Page 1 of 9 2017 -PPIC-0276

GROUND-FAULT PROTECTION - ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW

Nehad EI-Sherif, P.Eng, M.Se., MBA
Senior Member, IEEE
MNKYBR Inc.
1401 Elliott Street
Saskatoon, SK S7N OV9, Canada
nehad. e.el-sherif@ieee.org

Abstract - Industrial power systems, whether low voltage
(LV) or medium voltage (MV) systems, are the backbone of
any industrial facility. To keep production going and minimize
downtimes, they are required to be very reliable. Therefore, it
is important to deploy various protection systems to detect
and react appropriately to any abnormal condition that can
lead to a failure to deliver power or to a hazardous condition.
Ground faults are the most common condition experienced
by a power system. Hence the ability to detect and react as
needed quickly is paramount. The goal of this paper is to help
protection engineers, engineering consultants, and power
system operators to apply ground-fault protection systems
correctly while also complying with local electrical codes.
Index Terms - Ground faults, ground-fault protection of
equipment (GFPE), ground-fault relays, neutral grounding.
I. INTRODUCTION
Most North American industrial power systems are
designed to have an intentional connection to ground (earth's
mass), i.e., grounded systems, via a low impedance path.
Grounding of three-phase systems is done by connecting the
main transformer or generator neutral to ground. For a single-
phase (split-phase) system, the mid-point of the transformer
winding is connected to ground.
Most ungrounded systems, still in service, are legacy
systems that have not yet been converted to grounded
systems. An ungrounded delta-connected transformer can be
grounded by connecting either one of its corners or the mid-
point of one phase winding to ground. A grounding
transformer (zigzag or wye-delta) can also be used to provide
an artificial neutral that can be connected to ground. Those
three methods are shown in Fig. 1.
System grounding is a common practice because it limits
the voltage rise of un-faulted phases during a ground-fault to
a predictable value within the normal dielectric capabilities of
applied insulation systems. System grounding also provides
a safer path for ground-fault currents to allow the detection of
such condition by ground-fault relays and minimize step-
potential hazard.
A ground fault (also referred to as a line-to-ground fault) is
load current (by enough margin) to prevent tripping during an
overload condition. Accordingly, overcurrent devices cannot
detect high impedance arcing ground faults due to their very
low current magnitude. Therefore, ground-fault protection is
required by both the National Electric Code (NEC) in the US
and the Canadian Electric Code (CEC).
In order to understand and properly implement those code
requirements, it is important to differentiate between system
grounding and equipment grounding.
System grounding of a wye-connected system is the
connection of the neutral to ground. Delta-connected systems
are grounded as shown in Figure 1. Equipment grounding, on
the other hand, is the connection of all non-current-carrying
conductive metal parts (such as metal enclosures, motor
frames, conduits, cable trays, and junction boxes) to a local
grounding grid which is connected to earth . The connection
of all non-current-carrying metals parts together and to the
electrical supply source, which is called bonding, creates a
low-impedance circuit for the fault current. This facilitates the
operation of ground-fault protection. On the other hand,
connecting of non-current-carrying metals parts to earth limits
the voltage to ground (i .e., touch potential) on those parts to a
safer value. ensures that those metal parts are always at
ground potential. Therefore, a person who comes in contact
with those parts, during a ground-fault condition, is exposed
to a less hazardous voltage.
System grounding and equipment grounding, also referred
to as safety grounding, serve different purposes. Equipment
grounding is implemented to provide personnel safety, while
system grounding provides system operational stability.
It is worth mentioning that ground-fault relays only provide
equipment protection and are not appropriate for personnel
protection. To provide personnel protection against shock
hazards, a ground-fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) is used [2].
This paper is organized as follows: Section 11 covers the
definition, causes and types of ground faults. Then a brief
discussion of power system neutral grounding methods is
given in Section Ill. Finally, various topics related to ground-
fault protection are covered in Section IV. The topics covered
are: 1) protective relay technologies, 2) ground-fault detection
methods, 3) proper operation, 4) installation problems, 5)
testing, 6) applications, and 7) electrical code requirements in

tik:
an unintentional connection between an energized conductor Canada and the US.
and ground. This condition leads to a large amount of current

~: (-:
er- 1 c
flowing to ground, resulting in excessive heat damage at the
fault point. Ground faults can create various safety hazards
such as fire, electric shock, and serious damage to rotating
machinery and electronic equipment. Line-to-ground faults
comprise approximately 98% of all electrical failures [1].
Overcurrent protection can detect a ground-fault condition, if Ungrounded
-=-
Corner grounded
-=-
Centertap grounded Grounding transformer
the fault current is higher than the device setting. Overcurrent
protection devices are set at a value higher than the nominal Fig. 1 Grounding of 3-phase delta systems

978-1-5090-5288-2/17}$31 .00 2017 IEEE

 2017 -PPIC-0276
11. GROUND FAULTS - AN OVERVIEW
A. Definitions
The NEC defines a ground fault as: "an unintentional,
electrically conductive connection between an ungrounded
conductor of an electrical circuit and the normally non-
current-carrying conductors, metallic enclosures, metallic
race ways, metallic equipment, or earth. " [3]. On the other
hand, the CEC defines a ground fault as: "an unintentional
electrical path between a part operating normally at some
potential to ground, and ground." [4]. From those two
definitions, it is clear that both codes have a similar
definition for ground faults, although the NEC provides a
more detailed definition than does the CEC .
