1060
4, October 1987
SCALE MODEL STUDIES OF GROUNDING GRIDS IN NON-UNIFORM SOILS
B.Thapar
IEEE Senior Member
Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT
Abstract
A new improved scale model to study the
behaviour of grounding systems in non-uniform
(two layer) soils has been developed.Construc-
tional details and instrumentation has been
discussed.To verify the accuracy of the results
obtained from the tests conducted on the model,
they have been compared with the data available
in the literature.The results giving the poten-
tial profile, grounding resistance, mesh and
step potentials for a number of grids in two
layer soils are presented.
Introduction
With the increase in the number, size and
complexity of a.c. substations, it has become
necessary to develop accurate design procedures
for installing grounding systems which are
economic and provide the required degree of
protection. Analytical techniques with sim-
plifying assumptions have been used to develop
computer programs.The technique of using scale
models in an electrolytic tank to determine
potentials developed during groun,d fault has
been presented by Koch(l),ArmstxoPg 2),Thapar(3),
Keil(4), Mukhedkar(5),Caldecott(6) etc.Most of
the studies on scale models presented so far
assume the soil to be uniform.
The soil at most substation sites is non-
uniform. It is practically always possible to
find an equivalent two layer soil for the
actual soil structure(7). The two layer soil
is characterized by its upper layer of resist-
ivity pi, and height h, and the bottom layer of
resistivity P2 and infinite depth.The reflec-
tion factor K is defined as(P2-Pi)/(P1+P2).
The scale model studies for two layer soils
have been reported by Mukhedkar(5) and Caldecott(6)
In both the model studies water was used to
represent the top layer.Cement concrete wasused
by Mukhedkar to represent the bottom layer whereas
Caldecott used agar.Both the models suffered
from the disadvantage that the resistivity of
the two mediums could not be closely controlled
and maintained for a long time.The new model
described in this paper does not have this
disadvantage.It uses tap water or salt water
to representboth the mediums and anacrylic sheet
fitted with conducting pins keeps the two mediums
distinct and separate & conducts the electric
current as required.
87 WT4 189-4 A paper recommended and approved
by the IEEE Substations Committee of the IEEE
Power Engineerinp, Society for presentation at the
IEEE/PES 1987 Winter Meeting, New Orleans,
Louisiana, February 1 - 6, 1987. Manuscript
submitted January 30, 1985; made available for
printing November 14, 1986.
0885-8977/87/1000-1060$01 .00 1987 IEEE
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWRD-2, No.
S.L. Goyal
Non-Member
Punjab State Electricity Board
Chandigarh
Two layer soil Model
To conduct model studies of station ground-
ing grids in two layer soil the model should be
a true replica of the original as faras poss-
ible. When all the physical dimensions of the
grounding system including conductor diameter,
depth at which the grid is buried, the depth
of the upper medium etc. are reduced in size by
the same scale factor, the pattern of the
current flow and the shape of the equipoten-
tial surfaces are unaltered. To get correct
results the model should satisfy the following
requirements.
1. The two mediums representing the upper
layer and the lower layer should be stable
mix with each other.It should be possible
to change the resistivity of the two mediums
independently.
2. In order to (a) facilitate measurements
of potentials, (b) replace and modify
the delicate models representing the
grid and vertical rods and (c) have
proper contact with the thin wires of
the model, both the mediums should be
liquids.
3. At the boundary of the two mediums a point
in the upper medium should be at the same
potential as a point immediately below it
in the lower medium.
4. The size of the electrolytic tank should
be big enough to eliminate the boundary
effects.
To meet the above mentioned requirements
two tanks made of G.I. sheets and measuring
85.5 cm x 85.5 cm x 47.0 cm and 84 cm x 84 cm
x 40 cm respectively were used.Arrangement was
made to keep the bigger tank on the floor and
support the smaller tank in it is so that the
bottom of the upper tank was about 7 cm below
the top of the lower tank. The base of the
lower tank was of the same material as the
sides whereas the base of the upper tank was
made of acrylic sheet. Copper pins made of 16
SWG (1.62 mm dia) wire and of length 15 mm
were fixed in the acrylic sheet at a spacing
of 10 mm and perpendicular to the surface of
the plate so that the pins projected 6 mm on
each side of the acrlyic sheet.Both the tanks
were made leak proof. Water in the two tanks
was used to represent the two layers of soil.
The resistivity of water in each tank could be
changed independently by adding common salt
(NaCl) and any value of K between + 1 and -1
could be obtained.
The acrylic sheet forming the base of the
upper tank did not allow the electrolytes to
mix with each other and at the same time the
copper pins allowed the passage of electric
current almost in the same manner as it would
flow in the absence of the acrylic sheet and
the two mediums in contact with each other.
To minimize the effect of finite dimensions
of the tanks the size of the model of the
grounding system should be less than 1/5 times the
size of the tank.In order to study grounding

