Chapter 2: Literature Review of Earthing Measurement Techniques
Chapter 2: Literature Review of Earthing Measurement Techniques
Chapter 2: Literature Review of Earthing Measurement Techniques
techniques
study of commercially available earth testers and detailed description of smart ground meter
(SGM) developed by EPRI and recent trends in earthing impedance measurements for power
2.1 Introduction
Three phase power systems are earthed by connecting one or more selected neutral points to
buried earth electrode systems. Such earths are referred to as system earths. According to the
way the neutral is connected to the earth, electrode systems are categorised as solidly earthed
resonant types. In the UK power system, solid earthing has been adopted on networks
operating at 66 kV up to 400 kV [16]. At the transmission level 275 kV / 400 kV, the power
system is multiple earthed and is operated as a mesh system. This practice reduces
transformer capital costs, where graded insulation can be used and surge arresters of lower
temporary over-voltage rating can be employed. At voltage levels from 6.6 kV to 66 kV, the
system is normally radial configured and earthed at a single point corresponding to the
neutral or derived neutral of the supply transformer. On networks at 33 kV and below, low
resistance earthing is used. Reactance earthing and resonant earthing have the disadvantage
of high transient over voltages and hence are rarely used. A system is classified as effectively
earthed when the single phase to earth fault current is more than or equal to 60 % of the
magnitude of three phase short circuit current. Generally, when the earth impedance value is
greater than 1 Ω the reactive component of the impedance may be negligible, and the earth
impedance can be termed as earth resistance. However, this may not be the case always as for
example the chain earth impedance of the towers for high voltage overhead lines may have
earth impedance value greater than 1 Ω and simultaneously have a significant value of the
reactive component. In other words, it may be considered that for the concentrated earthing
systems if the earth impedance is greater than 1 Ω then it can be safely treated that the
reactive component of the earthing impedance is negligible and the earth impedance is
mainly contributed by the earth resistance. The reactive component is generally taken into
account when ohmic value of the earthing under test is less than 0.5 Ω.
Usually the approach to building an earthing installation for a power station or substation is
‘do what they did last time’ [13]. It has been observed that the old earthing installations may
not be adequate enough to handle high fault currents or not sufficiently robust and configured
to maintain the safety of the power system. As continuous monitoring of the earthing systems
is not always feasible, the deterioration in the earthing system over time may go unnoticed.
This fact demands extra care during design and installation stages. Periodical measurement of
earthing system performance is required by ENATS 41-24 to account for the seasonal
The impedance of an earthing system is usually determined with alternating current of power
frequency to avoid possible polarization effects when using direct current [15]. When the
power frequency current is injected into the earthing system under test, care has to be taken to
avoid the interference in measurement system due to the power system leakage currents. It is
generally considered to inject the current signal at the frequency close to the power frequency
such as either close to 48Hz or 52Hz but not exactly at 50Hz (when the power system
frequency is 50Hz) to avoid the power frequency signal interference which can distort the
measurement results. Commercially available earth testers tend to inject the switched DC
signal at a frequency of 96Hz to 128Hz to avoid the interference with the fundamental
component and the third harmonic component of the power frequency signals of 50Hz or
The generally used methods for measurement of earthing resistance as described by various
authors [12], [18], [20], [13], [15] are fall of potential method, two-point method, three-point
method, ratio method, staged fault test, single clamp earth resistance testing, double clamp
earth resistance testing and attached rod technique. These methods are briefly described in the
following text. The three point method and the ratio method are derived from the analytical
calculations related to the fall of potential theory. The two point method and clamp method of
measuring earth resistance should be limited to small earthing systems. It should be noted
that the measured ohmic value is called resistance. However, when the measured ohmic value
of the resistance is generally less than 0.5Ω, there is a reactive component that should be
This method involves passing a current in the earth electrode whose resistance is to be
measured and recording the influence of this current in terms of potential between the earth
electrode under test and an electrode P as shown in the Figure 2.1. Prior to the conduction of
the fall of potential test, the earth electrode may be disconnected if possible from the system
to which it is providing protection. However, the fall of potential method of measuring earth
impedance can also be carried out with the earth electrode connected to the power system
provided that the earth leakage current from the power system is measured appropriately. As
shown in the Figure 2.1, current ‘I’ is passed through the test electrode E and the current
electrode C.
