TP TethnosxF. RESEARCH SCHEME ON POWER EVOLVING DESIGN OF THE EARTH MAT FOR A SUBSTATION SITE OF LIMITED AREA AND HIGH RESISTIVITY TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 103 CENTRAL BOARD OF IRRIGATION AND POWER Malcha Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi - 110 021 NEW DELHI JANUARY 1995EVOLVING DESIGN OF THE EARTH MAT FOR A SUBSTATION SITE OF LIMITED AREA AND HIGH RESISTIVITY by PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD PUNJAB ENGINEERING COLLEGE CAMPUS CHANDIGARH TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 103 RESEARCH SCHEME ON POWER CENTRAL BOARD OF IRRIGATION AND POWER Malcha Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi-110 021 NEW DELHI JANUARY 1996CONTENTS FOREWORD PAVE YN 10. Introduction Literature Study Laboratory Test Effect of Moisture Content Development of ‘High Resistivity Area Model” Investigation of High Resistivity Area at Ferozepur Experimental Study Computer Study on Interconnection of Grounding Grid . With a Satellite Grid Conclusions Research Papers Published References 39 41 42 42FOREWORD _ Earthing is essential wherever electricity is generated, transformed or used, to ensure safety and proper operation of the electrical system. As is well-known the earthing systems are intended to protect equipment and personnel in around the substations from the dangerous over-voltages. An effective earthing system depends on various factors like resistivity of surface layer of soil, duration and ‘magnitude of fault current, maximum safe current that a human body can tolerate and the permissible earth potential rise that may take place due to the fault current. Earthing in a substation is the effective means of obtaining and maintaining low resistance value for providing easy path for the flow of fault currents and unbalance current flowing through neutral. Design of proper equipment for electrical substation grounding is important from the safety consideration of personnel and equipment. However, the existing design methods based on established practices are not able to keep the mesh and step potential within safe limits particularly where itis not possible to acquire large areas for the substations and the soil resistivity is very high. Such situations are going to be many in the foreseeable future when the land availability for the substations is going to be scarce because of other developments near the load centres. Keeping this in view, a project entitled, "Evolving Design of The Earth Mat for a Substation Site of Limited Area and High Resistivity" was assigned to Research Station of Punjab State Electricity Board under CBI&P’s sponsored RSOP for carrying out the study so as to evolve a suitable design for the equipment in such situations so that mesh and step potentials are within tolerable limits. This Technical Report is a useful guide for design and, construction organisations of electrical utilities who are facing the problems of limited available space with high resistivity earth, especially for GIS locations. ‘The Central Board of Irrigation and Power expresses its grateful thanks to the Research Station of Punjab State Electricity Board for carrying out the study on this project in a commendable way. le (C.V. J. Varma) Member Secretary Central Board of Irrigation and PowerEVOLVING DESIGN OF THE EARTH MAT FOR A SUBSTATION SITE OF LIMITED AREA AND HIGH RESISTIVITY 1, INTRODUCTION 1.1 This research problem was allotted by the Central Board of Irrigation and Power, New Delhi under Research Scheme on Power during the year 1991 for two years as period of study. Rs. 3.57 lakhs was the allotted funds. The work on this problem commenced on 1st January 1991 and was completed on 31 December 1992. ‘The primary requirements for designing a grounding system are mainly the station layout plan (Ghowing all the major equipment and structures) and soil resistivity data of the site under consideration. 12 The main objective behind the safe grounding system design is to provide easy and shortest path to the flow of current into the carth under normal and fault conditions without exceeding the operating and ‘equipment limits and adversely affecting the continuity cof supply), Secondly, to ensure that a person present in the station yard is not exposed to danger of critical electric shock. ‘The circumstances that make electric shock accident possible are: (@)_ Relatively high fault current to ground in relation to the area of grounding system and its resistance to remote earth. (b) Soil resistivity and distribution of ground current of such magnitude as results in high potential gradient at points at the carth surface. (©) Presence of an individual at such a point, time ‘and position at the time of occurrence of fault that the body is bridging two points of high potential difference. (@) Absence of sufficient contact resistance or other series resistance to limit current through the body to a safe value under the above circumstances. (©) Long duration of the fault and body contact and hence of the flow of current through human body 0 as to cause harm at the given current intensity. Unless proper precautions are taken to design the ‘grounding system, the maximum potential gradients along the earth surface may be of sufficient magnitude during ‘ground fault conditions as to endanger a person in the area, Moreover, dangerous potential difference may develop between structures or equipment frames that are grounded with respect to nearby earth surface. At stations where soil resistivity is high and arca for ground electrode is limited, it is difficult to limit the grid potential rise to a reasonable value. The value of ‘ground resistance is usually required to be of the order of 1.0 ohm or less. To obtain such a low ground resistance for an earthing system/located in a limited area station like G.LS. may indeed be impossible. In a soil of resistivity 1,000 ohm-m, to obtain a resistance of 1.0 ohm, ‘even by using a very closely spaced mesh which may be considered equivalent to a plate the earthing system ‘would have to cover an area of 196400 sqm. Such a large area is generally not available at the site of G.LS. In such situations it is difficult to control surface ‘gradients within grid area as well as around it To control such situations some possible ‘solutions are suggested and are given as under”): (1) Making a combination of horizontal grid and a number of long vertical electrodes penetrating the lower strata of soils. (2) Connecting an existing adjacent grounding grid to the newly designed grid. @) A predominant use of remote ground electrodes, and drilled ground wells. (4) Chemical treatment of soils or use of bentonite clay for backfilling. ? (5) Use of counterpoise wire mats. (©) Connecting O/H ground wires to the grounding system considering its effect while designing. (7) Use of concrete encased electrodes. (8) Barring access to limited areas where it may be impractical to eliminate the possibility of excessive potential differences during a fault. (9) Burrying the grid perimeter ground conductor outside the fence line.