|
发表于 2012-5-15 20:56:26
|
显示全部楼层
2 Standards and Legal Framework
2.1 Philosophy Underlying the Standards
As a general rule, the standards provide the design limits to be met and (together with
supporting codes of practice) explain how the earthing system can be designed to meet these.
They generally include formulae to enable the necessary calculations to be carried out or
detailed guidance on practical aspects - for example, how to connect items of equipment or where to position the electrodes. In this chapter the potentials on which the design limits are based will be described, based on supply industry practice. Readers should note that there are differences in the design limits appertaining to the supply industry and consumer electrical installations. For example, the shock voltage limits are lower within electrical installations than in supply industry substations. It is important to refer to the appropriate standard to check the design limits which apply to each situation.
Previously, it was established practice to design the earthing system to achieve a certain
impedance value and the main electrodes were usually positioned near the equipment where fault current was expected to pass (for example transformers). This has changed during the last ten years, as the approach in the standards has moved towards that of north American practice. The most significant change is that now the earthing system must be designed to ensure that the potentials in its vicinity during a fault are below the appropriate limits. When an earth fault occurs and current flows to ground via the earth electrode, the potential on the electrode and any equipment connected to it, will rise above true earth potential. The potential reached under severe fault conditions, can be several thousand Volts. As the earth fault current flows into the soil surrounding the electrode, the potential within the soil and on its surface will rise. Moving away from the electrode system towards a remote point, the potential will progressively reduce until eventually it becomes that of true earth. This situation is shown in Figure 2-1, where the potential rise on the surface of the soil surrounding a single vertical earth rod, has been illustrated in three dimensions. This attempts to explain the potentials involved, in a semi-structural way.
Reference to Figure 2-1 shows that the rate of reduction of soil surface potential, or the
potential gradient, is greatest near the rod and reduces as one moves away towards a remote point. Imagine that a person is walking away from the rod in a straight line towards a remote (reference) earth, i.e. down the potential “slope”, taking equally spaced steps. The potential difference between the feet would be higher near the rod (for example at position A1, where it would be the potential difference between points A1 and A2) and would fall rapidly with each successive step (for example it is lower at position B1, i.e. B1-B2) before leveling out some distance away. This effect is recognised in the standards and is the basis of the term “step potential”, which is the potential difference between two points on the surface of the soil which are one metre apart. The situation described for a single rod is similar to that for all electrode systems and the step potential is highest in the area immediately beyond the buried electrodes, in uniform soil conditions. Step potential is a directional quantity and calculations are required to find the highest value in a full 360 degree radius.
We have recognised that the potential on the surface of the soil differs according to the
position in relation to the electrode system. This has implications for the second type of
potential difference, the “touch” potential. Whilst fault current is flowing through the
impedance of the earthing system, all of the exposed metal connected to this will experience a rise of voltage. For small systems, this is assumed to be the same value on all metalwork and is referred to as the GPR (Grid Potential Rise). In the example shown in Figure 2-1, the GPR is approximately 420V. The potential at a point on the surface of the soil will be lower than this, by an amount dependent on the buried depth of the electrode and the horizontal distance away. If a person is in contact with exposed metalwork and is standing on the soil, then their hands will be at same potential as the GPR, whilst their feet will be at a lower potential. This potential difference will be lowest if the feet are directly above the buried rodand will increase as they move further away. For example, Figure 2-1 shows that the touchvoltage is significantly higher at position B1 than at position A1. The touch potential is normally the potential which dictates the design of the earth electrode system within an outdoor substation and it will be greatest in areas furthest away from buried electrodes where it is still possible to touch exposed metalwork. In chapter 7, examples of earth electrode arrangements are discussed and the new arrangements attempt to reduce touch voltages. It is also important to ensure that a potential difference cannot be experienced between hands
which are in simultaneous contact with different pieces of exposed metalwork and this is
catered for by inter-equipment bonding as discussed in chapter 4.
Figure 2-1 Touch, Step and Transfer potentials around an earth rod electrode
Finally, if an insulated cable which is connected to a remote (reference) earth, is brought near the rod, the potential difference between the cable and the rod is called the “transfer potential”. The same transfer potential would be present if an insulated cable were taken from the rod to a remote point, where metalwork connected to a remote (reference) earth electrode system was present. The highest value of transfer potential is thus the GPR and this is the value normally used for calculations. At present, transfer potential limits are set by communication directives. They are 430 V and 650 V in the UK, depending on the type of installation, above which additional precautions are required.
Whether a person experiencing any of these potentials is at risk depends on a range of
factors, including the GPR. The standards attempt to take these factors into account and
establish limits, below which the design is considered acceptable. The ultimate risk of these potentials is that they will be sufficient to cause an electric shock which causes ventricular fibrillation of the heart. In arriving at the present limits, it was necessary to predict the proportion of current which would flow in the region of the heart and then establish limits based on its magnitude and duration. In UK standards, curves C1 and C2 of IEC 479-1, 1989
(International Electrotechnical Committee, Effects of Current Passing Through the Human Body) are used. These curves illustrate, for two probability levels, the current required for different time durations to cause ventricular fibrillation in a human. |
评分
-
查看全部评分
|