systems of large dimensions only quarter space
may be considered for systems which are symmet-
rical about two horizontal axis passing through
the centre of the system.In such a system
current will flow across the vertical planes
passing through the two horizontal axis of symmetry.
To achieve this the two adjacent walls of both
the tanks were insulated by fixing bakelite,
polythene sheets on them. Figure 1 shows both
the tanks.
Figure 1. Electrolytic tanks
Frame for the model arid
For suspending the model of the grounding
grid in the upper tank a frame of backelite
strip strengthened with an aluminium strip was
used. Small holes and grooves were made in the
bakelite to accommodate model of quarterof the
grid having 1, 9, 25 and 49 meshes.It is very
difficult to use conventional soldering tech-
nique on wires having less than 0.2 mm dia. To
study larger grids it was necessary to make the
models with wire having diameter less than 0.2
mm. Soldering of the thin wires used was
avoided by making the model of the grid with a
continuous super enamelled insulated copper
wire passing through holes and grooves on the
frame. After securing the wire properly on the
frame, the insulation from the part of the
wire depicting the actual grid conductor was
removed by burning it with a candle flame and
then cleaning with rough cloth.Figure 2 shows
the frame supporting a quarter of meshes square
grounding grid.
The presence of thin insulated enamelled
wire and the edge of the curved portion of the
frame in the electrolyte had no noticeable
effect on the flow pattern of the current in
the electrolyte.
The frame with the model of the grid was
hung at the corner of the tank with strings so
that the two straight strips of the frame
touched the two insulated walls of the tank
respectively.The depth of the grid was adjusted by
adjusting the length of the strings. Two ends
of the super enamelled wire forming the grid
were used for feeding the current in the grid.
1061
no
Figure 2.Frame for model grid
Probe Carriage
For measurement of potential, probes made
of 0.1 mm dia copper wires were used.Ten wires
at a spacing of 5 mm were fixed in a straight
line in a small bakelite strip which was attached
to a vertical pipe, about 1 cm dia, so that the
tips of all the ten probes werein a horizontal
plane. A ten core flexible shielded cable connect-
ed the ten probes to ten sockets on the carriage
for making measurements of potentials. Arrangement
was made to move the strip containing the probes
in two perpendicular directions parallel to the
sides of the tank and to adjust its position so
that the tips of the probes barely dipped
below the surface of the water. With this
arrangement it was possible tomake,measurement
of potential at 10 points in a straight line
4.5 cm. long and then move the probes in any
direction for making further measurements.
Scale Factor
The maximum limit of the scale factor is
normally determined by conductor size. Typical
grid conductors used in practice have equiv-
alent diameter of 1.5 cm. The minimum size of
the wire that can be conveniently used on the
frame used is 0.1 mm. This gives 150 as the
maximum value of scale factor that can be
adopted. However, the size of wire does not
make any significant difference in the ground-
ing resistance and surface potentials.As such
a scale factor of 300 with minimum size ofwire
for the model as 0.1 mm may be used without
introducing much error.
If the size of the model of the grid is
limited to less than 1/5 times the size of the
tank the maximum size of the quarter model
grid that can be adopted is about 15 cm x 15cm.
On a scale factor of 300 , this would represent
an actual complete grid of 90 m x 90 m.
Instrumentation
Figure 3 shows the complete set up of the
model and Figure 4 shows the principal elec-
trical connections.50 Hz power supply was used
as the source. Isolating transformer was used
for personnel safety and to avoid leakage
currents flowing into the ground. The system
was usually operated at a current of 50 ma.
The capacitor was used to avoid any flow of
d.c. current due to use of dissimilar metals
(copper for the grid and zinc coating on the
tank) and subsequent polarization.A voltmeter
1062

with an impedance of atleast 10 mega ohms was
used to measure the potential of the probes.
Both the G.I. tanks were used as collecting
electrodes.
group of pins in the acrlyic sheet behave like
a plate for collection or dissipation of current
in the medium.
TABLE I
RESISTANCE BETWEEN PINS AND PLATES