‘At some stations, a number of different approaches as discussed earlier have been tried for obtaining low ground resistance. Some of these have proved useful. Some other measures which can be employed are extending the earthing system to include the area of residential colony near the station, shifting the high voltage switchyard some distance away from the station where a large tract of land is available, to install the grid in a water reservoir, to make steel liner of penstock of 1 hydro power generating station a part of the ground electrode, etc. One method of obtaining low ground resistance is to connect the station grounding grid with another ground electrode. ‘The second electrode which is located some distance away from the station is connected to the station grounding grid by means of underground or overbead tie wires. 13. Research Station of Punjab State Electricity Board thas developed and fabricated an apparatus which represents truc replica of two layer soil model. This apparatus consists of two number galvanised sheet tanks (named as upper tank and lower tank). The bottom of upper tank is made of ecrylic sheet having driven 10,000 vertical copper pins into it with their ends out on both the sides, Upper layer medium represents P, and lower layer medium as Pz. Plain tap water is used as a conducting medium and common salt is used as ‘conducting agent for increasing the conductivity of the ‘medium. There is no leakage of electrolyte from one tank into the other. ‘The electrical circuit is completed the conducting Pins only. Different values of K Py-Pt ic. | poppy | can be obtained by changing the conductivity of medium in the two tanks. ‘The performance of the apparatus has been checked by testing the behaviour of vertical ground rod in homogeneous as well as non-homogencous media prepared in the tanks. The percent surface potential profile plotted for different values of ‘K” have been compared with the results obtained on computer by Dr. JK. Arora, Professor Electrical Engineering Depart- ment, Punjab Engineering College, Chandigarh. 14 Use of Long Vertical Rods Penetrating the Lower Soil Horizontal grid conductors are most effective in reducing the danger of high step and touch voltage on the earth surface provided that grid is buried upto a depth usually 0.3 m to 0.5 m below the ground surface while sufficiently long ground clectrodes stabilize the performance of a combined system. Use of long vertical tlectrode is advantageous where upper layer of soil is of higher resistivity. Ground rods penetrating the lower resistivity soils are far more effective in dissipating fault ‘currents where multi-layers nil is encountered. For many space limited installations, this arrangement is most appropriate. To achieve this condition, extra long vertical electrodes or ground wells can be added to the ‘grounding system. . The installation of large number of ong vertical. ground electrodes will considerably moderate steep increase of the protential gradient near the peripheral meshes. ‘The experimental study with scale model grounding grid using different lengths of vertical ground rods and ‘with various electrodes groupings in different ‘non-homogeneous conditions of the electrolytic medium ‘can be carried out in the PSEB Research Station and the standard relations can be developed which can further be helpful in conducting the field study on actual grounding grids. 1.5 Connecting an existing grounding grid to a satellite eri. 1.6 Use of Counterpoise Mesh (Wire Mat) Where soil resistivity is high, the grounding resistance can be decreased by embedding the grounding ‘grid in deep soils with the result that the surface potential ‘also decreases and mesh potential rises. In order to equalise the gradient field near the surface, a fabricated mat made of steel wire is embedded ‘ata depth 0.05 t00.15 m below the earth surface overlying, the main grounding grid which is installed at a depth Detween 0.5 to 1.5 m. a ‘The counterpoise mesh can only be used if some ‘mathematical relation is developed for the percentage decrease in grounding resistance as a function of quantity of steel wire used for fabricating the counterpoise mesh. ‘The other effects on account of potential gradients etc. hhave also to be verified experimentally. This study can also be possible with the use of two-layer soil model. 1.7 Effect of O/H Ground Wires and Neutral Conductors’ connections to the Station Ground The field trials are needed to be performed to observe the effect of connecting O/H ground wires and neutral conductors to the station ground mat. “Where this situation exists the dissipation of thecurrent through the O/H ground wires or neutral ‘conductors can be taken into consideration in the design of the ground grid. It is obvious that connecting the station ground to the O/H ground wire or neutral conductors would cause the hazards at tower bases, while lossening it at the substation. This is due to the fact that each of the nearby tower will share voltage rise of the substation grid mat. ‘On the other hand the effect of connecting station system will decrease the magnitude of gradients near the station arid, 18 Use of concrete encased electrodes, steel reinforcement in concrete structures, penstock, tunnel linings reinforcement in hydro clectric station has been done in case of Bhabha Vidyut Yojna in Himachal Pradesh. Much of methematical work and experimental study is involved in this method particularly at the locations where the wholé power house complex has to ‘be constructed underground. 2.0 LITERATURE STUDY 2. Soll as a Grounding Medium ‘The behaviour of ground rod buried in soil can be analysed by means of the circuit as shown in Figure 2.1. ‘Most soils behave both as a conductor having resistance (R) and as a dielectric (d). Except for high frequency steep front wave penetrating a very resistive soil material the charging current is negligible in comparison to the leakage current and the earth can be represented by a pure resistance.) 22. Seasonal Variation in Electrode Resistance Even if the soil is homogeneous, its resistivity does not remain constant for all the times. Due to change in ‘seasonal conditions of the area, the resistivity changes. Similarly, the grounding resistance of the electrode driven in earth (homogencous soil) also changes. ‘The variation in electrode resistance which is generally observed in different times during period of one year is shown in Figure 2.2. 23. Effect of Current Magnitude on Resistivity of Soil Soil resistivity in the vicinity of ground electrode is affected by the current flowing from the electrode to the surrounding soil. Current density of the order of 200 Amps/m? for one second sufficiently evaporates the soil ‘moisture and increases its resistivity to a greater value. In case the soil resistivity increases due to loss of water content, the moisture content has to be maintained by sprinkling water on the earth’s surface in such a way that the whole quantity of water is absorbed by the soil. 24 ‘Design of Earthing Electrodes ‘The earthing electrodes upto 33 kV distribution systems are usually of a minimum size of MS. rod 20 ‘mm diameter or G.l. pipe 25 to 40 mm diameter and 2.5 to 3 m long (with due consideration for mechanical ‘and corrosion) buried in the ground at a depth of 0.5 to 0.75 m fromthe ground level. ‘Deep and long ‘driven electrodes have been found to be very useful in 24.1 Grouping of Electrodes ‘At places of high resistivity where the grounding resistance obtained with the arrangement given in para 24 exceeds the prescribed limit, the use of multiple clectrodes is recommended. In case of two electrodes, the inter-connection should be made with M.S. Strip of the same size as the grounding conductor. The