Figure 2.1 Typical set up of fall of potential test
This causes distribution of earth surface potential along the surface of the earth. The earth
surface potential profile along the electrodes C, P and E will have a curve as shown in the
Figure 2.2. Potential is measured with respect to the earth test electrode E. The ratio of V / I =
R (apparent resistance) is then plotted as a function of probe spacing. The potential electrode
is gradually moved away from the electrode under test in steps. A value of resistance is
obtained at each step. This resistance is plotted as a function of distance, and the value in
ohms at which this plotted curve appears to level out is taken as the true resistance value of
the earthing system under test. In order to obtain a flat portion of the curve, it is necessary for
the current electrode to be placed outside the influence of the earth to be tested as shown in
Figure 2.2. For large earthing systems, the spacing required may be impracticable and other
methods of interpretation can be used. A theoretical analysis of the fall of potential technique
[18] shows that placement of potential probe P at the opposite side with respect to electrode C
i.e. (P2) will always result in a smaller measured apparent resistance compared with the true
resistance.
Figure 2.2 Fall of potential profiles
However, the arrangement of P2 as shown in Figure 2.1 has the advantage of reducing the
mutual coupling between test leads. If reasonably large distances between P2 and C are
achieved (with respect to the electrode E under test), then according to [19] it is possible to
use this method to obtain a lower limit for the true resistance of electrode E. When P is
located on the same side as electrode C and away from it (P1), there is a particular location
The correct spacing may be very difficult to determine, especially if the earth grid has
complex shape [19]. The correct spacing is also a function of soil configuration [12]. The
required potential probe spacing x when the probe is between E and C and when the soil is
uniform, is such that the ratio x/d = 0.618. This was first proved by E.B. Curdts [20] for small
hemispherical electrodes. From the above statements, it is clear that the following conditions
The reference origin for the measurement of spacing must be determined. For large earthing
systems, some authors introduced the concept of electrical centre and the method of
determining the impedance of extensive earth systems embedded in uniform soils is described
in a paper by Tagg [13]. It should be noted, however, that there is no proof that the electrical
centre is a physical constant (such as a centre of gravity) which is not influenced by current
In this method as shown in Figure 2.3, the total resistance of the unknown and an auxiliary
This method is generally used to measure the resistance of a single rod driven earth which has
metallic water pipes in close vicinity and which can be used as an auxiliary earth. The earth
resistance of metallic water pipes without insulating joints is assumed to be of the order of 1
Ω which is low in relation to the driven earth resistance which is usually of the order of 25 Ω.
The resistance of the auxiliary earth (metallic water pipes) is assumed to be negligible in
comparison with the resistance of the unknown earth, and the measured value of the
resistance is taken as the resistance of the unknown earth. This method is not suitable for low
resistance earths. This method can be used for driven earths where a rough estimate of earth
resistance is required.
This method [11] involves the use of two test electrodes with the resistance of the test
electrodes taken as R2 and R3. The resistance of the earth electrode under test is taken as R1.
The resistance between each pair of electrodes is measured and designated as follows
We know
Thus, by measuring the series resistances of each pair of earth electrodes and substituting the
resistance values in to (2.4), the value of earth resistance can be calculated. If the magnitude
of the resistance of two test electrodes is comparatively higher than the earth electrode, then
this method will not give accurate results. The spacing of the test electrodes for driven earths
should be more than 5 meters. This method is not suitable for large area earthing systems
[12].
