Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 of 5
http://www.duncaninstr.com/Gr_article.htm
Search
Our Site
1-877-742-4448
Software Contact Us
Abstract:
The main factors that should be considered in order to get an accurate earth resistance
measurement in electrical systems are analyzed. The measurement system geometry, including
minimum distances that should be taken into account, is particularly considered.
Products
ARB /Function Generators
Battery Testing
Introduction:
Breadboarding Systems
Data Logging
The grounding system is an essential element for the electrical system security and it is
required to:
Environmental Instruments
Equalize the potential of conductive parts that can be accessed simultaneously, with the
potential in the surrounding soil in order to prevent people from being exposed to
hazardous voltages.
Oscilloscope
Power Analyzers
Power Quality Analysis
Power Supplies
Resistance Boxes
Due to the fact that it is a system designed to guarantee safety, its effectiveness should be
verified. The diffusion resistance value is the parameter normally considered to be the most
relevant one to test grounding system quality and its capacity to carry out its function properly.
But the correct measurement of this parameter needs to fulfill several requirements, which will
be analyzed in this issue.
Tachometers/Stroboscopes
Transformer Testing
Universal Programmers
Technical Articles
Insulation Resistance Tester
Low resistance ohmmeter /
microohmmeter / microohmmeter
The understanding of the earth resistance physical nature will help us evaluate the conditions to
be fulfilled in order to get its correct measurement.
According to its definition, resistors have two terminals and its resistance is defined as the
quotient of the voltage applied on those terminals and the current circulating between them as a
consequence of that voltage. The value of the resistance (eq. 1) depends on the type of
material (resistivity) and its physical dimensions (area and length of the resistive element), as it
is shown in figure 1.
Only one of the terminals is evident in the earth resistance. In order to find the second terminal
we should recourse to its definition: Earth Resistance is the resistance existing between the
electrically accessible part of a buried electrode and another point of the earth, which is far
away (Figure 2).
The idea is that outside the earth volume next to a buried electrode, through which a current is
injected, all the planet volume is equipotential related to that current. Any point of that
equipotential volume (Figure 3) can be considered as the second electrode of the earth
7/4/2011 4:57 PM
2 of 5
http://www.duncaninstr.com/Gr_article.htm
resistance.
In order to justify the previous statement, we will closely analyze the resistance geometry in the
area surrounding the buried electrode, which, in the following example, is supposed to be
hemispherical (Figure 4).
The current being injected in the earth through the buried electrode goes out from it in all
directions, with a uniform density (supposing the ground is electrically homogeneous), and it
must later go through the various layers illustrated in figure 4. Each layer offers a resistance to
the passing current, which is proportional to the ground resistivity and to the layer thickness
(resistance length in Figure 1), and inversely proportional to the layer's area, according to eq.1.
Then, the total resistance is the sum of many small resistances in series. The thickness is
arbitrarily defined as thin enough so as to consider both surfaces of the layer as of the same
area (requirement necessary to apply eq. 1).
Really, the thickness is infinitesimal and the sum of the resistances is an integral as shown in
eq. 2, where r0 is the radius of the buried hemisphere.
In order to allow an easier physical visualization of the phenomenon, we could imagine the
structure of an onion, made up of a great number of very thin layers, each of which represents
one of the resistances of the series.
The important concept to be observed is that, since the ground resistivity was supposed to be
homogeneous and the thickness of all the layers is the same, the only element that is modified
(it increases) as we go away from the electrode is the surface of the layer. In figure 4, it can be
observed that surface S3 is much bigger than the surface S1. When the surface increases, the
resistance decreases in the same proportion and therefore the contribution made by the remote
layers to the total resistance tends to be insignificant.
Calculations for the case of an hemispherical electrode show that in the nearest region, up to a
distance equivalent to 10 times the electrode radius, the 90% of the total resistance is
concentrated. In other words, the contribution made to the resistance by the layers located
outside this area, is not significant. And as there is no resistance, there is no fall-of-potential
either. Consequently, outside the region closest to the electrode (called resistance area), all the
ground is at the same potential.
Measurement method:
In order to measure the resistance, we need to apply a voltage among its terminals that causes
the circulation of a current through it. One of the terminals is the earth system accessible
contact E. The second one, according to the definition, is any other point of the earth that is
really far away from the first. In order to carry out the measurement, we should hammer an
auxiliary electrode H at that point. The second electrode will inevitably have its own earth
resistance and resistance area.
If we look at figure 5, we will see that:
1.
2.
The concept of "far away" -previously used without making greater precisions- is now
clarified. In fact, it can be considered that the auxiliary electrode H is sufficiently far
away from the earth system which resistance is being measured when its respective
resistance areas do not overlap. In such a case, all the volume that is outside the
resistance areas is, very approximately, at the same potential, which makes it possible to
develop the following measurement method.
7/4/2011 4:57 PM
3 of 5
http://www.duncaninstr.com/Gr_article.htm
Fall-of-Potential Method
A third electrode S is used in order to avoid the error introduced by the earth resistance of
electrode H, The S rod is hammered at any point outside the E and H influence zones, giving as
a result a geometry similar to the one shown in Figure 6.
This arrangement is known as Fall-of-Potential Method and it is the most commonly used for the
earth resistance measurement in small or medium dimension systems, in which the separation
of the resistance areas is obtained with reasonable distances between electrodes. The current
circulates through the earth system E and the auxiliary electrode H, and the voltage is
measured between E and the third electrode S. This voltage is the fall of potential that the test
current produces in the earth system resistance, Rx, which in this way can be measured without
being affected by the earth resistance of the H rod.
