Comparison of touch and step voltages between

IEEE Std 80 and IEC 479-1

C.-H.Lee and A.l?Sakis Meliopoulos

Abstract: A comparison of the safety criteria of two widely accepted standards, i.e. the IEEE Std 80
and the IEC 479-1 is proposed. The two standards differ in their definitions of permissible body
current and body resistance. Another difference is that the IEC 479-1 does not provide guidance on
human feeusoil contact impedances. It tacitly assumes that these impedances are computable by the
designer. A comprehensive study of permissible touch and step voltages by these two standards is
included for a wide range of conditions, which enables a direct comparison of the two standards. It is
shown that differences exist and these differences are quantified.

1 Introduction safety. On the other hand, globalisation of national econo-

mies provides an interest towards harmonisation of stand-
Since the early days of the electric power industry, safety of ards. The first step in this endeavour is the technical
personnel in and around electric power installations has comparison of various standards addressing the same issue.
been a prime concern. A mechanism by which the safety of This paper provides a technical comparison of two stand-
personnel is affected is the ground potential rise of ards that address the safety of electrical installations.
grounded structures during electric power faults, and the
possibility of humans touchng grounded structures and
therefore subjecting themselves to voltages. The 50 or 60Hz
electric current conducted through a human body as a
result of an accidental conduct with a grounded structure,
under adverse conditions, should be of magnitude and
duration below those that cause ventricular fibrillation.
Over the years, and after many investigations of electric
current effects on humans, safe limits have been established
and standards have been developed which provide permis-
sible values of body currents to avoid electrocution. Two
such standards are the IEEE Std 80 and the IEC 479- 1. Fig. 1 Defmitwn of electric shock mdeljnirameters - touch voltage
The IEEE Std 80 has seen three editions (1961, 1976 and
1986); it is being currently revised, and has been in use in
the USA and several other countries. The IEC 479-1 was
released in 1984. The premise of both standards is to estab-
lish safe (permissible) body currents. The underlying
assumption is that the designer of grounding systems will
make sure that these values are not exceeded under adverse A2
conditions of accidental contact of humans with grounded
structures. The phdosophcal difference between the two
documents is that while the IEC 479-1 does not address all
relevant computational issues that may be 'necessary in the
design process (such as feethoil resistance, etc.), the IEEE Fig. 2 h& equivalent circuit
Std 80 does address most computational issues and pro-
vides procedures and guidance for assessing safety of a 2 Electric shock model
grounding system [l].
With ever increasing fault current levels in today's inter- Electric shock may occur when an individual touches a
connected power systems, there is renewed emphasis on grounded structure during a fault (touch voltage), walks in
the vicinity of a grounding system during a fault (step volt-
OIEE, 1999 age), or touches two separately grounded structures during
ZEE Proceedings online no. 19990586 a fault (metal to metal touch voltage), etc. While each con-
DOL lO.l049hpgtd:19990586 dition can be examined separately and in detail, we shall
Paper received4th May 1999 only focus on touch voltages. The electric shock model is
C.-H.Lee is with the Departmentof Electrid Engineering, I-Shou Univmity, shown in Figs. 1 and 2, which dlustrate a human standing
Kaohsiung, Taiwan, Republic of China near the middle point of a ground mesh and subjected to
A.P. Sakis Meliopoulos is with the School of Elatrid and Computer Engi- touch voltage. The electric shock model is the circuit which
neering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332-0250, USA determines the flow of electric current in the human body.
IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 146, No. 5, September 1999 593
 The human body may come into contact with a ground or
soil at three points (hand and two feet), as illustrated in
Fig. 1. The grounding system and soil are represented with
a Thevenin equivalent at the points of contact. Fig. 1 illus-
trates the equivalent resistances between any pair of the
contact points, B, Al, and A2. When a fault occurs, volt-
ages will appear between any pair of the points of contact
B, Al, and A2. The Thevenin equivalent in this case is a
three terminal circuit (terminals B, Al, and A2), and can be
computed with proper analysis methods [2]. A typical sim-
plification is to assume that the voltage at points AI and
A2 are practically the same, in whch case the Thevenin
equivalent is simplified to that of Fig. 2. The Thevenin
voltage source Veq equals the open circuit voltage, in this
case the voltage at the points of contact when the human is
not touching. The equivalent internal resistance, as shown
in Fig. 2 between the points of contact, can be accurately
computed with numerical techniques [ 2 4 . For the electric
shock model of Fig. 2, the following definitions apply:
Touch voltage (or Thevenin equivalent voltage): The open
