Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Computer Modeling and Simulation of Grounding Systems in power Stations and Substations
A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering University of Technology in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering
Ghaith A. Abdul-Rahim
Supervised By
Dr. Hussein J. Al-Mashat
By
October 2003
SUPERVISOR CERTIFICATION
We certify that this thesis entitled Computer Modeling And Simulation of Grounding systems In Power Stations And Substations was prepared under our supervision at the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Technology, Baghdad, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Electrical Engineering.
Signature: Name: Ass. Prof. Dr. Hussein J. Al-Mashat Date: /10 /2003
Signature:
Approved for the Electrical and Electronic Engineering Department, University of Technology, Baghdad.
Signature: Name: Ass. Prof. Dr. Ali Al-Shekhely (Head of Electrical and Electronic Engineering Department)
List of Symbols
SYMBO
GPR I Ib If Ig v VDF V a j r r u E R D Currents Body current Fault current Ground current Potential Voltage distribution factor voltage resistivity Current density radius Unit vector Electric field intensity resistance Spacing between two electrodes Electrode length Depth of burial frequency Body resistance Time duration of electric current x-coordinates y-coordinates Angels in cylindrical coordinates
A
DESCRIPTION
Ground potential rise
UNITS
Volts Ampere Ampere Ampere Ampere Volts volts volts Ohm. m Ampere/m2 m Volt / meter ohm m m m Hz Ohm seconds -
l
z f rb t x y
k L H Vtouch Vstep
Reflection factor Electrode segment length Upper layer height Touch voltage Step voltage
m m volts volts
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering American National Standard Institute Voltage Distribution Factor Ground Potential Rise
ABSTRACT
Proper grounding in power stations and substations provides reliable operation of equipment and safety of personal working at (or near) the site. Present work is a contribution in this field and is devoted to the modeling and simulation of various systems and configurations used in substation grounding. For this purpose the various available theoretical approaches were analyzed and compared. A universal computer model is presented. The model included all factors of influence such as short circuit level, soil resistivity, electrode type, size, material, and configuration. two cases for the grounding soil have been investigated; the first is the uniform soil and the second is the two-layer earth model. For each system tested important information is provided from the computer output such as the resistance of the overall grounding system, the touch and step voltages at any selected location, the voltage on any selected grid point, a plot of voltage profile on a selected line segment, the transfer on a metallic structures not bonded to the grounding system, if such structures exist. The various methods of soil resistivity measurements are analyzed and discussed. The developed model was tested for two practical substations (NewShergatt and Thoba) and the results obtained were compared with those presented by foreign design and construction companies for the above substations.
Chapter One
Introduction
1.1 Introduction ......1 1.2 Literature Survey ......3 1.3 The Present Work ...8
Chapter Two
Analysis of Simple Grounding Systems Techniques
2.1 Introduction .....11 2.2 Analysis of Simple Grounding Systems ....12 2.2.1 Hemispherical Electrode Buried in Earth .. .12 2.2.2 Two Hemispheres Embedded in earth .14 2.2.3 Other Simple Grounding Systems .....16 2.3 Body Current due to Touch and Step Voltages 18 2.4 Grounding system safety assessment ..........22 2.5 Basic Equations and Solutions ....24 2.6 Analysis of Grounding Systems-Matrix method .27 2.7 Combined Integration-Matrix method ...30 2.8 Computer program-uniform soil .....36 2.9 VDF Between Two-Segments with any Direction ...39 2.9.1 Coplanar Non-Parallel Line Segments ....41 2.9.2 Angled Line Segments, Coplanar or Skew ...41 2.10 Analysis of Grounding System with Two-Layer Earth42
2.10.1 Both segment in top layer .....43 2.10.2 Both segment in Bottom layer ...44 2.10.3 One Segment in Top Layer and One in Bottom 45 2.11 Computer Program-Nonuniform Earth ...45
Chapter Three
Soil Resistivity Measurement and Modeling
3.1 Introduction ...48 3.1.1 Wenner method .....48 3.1.2 Drinen Rod Method ....49 3.2 Soil model .51 3.3 Point source electrode in a two-layer earth .52 3.4 Computer program for modeling earth in two layer ..53 3.5 Two-layer Model by Weighted least square method ..56 3.6 Measurement of Ground Electrode resistance ..58 3.6.1 Three electrode method .....58 3.6.2 Fall of Potential Method ......... 58 3.6.2.1 Theory of the fall of potential ..60 3.6.2.2 Identical Electrode and Large Spacings ..61 3.6.2.3 Hemispherical Electrodes ....62 3.6.2.4 General case ........62 3.6.3 Electrical Center Method ..63 3.6.3.1 Test at a large substation .....64
Chapter Four
Theoretical Study and Design Considerations
4.1 Simplified equations ..66 4.1.1 Introduction ..66 4.1.2 Equations for the resistance of grounding systems ...66 4.2 Equations for the touch and step voltages ..68 4.3 Equivalent-circuit representation of grounding systems...70 4.4 Design Procedure .73
4.5 Basic problem and solutions .....74 4.6 Selection of Conductor and connectors76 4.7 Fusing of Conductor.78
Chapter Five
New-Shergat and Thoba Substations Grounding Grid Calculations
5.1 Introduction..........80 5.2 Data for the Substations ...........80 5.3 Calculation of maximum allowable touch voltage .82 5.4 Grid design ...............82 5.4.1 Grid Resistance ........82 5.4.2 Maximum encountered mesh and step voltages ...84 5.5 Discussion of the Results..92
Chapter Six
Conclusions and Suggestions for Future Works
6.1 Conclusions .. ......94 6.2 Suggestions for Future Works 96 References ..98 Appendix [A] ..103 Appendix [B] ......110
1.1 Introduction
For several technical and safety reasons, electric power system installations must be grounded. Grounding of power system is achieved by embedding metallic structures (conductors) into earth and electrically connecting these conductors to the neutral of the power system. In this way low impedance is provided between the power system neutral and the vast conducting soil, which guarantees that the voltage of the neutral with respect to earth will be low under all conditions. Grounding necessary for several reasons [1]: a) b) c) To assure correct operation of electrical devices, To provide safety during normal or fault condition, To stabilize the voltage during transient conditions and therefore to minimize the probability of a flashover during transients, d) To dissipate lightning strokes, and so on. The earth embedded metallic structures will be called the grounding system and provide a conducting path of electricity to earth, hence the purpose of grounding is to provide a low impedance electrical contact between the neutral of an electrical power system and earth. Ideally, the potential of the neutral of a three-phase system should be the same as that of earth. In this case, human beings are safe whenever they touch metallic structures connected to the system neutrals. However, abnormal operation includes highly unbalanced operating conditions or fault conditions may occur and violet safety. Depending on the level of potential difference between earth points and grounded structures, a hazardous condition may be
1
Chapter six reveals the conclusions, which found during the work, and
suggests several broad lines for future works, which is not involved in the present work.
10
2.1 Introduction
Grounding systems vary considerably in complexity from a simple vertical rod to a substation mat with both vertical and horizontal components of different lengths and angles [35]. The design of grounding systems of substation and electrical systems in general has the primary purpose of ensuring the safety and well-being of personal, any one who may come close to conductive media, electrically coupled to grounding mats during unbalanced fault conditions. In general, an unbalance fault will cause a potential rise of the system neutral and a conductive medium electrically connected to the neutral. During a fault, hazardous transfer voltages may be generated on these elements [38]. A safe grounding design has two objectives: 1. Provide means to carry and dissipate electric currents into ground under normal and fault conditions without exceeding any operating and equipment limits or adversely affecting continuity of service. 2. Assure such a degree of human safety that a person working or walking in the vicinity of grounding facilities is not exposed to the danger of critical electric shock [2]. In the past, a great many people assumed that any object grounded, however crudely, could be safely touched. This misconception probably contributed to many tragic accidents in the past [1,2,27]. A low station ground resistance is not, in itself, a guarantee of safety. Since there is no simple relation between the resistance of the ground system as a whole and the maximum shock current to which a person might be exposed, a station relatively low ground resistance may be dangerous under
11
Ig
Rg
The effect of that particular portion of fault current, which enters and saturates the earth within the station area, has to be analyzed. If geometry, location of ground electrodes, local soil characteristics and other factors contribute to an excessive potential gradient field at the earth surface, the grounding system thus might be inadequate despite its capacity of sustain the fault current in magnitude and direction, as permitted by protective relays [2].
