1

Carson Grounding System and Its Impact on

Reduction Grounding Impedance
Forero Pedraza, Humberto1; Caldern Cancelado, Diego2; Ramos Lpez, Gustavo2
Garzn Martnez, Miguel1; Prez Vanegas, Fernando1; Quintero Cuartas, Carlos1
1. CODENSA S.A. ESP.
hforerop@endesacolombia.com.co; mgarzon@endesacolombia.com.co;
fperez@endesacolombia.com.co; cquinter@endesacolombia.com.co
2. School of Engineering, Los Andes University
dm.calderon65@uniandes.edu.co; gramos@uniandes.edu.co

Abstract-- This paper presents an innovative configuration

proposed and implemented grounding systems in distribution
networks by CODENSA S.A. ESP., and with the collaboration of
Los Andes University, called Carson Grounding System, which
can improve the response of system by lightning or short-circuit
as result of the reduction in the parameters concerning to
grounding impedance, touch voltages and step voltages that
guarantee human safety and the equipments protection.
The paper exposed the problems it represents for CODENSA
S.A. ESP. the failure associated distribution transformers by
lightning, likewise presents a computational tool based on the
voltage distribution factors for the validation of the performance
Carson grounding system in steady state and transient, and its
respective comparison with the results of implementation and
operation in field.
Index Terms-- Grounding impedance, Grounding System
Lightning, Soil Resistivity, Step and Touch Voltages, Voltage
Distribution Factors,
I. INTRODUCTION
The area of influence of CODENSA S.A. ESP
corresponding to the area of Bogot and Cundinamarca, have
levels of severity isokeraunic in a range of [80-60] units
(number of days per year when thunder can be heard in a
given area) as shown in Fig 1 (based on NTC 4552) [1], which
correspond in a scale of 4 items, the two higher ranks
cataloged under severe conditions and high ratio of lightning.
Proof of this is the municipality of La Palma has shown that a
two-month time, a relationship of 2150 lightning within less
than 14 km, implying a lightning density corresponding to 3,5
lighting/km2 [2].
The lightings involve for the company CODENSA S.A.
ESP. a problem for the failure of transformers, and all the
social, economic and environmental implications that this
entails. The Company currently has with 60,000 transformers
to the area of Bogota and Cundinamarca, of these
Cundinamarca has a population of 15,000 transformers, where
around 1200 transformers fail per year and approximately
67.3% of these are associated with lightning.
For the year 2010 it is estimated that in Colombia the
average annual cost of distribution transformers replacement,
failed by lightning strikes, was about US$ 7 million and for
CODENSA S.A. ESP was approximately US$1.489.000 [2].
This has involved not just economic costs but also great
efforts and work by the operational staff to restore service
especially in rural areas of our coverage, given a geographic
location with complexity personnel access and zones with
failure reiterative in transformer of until four times in just year
by lightning.
Fig. 1. Lightning risk index Cundinamarca.
It has made it necessary to propose a solution in order to
reduces transformer failure associated to lightning, caused by
the high isokeraunic level and the conditions or terrain
topologies over which our users are located (rocky and sandy
terrain) presenting grounding resistance values above 10 ,
which is the maximum for distribution networks [4].
Methodologies have been proposed and implemented to
achieve adequate protection of equipment and safety of
persons by lightning, such as increased insulation level (BIL)
of transformers [19], soil treatments [20], [21], installation of
different configuration surge arresters [22], shielding through
guard cable on distribution networks and ultimately drainers
surge scattering on the line and transformer.
This paper presents an alternative that improves the
grounding system current, the Carson Grounding System
(CGS) reducing grounding impedance with respect to a
traditional grounding (single electrode), achieving under
lightning disperse fault currents to protecting equipment, and
guarantee human security through the levels tolerable touch
and step voltages.
This paper presents the following topics: computational
validation of a grounding system through a computer tool;
presentation and simulation of the configuration of the CGS in
steady state and transient; analysis of the impact on reducing
the grounding impedance of the CGS and comparison with
other configurations based on this system; validation and
measurements in the field of the results of the behavior of the
ground; and finally the respective conclusions.
II. COMPUTATIONAL VALIDATION GROUNDING SYSTEM
A grounding system can be represented from circuit
parameters that allow modeling a set of electrodes in contact
with an area physically connected. To determine these