S.No. h cm Resistance between

Two plates Plate and pins
ohms ohms
1 1 17.5 17.6
2 2 27.0 28.1
3 3 41.5 42.5

Shape and size of tank

The limited size of the tank is expected to
introduce some error in measurements. In order
to estimate the order of the error consider the
r.Lyure J. rluue.l ZmL up
tank to be a hemisphere of radius R and the
CAPACITOR model of the grid being studied to be a circ-
ular plate of radius r placed horizontally on
the surface of the water at the centre of the
tank.
Accuracy, A, can be defined as
A = (R -Rt)/Rp
Where Rp = Grounding resistance of the plate
PP/(4r)
R = Grounding resistance of the hemi-
sphere of the tank
= p/(2iTR)
p = resistivity of the medium
Figure 4. Connection diagram
When both the tanks are used and the
Accuracy of the Model quarter space is considered, the radius of
the equivalent hemisphere may be about 70 cm.
The following two important sources of When r is 10 cm A will be 0.91.
error neen investigation.
Figure 5 gives the equipotentials at the
(a) Presence of the pinned acrylic separal tor surface of the water for a quarter of 9 mesh
between the two tanks.
(b) Shape and finite size of the tank.
Pinned acrylic separator
The following simple experiment was performed:
(a) Two square aluminium plates each measuring
13 cm x 13 cm were placed parallel to each
other with h as the separation distance in
water. The water extended a distance ofat least
10 h from the edge of the plates. Resistance
between the two plates was determined by simple
voltmeter ammeter method.
(b) A group of 14 x 14 pins on the acrlyic sheet
forming a 13 cm x 13 cm square was short circ-
uited and an aluminium plate measuringl1 cm x
13 cm was placed parallel to the plane formed by
the tips of the pins. The distance between
the tips of the pins and the plate was kept
as h. The medium between the plate & the pins
was water having the same resistivity and
extended to the same distance as in (a). The
resistance between the plate and the group of
the pins was measured by simple voltmeter and
ammeter method.
The results of the measurements are given
in Table 1 from where it is indicated that the Figure 5. Equipotentials
 1063

grid placed at the insulated corner of the tank.
As the tank walls are approached the potential
gradient in the medium becomes negligibly
small. The shape of the tank therefore becomes
unimportant.
The error in measuring the grounding resist-
ance because of the acrlyic sheet is positive
and because of the limited size of the tank it
is negative. The two errors wil compensate each
other to some extent.
Grounding resistance of an 8 cm x 8 cm grid
made of 0.26 mm dia copper wire having four
equal meshes was measured first by using only
the lower tank filled with tap water upto the
top and then using both the tanks with the
lower tank full of tap water & the upper tank
having the tap water to a depth of 3 cm. The
resistivity of the water was 17.9 ohm-m. The
results are given in table II. The calculated
value of the grounding resistance of the grid
was obtained with the help of formula developed
by Schwarz(8). The results show that measured
value of the grounding resistance of the grid
when placed in the upper tank is very close to
the calculated value.
TABLE II
GROUNDING RESISTANCE OF GRID
S.No. Depth of Measured Grounding
grid cm resistance ohm
Lower tank Upper tank
1 0.5 105 109
2 1.0 99 103
3 1.5 90 101
The model is therefore, expected to be
reasonably accurate for measurement of grounding
resistance, potential profiles and maximum value
to touch and step potentials.
Capabilities of the model
Following are the capabilities of the model:
1. Limited by the size of theconductor to make
the model,the maximum size of the symmetrical
grid that can be studied is about 90 m x 90 m.
2. To study asymmetric grids full half space
is to be used and the model of the grid will
have to be placed at the centre of the tank
with all the walls of the tank conducting.
In this case the maximum size of the grid
that can be studied is about 25m x 25m.
3. While analysing the error due to the finite
size of the tank in the previous section only
homogeneous soil(K = 0) was considered. It
is an established fact that the error because
of the finite size of the tank increases
when K is positive and it decreases when K
is negative.Therefore,the model will give
good results only in cases where the top
layer of the soil is having higher resist-
ivity as compared to that of the lower layer.
4. The minimum depth of the upper layer that
can be considered in the model is 2.5 cm.
A lesser value brings the grid conductor too
close to the pins of the acrylicsheet and
the position of the conductor relative to
the pins will affect the measurements.
First three limitations listed above can
be overcome by increasing the size of the tanks
whereas to overcome the fourth limitation the
spacing between the pins and the diameter of
the pins will have to be reduced.
Tests Conducted
Tests were conducted on grids of various
Calculated sizes and the value of K varying fromO to-0.9.
grounding Results of the studies made with the following
resistance parameters are reported.
ohm
Grid size 30 cm x 30 cm
No. of meshes 1, 9, 25, 49
107 Size of conductor 0.26 mm
103 P1 20 ohm-m (normalised)
K 0, - 0.9
101 depth of upper 2.5 cm, 5.0 cm, 12.5 cm.
layer, h
depth of burial 0.5 cm
of the grid
Table III gives the grounding resistance,
mesh & step potential for the various values of
these parameters. For K = 0 both the tanks
were used. The model of the grid was placed in
the upper tank and the depth of water in the
tank was kept 15 cm.
Figure 6 and 7 shows the potential profile
on the surface along a lineparallel to the side

