This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2524660, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
1

"This paper was submitted for the special section of "Modern Substation Technologies". Due to an error in the
editorial process, this material was uploaded for early access. The paper has not been fully reviewed and
accepted. If the full version of this paper is accepted, it will be uploaded for early access and published in the
IEEE Transaction on Power Delivery".

Optimal Location of Substation Metallic Fences

to Protect the Nearby Public Walking Through
Numerical Evaluation
Daniel S. Gazzana, Member, IEEE, Guilherme A. D. Dias, Alex B. Tronchoni, Arturo S. Bretas,
Senior Member, IEEE, Roberto C. Leborgne, Member, IEEE, Marcos Telló, Member, IEEE

adjacent structures within a safe range. [1]-[2].

Abstract-- This paper shows one way to calculate grounding
potentials in high voltage substation fences coupled by soil to a
grounding grid in a two-layer soil. This problem is of special
concern due to the presence of passers-by near metallic fences,
whose potentials usually have not been evaluated, not directly
connected to the grounding grid. In this context, the paper
presents a general analytical formulation aiming to estimate the
possible risk to human beings close to the substation. In order to
do that the generated potentials originating from a short-circuit
in the electric power system are calculated considering the
coupling by soil between the main grounding system and the
adjacent electrode (the metallic fence). Finally, the proposed
methodology is tested and validated using different grounding
topologies.
Index Terms-- Grounding, high voltage substation, metallic
fence, grounding coupled by soil, touch and step potentials.
I. INTRODUCTION
G rounding systems have great importance in the electric
power network, playing a key role regarding its power
quality and protection. These schemes are constituted by
simple horizontal or vertical rods to large grounding meshes,
as the case of substations, and are one of the main resources
capable of keeping the physical integrity of an installation in
the event of a short-circuit or lightning, promoting safety to the
people and enhancing the operation of the electrical system. In
the case of such events, considering high voltage substations
(HVS), the involved grounding system should be designed in
order to obtain the best current dissipation to the earth,
ensuring low values of grounding impedance and especially
acceptable potentials generated on the soil surface and in the
This work was supported in part by CAPES, Ministry of Education of
Brazil and Companhia Estadual de Energia Elétrica – CEEE-D.
Daniel S. Gazzana, Guilherme A. D. Dias, Alex B. Tronchoni and Roberto
C. Leborgne are with Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul - UFRGS,
Porto Alegre, RS 90035-190, Brazil, (e-mail: dgazzana@ece.ufrgs.br;
gaddias@terra.com.br; alex.tronchoni@ufrgs.br, rcl@ece.ufrgs.br).
Arturo S. Bretas is with University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611,
USA, (e-mail: arturo@ece.ufl.edu).
Marcos Telló is with Companhia Estadual de Energia Elétrica – CEEE-D,
Porto Alegre, RS 91410-400, Brazil, (e-mail: marcost@ceee.com.br).
The human tolerable step and touch potentials usually are
considered as reference parameters on the steady-state analysis
(low frequency 50/60 Hz). However, such potentials can be
exceeded in the transitory period of an electric impulse such as
lightning surges. Therefore, depending on the signal frequency
injected into the grounding system, impulsive analysis during
the transitory period must be evaluated [3].
The development of models for suitable grounding systems
can provide the necessary knowledge for the construction of
more efficient ground meshes. In turn, more efficient
grounding meshes allow for an increase in security and quality
of the electrical power system operation. In this context, the
generated potentials caused by short-circuit in the electric
power system must be calculated to ensure the safety of
passers-by in the vicinity of a HVS considering the coupling
by soil between the main grounding system and other
structures in the surroundings, which are not directly
connected as, for example, is the case of metallic fences.
Several methods, analytical and numerical, can be used to
determine potentials on the soil surface of grounding meshes.
Numerical methods are more attractive mainly because of the
solution limitations provided by analytical formulation in the
case of systems with complex geometries and non-
homogeneous media [4]. Among these formulations, precise
solutions based on different approaches, transient or steady-
state analysis can be obtained for high and low frequencies
[5]-[7].
The approach of this work is on the currents generated in
the grounding systems of HVS proceeding from a short-circuit
in steady-state analysis. The presented methodology is, based
on [7], and can be seen as an extension of the Average
Potential Method. The main contribution of this work is the
presentation of a numerical method for estimating grounding
potentials in high voltage substation fences, considering them
coupled by soil to a grounding grid in a two-layer soil. Still,
the proposed work presents a general analytical formulation
aiming to estimate the possible risk to human beings close to
the substation.
The remainder of this paper is as follows. Section II

