1752

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 29, NO. 4, AUGUST 2014

Influence of Potential Difference Within Large

Grounding Grid on Fault Current Division Factor
Bo Zhang, Member, IEEE, Yukuan Jiang, Jinpeng Wu, and Jinliang He, Fellow, IEEE

AbstractThe fault current division factor describes the

shunting ability of the ground wires of the transmission lines or
that of the neutral conductors connected to a substation ground.
As the power system capacity grows rapidly in China, more
substations with higher voltage classes are constructed, and the
grounding grid is becoming larger and larger in area. As a result,
the potential difference within the grounding grid may become
more obvious and, hence, its influence on the fault current division
factor cannot be ignored. This paper proposes a multiport circuit
model for grounding grids with multiple grounding points to take
into account the potential difference. With the help of commercially available tools for power system simulation, the model can
be easily used to calculate the fault current distribution and the
fault current division factor. The main factors that affect the
potential difference within the grounding grid as well as the fault
current division factor are analyzed. As an application, the fault
current division factor of a 1000-kV ultra-high voltage substation
is further calculated.
Index TermsFault current, fault current division factor,
ground potential rise, grounding, potential difference, substations.

I. INTRODUCTION
HE FAULT current distribution usually varies with
system configurations. The fault current in an ultra-high
voltage (UHV) or extremely high voltage (EHV) substation
usually consists of three parts, that is, the current flowing into
the earth, the current in the ground wires of the transmission
lines, and the current into the transformer through its neutral
point [1][4]. Among these components, the current flowing
into the earth is the main cause of safety problems in substations and determines the ground potential rise, step voltage, and
touch voltage [4][9]. The relation between the current flowing
into the earth and the fault current is usually described by a fault
current division factor [4]. The traditional ways to calculate the
fault current division factor are by means of empirical formulas
and numerical models. The method of empirical formulas uses
simple models and it is difficult to guarantee the precision [4],
[10], [11], while the method of numerical models has higher
precision [12][15]. However, these two methods have the

Manuscript received May 10, 2013; revised August 22, 2013; accepted
November 09, 2013. Date of publication December 03, 2013; date of current
version July 21, 2014. Paper no. TPWRD-00559-2013.
B. Zhang, J. Wu, and J. He are with State Key Lab of Power Systems, Department of Electrical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
(e-mail: shizbcn@tsinghua.edu.cn; wujinpengcn@gmail.com; hejl@tsinghua.
edu.cn).
Y. Jiang is with Zhejiang Electric Power Test and Research Institute,
Hangzhou 310014, China (e-mail: cloudjyk@gmail.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2013.2290898

same limitation in that they regard the grounding grid as a

lumped impedance, which means all of the grounding points
overlap each other or that the grounding grid is equipotential.
In fact, the aforementioned assumption is only suitable for
small grounding grids. As the power system capacity grows very
fast in China, more substations with high-voltage classes are or
are being constructed, and the area of the grounding grid is becoming larger and larger. For example, the 800-kV Huidong
UHVDC converter station in China takes up an area of 270 000
. Meanwhile, due to the high price of copper, steel is often
used as the grounding conductor in China, which has much
higher resistivity and permeability than copper. Thus, the feature of unequal potential of the grounding grid will become
more distinct [16][19], which means that the potential differences among the grounding points cannot be neglected anymore, for such differences will affect the distribution of the fault
current and the fault current division factor.
This paper proposes a method to calculate the fault current
division factor of large substations whose grounding grids are
nonequipotential and whose grounding points are far away from
each other. The main factors influencing the fault current division factor are analyzed, and the fault current distribution of a
1000-kV UHV substation is calculated.
Definition of Fault Current Division Factor
There are many kinds of short-circuit faults in a substation,
among which the incidence rate of single-phase-to-ground
faults is the highest. Thus, this paper focuses on this kind of
faults as an example. Usually, fault current distribution varies
with system configurations [4]. For UHV and EHV transformers, they are always grounded on both high-voltage side
and low-voltage side and, hence, all the power systems connected to the transformers are also grounded. Thus, as shown
in Fig. 1, when a fault occurs, the fault current is provided by
the power systems on both high-voltage side and low-voltage
and
. The total fault current
flows away
side, as
through three paths: some current flows into the earth , some
current flows in the ground wires , and the rest flows into the
transformer through its neutral point . In Fig. 1,
and
represent the currents in the ground wires of the substations
high-voltage and low-voltage sides respectively, and the sum
of them is . For other system configurations, there are also
corresponding current distributions [4].
The fault current division factor is mainly used to describe the
distribution of the fault current. According to [4], this division
factor of a grounding grid
is defined as