TABLE III
GROUNDING RESISTANCE, MESH & STEP POTENTIAL

S.No. No.of Meshes Top layer depth cm for k = - 0.9 K = 0

2.5 5.0 12.5
R M S R M S R M S R M S
1 1 25.7 86.0 16.9 27.0 77.0 14.5 31.0 60.0 12.5 38.5 63.9 12.0
2 9 20.9 60.0 17.5 24.0 52.0 16.5 25.5 39.0 15.5 30.5 39.5 12.0
3 25 19.3 45.1 23.1 21.5 35.0 22.0 22.5 32.0 18.7 30.5 20.0 12.0
4 49 18.5 41.0 22.9 20.7 34.0 21.0 21.4 29.0 19.0 29.0 15.0 12.0

R = Grounding resistance for p l= 20 ohm-m

M = Percentage mesh potential
S = Percentage step potential
 1064

with depth of the upper layer for different

1001_ number of meshes.

90
L 80 _
80ok z
NO. OF
70 _ MESHES
w 70If- '1
0
I- 0.
z
W
60
-J 60 -
: 1/)
w
a. z wi
l1 50 l;L

z
W 40 :r
0
a.
Ln 4o L 9
h, c m
w 30
Lr 12.5 Z 30r
'A 20 *t50 25
0.O r 49
2^5 0.
0o 0 20; LA 49
(A 25
9
0 --I A ! I-I .I
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
DISTANCE FROM GRID CEtITER LINE- cm
Figure 6. Potential profiles for 30cm x 30 cmy 0E3
25 mesh grid with K 0 and K = -0.9y
=

depth of grid 0.5 cm

=

5
2- 94 4s9

w 0 2-5 5-0 7-5 10.0 12-5

ID
HEIGHT OF UPPER LAYER. cm
z LL1._lI1, s I I l
,,

1-5 1-35
w

UI 8 6 4 3 2
r/h
Iz
w

-i Figure 8. Grounding resistance,mesh and

step potentials
z
The ratio of the grounding resistance in uniform
w
-I-

0
soil to that in non-uniform soil having the same
resistivity of the top layer,percentage mesh
and step potentials do not vary appreciably if
w

rnh is kept constant, r being the radius of

cU) a circular plate having the same area as that
,1 of the grid. Figure 8 also shows scale for
rnh which varies from 1.35 to 6.75. Therefore,
these results can be applied to other sizes of
the grids also.
Results
5 10 15 20 25 The following results in non-uniform soil
DISTANCE FROM GRID CENTER LINE-cm for K -0.9 can be observed.
=