circuit potential difference between a grounded structure
(point B) and the surface potential at the point where a per-
son is standing (points A1 and A2).
Body voltage: The voltage across the human body when the
electric shock circuit is closed.
Body resistance:The resistance of the human body between
the points of contact, i.e., in the case of Fig. 1 between
point B and points A1 and A2 (hand to two feet). It
depends on many factors such as size, skin condition, pres-
sure at the contact, etc.
Touch Resistance (Thevenin equivalent resistance): The
resistance of the soil between the point of contact of the
human body with the soil (points A1 and A2) and the
grounding system, i.e. req.
Body current:The electric current through the human body.
The described electric shock model is inherent in both
documents. However, the two documents differ in the
application of the electric shock model. Table 1 provides
an overview of the differences between the two documents
with reference to the electric shock model. In subsequent
paragraphs, a more detailed discussion of the safety criteria
adapted in the two documents will be presented, followed
by a comparison.
3 Safety criteria - IEEE Std 80
The IEEE Std 80 is based on a simplified electric shock
model. The parameters of the electric shock model are
shown in the second column of Table 1. This model is usu-
ally translated into permissible touch (or step) voltages. As
an example, the permissible touch, VTPerm,and step,
Vs,perm, voltages for a 50kg person are
0.116
VT,peTm = -( 1 . 5 ~1000)
~ ~ ~ +
h Teq
Table 1: Electrical shock model differences between IEEE Std 80 and IEC 479-1
IEEE Std 80
Body 100052
resistance
Thevenin equivalent resistance 1.5cgSfor touch voltage
6.0c8,for step voltage
Thevenin equivalent voltage Simplified equations k; k, L l o r use
of computer models is suggested
Permissible body current O.116Adtfor 50kg person
0.157Adtfor 70kg person
594
0.116
VS,perm = -( 6 . 0 ~ 1000)
~ ~ ~ +
h
Additional comments and observations regarding the IEEE
Std 80 are given below.
The permissible body current has been selected from sta-
tistical data and represents a 0.50/0probability of ventricular
fibrillation. It is believed that the approximate formulae for
the Thevenin equivalent resistance in IEEE Std 80 were
derived as follows. The human foot can be modelled as a
circular plate touchng the surface of the earth. The resist-
ance of the plate to remote earth is approximately
where p is the resistivity of the earth and b is the radius of
the plate. The human foot is definitely not a circular plate.
However, it has been observed with scale models and
numerical studies that the area of the foot in contact with
the earth is the most important variable. For this reason, b
can be approximated with
where A is the area of the foot in contact with the earth.
For an adult with large feet, the area A of the persons feet
is approximately 200cm2.Using this value, the radius is b =
0.08m and the resistance of one foot touchng the earth is
where p is expressed in Qm. The IEEE Std 80 further
assumes that the mutual resistance between the two feet
(see Figs. 1 and 2) has negligible effect, and thus the equiv-
alent resistance is simply the parallel combination of the
two feet to soil resistances
The equivalent resistance, req, in Fig. 2 should also take
into account the resistance of the grounding system. How-
ever, for practical grounding systems, this resistance is typi-
cally small compared to the resistance 1.5p, and is thus
omitted. Cases in which the effect of the grounding system
resistance can account for more than 2% are of academic
importance only.
The above equations for req apply to the case of uniform
soil and neglect the effect of grounding system proximity or
mutual resistance between feet. For nonuniform soil or for
soil with a cover layer of high resistivity, the IEEE Std 80
provides a correction factor c,(h,, k). Specifically, the equiv-
alent resistance req is given by
r e q= 6.0cs(hs,k ) p s for step voltage (3)
= 1.5cS(h,, k ) p s for touch voltage (4)
IEC 479-1
Voltage-dependent and
Path-dependent (Figs. 5 and 6 )
no guidance
no guidance
S-curves (Fig. 7) independent of
human size
IEE P r o c G e n e r . Tmnsm. D u t r i b . , Vol. 146, No. 5, September I999
where Note that the region of greatest discrepancy is for layers of
1 4 in (or 0.0254-0.1016 m) thck, which is the usual case.
= (P - Ps)/(P + P S I (5)
py = resistivity of the upper layer, p = resistivity of the soil
below the upper layer, h, = thickness of the upper layer, c,
= reduction factor for derating the nominal value of the
surface layer resistivity determined as follows: (1) c, = 1.04
for uniform soil, and (2) for nonuniform soil, the IEEE Std
80 provides a graph (Fig. 3 of the standard) for the graphi-
cal determination of c, from k and h,y.
Investigation with computer models revealed that the
IEEE Std 80 approximate formulae are accurate for all
practical purposes for uniform soil only. For soil with an
upper layer of high resistivity stone the correction factor
cs(hs,k) is in error, especially for the practical case of upper 0 0.06 0.12 0.18
layer thickness of 1-4 in (0.02544.1016m). layer thickness, m
Fig. 4 Reduction factor comparison of IEEE Std SO andprogrm SGSYS
~ IEEEStd 80
4 4 - SGSYS computed