The 62% rule
Many publications that make reference to the Fall-of-Potential Method indicate that, in order to
obtain a correct measurement, the three electrodes must be well aligned and the distance
between E and S must be the 61.8% of the distance between E and H (figure 7). This concept
comes from a careful mathematical development for the particular case of an hemispherical
electrode, published by Dr. G. F. Tagg (Note. 1) in 1964.
Nevertheless, this configuration is not easily applied in the real life. The first problem to be
faced is that real earth systems have complex geometries and it is difficult to assimilate them
with an hemisphere in order to precisely determine its center, from which distances can be
measured accurately enough. Besides, in urban areas it is difficult to find places where the rods
can be hammered, and it is rare for those available places to coincide in their position with the
62% rule requirements (alignment and distances relationship).
Fortunately, by using the same calculations of the previously mentioned paper we can derive
another geometry, which is easier to apply. Consider the segment joining E with H and the
straight line that intersects that segment at its middle point and that is perpendicular to the
mentioned segment. By placing the electrode at any point lying on the straight line the
measured value of the resistance will fall between 0.85 and 0.95 of the true value of the earth
resistance of the electrode. Then, multiplying the measured value by 1.11 the correct earth
resistance value is obtained, with an error lower than 5%. It is also observed that as the
voltage electrode goes far away from the segment EH, the area where the measured value is
within the indicated range of tolerance becomes wider, making the method to be more tolerant
to changes in the position of the voltage electrode in both directions. In Figure 8, if the electrode
S is hammered at any point outside the gray areas, the error will be lower than 5% when
applying this procedure that we will call "The 1.11 rule".
Perhaps the expected error caused by the suggested method may appear to be too high. In
order to evaluate this point, we will cite again the same Dr. Taggs paper: "...bearing in mind that
a high degree of accuracy is not necessary. Errors of 5-10% [in the measurement of earth
resistance] can be tolerated... This is because an earth resistance can vary with changes in
climate or temperature, and, as such changes may be considerable, there is no point in striving
after a high degree of accuracy."
"Recipe" for the 1.11 rule
1.
2.
Imagine the segment EH that joins the center of the grounding system E with the
auxiliary rod H. At the middle point of that segment, draw an imaginary straight line
7/4/2011 4:57 PM
4 of 5
http://www.duncaninstr.com/Gr_article.htm
3.
Hammer the auxiliary rod S (potential electrode) at any point that lies on that imaginary
straight line, far away from the EH segment.
4.
Measure the earth resistance using an "earth tester" and multiply the obtained value, by
1.11, in order to get the grounding resistance real value.
5.
Take into account that this method is very tolerant to variations in the potential rod
position. That's why you should worry neither for determining with real accuracy the
middle point position of the segment nor for the imaginary straight-line perpendicularity.
These values are merely indicative, and the measured value does not significantly
modify itself based on those values as long as the lateral withdrawal of the potential
ground rod is large (greater than 4D).
A more detailed analytical study of the development that leads to 1.11 factor rule does not fall
within the scope of this paper, but it can be found in a paper written by the same author(Note.
2).
Auxiliary electrodes earth resistance
Current and potential auxiliary electrodes are also earth electrodes, often of small dimensions,
and due to this they can present a fairly high earth resistance (also depending on the soil
resistivity). As it has already been seen, the 3 electrodes method is a configuration that makes it
possible to eliminate the influence of these resistances on the measurement. However, earth
testers constructive limitations impose restrictions to the earth resistances maximum value of the
auxiliary ground rods.
Related to current electrodes, the limitation is imposed by the features of the built-in generator
of the earth tester. A very high resistance of this electrode would limit the current that the
equipment can inject into the soil, with a subsequent decrease in the measurement sensibility.
Concerning the potential electrode, the limitation is determined by the voltmeter circuit input
impedance of the earth tester, which must be far greater than the earth resistance of this
auxiliary electrode.
The IEC 61557-5 standard, specific for earth testers, determines that the instrument must
provide a correct measurement result with an error lower than 30% for any resistance of the
auxiliary electrodes of up to 100 x Ra with a maximum of 50kW, being Ra the measured
resistance value. It also requires the instrument to be able to determine that this condition is
fulfilled, in order to avoid an error of this kind to go unnoticed. Several instruments carry this out
automatically, warning the operator and blocking measurement when the resistance of any
auxiliary electrode is excessive. If this is not the case, then the measure procedure should
include this checking before each test.
Interferences
When a grounding system resistance of an energized installation is measured, a significant
voltage of industrial frequency and possible harmonics between the earth electrode E and the
potential electrode S appears due to the existence of an earth fault current. The same happens
during measurements in soils in which there are spurious currents circulating, such as it
happens in the vicinity of some substations. These interfering voltages can be much higher than
the ones the equipment should measure. This is because the injected currents are always
small, perhaps a few milliamps, in order to preserve operators' safety. The greatest challenge
that a good Earth tester faces is to be able to distinguish the potential drop in earth resistance
due to the test current from the interfering voltages (which may have a substantially greater
magnitude).
This distinction is easier to achieve if the frequency of the injected current coincides neither with
the industrial frequency nor with any of its harmonics. This condition is mathematically
expressed in equation 3. Where:
7/4/2011 4:57 PM
5 of 5
http://www.duncaninstr.com/Gr_article.htm
1.
2.
3.
Manuel J. Leibovich, "Analytical study of the 1.11 rule for earth resistance measuring.
The author of the article is Mr. Manuel Jamie Leibovitch, R&D director of Megabras
Industria Electronica Ltda. Represented by Duncan Instruments Canada Ltd.
For your price and delivery inquires, application details comments, and general feedback, please
select
Feedback Mailbox
Home | Products | Services | Software | Contact Us
7/4/2011 4:57 PM