AN INTEGRATED

ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPLIANT
STANDARDS BASED APPROACH TO EARTHING
FOR
SYSTEMS, ELECTRICAL SAFETY & LIGHTNING

Author: Ir. Satha A. Maniam

P.Eng (MY), C.Eng (UK), A.C.P.E. (ASEAN)
+6012-2293692
https://my.linkedin.com/in/satha-a-maniam-83981347

Acuity System Consultants Sdn Bhd

www.acuity.com.my

Date: 20th July 2017

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 1/21

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 4
2. EARTHING FOR STRUCTURES - BACKGROUND ........................................... 5
2.1 Typical Categories of Earthing Systems ....................................................... 5
2.2 Independent Earthing Systems ..................................................................... 5
2.3 Main Earthing Terminal ................................................................................ 6
2.4 Common Bonded Earthing Network ............................................................. 7
2.5 EM Compliant (Functional) Earthing ............................................................. 8
2.5.1 Traditional Earthing - Independent Earths ................................................... 9
2.5.2 Traditional Earthing - The Main Earthing Terminal ...................................... 9
2.5.3 Traditional Earthing - The Main Earthing Terminal (Variation) ................... 10
2.5.4 Recommended Approach – The Common Bonded Earthing Network ....... 10
2.5.5 Concerns wrt Earth Loops ......................................................................... 11
2.5.6 Recommended Approach – Common Bonded Earthing Network (3-
Dimensional) ........................................................................................... 11
2.6 Common Bonded Earthing Network - IEC-62305 ....................................... 12
2.6.1 Common Bonded Earthing Network - Building........................................... 12
2.6.2 Common Bonded Earthing Network for a Plant or facility .......................... 13
3. LIGHTNING ACTIVITY IN MALAYSIA .............................................................. 14
4. IMPEDANCE CONSIDERATIONS OF CONDUCTORS .................................... 15
5. TENDERED DESIGN OF STATION EARTHING SYSTEM ............................... 16
6. RISK - IMPEDANCE & HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIENTS ............................. 17
6.1 Hazards of High Frequency Transients & Long Conductors ....................... 17
6.2 Reducing the Hazards of Long Conductors ................................................ 18
6.3 Achieving Low Impedance .......................................................................... 18
6.4 The Intent of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Mesh Earthing..................................... 19
6.5 In Summary ................................................................................................ 19
7. CONCERNS OF GROUND NOISE FOR SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT ................... 20
8. EARTHING – SYSTEMS, ELECTRICAL SAFETY, LIGHTNING – AN EM
COMPLIANT STANDARDS BASED APPROACH ........................................... 21

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 2/21

 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - Traditional Earthing Systems - Independent ..................................................... 5

Figure 2 - Traditional Earthing Systems - With MET ......................................................... 6
Figure 3 - Traditional Earthing Systems - With MET - Isolated from Functional Earths ..... 6
Figure 4 - Common Bonded Earthing Network ................................................................. 7
Figure 5 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Traditional Earthing Systems - Independent Earth
Electrodes ........................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 6 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Traditional Earthing Systems - MET Concept ................ 9
Figure 7 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Traditional Earthing Systems - MET Concept (Variation)
....................................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 8 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Recommended Approach – Common Bonded Earthing
Network .......................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 9 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Recommended Approach - Earth Loops & The PEC ... 11
Figure 10 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Recommended Approach – Common Bonded Earthing
Network (3-D) ................................................................................................................. 11
Figure 11 - IEC-62305:4 – Common Bonded Earthing Network for a Building ................ 12
Figure 12 – Common Bonded Earthing Network for a Plant............................................ 13
Figure 13 - Malaysia - Isokeraunic Level ........................................................................ 14
Figure 14 - Malaysia Lightning Ground Flash Density..................................................... 14
Figure 15 - Potential Difference across a Conductor ...................................................... 15
Figure 16 - Tendered Design .......................................................................................... 16
Figure 17 - Hazards of Long Conductors ........................................................................ 17
Figure 18 - Reducing the Hazards of Long Conductors .................................................. 18
Figure 19 - Achieving Low Impedance............................................................................ 18
Figure 20 - The Intent of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 - Mesh Earthing ....................................... 19
Figure 21 - The Intent of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 - Mesh Earthing (In Summary) ................. 19