distance between two electrodes should not be less than twice the length of electrode. In case three electrodes are used, ‘an equilateral triangle form should be used with sides pparellel for practical purposes and the total earth fesistance will thus be less than half or 1/3rd of a single rod earth resistance. Empirical relations for various ‘electrodes, connected in parallel, are given in the form ff equations with reference to the earth resistance of single rod as given below.) (a) Two rodes in parallel: Resistance of two rods in parallel _ 1+x Resistance of onerod. ‘a’ being the distance between the two parallel rods. “F being the length of rod and ‘a’ is the diameter of rod. (b) Three rods in parallel arranged in the form of equilateral triangle of side d Resistance of three rods in alte Resistance of one rod 3 (©) Rods arranged in a hollow or solid square are shown in Figure 23.Figure 2.1: Soil Model Ath rte " L: aya Tes aan wm : ech Rata ° o Oo o . °o ° ° Cret© ° ° ° ° ° ® tt Red npr nate square 1 Rods pal Seapets Figure 2.3: Earth ElectrodesIf N is the total number of rods, the relationship is expressed as Resistance of N rods in parallel _ 1+ Kx Resistance ofonerod ON Where K is constant and dependent on the number of rods. The values of K are given in Table 2.1, To determine the cir ground rod depth grounding nomogram given in Figure 2.4 can be used. In general, number of rods or pipes may be connected in parallel and the resistance is then practically proportional to the reciprocal of number of electrodes ‘used so long as cach is situated away from other at a distance not less than twice the length of electrodes.) Interconnections between the electrodes of a multiple electrode system should be made at a depth of 05 to 0.75 m from the ground level. [At locations where the multiple driven electrodes system can not be adopted because of space limitations, ‘or due to some other reasons, the treatment of the soil is desirable. For example, to obtain a grounding resistance of 20 ohms in soil with resistivity of 100 obm.-m. an 18 mm diameter MS. rod must be driven 6 m deep. The values indicated on the nomogram are based on the assumption that the soil is homogeneous and therefore, has uniform resistivity. How to Use Grounding Nomogram 1. Select required resistance on R Scale. 2. Select apparent resistivity on P Scale. 3. Lay straight edge on R and P Scale and allow to intersect with K scale. 4, Mark K Scale point. 5. Lay straight edge on K Scale point and dia. Scale and allow to intersect with D Scale. 6. Point on D Scale will be rod depth required for resistance on R Scale. 24.2 Computation of Potential Around a Driven Rod at Earth Surface In practice, rods or wire electrodes having a relatively small cross-section compared with the length, are preferred. A rod driven into the ground can be segmented with a good approximation (as shown in Figure 2.5) into large number N of nearly spherical elements and one segment is given as‘) 1 a= (2) N Each segment is feeding a current //N ito the ground. If ¥ is the distance from any clement to a point at the surface of the earth and « is the angle from y to the axis of the rod, the small diagram in Figure 2.5 shows that: sina = yS¢ (22) ‘The potential dv of every element is given by equation: _ pln av ‘any wn(23) By substitution of the distance 97 from equation (22) and ‘dP from equation (2.1). pap esas o Gxi' gina ipl fewer ra Bish Se mph tmalenb> 09 ‘The current density in the ground is assumed to be uniform. ‘The electric potential in the symmetry plane of the driven rod thus is dependent on only four parameters, namely: resistivity p of the ground, current J flowing into the rod, its length / within the ground and the angle of vision between the axis of the rod and the distance from the bottom of the rod to the point under consideration ‘at the surface. Angle f is a variable parameter., For distance X of the point considered from the axis of the rod, the logrithm in equation (2.5) is simplified te: Lae ct8/2) = Lone (5 ) = cosp =! 26) and the potential is Vas =p I/2ax 27) (On the other hand for the surface of the rod where ‘the potential V is identical with the voltage E of the clectrode, for a small radius ‘a’ as compared to length / Ref, Figure 26 cot Bi2 = 2a Therefore Raa Lf Lp, (28) 7" 2xt ()Resistivity Rod depth rid R = Dia 3 ot : » xO 0 g 5 » 130 se « wy * 3 = 2 z 6 = we % : . é "| : F Select required resistance on R scale Figure 2.4: Grounding Nomogram Figure 25: Development of Potential around a Rod ElectrodeShape of the rod for determining W/a is of minor significance since it forms only the argument of a logarithm. The length | of the rod is of major importance because the ground resistance is nearly inversely proportional to the length. 243 Multiple Rod Electrodes: Multiple driven rods connected in parallel are shown in Figure 2.7. ‘The voltage at teach of the electrodes is given by the sum of all the potentials produced by the rod considered and all the other rods. For rod number one, for example the voltage is y= 3 [ Ui Lowe Cot By/2) + (la Loge CotBr/2) | + Loge Cot B3/2) (2.9) For the sake of simplicity the resistivity of soil and Jength of all the rods have been taken as uniform. As ‘many equations of this type can be developed as there are rods in the ground, the angle "B” signifying always the angle of vision from the bottom of each rod towards the top of the rod considered as seen in Figure 2.7. “The first cotangent of equation (29) refers to the Bienen tetera ieee 2.10(@)} ed 2.1008] Further cotangents which refer to the other rods can be expressed by the ratio of the length / of rod to a distance Sy, cut off by the angle /2 on the distance ‘Sq between the rods thus from equation 2.10(b). =i Cot fy 2 = 1/5 Cot By /2 = US, 10(b)] If the rods are connected by zero resistance and are located symmetrically with respect to one another, the Ej =—)=E;=E Ty = y= Tyomlin (2411) Therefore with use of equation 2.10(b) all the ‘equations under 2.9 take the form: Bae ( (2.42) For each case equation (2.12) can be evaluated gaily but three significant examples may be considered in detail For large ratio Sil, with the rods distant from one another, evidently 8,/2 = 45° and $, = 1. Thus all the quotients //S = 1, and the combined resistance a Poe) eee es a-F-() f=.(7) (23) In this case ohmic value is reduced in inverse proportion to the number of parallel rods. For samil ratio S/L with’ the rod close together, the angle B are small therefore always Sq = Sq/2 as shown in Figure 2.7. Hence; if the number of electrodes ‘n’ is placed under the logarithm the resistance becomes: 21 = Pie ) fies (2.14) Inthe right hand term the ‘n’the root of the product of the distances between all the electrodes and the first electrode including the redius of the first electrode is expressed by the geometric mean distance. ABNNGS253 54 oe (215) ‘A comparison between equations (2.14) and (2.8) reveals that the sum of several or many driven rod electrodes in close proximity act as if there were only one rod of radius A in Table 2.2 is evaluated for three simple examples. Since A is.under the logarithm in equation (2.14) the total ground resistance of such closely spaced electrodes is diminished only slightly with increased number of electrodes. For medium ratio S/I = 1where the rods are driven at a distance equal to their length, evidently fy = 45° and thus cot f,/2= 24, For example if n = 3, the characteristic part of equation 2.12 becomes: 1/3 Loge[/5 24) .24)] and for values of the resistance R (2.16) m,a = 25cm,P = 1° Ohm = m 2 rage (480) . 