2.2.4 Ratio method
In this method [12], the resistance of the electrode under test is compared with a known
resistance, usually by using the same electrode configuration as in the Fall of Potential
Method. As this method is a comparison method, the ohmic readings are independent of the
test current magnitude. The test current magnitude can be kept high enough (few tens of
The most representative measurement of the earth impedance of an installation is the staged
fault test [12]. This test produces realistic fault current magnitudes and by using the remote
voltage reference the rise of earth potential and earth impedance can be calculated. The
staged fault test is seldom performed due to economic penalties and the system operational
constraints. Staged high current tests may be required for those cases where specific
information such as the integrity of the earthing system is desired on particular earthing
installation.
In this method [14], the auxiliary test probes for injecting current and measuring the voltages
are not needed when measuring the earth resistance. Earth resistance can be measured
without disconnecting the connections between the earthed body and the metal work of the
electrical plant. This means that there is no need to turn off the equipment power or
disconnect the earth rod. The clamp-on methodology is based on Ohm’s Law (R=V/I).
Figure 2.4 shows the typical set-up of the clamp-on earth tester.
Figure 2.4 Clamp on earth resistance testing
A known voltage is inductively applied to a complete circuit with the help of the source coil
inside the clamp of the earth tester inducing the voltage. The resulting current flow in the
earthing circuit due to the induced voltage is measured by the current coil installed in the
same clamp of the earth tester. The resistance of the circuit can then be calculated by taking
the ratio of the induced voltage and the circulated current in the earthing circuit. It has to be
ensured that the earthing system under test is included in the current circulation loop. The
clamp-on earth tester measures the resistance of the path traversed by the induced current. All
elements of the loop are measured in series. This method assumes that only the resistance of
According to the manufacturer (Megger), this method has the following disadvantages,
If the frequency of AC current injected into the earth by the tester happens to be of the
same as that of disturbance current in the earth, then the accuracy of the readings are
seriously affected.
The mutual inductance between the voltage and current loops of the clamp tester has
The clamp-on method is only effective in situations with multiple earthing electrodes are
in parallel and a closed circuit is available for the current circulation. It cannot be used on
isolated grounds, as there is no return path, thus making it in-applicable for installation
Measurement of low earth resistance of the order of 0.5 is difficult with this method.
The internal diameter of the clamp is usually small of the order of 25 mm which prevents
This method is slightly different to the single clamp earth resistance measurement method in
the sense that it uses two separate clamps instead of one to avoid the effect of mutual
coupling between the two coils installed in the same clamp. This system can be used without
isolating the earth conductor or turning off the power. The tester uses a variable low
frequency AC voltage generator, two separate clamps [15] for voltage and current. Figure 2.5
of earth disturbance current frequency. As shown in Figure 2.5, ‘V’ is the voltage applied to
the voltage clamp by the signal generator. By electromagnetic induction, voltage ‘v’ will be
V
v --------- (2.5)
Nv
The induced voltage ‘v’ produces an electric current ‘i’ in the earth loop. This current is
v
i --------- (2.6)
Rx
i
The current measured by the current clamp can be expressed as I
Ni
v
We know Rx --------- (2.7)
i
V
Nv
Rx --------- (2.8)
I Ni
V
Rx --------- (2.9)
I Nv Ni
If the value of Nv and Ni are set as 1, then the earth resistance can be worked out as
V
Rx --------- (2.10)
I
In order to improve the anti-interference ability of the tester, the frequency of the AC voltage
produced is kept variable and typically can be chosen automatically from four values as 94
Hz, 105 Hz, 111 Hz and 128 Hz. These frequencies avoid the interference from the
The Attached Rod Technique (ART) method of testing [14] provides some of the advantages
of clamp-on testing (not having to disconnect the ground electrode) while remaining true to
the theory and methodology of fall-of potential testing. A fall-of-potential measurement can
be made without disconnecting the ground electrode if additional measurements were made
with an earth leakage clamp meter (milliamp meter). In case of an interconnected earthing