0885-8977 2013 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

(1)

ZHANG et al.: INFLUENCE OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE WITHIN LARGE GROUNDING GRID

Fig. 1. Distribution of a fault current in a substation.

Fig. 2. Four-port model of a grid using controlled voltage sources.

However, since there will be many grounding points and

many corresponding currents flowing into the earth from these
grounding points, for convenience, this paper uses the fault
current division factor of the ground wires of the transmission
line
which is defined as
(2)
where

, and

1753

are in phasor form.

II. SIMULATION MODEL CONSIDERING THE POTENTIAL

DIFFERENCE WITHIN THE GROUNDING GRID
In order to obtain the fault current division factor, the distribution of fault current should be calculated first. As shown
in Fig. 1, the transformer, the transmission lines, the system
sources, and the grounding system of the substation should be
considered altogether in the calculation. Many commercially
available tools for power system simulation are capable of
calculating this fault current. For example, the widely used
software PSCAD/Electromagnetic Transients Program (EMTP)
has many kinds of transformer models, whose neutral points
can be grounded, and the models for complex transmission
lines, such as multicircuit overhead transmission lines and
cables [20]. Meanwhile, the grounding system has usually been
assumed to be equivalent to a lumped impedance. Thus, the
fault model with system sources, lines, transformers, and the
grounding system can be easily established in PSCAD/EMTP.
However, for large grounding systems with multiple grounding
points and nonequipotential feature, it is almost impossible
to simulate them by using the commercial tools, such as
PSCAD/EMTP. Although EMTP was also used by some
researchers, the mutual effect among the electrodes and especially the mutual resistances, were ignored, which would result
in great errors in analyzing complex grounding systems [21],
[22]. What is more, the micromesh model for the grounding
grid in PSCAD/EMTP will occupy a lot of computer resources.
In fact, the entire system is like an underground electric field
combined with a circuit network in the air [23]. The electric field
is generated by the distribution of the leakage currents from the
grounding electrodes. The circuit network consists of transmission lines, transformers, and so on. If a large grounding system
with multiple grounding points and a nonequipotential feature
can also be regarded as a multiport circuit network which is
connected with the power system through its ports, it can be
easily simulated in the commercially available tools to find out
the fault current distribution. In this paper, a method is presented to obtain the multiport circuit network and to calculate

the fault current distribution with the nonequipotential feature

of the grounding grid taken into account.
A. Multiport Model of the Grounding Grid
The large grounding system with multiple grounding points
and the feature of unequal potential can be regarded as a multiport circuit network. The relation between the inputs and the
outputs of the network would suffice for the calculation of the
fault current distribution.
With the currents of the ports as inputs and the voltages
as outputs, the relation between and can be expressed as
(3)
where is the impedance matrix of the network. The diagonal
elements in are the self-impedances of the ports, and the offdiagonal elements are the mutual impedances among the ports.
The self-impedance of a port is defined as the ground potential
rise at the corresponding grounding point when a unit current is
injected into the grounding grid from the same grounding point.
The mutual impedances between two ports are defined as the
ground potential rise at one grounding point when a unit current
is injected into the grounding grid from another grounding point.
Thus, the ground potential rises caused by mutual impedances
can be regarded as voltage sources controlled by the currents
in other ports, and a simplified equivalent circuit can be set up
for the multiport circuit network. For example, if a grounding
grid has four grounding points, namely, a fault grounding point,
a neutral point of the transformer, and two shunting points of
the ground wires on the high-voltage side and the low-voltage
side, a four-port model using controlled voltage sources can be
established as shown in Fig. 2.
Based on the aforementioned multiport model, the simulation model for the fault current distribution with the potential
difference within the grid taken into consideration can be established easily in the commercially available tools. Fig. 3 shows
the model in PSCAD/EMTDC.
The multiport model of the grounding grid proposed in this
paper has many advantages. For instance, each model uses a matrix to describe the relationship between the inputs and outputs,
which is easy to program.
B. Calculation of Matrix
In order to establish the multiport model, it is necessary to
obtain the value of matrix . The nonequipotential models of
the grounding grid should be used since they can calculate the
potential at any point on the grounding grid when a current is