24)? ] = 70 Ohms. If the rods were far apart, S = a the resistance would be 163 = 53° Ohms. Thus three rods with separation equal to their length experience a mutual influence which increases their resistance by 32%. 25 Effect of Rod Beds In order to obtain low ground resistance in highTABLE 21 Number of rods inside ‘Total Number Value of a square of rods ofA Hollow square 2 4 27071 3 8 42583, 4 R 53939 5 16 60072 6 2 6.4633 7 2 6.8363 8 2 71479 9 2 74195 2 % 7.6551 Solid square a 9 58917 4 16 8.5545 5 25 14371 6 36 14.0650 7 9 16.8933 5 4 19.5003 9 a1 22.3069 10 100 24.9587 Table 22 Geometric Mean Distances for Parallel-Rod Electrodes n= Arrangement Geometric mean distance 2 aves 3 5 a. ave a= bWias?Figure 2.6: Single Electrode . Dimension Figure 2.7: Multiple Electrodes Figure 2.8: Extended Bed of Vertical Electrodesresistivity soil, itis often necessary to arrange for quite a number of driven rods placed in lines or over an extended area. An extended bed of vertical ground rods is shown in Figure 2.8. In this the inner rods carry lower current than the outer rods due to the mutual influence of the surrounding'rods. In every case the application of the proper number of equations (2.9) gives the correct, solution for the current distribution and the total ohmic value of the ground resistance. Even unequal lengths of the rods and different resistivity around the individual rods can be taken into account. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY (LAB. TESTS) 3.0 LABORATORY TEST EFFECT OF MOISTURE CONTENT 3.1 A mini-model was prepared and used for carrying out laboratory tests on high resistivity area. In this mini-model stone powder of 2600 ohm.m. resistivity was used as a soil medium. In a known quantity of dry stone powder, water was added from 1% to 100% and the resistivity measured with different percent moisture content. The measured values are plotted in Figure 3.1. From the figure, it is seen that the rate of decrease in resistivity is very high between 1% to 10% of moisture. On further increasing the water content, the rate of decrease in resistivity is only nominal. It is thus seen that if moisture content can be maintained at about 10 per cent, a low value of resistivity is obtained, even in high resistivity soils. The moisture in soil increases the solubility of naturally occurring salts in the soil which results in better ‘earth contact and improves the soil conductivity. 32 Artificial Treatment of Soll In close texture soils, artificial treatment such as Sodium-Chloride, Magnesium Sulphate etc. may be effective over a period of many years. However, it is recommended that annual or biannual measurements of ‘earth resistivity should be made to find out if additional treatment is needed because the salts are gradually carried away by natural drainage towards the adjacent untreated soil. In using artificial treatment, the possible corrosive effect of the salt on the ground electrodes and connections and possible contamination of environment should be considered. 3.21 Laboratory Test with Salt Content To determine the effect of salt content in plain 10 water as well as in different kinds of soils, laboratory tests were carried out. In mini-model tank of 1m x Im x 0.5m size, the medium to be tested for its resistivity was filled. The quantity of medium by volume was 0.4 cum. and the concentrated saline water (NaC; + Water) in percent of the volume of the medium was added and the rate of decrease in resistivity measured.) 322 Another test was carried out on plain tap water having resistivity of 585 Ohmm. The variation in resistivity is shown in Figure 32. Further, in place of tap water, the different soils were tested. One medium ‘was stonedust of resistivity of 590 Ohm-m. and other was loamy clay of resistivity 165 Ohm-m. ‘The moisture content of both the materials was 5% before testing. Concentrated saline water was added to the media by pouring it through a number of vertical holes drilled in it, The variation in resistivity wat. the percent of salt content is shown by curves plotted in Figure 3.3. 33 Effect of Interconnection of two Grids (Model Test) 3.3.1 Two number single mesh square grids of 10 em x 10 cm size were fabricated and buried in soil resistivity of 8883 Ohm-m and 185.0 Ohm-m separately. ‘The experimental set up is shown in Figure 3.4. The grids were tested for their resistance individually and by interconnecting them with the help of insulated as well as bare copper conductor. The results are given in Table 3.1. The tests reveal that on inter-connecting the grids, the grounding resistance of the combined systems becomes less than that of the either grids. By making underground inter-connections with bare conductor the grounding resistance further decreases. 4 3.4 Experiment on Scale Model to Evaluate the Effect of Electrode Length in Combination with Ground Mat 3.4. Scale model study was carried out on a grounding grid as shown in Figure 3.5. ‘A model grid was fabricated with 0.15 mm diameter copper wire. Plain tap water of 67,584 Ohm-m. resistivity was used as electrolytic medium. Grid resistance and surface potential measurements were made with following conditions: (® A grid without any rod electrode.Soil resistivity (Ohm-m) 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Figure 3.4: te Variation in Seil Resistivity with Moisture Content Moisture content (Percent) Figure 3.4 : Experimental Set- ‘of Two Grids. “ ] se s ivy = xt z L i Stone dust tested in J ockeritci Cdere ee . model high resistivity ee eee le mea Figure 3.2: Variation of Resistivity of Plain Water with Salt Content wo Stone dust 5% Meishre j oe Ose Fins 0 Leamy a0 5% soiture m LINO rasan Mista oa 100 3 Pesala PR RSW Percent of satt {OCs water} Figure 33: Effect of Saline Water ‘on Sei Resistivity p of Interconnection(iA grid with 9 No. of electrodes each of 1 em. Tength of copper wire of the same size as that of the grid. (ii)_A grid with 9 electrodes each of 24 em. length of same size as is shown in (ji). 3.42 Measurement of Grid Resistance Grid resistance, as given in the Table 32, was ‘measured by immersing the quarter grid models at depth of 5.16 cm, using fall of potential method. The test current of 20m Amp. was injected to the grids A, B and C. The values of resistance of the three grids are calculated by multiplying the current injected to the potential difference measured between potential probe ‘and remote worth (in this case the electrolytic tank wall ‘acts as remote earth). Calculations of grid resistance in respect of three grids (ABC) are given in Annexure-3.1. From the above experiment in which arca of grounding grid was kept constant and 9 number electrodes each length 1 cm. were added (1 cm. length corresponds to 3 m in actual grid) the percentage decrease in resistance of actual grid comes out to be 7.5. ‘On further increasing the length of electrode from 1 em to 2.4 em. (2.4 em. length corresponds to 7.2 metres in actual grid) an appreciable decrease in percent resistance of the order of 36% is obtained. Itis, therefore found out that at the location where soil resistivity is high and area available is limited, the grounding resistance can be minimised to the desired level by using lengthy vertical ground electrodes in ‘combination with the ground