SOIL ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY AN ESSENTIAL PARAMETER FOR POWER PLANT DESIGN

JOHN R. DAVIE Principal Engineer LLOYD W. YOUNG, JR. Chief Geotechnical Engineer GEORGE A. STASHIK Electrical Engineer Bechtel Power Corporation Gaithersburg, Maryland

electrodes. If the soil has a constant resistivity throughout, then the resistivity that will be measured if the electrodes are art equal distance, A, apart can be shown to be: p=
2nAvfI

.................................................(l)

INTRODUCTION Soil electrical resistivity is perhaps the only soil parameter that is used by geologists and geotechnical engineers to explore the subsurface characteristics at a power plant site and also used by civil and electrical engineers as input to their design. A properiy designed and executed field electrical resistivity survey is one method of examining the subsurface profile. The same program can provide information about the corrosion potential of the soil that can play a major role in determining the protection needed for buried steel piping and pile foundations. At the same time, the soil conductivity interpreted from the results of the resistivity testing is an integral part of the design of the electrical grounding system for the plant. This paper describes soil electrical resistivity, test procedures to estimate resistivity values, and how these values can best be used to obtain the parameters required for successful power pknt design. Precautions and recommendations are provided on the correct interpretation of the test results. Measures that should be taken to ensure adequate design for corrosion and grounding based on resistivity values are described and discussed. SOIL ELECTRICAL True and Apparent RESISTIVITY TESTING

Of course, subsurface conditions are never entirely uniform, i.e., because of the way subsurface materials are formed and deposited, their properties vary within any specific area and depth. Thus, in an actual field test, the computed quantity on the right hand side of Equation (1) will not be the true resistivit y of the soil, since the resistivity of the soil will vary within the volume of soil influenced by the test. The quantity measured is thus called the apparent resistivity. The amount the apparent and true resistivities will differ will depend on the amount of variation of the soil. It is important to note that there will probably be less variation of electrical resistivity within a small volume of soil than within a large volume. Thus the apparent resistivity measured with the electrodes close together, i.e., a small A value, will be closer to the true resist.ivity than with the electrodes spaced far apart. Test Procedures The test setup with the evenly spaced electrodes shown in Figure 1 is called the Wenner electrode configuration. The spacing A of the four electrodes depends on what results are desired, bearing in mind that A is typically chosen as one to two times the depth of interest. Where measurement of variations of subsurface conditions in a horizontal direction is wanted (cakl prowling), A is held constant at the desired value and the entire spread is moved from location to location. Where measurement of the variation of resistivity with depth is wanted (called sounding), the center of the spread is held at a designated location, and A is increased with successive readings. Generally the A values for sounding are increased logarithmically to give the best results, e.g., spacing may beat 1, 1.75, 3, 5, 8, 12, 20, 30, and 40 meters. One of the advantages of this type of test is its relatively low cost and short duration. The cost of the sounding at the A spacings noted above would be in the $200 to $500 range (including interpretation of results) and the field portion would probably take less than 2 hours. The mild steel or martensitic stainless steel electrodes must be pushed or hammered into the ground until they come in contact with moist soil. Penetrations are typically around 150 mm but may have to be deeper (300 mm or more) under certain conditions. Penetration should be less for very small A values; as a rule of thumb, electrode penetration should

..

Resistivity

Electrical resistivity, p, is the electrical resistance of a unit volume of a material, and is measured in units of elecrncal resistance times length, typically expressed as ohm-meters. The concept is best illustrated by referring to Figure I which shows the setup for an electrical soil resistivity test. Four electrodes are placed in the ground, and a measured current, I, from a battery (or, preferably, an ac source) flows through the ground via the outer two electrodes. The portion of current that flows through the ground will produce a voltage drop, V, between the two inner

Proceedings
a-c Source or Battery

of the American Power Conference by multiplying the reading by A if the Werner configuration is used. electrode

m ..
,.. .

Ammeter

. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , ,.. ,..
. . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . ...
. ...

.,,

.,
,

Interpretation

of Test Resuits

..

Soil . . ., Resistivity 0
.

yl:f:~ Flow ..
. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .

...
pfw?1963Ku.i

Figure 1. Soil Electrical Resistivity Test not be greater than 10% of A. If the surface soil is very dry, water may have to be poured around the electrode. In frozen soil, not only is it difficult to install the electrodes, but the readings obtained in the frozen soil can be misleading. Care must be taken to avoid positioning the survey line close to any conductive structures such as steel piles, pipes or cables. Also, the cables connecting the test equipment to the electrodes must be in good condition since even a minute electrical leak can seriously affect the results. If a battexy or portable ac generator is used to energize the outer electrodes, consideration should be given to the effects of the current source on the test results. If a dc source is used, voltage and current readings should be taken in as short a period as possible and with the polarity at the outer electrodes in the forward and reversed directions. This is necessary to minimize the effects of polarization of the outer electrodes which can distort the results. If a portable ac generator is used, then voltage measurements should be taken at several pin spacings prior to energizing the outer electrodes in order to determine whether there are any stray ac currents flowing through the soil which may affect the test results. Most models of commercial resistivity measuring equipment operate at frequencies slightly higher than normal power system frequency. This negates the effects of dc polarization and stray ac currents. Commercial test equipment incorporates the ammeter and voltmeter into a control box that includes a temperature compensation device and a processing capability that provides readout in a directly usable form. To obtain a resistivity reading, the reading dial on the control box is adjusted until the null meter in the box is balanced. Since the range of soil resistivities can be very large, a scale multiplier setting switch is used in conjunction with the readkg dial. For most equipment, the reading provided is the 27tV/I term from Equation 1. The apparent resistivity is then obtained

The resistivity of earth materials tends to decrease with increasing water content and also with increasing salinity or free ion content of the water in the pore spaces. At the high end of the resistivity scale are massive rock formations (except ores) which contain only minimal pore space. Most clean sands and gravels also exhibit high electrical resistivity. This is almost always the case with dry sands and gravels, but is also usually true where the porewater is clean, and free of salinity. The resistivity of rock materials generally falls when they become weathered because of increasing moisture and ion content. Similarly, the resistivity of sands and gravels tends to decrease significantly when the porewater becomes dirty, i.e., when they contain fine grained soil particles. Most fine-grained soils, i.e., silts and clays, have medium or low resistivities. These can become very low in near-surface soils when pore water evaporates, leaving high concentrations of salts.

Current tends to flow towards low-resistivity materials, and away from high-resistivity materials. This is the basis for interpreting apparent resistivity readings in the sounding process, i.e., where electrode spacing A is increased for successive readings. Figure 2 shows a soil profile where a clay of low resistivit y p I and thickness D overlies a very thick coarse sand layer of high resistivity p2. In Figure 2(a) the A spacing is small; as a result, the sand layer has minimal influence on the current flow and the apparent resistivity reading is close to the true resistivity reading. As the A spacing increases (Figure 2(b)), the current lines that would have gone deeper are forced upwards towards the surface since current wants to flow away from the high resistance sand. Since a greater proportion of the current now flows along the surface, the voltage drop between the two inner electrodes will also increase. Since resistivity is proportional to voltage drop, the apparent resistivity will increase as the A value increases. Figure 3(a) shows apparent resistivity plotted against A for the case in Figure 2. Figure 3(b) illustrates the relationship between apparent resistivity and A for the case where the sand overlies the clay. At A spacings that are only a &action of D (less than about 0.5), the apparent The resistivity is close to that of the upper material. increasing A spacing corresponds to an increasing depth of sounding. However, this is certainly not a 1:1 relationship, nor is it linear. Nevertheless, provided there are no horizontal discontinuities, the transition curve towards p2 will be smooth. The A spacing required to

Proceedings

of the American

Power Conference

111111

111{1[

v ,. . . .. .

v ,, .... ,: ........... ... . . L~~

v .,. . . . .. . . ., . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . ~ ..: . . . . .. .. .

..

. . . . . . . ...

...

ResistiVity Clay High Resistivity Coarse Sand

. ..,,

....,,,

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

1 ., .., . . .:: . .... .. .... ...... .. .. ... . : . .....

....

............. . .......... .. ........... ....... .... ....... ....

.... ....

..

...

...

(a)

(b)

ppt-m634s2

Figure 2. Current Distribution Variation in Layered Soil System

Pa P. P.

P2

PI

,V
............ . .. .

.. . P EAPEY
PI A

p,, High

pl, High
02,

P2,High

P21 LOW

Low

P3tMedium

p3, Medium

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)
F$MI?J63U2-3

Figure 3. Qualitative Sounding Curves for Various Soil Profiles reach p2 is always greater than Ml = 1, and is a function of the difference between p, and p2. The greater the difference, the larger the A spacing needed to achieve p2. Figure 4 (from Ref. 1) shows a theoretically correct set of curves for this situation, and indicates that when the p2/p 1 ratio is very high (e.g., 40 or more), even at large A/D ratios the apparent resistivity of the pz layer is only a fraction of the true resistivity. Consequently, in situations where the top few meters of soil contain a high salt residue resulting in very low resistivity values, it is difficult to obtain even an estimate of the true resistivity of the underlying clean soil. When the soil profile contains more than 2 layers, the apparent resistivity versus A plot becomes correspondingly more complex. Figures 3(c) and 3(d) show the relationships for a 3-layer profile. Unless each underlying layer is extremely thick, the actual resistivity value will not be reached before the influence of the underlying layer is felt. As with the 2-layer profile, the true resistivity of the upper layer can be closely estimated. For the multiple-layer profde, the shape of the apparent resistivity versus A curve can be interpreted to provide an estimate of the thicknesses of the underlying layers and a qualitative estimate of their resistivity values relative to the top layer. The true resistivities of these lower layers are difflcuh to assess, particularly for a series of thin layers where there is a large variation in resistivity between the layers. Computer models are used to assist in the interpretation. The task of interpretation becomes much easier when there are data available from an adjacent sample borehole.