Resistivity
(a)
v1 v2
Resistivity
a (b)
r u
Figure 2.2, hemispherical electrode embedded in earth, (a) actual system (b) equivalent system for analysis purpose
Because of symmetry, the flow of the electric current in the semi-infinite earth will be the same as in the system of figure 2.2b, which illustrates a sphere embedded in an infinite medium of resistivity . In other words, the flow of the current will be such that the equi-potential surfaces generated will be concentric spherical surfaces. If total current I flow from the surface of the hemisphere into earth figure 2.2a, total current 2I will flow from the sphere into earth figure 2.2b. The current density J(a) at a point located a distance from the center of the electrode will be [1]:
J (a) = Where:
2I r u 4r 2
Ampere/m2
r u ....2.1
By ohms low, the electric field intensity at a point located at a distance from the center of the hemisphere will be: r r E (a) = J (a)u a r ...2.2 The potential of the hemisphere with respect to a point x located at a
distance a=a1 from the center of the hemisphere will be given by the equation:
a1
v(a1 ) =
a =r
J (a) da
v(a1 ) =
I 1 1 ( ) ....2.3 2 r a1
13
I ..........2.4 2r
The potential on the surface of the earth along a line passing through the center of the hemisphere is illustrated in figure 2.3. The resistance of the hemisphere to remote earth is:
R=
v = I 2r
........2.5
I
Resistivity
Figure 2.3. Potential distribution on the surface of the earth generated by a hemisphere
2I r r u u1 2 2 2 4a1 4a 2 2I
Amps/m2 ......2.6
r 2I r 2I r u1 u E ( x, y ) = 2 2 2 4a1 4a 2
Volts/m .2.7
r v = E ( x, y )du
Selecting an integration path along the line AB and carrying out the integration yield
v=
Air
I
I 1 1 1 1 + ( ) ......2.8 2 r1 D r2 r2 D a1
A r1 B
a2
r u
r u
1
-I r2
-I
Resistivity
D
a1
2
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.4 two hemispherical electrodes (a) configuration (b) lines of current flow
I 1 1 ( ) ......2.9 r Dr
.....2.10
15
(c)
(d)
z 2r b
b (e) (f)
Figure 2.5. Simple grounding systems. (a) Ground rod, (b) buried wire, (c) buried strip, (d) thin plate in infinite medium, (e) thin plate near the soil surface, (f) ring in infinite medium.
2l ln 2l r
...2.11
16
R=
2l l (ln + ln ) r 2l 2z
z 6r
..2.12
R=
8b
.....2.14
4b
..2.15
......2.16
expression
2 L4 L2 4L 1) + + (ln (1 ....) 2 r 4L 4D 3D 5D 4 4L 4L D D2 D4 (ln ....) R= + ln 2+ + 2 4L 2 L 16 L r D 512 L4 2L 2L D D2 D4 (ln R= + ln 0.2373 + 0.2146 + 0.1035 2 0.0424 4 ....) 4L r D L L L D D2 D4 2L 2L R= + ln + 1.071 0.209 + 0.238 2 0.054 4 ....) (ln r D L 6L L L D D2 D4 2L 2L R= + ln + 2.912 1.071 0.645 2 0.145 4 ....) (ln r D L 8L L L R=
L,
L,
L,
L,
D D2 D4 2L 2L + ln + 6.851 3.128 + 1.758 2 0.490 4 ....) (ln r D L 12L L L 2 4 D D D 2L 2L R= + ln + 10.98 5.51 + 3.26 2 1.17 4 ....) (ln r D L 16L L L R=
17
Where: Ib: is (rms) magnitude of the current flowing through the body, t: is duration of this current flow, k: is empirical constant related to an electric shock energy tolerated by x% of a given population. Figures 2.6a and 2.7a,[1] illustrate human being in the vicinity of a substation ground mat subjected to step and touch voltages, respectively.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.6 definition of equivalent circuit for the computation of body currents due to step voltage.
19
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.7definition of equivalent circuit for the computation of body currents due to touch voltage.
body with the ground field (i.e. points A and B in figure 2.7a and 2.7b). The Thevenin equivalent circuit comprises two parameters (a) the equivalent voltage source, and (b) the equivalent resistance. The voltage source equals the open circuit voltage, meaning in this case the voltage at the points of contact when the human being is not touching. This voltage will be the step or touch voltage, respectively. The equivalent internal resistance between the points of contact can be accurately computed with numerical techniques. For a fast but approximate computation, the human foot can be modeled as a plate touching the surface of the earth. The resistance of the plate to remote earth is approximately (section 2.2.3) R= Where:
4b
Where: A: is the area of the foot in touch with the earth. For an adult with large feet, the area of the persons feet is approximately 200 cm2. Thus, the value of b is computed to be b0.08 m. Hence the resistance of one foot touching the earth is
R=
4 0.08
3 ........2.17
The equivalent resistance, req , in fig 2.7b, should also take into account the resistance of the grounding system. However, for practical grounding systems, this resistance is typically small compared to the resistance1.5 , and thus omitted. Once the Thevinin equivalent circuit has been computed, the electric current through the human body, I b , is computed from
Ib = v eq req + rb
..2.20
Where:
r b : is the resistance of human body between the points of contact. r b of human body depends on many factors, such as size, skin condition,
pressure at the contact, and level of voltage v eq [1,2]. For dc and ac at normal power frequency, the human body can be substituted by non-inductive
21
tolerated by average person. Thus according to this standard, the maximum allowable body current is[1]:
Ib = 0.116 t amps
22
voltage. Thus combining the two preceding equations, the maximum allowable step or touch voltage is computed:
v eq.allowable =(req + rb )
0.116
......2.21
To obtain the maximum allowable step voltage, req should be replaced with 6. To obtain the maximum allowable touch voltage, req should be replaced with 1.5. For body resistance, req the value of 1000 is suggested, yielding:
0.116 t t
volts...................................2.22
0116
volts........................................2.23
Thus, for a safe grounding system, the maximum touch and step voltage should not exceed the foregoing values. It is obvious from the equations above that safety can be assessed in terms of the touch and step voltages instead of the body currents. Safety assessment refers to the procedure by which the actual maximum touch and step voltages are computed and compared to the tolerable (safe) touch and step voltages.
23
(a)
(b)
Fig 2.8 A point current source inside the semi-infinite conducting earth
The location of the source is at point As, illustrated in figure 2.8. The voltage, V(r,,z), at a point (r,,z) in side the earth must satisfy the Laplace equation
2V (r , , z )= Where:
1 V (r , , z ) 1 2V (r , , z ) 2V (r , , z ) + =0 2.24 (r )+ 2 2 2 r r r r z
r, , and z are the coordinates of the point A relative to a system of cylindrical coordinates as indicated in figure 2.8a. Because of the symmetry of the problem, the solution is independent of the coordinate . Thus V(r,,z)=V(r,z). In this case the Laplace equation reads 2V (r , z )= 1 V (r , z ) 1 2V (r , z ) r + =0 2 2 r r r r z .2.25
The general solution to this equation is given in terms of Bessel function of zero order, Jo:
I V (r , z ) = S 4
k =0
(k ) J o (kr )e
kz
dk .....2.26
24
2 (k ) J o (kr )e 4 1
0
IS
kz
dk
z > 0 ..2.27
In the general equation above, the term corresponding to propagation is the +z direction (e kz ) must be omitted because V2 (r , z ) 0 as z + . The general solution for the voltage in region 1 is: V1 (r , z ) = J o (kr )e 4 1
0
IS
k z zS
dk +
1 (k ) J o (kr )e 4 1
0
IS
kz
dk
z 0 2.28 In the general solution above, the term corresponding to propagation is the +z direction (e kz ) has been omitted because V1 (r , z ) 0 as z . In the set of two equations above, two unknown functions appear, 1 (k ) and 2 (k ) . The boundary conditions at the interface of the two regions will provide two equations which, if solved, will determine 1 (k ) and 2 (k ) . At the interface, the voltage must be a continuous function and the electric current must also be a continuous function. These requirements result in the fallowing boundary conditions: V1 (r ,0)=V2 (r ,0) For every r
For every r
.....2.29
.....2.30
V1 (r ,0) V (r ,0) = 2 2 z z
25
2 (k ) J o (kr )dk
0
V1 (r ,0) =
IS
4 1
J o (kr)e
0 0
+ kz S
dk +
IS
4 1
1 (k ) J o (kr )dk
0
I k V (r ,0) 1 1 = S z 4
J o (kr )e
+ kz s
I k dk + S 1 (k ) J o (kr )dk 4
V 2 (r ,0) =0 z
2 ( k ) =e
e
kz S
+ kz S
+ 1 (k )
+ 1 (k )=0
1 ( k ) =e
kz S kz S
....2.31 .2.32
2 ( k ) = 2e
Finally upon substitution of the computed function 1 (k ) and 2 (k ) , the general solutions for the voltage in region 1 and 2 are obtained: V 2 (r , z ) = 2 J o (kr )e 4 1
0
IS
k ( z zS )
dk .2.33 IS
V1 (r , z ) =
J o (kr )e 4 1
0
IS
k z zS
dk +
J o (kr )e 4 1
0
k ( z + zS )
dk
..2.34 we shall be concerned with the voltage in region 1 only. The integrals appearing in the equation for V1 (r , z ) are evaluated by utilizing the following identity of Bessel functions:
26
J o (kr )e
0
ka
dk
1 r 2 +a 2
...2.35
1 1 V1 ( r , z )= + ..2.36 2 2 2 4 1 ( x x ) 2 + ( y y ) 2 + ( z z ) 2 ( x x ) +( y y ) +( z + z ) s s s s Or I 1 1 ...2.36a V= 1 + 4 r r Where: r :is the distance between p and the source of current,
IS
r :is the distance between p and the image of the source current. The derived result is interpreted as follows: the voltage in region 1 is identical to the voltage generated by two point sources of magnitude I S located at points ( x s , y s , z s ) and ( x S , y s , z s ) in an infinite region of conductivity 1 . In other words, the interface between 1 and 2 has the effect of generating the image of the point source with respect to the plane interface. This interpretation is illustrated in figure 2.8b. The result derived is the basic building block of all numerical analysis procedures of grounding systems.