978-1-4799-6415-4/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE

 2

Fig. 2. Parametric Model of an element of grounding system [14]

parameters given in Fig. 2 are part of the physical analysis of
the behavior of electromagnetic signals when they are injected
into the grounding system. Based on the electromagnetic
model and calculating the Voltage Distribution Factor (VDF)
[11], it developed a computational tool that allows obtaining
the grounding resistance of the entire system, critical
parameter in the design and assessment of system security
levels.
Electromagnetism fundamental equation governing the
behavior of electromagnetic signals in the grounding systems
is the Laplace equation (1) for electric potential, this equation
is determined by the configuration of geometric system Fig. 3. Carson Grounding System.
grounding and electrical characteristics of the soil.

1 , , 1 , , , ,
, , 0 1

Solving the Laplace equation to represent the voltage at a

point (x, y, and z) of the field due to a current injection point
(xs, ys and zs) is given by equation (2):

, , 2

Meliopoulos and Moharan [11], [13], posed the solution of

Laplace's equation based on the Voltage Distribution Factors
(VDF), which is possible to obtain conductance values of the
finite elements and determine the value of the equivalent
circuit parameters per segment.
The VDF are used to calculate the self-resistance and mutual
coupling resistance of the conductors buried in a soil of
homogeneous resistivity or two layers soil. It calculates a
matrix in which the elements are called VDF since they allow
determining the potential at a point due to a given current
flow.
A. Computational Tool
Based on the electromagnetic model and calculating the
VDF, it developed a computational tool that allows obtaining
the grounding resistance of the entire system, critical
parameter in the design and assessment of system security
levels.
With the admittance matrix derived of the segmentation and
configuration of the grounding system is obtained capacitance
and conductance between each element and remote earth as
well as the self-inductance and self-resistance of each item
obtaining its representation of a circuit model for each
segment like Fig. 2, in order to simulate the behavior of the
system to various disturbances in the steady state and
transient.
Subsequently, calculated the surface, touch and step voltage
profiles, also of the ground potential rise (GPR) of the
grounding system in order to evaluate its the security levels.
Fig. 4. Carson Grounding System Results.
B. Carson Grounding System
The CGS is a system with two copper rods of 5/8"x2.4m and
bare copper wire of 2.4m 4AWG to connect the rods to the
bottom as illustrated in Fig. 3.
The computational tool was used to evaluate the
performance of the CGS and the Fig. 4 presents the results
concerning the grounding resistance, GPR, highs step and
touch voltage, surface and touch voltage profiles in 3
dimensions to the CGS to inject a current short-circuit 100
Amp with a homogeneous soil model and soil resistivity of 50
*m, yielding:
Grounding resistance 8.67 .
Maximum step voltage 142.7V.
Maximum touch voltage 673.1V.
Maximum ground potential rise (GPR) 867.2V.
Then to make a sensitivity analysis of the variation of
ground resistance with respect to soil resistivity homogeneous
model for a sweep of soil resistivity from 1-500 *m is
observed that the electrode resistance land is directly
proportional to the soil resistivity. Further the variation in
grounding resistance with respect to the depth at which the
system is installed has an exponential behavior performing
depth variations from 0 to 5 meter as set forth in Fig. 5.
 3

Fig. 5. Grounding Resistance vs Soil Resistivity and Depth.

C. ATP Simulations
To make the analysis of CGS at steady state and transient,
performed a set of simulations from circuit model obtained Fig. 6. Voltage by lightning wave (1,2/50 s).
computational tool, where the data of their constitutive
parameters for each of the elements componene the system are
shown in Table I (two elements per component) for a
homogeneous soil resistivity 100 *m.
This is used for simulation software ATP (Alternative
Transient Program) in order to observe the behavior of the
maximum ground potential rise (GPR), in presence a lightning
wave or short-circuit.
The voltage at the CGS and traditional grounding that
consisting of a single rod of 5/8 and 2,4 m buried to 30 cm
deep, is shown in Fig 6, for a lightning wave 1.2/50 s to 1000
amperes, the maximum voltage rise of the ground is about 18
kV and 38 kV respectively.
In this way CGS presents a reduction in surges that occurs
due to the lightning corresponding to a decrease of 20kV/kA, Fig. 7. Voltage by short circuit (10 A, 60 Hz)
implying that the CGS greatly attenuates the GPR, improving
human security and protection of distribution system TABLE I
equipment. CIRCUIT PARAMETERS OF THE GROUNDING SYSTEM
Similarly ATP software is used to simulate the performance Rod 1 Wire Rod 2
of the CGS under short circuit of 10A and 60Hz, this generates
Circuit
a voltage of 177V in CGS and 376V in a conventional system Parameter
Element1 Element2 Element3 Element4 Element5 Element6
which corresponds to the GPR, as shown in Fig. 7, This
C Shunt/2
elevation is more than double in the traditional system than in (pF)
162,1 166,9 121 121 162,1 166,9
CGS which reaffirms a substantial improvement of human
security and protection of distribution system equipment. R Shunt/2
()
196,7 191 263,4 263,4 196,7 191

