEEE Std 837 - Future
• Likely to be issued in 2014
• Changes to include
• New wave forms and current levels for EMF testing
• Removal of resistance criteria
• Connections must be qualified for various conductor
types in order to meet IEEE 837 requirements (i.e.,
connector manufacturers that claim compliance with
CCSC must test with CCSC)
• Above grade conductors can not be restrained

IEEE is a registered trademark of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
 Ground Electrodes
Features & Service Life
 Ground Rod Choices

• Solid copper rods

– Expensive and difficult to drive due to softness of material
• Stainless steel rods
– Option for use in soils that are corrosive to copper
– Cost prohibitive in most cases
• Copper-bonded steel
• Galvanized steel

69
 Comparing Copper-bonded &
Galvanized Steel Ground Rods

• Both rod types are composed of a steel core

– Copper-bonded rods use cold drawn steel with a
tensile strength of 90,000+ psi
– Most galvanized steel rods use hot rolled steel
with a tensile strength of 58,000+ psi
• Higher tensile strength leads to less rod end
deformation during installation

70
Comparing Copper-bonded &
Galvanized Steel Ground Rods
• The thickness and type of coating material
determines corrosion resistance and
service life
• Copper-bonded steel rods
– Coated with 10 mils (.010” or .254mm) of
copper
• Galvanized steel rods
– Coated with 3.9 mils (.0039” or .099mm) of zinc
– Limited by hot dip galvanizing process
• Thicker coating = longer service life

71
Corrosion Protective Mechanism
• Copper is resistant to corrosion in most
soils
• Zinc is sacrificial in most soils and with
respect to most metals
• Corrosion protection mechanisms are
different
– The copper coating is designed to prevent
corrosion of the steel core
– The zinc coating will delay corrosion of the
steel core by providing a sacrificial barrier

72
 NEGRP Corrosion Protective
Mechanism
Galvanized Ground Rod

Copper Bonded Steel Ground

Rod

73
National Electrical Grounding Research
Project (NEGRP)
• Electrodes removed for corrosion analysis
– Balboa: January 29, 2001 (9 years)
– Pawnee: March 17, 2003 (11 years)
– Pecos: April 12, 2004 (12 years)
– Lone Mountain: April 14, 2004 (12 years)
• Moderate to severe corrosion of galvanized
rods
• Minimal corrosion of copper-bonded rods
• Observations were same at all sites
 NEGRP: Electrodes H & I

5/8” x 8’ Cu bonded rod ¾” x 10’ galvanized rod 11

11 years exposure years exposure
Microscopy Evaluation

Average Cu plating loss

on electrodes “E” and
“G” over a 10 year
period was 0.0018”
Ground Enhancement
Ground Enhancement - Chemical
Ground Rods

78
 Ground Enhancement - Bentonite

Bentonite clay
• Low initial cost
• Ineffective when dry
• Resistivity of 2.5 Ω·m at 300% moisture
• Low resistivity results mainly from an electrolytic
process
• May shrink and pull away from rod or soil when it dries
• IEEE® Std 80 – 2000 Section 14.5
o “It may not function well in a very dry environment, because
it may shrink away from the electrode, increasing the
electrode resistance”

79
IEEE is a registered trademark of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
Ground Enhancement Material (GEM)

Parameters:
• Environmentally friendly
• Hygroscopic
• Permanent, maintenance free
• Low resistivity
• Unremarkable affect by wet, dry or freezing
conditions
• Works in any type of soil
• Cost effective
GEM Encased Electrode (NEGRP “E”)

81
8 Years Data from NEGRP - Performance
Evaluation of GEM Encased Electrodes
Balboa, NEVADA
400
Soil resistivity, R (Ωm)
Soil moisture, M (%)
Soil temperature, T (°C)
300
T, M and R

200

100

0
08/22/92 08/22/94 08/21/96 08/21/98 08/20/00

100
Vert. - driven
Measured resistance (Ω)

Vert. - GEM
80 Horiz. - concrete
Horiz. - GEM

60

40

20

0 82
08/22/92 08/22/94 08/21/96 08/21/98 08/20/00
NEGRP Study Investigation Results of
GEM Encased Electrodes
• For all investigated electrodes the
resistance of GEM encased electrodes
is on the average 50% lower than
resistance of driven ground rods
• GEM also reduces the seasonal and
long-term variability of the resistance

83
 GEM in Grounding Wells

• Most effective way to enhance

substation grounding. Water
• Calculate the amount of GEM NCC
required to fill the hole size.
• Place the ground rod in the
hole.
• Pump down GEM by a tube Rock

from bottom of the hole up.

• Fill GEM to the top.
• Holes deeper than 10 feet
should use pump
Conductors
 Copper Theft

• US Department of Energy estimates over US

$1 Billion in copper theft annually

From Surveillance Video of

Actual Theft
 Copper Theft

Even birds are stealing copper…

Methods for Copper Theft Prevention
• Painting
• Signage
• Alternative Coatings
• Encoding / Marking
• Covering (PVC Conduit,
etc.)
• CCTV Systems
• Motion Detectors /
lighting
• Alternative Materials
• Theft Monitoring systems
 Conductors

• Material
– Copper
– Copper - bonded steel
– Copper – clad steel
– Composite
• Size
– Sufficient to withstand maximum fault current for
maximum clearing time
– Resist underground corrosion

89
Advantages of Copper Conductors

• Copper is the most common material used

for grounding
• Copper has high conductivity
• Copper is resistant to most underground
corrosions
• Copper is cathodic with respect to most
other metals that can be buried in it’s
vicinity

90
 Advantages of Copper-Clad Steel &
Copper-Bonded Steel Conductors

• Combines the strength of steel with the corrosion

resistance of copper
• It is more economical
• It is more resistant to damage and theft
• Low scrap value adds to theft deterrence

91
Formed Copper-bonded Steel
Conductors
 UL® 467 30 Bend
o Test

93
UL is a registered trademark of UL LLC.
 UL® 467 30 Bend
o Test
Galvanized Steel
Conductors

Copper Bonded Steel Conductor Copper Jacketed Steel Conductor

94
Field-bent Copper-bonded Conductor

Substation ground leads

95
Pre-bent Copper-bonded Conductor

96
Composite Conductors
Composite Conductor Chart
Composite Conductor Testing

ERICO Confidential 99
 Composite Conductor Features

• Copper strands are hidden by outer tin plated

copper bonded steel strands
• Copper strands are tinned for superior
corrosion resistance
• The copper stranding increases conductivity
and flexibility of the conductor
• Comes in bare or insulated option
• Available in five configurations
Composite Conductor Advantages

• Has many years of proven record in

successful field applications in all major rail
companies in the USA
• Combines conductivity of copper with
strength of steel
• Difficult to cut with hand tools
• The outer steel strands are magnetic which
further deters thieves looking for copper.
Composite Cable Applications
 Thank you for your time!

This concludes the educational content of this activity

www.erico.com