system if the fall of potential test is carried out, it will measure the effective resistance of the
interconnected earthing systems. If the earthing resistance of the individual earthing system is
of interest, then it is necessary to know the current carried by the individual earthing system
during the test conditions. This is accomplished with an additional clamp-on meter used in
system using a typical fall-of-potential configuration with the applied voltage V, (b) The
second step is to measure the total current (I) being injected into the system and (c) The third
step is to measure the amount of current (I1) flowing to the rest of the interconnected system
other than the earthing under test. The difference of the current (I) and the current (I1) gives
the current (Ie) passing through the earthing system under test. Using this current, the
resistance of the earthing (Re) system under test can be calculated as follows,
I
Re R --------- (2.11)
Ie
This study was undertaken to understand the features and limitations of some commercially
The comparison of the features and limitations of the various commercially available earth
Table 2.1 Summary of the comparison of the commercially available earth testers
Fluke 1625 GEO Measurement at automatically / user selectable test frequencies of 94,
Earth Tester 105, 111, 128 Hz is provided to mitigate the effects of interference
due to the power frequency and harmonic noise. It can inject test
AEMC Instruments, Automatically seeks optimum measurement test current and test
Digital Earth frequency from 40 to 513Hz to avoid interference with the power
Resistance Tester, frequency and harmonic noise. It can inject test currents up to 250
Omicron (CPC 100 + It has automatic / manual frequency selective measurement of the test
CP CU1) system that allows testing at typically 30 to 100 Hz. Narrow band
Megger (DET 2/2) User selectable test frequencies in the range of 105 Hz to 160 Hz.
Megger (DET4TC) It can inject test current of 4.5 mA @ 25V / 450 µA @ 50V. Noise
allowed are 100k @ 50V range, 50k @ 25V range and 5k for
10mΩ resolution.
ABEM Terrameter Automatic or user selectable currents of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200,
SAS 1000 500, 1000 mA @ voltages up to 400 V (800 V peak to peak) and
Comments: All the commercially available earth resistance / impedance testers have an
adequate power frequency noise rejection capability. Omicron-make instrument has the
maximum current injection capability of up to 100A which makes it suitable for measuring
large earthing systems. Remaining earth testers have a limited current injection capability
which makes them suitable only for the small and medium earthing systems. ABEM
Terrameter is capable of measuring earth resistance at a wide current range (1mA to 1A) at
maximum 100W power level. This feature makes it suitable for use as a DC variable current
source of measuring earth resistance to study the effect of current magnitude on the earth
resistance.
Smart ground meter (SGM) [17] measures the earth impedance at various frequencies by
pseudorandom signal is shown in Figure 2.7. It is an AC signal of typically 28V peak to peak
magnitude and having random frequency components in the range of 0 to 400Hz. The Smart
ground meter is an instrument for earth impedance testing with computer based techniques.
An electric current as shown in Figure 2.7 is injected for a short duration into the earth
electrode under test, and the return current is collected from the current electrode placed at a
sufficiently long distance so as to be out of reach of the influence of earth. This instrument
integrates the hardware and software to measure the earth impedance, soil resistivity, tower
The earth impedance measurement function can be applied to any existing earthing system of
consisting of all interconnected earthing electrodes as well as nearby earths connected via
shield and neutral wires. The smart ground meter generates a pseudorandom signal across the
black and red terminals. As shown in Figure 2.8 the black terminal is connected to the earth
under test and the red terminal is connected to an auxiliary current probe. As a result, a
current circulates between the earth under test and the auxiliary current electrode. The
The SGM samples soil potential at six locations via six voltage probes installed at six
locations in the vicinity of earth under test as shown in Figure 2.9. In addition, the SGM
monitors the injected electric current. The raw measurement data consists of earth potential
differences (GPD) between the earthing system under test and six voltage probes due to the
From these data, the impedance of the earthing system under test is extracted using
estimation methods and error correction techniques using the software installed in the SGM.