0885-8977 (c) 2015 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.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2524660, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
2

describes the problem formulation. The proposed analytical
methodology is described on Section III. A case study is
presented on Section IV. Section V presents the conclusions of
this work.
II. BACKGROUND
When the grounding system of a substation is submitted to
a phase-to-ground short-circuit fault, potentials on the mesh
and surrounding area are generated. In the analysis of the
Ground Potential Rise (GPR), step and touch voltages and
potentials generated on the soil surface, the coupling through
the soil among metallic materials must be considered. These
statements deal with the problem of grounding metallic fences
as a property limit of a HVS and its correspondent grounding
grid.
Another aspect to be observed is that a conductor falling
over the metallic fence is an event that is not considered for
the following reasons presented in [8], Page 101.
“Construction of transmission lines over private fences is
common and reliable. The number of lines crossing a
substation fence may be greater, but the spans are often shorter
and dead-ended at one or both ends. Hence, the danger of a
line falling on a fence is usually not of great concern. If one is
to design against this danger, then very close coupling of the
fence to adjacent ground throughout its length is necessary.
Touch and step potentials on both sides of the fence must be
within the acceptable limit for a fault current of essentially the
same maximum value as for the substation. This is somewhat
impractical because the fence is not tied to the main ground
grid in the substation and the adjacent earth would be required
to dissipate the fault current through the local fence grounding
system. In addition, the fault current would cause significant
damage to the fence, and predicting the actual clearing time
and touch and step voltages might be impossible.”
There are four situations involving the substation and fence
grounding system [9]:
• Case 1: fence within the substation grounding grid area,
connected to the substation grounding grid.
• Case 2: fence outside the substation grounding grid area,
connected to the substation grounding grid.
• Case 3: fence outside the substation grounding grid area, but
not connected to the substation grounding grid. The fence is
connected to a separate grounding electrode.
• Case 4: fence outside the substation grounding grid area, but
not connected to the substation grounding grid. The fence is
not connected to a separate grounding electrode. In this case,
the contact of the fence post with the earth works as an
effective grounding.
This work deals with case 3, the most common topology,
when the coupling between two or more grounding systems
through the soil occurs. Such case is considered to be the most
difficult case to evaluate numerically. In the following, the
proposed mathematical model is presented. For this propose
studies [6]-[7] and [10] are taken as primordial references.
III. MATHEMATICAL MODEL
Computational algorithms are a reliable alternative to
determine with high precision the interaction among the
various electrodes that form the substation grounding grid
system. The algorithm considers:
• individual modeling of elements that compose the grounding
system (rods, cables, counterpoise);
• a set of equations that describe the interaction among the
various electrodes;
• the determination of the short-circuit currents that flow from
various grounding systems to the soil;
• evaluation of the potential on the soil surface which can be
performed considering a single value of potential in a
determined point; potential profile and potential surface.
The methodology proposes dividing the grounding
electrode into segments, where each section has a particular
current value. To determine the leakage currents flowing in
each segment to the ground, the average electric potential on
the surface of each conductor segment is computed and
matched to the same value of constant electrical potential. In
addition, the images theory is considered in order to make the
normal component of the electric field equal to zero in the soil
/air boundary surface.
The algorithm precision depends mainly on the size and the
segmentation of each electrode in the mathematical modeling.
This definition determines the precision of current densities in
each conductor segment. Considering the approach in low
frequency, the precision also depends on the medium
resistivity and the number of soil layers.
The problem is divided into two parts: the determination of
currents injected in the soil by the several elements that
compose the grounding system, and the determination of the
potential in any point of the soil surface.
The following mathematical formulation describes a general
solution of a grounding system composed by N isolated
electrodes which are coupled by soil. The equations system in
the case of a unique grounding electrode, composed by n
elements, is as follows (1),
 r11 r12 ... r1n   I 1  U 
r r22 ... r2 n   I 2  U 
 21 ⋅ =  (1)
 ... ... ... ...   ...   ...
     