mat. 343 Measurement of Surface Potentials Surface potential measurements have been made on the three different grid models A, B & C as referred above. The absolute values of surface potential are shown in Annexure 32 (a, b, 6). Percent Surface Potential From the absolute values of the surface potential ‘measurement in respect of grid A, B and C the percent potential ws. the input potential have been calculated. ‘The percent surface potential is plotted against the distance from the point (0, 0) co-ordinates of the model grid. To assess the dispersion of potential in all the directions looking from the point above the point of ‘current injection, the percent surface potential curves, are draw in horizontal, vertical and diagonal planes as shown in Figures 3.6 to 3.10. From al the profiles similar type of behaviour is observed. Within the grid periphery, the percent potential for grid with longer electrodes is higher and on crossing the grid boundary it follows decreasing trend and at a distance of 80 cm, from the origin the values are comparatively lesser. It indicates that besides the reduction in grid resistance, the use of longer ground electrodes helps in bringing down the potential gradients. TABLE 3.1 Grid Resistance Description Impressed Potential Measured Calculated current Resistance Resistance as per Guide (mamp,) (Volts) (Ohm) 80 (Ohm) Grid A In Stone Dust 10 460 4600.0 4624.07 Grid B In Soil x0 25 9833 968.47 On inter connecting (A+B) @ _Inter-connection by Insulated leads 30 25 750.0 80032 (i) Bare wire within the soil medium 30 2s 4166 -B . ANNEXURE 3.1 (@) CALCULATION OF GRID RESISTANCE sc = Measured resistance of model grid C Estimation of the total resistance to ground is ‘ ; cone of the first steps in determining the size and basic "fAme Calculated resistance of model grid A layout of a grounding system. The station resistance 5 depends primarjly on the area to be occupied by the Seo me = Calculated resistance of model grid B ground system, which is usually known in the early t i design stage. Rscme _~ Caleulated resistance of model grid C As a first approximation, a minimum value of "gq, = Calculated resistance of actual grid. sub-station grounding resistance in uniform soil can be oe estimated by means of the formula for a circular metal gp, = Calculated resistance of actual grid B plate at Zero depth, once the soil resistivity has been a determined. Rec ge = Calculated resistance of actual grid C uzyz 671584 [—B— , 61584 eg a Nico ~~ 4 ‘T0258 * 090 Where, Ry = Station ground resistance ohms. = 16,896 x SUBST 4 75.093333 P = Average earth resistivity in ohm-metre. = 16.896 x 1.818739 + 75.093333 + ‘A = Area occupied by the ground grid in m*, = 199.6894 + 75.09333 = 274.78 = 274.78 Ohms of) ‘The upper limit of the station resistance can be ‘obtained by adding a second term to the above formula, as proposed by Laurant and Niemann. Bea mc fe 2 = 199.6994 + 68.266 = 267.95 obm ...2) aor : Note: The length of an electrode 1 em long is added to ‘Where, L is total buried length of conductor the horizontal length of the grid conductor. (a) Resistance of quarter model grid: Dee eee ate ae Ryo = 199.6504 + IH P= 67.584 ohm metre ne d A = (ISomx 15cm) = 199.6994 + 60.5591 = 260.248 SNe? Say = 260.25 3) L = 090m. In'this case horizontal conductor length is added in place of 9 electrodes each of 2.4 em Substituting the values of P, A and L co culations of actual grounding gridi- FE nae els alae opi Petince SMES a ae om in respect of grids, 4, Band C are:- Size of grid = 90m x 90m (4 mesh) grid. 5; F = 67584 ohm. Z Lamm = Measured resistance of model grid ain tei xt. o EE 1 eripay Measured resistance of model grid B L = 10 x 90m = 900 m4 nana "ape "Shae Pio, _ 260288. gus.776 Re, 0.403 : = 16896 x 0.1969 + 0.075 cn = 0.33268 + 0.075 = 0.40768 ohms. These ratios are used to determine the grid Rep gc = 033268 + 0.729 = 0.4055 ohm. resistance of actual grounding grid from those measured - with scaled down model grids. = 033268 + 0.070049 ac = 0.402729 ohms: Lt = 673.480 Ratios of Resistance Calculated: "eave 2078 | _ 4B - De 7 673480 eam Sra. 79.665 obm. ‘TABLE 32 ‘Showing equivalent resistance of actual grounding grid based on ‘measurements made on scaled down model grid resistance Model Grid type Input Voltage Measured Calculated Calculated Ratio of Equivalent resistance grid and Dimen- Current measured resistance resistance resistance calculated of actual grounding code sions m.Amp. volts of quarter of quarter of actual resistance grid 90m x 90m size model gridof gridof_——_-between _based on measure- (Ohms) 90mx90m 90mx90m actual ments (Ohm) (Ohms) (Ohms) —_and model . es aera 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Quarter model of 4x4 Square mesh without electrodes. 20 896 448024780407 73.480 0.065 ‘Same model grid yyith 19 electrodes, each em length. 20 812 4050-26795 00S OSBSTS .OSIS Same model grid with 9 electrodes each 2.4.cm.long. 20 55 2750 260.25 0.402 645.776 0.425Percent surface potential bat w co el Figure an Grid Models Distance along x-axis fe 35 Figure 3.6: Showing Percent Surface Potential Percent surface potenti. Distance along x-axis (on) yenis om Figure 3.7: Showing Percent Surface PotentialPercent surface potential 100 16 Vertical profile 0 : Distance along y-axis (cn) x375 cm Figure 3.8: Showing Percent Surface Potential Vertical profile Distance along y-axis (cm) 25 em Figure 3.9: Showing Percent Surface Potentiatvv stb x Jeyuajog s2ejsng jua2veg Bunoys :o¢ unbly (u>) jeuoberp Suoje aoueysig oo : os yeyuajod anejuns yueaeg18 13 wi 126 1s 37 1% 3 12 4 8 12 Point of current injection a im « tw 3 oa at 15 00. 4 Ohm—m jected = 20 m Amp Depth of immersion of model grid = 5.16 cm Total input voltage = 110 volts Grid resistance = 448 Ohms Annexure 3.2(a): Showing Surface Potential in Volts09 cn 19 09s 093 089 ost on 083 0.80 675, on 620 oo 60 515 082 700 1 6.10 087 ¢ 090 ¥ s 093 093 096 P = 67584 Ohm- Depth of immersion of model gri Input voltage = 10.18 volts Grid resistance = 406 Ohms No, & length of electrodes = 9, each of 1 cm, length id = 5.16 cm Annexure 3.2(b): Showing Surface Potential in Volts20 a ost ost oat a7 660 662680 sn 0 165 161 16h 158 13 550 om wen P = 67584 Ohm-m = 20m Amps Depth of immersion of model grid = 5.16 cm Input voltage = 9.60 volts Grid resistance = 275 Ohms No. of electrodes = 9 Length of each electrode = 2.4 cm Annexure 3.2(c): Showing Surface Potential in volts 075, oat4.0 DEVELOPMENT OF ‘HIGH RESISTIVITY AREA MODEL’ ‘The high resistivity area mode! has been developed and is shown in Figure 4.1. The constructional details of this area are given as under:- Area of land covered 12 ft. x 12 ft Depth of high resistivity area Sift. Main constituents Stone Dust and Brick ‘of material Boulders in the ratio of 2:1 3 Dyan Prevention fromthe The entire volume of high effects of Stray current. resistivity material was isolated from the mass earth with the help of two thicknesses of polythene sheets of 0.23 mm. 4, Resistivity Tests ‘The resistivity of the area under reference was tested with four probe method (Wenner’s configuration). ‘The results obtained along four different radials are given in Table 4.1. 4.2 Validity Test of High Resistivity Limited Area Models, Ground resistance of two standard electrodes was measured and compared with the calculated results. 