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 3/21

1. BACKGROUND
a. Preliminary E&B, Lightning Protection, and Stray Current Report (May 2016) by
SYSTRA is in compliance with IEC 62305, and IEC 61000-5-2. However, SYSTRA
has stated in the document that Prasarana wants lightning earth to be separate (even
if not recommended to do so in the Standards);
b. June 2016 issue of SYSTRA document removes the reference to IEC 61000-5-2.
However, the concept still remains in line with IEC 61000-5-2. The requirement for a
separate lightning earth by Prasarana remains.
c. 3rd Aug 2016, a workshop is held with PB, and there is a change as follows:
i. The clean earth and electrical earth of each room, shall be star referenced, by
combining them at a point on the concourse level (before the two earthing
systems proceed to the earth grids in the ground below);
ii. The clean earth, electrical earth, and lightning earth grids shall be combined at
ground level.
d. Both MINCO and MMSB have called tender based on the concept in (c) above.
e. MMSB engaged Ir. Satha A. Maniam to review the earthing system, who then
highlighted the risks of high potential differences (due to long conductor runs and high
frequency transients), which would be detrimental to equipment, and which may also
prove to be a safety hazard. This matter has since been highlighted and discussed
with PDP over several meetings since March 2017.
f. The solution to the matter is to bond the earthing systems at multiple levels, employ a
mesh, and bond them together with the structural rebars. This is in line with IEC
62305, IEC 610000-5-2, and with the SYSTRA document (with lightning bonded as
well at the various levels).
g. It is expected that there will be no significant cost increase through the adoption of the
following measures:
i. Use of aluminium instead of copper tape at the roof level;
ii. Removal of long copper cable runs to implement the discrete ‘clean’, and
‘electrical’ earth (and to be replaced instead by a 5mx5m copper mesh bonded
to the structural rebars). (Note that bonding ring conductors, bonded to the
floor slab copper mesh, will be provided in equipment rooms).

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 4/21

2. EARTHING FOR STRUCTURES - BACKGROUND

2.1 Typical Categories of Earthing Systems

A facility would in general have the following earthing systems:

a. High Voltage;
b. Low Voltage;
c. Functional (also known as ‘Clean’, ‘Quiet’, ‘System’, ‘Telco’, ‘Technical’, ‘Instrument’. A facility may
have one or more functional earthing systems);
d. Lightning Protection.

2.2 Independent Earthing Systems

In the past, when equipment was generally electro-mechanical in nature, earthing systems were treated as
independent, disparate entities. This is illustrated below.

HV/MV LV Lightning Telco Clean/ Systems Technical Instrument

Quiet

For Safety For Functional Performance of Equipment

(EMC Earthing Systems)

Figure 1 - Traditional Earthing Systems - Independent

Whilst the above diagram shows numerous functional (clean) earths, the intent here is primarily to highlight
the various names used in industry.

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 5/21

2.3 Main Earthing Terminal
As time progressed and equipment became more sensitive, it was gradually realised that separating the
earths introduced potential differences which led to equipment failure, as well as introduced Step & Touch
potential (S&TP) risks. This then led to the concept of the Main Earthing Terminal of a facility where all the
disparate earthing systems were to be integrated at one point. This is illustrated below.

MET

HV/MV LV Lightning Telco Clean/ Systems Technical Instrument

Quiet

For Safety For Functional Performance of Equipment

(EMC Earthing Systems)

Figure 2 - Traditional Earthing Systems - With MET

However, due to the concern of ground noise, functional earthing systems, were more often than not, isolated
from the safety earthing systems.