1754

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 29, NO. 4, AUGUST 2014

TABLE I
PARAMETERS USED IN ANALYSIS

Fig. 3. Multiport model of the grid in PSCAD/EMTP.

Fig. 4. Part of a grounding system and its equivalent circuit. (a) Part of a
grounding system. (b) Equivalent circuit.

injected into any point of the grid. Many researchers have presented their models [16][19], [25], [26], and this paper uses a
model based on the moment method and the circuit theory [16].
First, according to the moment method, the grounding grid
is divided into segments. The longitudinal current
of each
segment is made centralized on the axis, and the leakage current
of the segment only flows out from its central point. Fig. 4(a)
shows these two currents on the th segment [16].
Then, a circuit model of the grounding grid is set up as
Fig. 4(b) shows, where the potential on the outer surface of the
midpoint of the segment is regarded as a voltage source, expressed as
.
are the
self-impedances of the corresponding segments. The voltage
sources are generated by all of the leakage currents and are
determined by
(4)
where is the column vector of the voltage sources,
is the
column vector of the leakage currents, and is a mutual resistance matrix [16]. Thus, a circuit model for the grounding grid
is set up which can be analyzed by the nodal analysis approach.
In this way, the distributions of the leakage current and the potential on the grounding grid can be obtained. The validity of
the method has already been verified in [16].
All elements of in (3) can be calculated by means of the
aforementioned model or other models that are capable of
modeling large grounding grids considering voltage drop in
grounding grid conductors. For instance, the impedance matrix
of a grid with four grounding points is a 4 4 square matrix,
and it is calculated in the following way: Only inject current

into grounding point 1, and the potentials of grounding points

1 to 4 will be
,
,
, and
. Only inject current
into grounding port 2, and the voltages of grounding points 1 to
4 will be
,
,
, and
. With the same method,
,
,
,
,
,
,
, and
can also be figured out.
Then, the element in the impedance matrix will be
(5)

III. INFLUENCE OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE OF THE

GROUNDING GRID ON THE FAULT CURRENT DIVISION FACTOR
The factors that influence the nonequipotential feature of the
grounding grid mainly include the area of the grid, soil resistivity, the material of the grounding conductors, and the relative
position of the grounding points.
This paper will explore these factors by numerical simulation. Under each condition, the model of lumped impedance
and the model of the multiport circuit network are used to
analyze the differences in fault current distribution and division
factor. The former will hereafter be called Model 1 and the
latter Model 2 for the sake of convenience. For Model 1, the
lumped impedance is also obtained by the method presented
in Section III-B, which is the grounding impedance at the
grounding point of a fault.
The analysis is based on the model in Fig. 3, and the system
parameters used are shown in Table I.
A. Influence of Grounding Grid Area
In China, usually the 220-, 330-, 500-, 750-, and 1000-kV
substations are about 100 100
, 200 200
, 300 300
, 400 400
, and 500 500
in area, respectively.
Thus, the fault current distributions of the grounding grids of
the aforementioned areas are analyzed. The spacing between

ZHANG et al.: INFLUENCE OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE WITHIN LARGE GROUNDING GRID

TABLE II
PARAMETERS OF THE GROUNDING CONDUCTOR AND SOIL

Fig. 5. Division factors using different models.