Proceedings 10.

of the American

Power Conference

1 I I 81I

P2=40P1 5 -

3 2 Pa/P, 1
J

Y - D = Thickness of Layer 1 .5 p, = Reaiativityof Layer 1 .3 .2 p.= Apparent Resistivity of Layer 2 p2= Resistivity of Layer 2

L---u+
.2 .3 .5

23 ND

10

10

30

50

100

ppt-ms+m-.l

Figure 4. Quantitative Sounding Curves for a TwoLayer The above discussion assumes that the subsurface strata are When the strata are sloping, interpretation horizontal. becomes even more difficult. Frequently, the resistivity sounding test is repeated with an orthogonal survey line through the center point to provide confirmation of whether the strata are horizontal (the two soundings give similar resistivity versus A plots) or sloping (the two plots show some variations). USES OF SOIL ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY POWER PLANT DESIGN Investigating the Subsurface Profile IN

System

kept constant and the location of the array is moved in a specified manner (e.g., tests taken at 50 m spacing), can be used as an inexpensive means of locating, for example, a source of clean granular material (i.e., where the soil resistivity is significantly higher) for fdl or well water, or for locating buried obstructions or undesirable rnateriaI, e.g., a former ash pond on an existing power plant site. Corrosiveness of the Subsurface Environment

This use has been described briefly in the previous section. Subsurface conditions under specific structures are typically investigated by sample borings and in-situ tests such as cone penetrometer soundings. Electrical resistivity surveys can provide confirmation of the soil layering and can be used as a rapid means for distinguishing variability of this layering within a particular area of interest. The orthogonal tests noted above provide a method of determining the slope of the subsurface strata. Soil profding, where the A vzdue is

The corrosivity of a soil towards a buried metal object is dependent upon a number of parameters, including soil resistivity, moisture content, dissolved salts, pH, presence of bacteria, and the amount of oxygen available at the metal surface. It is generally agreed that no one parameter can be used to accurately forecast the corrosiveness of a particular Nevertheless, electrical resistivity is commonly soil. utilized as an indicator of the soils corrosiveness, and as the basis for determining whether special corrosion mitigation measures, such as cathodic protection, should be taken for buried steel pipes or piles in contact with the soil.

Proceedings

of the American

Power Conference

Table 1- Soil Corrosiveness Criteria for Buried Steel

Soil Property Little Corrosive >100(1.2) Property value range for corrosiveness Mildly Corrosive 20-100(1) 50-100(2) >30(3) pH Chlorides, ppm Sulfates, ppm l%rom Reference 2 2h%om Reference 3 3~rom Reference 3, provided 5<pHc 10, chloride content <200 ppm, and sulfate content <1,000 ppm. Electrical resistivity plays a major role in determining the selection of the type of cathodic protection system that can be used when the soil is comosive. Low resistivity soils allow the use of sacrificial galvanic anodes to protect the buried pipes from corrosion. The number of sacrificial nodes required is related to the effectiveness of the pipe coating and to the soil resist.ivity. Where there are large numbers of buried steel pipes, then an impressed current type of cathodic protection system may be used, requiring a rectifier whose voltage rating is primarily governed by soil resistivity. Power Plant Grounding One component of the plant grounding system is the network of buried interconnected conductors commonly referred to as the ground grid. The primary purpose for installing the ground grid is to maintain safe voltages across the plant area during high-voltage transients. All plant equipment and structures ase connected to the grounding system. Conductor material is generally copper although steel strips have been used in countries where copper is expensive or where resale of copper is lucrative enough to encourage theft. Steel has also been used at sites where the soil is corrosive to copper. Soil resistivity is an important parameter that affects the resistance of the ground grid and determines the step-andtouch voltages that a person can tolerate. Knowledge of the soil resistivity is thus essential for ground grid design. The number of test sites for determining resistivity depends on the area covered by the plant. Measurements should be made at a minimum of two locations, with one of the locations being in the switchyard or high-voltage area. The length of the survey traverse, i.e., the distance between the >5.0 and <10.0(2) <200(2) <1 ,000(2) 5.0-6.5(1) 300-1 ,000() 1,000-5,000(1) ~to(l) >1 ,000() >5,000() Moderately Corrosive 10-20() 20-50(2) 5-IO(I) 7-20(2) indicated below Corrosive Very Corrosive .@) <7(Z)