B. Causes
Ground faults may occur because the dielectric function
of insulation is compromised for any number of reasons,
among them :
Aging , physical damage, and stresses (caused by
overvoltages, lightning , etc.) wear insulation out
resulting in its failure
Exposure to moisture, chemicals, or conductive dust
Raccoons and rodents (e.g., squirrels, beavers, and
rats) chewing into insulation or bridge an insulating
gap between conductors
Accidental human intervention causing a fault (e.g.,
dropping tools or improperly handling conductors)
C. Types
Within industry literature, the most commonly defined
ground fault is the bolted fault. A bolted fault is
characterized by having zero impedance-to-ground .
Practically, it is difficult to have a zero impedance-to-ground
fault. Yet, human mistakes (e.g., leaving grounding cables
connected after maintenance or crossing conductors during
equipment assembly) could result in a bolted ground fault.
The magnitude of ground-fault current is controlled by
the : 1) system total impedance (grounding impedance,
transformer and cable impedances) and 2) fault impedance
to ground. Accordingly, for a given system (i.e., constant
system impedance), the magnitude of the fault current is
determined by the fault impedance to ground. Since, the
fault impedance depends on the fault's nature. Therefore,
an external impedance is used to limit the fault current to a
predetermined value as explained in the following section .
Equipment type ground faults in low voltage distribution
systems could be classified into three ranges: 1) High
magnitude low impedance faults that can be detected by
normal phase overcurrent protection because the current is
high enough, 2) High impedance arcing ground faults that
require dedicated detection that isolates and measured the
zero sequence current that is associated with the fault and
not normal load current unbalance, 3) Ground-fault currents
having a predetermined value that are experienced by high
impedance grounded systems. This value is determined by
the impedance of the grounding element used .
Detection systems for all types of ground faults have
978-1-5090-5288-2/171$31 .00 2017 IEEE
Page 2 of 9
been available for many years; however modern technology
has allowed significant improvements in the methods and
devices available for detection and identification of ground
faults in impedance grounded systems.
Ill. SYSTEM NEUTRAL GROUNDING
As previously mentioned, neutral-to-ground impedance
plays an important role in determining the ground-fault
current. To illustrate the effects, the single-phase equivalent
circuit, shown in Fig. 1, is used. Note that XL represents the
per phase inductance of the power carrying cable and the
transformer secondary reactance . Usually, the per-phase
distributed capacitance to ground is assumed to be
balanced and can therefore be lumped together. The
capacitive reactance between each phase conductor and
ground is represented by Xco (the suffix 0 indicates the zero
sequence component). A further simplification can be made
to the circuit by obtaining the Thevenin equivalent
reactance of the parallel combination of the three Xco (i.e.
Xco/3) . Finally, V1 represents the line-to-ground voltage of
the faulted phase.
For example, to model a line-to-ground fault on phase A,
V1 equals phase A to ground voltage. A line-to-ground fault
of impedance Z, is represented by connecting Z, between
the output terminals of Fig. 2.It is worth mentioning that the
phase-to-phase capacitances are not modeled as they have
no contribution in ground fault currents .
As mentioned previously, the magnitude of the ground-
fault current is determined by the total system impedance
(system characteristic) and the fault impedance to ground
(fault dependent). Therefore, to control the magnitude of the
fault current, an external impedance of a known value can
be added to the system. This impedance is typically
inserted between the system neutral and ground.
Referring to Fig. 2, the external impedance inserted
between the neutral and ground is in parallel to the total
system charging capacitance, Xco/3 . Accordingly, the
ground-fault current magnitude is determined by the
equivalent impedance of this parallel combination .
Fig . 2 Single-phase equivalent circuit of a power system
The different methods of neutral power system grounding
are shown in Fig. 3. According to the nature of the
grounding element inserted between the source neutral and
ground, power systems are classified as:
1) Ungrounded: No intentional connection of the system
neutral to ground is made. Yet, the system distributed
charging capacitance establishes such a connection to
ground. Therefore, ungrounded systems are capacitive
grounded systems.
2) Solidly Grounded: The neutral is directly connected
to ground with no intervening impedance. This has the
effect of shorting the charging capacitance, Xco/3 .
Page 3 of 9
3) Resistance Grounded: A resistance is used to
connect the system neutral to ground. Based on the value
of the grounding resistor (and hence the magnitude of
ground fault current permitted to flow) , resistance grounding
is further classified into high-resistance and low-resistance
grounding.
