• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

GreyMatters

Electrical Earthing System Design & Soil Resistivity Testing

  • Home
  • About
    • Contact Us
  • Blog
  • Earthing Services
    • Earthing Design Services
    • Lightning Protection Design
  • Earthing Training Courses
  • XGSLab
    • XGSLab Services
    • XGSLab Online Demo
    • XGSLab Sales
  • Members Academy
Home » Ask the Experts Electrical Earthing Blog » When Electrical Earthing Science Actually Works

23/04/2015 By Ian Leave a Comment

When Electrical Earthing Science Actually Works

Electrical Earthing Science…

On a recent generation project, there was a need to connect a partially completed system to the network as part of a staged commissioning. This meant that the full electrical earthing system had not been fully installed.

However, in order for the client to connect, the network operator requires proof (verification) that what they had installed so far is capable of dealing with on-site electrical faults as well as handling any imported faults from the nearby network.

Before the advent of electromagnetic field finite element software, this would have meant 2 site visits – one to physically measure the partial system has sufficiently low impedance and is safe to connect, and a second to verify that the specified system had been installed correctly and will perform in accordance with ‘predicted’ design when construction was completed.

Using electromagnetic field finite element software modules in CDEGS, we were able to replicate the actual on-site Fall of Potential (FoP) measurements in the virtual environment, allowing us to not only verify that the system had been correctly installed, but providing increased confidence in the initial model, the soil structure data and as a result, the final design.

Modelling the measurements in the virtual environment showed very high agreement with the real-world site earth measurements, with the output of the model being within the 5% margin of error of the earth testing instrument itself.

By applying the simulated FoP test on a full system, we can also predict the result that should be seen by the client’s regular testing.

Common Barriers to Testing in the Real World

In long lead ‘real-world’ FoP testing, it’s common to hit physical constraints whilst deploying the test leads.

Think about it – To get an accurate FoP measurement, very long test leads are required, ideally up to 10 times the diagonal of the earthing system. This is often not possible. Due to issues with land access, angry farmers, angry live-stock itching to chew on your equipment. Or simply because there’s a motorway/highway cutting across your route. Asking for a road closure isn’t going to go down well with the locals.

However, in the ‘virtual’ world – no such obstacles or barriers exist (unless you chose to put them there).  You can simply extend your ‘virtual’ set of test leads out 1 km, 5 km to 10s of kilometres, without encountering a single obstacle!

By modelling the test performed, it is possible to verify that even a partial test procedure matches the expected result for the system.

Why do the test leads have to go so far?

Without going into too much detail (that’s for another day) – every earth system has an area of electrical ‘influence’.  To get a true earth value using the FoP method, the current probe, which injects the signal into the ground, must be positioned outside the influence of the earth system under test.

Below is a simplification of the area of influence that an earth system imposes with respect to true earth.

Earthing Science

Getting the leads outside this area is so that the measurement is in respect to remote earth … otherwise, if the leads remain within the area of influence you are testing with respect to the area of influence, which would give you an artificially lower reading than the actual real value – a type of false positive, if you will.

Having a low reading is good, right?

The lower the impedance, the lower the EPR (earth potential rise) during a fault, so the safer the earth system is … this is true!

However, when there’s not enough land to deploy to a sufficient distance. Or the lead distances are too short due to lack of understanding. It’s all too common a mistake in the ‘real-world’ to accept the low FoP reading. When in fact the ‘actual’ true impedance might be many times higher than the value recorded.

This leads people into a false sense of security thinking a low FoP has been achieved when in reality the truth is anything but … and a genuine hazardous condition exists because the EPR is higher due to a higher earth impedance from the system.

When Virtual beats Actual

Simulation techniques using Electromagnetic Theory software tools, like the Hi-Freq module of CDEGS take previously unsolvable physical constraints out of the equation … there is now no excuse not to verify an earth system accurately to ensure safe operation (according to EIC EN50522 or EN50122-1).

There is one key point to bear in mind – this methodology is only valid using software based in Electromagnetic Theory … Circuit Theory based versions of CDEGS, such as MALZ or MALT cannot perform these simulations.

So what should you ‘take-away’ from this?

It’s one thing to do an on-site test, but getting technically secure results is no-so-straight forward, especially in built-up areas. By modelling and replicating the physical test procedure in the virtual environment. You can confirm that the test results are as they should be. Even when you can’t perform a full-scale test.

The science works … and works well!  Why not drop us a line with your challenge on the chat line below …


[wptab name=’Author’]

Ian Griffiths SelfieIan Griffiths

Ian is a Principal Consultant at GreyMatters, with 26 years experience solving HV earthing, EMC, and lightning problems for clients worldwide.  When he’s not busy studying problems and designing solutions. You can find him mountain biking, sailing and racing motorbikes in the summer.  In the winter he tends to head off to the mountains chasing the snow with friends and family.  Ian holds a Master’s Degree, and Degrees in both Mechanical and Electrical disciplines, and is one of the top 1% accredited CDEGS consultants and advisor to international utility companies, data-centre and infrastructure developers globally.