rn1 rn 2 ... rnn   I n  U 
where:
r ii self resistance of element I (Ω);
r ij mutual resistance of elements i and j (Ω);
Ij injected current in the soil through element I (A);
U Ground Potential Rise (GPR) of electrode, when the
current flows to the soil through the electrode (V).
In a compact form, the previous equation can be written as:
R⋅ I =U (2)
where:
R resistance full matrix (n x n) defined in [7] (Ω);
I current column vector (n x I) (A);
U GPR column vector (n x I) in which all elements are

0885-8977 (c) 2015 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.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2524660, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
3

equal (V). and lengthy processing times, especially in the case of large
This equation system presents (n + 1) unknown variables grounding meshes.
(I 1 , I 2 ,...,I n and U) requiring, therefore, an additional equation
to reach a proper solution, IV. NUMERICAL SIMULATION
In order to clarify the potentiality of the proposed
I 1 + I 2 + ...I n = I cc (3)
technique, two case studies will be presented. The first one
where I cc is a short-circuit current injected by the electrode in analysis the Ground Potential Rise generated on a fence by the
the soil. coupling with the soil considering a short-circuit in a main
When the grounding system is formed by N isolated grounding system. The second one evaluates the GPR on a
electrodes, the equivalent equations system can be represented fence taking into account different distances from a short-
by the following generic model, circuited grounding mesh.
A. Potentials generated on a fence
 r AA r AB ... r AN   I A  U A 
 BA      The first simulation presented is based on the two
r r BB ... r BN   I B  U B 
⋅ = (4) grounding systems shown in Fig. 1. The first is composed by a
 ... ... ... ...   ...   ...  substation grounding mesh with unequally spaced conductors
 NA     
 r r NB ... r NN   I N  U N  inside a metallic fence. The second is composed by the
referred fence grounding unconnected to the potential contours
where:
of the substation grounding mesh.
RXY matrix (n x x n y ) of mutual resistances between the
Fig. 1 shows both grounding systems composed by metallic
elements of electrodes X and Y;
fence grounding (in blue), the substation grounding mesh and
RXX matrix (n x x n y ) of self resistances and mutual
resistances of X electrode elements; their corresponding dimensions.
IX column vector (n x x 1) of injected currents in the soil by The main parameters used in the simulation are: soil
the elements of electrode X, when the circulation of resistivity of first layer = 100 Ωm; first layer depth = 5 m; soil
current to the soil occurs due to a short-circuit in one or resistivity of second layer = 500 Ωm; substation and fence
more electrodes; grounding depth = 0.5 m; substation and fence grounding
UN Column vector (n x x 1) whose elements are equal to the cables = 70 mm2 (copper); current from ground to soil = 1kA.
GPR that occurs in the elements of electrode X.
This equation system presents (n A +n A +…+n n +N) unknown
variables. All the vector elements (IA,IB,…,IN and UA,UB,…,UN)
need N additional equations for its solution:
I 1A + I 2A + .............. + I nA
A
= I CC
A

I 1B + I 2B + .............. + I nB
B
= I CC
B
(5)