This is illustrated below.

MET

HV/MV LV Lightning Telco Clean/ Systems Technical Instrument

Quiet

For Safety For Functional Performance of Equipment

(EMC Earthing Systems)

Figure 3 - Traditional Earthing Systems - With MET - Isolated from Functional Earths

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 6/21

2.4 Common Bonded Earthing Network
As facilities increased in size, and equipment became more sensitive, in spite of the bonding at the Main
Earthing terminal, it was realized that the large distances between the earthing systems introduced potential
differences, particularly in the case of lightning and switching transients which are some high frequency
phenomena.

At 50Hz, it is quite easy to achieve equipotential bonding. However at high frequencies, the inductance of the
long cable leads multiplied by the high frequency currents, introduces very high potential differences into the
earthing and bonding system.

In view of this, the concept of earthing systems moved to an integrated low impedance network. The key
word being low impedance, as in a low impedance network, even with ground currents flowing in the
grounding network, the potential difference remains negligible.

The following diagram illustrates the concept of bonding the earthing systems at every level of a building.

HV/MV LV Lightning Telco Clean/ Systems Technical Instrument

Quiet

For Safety For Functional Performance of Equipment

(EMC Earthing Systems)

Figure 4 - Common Bonded Earthing Network

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 7/21

2.5 EM Compliant (Functional) Earthing
The intent of Functional (ie. electromagnetic compliant) Earthing, is to ensure that equipment can operate as
intended.

In this respect, one will need to consider IEC (TR) 61000-5-2:1997 (Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) -
Part 5: Installation and mitigation guidelines - Section 2: Earthing and cabling).

The following illustrations are from the said document. All the text in the following illustrations are exact as in
the document except that the font has been enhanced to accentuate key descriptions.

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 8/21

2.5.1 Traditional Earthing - Independent Earths

Figure 5 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Traditional Earthing Systems - Independent Earth Electrodes

2.5.2 Traditional Earthing - The Main Earthing Terminal

Figure 6 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Traditional Earthing Systems - MET Concept

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 9/21

2.5.3 Traditional Earthing - The Main Earthing Terminal (Variation)
The following is another typical variant in many projects. The original figure has been changed with the
‘green additions’.

Figure 7 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Traditional Earthing Systems - MET Concept (Variation)

2.5.4 Recommended Approach – The Common Bonded Earthing Network

The following is the recommended approach.

Figure 8 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Recommended Approach – Common Bonded Earthing Network

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 10/21

2.5.5 Concerns wrt Earth Loops
The following is a clarification from IEC (TR) 61000-5-2:1997 in respect of earth loops and noise. The text in
the figure below, is the paragraph preceding the figure in the said document. However, a green box to
highlight the PEC has been added to the diagram. All other text is as per the document.

Figure 9 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Recommended Approach - Earth Loops & The PEC

2.5.6 Recommended Approach – Common Bonded Earthing Network (3-Dimensional)

The following is the recommended approach in 3-dimensions.

Figure 10 - IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Recommended Approach – Common Bonded Earthing Network (3-D)

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 11/21

2.6 Common Bonded Earthing Network - IEC-62305
The following illustrations are from the standard on lightning protection, ie. IEC 62305.

2.6.1 Common Bonded Earthing Network - Building

The following illustration from IEC 62305 [AS-11], is of the Common Bonded Earthing Network of a building.

Figure 11 - IEC-62305:4 – Common Bonded Earthing Network for a Building

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 12/21

2.6.2 Common Bonded Earthing Network for a Plant or facility
The following illustration from IEC 62305 [AS-11], is of the Common Bonded Earthing Network of a facility or
plant, and in the case of this project, ought to be applied for the Depot to interlink the earthing systems of the
various buildings and structures.

