Comparative Study between IEEE Std.

80-2000
and Finite Elements Method application for
Grounding Systems Analysis
L. M. Coa

Abstract- This paper presents a brief compilation of typical

and particular cases of grounding systems calculation using
procedures proposed by IEEE std 80-200 [1], simulated by
means of a software developed under the mathematical tool
Matlab, based on the Finite Elements Method [2]. This study
consists, basically, of tables and graphics that shows a series of
interesting results and offer a reliable and practical instrument
for the grounding systems design.
Index Terms--Ground potential rise, ground resistance,
programming, protections, step voltage, touch voltage.
I. NOMENCLATURE

1g
tf
h
Rg

hs

H
p
Pi
P2
Ps

Ground fault current.

Fault duration time.
Grounding system depth.
Ground resistance
Surface material thickness.
First layer thickness.
Uniform soil resistivity.
First layer resistivity.
Second layer resistivity.
Surface material resistivity.
II. INTRODUCTION

T HE simplified techniques for grounding systems design in

substations and transmission lines allow those persons
with a basic training in these type of systems, to be able to
make this work having no need of the use of more complex
calculation tools. However, in some particular cases the
results obtained by these means do not reproduce accurately
the reality and, in general lines, the system may be oversized
to accomplish with the applying norms and recommendations.
In some cases, the problems founded in the practice can't be
analyzed using simplified techniques without incurring in
important errors, so it can be necessary to use more complex
calculation algorithms.

L. M. Coa is with Inelectra S.A.C.A., Lecheria, Anzoategui, Venezuela

(email: luis.coaginelectra.com).

1-4244-0288-3/06/$20.00 2006 IEEE

III. THE SOFTWARE

SPATC program was designed in Inelectra S.A.C.A. for the

calculation of the determining parameters in the design of
grounding systems. This program was developed under the
calculations tool Matlab from Mathworks, Inc.
One of the most important characteristics of the SPATC is
its capacity to collect the data of the grounding system from a
dxf file generated once made the drawing of the ground grid in
AutoCAD.
The program allows the user to select a dxf file that
contains all the data relative to dimensions of the ground grid,
offering a graphical interface and avoiding therefore the
tedious work of having to introduce this information
manually.
This characteristic of the program required of a
considerable time for the establishment of a pattern within the
dxf file that allowed locating the information needed for the
SPATC to accomplish the calculations. It was a delicate stage
of the process, considering that when drawing up a simple line
in AutoCAD, the generated dxf file is an ASCII file conformed
by approximately 6 thousand lines of characters.
The SPATC (Fig. 1) offers to the user a graphical interface
that facilitates the introduction of data for the grounding
system simulation, allows in addition to review the obtained
results in a organized way, including graphs and a written
report with the data and the results of the simulated project.

As it is appraised in Fig. 2, the SPATC allows to directly

introduce the data in the initial screen; this screen is
conformed by the following parts:

finite element. The transfer resistances, mutual resistances and

self-resistances for the segments are represented as VDFs
(Voltage Distribution Factors) and the association between the
voltage and currents in the conductor segment i, is:
n

Vi==RtjIj
j=l

Where:

(1)

Rtu

VDF between segments i andj (self is i =j).

Potential at conductor segment i.
Current flowing into earth from segmentj.
I1
n
Total segments number.
Due to the low resistance of the conductor material,
generally it is assumed that the entire ground grid is at the
same potential; thus, the voltage of all the segments will be
approximately equal, so:

Vi

VO = V1 = V2
Vn V
And then, the equations for each conductor segment will be
as follow:
n

j=1

rig. z. 3IAI C main screen.

V=

A. Suelo (Soil)
This panel contains the fields corresponding to the soil
model for which is going to make the simulation. It contains
the following fields:

1) Modelo del Suelo (Soil Model).

2) Profundidad del l er Estrato (First layer thickness).
3) Resistividad del ler Estrato (First layer resistivity).
4) Resistividad del 2do Estrato (Second layer resistivity).
5) Capa Adicional Superficial (Surface material).
6) Altura (Height).
7) Resistividad (Resistivity).
B. Datos del Proyecto (Project Data)
In this panel the technical data for the simulations are
introduced, more ahead that data will be also included in the
final report.

1) Nombre del Proyecto (Project name).