42.1 Test of Hemispherical Electrode ‘A hemispherical mild steel electrode of 77.26 mm diameter was fabricated and tested for grounding resistance, The circuit diagram is shown in Figure 42. ‘The measurements are given in Table 42. The average fing resistance was measured as 11.47 K. ohms. The calculated value of grounding resistance using expression R = 32 is 11391 Koohms, where p is resistivity of the medium in Ohm-m and r is the radius of hemispherical electrode in metres. 422 Test on Vertical Electrode Vertical electrode of varying lengths were tested in this model. The values of grounding resistance obtained for different electrodes by measurements and also by calculations are given in Table 43. Experimental and calculated results are in close agreement. 43 Increment of Ground Conductance with Length of Electrode ‘When a vertical ground rod is driven into earth as shown in Figure 4.3, It penetrates the horizontal and slanting earth layers. The expression for conductance of ground rod is given as: a 2al p(n ty Where p = Soil Resistivity in Ohm-m. 1 = Length in metres, a = Radius in m. ‘The electrode current ‘clementry length faces soil for soil resistivity is given as under: 2x db p= ft a2) 6 a If a rod is of radius ‘a’ = 2.5 om is driven step by step into the depth and if length (L) = 6 metres, the resistance is measured as (R) =, 16 ohms and the derivative as dR/di = - 0.15 ohm per metre, the resistivity at that depth will be 174.0 ohm-m(”) Percent decrease in resistance with percent increase in length of electrode experimentally as well as, analyticaly is given in Table 4.4. 44 Effect of Counter Poise Mat (Experimental Study) In the high resistivity areas it is difficult to keep step and touch voltages within the tolerable limits. To equalise the Surface Potential, it is suggested that ‘Counter Poise mat may be helpful. In the high resistivity model as shown in Figure 4.4. One square mesh of M.S. Flat 25 mm x 3mm of 1500 mm side was buried at @ depth of 500 mm. A current of 180 m amps was injected into the grid. The'grid potential rise with respect to collecting electrode was 85 volts. The surface potential was measured in the’soil within the grid. The second part of the experiment was carried out by inserting a 6x6 mesh of 8 SWG'G.L Wire grid at a depth of 150 mm exactly over the main grid already buried, and no electrical connection was made between the two. A current of 180 Amps was injected into main grid and surface potential measured. The results are given in Table 4.5. From the results, it is experienced that with the burial of Counter Poise mat over the main grounding grid, the potential gradient on the earth surface is greatlyFigure 4.1: Model of High Res Limited Area 230 VAC Gas a eaeneny es Transformer Two thickness polythene sheet of 623 am Figure-4.2: Circuit Diagram of High Resistivity Model Areaeasy NS Figure 4.3: Increment of Ground. Conductance with Length of @ Rod Figure 44 : ‘Test of Counterpoise Mat in Limited ‘Area ModelTABLE 4.1 Resistivity Test in Limited Area Model Location Input Resistivity Average Current (Ohm-m) with Resistivity MA Probe Spacing (Ohm-m) 025m 050m A "io 2906.30 2995.20 2950.75 1s 2590.50 2604.40 2597.45 B 10 2592.10 2542.60 2567.35 1s 2360.50 2361.0 2364.10 G 10 2683.00 2954.40 2818.70 15 2780.60 271630 27IRAS D 10 3063.45 300150 3032.47 15 3010.25 3027.70 Average 274830 273.70 : TABLE 42 Resistance Measurements of Hemispherical Electrode(Electrode Current 15 mA) *0 1020 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 120 130 140 150 160 170 **0 55 102 162 172 172 173 175 176 178 180 182 185 189 195 202 210 230 * Distance from the electrode (cm) ** Voltage measured on the surface (Volts) TABLE 43 Electrode resistance measured and calculated (Average Soil Resistivity + 1873.14 Ohm-m) SL Electrode Experimental Results Calculated No. ~ length (m) nat Current Resistance (mA) (Volts) (Ohm) (Ohm) a 02 30 wis 4716.67 416199 2 03 0 108.5 3616.67 3575.99 3. 04 30 815 2916.67 2898.00 4 0s 30 740 2466.67 2455.51 si 06 30 45 2150.00 2135.66TABLE 44 Percent variation in grounding resistance with Electrode length experimentally observed and calculated SL Percent Percent Decrease in No. increase in Grounding Resistance electrode, BORE te eA length Experimentally Calculated Observed al 50 B32 25.00 a 100 38.16 2 3 150 4170 48.50 4 200 5452 5521 TABLE 45 Effects of Counter Poise Mat on Touch Voltage and Step Voltages within the Grid 1. Max. Touch Voltage (without counter poise mat) in % GPR 8% 2, Max. Touch Voltage (with counter poise mat) in % GPR 533% 3. Max. Step Voltage (without counter poise mat) in % GPR 6.66% 4. Max. Step Voltage (with counter Poise mat) in % GPR 133% reduced, and consequently the touch and step voltages. can be brought to safer limit within the grid area. 5.0 INVESTIGATION OF HIGH RESISTIVITY AREA AT FEROZEPUR At 33 KV proposed MES Sub-station at Ferozepur ‘Cantt, soil resistivity measurements were carried out during ‘the month of June, 1990 (Annexure 5.1) and November, 1990, (Annexure 52). ‘There was a decrease in the overall soil resistivity taken during the month of November, 1990 2s, ‘compared to the values taken during the month of June 1990. This difference is obviously duc to the increase in moisture in the soil during the rainy season, The resistivity measurements were made at three different locations with spacings of probe at 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 metres, The results were found to be almost same in all the cases. It was found that the top layer of ~the soil is of high resistivity. This site was again visited by the team of Engineers from this Research Directorate during the month of June, 1991. The soil resistivity tests were carried out at different locations. ‘The resistivity of the soil was found to’be of the order of 800 ohm-m to 900 ohm-m with probe spacings of 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 metres (Annexure 5.3). Since there was wide spread rain oon the area under test a day before, therefore, the results were found to be onthe lower ‘side. Then the soil resistivity tests were carried out at an other location at a distance of 500 metres, away from this proposed 33 kV Sub-Station site. ‘The resistivity of these locations was found to be of the order of 98 ohm-m to 200 ohm-m, with probe spacings of 2 to 16 metres. The values of this resistivity decreased with the increase in the probe spacing. The comparison of these two-results indicated that there is some kind of high vresistivity material embedded in the top layér soil at the proposed 33 kV Sub-Station site. The excavation was carried out on this site to find out the presence of high resistivity material. It was found that there was a concrete flooring with embedded brick boulders and sand. The thickness of each layer of the constituents is shown in Figure 5.1. After removing the high resistivity material from the excavation site, resistivity of the natural earth was measured and the same was found to be of the order of 100 ohm-m to 150 ohm. This concrete flooring at the sub-station site is spread in the area of 100 m x 100 m approximately with brick walls of 0.5 m width. This confirms the view that the site has some old fortifications. ANNEXURE 5.1 Soil Resistivity Data-Measurements made during June 1990 Location SL Spacing» Resistance Resistivity No. No. (metres) (ohms) (chm-m) a) 1 2 ” i942 2 4 2 1307.42 3 8 2B 1407.99 4 2 185 1395.42 5 16 122 122697 2 1 2 95 1194.28 2 4 30 125714 3 8 2B 140799 4 812 1B 1357.71 5 16 2 120685 3 1 2 95 1194.28 