The measured impedance of the earthing system is obtained as a function of frequency. The
with frequency. The measured earth impedance is the combination of the impedance of the
earthing system under test in parallel with the impedance to earth of all shield wires, neutral
wires and other earthed metallic structures connected to the earthing system under test. The
soil resistivity function is based on the extension of the four-terminal method. Specifically,
the SGM is capable of taking simultaneous measurements on nine probes uniformly placed
along a line on the soil surface. The measurements obtained from the nine probes are
processed by error correction and estimation algorithms in order to construct a two layer soil
model. The resistivity of the two soil layers and the thickness of the upper soil layer are
presented. Soil resistivity measurements are also characterised by an expected error versus
confidence level. For soil resistivity measurements, the SGM displays the confidence level
for dynamically selected error boundary (based on particular case). The results are displayed
resistivity even within a relatively small area (several tens of meters). Yet for design purposes
a manageable and measurable soil model is required. The two-layer soil model may be taken
as a suitable approximation for such applications. The tower earth resistance meter option
measures the earth resistance of an energised or de-energised transmission line tower. Shield
wires may be connected to the tower earth during measurements. The SGM injects a current
into the tower earth and measures the earth potential differences (GPD) between the tower
earth and six voltage probes installed around the tower. These data are used to compute the
parallel combination of the tower earth resistance and the impedance looking into the
transmission line shield wires. However, as the maximum frequency of the injected signal is
not more than 400Hz this measurement will tend to highly underestimate the tower earth
impedance as the chain impedance of the tower earth with the transmission line shield wires
connected to the other towers. This measurement will provide a significantly lower
impedance reading at a frequency of 400Hz. It is shown later in this thesis, in Fig. 5.28, that,
to estimate the tower earth resistance, a frequency of injected current will have to be more
than 30kHz. This is one of the limitations of Smart Ground Meter while trying to use it to
measure the tower earth resistance with shield wires connected. An identification algorithm
determines the contribution of the shield wires and eliminates this contribution from the
measured total impedance. The algorithm is based on the observation that the shield wire
impedance is predominantly reactive while the tower earth impedance is resistive. Moreover,
the shield wire resistance and reactance are functions of frequency. The algorithm takes
advantage of this frequency dependence to extract the tower earth impedance from the
measured data. The algorithm also provides the statistical measures of the measurement
accuracy, which is expressed in terms of expected error versus confidence level. The
presented results consist of the tower earth impedance plotted as a function of frequency. The
touch and step voltage function measures the actual touch and step voltage at a substation as a
function of the fault current. The measurement is performed at up to six points near the
earthing system. A required input for this function is the fault current available at the location
of the earthing system. The data analysis takes into consideration the effect of the proximity
of the current return electrode on the measured touch and step voltages. The additional data
required for this measurement function are the co-ordinates of the voltage probes, current
return electrode and approximate size and shape of the earthing system.
A personal computer is used to compute the values of potential gradients and current at
various locations to generate the values of earth impedances at various frequency levels. The
signal acquisition unit acquires, filters and attenuates the signals to the suitable level for
further processing. There is also a current source unit which circulates the test current into the
earth electrode under test. There are six voltage probes with a set of three voltage probes each
in an insulated flexible conduit. These probes are used for recording the potential at various
points in relation to the earth under test. It also consists of one assembly of current return
electrode.