2) Corriente de Falla (Groundfault current).
3) Profundidad del SPAT (Grounding system depth).
4) Conductor.
C. Resultados (Results)
It contains the information referred to the results obtained
in the simulation.
IV. THE METHODOLOGY
The program was based on the method described by
Meliopoulos for grounding systems analysis [2].
Basically, it consists on getting the system partitioned into
n finite conductor segments and assuming that the current on
each one of the segments is uniformly distributed along the

RtljIj

YRt2jIj
j=1
n

V = E, RtnjIj
j=1

With the equations system above, the value for the

potential V is assumed to calculate the currents flowing into
earth.
Once obtained the currents, other parameters, as the ground
resistance, GPR and the surface potential at any point, can be
calculated:

R9

II

+ I2 +I3 + ...+In

(2)

GPR = Ig9Rg

(3)

VA

(4)

jRtAJIj

j=l

Where RtAj is the VDF (or transfer resistance) between the

conductor segmentj and point A.
Meliopoulos presents VDFs tabulated by transfer
resistances, mutual resistances and self-resistance for
conductor segments oriented along the three coordinate axes
x, y or z [2].
For two-layered soil models the procedure is the same, but
the VDFs equations are relatively more complex, due to the
multiples images produced by boundary conditions between
layers; however, the equations used for these cases start from
the same principle described by Meliopoulos [2].

.M . .

V. THE SIMULATION
For effects of validating the results in this document, the
cases exposed in the Annex B of the IEEE std 80-2000 were
used as a departure point [1], for which there are, next,

comparative tables and the corresponding graphs.

For the considered cases, the design data are the following
ones:
1908 A.
Ig
0.5 s.
tf
400 Q.m.
p
2500 Q.m.
Ps
sh = 0.102m.
h =0.5m

H.iI

grounding system, the maximum limit for touch voltages is

violated. Among other graphs offered by the program (Fig. 8),
are those of touch voltages contours and the two-dimensions
graphs for touch and step voltages in trajectories previously
indicated.

1cO

bO

cz

A. Square grid without ground rods

0,c

duo

700

?ni
ao

100

l...

These are the obtained results using both techniques.

TABLE I
COMPARATIVE TABLE FOR CASE 1

IEEE std 80-2000

2.78 Q
5304 V

vdltaj-s tie Tolue an el Perirretro de la lalla

Fig. 7. Maximum and real touch voltages for case 1.

Fig. 6. Square grid without ground rods.

Ground resistance
GPR

SPATC
2.62 Q
4996.22 V

IEEE Standard 80 method gives in addition results for

maximum allowable touch and step voltages, as well as the
maximum real voltages in the system for which the
calculations are being made. For this example the following
results were obtained:

...~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...
~.... ..

I.-..........-- U..........

SE

|
.. ..._lugg

ii

I|

Fig. 8. Graphs contained in the results folder.

Finally, another of the most important advantages of the

SPATC is the possibility of obtaining a written report that
contains the data and results of the project, specifying the
touch and step voltages with its coordinates and
corresponding status.
Fecha: 25/3/2006

Proyecto ej1(1)
If: 1908[Amps]

Hora:

17:53:33

0.5[seg]
Resistividad 1: 400 [Ohm-m]
Altura de Capa Adicional en Superficie: 0.102[m]
PLesistividad de Capa Adicional en Superficie: 2500[Ohm-m]
Diametro de Conductor: 0.01 [m]
Resistencia de Malla: 2.6186[Ohm s]
GPR: 4 996. 222 [Volts]
t:

Longitud aproximada del conductor: 1540 [m]

Maximum allowable touch voltage

Maximum real touch voltage.

838.2 V
1002.1 V

For which the SPATC offers the following graph (Fig. 7)

that comprises of the set of 7 graphs included in the folder
with the project results.
In Fig. 7 it is possible to observe how on the corners of the

Reporte de Voltajes de Toque y Voltajes de Paso

X [mr]

Y [mrr]

St [v]

Status

0.00
1.75
3.50
5.25

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

941.39
745.45
658.59
547.41

EXCEDE
OK
OK
OK

Fig. 9. Written report segment for the case 1.