4 Safety criteria - IEC 479-1

i8 4.0
.
3.5

0 1.o 2.0
D
Fig.3 Feet to soil resistances as a fwzction of feet separation and gravel
thickness
= 3925Rm. pyclt/
= 2108m, D = feet separation. ft

The computer-based method for evaluation of the cor-

rection factor c,(h,, k ) consists of computing an equivalent
voltage source connected to the points of contact of the
human body with the ground field as indicated in Figs. 1
and 2. The points of contact of the human feet with the
earths surface are modelled with two metallic plates placed
at the location of the feet. The shape and dimensions of the
plates are shown in Fig. 3. The grounding system together
with the contact model is then viewed as a system with
multiple grounds. This system has three terminals Al, f i 2 ,
and B. The elements of the equivalent circuit are computed
with the method of moments [2,4]. Standard network tech- 7000 -
niques are then employed to compute the Thevenin equiva- 6000 t
lent parameters veq, req, as illustrated in Fig. 2. It is
important to note that modelling the feet as two plates C: 5000 -
ai
(surface electrodes) provides a realistic analysis model. The -
correction factor c,(h,, k) is then computed from equation 5 4000

req
c s ( h s , k )= -
1.5Ps
The value of reg, and therefore cs(h,, k), depends on foot
size and spacing between feet. Using a foot model as shown
in Fig. 3, the IEEE Std 80 model is matched exactly for
uniform soil and assuming feet separation of D = 2 ft.
Fig. 3 also illustrates the effect of the mutual resistance
between the two plates representing the two feet. Note that
for the usual standing position D = 1-2 ft, the effect of the
mutual resistance is negligible. However, as the feet come The data of IEC 479-1 can be utilised in two ways: (a)
closer than 1 ft, the effect of the mutual resistance is such actual body currents can be computed for an individual
as to increase the value of req. subjected to a touch or step voltage in a specific system and
The computed values of c,(h,, k) are given in Fig. 4 specific conditions, and (b) permissible touch and step volt-
superimposed on the present values of the IEEE Std 80. ages can be computed for a specific system.
IEE Proc -Gener Trunsm Distrib , Vol 146, No 5, September 1999 595
 Figs. 5 and 6. req,T is the feet to soil resistance for touch
voltage, i.e. the two feet to soil resistances are in parallel.
reqSis the feet to soil resistance for step voltage, i.e. the two
feet to soil resistances are in series.
The IEC 479-1 does not provide any data for r e , , or
req,* For this reason, we shall use the data of IEEE Std 80,
i.e. Eqns. 3 and 4.
Note that application of above equations to obtain the
permissible touch and step voltages is straightforward and
involves the following steps:
Step 1: For a given electric shock duration t and assumed
probability of ventricular fibrillation, determine the value
of permissible body current, ib,penn(t), from Fig. 7.
Step 2 For the current ib,penn(t), determine the body resist-
ances RbT and Rbs from the data of Figs. 5 and 6. For
touch voltage it is expedient to assume that the path will be