4) Reactance Grounded: A reactor is used to connect
the system neutral to ground. Similar to resistance
grounding, reactance grounding is classified to high-
reactance and low-reactance grounding. A ground-fault
neutralizer, which is also known as tuned-reactance
grounding or Peterson coil, is a special case of reactance
grounding, where an adjustable reactor is tuned to resonate
with the total system charging capacitance Xco/3 .
Power system neutral grounding is a broad topic and has
been covered extensively in industry literature. For more
information, consult [1], [5] and [6] .
o continuous thermal current rating factor, 3) rated output, 4)
)--.....~-.()----{ A
_ _ _~_ _-{ D
~
Ungrounded Solidly Grounded
Resi stance Grounded Reactance Grounded
Fig . 3Power system grounding methods
IV. GROUND-FAULT PROTECTION
Usually, a protection system is compromised of:
1) Transducers (or Sensors): Convert a physical quantity
(e.g., current, voltage, light, etc) into a proportional electrical
output. This output is then fed to a protective relay. Current
transformer (CT) and potential transformer (PT), also referred
to as voltage transformer (VT), are the most commonly used
sensors. CTs and PTs step down the power system current
and voltage, respectively, to safer levels for protective relays
to handle. Light, pressure, and heat sensors are other
example of sensors used for power system protection.
2) Protective Relays: Process the electrical output of the
transducer to determine the power system condition (i.e.,
whether there is a fault or not). If a fault is detected, a trip
command is initiated to open or close circuit breaker(s). In
simple terms, a protective relay is an electrically operated
device designed to trip circuit breaker(s) when a fault
condition is detected. A ground-fault relay processes the CT
output signal to determine if a ground-fault condition exists. If
it does, the relay sends a trip signal to clear the fault.
3) Circuit Breakers: Mechanically open or close power
system circuits based on a relay command.
4) Batteries: Provide backup power to the protection
system in case of power loss.
5) Communication Channels: Used to enable or inhibit
tripping of remote equipment and communicate the status of
the power system. Communication is also used to transmit
fault data to the power system control room .
978-1-5090-5288-2/171$31 .00 2017 IEEE
2017 -PPIC-0276
A ground-fault protection system consists of some or all of
the above components. For example, ground-fault protection
systems used in low voltage applications (i.e. system of 1 kV
or less) typically have no ground-fault relays. Instead the
ground-fault sensing unit is integrated into the circuit breaker.
On the other hand, medium voltage ground-fault protection
systems use ground-fault relays and current sensor(s) to
detect a ground-fault condition . The number of CTs used
depends on the detection methods used, as explained later.
A communication option is typically not included with ground-
fault protection systems.
A. Current Transformers
The four types of CTs: 1) wound, 2) bar, 3) window, and 4)
bushing are shown in Fig. 4 [7]. Window CTs are usually
used in medium voltage ground-fault protection systems
provided that the window is big enough to fit the power
cables. When selecting CTs, the following factors should be
considered: 1) continuous primary current rating , 2)
short-time thermal rating, 5) short-term mechanical rating, 6)
nominal system voltage, 7) accuracy class, 8) basic insulation
level (BIL), and 9) saturation [7].
CT polarity is very important for the proper operation of a
ground-fault system. The CT polarity defines the relative
instantaneous direction of the CT primary and secondary
current. When primary current is entering the marked
primary terminal, the corresponding secondary current is
leaving the similarly marked secondary terminal [7] .
WoundCT BarCT
WindowCT BushingCT
Fig. 4 Types of CTs
B. Protective Relay Technologies
Ground faults in solidly grounded low voltage systems are
often arcing and therefore rapid fault clearing is required to
avoid the damage caused by the excessive arc heat. Also,
the magnitude of ground-fault currents is typically less than
the phase overcurrent device rating . Phase overcurrent
devices are designed to withstand overloads for a
considerable length of time. Therefore, they are not
appropriate for detecting and clearing ground faults.
Accordingly, a dedicated device (i.e. ground-fault relay) is
required to detect ground faults.
No different than other protective relays, the very first
ground-fault relay models introduced were electromechanical
devices. Those relays relied heavily on coils interacting with
moving parts to detect ground faults.
 2017 -PPIC-0276
As a result of the advancement in electronics during the
1960s, static relays (also known as solid state relays) were
introduced. Contrary to electromechanical relays, static relays
have no moving parts and use electronic, electromagnetic, or
optical components to detect ground faults.
Analog electronics (e.g., diodes, transistors, operational
amplifiers) were initially used to implement analog static
relays. Later, digital static relays were introduced. Digital
static relays employed digital electronic components (e.g.,
analog-to-digital converters, logic gates, flip-flops) to
implement the same functionality as their electromechanical
and analog static relay predecessors.
Microprocessor based relays were introduced in the mid
1980s. At the beginning, each protection function had its own
microprocessor. As the technology matured, it became a
common practice to develop multifunction protective relays
and later on combining control and protection functions into
an Intelligent Electronic Device (lED).