[/wptab] [wptab name=’Latest Posts’]

Recent Posts by Ian

50 Shades Darker – CDEGS Myths Busted!

50 Shades of GreyMatters

Real people, real answers in real time – the power of LIVE CHAT for our clients

GreyMatters – Protecting 100,000 lives through Earthing Design

[/wptab]

[wptab name=’Co-Author ‘]

Hugh Wren SelfieHugh Wren

Hugh is a Research Engineer at GreyMatters, joining in 2014.  He graduated from the University of Bath, sponsored by the IET’s Power Academy scheme. Hugh has a strong technical background with National Grid working on T&D schemes at voltages from 132 kV to 400 kV. Outside of work, you can find him cycling and fly fishing, or backstage at various local amateur dramatic companies.

[/wptab] [end_wptabset]

Filed Under: Earth Testing, Electrical Earthing Tagged With: BS7430, CDEGS, earth impedance, earth measurements, earth potential rise, earth value, earthing systems, EIC/EN50522, electrical faults, electromagnetic field, Electromagnetic Theory software, EN50122-1, EPR, Fall of Potential, finite element software, FoP measurement, FoP method, ground, HI-FREQ, imported faults, low impedance, MALT, MALZ, remote earth, test procedure, testing, verification, virtual environment

Electrical Earthing Training – Free Trial

Do you want to understand more about Electrical Earthing System Design – Greymatters Academy is our Earthing Training site take a look or access your free trial here.

Recent Posts:

How-to sessions in earthing design

If you’re an electrical engineer, you know how crucial it is to have a solid grounding system for your electrical installations. Proper earthing design protects against electrical shock, ensures electrical safety, and prolongs the lifespan of your equipment. But what happens when you encounter a complex grounding challenge that’s beyond your expertise? That’s where “how-to” […]

Ian getting ready

We take a look at soil resistivity and provide practical advice on what is ground soil resistivity, why we measure it and these common mistakes when Soil Resistivity Testing:

Soil Resistivity Testing Methods Wenner 4 Probe Test

Soil Resistivity Testing Methods a popular post. Originally published in 2013 and now updated. A Wenner probe test is a geotechnical investigation method used to determine the electrical resistivity of the soil. Soil resistivity testing can be carried out using different methods. The Wenner 4 Probe test is one of the most common soil resistivity […]

Schlumberger Array

The Schlumberger array is a geotechnical investigation method which determines the electrical resistivity of the soil. This is similar to the Wenner probe test, but it uses multiple current electrodes rather than just two. This allows for a more detailed and accurate measurement of soil resistivity. Soil resistivity testing carried out using different methods, this […]

Driven Rod Method

The driven rod test is a geotechnical investigation method which determines the resistance of soil to the penetration of a rod or other penetrometer.  The Soil resistivity is determined using different Soil Resistivity Testing methods. However the Driven Rod, described below is the last of the three most popular Soil Resistivity Testing methods we use […]

About Ian

This post is written by Ian Griffiths, Principal Engineer at GreyMatters, an Earthing & Lightning Consultant of 28 years, one of the top 1% accredited CDEGS and XGSLab consultants and professional advisor to international utility companies, data centre and infrastructure developers.

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Primary Sidebar

GreyMatters Accreditations

GreyMatters Accreditations

Online Earthing Courses

Free Trial Learn More

Free Online Course – Learn Ohms Law in 10 minutes or less!

Learn Ohms Law

Blog Categories

  • Acadamy (3)
  • Anti-Theft (1)
  • CDEGS (6)
  • Earth Testing (6)
  • Earthing Designs (7)
  • Earthing System Design (16)
  • Earthing Systems (5)
  • Electrical Earthing (39)
  • Energy Modelling Software (1)
  • General Post (11)
  • Grounding (1)
  • Lightning (11)
  • Lightning Protection Design (17)
  • Lightning Strike (1)
  • Renewable Energy (2)
  • Soil Resistivity (18)
  • Soil Resistivity Testing (10)
  • Solar (5)
  • XGSLab Updates (3)

Tag Cloud

BS7430 BS EN 50522 CDEGS data centres earth electrode Earthing earthing design earthing protection earthing standards Earthing system design earthing systems earth potential rise earth systems Electrical Earthing System Design Electromagnetic Field Theory electromagnetic interference EMI EN 50522 EPR Finite Element Analysis Finite Element Analysis Software greymatters Grounding HV Earthing HV Earthing Protection lightning lightning danger Lightning Protection lightning strikes Renewable Energy Rise of Earth Potential risk management ROEP Soil Resistivity Soil Resistivity Methods Soil Resistivity Testing Soil Resistivity Testing 10 Common Mistakes Soil Resistivity Testing Methods soil structure Step Potential Surge Protection Tag Archive - Lightning Strike Touch Potential what to do in a thunderstorm what to do when lightning strikes

Footer

  • Terms
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
GREYMATTERS PART OF THE GROUP OF COMPANIES © 2023