one hand to two feet (75% of the body resistance given in
Fig. 5), and for step voltage the path is foot to foot (100%
of the body resistance given in Fig. 5).
Step 3: Compute req,Tand reqSfor IEEE Std 80.
Step 4: Compute permissible touch and step voltages using
eqns. 6 and 7
For comparison purposes with the IEEE Std 80, the per-
missible body current ib,pem(t) is computed for probability
0.5'1/0 of ventricular fibnllation by proper interpolation
between the curves C1 and C2 of Fig. 7.
Pa' a
Fi .6 Internal i m p e k e of the human bo& as a fiction of the current
Numbers in brackets indicate current paths between both hands and corresponding
part of the body. Numbers without brackets indicate impedance of several paths in 4.2 Computation of actual body current
the body as percentage of hand to hand impedance. Data from IEC 479-1 (1984). For a given touch or step voltage, the computation of the
body current using the IEC data requires the solution of a
set of nonhear equations. This solution can be obtained
iteratively or with a graphical method described below.

a
E
3L
10-
zone 4
Step 1: Compute the Thevenin equivalent resistance, req, of
the electrocution circuit.
Step 2 For a given (or computed) touch (or step) voltage
and equivalent resistance re from step 1, the actual body
current is computed with t i e graphical method shown in
Fig. 8. Specifically, the actual body current is determined
by the simultaneous solution of the following two equa-

10
zone2 '--. tions:

&ouch v b $- r e q i b (8)
1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10
duration of current-flow, ms Ib = V b / r b = T/b/f(Vb) (9)
Fig.7 Permissible bo4 currentfor IEC 479-1 where the function rb = V b ) represents the nonlinear char-
acteristics of the body resistance as a function of body volt-
4. I Permissible touch and step voltage - age determined with the data of Fig. 5. Note that eqn. 9
IEC 479-1 represents a nonlinear function whch is illustrated in Fig. 8
The permissible (or allowable) touch, VTa,and step, Vf, as curve 1.
voltages are computed from the following equations
v$ = i b , p e r m ( t ) [RF ( i b , p e r m ( t ) ) $- r e q , ~ ] (6) 350
r1-
v: = i b , p e r m ( t ) [Rf ( i b , p e r m ( t ) ) $- Teq,S] (7) CUNe 1
where ibgem(t) is the permissible body current for IEC 479-
1 for an electric shock duration t. This current is obtained
from the data of Fig. 7. &T(ib,pem(t)) is the body resistance
for the path specified by the touch voltage (typically hand
to two feet) and for a body current equal to ibpem(t). This 50
value can be obtained from the data of Figs. 5 and 6. B(Vtouch/req, 0)
I 1
0
R,,s(ib,pem(t)) is the body resistance for the path specified by 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

the step voltage (foot to foot) and for a body current equal body current, mA

to ibgem(t). This value can be obtained from the data of Fig.8 Graphical methodof computing a c t d b o r f v current

596 IEE Proc-Cener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 146, No. 5, September 1999
 Table 2: Permissible touch voltages per IEEE Std 80,1986 edition 50kg person, probability of
ventricular fibrillation 0.5%

