You are on page 1of 18

Basis for safety and power quality

Grounding and bonding are the basis upon which


safety and power quality are built. The grounding
system provides a low-impedance path for fault
current and limits the voltage rise on the normally
non-current-carrying metallic components of the
electrical distribution system.

During fault conditions, low impedance results


in high fault current flow, causing overcurrent
protective devices to operate, clearing the fault quickly and safely. The grounding
system also allows transients such as lightning to be safely diverted to earth.

Bonding is the intentional joining of normally non-current-carrying metallic components


to form an electrically conductive path. This helps ensure that these metallic
components are at the same potential, limiting potentially dangerous voltage
differences.

Careful consideration should be given to installing a grounding system that exceeds the
minimum NEC requirements for improved safety and power quality.

Recommended practices for grounding //

1. Equipment Grounding Conductors


2. Isolated Grounding System
3. Branch–Circuit Grounding
4. Ground Resistance
5. Ground Rods
6. Ground Ring
7. Grounding Electrode System
8. Lightning Protection System
9. Surge Protection Devices (SPD) (formerly called TVSS)

1. Equipment Grounding Conductors


The IEEE Emerald Book recommends the use of equipment-grounding
conductors in all circuits, not relying on a raceway system alone for equipment
grounding. Use equipment grounding conductors sized equal to the phase
conductors to decrease circuit impedance and improve the clearing time of
overcurrent protective devices.

Equipment grounding conductor

Bond all metal enclosures, raceways, boxes, and equipment grounding


conductors into one electrically continuous system. Consider the installation of an
equipment grounding conductor of the wire type as a supplement to a conduit-
only equipment grounding conductor for especially sensitive equipment.

The minimum size the equipment grounding conductor for safety is provided
in NEC 250.122, but a full-size grounding conductor is recommended for power
quality considerations.

2. Isolated Grounding System

As permitted by NEC 250.146(D) and NEC 408.40 Exception, consider installing an


isolated grounding system to provide a clean signal reference for the proper
operation of sensitive electronic equipment.

Isolated grounding system for branch circuits


Isolated grounding is a technique that attempts to reduce the chances of “noise”
entering the sensitive equipment through the equipment grounding conductor.
The grounding pin is not electrically connected to the device yoke, and, so, not
connected to the metallic outlet box. It is therefore “isolated” from the green wire
ground.

A separate conductor, green with a yellow stripe, is run to the panelboard with the
rest of the circuit conductors, but it is usually not connected to the metallic
enclosure. Instead it is insulated from the enclosure, and run all the way through
to the ground bus of the service equipment or the ground connection of a
separately derived system. Isolated grounding systems sometimes eliminate
ground loop circulating currents.

Note that the NEC prefers the term isolated ground, while
the IEEE prefers the term insulated ground.
3. Branch-Circuit Grounding

Replace branch circuits that do not contain an equipment ground with branch
circuits with an equipment ground. Sensitive electronic equipment, such as
computers and computer-controlled equipment, require the reference to ground
provided by an equipment grounding conductor for proper operation and for
protection from static electricity and power surges.

(Failure to utilize an equipment grounding conductor may cause current flow through
low-voltage control or communication circuits, which are susceptible to
malfunction and damage, or the earth.)

Surge Protection Devices (SPDs) must have connection to an equipment


grounding conductor.

4. Ground Resistance

Measure the resistance of the grounding electrode system to ground.

Take reasonable measures to ensure that the resistance to ground is 25 ohms


or less for typical loads. In many industrial cases, particularly where electronic
loads are present, there are requirements which need values as low as 5 ohms
or less many times as low as 1 ohm.
Measuring earth resistance with fall of potential method (photo credit: eblogbd.com)

For these special cases, establish a maintenance program for sensitive electronic
loads to measure ground resistance semi-annually, initially, using a ground
resistance meter. Ground resistance should be measured at least annually
thereafter.
When conducting these measurements, appropriate safety precautions should be
taken to reduce the risk of electrical shock .
Record the results for future reference. Investigate significant changes in ground
resistance measurements compared with historical data, and correct deficiencies
with the grounding system. Consult an electrical design professional for
recommendations to reduce ground resistance where required.
5. Ground Rods

The NEC permits ground rods to be spaced as little as 6 feet apart, but
spheres-of-influence of the rods verlar.

Recommended practice is to space multiple ground rods a minimum of twice the


length of the rod apart. Install deep-driven or chemically-enhanced ground rods in
mountainous or rocky terrain, and where soil conditions are poor. Detailed design
of grounding systems are beyond the scope of this document.

Earthing electrode

6. Ground Ring

In some cases, it may be advisable to install a copper ground ring,


supplemented by driven ground rods, for new commercial and industrial
construction in addition to metal water piping, structural building steel, and
concrete-encased electrodes, as required by Code.
Grounding rings provide a convenient place to bond multiple electrodes of a
grounding system, such as multiple Ufer grounds, lightning down-conductors,
multiple vertical electrodes, etc.
Install ground rings completely around buildings and structures and below the
frost line in a trench offset a few feet from the footprint of the building or structure.
Where low, ground impedance is essential, supplement the ground ring with
driven ground rods in a triplex configuration at each corner of the building or
structure, and at the mid-point of each side.