2 4 50 1057.14 3 8 185 1433.14 4 2 185 357.71 5 16 2s 1057.14EE 2 BL 2 150 Site 500 m away from ‘Soll Resistivity Data-Measurements @ fo Rigie abaee dee? ‘made during November 1990 - ft Location Sl Spacing Resistance Resistance *, = No. No. (metres) (ohms) (obm-m) 9 ____6 - nips eae 30 dita ; Po Bcd "4 47 481.71 4 re 3 8 mS 123199 Z ta 4 2 140 1055.99 Fi - 5 16 10 1005.71 ue = 2 1 2 86 wosi4 BS E a 2 4 43.5 3093.71 £ 3 3 8 B 115657 eI fe 4 2 B 980.57 a 5 16 95 955.42 aa 2 cr 1 110 Natural earth surface 3 1 2 86 1081.14 2 a a a aa 2 108 obtained after excavation 5 8 B 15657 3 405 and below the Sand layer 4 2 154 1169.14 a a 5 16 10, 100571 C2 1 135 Sand layer as shown in 2 120 Figure 5.1 ANNEXURE 53 3 a Soll Resistivity Test Results c3 e oa In moist soil conditions Location Probe Soil ai us No. spacing Resistivity AL 2 200. Proposed sto of 5.1 Use of Bentonite Clay as Backfill 4 810 132 kV Sub-Station Bentonite clay consists of mineral montmorilonite ay (a hydrous aluminium silicate). It acts as an excellent 2 802 backfill if sufficient amount of water is added to it. 16 820 Bentonite ‘can absorb water upto 5 times its weight and swells upto 13 times its dry volume. At six times its dry A2d 2 805 Ferozepur Cantt. ‘volume it remains dense and pasty and adheres well to 4 795 (MES Complex) any surface it touches. These two characteristics solve 8 790 the compaction and soil-rod contact. problem, 2 810 16 $30 SLI Laboratory Analysis of Bentonite Clay ae = ea rea a ‘The indigenous bentonite clay was got tested in the ; Pee ern ee 8 800 ROR 2 805 The test results revealed that the clectrical 16 820 resistivity of bentonite is 8.7 ohm.-m at 20°C with ‘water-bentonite ratio of 4:Present + Earth Surface #= 790 to 350 Ohm/m DOverburdened soit layer Age Compact layer of brick boulder Compact layer of sand +e p= 98 to 200 Ohm—m Figure 5.1: Cut Section of Earth up to 12 m Depth at MES Complex Ferozepur 150) r P= 2500 Oha/m ‘Sub-mountaneous area of Ropar Distt. (Pb) Bentonite treated 100) electrode. ance, (Ohm) so July ‘Sept Jan Feb Mar Period of measurement Figure 5.2: Resistance Comparison Curve .$2 Field Tests Field tests were carried out in Sub-mountainous arca with average soil resistivity of the order of 2500 ‘ohm-m. Two ground rods of 16 mm dia. and 1500 mm length were tested for their resistance with respect to remote ground electrode. One electrode was driven in earth by hammering, while the other was placed in the centre of bentonite slurry of 4:1 water bentonite ratio filled in a 250 mm dia. hole made in the earth. ‘The periodical measurements of electrodes resistance were ‘made and the results are plotted in Figure 5.2 From the curves, it is obvious that an appreciable decrease in electrode resistance is obtained by placing it in bentonite slurry which may be duc to better rod soil contact through bentonite. Also bentonite increases effective diameter of the electrode. In another experiment a bentonite treated rod was placed in the centre of one mesh grid as shown is Figure 53. Surface Potential was measured in the centre of the mesh (i) without any rod at the centre, (ji) with an ordinary 19 mm rod at the centre and (iii) with bentonite treated rod placed as shown in Figure 5.4 change of percent of surface potential was observed at the centre of the mesh with bentonite treated rod. It is, therefore, experimentally found out that in addition to providing vertical electrodes at the appropriate locations in the ground mat, if additional rod treated with bentonite is placed near to:the centre of critical meshes, it would improve the potential gradient fon the earth surface besides reducing the ground resistance. 6.0 EXPERIMENTAL STUDY 6.1 Effect of Rainfall in Resistivity of Soil In Figure 6.1 (A,B,C) soil resistivity values are measured in the field of Himachal Pradesh Plain arca. On the same earth surface, soil resistivity was measured during March, 1992 when the soil was dry. The resistivity was as shown by point ‘A’. The resistivity was again measured on the same earth surface a day after the area had first wide spread rain and marked as point ‘B’. The measurement taken after second wide spread rain is shown ‘as point C. From the laboratory tests and field tests it is observed that the moisture content has predominant effect on the resistivity of soit 62 Selection of Site for Experimental Work on Remote Electrode Grounding System Some plices in the areas of Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh were visited to select the high resistivity areas for carrying out the experimental work ‘on remote electrode grounding system. The following sites were then selected for performing these tests. These selected sites are near to Chandigarh: 1. Site near 83'KV S/S Bharatgarh, Distt. Ropar (Pb.) (65 kms. from Chandigarh) 2. Site near village Barotiwala, Distt, Solan Himachal Pradesh, (55 kms. from Chandigarh) 3. Site Near Virat Nagar, Distt. Ambala, Haryana, (G0 kms. from Chandigarh) ‘The selected sites are located in semi-hilly areas. ‘The soil resistivity was higher as compared to the values in plain area. 63 Field Tests on Vertical Ground Electrodes (Effect of Grouping the Electrodes) Field tests were carried out in the area of Himachal Pradesh on vertical ground rods of different lengths. The ‘ground rods of 1m to 3m length were used. The results are given in Table 6.1. From the result it is evident that resistance of two or more short length electrodes is much less than that of single long rod of length equal to the combined length of group of electrodes. For example resistance of a group of two electrodes ceach 1m long is 50% of that which measured with a single 2m long rod. Similarly in case of a group of three clectrodes, each one metre length, the grounding resistance is 43.8% of the value measured with a single 3m long electrode, 6A Tests Near Village Baddi (Himachal Pradesh) (Grouping of Vertical Electrodes and Ring Electrodes) A high resistivity area as shown in Figure 6.2 was selected near village Baddi in Himachal Pradesh to carry ‘out field tests with vertical electrodes in combination with ring electrodes. Two vertical electrodes (Eq and Ep )andtwo ring electrodes Ra and Rp, were buried in the soil as shown in Figure 63 with the dismensions as shown in Figure 6.4. Resistivity tests werePercent surface potential Dia of bentonite slurry (O" Ground mat Figure 5.3: Bentonite Treated Rod in a Single Mesh Ground Mat Without any rod in centre Percent side length of a grid Figure 5.4 : Surface Potential Profile along Horizontal Planmade at location A and B. The results of site A are ‘iven in Table 6.2. The average soil resistivity at locations A and B was 2465 ohm-m & 837 ohm-m respectively. Location A is at 22.707 m higher level than location B. ‘The grounding resistance measurements were taken individually as well as by interconnecting the rings and vertical electrodes in different manners as shown in Table 63. From this test it is observed that interconnection of ring electrode however helps in reducing the resultant ‘grounding resistance but the interconnection of vertical electrodes has predominant effect. ‘The route of underground tie-wire and experimental set up are shown in Figures 6.5 to 6.8. 