Vi
i-1
voltage i+1 Vi
i (a) (b)
Ii (c)
Figure 2.9, Illustration of the matrix method. (a) Simple grounding system, (b) small segments i-1, i+1, (c) mathematical model of segment i.
segment is vi. This is illustrated in figure 2.9c. The same model can be assumed for segments (i-1, i+1), and all other segments. Then the basic equations are utilized to develop relationships among the electric currents Ii, i=1,2,, n, and the voltages vi, i=1,2, , n. Specifically, the voltage vi (i.e., voltage of segment i) at point A will be: vi = f ( x Ai , y Ai , z Ai , x j , y j , z j , ) I j j =1 Where:
f ( x Ai , y Ai , y Ai , x j , y j , z j , ) = 1 1 + 4 ( x x ) 2 + ( y y ) 2 + ( z z ) 2 Ai j Ai j Ai j
n
......2.37
( x Ai x j ) 2 + ( y Ai y j ) 2 + ( z Ai + z j ) 2 1
.....2.38
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v n = f ( x An , y An , z An , x j , y j , z j , ) I j
j =1
If the voltages vi , i = 1,2,..., n, are known, then the equations above can be solved to yield the electric currents I j , j =1,2,...,n . Once the electric currents are specified, the voltage v( x, y, z ) at any point ( x, y, z ) in the earth can be computed from the equation v( x, y, z ) = f ( x A , y A , z A , x j , y j , z j , ) I j .2.39
j =1 n
In general, grounding systems are constructed with copper conductors. In this case, because of the high conductivity of copper, the entire grounding system is at essentially the same potential, the ground potential rise (GPR). Thus, the voltage of all segments is the same and equal to v (i.e.,
...2.40
[I] T=[I1 I2 . . .In] [VDF] I, j=f (xAi ,yAi zAi ,xj, yj,zj,) v : is the ground potential rise of the grounding system. The electric currents [I] are computed from [I]=[VDF]-11v ....2.41
29
.... 2.42
And v ...2.43 IT This method bears the name matrix method because it involves the R= matrix [VDF]. The entries of this matrix will be called voltage distribution
factors (VDFs) because they provide the voltage at a given point due to the
flow of a specific current source. The voltage distribution factors have dimensions of resistance (ohms).
(x2,y2,z2)
The coordinates of the center of conductor segments are (x1,y1,z1) and (x2,y2,z2), respectively. Assume that a total electric current, I1, emanates from
31
Table 2.1 Equations for voltage distribution factors between a conductor segment and a point (transfer resistance)
x-directed
1 f ( x x + L, A ) f ( x x L, A ) + f ( x x + L, A+ ) f ( x x L, A+ ) 1 x 1 1 x 1 1 x x 1 1 8L 1
y-directed
1 [ f ( y y + L, A ) f ( y y L, A ) + f ( y y + L, A+ ) f ( y y L, A+ )] 1 y 1 1 y 1 1 y 1 1 y 8L 1
z-directed
1 [ f ( z z + L, A ) f ( z z L, A ) + f ( z + z + L, A ) f ( z + z L, A )] 1 z 1 1 z 1 1 z 1 1 z 8L 1
b c
2 2 , Ay = ( x x1 ) + ( z z1 ) ,
Az = ( x x1 ) 2 + ( y y1 ) 2 .
33
f ( x x + L + L ,B ) f ( x x + L L ,B ) 2 2 1 1 2 x 16 L L 2 2 1 1 2 x
1 1 2
f ( x x L + L ,B ) + f ( x x L L ,B ) 2 2 1 1 2 x 2 2 1 1 2 x
y-directed
y-directed
+ f ( x x + L + L ,B+ ) f ( x x + L L ,B+ ) 2 2 1 1 2 x 2 2 1 1 2 x f ( x x L + L , B + ) + f ( x x L L , B + ) 2 2 1 1 2 x 2 2 1 1 2 x I 1 f ( y y + L + L ,B ) f ( y y + L L ,B ) 2 2 1 1 2 y 16 L L 2 2 1 1 2 y
1 2
f ( y y L + L ,B ) + f ( y y L L ,B ) 2 2 1 1 2 y 2 2 1 1 2 y
+ f ( y y + L + L ,B+ ) f ( y y + L L ,B+ ) 2 2 1 1 2 y 2 2 1 1 2 y f ( y y L + L , B + ) + f ( y y L L , B + ) 2 2 1 1 2 y 2 2 1 1 2 y
z-directed z-directed
f ( z z + L + L ,B ) f ( z z + L L ,B ) 2 2 1 1 2 z 16 L L 2 2 1 1 2 z
1 1 2
f ( z z L + L ,B ) + f ( z z L L , B ) 2 2 1 1 2 z 2 2 1 1 2 z + f ( z + z + L + L ,B ) f ( z + z + L L ,B ) 2 2 1 1 2 z 2 2 1 1 2 z f ( z + z L + L , B ) + f ( z + z L L , B ) 2 2 1 1 2 z 2 2 1 1 2 z
x-directed y-directed
1
16 L1 L 2
[ f3 ( x2 x1 + L1, y2 y1 + L2 , z2 z1)
f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, y2 y L2 , z2 z1) f 3 ( x2 x L , y2 y + L2 , z2 z1) 1 1 1 1 + f 3 ( x2 x1 L1, y2 y1 L2 , z2 z1) + f 3 ( x2 x + L , y2 y + L2 , z2 + z1) 1 1 1 f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, y2 y1 L2 , z2 + z1) f 3 ( x2 x L , y2 y + L2 , z2 + z1) 1 1 1 + f 3 ( x2 x1 L1, y2 y1 L2 , z2 + z1)]
x-directed
z-directed
1
16L L
1 2
[ f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, z2 z1 + L2 , y2 y1)
f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, z2 z1 L2 , y2 y1) f 3 ( x2 x L , z2 z + L2 , y2 y1) 1 1 1 + f 3 ( x2 x1 L1, z2 z1 L2 , y2 y1) + f 3 ( x2 x + L , z2 + z + L2 , y2 y1) 1 1 1 f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, z2 + z1 L2 , y2 y1) f 3 ( x2 x L , z2 + z + L2 , y2 y1) 1 1 1 + f 3 ( x2 x1 L1, z2 + z1 L2 , y2 y1)]
34
1
16 L1 L 2
[ f3 ( y2 y1 + L1, z2 z1 + L2 , x2 x1)
a
b
f 3 ( y2 y1 + L1, z2 z1 L2 , x2 x1) f 3 ( y2 y L , z2 z + L2 , x2 x1) 1 1 1 + f 3 ( y2 y1 L1, z2 z1 L2 , x2 x1) + f 3 ( y2 y + L , z2 + z + L2 , x2 x1) 1 1 1 f 3 ( y2 y1 + L1, z2 + z1 L2 , x2 x1) f 3 ( y2 y L , z2 + z + L2 , x2 x1) 1 1 1 + f 3 ( y2 y1 L1, z2 + z1 L2 , x2 x1)]
segment 1 length is 2L1. segment 2 length is 2L2. segment 1 is centered at (x1,y1,z1). segment 2 is centered at (x2,y2,z2).