C. Detection Methods
Regardless of the protective relay technology used, a
ground fault is detected by one of the following three
methods [8] :
1) Ground Return: The connection between the source
(transformer or generator) neutral point and ground is
passed through a CT window as shown in Fig. 5. The
premise of the detection principle is that normal load current
does not return to the source via ground. Accordingly, any
current flowing and sensed in this portion of the circuit is a
ground-fault current. One problem with this method is that
any unbalance in capacitive coupling current could cause
nuisance tripping . Some ground-fault relays overcome this
by filtering out the capacitive current component and only
use the resistive current to detect a ground-fault condition .
, . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PHASE A
,c--- - - - - - - - - - - PHASE
' - - - - - - - - - - - - NEUTRAL
PHAS E C
L..-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Fig . 5Ground return detection technique [8)
2) Core Balance (or Zero Sequence) : In those cases
when the source grounding conductor is not available (e.g.
feeders) , the three phase and the neutral (if present)
conductors are passed though the CT window as shown in
Fig . 6. During normal operation, all phase currents must
return to the source via a phase conductor or the neutral
conductor. Therefore, the total current passing through the
CT window (i.e., l a + I b + l e + In) at any given time is zero.
Consequently, the resultant magnetic field is also zero , and
hence there is no CT output. When a ground fault occurs,
the current imbalance through the CT window establishes a
magnetic field that generates a CT output proportional to
the ground-fault current. This method is the primary method
uses for detecting ground faults in medium voltage systems.
978-1-5090-5288-2/171$31 .00 2017 IEEE
Page 4 of 9
.----------j'---lr------- PHASE A
~--+--_+------ PHAS E B
'---+---+------ NEUTRAL
L...-_ _ _ +-_-+______ PHASE C
GROUND l e
FAULT - __. I -
RELAY
Fig . 6Zero sequence detection technique [8)
3) Residual (or Differential) Current: Phase overcurrent
protection CTs (when available) can be used to detect
ground faults by connecting them as shown in Fig . 7. This
connection provides a residual current, which is the phasor
summation of the phase currents and the neutral current (if
present). For a healthy system , the differential current is
always zero. On the other hand, if a ground-fault condition
exists, then a non-zero differential current will flow through
the ground-fault relay. This method is the primary method
used for detecting ground faults in low voltage systems,
since low voltage circuit breaker integral trip units are used.
...--------=fX.:q..,...........- - - - - - PHASE A
PHASE
OVERCURRENT
RELAY
,c------+;~I--.J------- PHASE B
' - - - - - I : f : t : : q = - : : l ' - - - - - - - - NEUTRAL
L...-G-
RO-U-N-D---I:f:t::q-d~------ PHAs e C
FAULT
RELAY
B Fig . 7 Differential current detection technique [8)
D. Proper Operation
Due to its simplicity, low cost, and high accuracy (since
only one CT is used), core balance is the most commonly
used method for detecting ground faults in medium voltage
power systems. Therefore, it will be used to illustrate the
operation of the ground-fault protection system shown in
Fig. 8.
Fig. 8 shows a 3-phase 4-wire power system with a
single-phase to neutral load, where the core balance
ground-fault detection method is used. Note that there is no
ground connection of the neutral conductor downstream of
(after) the CT, which is very important to ensure proper
operation as explained in the following section.
Referring to Fig. 8,the 3-phase load is balanced (i.e., the
sum of the 3-phase currents is zero) . Also, the single-phase
load current flows from the source to the load through the
CT and returns back to the source through the CT through
the neutral. Therefore , the magnetic fields of all currents
flowing through the CT will cancel and there will be no CT
output.
Page 5 of 9 2017 -PPIC-0276
Incoming Service Switchgear
CT S'JITCH I,..
M
Fig. 8 A 3-phase 4-wire power system with no ground-fault [9]
When a ground-fault occurs as shown in Fig. 9,the fault
current will return to the source via ground bypassing the
CT. Therefore, the magnetic field balance is lost and a CT
output (proportional to the ground-fault current) is induced .
This output triggers the ground-fault relay to trip.
Incoming Service Switchgear
CT SWITCH
r,
Fig . 9 A 3-phase 4-wire power system with a ground-fault [9]
E. Installation Problems
The following installation problems can prevent proper
operation of the ground-fault protection system [9]:
1) Grounded Neutral Downstream of the CT: On 3-
phase 4-wire systems, this condition has the effect of
desensitizing the ground-fault protection system (during a
ground-fault) and causing nuisance tripping (during normal
operation).
First, to illustrate the desensitization effect, a 3-phase 4-
wire system with a grounded neutral conductor downstream
of the CT during a ground fault is shown in Fig. 10. The fault
current has two components: IF that returns to the source
via ground (similar to the situation shown in Fig . 9), and IFN
that returns to the source via the neutral conductor and
flows through the CT. In other words, not all the fault current
bypasses the CT. The value of IFN (i.e., the current
unbalance) will determine how the relay responds to the
fault condition . If IFN is lower than the relay pick-up value,
then the relay will never trip and the fault will go unnoticed .
On the other hand, if IFN is higher than the relay pick-up
value, then the relay will trip but slower than expected (if an
inverse time relay is used). The reason being the fault
current measured by the relay (i.e., IFN) is lower than the
actual fault current value . Therefore, the protection system
is desensitized.