Fig. 6. Currents simulated by different models.

adjacent parallel grounding conductors is 20 m. The parameters

of the conductors and soil are shown in Table II.
In order to compare the results easily, the grounding points
of the ground wires and the neutral point of the transformer
are set as overlapping each other, so there are only two actual
grounding pointsone being the grounding point of faults and
the other being the grounding point of the ground wires, that
is, the neutral point of the transformer. In consideration of the
worst scenario, the fault grounding point is set on one corner of
the grid while the grounding point of the ground wires is on the
opposite corner.
The simulation results are shown in Table III, where
is the
grounding resistance at the grounding point of the fault which
is the lumped impedance used by Model 1,
is the ratio of
the potential difference between the two grounding points to the
potential at the grounding point of fault, and is the relative
error (
). Fig. 5 shows the difference in
division factor between Model 1 and Model 2, and Fig. 6 shows
the difference in current.

1755

TABLE III
SIMULATION RESULTS WITH DIFFERENT GROUNDING GRID AREAS

It can be seen from Table III, and Figs. 5 and 6 that:

1)
and
increase with area, which means that the potential difference within the grounding grid becomes more
distinct; when the side length of the grounding grid is 500
m, the ratio of the potential difference between the two
grounding points to the potential at the grounding point of
faults
reaches 0.928;
2) the potential difference within the grounding grid has almost no influence on the total fault current; this is because
the grounding impedance of the ground grid is rather small
compared with the impedance of the entire system;
3) under the same condition of area, the current in the ground
wires and the division factor of Model 2 are both smaller
than those of Model 1; with the increase of area, the relative
error between the two models also increases and reaches
17.9% when the side length of the grounding grid is 500
m; in Model 1, all of the grounding points overlap each
other, while in Model 2, the fault current should flow in the
grounding conductors before it reaches the ground wires;
during this process, there would be some currents leaking
into the soil; thus, there would be little current flowing in
the ground wires;
4) the current in the ground wires and its division factor both
decrease with the increase of area; due to the large distance
between the grounding points, it takes a long path for the
fault current to flow from the fault point to the grounding
point of the ground wires; during this process, there would
be more current leaking into the soil; thus, the fault current,
which finally reaches the grounding point of the ground
wires, would be little.
The results show that the current in the ground wires and
the division factor of Model 2 are both smaller than those of
Model 1. If the area is very large, the relative error between the
two models will be enlarged. A smaller division factor means
there will be more current injected into the earth, and the safety
problem of the grounding grid will be more grievous. Thus, in
order to obtain the precise results, it is necessary to consider
the influence of the potential difference within the grounding
grid on the fault current distribution. It can be seen that when
the area of the grounding grid reaches 300 300
or above,
will be greater than 0.5, and the relative error between the
two models will be above 10%. Thus, for the 500-, 750-, and
1000-kV substations, it is necessary to use the model of the multiport circuit network of the grounding system to calculate the
division factor.

