Thanks very much Engineer, I have watched your 7 lectures on earthing and I am truly grateful. I now have a much better understanding of earthing. Thanks for your generosity and may God bless your life.
Hello. Your video is so helpful. By the way, at 9:36 the third formula named EN50522 is different from the drived formula. Could you explain why the third one is different from the first?
Actually, all these standards not only follow the derived expression, but make suitable adjustments to it based on test reports and results from software to match accuracy. Therefore, you might some changes. However, the approach remains same.
Thanks for your videos. What would you do if the earth rod was not a "rod" and instead a pipe? Would you include the material contained within the pipe as the overall "rod" diameter?
Many thanks... What you stated is correct.... The resistance that we derived here is the dissipation resistance of rod. So, whether you take into consideration rod or pipe in both the cases it remains same. We will consider pipe radius as initial value and infinity as final. It would be great if you also refer to Lec 2 of this series, where I explained about dissipation resistance.
Sure will do that... For horizontal rod with half inside the surface and plate, I will prepare one lecture... However, for the case where rod is embedded at certain depth like the case of BEC, we need to use Maxwell equations which I will deal in EMC series...
@@railwayengineeringinsights6463 Thanks a lot. I will wait for your update. By the way, how do you apply the soil material, humidity, temperature, etc. to the problem when designing the grounding system? Because for example, if you are using the vertical rod, still, you have to consider that because of the geographical position of the well, maybe you cannot obtain a good value for the resistance. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Yes you are absolutely correct... We need to measure the soil resistivity (using Wenner 4-pole method)... Which is dependent on the type of soil (geographical location, temperature, moisture content, etc). If we find that the resistivity to too high like in dry regions, then we apply resistivity enhancement material like bentonite... This helps to lower the resistivity... Also sometimes we used concrete cased electrode, this help also in reducing corrosion if you use MS as the rod material...
@@railwayengineeringinsights6463 I would be grateful if you can explain about the methodologies of the items that I have written in my two comments in your next video.
Sure I will do a video... However, it will be done at the end of this series where I will explain about resistivity test... Upcoming lectures will be related to fault calculation....
Here A is the cross section area, which is considered to be equal to A1 at x distance from the rod (A=A1). Then at x+dx, it will be A2. As dx is tending to 0, A2 will be nearly equal to A1 as we can equate dx to 0. So, A1=A2=A.... This is true only for dx change, i.e. very very small change...
Great teacher
Many thanks
Thanks very much Engineer, I have watched your 7 lectures on earthing and I am truly grateful. I now have a much better understanding of earthing. Thanks for your generosity and may God bless your life.
Many thanks for your words.
Hi Engineer, looking forward to your lecture on earthing of surge diverters
Will upload soon
Mind blowing 👌👌👌
Many thanks
Back to engineering school... Superb explanation .. Keep doing the grt work... 👏👍📑📚
Many thanks...
This has clear my old doubts..Thanks..
Many thanks...
Hello. Your video is so helpful.
By the way, at 9:36 the third formula named EN50522 is different from the drived formula.
Could you explain why the third one is different from the first?
Actually, all these standards not only follow the derived expression, but make suitable adjustments to it based on test reports and results from software to match accuracy. Therefore, you might some changes. However, the approach remains same.
Thanks for your videos. What would you do if the earth rod was not a "rod" and instead a pipe? Would you include the material contained within the pipe as the overall "rod" diameter?
Many thanks... What you stated is correct....
The resistance that we derived here is the dissipation resistance of rod. So, whether you take into consideration rod or pipe in both the cases it remains same. We will consider pipe radius as initial value and infinity as final. It would be great if you also refer to Lec 2 of this series, where I explained about dissipation resistance.
how to calculate the Resistance of earth rod when provided with chemical earthing
Could you please provide the same video for the horizontal rod and more importantly plates?
Sure will do that... For horizontal rod with half inside the surface and plate, I will prepare one lecture... However, for the case where rod is embedded at certain depth like the case of BEC, we need to use Maxwell equations which I will deal in EMC series...
@@railwayengineeringinsights6463 Thanks a lot. I will wait for your update. By the way, how do you apply the soil material, humidity, temperature, etc. to the problem when designing the grounding system? Because for example, if you are using the vertical rod, still, you have to consider that because of the geographical position of the well, maybe you cannot obtain a good value for the resistance. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Yes you are absolutely correct... We need to measure the soil resistivity (using Wenner 4-pole method)... Which is dependent on the type of soil (geographical location, temperature, moisture content, etc). If we find that the resistivity to too high like in dry regions, then we apply resistivity enhancement material like bentonite... This helps to lower the resistivity... Also sometimes we used concrete cased electrode, this help also in reducing corrosion if you use MS as the rod material...
@@railwayengineeringinsights6463 I would be grateful if you can explain about the methodologies of the items that I have written in my two comments in your next video.
Sure I will do a video... However, it will be done at the end of this series where I will explain about resistivity test... Upcoming lectures will be related to fault calculation....
After equating A1 to A2, how did you arrive at A that you used in the derivations?
Here A is the cross section area, which is considered to be equal to A1 at x distance from the rod (A=A1). Then at x+dx, it will be A2. As dx is tending to 0, A2 will be nearly equal to A1 as we can equate dx to 0. So, A1=A2=A.... This is true only for dx change, i.e. very very small change...