= ( y2 y1) 2 + ( z2 z1) 2 B y = ( x2 x1) 2 + ( z2 z1) 2 B z = ( x2 x1 ) 2 + ( y 2 y1 ) 2 ; ,
2 2 2 2
c Bx
x-directed
1 16 L
1 16 L
2 2
[ f 2 (2 L,a )+ f 2 (2 L,a ) 2a + f 2 (2 L, z1 2 )+ f 2 (2 L, z1 2 ) 2 z1 2 )
[ f 2 (2 L,a )+ f 2 (2 L,a ) 2a + f 2 (2 L, z1 2 )+ f 2 (2 L, z1 2 ) 2 z1 2 )
y-directed
z-directed
1
2
16 L 2 f (2 z1 , a )
2
[ f 2 (2 L, a ) + f 2 (2 L, a ) 2a + f 2 (2 z1 + 2 L, a ) + f 2 (2 z1 2 L, a )
a b
Input Data
Repeat computations to all segments Yes Compute self Yes i=j ? No Compute mutual Direction of segment i =dirction of segment j =1 No Yes Compute self Yes i=j ? No Compute mutual
VDF
VDF
VDF
VDF
Yes Compute self Yes i=j ? No Compute mutual
VDF
VDF
2
36
Yes
37
I actual =
GPR R
Yes
...2.45
The voltage distribution factor between segment 1 and 2 is the voltage produced in segment 2 by one ampere leaking from segment 1. The symmetry of (2.45) shows that this will also be the voltage produced in segment 1 by one ampere leaking from segment 2. Therefore, VDFjk=VDFkj, where VDF is the voltage distribution factor. In (2.45) r is the distance between a source element of length ds and a receiving element of length dS. One is therefore faced with the problem of evaluating the above integrals for line segments, which may be paralleling, coplanar but angled, or skewed. The paralleled case is easy to integrate. The others are more difficult. The way of evaluating the Neumann integral:
M = cos Where: : is the angle between the two line segments S and s: are measured along the segments from their intersection with their common perpendicular. To remove the cos() term and to avoid use of mixed lower case and upper case letters (which are difficult to program), one obtains, for 0 [22], dsdS r
M = cos
dsdS BF + BF AF + AF BF + F B = CB ln CA ln + GF ln r BE + BE AE + AE AF + F A GE ln BE + E B CG AE + E A sin
..2.46
Where:
CB GF sin CG CB GE sin CG 1 = tan 1 + + tan BF BE BF tan CG BE tan CG
39
Figure (2.12) is the diagram corresponding to these equations. Line segments AB and EF are shown projected in planes perpendicular to their common perpendicular CG. E and F are the projections of E and F on AB. A and B are the projections of A and B on EF. CG and all other distances are taken as positive except those (underscored) measured along AB and EF, which are taken as algebraically positive in the directions AB, and EF, respectively. is the (positive) solid angle subtended at B by a parallelogram EFHI constructed on EF with FH parallel and equal to AB.
A G
E B I
F H
E F B
would not vary smoothly when the terms shown underscored in (2.47) change sign. The above equations become greatly simplified in some frequently encountered cases, such as coplanar line segments, parallel lines, and perpendicular lines.
40
With 0, as CG is reduced towards zero, making the segments coplanar, approach zero.
B`
A`
E
y
C,G
E` L1
F`
To obtain the quantities needed to compute M in (2.46), proceed as follows: If z=0 and y=0, set y=a small number, such as the wire radius. This will avoid the possibility of attempting to take the logarithm of zero. It will not change the result appreciably. W2=y2+x2 y GE= sin y CF = F tan XF=x+L2cos y GF = F sin CA=CE-X
41
2 BF = ( X F L1 ) 2 +Y F + z 2 BE=CE-GB
2 2 AE=GE-GA AE= x 2 +w2 AF = X F +YF + z 2 AF=GF-GA EA=CA-CA EA=CA-CA FA=CA-CF EB=CB-CE FB=CB-CF CG=z M can be computed from the above constants, using (2.46). The voltage
distribution factor VDF is computed from M by (2.45). Two values of VDF must be computed and added to allow for the effect of the surface: The value for the two wires themselves, and the VDF between one wire and the image of the other. This can conveniently be done by calling the VDF subroutine twice, once with z=0, and once with z=2D (for horizontal coplanar wires).
k=
2 1 2 + 1
42
M(z): is the function of z defined previously. M is, of course, also a function of x and y displacement of one segment relative to the other, the lengths, and the angles , but these are the same for all of the images of a given pair of segments. In uniform soil k=0. All of the above terms drop out except for n=0, remembering that 00 is defined as 1, hence the above equation is reduced to
43
4L1 L2
[M ( z j + z i ) + M ( z j z i )]
That is, of course, just the VDF of the two segments themselves plus the VDF between one segment and the image of the other. As usual, the equations are symmetrical, so that the above equations also give the VDF of segment i as seen by segment j.
2 [M ( z j z i ) kM (2 H z j + z i ) + 4L1 L2
44
k n M (2nH + z j + z i ) ..2.50 n =0
1 M ( z j zi ) + 4L1L2
n=0
k n M (2nH + z j + zi ) +
k (2nH + z
n n =1
zi )
...2.51 The first term is the voltage distribution factor of the two segments themselves. The first infinite sum is caused by the image point i sees looking up towards the surface. The second infinite sum is caused by the reflections of these images segment i sees when looking down toward the interface between the two layers. The VDF of segment i as seen by segment j has 1(1-k). These two expressions are equal, again making, rij=rij.
No
Yes Compute M
Compute self VDF Repeat for several image coordinates Compute Mutual VDF Compute self VDF Repeat for several image coordinates Compute Mutual VDF 2 1 1
Yes Compute M
Yes i=j ? No
Yes
Yes
Yes
47
3.1.1Wenner Method
The Wenner method is the most widely used in practice. It involves placing four small pins into the earth in straight line, as illustrated in figure 3.1a. A source, connected between the outer pins, generates an electric current, which is injected into the earth from one pin and collected at the other pin. The flow of this electric current in the earth generates a potential distribution in the soil. As a result, the potential at the location of the two inner pins is nonzero. The voltage between the two inner pins is measured with a voltmeter. The injected current I, and the measured voltage V are related to the resistivity of the soil. This relationship is obtained as follows. Assume that the length of the pin is very small compared to the separation distance between them. In this case, the two outer pins can be considered as point current sources of current I and I, respectively, located on the surface of the earth. The voltage at a point a long the line of the pins, located at a
48
2x 2 (3a x)
.....3.1
The voltage of the two inner pins is V(a) and V(2a), respectively. Thus the voltage V between the two inner pins is
V =V (a )V (2a )=
I 2a
.....3.2
=2a
Where:
V I
.......3.3
: resistivity of soil .m a: probe spacing m. V: voltmeter reading volts, I: ammeter reading amperes. In uniform soil, the four-pin arrangement should provide the same soil resistivity irrespective of separation distance a. when the soil is not uniform, which is the most common case, the method will provide the apparent soil resistivity which depends on the separation distance a. From this information, it is possible to determine a non-uniform soil model.
R=
2l ln r 2l
2lR 2l ln r
......3.4
....3.5
Where:
l : rod length,
R=V/I, r: radius of rod, If the soil is uniform (constant resistivity throughout), the driven rod method should provide the same soil resistivity irrespective of the length of the driven rod in contact with the soil. When the driven rod method is applied to a non-uniform soil, it will provide an apparent soil resistivity which will vary with the length of the ground rod in contact with the soil.
Source
A Source A
Earth surface
I a x a a
I
V
Voltage probe
Current probe
1 2
(a)
(b)
Figure 3.1 Soil resistivity measurement system arrangements. (a) Wenner method, (b) driven rod method
In the application of driven rod method, the position of the current and voltage probe is important. Specifically, the current probe should be placed away from the driven rod so that the electric field around the ground rod is
50
The apparent resistivity, a, as measured using the Wenner method is derived for the two- layer earth condition is expressed as:
52
.....3.6
Where:
a : the apparent resistivity as measured using the Wenner method.
k=
2 1 =Reflection coefficient 2 + 1
The gradient of this function is calculated at an initial point Mo defined by xo, yo. The values of x and y are then selected so that the function decreases along the direction defined by the gradient vector. The process is repeated until the function along the initial direction starts to increase. The process will stop when all possible directions of the gradient indicate that the present (x,y), coordinates corresponds to a minimum of the function (zero gradient). This process will normally converge to a minimum of the function. However there is no guarantee that the minimum obtained will be the only one nor that it is the minimum of the minima. When a secondary minimum is
53
o (a i ) (a i ) ( 1 , k , h) = ...3.7 o (a i ) i =1 The best fit is obtained when is minimum. The values of 1, k, and h,
which lead to this minimum, are determined by the steepest-descent algorithm. The gradient vector is defined as:
, , 1 k h each component of the potential vector is determined from equation 2.7, thus: GV =
= 2 1 = 2 k
1 1 n
o o 1 o o k
....3.8a ....3.8b
54
1 = k = h =
1
.3.9
k h
Where: is a positive value expressed in p.u. of GV, suitably selected to guarantee a smooth search for the minimum. The above changes cause a small variation in in the error function :
1 + k + h or 1 k h
Therefore the main steps in the steepest-descent algorithm are: 1. Estimate initial values of 1, k and h (i.e., 1o, ko, ho). 2. Calculate a suitable value of . 3. Determine 1, k and h. 4. Estimate a new starting point:
( ( 1 q ) = 1 q 1) + 1
k ( q ) = k ( q 1) + k
....3.12
h ( q ) = h ( q 1) + h
5. Calculate and compare it with :
55
.3.13
1 1 = 4 nk n 1 k B A n =1 Where:
...3.14
..3.15
Where:
1 = 2 h
.3.16
The scalar a is computed in each iteration such that two criteria are met: (a) the parameter values do not change more than 50%, and (b) the objective function (3.14) assumes a smaller value. The algorithm (3.19) always converges to the solution. The following flowchart evaluates the two-layer soil model described above [33,39].