1756

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 29, NO. 4, AUGUST 2014

TABLE IV
SIMULATION RESULTS WITH DIFFERENT SOIL RESISTIVITIES

TABLE V
PARAMETERS OF THE CONDUCTOR MATERIALS

TABLE VI
SIMULATION RESULTS WITH DIFFERENT CONDUCTOR MATERIALS

B. Influence of Soil Resistivity

After the fault current is injected into the grid, it will continually leak into the earth during its flow in the conductors,
which is affected by soil resistivity. For different soil resistivities, the corresponding fault current distribution is analyzed with
different grounding grid models.
Take a grid with an area of 500 500
as an example.
The spacing between adjacent parallel grounding conductors is
20 m. The grounding point of the fault and the grounding point
of the ground wires are on the opposite corners of the grid. The
parameters of the conductors are shown in Table II. The soil
resistivities are 50, 100, 500, and 1000 m, respectively. The
calculation results are shown in Table IV.
It can be seen from the results that:
1) as the soil resistivity increases, the total fault current barely
varies while the current in the ground wires increases;
2) as the soil resistivity increases,
and
both decrease, which means that the potential difference within
the grounding grid is decreasing and that the grid is more
like an equipotential zone; when the soil resistivity is
higher than 1000 m, the relative error between the two
models is below 10%, and the effect of the potential
difference within the grounding grid on the division factor
can be neglected.
C. Influence of Conductor Material
The material of the grounding conductors affects the potential
distribution of the grid. Theoretically, the smaller the resistivity
of the material, the smaller the potential difference between the
grounding points will be. Copper and steel are the two major
materials that are widely used in the field of engineering. The resistivity and permeability of copper are much smaller than those
of steel. Grounding grids made of copper have lower grounding
resistance and stronger corrosion resistance than those of steel.
However, due to its high price, copper is not as widely used as
steel in China. The influence of conductor material on the fault
current distributions is analyzed in this section.
A grid with an area of 500 500
is chosen as an example.
The spacing between adjacent parallel grounding conductors is
20 m. The grounding point of the fault and the grounding point
of the ground wires are on the opposite corners of the grid. The
soil resistivity is 100 m. The types of conductor materials include copper, copper-clad steel, and steel. The parameters of the
materials are shown in Table V, and the results of the simulation
are in Table VI.

As shown in Table VI, it is obvious that:

1) with the resistivity and permeability increasing, the total
fault current almost stays unchanged;
2) for Model 1, as the resistivity and permeability increase,
the currents in the ground wires and the division factor
will both increase, while for Model 2, they will decrease.
This is because the lumped impedance
used in Model
1 increases with resistivity and permeability, which means
that more currents will flow away from the ground wires
instead of the grounding grid; however, in Model 2, high
resistivity and permeability of the conductor means that
more fault currents will leak into the soil before reaching
the ground wires;
3)
and
increase with the resistivity and permeability,
which means that the nonequipotential feature becomes
more distinct; also, the relative error between the two
models increases, with 2.8% for copper and 17.9% for
steel.
The results indicate that if the grid is made of steel, the model
of the multiport circuit network for the grounding grid should be
chosen to analyze the fault current distribution and the division
factor.
D. Influence of the Grounding Point Position
The fault current is injected into the earth through the
grounding point, flowing in the conductors, and the last part of
it runs away through the shunting points. During this process,
the fault current continually leaks into the earth.
The basic idea of the lumped impedance model is assuming
that the grounding points overlap each other and that there is
no potential difference between the grounding points. Theoretically, this assumption will be acceptable if the distance between
the grounding points is short; otherwise, it will lead to a large
error. The relative position of the grounding points affects the
potential difference within the grounding grid, and then affects
the fault current distribution.
We choose a grid with an area of 500 500
as an example. The spacing between adjacent parallel grounding conductors is 20 m. The soil resistivity and conductor material are

ZHANG et al.: INFLUENCE OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE WITHIN LARGE GROUNDING GRID

