DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Analysis on Ground Impedance for a Carbon Block and a Copper Rod

탄소블록과 동봉의 접지임피던스 비교 분석

  • Seo, Jae-Suk (Division of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Korea Maritime University) ;
  • Park, Hee-Chul (Division of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Korea Maritime University) ;
  • Kil, Gyung-Suk (Division of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Korea Maritime University) ;
  • Oh, Jae-Geun (National Forensic Service)
  • 서재석 (한국해양대학교 전기전자공학부) ;
  • 박희철 (한국해양대학교 전기전자공학부) ;
  • 길경석 (한국해양대학교 전기전자공학부) ;
  • 오재근 (국립과학수사연구원)
  • Received : 2013.05.20
  • Accepted : 2013.05.24
  • Published : 2013.06.01

Abstract

This paper carried out the comparative analysis on ground impedance of a carbon block and a copper rod. Two types of grounding electrode were compared ; a carbon block (L : 1 m, ${\Phi}$ : 245 mm) buried at a depth of 0.8 m and a three-linked copper rod (L : 1 m, ${\Phi}$ : 10 mm) of equilateral triangles with 1 m spacing. Ground impedance depending on applied current source was evaluated by the application of a sine wave current with 60 Hz ~ 3.5 MHz, a fast-rise pulse with rising time of 200 ns, a standard lightning impulse of $8/20{\mu}s$ and a 600 Hz square wave. Ground impedance for both electrodes were almost the same value below 100 kHz, and increased rapidly afterwards. The maximum ground impedance appeared $400{\Omega}$ at around 1.5 MHz. Ground impedance of the carbon block was lower at the square wave and was higher at fast-rise pulse than that of the copper rod. Also, ground impedance as ages showed no difference for the last 8 months. From the results, it is likely that ground performance for both electrodes shows no difference against commercial frequency and lightning impulse current, while the copper rod shows better performance against a fast-rise pulse with rise-time of a few hundred ns.

Keywords

References

  1. A. Geri, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, 14, 3 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1109/59.744458
  2. G. Vijayaraghavan, M. Brown, and M. Barnes, Practical Grounding, Bonding, Shielding and Surge Protection (Newnes, London, 2004) p. 62.
  3. R. P. O. Riley, Electrical Grounding: Bringing Grounding Back to Earth (Delmar Publishers, New York 2002) p. 40.
  4. A. D. Papalexopoulos and A. P. Meliopoulos, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, PWRD-2, 4 (1987).
  5. R. Elarbi, S. Kato, and K. Mizobe, JIEE, 117-B, 3 (1997).
  6. G. S. Kil, K. S, Rhyu, I. K. Kim, B. D. Moon, H. K. Kim, and C. Y. Park, Journal of the Korean Society for Railway, 10, 645 (2007).
  7. R. Morrison and W. H. Lewis, Grounding and Shielding in Facilities (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1990) p. 44.
  8. T. Hiyama, T. Miyake, T. Kita, and H. Andou, Trans. IEE of Japan, 118-B, 37 (1998).
  9. A. P. S. Meliopoulos and G. Cokkinides, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, PWRD-8, 1095 (1993).
  10. I. D. Lu and R. M. Shier, IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and Systems, PAS-100, 1918 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAS.1981.316535
  11. R. L. Stoll, G. Chen, and N. Pilling, IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib., 151, 2 (2004).
  12. G. S. Kil, D. W. Park, U. Y. Jang, J. S. Han, and H. J. Gil, J. KIEEME, 23, 10 (2010).
  13. IEEE Std. 81, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (2012).