Fig. 11 is used to illustrate the nuisance tripping scenario.
This time the same 3-phase 4-wire system is shown during
normal operation (i .e. with no ground-fault). This is the
same situation shown in Fig . 8 with the exception that now
part of the load current (ILG) returns to the source via the
neutral connection downstream of the CT (i.e. bypassing
the CT). This current unbalance in the CT is interpreted by
978-1-5090-5288-2/171'$31.00 2017 IEEE
the relay as a fault condition . If the value of ILG is higher
than the relay pick-up value, then the relay will trip to clear a
fault that does not exist. In other words, the protection
system nuisance trips .
Incoming Service Switchgear
CT SWITCH
Switchgear
Ground
Fig. 10 Desensitization of a ground-fault protection system [9]
Incoming Service Switchgear
CT ~
~~M
Fig. 11 Nuisance tripping of a ground-fault protection system [9]
From the previous discussion, it is clear that the integrity
of the ground-fault protection system is compromised by
misplacing the neutral-conductor grounding connection .
This condition is encountered in many installations.
Therefore, special care should be given to make sure that
the neutral conductor is only grounded at the main bonding
jumper which is located in the service entrance section.
There should be no additional grounding connections
downstream from the bonding jumper and the CT.
2) Incorrect CT Polarity: When using the residual
current method to detect a ground-fault, the neutral CT
must be installed with the same polarity with respect to the
phase CTs. This will guarantee that during normal
operation, the neutral current magnetic field cancels the
magnetic fields of the phase currents. Therefore, a
balanced condition is attained and there is no CT output. If
the neutral CT is installed with incorrect polarity, the neutral
current will generate magnetic field that adds to the
magnetic fields of the phase currents. In other words, the
load current is interpreted as a fault current and a CT output
is induced, resulting in false tripping .
3) Conductor Omission from Passing through the CT
Window: When using the core balance method to detect a
ground-fault, all conductors (including the neutral) must
pass through the CT window. Omission of any of the
conductors from passing through the CT will result in false
tripping due to current unbalance.
4) Incorrect Power Cable Installation through the CT
Window: When using the core balance method to detect a
ground-fault, the power cable should be located at the
center of the CT window . The cable should not be placed
directly against the CT chassis . If the cable is in contact
with the CT chassis false operation could take place due to
 2017 -PPIC-0276
local saturation of the CT core under through-fault
condition . Proper installation of shielded and unshielded
power cables is shown in Fig . 12.
Unshielded Cable Shielded Cable
Fig.12 Proper installation of cables through the eT window
5) Direction of Neutral and Phase Conductors: To avoid
false tripping because of unbalanced currents, the neutral
and phase conductors must pass through the CT window in
the same direction .
6) Passing the Equipment Grounding Conductor (EGC)
through the CT Window: The EGC provides a low
resistance return pass to the fault current. Passing the EGC
through the CT window forces the ground-fault current to go
through the CT (instead of bypassing it). This has the effect
of restoring the current balance through the CT. Therefore,
there will be no CT output during a ground-fault condition .
Consequently, the ground-fault relay fails to trip.
F. Testing
Unlike rotating machines and other equipment, protection
systems (including ground-fault systems) remain standstill
and inoperative until a fault develops. Protection systems
are similar to car airbags; they sit unnoticed, yet must
operate properly and reliably whenever needed .
To guarantee that the protection system stays vigilant at
all times proper maintenance and testing is required . The
NEC recognized this in Article 230.95(C) which reads as
follows [3]: "the ground-fault protection system shall be
performance tested when first installed on site. The test
shall be conducted in accordance with instructions that shall
be provided with the equipment. A written record of this test
shall be made and shall be available to the authority having
jurisdiction." The performance tests of ground-fault
protection systems are:
1) Neutral Insulation Resistance: It is imperative to test
the neutral insulation resistance to detect any unintended
grounding connections downstream of the bonding jumper
or the CT. This will eliminate the desensitization and
nuisance tripping of the protection system mentioned
previously.
To perform this test, one must temporarily remove the
neutral disconnect link and measure the resistance between
the neutral and ground as shown in Fig .13. If the measured
value is less than one megaohm, then the problem should
be corrected prior to placing the equipment into service [9] .
978-1-5090-5288-2/17~31 .00 2017 IEEE
Page 6 of 9
3-Phase, 4Wire r----------------,
Transformer
I Ma' I
IA1 .-.. I
,- ----
I
I N1 I
N~ I
I I
I
I
I
Gr nd
,lflt
-y-
To loads
I
I
I
BUS
L_ -----r-------J
-= '- Equipment
Enclosure
Fig.13 Neutral Insulation resistance test [9]
2) Primary Current Injection: As mentioned earlier, it is
a code requirement to conduct performance testing during
ground-fault protection systems commissioning . Also
regular maintenance testing is essential to ensure proper
operation . Primary current injection is one of two test
methods used for evaluating the ground-fault protection
system performance. The advantage of primary current
injection method (over the simulated fault current method
discussed next) is that the whole protection system is
tested. Primary current injection verifies that CTs are
mounted and wired correctly and that there is no nuisance
tripping during normal operation [9] . Also, primary current
injection is the only method capable of testing integral
ground-fault trips on low voltage circuit breakers [10] .