1757

TABLE VII
SIMULATION RESULTS WITH DIFFERENT POSITIONS OF GROUNDING POINTS

shown in Table II. The grounding point of the ground wire is on

one corner of the grid, and the grounding point of the fault is on
the opposite corner or in the center of the grid. The simulated
fault current distribution is shown in Table VII.
The results show that the relative error between the two
models is 9.2% when the fault grounding point is in the center
and 17.9% when the fault grounding point is on the opposite
corner. Also, if the spacing between the grounding points is
large, the potential difference will be distinct, in which case the
model of the multiport circuit network for the grounding grid
should be utilized.
In summary, the potential difference within the grounding
grid has little influence on the total fault current, but a great
influence on the current in the ground wires. The larger the potential difference is, the smaller the shunt current will be, which
means more current will be injected into the earth and that the
safety problem of the grounding grid might be aggravated. Thus,
it is necessary to take account of the influence of the potential
difference within the grounding grid on the fault current distribution. For steel grounding grids, when the soil resistivity is
lower than 1000 m and the area of the grounding grid reaches
300 300
or above, it is necessary to use the model of the
multiport circuit network of the grounding system with multiple
grounding points to calculate the division factor.
IV. FAULT CURRENT DISTRIBUTION IN A 1000-kV SUBSTATION
The Jindongnan 1000-kV substation is one of the first
ultra-high voltage (UHV) substations in China, whose
grounding system was designed by using the method in
this paper. In this section, the fault current distribution of this
particular substation during a single-phase-to-ground fault
is presented, and the influences of different grounding grid
models on fault current distribution are analyzed.
A. Parameters of the 1000-kV Substation
The substation has three 1000-kV transmission lines and five
500-kV lines. The system parameters are the same as those
shown in Table I. The parameters of soil are shown in Table VIII.
The layout of the substation is shown in Fig. 7. The grounding
grid is made of copper, whose parameters are listed in Table V.
The spacing between adjacent grounding parallel conductors is
20 m.
Both the HV side and the LV side of the substation have
more than one transmission line and each line has its corresponding ground wires connected to the grid. Thus, there would

Fig. 7. Layout of the 1000-kV substation.

TABLE VIII
SOIL PARAMETERS OF THE 1000-kV SUBSTATION

TABLE IX
COORDINATES OF THE GROUNDING POINTS

be many grounding points. However, all of the ground wires of

the transmission lines with the same voltage are first connected
to the same steel portal frame, and then the frame is grounded
to the grounding grid. Since the resistance of the frame is much
smaller than that of the grounding conductor, the grounding
points of the ground wires with the same voltage can be assumed to be equipotential and be one single port of the multiport
circuit model. Along with the grounding point of the fault and
the transformer neutral point, a four-port circuit model can be
established.
The position of the fault is set on the 1000-kV side, and since
the 1000-kV busbars are very long, two positions are chosen for
analysis to gain more accurate results. The positions of the fault
and transformer neutral point are shown in Fig. 7. The lower
left corner of the substation is set as the origin, and all of the
coordinates of the grounding points are shown in Table IX.
B. Results of the Simulation
As the position of the fault differs in these two cases, the
impedance matrices are not the same. The impedance matrices
are derived by means of the method mentioned in Section III,
and the results are as shown in Table X.
The fault current distribution during a single-phase-to-ground
fault is simulated by employing the model of lumped impedance
and the model of the multiport circuit network. The results are

1758

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 29, NO. 4, AUGUST 2014

TABLE X
IMPEDANCE MATRICES OF THE GROUNDING GRID (UNIT:

model of lumped impedance, as more currents flow into

the earth during the fault.
Usually, transmission lines of different voltage classes are on
the opposite sides of the substation, and regardless of where
the fault occurs, the distance among them would be very long.
Thus, the potential difference within the grid should not be ignored. Since the fault position cannot be manually controlled,
engineers should always consider the worst case scenario.
V. CONCLUSION

TABLE XI
SIMULATION RESULTS WITH DIFFERENT FAULT GROUNDING POINTS

TABLE XII
COORDINATES OF THE GROUNDING POINTS

A multiport circuit network model for grounding grids with

its potential difference taken into account is proposed in this
paper. By applying the model to the commercially available
tools for power system simulation, a simulation method of fault
current distribution is then derived.
The influences of the grid area, soil resistivity, material of
the grid conductor, and relative position of the grounding points
on the fault current distribution are thoroughly analyzed. According to the simulation results, if the grounding grid is large
in area, or the soil resistivity is low, or the resistivity and permeability of the conductors are high, or the distance among the
grounding points is great, the amount of current injected into
the earth will be great. For steel grounding grids, when the soil
resistivity is lower than 1000 m and the area of the grounding
grid reaches 300 300
or above, it is necessary to use the
model of the multiport circuit network of the grounding system
with multiple grounding points to calculate the division factor.
The fault current distribution, maximal step voltage,
and touch voltage of a 1000-kV UHV substation during a
single-phase-to-ground fault are specifically analyzed. The
results show that the calculations by using the model of the
multiport circuit network for the grounding grid, the current
injected into the earth, and the maximal step voltage and touch
voltage are all much larger than those by using the traditional
model of lumped impedance.
REFERENCES