Resistivity, Ohm-m

Generally speaking, the lower the soil resistivity, the higher the potential for corrosion. Table 1 provides ranges of values of resistivity and chemical content corresponding to various degrees of corrosion. Table 1 is included for guidance only; considerable variation in the ranges tabulated can occur. When investigating the corrosiveness of a particular soil profile towards, for example, a buried steel pipe, soil resistivity data should be collected at several depths, starting near the surface and extending to below the bottom of the Thus, the method used is similar to that for a pipe. sounding survey described earlier. In some cases, the soil near the surface will exhibit a lower resistivity (i.e., more corrosive) while the soil at pipe depth may be high resistivity (i.e., mildly or non-corrosive). Unfortunately, on-cc the pipe is backfilled, there is no way to prevent the more corrosive upper soil from mixing with the noncorrosive lower soil, and so the soils all have to be classified as potentially corrosive, and mitigative memures considered. At power plants, buried steel pipe is particularly vulnerable to underground corrosion because of the extensive network of buried copper conductors that comprise the plant ground grid. Interconnecting the buried steel pipe with the copper grid creates a corrosion cell due to the dissimilar metals. The amount of corrosion that results tiom the coupling of the dissimilar metals is a function of the soil resistivity, since the lower the soil resistivity, the higher the corrosion currents currents flowing from the steel. High corrosion mean more metal loss, and more rapid penetration of the pipe wall. As would be expected, in high resistivity soils the corrosion currents are smaller, resulting in a longer useful life for the pipe.

Proceedings

of the American Power Conference from the ground grid through the earth and back to the source. The resistance of the ground grid to earth, which is a function of the soil resistivity, in conjunction with the current flowing from the ground grid results in a ground potential rise (GPR). If the GPR is high from the telephone companys viewpoint, they will install equipment to protect their lines from being damaged. GPR hi become less of a concern with the use of fiber optic cables since there is no metallic path to remote locations. CONCLUS1ONS The field soil resistivity test where soil resistivities for successive strata are obtained by performing tests at increasing electrode spacing provides data that can be used . . (1) as an inexpensive means of interpreting the subsurface profile, (2) for determining the corrosion potential of the soil towxds buried piping, and (3) as input for designing the plant ground grid. The test provides apparent soil resistivity values. True soil resistivity can be interpreted from apparent resistivity; this interpretation becomes more dit%cuh with more complex soil profiles. Near-surface soils with high resistivity generally provide a suitably noncorrosive environment for buried piping, but increase the cost of the ground grid. Low resistance near-surface soils generally result in an economical ground grid design, but also result in a need for corrosion protection of the buried piping. REFERENCES 1. Bison Instruments Incorporated. Instruction Manual for Earth Resistivitv Meters, 1973. American Petroleum Institute. Cathodic Protection of Abovemound Petroleum Storage Tanks, API Recommended Practice 651, Washington, D. C., 1991. STS Consultants, Inc. Reinforced Soil Structures. Vol. 1. Desire and Construction Guidelines, FHWA Report No. FHWA-RD-89-043, McLean, VA, 1990.

current probes (three times A in the Wenner configuration) determines the volume of soil being tested. Some advocates support using a traverse equal to twice the diagonal length of the site. For large sites this becomes impractical. A maximum traverse of 30 to 100 m is generally considered acceptable. As with the sounding survey described earlier, measurements are started at close probe spacings (shallow depths) and increased incrementally until the selected traverse length is reached. Preferably, two sets of measurements are taken at each location, using orthogonal traverses. NormalIy, the two sets of results will be similar. Small differences may indicate sloping s&ata. Large differences could irdcate possible noise problems from nearby power lines, buried metallic structures, or soil anomalies. Soil anomalies can usually be checked from soil boring logs. After any extraneous data have been discarded, the soil resistivity information collected at the various locations and probe spacings are analyzed using a computer program. The output is generally in the form of a multi-layer soil model that provides an estimate of soil resistivity and thickness for each soil layer. The soil model provides important data for designing the ground grid. For example, normal practice may be to bury the ground grid conductor at 0.5 m depth; however, the soil model may indicate that the soil at 1 m depth is more conductive. A cost comparison would then be made to determine whether the savings in conductor material outweigh the additional costs for the deeper installation. By studying the soil resistivity model, decisions can be made about using ground rods. These copper rods are more costly than a conventional ground grid, and are typically used when the near-surface soils have very high resistivity. The authors have experienced this situation with coarse granular soils (gravels and cobbles), as well as calcareous sands and lateritic soils. In all cases, the ground water table was below the high resistivity layer, and the grounding rods had to extend into the underlying saturated stratum. This involved installing the rods to as deep as 20 to 30 m. Indirectly, the telephone company is also concerned with the soil resistivity at the power plant site. During a fault on the high voltage system, a portion of the fault current flows

2.

3.