The test is performed by injecting primary CT current into
the protected system phases and neutral conductors to
duplicate the flow of ground-fault current under different
conditions. The test set used includes a high current supply
designed to provide variable current (up to 1000 A or more
at 2.5 V, or similar) via built-in autotransformers. A current
supply capable of delivering 1200 A or more may be
needed, if the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) requires
testing at the full ground-fault protection system setting .
Detailed test instructions and diagrams for various ground-
fault protection systems can be found in [10j.
3) Simulated Fault Current (or Secondary Current
Injection) : An alternative to the primary current injection test
is the simulated fault current test. This test is conducted by
simulating a ground-fault current generated by an external
coil wrapped around the CT core or by using a separate test
winding in the CT. The current injected is the secondary CT
current equivalent to the simulated primary CT ground-fault
current (hence the name secondary current injection) .
Accordingly, a high current supply is not required , which is a
huge cost saving over the primary current injection test.
A simulated fault current verifies the proper operation of
the CT, ground-fault relay, shunt trip and the control power
supply. However, it cannot detect a neutral grounding
connection downstream of the CT, incorrect CT polarity,
and that all conductors are passed through the CT window
in the same direction. Therefore the simulated ground-fault
test is not adequate to verify that the entire ground-fault
Page 7 of 9
protection system is correctly installed. Also, this method
cannot be use to test integral ground-fault trips on low
voltage circuit breakers.
Consequently, the test must be supplemented by
thorough visual inspection to detect the existence of any of
the aforementioned problems. The only restriction is that
the simulated fault current test combined with a thorough
visual inspection must be accepted by the AHJ . Otherwise,
primary current injection test must be used instead.
4) Reduced Control Voltage : The control power needed
to operate a ground-fault system is provided via an external
power supply or from the protected system lines. The latter
method is advantageous because the protection system is a
standalone system that is not dependent on an external
power supply to operate. A line-fed protection system
control power is typically driven from a control power
transformer (CPT) as shown in Fig.12. Depending on the
protection system design, a CPT with an appropriate turns
ratio is used . A 480/120V CPT is commonly used and
hence is used to demonstrate the importance of the
reduced control voltage test.
Fig .14 shows a fault on one of the power lines energizing
the CPT. This fault forces the CPT input voltage to change
from line-to-line voltage to line-to-ground voltage .
Therefore, the CPT input voltage drops by a factor of ../3;
from 480 V to 277 V. Consequently, the CPT output voltage
drops (by the same ratio) to 69 V from 120 V. Accordingly, a
ground-fault protection system must operate at 69 V (which
is approximately 58% of the rated control voltage) to detect
and trip that ground-fault. This is the reason for UL 1053
standard to require ground-fault relays to be fully operable
at 55% of the rated input voltage [11] .
[- - - - -- -- - G;.;,;-;;;;,itl
I A1 Main A2
+
'----N --+...-++-+-- ....
N2
,...--N!....
lffi
I I
I 5.
r n
To Loads
BU
L_ =-----~ ~UiP:;---~
EnClosure
Fig.14 A line-fed ground-fault protection system during a fault (9)
G. Applications
As mentioned previously, 98% of all electrical failures are
attributed to ground faults [1]. Accordingly, ground-fault
protection is applicable in almost all industries.
Ground-fault protection is used in mining, pulp and paper,
oil and gas, cement and aggregate, and forestry industries.
It is also has a variety of applications in construction,
agriculture, food and beverage, electric utilities, and the
entertainment industry. Within those industries, a few
examples of potential applications are protection of
generators (permanent or portable), feeders, motors, etc.
978-1-5090-5288-2/177$31 .00 2017 IEEE
2017 -PPIC-0276
H. Code Requirements
From the previous discussion , it is clear that ground-fault
protection can be applied virtually everywhere. Therefore, it
is important to have guidelines on when the application of
ground-fault protection is required and when it is prohibited.
Electrical codes are developed to provide the required
guidance. The NEC in the US and the CEC in Canada have
similar requirements for the application and prohibition of
ground-fault protection . Keep in mind that both codes are
on a three year review cycle . Therefore , those requirements
are under regular evaluation, which makes it very important
to stay up-to-date with the code new revisions.
1) NEC Requirements: The term ground-fault protection
of equipment (GFPE) is used by the NEC to reference
ground-fault protection systems. This term is used to
emphasize that those protection systems are not
appropriate for personnel protection .
GFPE for service disconnecting means became a code
requirement in 1971 as a result of the high number of
burned down equipment reported on large capacity
480Y/277V solidly grounded services [12]. The
requirements for applying EGFP are found in Chapter 2
(Wiring and Protection), Article 230.95 (Services): "Ground-
fault protection of equipment shall be provided for solidly
grounded wye electric services of more than 150 volts to
ground but not exceeding 1000 volts phase-to-phase for
each service disconnect rated 1000 amperes or more." [3] .