shown in Table XI, and the phase differences between the currents are shown in Table XII.
As shown in Tables XI and XII, it is obvious that:
1) for the same fault position, the value of does not
change much when different simulation models are used.
However, the
obtained by the model of the multiport
circuit network is much smaller than that of the model of
lumped impedance, which means more currents flow into
earth during the fault.
2) The relative error of division factor between the two
models of fault in the center of the grid is much smaller
than that on the corner.
3) The step voltage and touch voltage of the model of the
multiport circuit network is much higher than that of the

[1] D. L. Garrett, J. G. Myers, and S. G. Patel, Determination of maximum

substation grounding system fault current using graphical analysis,
IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. PWRD-2, no. 3, pp. 725732, Jul. 1987.
[2] F. Dawalibi, Ground fault current distribution between soil and neutral
conductors, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-99, no. 2, pp.
452461, Mar. 1980.
[3] F. Dawalibi and G. B. Niles, Measurements and computations of
fault current distribution on overhead transmission lines, IEEE Trans.
Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-103, no. 3, pp. 553560, Mar. 1984.
[4] IEEE Guide for Safety of AC Substation Groundings, IEEE Standard
80-2000, Jan. 2000.
[5] E. K.-N. Yung, An innovative analysis of earthing grids for power
substations, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen., Transm. Distrib., vol. 132,
pp. 251256, Sep. 1985.
[6] C. Chang and C. Lee, Computation of ground resistances and assessment of ground grid safety at 161/23.9-kV indoor-type substation,
IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 12501260, Jul. 2006.
[7] A. P. Meliopoulos, R. P. Webb, E. B. Joy, and S. Patel, Computation of
maximum earth current in substation switchyards, IEEE Trans. Power
App. Syst., vol. PAS-102, no. 9, pp. 31313139, Sep. 1983.
[8] M. Mitolo, P. E. Sutherland, and R. Natarajan, Effects of high fault
currents on ground grid design, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 46, no. 3,
pp. 11181124, May 2010.
[9] H. R. Seedher, J. K. Arora, and S. K. Soni, A practical approach for
computation of grid current, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 14, no. 3,
pp. 897902, Jul. 1999.

ZHANG et al.: INFLUENCE OF POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE WITHIN LARGE GROUNDING GRID