I 1N + I 2N + .............. + I nN
N
= I CC
N

where I ccx is the short circuit current injected by electrode X in

the soil.
The solution of the systems of equations (1) or (4) can be
solved in several ways. The technical choice must consider the
entire variable number of the problem. The most appropriate
solution techniques are iterative or direct methods [1].
• Iterative methods: these techniques are characterized by a
solution through a sequence of steps, in each step the
previous value is improved until the precision goal is
achieved. The processing time depends on the level of
accuracy required, as it may demand a higher or lower
number of iterations [10].
• Direct methods (triangularization or matrix inversion): these
methods are characterized by the association of equations
(1) and (3) or (4) and (5) forming a set of simultaneous
equations to be solved in a finite number of steps, using
elementary operations. This technique sometimes requires a
great number of elements necessary for an accurate detailing
of grounding systems (discretization process), generally
leading to huge matrices that demand a high storage capacity
Fig. 1. Layout of the substation and the metallic fence grounding system.
In this simulation, the current injected in the soil originates
only from the substation grounding mesh producing a Ground
Potential Rise (GPR) in the ground mat and also in the fence
grounding due to the existing soil coupling.
Based on the proposed formulation, the GPR in the
substation grounding mat is 3346.1 V with a grounding
resistance of 3.346 Ω and the GPR of the fence grounding
reaches 2151.2 V.
Fig. 2 shows a potential profile (blue dashed line) crossing
the diagonal of the fence and an area (red dashed line) where
the potential will be evaluated considering the grounding
systems coupled by the soil.

0885-8977 (c) 2015 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.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2524660, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
Fig. 2. Area of potential and potential profile diagonally crossing the
substation and the metallic fence grounding system.
The methodology permits to establish surface and profile
potentials allowing for a precise determination of step and
touch potentials.
Fig. 3 shows both grounding systems and their
corresponding potential on the referred soil surface area.
Based on this figure the red equipotential curves refer to the
potential on the soil above the substation grounding mesh. The
predominantly yellow equipotential curves show the soil
potential between the grounding mesh and the fence. The light
blue equipotential curves represent the potential on soil above
the fence grounding, and finally, the blue curves reflect the soil
potential outside the fence. The maximum potential on the soil
surface is 3315.59 V. The minimum value of 1108.24 V can
be observed close to the boundary of the selected area. As
expected, the highest potential reaches values smaller than the
grounding mesh GPR.
Fig. 3. Potential on the soil surface showing the coupling between the
substation and the fence grounding through the soil.
The potential profile on the soil surface (black line), the
substation GPR (red line) and the fence GPR (blue line) are
presented in Fig. 4.
0885-8977 (c) 2015 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.
4
Fig. 4. Potential profile and GPRs.
As can be seen in Fig. 4 both the substation and the fence
GPRs are not of great magnitude. Additionally, by analyzing
the step and touch voltages generated near the fence, it is
possible to improve the performance of the grounding system
in order to increase levels of safety of human beings walking
near the substation.
The soil parameters presented previously were determined
based on the Wenner Method, where the soil was stratified in
two layers [11].
Tolerable touch and step voltage used for evaluating
potentials near the fence are determined for people of 50 kg
and 70 kg, and interruption time of 0.5s [10]. The equations
used for determining such potentials are as follows,
k
Estep = ( 1000 + 6 ⋅ CS ⋅ ρ S ) ⋅ (6)
tS
k
Etouch = ( 1000 + 1.5 ⋅ CS ⋅ ρ S ) ⋅ (7)
tS
where:
k = 0.157 for 70 kg person
k = 0.116 for 50 kg person
The substation soil, over the ground mat and fence
grounding, 1 m outside the metallic fence, is covered with a 10
cm layer of washed granite, similar to ¾ in (0.02 m) gravel
with resistivity of 10000 Ωm. As a result, using (6) and (7), the
tolerable touch voltages found were: 1868.74 V (50 kg person)
and 2529.25 V (70 kg person); and the tolerable Step Voltages
were 6982.82 V for 50 kg person and 9459.89 V for 70 kg
person.
Considering that the main interest of this study is the
outside fence voltages, only the potentials on the profile
outside the fence (black dashed lines in Fig. 2) will be shown.
Fig. 5 shows the profile 1 m outside the fence in the longer
fence side (horizontal black dashed line in Fig. 2). The blue
line is the tolerable touch limit for a 70 kg person and the red
line is the tolerable limit for a 50 kg person.
Fig.5. Profile 1 m outside the fence in the longer side.
Fig. 6 shows the profile 1 m outside the fence in the shorter
fence side (vertical black dashed line in Fig. 2). Again, the
blue line is the tolerable touch limit for a 70 kg person and the
red line is the tolerable limit for a 50 kg person.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2524660, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
5