Setting of GFPE is done in accordance to Article 230.95 :
"The maximum setting of the ground-fault protection shall
be 1200 amperes, and the maximum time delay shall be
one second for ground-fault currents equal to or greater
than 3000 amperes." [3]. The requirements of Article 230.95
for applying GFPE are extended to the following
applications [3] :
~
... 1. Branch Circuits - Article 210.13
2. Feeders - Article 215.10
3.
4.
Overcurrent Protection - Article 240.13
Health Care Facilities - Article 517.17
Critical Operations Power Systems - Article
708.52
The requirement for prohibiting the application of GFPE is
also stated in Article 230.95 Exception: " The ground-fault
protection provisions of this section shall not apply to a
service disconnect for a continuous industrial process
where a nonorderly shutdown will introduce additional or
increased hazards." [3] . This exception clarifies the code
rational for prohibiting GFPE. The rule of thumb is: the
application of GFPE is prohibited when unplanned
interruption of power to industrial processes (due to GFPE
operation) results in a life-safety or catastrophic-failure
hazard more significant than the electrical hazard mitigated
by their operation [12] . For example, the continued
operation of the fire pumps until the fire is extinguished is
essential and overrides any safety concerns due to a
ground-fault. Therefore, the protection of fire pumps by
GFPE is prohibited by Article 695.6(G) : "Ground-fault
protection of equipment shall not be permitted for fire
pumps." [3].
The deliberate wording and content of the code specifies
what is required , prohibited , and by its absence, what is not.
 2017 -PPIC-0276
In other words, there are incidences where the application
of GFPE is not required, yet it is not prohibited. For
example, GFPE is not required on single phase, dc circuits,
impedance grounded systems, ungrounded wye systems,
any type of delta or open delta systems, whether solidly
grounded or not.
An area of confusion is Chapter 4 (Equipment for General
Use), Article 430 (Motors, Motor Circuits and Controllers)
where there is no requirement for GFPE. Yet Articles
430.51, 430.53, 430.55, and others include requirements for
ground-fault protection. Article 430.51 declares that ground-
fault protection does not include the types of devices
required by Articles 210.8 (GFCI), 230.95 (EGFPD), and
590.6 (GFCI protection for temporary installations).
Unfortunately, no definition for the difference between
GFPE and ground-fault protection is given.
Even though not required , it is a standard practice to
equip motors with rapid EGFP when the value of a motor
rewind or the risk of an extended outage would
economically outweigh the cost of the EGFP. Motors 50 HP
and higher, depending on the application, are typical
candidates for installing EGFP.
2) CEC, PART I Requirements: The requirements for
ground-fault protection are intended to minimize and, as far
as possible, eliminate equipment damage and fire hazards
related to arcing ground faults [13] . Those requirements are
stated in Section 14 (Protection and Control), Rule 14-
102(1) (Ground Fault Protection): "Ground fault protection
shall be provided to de-energize all normally ungrounded
conductors of a faulted circuit that are downstream from the
point or points marked with an asterisk in Diagram 3 in the
event of a ground fault in those conductors as follows:
(a) for circuits of solidly grounded systems rated more
than 150 volts-to-ground, less than 750 V phase-
to-phase and 1000 A or more; and
(b) for circuits of solidly grounded systems rated 150 V
or less to ground and 2000 A or more." [4].
The setting of ground-fault protection is specified by Rule
14-102(2): "Except as permitted by Subrule (8), the
maximum setting of the ground fault protection shall be
1200 A and the maximum time delay shall be one second
for ground fault currents equal to or greater than 3000 A."
[4]. Where Subrule (8) states that: "In ground fault schemes
where two or more protective devices in series are used for
ground fault coordination, the upstream protective device
settings shall be permitted to exceed those specified in
Subrule (2) where necessary to obtain the desired
coordination, provided that the final downstream ground
fault protective device in each circuit required to be
protected conforms to the requirements of Subrule (2)." [4] .
Ground-fault protection is a requirement for the following
applications [4] :
1. Submersible Pumps - Rule 29-596(d)
2. Neon Supplies Secondary Circuits - Rule 34-302
3. Fixed Electric Heating Systems - Rule 62-116
4. Renewable Energy Systems - Section 64, Rules
64-064(4), 64-066(e) , and 64-112(e)
5. Relocatable Structures - Rule 70-120(4)(a)
6. Interconnection of Electric Power Production
Sources - Rule 84-016
978-1-5090-5288-2/17~31 .00 2017 IEEE
Page 8 of 9
Similar to the NEC, the CEC does not permit ground-fault
protection of fire pumps as per Rule 32-212: "Ground fault
protection shall not be installed in a fire pump circuit." [4] .