The minimum geographical extent required to measure the earth impedance with sufficient
accuracy (linear pin spacing required between the injection electrode and the return current
electrode and the orthogonal pin spacing required between the injection electrode and the
potential reference electrode) is of interest from the point of view of area constraints faced
during the measurement of the large area earth electrodes. The effect of pin spacing on the
earth resistance depends on the geometrical extents of the earthing electrode and the soil
resistivity pattern of the site of earthing [13]. Wenner 4-pin measurement method is generally
used to interpret the layered soil resistivity at the site. It is generally known that larger the
Wenner pin spacing, higher the depth of the soil resistivity sensed. To study the effect of pin
spacing on the measured earth resistance Southey et al. [13] performed computer simulations
based on the measured soil resistivites with different pin spacings and substituted these
values in the computer program to estimate the earth resistance. They considered 152m x
152m earth grid and the two double layer soil resistivity models such as a) 100Ωm layer over
5000Ωm and b) 5000Ωm layer over 100Ωm. They computed grid earth resistance as a
function of top layer thickness sensed by the resistivity measurements. The % error in the
computed grid resistance and safety voltages observed by them is shown in Figure 2.10.
(a) Error in grid perfromance predictions versus maximum pin spacing: 100 Ωm soil layer,
30m (100ft) thick, over 5000 Ωm soil.
(b) Error in grid perfromance predictions versus maximum pin spacing: 100 Ωm soil layer,
152m (500ft) thick, over 5000 Ωm soil.
(c) Error in grid perfromance predictions versus maximum pin spacing: 5000 Ωm soil layer,
30m (100ft) thick, over 100 Ωm soil.
Figure 2.10 Percentage error in computed grid resistance as a function of pin spacing
They concluded that with the resistivity ratios varying from 1:50 and 50:1 (extreme cases
expected in the field) between two layers, the maximum error in the computed grid resistance
depends on the depth of the top layer and maximum pin spacing as shown in Table 2.3.
Maximum pin spacing (% of grid length) Maximum computed grid resistance error
range
40% -50% to +30%
100% -33% to +9%
300% -17% to +(<9%)
From the study conducted by Southey et. al, it can be concluded that for the high over low
resistivity layer model, the pin spacing (between the injection current electrode and return
current electrode) of more than 3 times the maximum grid length is sufficient to minimise the
error within +9% for the computed grid resistance. For the converse resistivity model (low
over high resistivity layer, with deeper top layer), it is desirable to have the pin spacing
(between the injection current electrode and return current electrode) close to 10 times the
maximum grid length to minimise the error (<-10%) in the computed earth resistance. The
pin spacing between the injection electrode and the potential reference electrode is desired to
be such that the potential reference electrode is outside the zone of influence of the earth
2.6 Conclusion
The literature review revealed that the most reliable method of measurement of earthing
impedance of the practical earth electrodes is the Fall of Potential Method. This method has
been widely used by the commercially available earth resistance measurement testers.
However it is time consuming and labour intensive. Therefore different other methods of
measurements such as three point method, ratio method, clamp-on earth testing method are
used to measure the impedance of earthing system. The behaviour of earth impedance
measurement at the power frequencies has been studied in considerable details in the past and
has led to the development of robust techniques for the measurement of earthing impedance
at power frequencies. Several efforts were also made by the authors in the past and are being
made at present to characterise the behaviour of earthing systems under high frequency and
impulse conditions. However, to know to complete extent, the behaviour of earthing systems
under transient impulse and high frequency conditions it would require further investigation.
These findings will help us propose the suitable measurement techniques to measure the earth
impedances which will be representative at the lightning transient and impulse conditions. It
was noted that the Smart Ground Meter will provide underestimation of the values of the
tower earth resistance as the injected signal from the Smart Ground Meter is less than 400Hz.
This limitation of Smart Ground Meter can be overcome by using a suitable current signal
injection source with a frequency of the order of few tens of kHz. The literature review has
also revealed that the effect of electromagnetic coupling between the test leads, interference
with the leakage power frequency currents circulating in the earthing system and the spacing
between testing electrodes may affect the measurement. Due care is required to be taken to
reduce the error introduced by these aspects. Moreover, in this chapter, the survey of earthing
measurement techniques was carried out, the limitations and advantages of the commercially
available earth testers has been identified and the range of applications of these earth testers