MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285022039 · doi:10.1109/tia.2022.3189614

Experimental Assessment of Grounding System Impacts on Ground Currents and Transient Overvoltage

2022· article· en· W4285022039 on OpenAlexaff
S. A. Saleh, D. Jewett, Ahmed Al‐Durra, Saikrishna Kanukollu, Julián Cárdenas-Barrera, Marcelo E. Valdes, Julian Meng, Sergio Panetta

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industry Applications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNotationGroundAlgorithmMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, experimental performance assessment and comparison are presented for solid, low impedance, high impedance, frequency-selective, and isolated grounding (IG) systems. The typical design of a grounding system (for low and medium voltage generation, transmission, and distribution systems) is based on selecting an impedance ( <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\bar{Z}_{G}$</tex-math></inline-formula> ), which is used to connect the neutral point and the ground. The impedance <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\bar{Z}_{G}$</tex-math></inline-formula> is typically composed from a combination of <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$R$</tex-math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L$</tex-math></inline-formula> , and <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$C$</tex-math></inline-formula> elements. The combination type (series or parallel), along with the values of <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$R$</tex-math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L$</tex-math></inline-formula> , <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$C$</tex-math></inline-formula> elements, allow estimating the possible effects of <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\bar{Z}_{G}$</tex-math></inline-formula> on ground currents and potentials during ground faults. In this article, solid, low impedance, high impedance, frequency-selective, and IG systems are designed for a 35-kVA <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$3\phi$</tex-math></inline-formula> transformer and a 5-kVA <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$3\phi$</tex-math></inline-formula> synchronous generator, for purposes of assessing and comparing their effects on ground currents and potentials during ground faults. The laboratory transformer and generator are tested for line-to-ground and double line-to-ground faults with all designed grounding systems under different loading levels. Experimental results show that some grounding systems can effectively reduce ground currents, and other grounding systems can effectively reduce ground potentials. These capabilities and features can be used to achieve certain system and operation mandates, including ground capacity, maximum allowed overvoltage, and service continuity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Industry ApplicationsSame topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207