The emergency generator connected to the ring-ground, and additionally grounded to reinforcing rods in its concrete pad (photo
credit: psihq.com)
The NEC-minimum conductor size for a ground ring is 2 AWG , but sizes as large
as 500 kcmil are more frequently used. The larger the conductor and the longer
the conductor, the more surface area is in contact with the earth, and the lower
the resistance to earth.

7. Grounding Electrode System

Grounding electrode system bus (photo credit: electrical-contractor.net)

Bond all grounding electrodes that are present, including metal underground
water piping, structural building steel, concrete-encased electrodes, pipe and rod
electrodes, plate electrodes, and the ground ring and all underground metal
piping systems that cross the ground ring, to the grounding electrode system.

Bond the grounding electrodes of separate buildings in a campus environment


together to create one grounding electrode system.
Bond all electrical systems, such as power, cable
television, satellite television, and telephone systems, to
the grounding electrode system. Bond outdoor metallic
structures, such as antennas, radio towers, etc. to the
grounding electrode system. Bond lightning protection
down-conductors to the grounding electrode system.
8. Lightning Protection System

Copper lightning protection systems may be superior to other metals in both


corrosion and maintenance factors. NFPA 780 (Standard for the Installation of
Lightning Protection Systems) should be considered as a minimum design
standard.

Building lightning protection system (photo credit: Schneider Electric)

9. Surge Protection Devices (SPD) (formerly called TVSS)

The use of surge protection devices is highly recommended. Consult IEEE


Standard 1100 (The Emerald Book) for design considerations. A surge protection
system should only be connected to a high quality, low impedance, and robust
grounding electrode system.

Surge protection device – Single line diagram (credit: Schneider Electric)

Generally, a surge protection device should not be installed downstream from an


uninterruptible power supply (UPS). Consult manufacturers’ guidelines.

Reference // Recommended Practices for Designing and Installing Copper Building Wire
Systems – Copper Development Association Inc.
Earth resistance of an earth electrode
When an earth electrode system has been designed and installed, it is usually
necessary to measure and confirm the earth resistance between the electrode and “true
Earth”.

The most common methods of measuring the resistance of an earth electrode

The most commonly used method of measuring the earth resistance of an earth
electrode is the 3-point measuring technique shown in Figure 1.

This method is derived from the 4-point method – which is used for soil
resistivity measurements.

The 3-point method, called the “fall of potential” method, comprises the Earth
Electrode to be measured and two other electrically independent test electrodes,
usually labelled P (Potential) and C (Current). These test electrodes can be of
lesser “quality” (higher earth resistance) but must be electrically independent of
the electrode to be measured.
Figure 1 – The 3-point Method of Earth Resistance Measurement

An alternating current (I) is passed through the outer electrode C and the voltage
is measured, by means of an inner electrode P, at some intermediary point
between them.

The Earth Resistance is simply calculated using Ohm’s


Law: Rg = V/I.
Other more complex methods, such as the Slope Method or the Four Pole
Method, have been developed to overcome specific problems associated with
this simpler procedure, mainly for measurements of the resistance of large
earthing systems or at sites where space for locating the test electrodes is
restricted.

Regardless of the measurement method employed, it should be remembered


that the measurement of earth resistance is as much an art as it is a
science, and resistance measurements can be affected by many parameters,
some of which may be difficult to quantify. As such, it is best to take a number of
separate readings and average them, rather than rely on the results of a single
measurement.
When performing a measurement, the aim is to position the auxiliary test
electrode C far enough away from the earth electrode under test so that the
auxiliary test electrode P will lie outside the effective resistance areas of both the
earth system and the other test electrode (see Figure 2).

Figure 2 – Resistance areas and the variation of the measured resistance with voltage electrode position

 If the current test electrode, C, is too close, the resistance areas will
overlap and there will be a steep variation in the measured resistance as the
voltage test electrode is moved.
 If the current test electrode is correctly positioned, there will be a ‘flat’
(or very nearly so) resistance area somewhere in between it and the earth
system, and variations in the position of the voltage test electrode should
only produce very minor changes in the resistance figure.
The instrument is connected to the earth system under test via a short length of
test cable, and a measurement is taken.
Measurement accuracy can be affected by the proximity of other buried metal
objects to the auxiliary test electrodes. Objects such as fences and building
structures, buried metal pipes or even other earthing systems can interfere with
the measurement and introduce errors.
Often it is difficult to judge, merely from visual inspection of the site, a suitable
location for the tests stakes and so it is always advisable to perform more than one
measurement to ensure the accuracy of the test.

Fall of Potential Method

This is one of the most common methods employed for the measurement of earth
resistance and is best suited to small systems that don’t cover a wide area. It is
simple to carry out and requires a minimal amount of calculation to obtain a
result.

Measuring earth resistance with fall of potential method (photo credit: eblogbd.com)
This method is generally not suited to large earthing installations, as the
stake separations needed to ensure an accurate measurement can be excessive,
requiring the use of very long test leads (refer to Table 1).