57
k +1
No
Converged? Yes
RE =
Rx + R y + Rz 2
E
......3.23
P R
Figure 3.5 Three ground electrodes provide a system for measuring ground electrode resistance
This method of measurement gives best results if the three resistors are of approximately the same resistance magnitude.
I P
E V R D
If the distance D is large enough (with respect to the grounding system dimensions) the center part of the fall of potential curves tends to the approximately horizontal. This flat section of the curve gives the true resistance RE for large grounding systems, large distances D may not be practical or even possible and as a result the horizontal section of the curve will not exist. In this case accurate measurements will not be obtained unless one has already a good idea of the exact probe P position.
E R U E = v E I + v E I .3.25
This is by definition the resistance RE (or impedance) of electrode E. Therefore; equation 3.26 can be written as: R= v R R E = RE + (vP vE vP ) .......3.27 I
......3.28
R v P = ( D X ) .....3.29
E v P = ( X ) ...3.30
According to (3.27) the measured resistance will be equal to the true resistance if:
R R E v P v E v P = 0 , that is:
.....3.31
Xo=D/2
61
1 1 1 =0 DX D X
.......3.32
The positive root of (3.32) is the exact potential probe location Xo=0.618D
P3
Xo=1 D
P3= 0.5 D
P1 E
Xo= 0.618 D
P2
1D Xo= 1.618 D
Figure 3.7 Electrode arrangement, which minimize error in fall of potential method
If the potential probe P is at location P1 (E side figure 3.7) then D-X should be replaced by D+X in (3.32). In this case the equation has complex root only. If P is at location P2 (R side) then D-X should be replaced by X-D in (3.32), the positive root of (3.32) is: Xo=1.618D
62
R 1 1 1 =1 + R ac / r ap / r ac / r ap / r Where:
.....3.33
ac: distance from arbitrary starting point to the current electrode. ap: distance from arbitrary starting point to the potential electrode. r: radius of equivalent hemisphere. R=V/I, is the measured resistance. R: true resistance of an earth system. And if the true resistance is obtained when R= R and ap=0.618ac. This will give very accurate results [9]. But two conditions are necessary. First, it must be possible to consider the earth electrode system as a hemisphere. A number of measurements have shown that the resistance curves of most electrode systems approximate closely to that of hemisphere, except at points very close to the system. The second, problem is to know at what point to start the measurements of the distances to the current and potential electrode; i.e. where is the center of the equivalent hemisphere? It is very difficult to
63
O1
204.8
0.2
0.1
60
240
300
0.3
122 152.4
Resistance
0.2
243.8 204.8
0.1
12 , m
15
18
21
24
65
4 Theoretical Study and Design Considerations 4.1 Simplified equations 4.1.1 Introduction
For fast approximate calculations, simpler formulae can be derived by taking into consideration the specific structure of grounding systems. Such simple formulae have been presented in section 2.2. In this section typical simplified formulae are considered and the approximations involved in deriving these formulae are discussed.
[ { 2 Lln{ 2 L+
2 2
4 L + (4 L) 2 + a 2 8 L +
a2 8L
8L
a2 R= 4 Lln8L 4 L2 Lln 4 L 2 Lln 3a 4L 16 L2 The result above can be rewritten in the following form:
1 (8 L)(4 L) 1 8L 2 Lln 4 L 3a + 2 Lln R= 4L 16 L2 a2 (2)(2 L) 1 = (4 Lln 24 L 3a)+ 4 Lln a 2 16 L Now observe that the quantity 4Lln2-4L-3a is very small compared to the quantity 4 L ln
R= or R= Where:
(2)(2 L) 1 ln 4 L a
2l ln 2l a
67
4b
substitution, the approximate resistance of a ground mat of area A is ....4.1 4 A Note that since the equation above is approximate, alternative formulae are possible [3, 5, 19, 20, 36, 38, 40].
R=
L K K I E s= s i e L Where:
: soil resistivity
E m=
K m K i I e
.4.2 .4.3
Ie: total current injected into the soil from the ground grid (earth current) L: total length of the ground grid conductor Ki: nonuniformity factor which accounts for the fact that the current distribution is not uniform along the grid conductors. Km and Ks are geometric factors defined with the following approximate formulae:
Km = 1 D 2 1 n 2i 3 ln + ln 2 16hd i =3 2i 2 ....4.4 ..... 4.5
n 1 1 1 1 Ks = + + h D + h i =3(i 1) D Where:
n: number of parallel grid conductors D: spacing between two adjacent conductors d: diameter of the conductors h: burial depth In addition, the following empirical formula is suggested for the nonuniformity factor Ki: Ki=0.65+0.172n .....4.6 The approximate formulas above have been compared extensively against computer models and found to be acceptably accurate only for square or nearly square ground grids. The simplified equations discussed in this section
69
The analysis of grounding systems is often better understood through the use of equivalent circuits [1, 28]. Specifically, it is possible to represent a general grounding system with an equivalent circuit. The conceptual basis for such an equivalent circuit is illustrated in figure 4.1. The figure illustrates three conductor segments buried in earth. Assume that each conductor segment is connected to a thin wire that is brought outside the soil. Further assume that the thin wires are insulated from the soil in such a way that electric current may not flow from the surface of the thin wire into earth. Under these conditions, the presence of thin wires does not affect the electric current flow or the voltage distribution in the soil. On the other hand,
1 2 3
2 g23
g33
the entire system appears as a system with three terminals. It is well known from the theory that given any linear system with terminals, no matter how complex, it can be represented with a circuit that has the same input/output
70
V1 I1 V And [V ]= 2 [I ]= I 2 V3 I 3 The equation above is solved for the currents [I], to yield
71
Yij
j =1
between conductor segment i and remote earth. Note that the equivalent circuit represents the soil surrounding the grounding system. Since a grounding system will typically be connected to a power system, the equivalent circuit can be used to represent the grounding system in the power network. The equivalent circuit approach is practically useful in the analyses of systems with multiple grounds.
74
75
Transformer
Ground rod
Ground mat Substation Figure 4.2 Illustration of power system grounding structures
The general procedure outlined above involve the following specific tests: Step 1. Perform soil resistivity measurement around the substation site. Step 2. Analyze soil resistivity measurements to establish the soil model. Step 3. Collect and prepare data for the interconnected power system. Step 4. Assume a preliminary design for the substation ground grid. Step 5.Compute the impedances of all grounding structures of the system, such as substation ground resistance. Step 6. Perform a detail analysis of the substation grounding system to determine ground resistance, maximum touch voltage, and maximum step voltage as a percentage of ground potential rise. Step 7. Identify the worst fault type and location and determine by computation the maximum earth current. Step 8. Perform safety assessment. Specifically, compute the maximum touch voltage and maximum step voltage in volts. Determine whether these values meet postulated safety criteria. If yes, the procedure stops here. Otherwise, the design must be modified and steps 6, 7, and 8 must be repeated.
to
relate
deterioration
in
the
surrounding
environment.
Electrical conductivity: such that the element will not contribute
mechanical stress during the most adverse conditions of fault current magnitude and duration.