Y [mY]

0.00
1 .75
3.50
5.25

v s [ V]

36.80
31.15
108.75
20 7 28

Statu s

OK
OK
OK

OK

B. Rectangular grid with ground rods

The following example extracted from the IEEE Standard
80 annexes consists of a mesh that, in this case, includes
vertical ground rods (Fig. 10) [1].
84fm

C. Equally spaced grid with ground rods in two-layer soil

In order to illustrate the simulation of grounding systems
for two-layered soil model cases (Which apply to most of the
cases in the practice), the B.5 example of the IEEE Standard
80 annexes was used; this arrangement is shown in Fig. 12

.r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[1].
--

44

n-TI

SO.gm

Ir
I

--

--I 0

.1

-"

loooow -M

Fig. 10. Rectangular grid with

10

ground rods.

For which the following results were obtained:

TABLE II
COMPARATIVE TABLE FOR CASE 2

Ground resistance
GPR

IEEE std 80-2000

2.62 Q
4998.96 V

SPATC
2.25 Q
4298.1 V

Fig. 12. C. Equally spaced grid with ground rods in two-layer soil.

And the results obtained from the calculation of this

follows:

The results for maximum and real touch voltages calculated

for the system, for IEEE Standard 80 are as follows [1].

Maximum allowable touch voltage

Maximum real touch

voltage

838.2 V
595.8 V

en

el Pe-imc -ro do la Mhalla

*300

1cL

::

TABLE III
COMPARATIVE TABLE FOR CASE 3

Ground resistance
GPR

Whereas the results obtained by the SPATC for this second

case, are in the following graph (Fig. 11).
V ltFje5 de ToqLe

case

are as

IEEE std 80-2000

1.353 Q
2581.52 V

SPATC
1.359 Q
2592.97

It can be observed that, for this case, when the ground

resistance value obtained is low, the difference on the results
is almost insignificant. This small difference for the ground
resistances brings as a consequence a proportional difference
between the GPR results for each one of the methods.

Additional, the computer program of EPRI TR-10622,

applied for this case in the IEEE Standard 80 [1], gives the
following results for the critical voltages.

400z 00

Em
Soo
200

1c
100

Fig. 11. Maximum and real touch voltages for case 2.

Es

49.66 % of GPR
18.33 % of GPR

While the SPATC offers Fig. 13 as a result to evaluate

touch voltages (These are, in fact, the most critical potential
differences in a grounding system design) in the simulated
system, in addition to the two-dimension graphs for touch and
step voltages in trajectories previously specified.

5
V;oltaju-

d-

Toqje en PI PPerimi*ot du la M1ala

IX. BIOGRAPHY
Luis

Coa

was

born in Barcelona,
on May 24, 1983.

Anzoategui Venezuela,

1Lw*-

He graduated from the Universidad de

Oriente.
His employment experience includes
Inelectra, S.A.C.A. His special field of
interest includes programming, grounding

Systems, digital systems.

ar)
40~

40

60

20

Fig. 13. Maximum and real touch voltages for case 3.

VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of S.

Meliopoulos for his previously research on this topic.
VII. CONCLUSIONS

One of the differences between both previously studied

methods is the form in which the critical voltages for the
calculated system are given. During the development of the
SPATC a great importance was paid on knowing not only the
value for the maximum real touch voltage in the system, but
also these voltages behavior in all the area occupied by the
simulated ground grid, since this allows to locate points of
special interest on the corresponding planes of the facilities, in
such a way that is possible to take the necessary preventive
actions at the time of execute a grounding system design.
It can be observed in addition, that exists a differences
pattern between the results of ground resistance and therefore
of GPR; the values given by the method proposed by IEEE
Standard 80 are generally more pessimists, even when this
factor is not necessarily unfavorable it can take the design to

an oversizing.
Also it was stated, by means of the simulations, the fact
that the most critical touch voltages can be found in the
corners for rectangular meshes cases, as observed for case 1 in
Fig. 7.
Finally it is possible to affirm that the finite elements
methods represent without a doubt a very effective instrument
for the grounding systems study, since they offer the
possibility of making a closest to the reality detailed analysis.
In spite of involving more complex algorithms of calculations
that requires the use of computational tools, is necessary to
consider that, nowadays, needing a computer is not really a

limitation.

VIII. REFERENCES
[1] IEEE Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding, IEEE Std 80-2000
(Revision of IEEE Std 80-1986). New York, USA. 2000.
[2] 5. Meliopoulos, Power System Grounding and Transients, Marcel
Dekker, Inc. New York, USA. 1998.