D. Other Configurations based in CGS L(H) 1,78 1,73 2,38 2,38 1,78 1,73
Table II shows a comparison between the CGS and other Self-R
similar configurations with different number of rods, distance 0,1 0,1 0,98 0,98 0,1 0,1
(m)
between them and adding counterpoise, in order to evaluate
configuration alternatives that can improve the system
III. VALIDATION AND MEASUREMENTS OF THE FIELD
performance, for all the simulation the soil resistivity is
homogeneous with a value of 100 *m, the current short The CGS has been implemented by CODENSA S.A. ESP. in
circuit was assumed in 10 Amps. a pilot test in about 50 transformers from 2011 to the first half
In each case it is compared grounding resistance and step of 2013, mainly in the area of Cundinamarca with isokeraunic
and touch voltages maximum that may occur by short circuit, high level and reiterative transformers for failures associated
is noted as increasing as the number of rods or counterpoise t to lightning.
can be significantly reduced these parameters and improve the Table III presents the results of measurements of the
performance of earth of any kind of disturbance in the power grounding resistance for thirteen transformers with a
system. traditional system (single electrode), then the implementation
It can be found in various configurations which substantially CGS with reduction in all cases more than 65% in the
improve the behavior of the grounding, this is carried out resistance grounding value, which validates the performance
without significantly affecting the cost of the same with the exhibited by the computational tool.
application of the counterpoise and reducing the depth of In turn, when comparing the results obtained in respect to
burial of the cable connection between ground rods. ground computational model, it is clear similarity between
these as outlined below:
 4

TABLE II TABLE III

GROUNDING CONFIGURATIONS TRANSFORMERS WITH CARSON GROUNDING SYSTEM
Maximum Maximum Gounding Gounding
Grounding
Touch Step CD Resistance Resistance Reducction
Configuration Resistance
Voltage Voltage Traditional () CGS()
()
(V) (V) 14533 461 4,3 99,1%
15314 137 9,3 93,2%
36,174 312,5 45,6 15316 697 9,3 98,7%
14848 187,9 1,9 99,0%
46706 483 7,5 98,5%
16864 70 5 92,9%
17,3 167,6 28,5 56301 200 6 97,0%
56076 47 9 80,9%
48594 30,4 9,4 69,1%
57932 80,1 8,1 90,0%
14,7 140,9 24,7 30778 410 44 89,3%
86039 500 10 98,0%
15170 12,3 3 75,6%

13,8 104,9 21,0 TABLE IV.

GROUNDING RESISTANCE TRANSFORMER CD 521912.
Current
Voltage Electrode Resistance
Electrode
12,3 89,9 19,5 Distance (m) Measurement ()
Distance (m)
21,6 4,3

9,2 66,2 12,3 30 18,6 4,1

15,6 4,1
10,2 73,2 24,7
TABLE V.
SOIL MODEL OF TWO LAYERS CD 61001.
13,0 83,3 32,1 Top Layer Resistivity(*m) 63,4
Bottom Layer Resistivity(*m) 6,2
Top Layer Depth (m) 4,3
13,5 86,9 33,8
Reflection Factor (K) -0,8

10,7 65,3 26,9 TABLE VI.