Mechanical strength and ruggedness: to withstand electromagnetic forces
and physical abuse. In order to design such a grounding system, it is necessary to determine: Magnitude of fault current. The current that equipment and structure grounding conductors may be required to carry depends upon particular design, which is used when a single grounding conductor is used, it must be capable to carry of carrying the total fault current. Also when two grounding conductors are used for redundancy, each of them must be capable of carrying the total fault current. When two grounding conductors used and divide fault current equally, each must be capable of carrying one-half of the total fault current, The fusing of grounding electrodes such as ground rods is normally not considered because the current is divided by the number of rods connected in parallel by the grid conductors. In case where the rods provide a lower ground resistance than the grid conductors, and
77
prevent fusing under the maximum fault current and maximum fault time to which that conductor may be subjected. The fusing formula used for any material, knowing the material constants [42]:
TCAP10 4 K o +Tm ln I=A t K +T ..... .....4.10 c t t o a Where: I: rms current, in kA A: conductor cross-section, in mm2
78
A= Ik f t c
Where:
.....4.11
A: conductor cross-section, in circular mils I: rms current, in amperes Tc: current flow duration, in seconds Kf: constant from table B.1 (appendix) and using: Ta=40 oc The conductor size actually selected may be larger than that based on fusing because of factors such as:
Conductor must have strength to withstand any expected mechanical
79
Table 5.1 Data used by the companies for New-Shergat and Thoba substations Substation Item New-shergatt Thoba Earth fault current 20KA 25KA Soil resistivity 20 .m 102.7 .m Depth of burial of grid 0.8m 0.5m Main 7065m2 2 Area included within grid 202109m External 5020m2 Rod (142.4) m. long o Ambient temperature 30 C 40oC Allowable temperature in joints 250oC 450oC Voltage of operation 132kv 132kv Time duration fault current 1second 1second s (gravel top layer) 5000 .m 3000 .m
80
109m 19m 7m 202m Figure 5.1. New-Shergatt substation lay out 15m
15m
65 meter
81
4r
....5.1
Where: R: grid resistance . : soil resistivity .m, =20 .m. r: radius of circle with same area as that enclosed by grid m,
r=
202 109
=83.7 m
Table 5.4, comparison between programs values uniform and non-uniform soil for Thoba and New-Shergat substations Substation New-shergatt grid resistance Thoba substation grid resistance External grid Main grid Rod system Total grounding system resistance Our value Uniform soil 0.06237280304 1.43422246308 0.69126833235 1.84681213686 0.55308930944 Uniform soil 0.06257495483 1.43509768223 0.69046051157 1.84789197951 0.54202746664
In other words the condition that this value be less than 1 , has been satisfied.
83
Thus, this calculation shows that the grid design too more satisfy the requirements. The following table summarizes these results: Item
E touch
E step
Substation New-shergat Thoba Maximum Maximum Encountered Encountered allowable allowable 966> 198.2 885.3> 838.7 3616> 73.2 3133.9> 899.3
The following curves illustrates the voltage profile, touch and GPR voltages at certain x-direction line and constant y-coordinate 1- Program run results at 0 meter y-coordinates for New-Shergatt substation Rg: 0.06233 GPR: 1246.66115 Itotal: 1604.28518 Min touch: 46.52105 its coordinate: 128.00000 Max touch: 223.98297 its coordinate: 202.00000 Vminpoint: 1022.67818 its coordinate: 202.00000 Vmaxpoint: 1200.14010 its coordinate: 128.00000
84
Distance Meters
Figure 5.3 Voltage profile at y-coordinate of 0 Meters
Distance meters
Figure 5.4 Touch voltage at y-coordinate of 0 Meters
85
Distance Meters
Figure 5.5 Voltage profile at y-coordinate of 0 Meters
2- Program run results at 7.5 meters y-coordinates for New-Shergatt substation Min touch: 88.14394 its coordinate: 46.00000 Max touch: 274.98181 its coordinate: 198.00000 Vminpoint: 971.67934 its coordinate: 198.00000 Vmaxpoint: 1158.51721 its coordinate: 46.00
Distance Meters
Figure 5.6 Voltage profile at y-coordinate of 7.5 Meters
86
Distance Meters
Figure 5.7 Touch voltage at y-coordinate of 7.5 Meters
Distance Meters Figure 5.8 Voltage profile, GPR against distance y-coordinate 7.5 meters
87
Distance Meters
Distance meters
88
Dstance meters
Figure 5.11 Voltage profile, GPR against distance y-coordinate 100 meters
4- Program run results at 0 meters y-coordinates for Thoba substation Rg: 0.53315 GPR: 13328.70379 I total: 187.56513 I actual: 25000.00000 Min touch: 147.01068 its coordinate: 37.00000 Max touch: 1389.52641 its coordinate: 1.00000 Vminpoint: 11939.17738 its coordinate: 1.00000 Vmaxpoint: 13181.69311 its coordinate: 37.0
89
Distance Meters
Distance Meters
90
. . . . . .
Distance Meters
5- Program run results at 2.5 meters y-coordinates for Thoba substation Min touch: 52.75847 its coordinate: 37.00000 Max touch: 1156.71756 its coordinate: 69.00000 Vminpoint: 12171.98624 its coordinate: 69.00000 Vmaxpoint: 13275.94532 its coordinate: 37.00000
. . x
Distance Meters
Figure 5.15 Touch voltage against distance y-coordinate 2.5 meters
91
Distance meters
Figure 5.16 Touch voltage against distance y-coordinate 2.5 meters
. .
Distance Meters
Thoba substations. Thoba substation has three groups or grids: the main and external grids and the rod systems, each grid is calculated individually and then the total grid resistance is calculated. The same manner done with computer programs uniform and non-uniform soil.
Table 5.4 shows comparison between the outputs of uniform and non-
uniform computer programs. The soil resistivities considered equal for both upper and lower layer in case of non-uniform computer program.
The computer program has been run for an x-directed line with constant y-
coordinate, three curves obtained each time. The first curve is the voltage profile against distance and touch voltage against distance and the third voltage profile-GPR against distance.
Several runs needed for the grid at different y-coordinates for example 0.5
voltages between two points one step apart, say 0.5 or 0.75 meter.
93
Conclusions and suggestions for future works 6.1 Conclusions and discussions
The thesis has been dealt with the modeling and simulation of grounding systems of power stations and substations. There are several point concluded during the work, they are: 1. Power stations and substations grounding system have been modeled and a suitable computer program was developed and used successfully. 2. The grounding system with various configuration consisting with one or more or any combination of the elementary grounding structures such as: ground mat, ground rods, fence, metallic pipes and so on is investigated and analyzed with the aid of the developed program. The information supplied by the program includes : The resistance of the overall grounding system. The touch voltage at any selected point. The step voltage at any selected point and direction. The voltage on a selected grid of points. A plot of the voltage profile on a selected line segment. The transfer voltages on metallic structures not bonded to the grounding system, if such structures exist. 3. Two cases for the earth have been considered the first is the uniform soil and the second is the two-layer earth model. 4. The assumption of a uniform soil resistivity provided reasonable results. However, resistivity of the soil exhibits space and seasonal variations. Analysis that will take all these variations into account is practically impossible. On the other hand, the effects of variations in soil resistivity
94
96
97
References
References 1. []A. P. Meliopoulos Power system grounding and transient an introduction Marcel Dekker, Inc New York and Basel 1988 2. []J. G. Severak, W. k. Dick, T. H. Dodds, R. H. HeppeSafe substation grounding PART-I Report of substation committee working group 78.1 IEEE 80 guide for safety in AC substation. Review IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-100, No.9 September 1981 pp. 4281-4290 3. [SII]J. G. Severak, R. U. Benson, W. k. Dick, T. H. Dodds, D. L. Garret, J. E. Idzkowski, R. P. Keil, S. G. Patel, M. E. R. H. Heppe Safe substation grounding PART-II Report of substation committee working group 78.1 IEEE 80 guide for safety in AC substation. Review IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-101, No.10 October 1982 pp4006-4023 4. E. D. Sunde Earth conduction effects in transmission systems Dover Publications, New York, 1948 5. [I1]S. J. Schwarz Analytical expressions for the resistance of grounding systems AIEE, August 1954 pp1011-1016 6. [A1]Eric T. B. Gross, Richard B. Wise Grounding grid for high voltage stations, II-resistance of large rectangular plate AIEE, trans. October 1955 pp801-819 7. [B1]Eric T. B. Gross, Robert S. Hollitch Grounding grid for high voltage stations, III-resistance of rectangular grid AIEE, trans. October 1956 pp926-935 8. [H1]J. Zaborszky Efficiency of grounding grids with non-uniform soil AIEE, trans. December 1956 pp 1230-1233 9. [MR]G. F. Tagg Measurement of the resistance of an earth electrode system covering large area Proceeding IEE Transaction Vol. 116, No. 3, March 1969, pp 475-480
98
98
References
10. [A]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhdkar Ground electrode resistance measurement in non-uniform soil IEEE-trans. vol. PAS-93 No.1 Jan. 1974, pp 109-115. 11. [U]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar Optimum design of substation grounding in a two-layer earth system. Part I. Analytical study IEEE trans. vol. PAS-94, No. 2, march/April 1975 pp252-261 12. [V]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar Optimum design of substation grounding in a two-layer earth system. Part II. Comparison Between theoretical and experimental result IEEE trans. vol. PAS-94, No. 2, march/April 1975 pp262-266 13. [W]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar Optimum design of substation grounding in a two-layer earth system. Part III. Study of grounding grids performance and new electrode configuration IEEE trans. vol. PAS-94, No. 2, march/April 1975 pp267-272 14. [S]J. G. Severak Optimized grounding grid design using variable spacing technique IEEE trans. vol. PAS-95, No. 1, Jan/Feb 1975 pp362373 15. [J]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar Multi step analysis of interconnected grounding electrodes IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-95, No.1, Jan/Feb 1976, pp113-119 16. [kk]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar Transferred earth potentials in power systems IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-97, No. 1, Jan./feb.1978, pp 90-101 17. [A1]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhdkar Resistance measurement of large grounding systems IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-98, No. 6, Nov/Dec1979, pp 90-101 18. [C1]F. Dawalibi, D. mukhedkar Influence of ground rods on grounding grids IEEE trans. vol. PAS-98, No. 6, January 1979 pp20892098
99
99
References
100
19.