Multiplying the current of the grid to the soil by the

equivalent resistance, the grid GPR can be obtained, as well
as, the fence GPR. This statement demonstrates the coupling
by the soil between electrodes.
Table I summarizes the Ground Potential Rise on the grid
Fig.6. Profile 1 m outside the fence in the shorter side.
and in the fence and the resistances (grid and mutual)
As can be seen, in neither case the tolerable touch limits considering different distances from the grounding mesh to the
were violated. The maximum touch potential found was fence.
460.23 V in the upper right corner close to the fence. The TABLE I
same conclusion can be stated in regards to the step potential, GPR and resistances considering different distances
where the maximum value reaches only 59.08 V, much smaller Electrodes Grid GPR Fence GPR
R Grid (Ω) R M (Ω)
value than the limits established by (7). The touch potential is spacing (m) (V) (V)
defined as the difference of the GPR on the electrode and the 10 2029.4 1026.7 4.059 2.053
voltage on the soil surface for one specific point. The step 20 2031.8 790.6 4.064 1.581
potential is estimated as the difference of potential on the soil
30 2033.0 648.6 4.066 1.297
surface in two points considering a distance of 1 meter.
40 2033.9 551.1 4.068 1.102
B. Fence distance Effect
50 2034.7 479.3 4.069 0.959
The second simulation has the intent to verify the influence
of the fence distance in relation to the main grounding grid in Based on the figures, as the fence is placed away from the
terms of GPR considering the coupling by the soil. Distances grid the coupling is reduced conducting to a proportional
ranging from 10m to 50m from the grounding to the reduction in the mutual resistance R M . Consequently, the
surrounding fence were considered. Fig. 7 illustrates the voltage on the fence decreases, as expected.
proposed configuration. Fig. 9 shows the Ground Potential Rise on the fence for the
distances presented in the Table 1. An exponential trend can
be observed in the reduction of the GPR with the increase of
the distance from the short-circuited grid to the fence.

Fig.7. Grounding grid and fence considering different distances.

The same soil and electrode characteristics presented in the

previous example were considered. However, in this case a
current from ground to soil = 500A was applied.
To explain the coupling between the grounding mesh and
the fence by the soil with a short-circuit injected in the mesh,
the simplified equivalent "Y" circuit of the evaluated system is
presented in Fig. 8. In other words, for each distance between
the mesh and the fence a mutual resistance R M proceeding
from the coupling by the soil can be obtained. Fig.9. GPR on the fence considering different distances.

Finally, the proposed method was applied in several cases

including large substation of 500 kV (breaker and a half
configuration) and 230 kV (double bus single breaker
configuration) with dimensions of about 750 m x 500 m
composed by several grounding systems, some of them
coupled by the soil.

Fig.8. Simplified equivalent "Y" circuit of the evaluated system.
V. CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, according to the simulations, it can be seen
that a grounding electrode, when submitted to a short-circuit
phase to ground, produces a Ground Potential Rise in any
electrode in its vicinities as it is the case of a fence around a

0885-8977 (c) 2015 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.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2016.2524660, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
6