7,2 38,9 17,5
The CD 52192 transformer located in the township of
Villeta, presented a soil resistivity measurements [5] of 26.3
*m and a value of the Box-Cox methodology is of 28.3
*m, because no data is outside 30% of the average soil may
be modeled as a single layer for the calculation of the
grounding resistance and the voltage profiles.
In this way the resistance grounding system is simulated is
4.5 has a deviation of 9.4% with respect to the measured
resistance of 4.1 Table IV (measuring method of 62% [5]),
this is a fairly low percentage that successfully validates the
computational model.
The CD 61001 transformer located in the municipality of La
Pea presents for soil resistivity measurements soil model
must use the two-layer method (no homogeneous soil [5]),
shown in Table V.
Measuring the grounding resistance is shown in Table VI,
where the measured value is 8.3 and the resistance
calculated by the computational tool is 9.4 involving a
deviation of 12.3%; it successfully validates the model and
computational tool.
GROUNDING RESISTANCE TRANSFORMER CD 61001.
Current Electrode Voltage Electrode Resistance
Distance (m) Distance (m) Measured ()
21,6 8,54
30 18,6 8,3
15,6 8,22
An analysis of the economic impact of the project within the
company shows how the implementation of CGS, implies a
low cost of installation and reduced costs by: improving
service delivery (low) energy not supplied, cost associated
with the normalization of the service transformer burning
under a lightning, reduction in compensation costs and service
quality indicators as ITAD (Index of Grouped Quarterly
Discontinuity), besides no tangible benefits as reducing
occupational hazards in remote areas, use teams in preventive
maintenance and not corrective, and reduction in possible
spills oils given by transformer failures caused by a lightning.
The cost of installing the CGS is approximately US$ 408
representing a materials cost of US$226 which correspond to a
kit grounding stainless steel, cable 4AWG bare copper, wedge
connector grounding and copper rods 5/8x2.4m. In addition
to a labor cost of US$182 for installation, excavation tools and
measurements of resistance grounding.