[E1]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhedkar Parametric Analytic of grounding grids IEEE trans. Vol.PAS-98. No.5, No.5, Sept/Oct 1979 pp1659-1668
20.
[D1]L. G. Zukerman simplified analysis of rectangular grounding grids IEEE trans. vol. PAS-98, No. 5, Sept/Oct 1979 pp1777-1785
21.
[G1]Robert J. Heppe Step potentials and body currents near grounds in two-layer earth IEEE trans. vol. PAS-98, No. 1, Jan/Feb 1979 pp45-59
22.
[R]Robert J. Heppe Computation of potential at surface above an energized grid or other electrode allowing for non-uniform current distribution IEEE Trans.Vol.PAS-98, No. 6, Nov/Dec 79 pp 1978-1987
23.
[I]D. L. Garrett, H. J. Holley Calculation of substation grounding system resistance using matrix techniques IEEE Trans. Vol.PAS-99 No.5 Sept/Oct 1980 pp 2008-2011
24.
[NC]Pierre Kouteynikoff, Numerical computation of grounding resistance of substation and towers IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-99, No.3 May/June 1980 pp957-965
25.
[Survey]F. Dawalibi, M. Bouchard, D. Mukhedkar Survey on power system grounding design practice IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-99, No.4 July/August 1980 pp1396-1405
26.
P. G. Biegelmeier, W. R. Lee New considerations on the threshold of ventricular fibrillation for AC shocks at 50-60 Hz IEE proceedings Vol.1270, No.2, pt. A, March 1980 pp103-110
27.
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, IEEE Brown book, IEEE standard-399, 1980, Industrial and commercial power system analysis IEEE New York, 1980
28.
[O]A. P. Meliopoulos, R. P. Webb, E. B. Joy Analysis of grounding system IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-100, No.3 March 1981 pp1039-1048
100
References
101
29.
[MC]F. Dawalibi, D. Mukhdkar, D. Bensted Measured and computed current densities in buried ground conductors IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS100, No.8 August 1981 pp4083-4092
30.
[D]C.J. Blattner study of driven ground rods and four point soil resistivity tests IEEE Trans. vol. PAS-101, No.8 Aug 1982 pp2837-2850
31.
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, IEEE green book, IEEE standard-142, 1982, IEEE recommended practice for grounding of industrial and commercial power systems IEEE New York 1982
32.
[N]E. B. Joy, N. Paile, T. E. Brewer, R. E. Wilson, R. P. Webb, and A. P. Meliopoulos Graphical data for ground grid analysis IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-102 No.9September 1983 pp3038-3048
33.
[B]A. P. Meliopoulos, A. D. Papalexopoulos, R. P. Webb, C. Blattner Estimation of soil parameters from driven rod measurements IEEEtrans. vol. PAS-103, No.9, sept1984 pp2579-2585
34.
[E]F. Dawalibi, C. J. Blattner Earth resistivity measurement interpretation techniques IEEE trans vol. PAS-103, No. 2, Jan 1984 pp374-382
35.
[K]K. A. Ewy, H. A. Smolkck A graphical explanation of the resistance and surface potential-calculation for grounding system in twolayer earth IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-103, No.3, March 1984 pp631-639
36.
[M]J. G. Sverak Simplified analysis of electrical gradients above a ground grid-I. How good is the present IEEE method? (A special report for WG 78.1) IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-103 No.1 Jan 1984 pp7-25
37.
[L]J. G. Sverak Simplified analysis of electrical gradients above a ground grid part-II; the beauty of improper approximation for an efficient optimization of progressively spaced grid under a dominant safety constraint IEEE Trans. Vol. PWRD-4 No.1 Jan 1989 pp272-281
101
References
102
38.
[Q]J. Nahman, D. Salamon Analytical expressions for the resistance of grounding grid in nonuniform IEEE Trans. Vol. PAS-103, No.4 April 1984 pp880-885
39.
[C]A. P. Meliopoulos, A. D. Papalexopoulos Interpretation of soil resistivity measurements: experience with the model, SOMIP IEEE trans. on power delivery, vol. PWRD-1, No. 4 October 1986 pp 142-151
40.
J. Nahman, D. Salamon Analytical expressions for the resistance of roadbeds and of combined grounding system in non-uniform soil IEEE Trans. Vol.PWRD-1 No.3 July 1986 pp 90-96
41.
E. P. Joy, R. E. Wilson Accuracy study of the ground grid analysis algorithm ibid pp97-103
42.
D. L. Garret IEEE tutorial course; practical applications of ANSI/IEEE standard-80-1986 IEEE guide for safety in substation grounding IEEE 1986
43.
[T]Peter A. Zotos Ground grid design in large industrial plant IEEE Trans. on industry applications Vol. 24, No.3 May/June 1988 pp521-525
44.
J. Robert Eaton, Edwin Cohen Electric power transmission systems Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1991
45.
Chien-Hsing Lee A. P. Meliopoulos A Comparison of IEC 479-1 and IEEE Standardd-80 on Grounding Safety Criteria IEEE Trans. Vol. 23, No. 5, 1999. pp 612-621
46.
Dr. F. J. Alazzwi, Dr. Q. A. Majboor, Dr. M. T. Lazim Earthing system A 4-day course October 5-8 1999
47.
Tercel training staff Earthing systems version 1.2-October 1999 Researched and compiled by Tercel training staff.
48.
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory ES&H Directives (PPPL) Isolation of Hazards section 2 Chapter 4 www-local.pppl.gov/services/ support services
102
References
103
49.
AEMC Instruments Understanding Ground Resistance Testing Chauvin Arnoux, Inc. sales@aemc.com www.aemc.com
50.
SPRECHER ENERGIE New-Shergatt earthing calculation Sprecher Energie for power distribution projects Switzerland 1-4-1989
51.
SAE Societa Anoninma elettrificazione S.P.A. Milano Thoba substation Grounding system calculation description SAE Societa Anoninma elettrificazione S.P.A. Milano 12-3-1985
103
Appendix
A Derivation of equations of tables 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3
VDF between an x-directed conductor segment and a point (x,y,z) Consider the conductor segment 1 illustrated in figure A.1 and an arbitrary point (x,y,z) in the earth. Our objective will be to compute the voltage at point (x,y,z), due to the flow of current I1, neglecting all other sources of electric current (i.e., neglecting the presence of other conductor segments). The electric current I1 is assumed to be uniformly distributed on the surface of the conductor. Typically, the radius of the conductor is small (less than 0.5 inch). In this case it is reasonable to assume that the source of this current is an ideal line source located on the axis of the conductor segment. The line current density is I1/2L1 (amperes per meter). The electric current of an infinitesimal length of the line source, dxs, is I1dxs/2L1. The contribution of this current to the voltage at point (x,y,z) is
I 1 dx s 1 1 + dV ( x, y, z )= 2 8 L1 ( x x ) 2 + A 2 ( x x s ) 2 + A+ s Where
2 A =( y y1 ) 2 +( z z1 ) 2
Figure A.1 illustrates the geometry of the infinitesimal current source and the point of interest (x,y,z). For simplicity, the conductor segment length will be denoted as 2L and the current as I. The voltage at point (x,y,z) results from the contributions of all infinitesimal current sources, that is,
V ( x, y, z )= dV ( x, y, z )
I = 8 L
1 1 + 2 2 2 ( x x s ) 2 + A+ xs = x1 L ( x x s ) + A
x1 L
dx s
104
Appendix
z y x
2 r = ( x xs ) 2 + A
(x,y,z)
(xs,y1,z1)
Dxs
(x1,y1,z1)
Figure A.1 Illustration of conductor segment represented with a line current source of constant current density.
The integral above is evaluated with the aid of the following indefinite integral:
(t 2 u 2 ) The result is:
dt
=ln(t + t 2 u 2 )
V ( x, y , z ) =
I [ f 1 ( x x1 + L, A ) f 1 ( x x1 L, A ) + 8 L
f 1 ( x x1 + L, A+ ) f1 ( x x1 L, A+ )] Where:
...A.1
f1 (t ,u )=ln(t + t 2 +u 2 ) ... A.2 Comparison of the derived formula to the one defining the VDF yields VDF = 1 [ f 1 ( x x1 + L, A ) f1 ( x x1 L, A ) 8 L f1 ( x x1 + L, A+ ) f1 ( x x1 L, A+ )] . A.3 In summary, equation A.3 provides the voltage distribution factor (otherwise known as transfer resistance) between a conductor segment of length 2L, oriented parallel to the x-axis, and a point (x,y,z).