[10] L. M. Popovic, A practical method for evaluation of ground fault current distribution on double circuit parallel lines, IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 108113, Jan. 2000.
[11] L. M. Popovic, Practical method for evaluating ground fault current
distribution in station supplied by an unhomogeneous line, in Proc.
IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Transm. Distrib. Conf., 1996, pp. 314319.
[12] J. He, J. Wu, B. Zhang, and R. Zeng, Fault current-division factor of
substation grounding grid in seasonal frozen soil, IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 855865, Apr. 2013.
[13] C. H. Lee and C. N. Chang, Computation of current-division factors
and assessment of earth-grid safety at 161/69 kV indoor-type and outdoor-type substations, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., Gen., Transm. Distrib.,
vol. 152, pp. 837848, Jun. 2005.
[14] H. B. Gooi and S. A. Sebo, Distribution of ground fault currents along
transmission lines An improved algorithm, IEEE Trans. Power
App. Syst., vol. PAS-104, no. 3, pp. 663670, Mar. 1985.
[15] G. Weitzenfeld, Power system ground fault current distribution using
the double-sided elimination method, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol.
1, no. 1, pp. 1725, Jan. 1986.
[16] Z. Bo, C. Xiang, Z. Zhibin, H. Jinliang, and L. Lin, Numerical analysis
of the influence between large grounding grids and two-end grounded
cables by the moment method coupled with circuit equations, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 2, pt. 1, pp. 731737, Apr. 2005.
[17] Y. Jiansheng, Y. Huina, Z. Liping, C. Xiang, and M. Xinshan, Simulation of substation grounding grids with unequal-potential, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 36, no. 4, pt. 1, pp. 14681471, Jul. 2000.
[18] A. F. Otero, J. Cidras, and J. L. del Alamo, Frequency-dependent
grounding system calculation by means of a conventional nodal analysis technique, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 873878,
Jul. 1999.
[19] M. Heimbach and L. D. Grcev, Grounding system analysis in transients programs applying electromagnetic field approach, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 186193, Jan. 1997.
[20] H. W. Dommel, Digital computer solution of electromagnetic transient in single and multiple networks, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst.,
vol. PAS-88, no. 4, pp. 388399, Apr. 1969.
[21] A. P. Meliopoulos and M. G. Moharam, Transient analysis of
grounding systems, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-102, no.
2, pp. 389397, Feb. 1983.
[22] M. M. B. Narayanan, S. Parameswaran, and D. Mukhedkar, Transient
performance of grounding grids, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 4, no.
4, pp. 20532059, Oct. 1989.
[23] B. Zhang, J. Zhao, R. Zeng, and J. He, Numerical analysis of DC
current distribution in AC power system near HVDC system, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 960965, Apr. 2008.
[24] B. Zhang, R. Zeng, and J. He, Numerical analysis of potential distribution between ground electrodes of HVDC system considering the effect
of earth deep layers, IET Gen. Transm. Distrib., vol. 2, pp. 185191,
Mar. 2008.
[25] F. P. Dawalibi, Electromagnetic fields generated by overhead and
buried short conductors, Part 1 and Part 2, IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. PWRD-1, no. 4, pp. 105119, Oct. 1986.
[26] L. Grcev, Lightning surge efficiency of grounding grids, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 16921699, Jul. 2011.
Bo Zhang (M10) was born in Datong, China, in
1976. He received the B.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in
theoretical electrical engineering from the North
China Electric Power University, Baoding, China, in
1998 and 2003, respectively.
Currently, he is an Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing. His research interests include computational electromagnetics, grounding technology, and
electromagnetic compatibility in power systems.

1759

Yukuan Jiang was born in Zhejiang, China, in 1989.

He received the M.S.E.E. degree in electrical engineering from Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in
2013.
Currently he is with Zhejiang Electric Power Test
and Research Institute, Hangzhou. His research interests include overvoltage analysis in power systems,
and grounding technology.

Jinpeng Wu was born in Hebei, China, in 1987. He

received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering
from Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 2010,
where he is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in
electrical engineering.
His research interests include overvoltage analysis
in power systems, and grounding technology.

Jinliang He (M02SM02F08) was born in

Changsha, China, in 1966. He received the B.Sc.
degree from Wuhan University of Hydraulic and
Electrical Engineering, Wuhan, China, the M.Sc. degree from Chongqing University, Chongqing, China,
and the Ph.D. degree from Tsinghua University,
Beijing, China, all in electrical engineering, in 1988,
1991, and 1994, respectively.
He became a Lecturer in 1994 and an Associate Professor in 1996, both in the Department
of Electrical Engineering, Tsinghua University.
From 1994 to 1997, he was the Chair of High Voltage Laboratory, Tsinghua
University. From 1997 to 1998, he was a Visiting Scientist with the Korea
Electrotechnology Research Institute, Changwon, Korea, involved in research
on metaloxide varistors and high voltage polymeric metaloxide surge
arresters. In 2001, he was promoted to Professor at Tsinghua University, and
is currently the Chair of the High Voltage Research Institute. His research
interests include overvoltages and electromagnetic compatibility in power
systems and electronic systems, lightning protection, grounding technology,
power apparatus, and dielectric material. He is the author of five books and
200 technical papers.