Figure 12 – Common Bonded Earthing Network for a Plant

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 13/21

3. LIGHTNING ACTIVITY IN MALAYSIA
The Isokeraunic level, refers to the number of thunderstorm days (TD) per year.

About 10 TD/Yr WORLD ISOKERAUNIC MAP

Up-to 250 TD/Yr
My. Avg. 37 kA
My. Max 352 kA

THUNDERSTORM DAYS
0 2 4 1020 40 60 80 100 140 200+

Figure 13 - Malaysia - Isokeraunic Level

Malaysia has an IsoKeraunic Level (IKL) that goes up to 250 TD/year. Based on IEC 62305, this translates to
a Lightning Ground Flash Density (LGFD) of around 25 ground flashes/sq.km/year. It needs to be recognised
that these figures are national averages, and that peaks will indeed abound.

The following LGFD map (published by NASA), shows the Perak-Selangor-Negri_Sembilan belt to have an
extremely high LGFD (as much as 70 ground flashes/sq.km/year).

The LRT3 project does indeed fall into this belt of extremely high LGFD.

Figure 14 - Malaysia Lightning Ground Flash Density

It is essential, that any earthing design should consider the high frequency effects of lightning transients.

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 14/21

4. IMPEDANCE CONSIDERATIONS OF CONDUCTORS
The following figure provides an illustration of the potential difference across a conductor taking into
consideration of both powerline frequencies and lightning transients.

It computes and compares the potential difference due to both these components

Figure 15 - Potential Difference across a Conductor

As can be seen from the simplified scalar computation above, at 50HZ, resistance voltage drop is the
dominating factor when compared to the inductive voltage drop.

However, when once starts to consider high frequency currents, such as that of lightning transients, the
inductive voltage drop is the dominating parameter. In the above example, the induced current waveshape is
assumed to be 8/20µs, which results in an inductive voltage drop of 125V/kA/m. The text to the right of the
figure is based on an extract from IEC 616143, which goes to state that if the rate of rise is taken at 1kA/us,
then the resulting inductive voltage drop will be as high as 1kV/kA/m.

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 15/21

5. TENDERED DESIGN OF STATION EARTHING SYSTEM
The tendered Station earthing design is based on each equipment room having a ‘clean’ and ‘electrical’ earth
bar, and with the earth bars star point referenced to the ‘main-clean’, and ‘main-electrical’ earth bars. The
‘main-clean’ earth bar and main-electrical’ earth bars are bonded together at the concourse level. The earth
grids of the ‘clean’ and ‘electrical’ earths are bonded once again at the ground level. This is illustrated below.

The approximate lengths of cables from the ground floor grids to the MCE/ME Room, and from the MCE/ME
Room to the CTER Room is also indicated.

TENDERED DESIGN – STAR POINT REFERENCED AT CONCOURSE LEVEL

(Shows Three Rooms)
CTER ROOM XXX ROOM

C E C E
110m

MCE ME
Assume 0Ω
35m

GROUND LEVEL EARTHING SYSTEM

(MET)
0.5Ω

Figure 16 - Tendered Design

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 16/21

6. RISK - IMPEDANCE & HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIENTS
This section considers the risk introduced in Stations by having long bonding/grounding conductors.

6.1 Hazards of High Frequency Transients & Long Conductors

The following illustration shows:

a. One CTER, and one MCE/ME room;

b. A “Clean” Earthing System and “Electrical” Earthing System that are as per the Tendered Design
(Section 5);
c. the cable run lengths are assumed as shown, which does indeed occur in the railway station;
d. a lightning transient (surge), is conducted into an equipment room by one or more field cables, and
shunted by one or more Surge Protective Devices, into the “Clean” Earth, and into the ground below
(only one cable and SPD shown);
e. voltage drop is assumed at 125V/kA/m (Section 0).

It can be seen that this configuration causes significant dangerous potential differences between the “Clean”
and “Electrical” bars in the CTER.