105
Appendix
VDF between two x-directed conductor segments
Consider the configuration of two conductor segments as illustrated in figure 2.10. The coordinates of the centers of the two conductor segments are (x1,y1,z1) and (x2,y2,z2), respectively. The lengths of the segment are 2L1 and 2L2,respectively. The total electric current of conductor segment 1 is I1. the flow of the current I1 will transfer a potential to the conductor segment 2. Let this potential be V2. Our objective is to compute this voltage. A reasonably accurate way to compute this voltage is to compute the average voltage along the centerline of the conductor segment 2, assuming that the second conductor does not exist. The coordinates of a point on the centerline of conductor segment 2 are (x,y2,z2), where x varies in the interval [x2L2xx2+L2]. The voltage at point (x,y2,z2) is given from equation A.3
V 2 ( x, y 2 , z 2 ) = Where:
I1 [ f 1 ( x x1 + L1 , B ) f1 ( x x1 L1 , B ) 8 L1 f1 ( x x1 + L1 , B+ ) f1 ( x x1 L1 , B+ )]
1 V2 = 2 L2
x2 L2
x = x2 L2
V2 ( x, y 2 , z 2 )dx
.. A.4
The integral above is evaluated with the aid of the following indefinite integral: The result is
f1 (t, u) = t ln(t +
t2 + u2 ) t2 + u2
I1 V2 = [ f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 + L2 , B )+ f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 + L2 , B + ) 16 L1 L2 f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 L2 , B ) f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 L2 , B + ) f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 + L2 , B ) f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 + L2 , B+ ) + f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 L2 , B )+ f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 L2 , B+ )] A.5
106
Appendix
Where
f 2 (t ,u )=t ln(t + t 2 +u 2 ) t 2 +u 2 ..A.6 Comparison of the equations above with the one defining the VDF yields
I1 VDF = [ f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 + L2 , B )+ f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 + L2 , B+ ) 16 L1 L2 f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 L2 , B ) f 2 ( x 2 x1 + L1 L2 , B + ) f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 + L2 , B ) f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 + L2 , B + )
+ f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 L2 , B )+ f 2 ( x 2 x1 L1 L2 , B+ )] A.7
In summary, equation A.7 provides the voltage distribution factor (otherwise known as transfer resistance) between two x-directed conductor segments of length 2L1and 2L2 respectively.
VDF between an x-directed and y-directed conductor segment
The configuration of two conductor segments, one x-directed and the other y-directed, is illustrated in figure A.2. Let the x-directed conductor segment be of length 2L1 and centered at the point (x1,y1,z1). The y-directed conductor segment is of length 2L2 and centered at the point (x2,y2,z2). The total electric current of the x-directed conductor segment is I1. Our objective is to compute the voltage transferred to the y-directed segment due to the current of the x-directed segment. Again, a reasonably accurate way to compute the average voltage along the centerline of the y-directed conductor segment assuming that the y-directed conductor does not exist. The coordinates of a point on the centerline of y-directed conductor are (x2,y,z2), where y varies in the interval [y2-L2yy2+L2]. The voltage at point (x2,y,z2), due to the current of the x-directed conductor is given with an appropriate application of equation A.3: V 2 ( x 2 , y , z 2 )= I1 [ f 1 ( x 2 x1 + L1 ,C ) f 1 ( x 2 x1 L1 ,C ) 8 L1
+ f1 ( x 2 x1 + L1 ,C + ) f1 ( x 2 x1 L1 ,C + )]
107
Appendix
z y x (x2,y2,z2) (x1,y1,z1)
Figure A.2 Tow earth embedded conductor segments (x- and y-directed).
y = y2 L2
V2 ( x 2 , y, z 2 )dy .A.8
The integral above is evaluated with the aid of the following indefinite integral:
2 2 2 f 1 (t ,u ,v)= ln(t + t +u +v )du
1 t +u +
t 2 +u 2 + v 2 ) v
Applying the integral above for each one of the four terms involved in equation A.8 yields I1 V2 = [ f 3 ( x 2 x1 + L1 , y 2 y1 + L2 , z 2 z1 ) 16 L1 L2 f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, y2 y1 L2 , z2 z1 ) + f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, y2 y1 + L2 , z2 + z1 ) f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, y2 y1 L2 , z2 + z1 ) f 3 ( x2 x1 + L1, y2 y1 + L2 , z2 z1 ) + f 3 ( x2 x1 L1, y2 y1 L2 , z2 z1 ) f 3 ( x2 x1 L1, y2 y1 + L2 , z2 + z1 ) + f 3 ( x2 x1 L1, y2 y1 L2 , z2 + z1 )].......................................................... A.9
The voltage distribution factor (VDF) (or transfer resistance) equals the voltage V2 divided by the current I1.
108
Appendix
Self-VDF of an x-directed conductor
The self-VDF is defined as the ratio of the voltage rise of an earth embedded conductor segment to the total electric current flowing into earth from the outside surface of the conductor. The computation of the self-VDF requires consideration of the finite diameter of the conductor segment. Specifically, as in our previous discussions, the conductor segment is modeled as a line current source located on the axis of the conductor. A constant current density along the line current source is assumed. Then the voltage of the conductor segment is computed as the average voltage on the cylindrical surface of the conductor segment. Because the conductor segment length is typically much larger than the radius, the two end surfaces of the segment are ignored. Let the length of the conductor segment be 2L, its radius (r), and the total current I. The current density of the line source is
I 2L Consider an infinitesimal cylindrical surface of the conductor segment at J= location (x) as illustrated in figure A.3. An infinitesimal length dxs of the line current source is also shown. This length represents an infinitesimal current source of current Idxs/2L. Now consider a point (x,y,z) located on the infinitesimal cylindrical surface. The voltage at this point due to the infinitesimal current source is dV ( x, y, z )= Where:
A+ = ( y y1 ) 2 +( z + z1 ) 2 . Assuming that the conductor is buried in earth at depth much greater than
Idx s 1 1 + 8 L ( x x) 2 + a ( x x) 2 + A 2 s s +
....A.10
109
Appendix
2 A + 2 z1
z y x dx(x,y1,z1)
(x,y,z)
(x1,y1,z1) dx(x,y1,z1)
dxs
Figure A.3 Illustration of an x-directed conductor segment. (Conductor radius is enlarged to illustrate the analysis procedure.)
The voltage at point (x,y,z) will be equal to the sum of the contributions from all infinitesimal sources:
x1 L
V ( x, y , z ) =
dV ( x, y, z)
V ( x, y, z ) =
I [ f 1 ( x x1 + L , a ) f 1 ( x x1 L , a ) 8 L
+ f 1 ( x x1 + L, z1 2 )+ f 1 ( x x1 L, z1 2 ) ..A.11 Where the function f1 is defined with equation (A.2). The average voltage around the infinitesimal cylindrical strip of figure A.3 will be equal to V(x,y,z) since from equation A.11 it is apparent that the voltage V(x,y,z) depends only on the coordinate (x). Thus V(x)=V(x,y,z) Now the voltage elevation of the conductor is computed as the average voltage along all infinitesimal surfaces:
V1 =
Appendix
Where the function f2 is defined with equation A.6. Note that f2(0,a)=-a, f 2 (0, z1 2 )= z1 2 . The self-VDF of the conductor segment is computed as the ratio of the voltage V1 to the current I:
I VDF = [ f 2 ( 2 L , a ) f 2 ( 2 L , a ) 2 a 16 L2 + f 2 (2 L, z1 2 )+ f 2 (2 L, z1 2 )2 z1 2 ) ...A.14 In summary, equation (A.14) provides the self-VDF (otherwise known as
B Meterial constants
Table B.1 material constants material Copper, soft drown Copper, soft drown Copper, soft drown Copper, soft drown Copper, hard drown Copper, hard drown Copper, hard drown Copper, hard drown Copper-clad, steel 40% Copper-clad, steel 40% Copper-clad, steel 40% Copper-clad, steel 40% Copper-clad, steel 30% Copper-clad, steel 30% Copper-clad, steel 30% Copper-clad, steel 30% Aluminum 61% Aluminum alloy 5005 Aluminum alloy 6201 Aluminum-clad steel 20% Copper-clad rod, 20% Steel Galvanized steel (zinc) Stainless steel, 304 Tm 1083 450 350 250 1084 450 350 250 1084 450 350 250 1084 450 350 250 657 660 660 660 1083 1300 419 1400 kf 7.01 9.18 10.10 11.65 7.06 9.27 10.20 11.77 10.46 13.74 15.13 17.47 12.08 15.87 17.46 20.17 12.13 12.38 12.45 19.90 15.39 23.32 28.97 30.05
111