high voltage substation. The GPR in the electrodes can Grande do Sul (UFRGS) in 2000. He was a Full Professor in the Pontifical
Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) until 2006. Now he is
produce dangerous touch and step voltages that must be Technical Director of DDias Assessoria Empresarial.
verified quantitatively case by case and not in a simplified way
as normally proposed in project procedures. Alex B. Tronchoni was born in Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, on
The methodology presented in this paper allows January 30, 1977. He received in 2002 the B.E. degree in Mechatronics from
the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) Brazil and
determining the coupling through soil between 2 or more
in 2008 the Msc. degree in electrical engineering from PUCRS. Currently he
grounding electrodes. Finally, the proposed method allows for is Ph.D student in the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
the evaluation of the step and touch potentials to which Brazil. His main research fields are grounding systems, lightning and power
passers-by near the metallic fences of a high voltage or extra systems.
high voltage substation are exposed to. In this context some
Arturo S. Bretas was born in Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil, on July 5, 1972. He
procedures can be adopted in order to ensure the safety of received the B.Eng. and M.Eng. degrees from the University of São Paulo,
human beings if the potentials are at no control. Brazil, in 1995 and 1998, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical
engineering from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Blacksburg, in 2001. Currently, he is an Associate Professor of the Federal
University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil and Professor
The authors would like to thank CAPES, FAPERGS and of the University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. His research interests include
CEEE-D for the financial assistance and the University of power system protection, control, and restoration.
Nottingham for the facilities offered during the development of
Roberto Chouhy Leborgne received the M.Sc. degree in electrical
this work. engineering from Itajubá Federal University, Itajubá, Brazil, in 2003 and the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the Chalmers University of
VII. REFERENCES Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, in 2007. He was with ABB-Daimler Benz
[1] W. Jaroslaw, “Distribution of step and touch voltages at typical HV/MV Transportation, Brazil, and Teyma Abengoa, Uruguay. Currently, he is a
Substation During Lightning,“ presented at the XIII International Professor at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre,
Conference on Electromagnetics Disturbances, EMD 2003, Bialystok, Brazil. His fields of interest are power quality and power system planning.
Poland, 2003.
[2] C. Portela, “Grounding systems behavior for atmospheric discharges - Marcos Telló was born in Ijuí, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, in November
determination of relative effect related to people and equipments 1956. He received the Doctor Degree from Federal University of Rio Grande
security and the interference in the protection and control systems,” do Sul (UFRGS) in 2000. He is currently a Full Professor in the Pontifical
presented at the XIV Seminário Nacional da Produção e Transmissão de Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), where he is also the head
Energia Elétrica, SNPTEE, Belém, Brazil, 1997. of Electromagnetics Compatibility Group (GCEM).
[3] D. S. Gazzana et al. " A. study of human safety against lightning
considering the grounding system and the evaluation of the associated
parameters," Electric Power Systems Research, v. 113, pp. 88-94, Aug.
2014.
[4] M. N. O. Sadiku Numerical Techniques in Electromagnetics with
MatLab. New York: CRC Press, 2009.
[5] D. S. Gazzana et al. " Novel formulation to determine the potential on
the soil surface generated by a lightning surge," IEEE Transactions on
Magnetics, v. 52, 2015 (in press).
[6] R.J. Heppe, “Computation of potential at surface above and energized
grid or other electrode, allowing for nonuniform current distribution,”
IEEE PAS – 98, Nº. 6, pp. 1978 -1989, Nov. 1979.
[7] R.J. Heppe, “Step potentials and body currents near grounds in two
layer earths,” IEEE PAS – 98, Nº. 1, Jan/Feb. 1979.
[8] IEEE Std 80:2013 Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding.
[9] J. L. Alqueres and J. C. Praca, "The Brazilian power system and the
challenge of the Amazon transmission presented at the 1991 IEEE
Power Engineering Society Transmission and Distribution Conference,
Dallas, USA, 1991.
[10] S. L. Haffner, G. A. D. Dias and M. Telló, “Aterramento de cercas
metálicas de subestações situadas em regiões urbanas”, presented at the
XI Seminário Nacional da Produção e Transmissão de Energia Elétrica,
XI SNPTEE, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1991.
[11] IEEE Std 81-2012IEEE Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity, Ground
Impedance, and Earth Surface Potentials of a Grounding System

Daniel S. Gazzana was born in Veranópolis, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, on

December 6, 1977. He received in 2002 the B.E. degree in Mechatronics from
the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) Brazil and
in 2004 the Msc. degree in electrical engineering from PUCRS. In 2012 he
received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from Federal University of
Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) Brazil. Now he is researcher and Assistant
Professor in Electrical Engineering at UFRGS Brazil. His main research fields
are grounding systems, lightning, power systems and artificial intelligence.

Guilherme A. D. Dias was born in Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil,
in April 1950. He received the Doctor Degree from Federal University of Rio

0885-8977 (c) 2015 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.