Normally, the outer test electrode, or current test stake, is driven into the ground
30 to 50 metres away from the earth system, (although this distance will depend
on the size of the system being tested – refer to Table 1) and the inner electrode,
or voltage test stake, is then driven into the ground mid-way between the earth
electrode and the current test stake, and in a direct line between them.

Table 1 – Variation of current and voltage electrode separation with maximum


earth system dimensions, in metres

Maximum Distance from Minimum distance


dimension ‘electricalcentre’ from
across of earth system to ‘electrical
earth system voltage test stake centre’ of earth
system
to current test
stake
1 15 30
2 20 40
5 30 60
10 43 85
20 60 120
50 100 200
100 140 280

The Fall of Potential method incorporates a check to ensure that the test
electrodes are indeed positioned far enough away for a correct reading to
be obtained. It is advisable that this check be carried, as it is really the only way
of ensuring a correct result.

To perform a check on the resistance figure, two additional measurements


should be made:

1. The first with the voltage test electrode (P) moved 10% of the original voltage
electrode-to-earth system separation away from its initial position, and
2. The second with it moved a distance of 10% closer than its original position,
as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 – Checking the validity of a resistance measurement

If these two additional measurements are in agreement with the original


measurement, within the required level of accuracy, then the test stakes have
been correctly positioned and the DC resistance figure can be obtained by
averaging the three results.

However, if there is substantial disagreement amongst any of these results,


then it is likely that the stakes have been incorrectly positioned, either by being
too close to the earth system being tested, too close to one another or too close
to other structures that are interfering with the results.
The stakes should be repositioned at a larger separation distance or in a different
direction and the three measurements repeated. This process should be
repeated until a satisfactory result is achieved.

The 62% Method

The Fall of Potential method can be adapted slightly for use with medium sized
earthing systems. This adaptation is often referred to as the 62% Method, as it
involves positioning the inner test stake at 62% of the earth electrode-to-
outer stake separation (recall that in the Fall-of-Potential method, this figure
was 50%).

All the other requirements of test stake location – that they be in a straight line
and be positioned away from other structures – remain valid.
When using this method, it is also advisable to repeat the measurements with the
inner test stake moved ±10% of the earth electrode-inner test stake separation
distance, as before.

The main disadvantage with this method is that the theory on which it is based
relies on the assumption that the underlying soil is homogeneous, which in
practice is rarely the case. Thus, care should be taken in its use and a soil
resistivity survey should always be carried out.

Alternatively, one of the other methods should be employed.

Other Test Methods

Many other methods exist for taking earth resistance measurements. Many of
these methods have been designed in an attempt to alleviate the necessity for
excessive electrode separations, when measuring large earth systems, or the
requirement of having to know the electrical centre of the system.

Three such methods are briefly described below. Specific details are not
given here, but instead the reader is referred to the relevant technical paper
where these systems are described in detail.

1. The slope method


2. The star-delta method
3. The four-potential method (Wenner method)

(a) The Slope Method

This method is suitable for use with large earthing systems, such as power
substation earths. It involves taking a number of resistance measurements at
various earth system to voltage electrode separations and then plotting a curve of
the resistance variation between the earth and the current.

Using this method it is possible to calculate the theoretical optimum location for
the voltage electrode and thus, from the resistance curve, calculate the true
resistance.
The additional measurement and calculation effort tends to relegate this system
to use with only very large or complex earthing systems.
Potential probe locations for using the slope method (figure credit: Whitham D. Reeve)

For full details of this method, refer to paper 62975, written by Dr G.F. Tagg,
taken from the proceedings of IEE volume 117, No 11, Nov. 1970.

NETA WORLD TechTips ‘Slope Method’ by by Jeff Jowett AVO


International:

(b) The Star-Delta Method

This technique is well suited to use with large systems in built up areas or on
rocky terrain, where it may be difficult to find suitable locations for the test
electrodes, particularly over long distances in a straight line.

Three test electrodes, set up at the corners of an equilateral triangle with


the earth system in the middle, are used and measurements are made of the
total resistance between adjacent electrodes, and also between each electrode
and the earthing system.
Using these results, a number of calculations are performed and a result can be
obtained for the resistance of the earth system. This method, developed by W.
Hymers, is described in detail in Electrical Review, January 1975.

NETA WORLD TechTips ‘Ground Testing in Difficult Installations’ by Jeffrey


R. Jowett (Megger):
(c) The Four Potential Method (Wenner method)

This technique, helps overcome some of the problems associated with the
requirement for knowing the electrical centre of the earthing systems being
tested.

This method is similar in set up to the standard Fall of Potential method, except
that a number of measurements are made with the voltage electrode at
different positions and a set of equations are used to calculate the theoretical
resistance of the system.
The main draw back with the Four Potential method is that, like with the Fall of
Potential method, it can require excessive electrode separation distances if the
earthing system being measured is large.

NETA WORLD TechTips ‘Ground Resistance Testing: Four Potential


Method’ by Jeffrey R. Jowett (Megger):

You might also like