SIGNIFICANCE OF HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIENTS & IMPEDANCE

5kA
NOTES:
EQPT
1) C – Clean earth bar. E – Electrical Earth bar. MCE/ME (M – Main).
2) Cable runs are based on a typical station with the CTER (room) being the furthest
room (at concourse level). Cable lengths are shown for horizontal runs between C/E
C 82.1875kV 13.4375kV E and MCE/ME, and from MCE/ME to the earthing systems at ground level.
3) It is assumed that the earthing systems are “commoned” at (MCE/ME Room), and
Vd = 68.75kV again at the bottom, through a Main Earthing Terminal (MET), or earthing grid, and
that the interconnects between the earthing systems are very short (thereby not
68.75kV
110m

introducing any further voltage differences).

0kA

4) Assume the integrated earthing resistance is 0.5 Ω.

5kA

5) An 8 µs rise time (8/20 µs waveform) would have a voltage drop of 125V/kA/m.

6) Assume a 5kA surge comes through one or more field cables, and is injected into the
earth bar of a SYSTEMS equipment room via a Surge Protective Device.
13.4375kV 13.4375kV 7) As shown, this will result in a hazardous voltage difference of 68.75kV between the
MCE ME
Assume 0Ω
10.9375kV

two earth bars in the equipment room.

2.5kA
2.5kA
35m

8) This potential difference poses the following hazards:

EPR = a. Damage to equipment which are connected to the different earthing bars and
0.5x5 =2.5kV which have power or data line interconnects (between the equipment);
GROUND LEVEL EARTHING SYSTEM b. Touch potential risks to human beings.
(MET)
0.5Ω

Figure 17 - Hazards of Long Conductors

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 17/21

6.2 Reducing the Hazards of Long Conductors

5kA SIGNIFICANCE OF HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIENTS & IMPEDANCE

EQPT NOTES:
1) Assume the bonding conductor between the “C” AND “E” earth bars is
of zero impedance. Hence even with currents flowing in the bonding
conductor, it does not introduce any potential difference.
C 47.8125kV 47.8125kV E
2) As can be seen this configuration:
Assume Z=0Ω a. Eliminates touch potential risks;
b. If the floor rebars of the room, are also bonded to the earth bar,
34.375kV

Vd = 0kV
110m

then even the floor will be at the same potential, thereby

2.5kA
protecting personnel even more.
2.5kA

13.4375kV 13.4375kV
MCE ME
Assume 0Ω
10.9375kV

2.5kA
2.5kA
35m

EPR =
0.5x5 =2.5kV
GROUND LEVEL EARTHING SYSTEM
(MET)
0.5Ω

Figure 18 - Reducing the Hazards of Long Conductors

6.3 Achieving Low Impedance

5kA SIGNIFICANCE OF HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIENTS & IMPEDANCE

EQPT NOTES:
1) It is essential to minimise the impedance of between any two pints of
an earthing system.
2) This may be achieved through a mesh/grid.
C 47.8125kV 47.8125kV E
Mesh
Z ~ 0Ω
34.375kV
110m

Vd = 0kV
2.5kA
2.5kA

13.4375kV 13.4375kV
MCE ME
Assume 0Ω
10.9375kV
35m

EPR =
0.5x5 =2.5kV
GROUND LEVEL EARTHING SYSTEM
(MET)
0.5Ω

Figure 19 - Achieving Low Impedance

The potential difference between the C/E bars at the CTER has been mitigated. However, we still have a
huge potential difference between the CTER and MCE/ME Rooms. Equipment bonded at the respective
rooms, with data line interconnects will see this huge potential difference. Hence this potential difference too
needs to be mitigated.

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 18/21

6.4 The Intent of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 – Mesh Earthing

Figure 20 - The Intent of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 - Mesh Earthing

In the above figure, the potential difference between the CTER and MCE/ME rooms has been mitigated
through the mesh earthing system.