V. CONCLUSIONS
Providing ground-fault protection is of prime importance
since ground faults represent the majority of abnormal power
system conditions. Ground-fault protection systems are used
to detect and clear ground faults to minimize or prevent (if
possible) equipment damage. Electrical codes in Canada and
the US determine when the application of ground-fault
protection is required, when it is prohibited, their setting, and
where to install them . There are some cases where the
electrical codes neither prohibit nor require ground-fault
protection systems. In those cases, the application of ground-
fault protection is a judgment call based on the economical
value and importance of the equipment to be protected. In
order to guarantee proper operation of ground-fault protection
systems, proper installation, performance testing during
commissioning, and frequent maintenance are required.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] J. R. Dunki-Jacobs, F. J. Shields and C. S. Pierre,
Industrial Power System Grounding Design Handbook,
Thomson-Shore, 2007.
[2] N. EI-Sherif, M. Nilson and R. Zweifel , "Reducing
Electrocutions in Industry: Application of a Class C
Ground-Fault Current Interrupter in a Pulp and Paper
Plant," IEEE Industry Applications Magazine, vol. 21 , no.
1, pp. 49-53, 2015.
[3] NFPA 70, 2014 National Electrical Code, Quincy, MA:
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA).
[4] C22.1-15, 2015 Canadian Electrical Code, Part I,
Toronto, ON : CSA Group.
[5] D. Beeman, Industrial Power Systems Handbook, New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1955.
[6] N. EI-Sherif and K. Sheldon, "A Design Guide to Neutral-
grounding of Industrial Power Systems," in IEEE
Petroleum and Chemical Industry Conference (PCIC),
Calgary, 2017.
[7] IEEE Std 242-2001 (Buff Book), IEEE Recommended
Practices for Protection and Coordination of Industrial
and Commercial Power Systems.
[8] IEEE Std 142-2007 (Green Book), IEEE Recommended
Practices for Grounding of Industrial and Commercial
Power Systems.
[9] P. Beisert, "Performance Testing of Ground Fault
Protective Devices, A Look at Article 230.95," in NETA
Power Test Electrical Maintenance and safety
Conference, Long Beach, CA, 2010.
Available: http://ecmweb.com/ops-amp-maintenance/
performance-testing-ground-fault-protective-devices
[10] GEI-48907, "Ground Fault Protection Systems -
Performance Testing," GE Industrial Solutions, 1986.
Available: http://apps.geindustrial.com/publibrary/checko
utlGEI-48907?TNR=Application%20and%20Technical
%7CGEI-48907% 7CPDF&filename=GEI-48907 .pdf
[11] UL 1053, "Standard for Ground-Fault Sensing and
Relaying Equipment," Underwriters Laboratories (UL),
2015.
Page 9 of 9 2017 -PPIC-0276
[12] NFPA 70, 2014 National Electrical Code Handbook,
Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA).
[13] C22.1HB-15, 2015 Canadian Electrical Code Handbook,
Toronto, ON : CSA Group.
VII. VITA
Nehad EI-Sherif, P.Eng., M.Sc., MBA is the founder and
president of MNKYBR Inc., an R&D and engineering services
company. He received his B.Sc. and M.Sc. in Electrical
Engineering (major in Power Systems and Machines) from
Ain-Shams University, Cairo, Egypt in 2001 and 2005
respectively and an MBA from the University of
Saskatchewan in 2015. In 2006, Nehad moved to Canada
after accepting a scholarship award to pursue a PhD at the
University of Saskatchewan. Seeking practical experience,
Nehad decided to put his PhD on hold and joined the
Research and Development (R&D) department at Littelfuse
Startco in 2010. While working in R&D, he was involved in
software and hardware design of protection relays and the
certification of various products with Underwriters
Laboratories (UL) and Canadian Standards Association
(CSA). In 2013, Nehad moved into the Marketing and
Product Management department at Littelfuse Startco. In this
978-1-5090-5288-2/17$ 31 .00 2017 IEEE
role, he authored peer-reviewed papers, technical articles,
white papers and delivered technical presentations. Nehad
also assisted with launching new products and the
development of product road maps. He is a senior member of
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
and several professional societies and associations including
IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA), IEEE Industrial
Applications Society (IAS), IEEE Power and Energy Society
(PES), International Association of Electrical Inspectors
(IAEI), Association of Professional Engineers & Geoscientists
of Saskatchewan (APEGS) and Egyptian Syndicate of
Engineers. Nehad also serves on numerous committees and
working groups including NFPA NEC CMP 2, UL STP 943,
IEEE-SA SCC 18, CSA Z462, CSA C22.2 No.144, and C22.2
No.166 standard committees, IEEE Communications-Based
Protection of Industrial and Commercial Power System
Working Group (CommWG), and Entertainment Services &
Technology Association (ESTA) Electrical Power Working
Group (EPWG). He is also the chair of the IEEE Pulp and
Paper Industry Technical Committee (PPIC) Training, Safety,
Standards, & Codes (TSSC) Subcommittee and is a member
of the IEEE Pulp, Paper and Forest Industries Conference
(PPFIC) executive committee. He is a registered Professional
Engineer in Saskatchewan, holds one patent and has
another patent pending application.