Figure 7. Potential profiles for 30cm x 30cm
grids with K = 0.9,h = 5.0 cm,
-
depth 0.5 cm.
=
of the grid and passing throuch the centre of the grid
and 15 cm point is vertically above the outer
conductor.
Figure 8 shows the variation of grounding
resistance, ,ercentage mesh and step potentials
(a) The grounding resistance for r/h=7.0 would
be about 70% of the grounding resistancein
uniform soil of Pi resistivity.
(b) The percentage mesh potential for rfh=7.0
increases toabout 2 times when compared with
the value in uniform soil. Since there is
a corresponding decrease in the grounding
resistance the actual increase in the mesh
 1065

potential is small (not more than 1.5 times). TABLE VII

(c) The percentage step potential for r/h= 7.0 COMPARISON OF GROUNDING RESISTANCE IN NON-UNIFORM
increases to about 1.5 times when compared SOIL
with the value in uniform soil.Because of
the corresponding decrease in the grounding S.No. No.of h cm Grounding Resistance Ohms
resistance the actual change in the step meshes Measured Thapar 3)
potential is negligible.
Verification of Results 1 1 5.0 27.0 30.8
2 9 5.0 24.0 21.6
The measured values of the grounding
resistance, percentage mesh and step potentials 3 25 5.0 21.5 19.0
were compared with the corresponding values 4 49 5.0 20.7 17.1
available in literature. Tables IV to IX
present the comparison. The measured values
obtained from the model studies are quite close TABLE VIII
to the values either calculated or obtained
with th )elp of a dig it 1 computer by Laurent(9), COMPARISON OF MESH POTENTIAL IN NON-UNIFORM
Schwarz ,I 80 O, Thapar (3,1),Dawalibi7' SOIL
Joy(12) and the values obtained from model S.No. No.of
studies by Caldecott and Kasten(6). h cm Percentage Mesh Potential
meshes Measured Dawalibi((7) CaldecottT6)
6
TABLE IV
COMPARISON OF GROUNDING RESISTANCE IN UNIFORM SOIL 1 9 2.5 60.0 65.0** 80.0**
2 9 5.0 52.0 50.0** 59.0**
S.No. No.of Grounding Resistance ohms 3 9 12.5 39.0 40.0** -
meshes Meas-
ured
Lau-
rant(9)
Schwarz(8)Cald Joy(12)
cottT6) ** No. of meshes 16
1 1 38.5 46.2 39.0 - 44.0 TABLE IX
2 9 32.0 37.9 35.1 41.4 38.0 COMPARISON OF STEP POTENTIAL IN NON-UNIFORM
3 25 30.5 35.1 33.3 36.0 36.0 SOIL
4 49 29.0 33.7 32.3 - 34.0 S.No. No.of h cm Percentage Step Potential
meshes Measured Dawalibi (7)

TABLE V 1 9 2.5 17.5 19.0*

COMPARISON OF MESH POTENTIAL IN UNIFORM SOIL 2 9 5.0 16.5 16.0*
S.N o. No.of Percentage Mesh Potential 3 9 12.5 15.5 13.0*
meshes Meas-
IEEE-80 (10) Caldecott (65 Joy (12) 4 25 2.5 23.1 22.0**
ured 5 25 5.0 22.0 20.5**
1 1 63.9 57.6 - 60.0 6 25 12.5 18.7 17.0**
2 9 39.5 32.9 42.0 33.0
* No. of meshes 4
3 25 20.0 18.2 36.0 28.0 ** No. of meshes 16
4 49 15.0 12.7 - 23.0
Conclusions