While costs for the replacement of a failed transformation
center by a lightning strike requires a normalization of service
in three days at most, with costs energy not supplied of an
equipment with two reiterative failure per year is
approximately US$1044 and cost associated with failed
transformer change (materials and labor) US$3575 assuming a
nominal power of 45 KVA, therefore for a failure rate of two
per year (corresponding to systems with traditional land
making) the cost is US$7151 this corresponds to a total cost
for one transformer of US$8195.
This represents a savings of more than US$7787 is to say
95% of the costs in each of the transformers in a system
installation of CGS due to which greatly reduces the
occurrence of failures in transformers.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The CGS allows reducing grounding resistance compared
with grounding system traditional used by the company in
most rural distribution transformers as it is a single ground
rod, with a reduction of over 65% in the value of resistance in
most cases in this document. This reduction allows greater
dissipation of ground currents and a decrease in the step and
touch voltages in order of not exceeding tolerable voltages by
human, compliance regulations and protection of equipments.
The CGS significantly improves system response to a
lightning strike, that is the biggest problem of failure of
transformers in the company, thus reducing the ground
potential rise (GPR) at 20 kV/kA for a lightning wave with
respect to the grounding system of traditional (single rod), The
CGS allows inside CODENSA S.A. ESP., improve service
provision indices decreasing energy not supplied, reduction in
compensation costs and service quality indicators as ITAD,
decreased occupational hazards in remote areas access,
reduced costs associated with the failure of transformers
(materials, labor), just as its implementation is low cost,
environmental benefits in addition to oil spills given the
lightning burns and not have the use of foreign materials to the
network or environmental pollutants in their implementation.
The implementation of the CGS presents benefits of social,
economic and environmental, in the economic field cost
reduction is quite significant reaching 95% for reiterative
transformers with two failures per year, when comparing the
cost of installation of CGS with the cost associated with the
normalization of the service by transformer failure by
lightning, this is due largely to a reduction in the occurrence of
failures by lightning and low investment cost of the project.
V. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To Los Andes University for their support and contribution
to the academic validation and compliance with the standard
of the proposed system, just as the team of Cundinamarca
Division and Networks Submanagement, especially the
Engineer Carlos Lastre, Technologist German Hernndez y
Technical Mario Anzola for their support and contributions in
favor of this idea, and his commitment and dedication to the
project permanently.
5
VI. REFERENCES
[1] ICONTEC, 2004, Colombian Technical Standard NTC-4552
Protection against lightning general principles, Bogot, December.
[2] M. Garzn, M. Salgado, Improving quality indices of rural distribution
circuits "Codensa" in areas of high atmospheric electrical activity,",
Programa de Investigacin sobre Adquisicin y Anlisis de Seales
PAAS UN, Universidad Nacional Codensa, pp.1-104, Bogot, July,
2010.
[3] IEEE Std 80, 2000, IEEE Guide for Safety in AC substation
Grounding. Nueva York, Enero.
[4] Ministerio de Minas y Energa, Colombia, Technical Regulations for
Electrical Installations - Retie. Bogot, Agosto, 2008.
[5] IEEE Std 81, 2012, IEEE Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity,
Ground Impedance, and Earth Surface Potentials of a Grounding
System, Nueva York, Diciembre.
[6] Tagg. G. F., Earth Resistance, Gran Bretaa, Whitefriars Pres , 1964.
[7] Thug, G. F., Earth Resistances, London: Georges Newnes Limited,
1964.
[8] Moreno O.G., Valencia V. J., Crdenas A. C., Villa A. W.,
Fundamentals and engineering of the grounding, response under
electrical faults and lightning, Universidad de Antioquia, Septiembre
de 2007.
[9] ICONTEC 2012, PROJECT COLOMBIAN TECHNICAL STANDARD
NTC 389/03 Grounding Systems (GS) Bogot, Colombia.
[10] ASTM G5795a Standard Test Method for Field measurement of Soil
Resistivity Using the Wenner Four Electrode Method, 2012.
[11] Meliopoulos A.P. Power System Grounding and Transient An
Introduction. New York, Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1988.
[12] G.A. Ramos, Analysis and Simulation of Stable and Transient Systems
Grounding State. Case Substations High and Medium Voltage.
Universidad de los Andes, Tesis de Maestra en Ingeniera Elctrica,
1999, Colombia.
[13] A.P. Meliopoulos y M.G. Moharan, Transient Analysis of Grounding
Systems, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol.
PAS-102, N 2, p.p. 389 - 399, February 1983.
[14] Quesada Ocampo, Juan D., Physical model of an electrode in contact
with a land consisting of one or two layers when injected electric
current, Universidad de los Andes, Trabajo de grado en Fsica, 2003,
Colombia.
[15] F. Dawalibi y D. Mukhedkar, Optimum Design of Substation
Grounding in a Two Layer Earth Structure; PART1 Analytical Study,
IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-94, N
2, p.p. 252 261, March/April 1975.
[16] Y.L. Chow, J.J. Yang y K.D. Srivastava, Grounding Resistance of
Buried Electrodes in Multi-Layer Earth Predicted by Simple Voltage
Measurements along Earth Surface A Theoretical Discussion, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 10, N 2, p.p. 707 715, April
1995.
[17] Dalziel, C. F., Electric shock hazard IEEE Spectrum, pp. 103-110,
febrero, 1974.
[18] A. Elices, L. Rouco, Study lightning overvoltages transferred to low
voltage in MV / LV pole-mounted transformers, Universidad Pontificia
Comillas, 1999, Julio.
[19] Shankland, L.A. ; Feltes, J.W. ; Burke, J.J., The effect of switching
surges on 34.5 kV system design and equipment, Power Delivery, IEEE
Transactions on Volume: 5, Issue: 2 , 1990 , Page(s): 1106 -1112.
[20] Khan, Y. ; Malik, N.H. ; Al-Arainy, A.A.; Qureshi, M.I. ; Pazheri, F.R.
Efficient use of low resistivity material for grounding resistance
reduction in high soil resistivity areas, TENCON 2010-IEEE Region 10
Conference, 2010 , Page(s): 620-624.
[21] Feng Zhenghua ; Lu Ling ; Feng Junzhong Research on reducing
grounding resistance of transmission line tower grounding grid,
Electrical and Control Engineering (ICECE), 2011 International
Conference on, Page(s): 1216-1219.
[22] Plummer, C.W.; Goedde, G.L; Pettit, E.L., Jr.; Godbee, J.S. ; Hennessey,
M.G., Reduction in distribution transformer failure rates and nuisance
outages using improved lightning protection concepts, Power Delivery,
IEEE Transactions on.Volume:10, Issue:2, 1995 , Page(s): 768-777