6S Testing Near Bharatgarh Town in District Ropar (Punjab) ‘Two electrodes were buried in the month of March 1992, as shown in Figure 6.9. The testing was carried out during the month of November-1992 assuming that sufficient time has been given for setting and making good contact between soil and electrode, ‘At the same site there were two locations very near to each other where resistivity differs 300% to 400%. A. ‘general case is shown in Figure 6.9 wherein electrode EA and EB are driven. The soil resistivity of two locations electrode resistance of EA & EB were measured individually, and on interconnecting the two ‘with insulated tie wire are given in Figure 6. From this test it reveals that in hilly area where it is difficult to provide deep ground rods, the deep khads and valleys are available where soil resistivity is generally low. ‘The small length electrodes driven in deep khad can serve as, good remote earth to reduce the grounding resistance of the grids buried at elevated locations. 64 Tests on Grounding Electrodes Near Kotla Hydro Electric Power Plan Another site was selected near Kotla Power Plant where three electrodes were driven in earth during the month of March 1992 and measurements were taken during the month of November 1992. Average soil resistivity measured at the locations of electrodes, EA, EB & EC was between 325 and 355 ohm-m. TABLE 6.1 ‘Comparison of Electrodes Resistance, pee I SLNo. Electrode No.of Measured Calculated ength _Elect- Resistance Resistance (=) odes (Ohm) P2265 (Ohm-m) Ht 1 1 19100 1894.76 a 2 2 5656 - BS 1 3 3330 - 4 2 1 10250 107945 Sa 3 ft 760.0 768.39 ee ee TABLE 62 Soll Resistivity Test Allocation ‘A? Location Spacing Resistance _Soil Resistivity (Ohm-m) ee ee ALS @ 65m 5333217890 () 100m 40.00 251430 A2 (@) 65m 60.00 2451.40 (&) 100m —° 3333,——-2095.00 A3 (a) 65m 6566. -2723.50 () 100m 4666 2932.90 Ad (@) 65m 56.66. 2AI7-AT (b) 100m — 4000251430 Average soil resistivity = 2465.6 ohm-m. Resistance of individual electrodes and groups of ‘two and three was measured and are given in Tabular form in Figure 6.10.31 ry 3» vide spr C Fiald test-atter second Wide spread rain x Soll resistivity (hm-meter) > 6 S ws 5S Moisture ta sail (Percent) Figure 64: Variation of Soil Resistivity with Moisture Content Figure 6.2: Cut Section of Hill Near Experimental Site in Himachal PradeshYsepedg JeyrewIY Jo Wess, AIH UL sGuRY gy spoy puNoJD Jo UO'yeI07 : E'9 aunNbIy (9M soi = azis sojanpue)) “ep w 4 jo ‘364d so}anpue> Jadde> ave Oy Yd wag Lee = ag & vOHED0) Jepun eny apoupape a ' 1 wpaig 59% = nn oO ¥ uouen0] sapun ealy 433 65 cA I ++ ~ Slope Sm OV : RB - ) (Oban v Figure 6.4: Showing Relative Locations of Vertical Electrodes & Ring Shape ElectrodesFigure 6.6Figure 6.7: Route of U/G Inter Tie Wire extended, to 154 Metres Figure 6.8: Field Test ApparatusField Testing near Bharat Garh (Distt. Ropar) WN Electrode resistivity resistance Roam Ohms-m measured Faure Ohms interconnected Ep length a Pan nm by OH wire Ohas Di te MS. fy -ae- ss 6 SIs Figure 6.93” Field Testing near Kotla ‘x Hydro~Electric Power Plant (Distt. Ropar) Gi pele Uf C7 tale vptd scien, | tin Geaundagresistare resstty bedi B Asbo sic A 388 260 se : ae 2 we c mS nm 120.0 Mote ‘AsB,BoC & AsBeC interconnaction were with O/H tie wires Figure 6.10: Field Testing near Kotla Hydro-Electric Power Plant Distt. Ropar38 Table 63 Measured Ground Resistance of Different Types of Electrodes Buried at the Locations as Shown in Figure 7.10 & 7.11 (Inerconnections were made with Insulated Cables ) Sr. | Electrodes Pieasured Sr. [Electrodes Measured No. | Description Ground No.| Description Ground Resistance (Ohm) Ne Resistance (Ohm) 1890.0 B 1 1150.0 Rw Orn Rp 390.0 4, 4. +a 680.0 5, 700.0 Serre es: R ‘~ Ral 1. @ 4020 Ry & & Ra = Ring electrode Atm dia C Se Aes Rp = Ring electrode B 1m dia if Eqs Electrode (Vertical) A S {fm length) 9. {amet 495.0 : , rE, Eg = Vertical Electrode B length 1m a Oza 302.0 Ring electrode depth = 0.5m R & "!Q Ym R,7.0 COMPUTER STUDY ON INTERCONNECTION OF GROUNDING GRID WITH A SATELLITE overhead tie wires. The ground resistance of individual ‘grids, tie wires and combined system was measured. The ground resistances were also determined by computer simulation. In addition the surface potentials were determined to obtain the safe step and touch voltages, within the grids, outside the grids, along the tie wire route and along the axis prependicular to the tie wire. ‘The computed and experimentally determined values are in close agreement. ‘7d Field Study on Interconnection of Grounding Grids The two grids on which experimental study was carried out, were buried in rocky soil on a hillock at a depth of 0.5 m. The site is at Baddi in District Solan of Himachal Pradesh. Configuration of the grids is shown, in Figure 7.1. The average soil resistivity measured by the Wenner’s method with probe spacing varying from ‘Im to 16m was 2465 ohm-m. Two sets of studies were carried out with interconnection through intertie wire of size 14 SWG. In one study, the tie wire was laid underground and in the second case, it was ovethead. ‘The tie wire was run along the shortest path between the ‘two grids measuring 154 metres. “The depths of burial of intertic wire used in the study were 0.1m, 0.25m and 0.5m. The ground resistance of individual grids, the wires and complete interconnected system with different ‘modes of interconnection underground or otherhead, was ‘measured by fall of potential method. 72 Digital Simutation Ground resistance and surface potentials for the configuration of Figure 7.1 were calculated on digital ‘computer. The calculations were carried out for (i) the gid alone, (ii) tie wire alone, (ii) girds with underground tie wire and (iv) grids with overhead tie wire. The depth of burial of the grids in all cases was 0.5m. For the tic wire three values of depth of burial namely, 01m, 0.25 m and 05 m were used. A computer program based on average potential method hasbeen used inthe digital simulation. Inthismethod the linear conductors forming the earthing electrode are divided into a number of segments. The current dissipation from the segments is determined by equating the average potential of all the segments. The average potential of any ‘TABLE 7.1 Measured and Computed Values of Ground Resistance of Intertie Grounding Grids Ground Resistance (ohm) Measured Calculated 840.0 8450 a Grid alone Grid ‘B* alone Underground tie wire alone at depth @® im Gi) 025m - Gi) 05m - Grids jointed by overhead tie wire Grids joined by underground tie wire at depth @® 1m ii) 025m - Osm 856.7 856.7 459 36 418 4296 434 414 398 Gi) cone segment can be expressed as ¥ = E Rh G j= ERC jet 9 Where Vj is the potential of ith segment, Ri represents the mutual resistance between ith and jth ‘segments, J; is current dissipated to earth by jth segment and N is the number of segments into which grounding system is divided. The mutual resistance Rj is the potential of ith segment due to unit current dissipated injth segment. For i = j, Ri represents the selfresistance. ‘of ith segment. Expressions for self and mutual’ resistance are given by Heppe®. Current dissipated by- various segments is obtained by solving (1). Potential at any point on earth’s surface is computed by summing the potential contribution from all the segments. 73 Results and Discussion BieiN) ‘The measured and computed values of ground resistances are given in Table 7.1. 74 The ground resistance of the two grids joined by the ‘overhead tie wire is about half of that of one grid. The ‘computed value is slightly lower than ore half because of the mutual effect between the grids. The effect of