TABLE VI 1. A new two layer soil model to study the

behaviour of grounding grids in non-uniform
COMPARISON OF STEP POTENTIAL IN UNIFORM SOIL soil has been developed.
S.No. No.of Percentage Step Potential 2. The model has been tested and the values
of grounding resistance,mesh and step potentials
meshes Meas- IEEE-80( 10)Dawalibi (7) y(12) are quite close to those obtained by calculations
ured or with the use of digital computer by other
1 1 12.5 13.8 - 14.5 authors.
2 9 12.0 14.5 10.0* 12.2 3. The model described in the paper has the
following advantages over the models developed
3 25 12.0 13.3 12.0** 12.0 previously (a) The two mediums do not mix and
4 49 12.0 14.6 - 12.0 retain their values of the resistivity for
any time needed to complete the study. (b)
Any value of K can be obtained by using tap
water as one medium and salted tap water as
* No. of meshes 4 the other medium.
** No. of meshes 16 4. The model presented in the paper should
prove to be very good tool to study the
grounding grids in non-uniform soils.
1066
References
1. Walter Koch, "Grounding Methods of High-
voltage Stations with Grounded Neutrals",
Elektrotechnische Zeit, Vol. 71, No. 4
February 1950, pp. 89-91 (Translated and
reprinted as Appendix VI of AIEE-80, 1961).
2. H.R. Armstrong and L.J. Simpkin,"Grounding
Electrode Potential Gradients from Model
Test", AIEE Transactions, Vol. 78,Part III,
1959, pp. 618-622.
3. B.Thapar and E.T.B. Gross,"Grounding Grids
for High-voltage Stations IV-Resistance of
Grounding Grids in Non-Uniform Soil", IEEE
Transactions, PAS,Vol.PAS-82,1963,pp. 782-
788.
4. R.P.Keil and W.K.Dick,"Substation Grounding
-Update of IEEE STANDARD 80", Fourteenth
Annual Transmission and Substation Design
and Operating Symposium, University of
Texas at Arlington, September,1981.
5. D. Mukhedkar, Y. Gervais & 3.P. Dejean,
"Modelling of Grounding Electrode", IEEE
Transactions,PAS, Vol. PAS -92, 1973, pp.
295-296.
6. Ross Caldecott and Donald G.Kasten, "Scale
Model studies of Station Grounding Grids",
IEEE Transactions, PAS, Vol. PAS-102, 1983,
pp. 558-566.
7. F.Dawalibi and D. Mukhedkar, "Parametric
Analysis of Grounding Grids", IEEE Transac-
tions, PAS, Vol.PAS-98,1979,pp.1659-1668.
8. S.B. Schwarz, "Analytical Expressions for
Resistance of Grounding Systems", AIEE
Transactions,Vol. 73, Part - III B, 1954,
pp. 1011-1016.
9. P.G. Laurent, "General Fundamentals of
Electric Grounding Technique, "Bulletin
de la Societe' Grancaisedes Electriciens,
Vol. I Series 7,July, 1951, pp. 368 402
-
(Translated and reprinted as Appendix III
AIEE-80, 1961).
10. Guide for Safety in Alternating Current Sub-
Stations Grounding",IEEE Standard 80,1976.
11. B. Thapar and 8.K.Arora,"Grounding Systems
in Non-Uniform Soil",Institution of Engineers
(India), Vol. 58, Pt. EL I, August, 1977,
pp. 23-29.
12. E.B. Joy, N.Paik, T.E.Brewer, R.E. Wilson,
R.P. Webb, and A.P.Meliopoulos, "Graphical
Data for Ground Grid Analysis, IEEE Transac-
tions, PAS, Vol. PAS-102,1983,pp.3038-3048.
B.Thapar (S'61-M'63-SM' 70 )
was born in Ludhiana,India on
Sept.1,1930.He received the
B.Sc.degree in Electrical
Engineering from Banaras
Hindu University, M.S. and
Ph.D. degrees in Electrical
Engineering from Illinois
Institute of Technology,
Chicago, in 1953, 1960 and
1963 respectively.
From 1953 to 1955 he was
with Punjab Public Works Department, Electricity
Branch, Chandigarh, India, working in Power
System operation section. In 1955 he joined
the faculty of Punjab Engineering College
Chandigarh, and is now a Professor of Electrical
Engineering. He has published a number of
Technical papers and is co-author of a book on
power system transients.
Dr. Thapar is a member of IEE, fellow of
number of
IE(India). He is working on a
bodies for the development of electrical educa-
tion and research in electric power systems.
S.L. Goyal was born in Moga,
India, on November 1, 1932.
He graduated in Electrical
Engineering from Rajasthan
University in the year1953.
Received M.Sc. Electrical
Engineering(Power Systems)
degree from Panjab University
in 1973.
After working at Hirakud
Dam Project for two years,
joined Punjab State Electri-
city Board in the year 1956.He was responsible
for the operation and maintenance ofdistribu -
tion systems as Assistant Engineer and Executive
Engineer. He was assigned the responsibility
for field design,construction and planning of
first 400 kV (Dehar Panipat)line in the country.
As Superintending Engineer, had a stint at the
Material Management of the State Electricity
Board. As Deputy Director and presently as
Director, directed and carried out investigations
on various research projects in power systems.
He has to his credit a number of Research and
Technical Publications.Areas of specialisation
and interest are Vibrations and Oscillations
in single and bundle conductor transmission
lines and grounding systems.
Mr. Goyal is a fellow of Institution of
Engineers (India),member CIGRE and member ERA.