6.5 In Summary

5kA SIGNIFICANCE OF HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIENTS & IMPEDANCE

EQPT NOTES:
1) In the case of traditional “common” earthing systems, currents flowing in
conductors of shared earthing systems, producing noise voltages and
potential differences in the earthing system, which effect equipment
C E installed in different areas of the ‘common’ earthing system (and with
data or power line interconnects).
Mesh
Z ~ 0Ω 2) However, with low impedance mesh based systems, the issue of
110m

potential difference does not arise, and consequently the issue of ground
(potential) ‘noise’, or a ‘noisy’ earth does not arise.

3) This system (as per IEC (TR) 61000-5-2), of a low impedance Common
Bonded Earthing Network, works fine for lightning, electrical safety, and
as a signal reference (Functional).
MCE ME
Mesh 4) It also needs to be stressed that signalling and telecommunications
35m

systems of today, are digital systems, using balanced differential mode

signalling (which is not ground referenced), and where the cable shields
are bonded at only one end. This is quite unlike older analog systems (of
GROUND LEVEL EARTHING SYSTEM equipment of the 80s), where they utilised common mode (ie. ground
(MET) referenced) signalling/comms, and as a result of which they were
susceptible to ground noise.
0.5Ω

Figure 21 - The Intent of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 - Mesh Earthing (In Summary)

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 19/21

7. CONCERNS OF GROUND NOISE FOR SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT

a. REFERENCE: IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 (Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) - Part 5: Installation and
mitigation guidelines - Section 2: Earthing and cabling);
b. The recommendations of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 are for the provision of an EM compliant earthing system,
which would make it suitable for signalling and telecommunication systems;
c. Malaysia has an isokeraunic level of around 252 thunderstorm days per year, with the Klang Valley have
a lightning ground flash density as much as 70 flashes/sq.km/year (NASA OTD & LIS). The
recommendations of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 also takes into consideration of the high frequency nature of
lightning protection systems. Conventional earthing system designs would result in significant potential
differences with risks to equipment failure;
d. The concept behind IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 is low impedance, so that even with currents flowing in the
earthing system, there is no appreciable potential difference that may affect interconnected equipment
installed at different locations of the earthing network;
e. Standard EMC practices (as per IEC (TR) 61000-5-2) call for the use of Parallel Earthed Conductors
which will further reduce the risk of potential differences, and noise;
f. The final key element that needs to be recognised, but which is often overlooked, is that signalling and
telecommunication systems of today are based on balanced differential mode signalling, as compared to
previous analog practices which used common mode unbalanced signalling. From this perspective, it is
clear, that they are not affected by ground currents in a low impedance grounding network;
g. It further needs to be added that Signalling Systems are floated with respect to earth, again immunizing
them from ground noise. They do not used a grounded (earthed) reference for their electronics. The only
devices within Signalling systems that reference earth, are the Earth Leakage Detector, and SPDs, which
do not compromise the isolated nature of the Signalling equipment;
h. As such the concerns of noise (and noisy earths) are simply not warranted in the case of earthing
systems constructed to IEC (TR) 61000-5-2. Furthermore, with the nature of equipment today (digital,
balanced mode), these risks are matters of the past (with analog and unbalanced common mode
systems);
i. It should be also recognised that IEC (TR) 61000-5-2 was gazetted by the Malaysian Government as
a Standard (MS 61000-5-2) in 2011, and adopted in full, with no changes from that of IEC (TR) 61000-5-
2.

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 20/21

8. EARTHING – SYSTEMS, ELECTRICAL SAFETY, LIGHTNING – AN EM COMPLIANT
STANDARDS BASED APPROACH
It is recommended that an EM Compliant, Standards based approach to earthing for SYSTEMS,
ELECTRICAL SAFETY, & LIGHTNING be applied as per the recommendation of IEC (TR) 61000-5-2:1997.

IEC (TR) 61000-5-2:1997 was gazetted in Malaysia as a Standard (MS 61000-5-2:2011) in 2011.

EARTHING PHILOSOPHY - V0.5 21/21