Shock Soil resistivity

duration 50Qm 100Qrn 200Qrn 500Qm 1000Qrn 3000Qm
0.05s 526.9V 559.2V 599.7V 680.6V 923.4V 1328.0V 2946.6V
0.10s 372.5V 395.4V 424.0V 481.3V 652.9V 939.1V 2083.6V
0.15s 304.2V 322.9V 346.2V 393.0V 533.1V 766.7V 1701.2V
0.20s 263.4V 279.6V 299.8V 340.3V 461.7V 664.0V 1473.3V
0.25s 235.6V 250.1V 268.2V 304.4V 413.0V 593.9V 1317.8V
0.30s 215.1V 228.3V 244.8V 277.9V 377.0V 542.2V 1202.9V
0.35s 199.1V 211.4V 226.7V 257.3V 349.0V 502.0V 1113.7V
0.40s 186.3V 197.7V 212.0V 240.6V 326.5V 469.5V 1041.8V
0.45s 175.5V 186.4V 199.9V 226.9V 307.8V 442.7V 982.2V
0.50s 166.6V 176.8V 189.6V 215.2V 292.0V 420.0V 931.8V

Table 3: Permissible step voltages per IEEE Std 80,1986 edition, 50 kg person, probability of
ventricular fibrillation 0.5%

Shock Soil resistivity

duration 50Qm 100Qm 200Qm 500Qm 1000Qm 3000Qm
0.05s 551.1V 680.6V 842.5V 1166.2V 2137.3V 3755.9V 10230.1V
0.1os 389.7V 481.3V 595.7V 824.6V 1511.3V 2655.8V 7233.8V
0.15s 318.2V 393.0V 486.4V 673.3V 1234.0V 2168.5V 5906.4V
0.20s 275.6V 340.3V 421.2V 583.1V 1068.7V 1877.9V 5115.0V
0.25s 246.5V 304.4V 376.8V 521.5V 955.8V 1679.7V 4575.0V
0.30s 255.0V 277.9V 343.9V 476.1V 872.6V 1533.3V 4176.4V
0.35s 280.3V 257.3V 318.4V 440.8V 807.8V 1419.6V 3866.6V
0.40s 194.9V 240.6V 297.9V 412.3V 755.7V 1327.9V 3616.9V
0.45s 183.7V 226.9V 280.8V 388.7V 712.4V 1252.0V 3410.0V
0.50s 174.3V 215.2V 266.4V 368.8V 675.9V 1187.7V 3235.0V

Table 4 Permissible touch voltages per IEC 479-1,5% body resistance values, probability of
ventricular fibrillation 0.5%, hand to two feet

Shock Soil resistivity

duration 10Qm 50Qm lOOQm 200Qrn 500Qm 1000Qm 3000Qm
0.05s 342.4V 375.8V 417.6V 501.2V 751.8V 1169.6V 2840.9V
0.1os 319.0V 349.3v 387.1V 462.7V 689.6V 1067.7V 2580.2V
0.15s 287.5V 313.8V 346.7V 412.5V 609.9V 938.9V 2254.9V
0.20s 256.7V 279.5V 308.1 V 365.1V 536.1 V 821.2V 1961.6V
0.25s 222.2v 241.3V 265.2V 313.1V 456.6V 695.9V 1652.9V
0.30s 187.9V 203.7V 223.4V 262.7V 380.9V 577.8V 1365.3V
0.35s 148.8V 160.9V 176.0V 206.2V 296.9V 448.2V 1053.0V
0.40s 121.7V 131.0V 142.7V 166.1V 236.1V 352.9V 820.1V
0.45s 101.1V 108.5V 117.9V 136.6V 192.6V 286.1V 660.0V
0.50s 88.9V 95.3V 103.4V 119.5V 167.8V 248.2V 570.1V

IEE Proc-Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 146. No. 5. September 1999 591
 Table 5: Permissibletouch voltages per IEC 479-1,50% body resistancevalues, probability of
ventricular fibrillation 0.5%, hand to two feet

Shock Soil resistivity

duration 108m 508rn 1009rn 2008rn 5008m 10008rn 30008rn
0.05s 449.4V 482.8V 524.6V 608.2V 858.8V 1276.7V 2947.9V
0.10s 415.5V 445.7V 483.6V 559.2V 786.1V 1164.2V 2676.6V
0.15s 374.5V 400.9V 433.8V 499.6V 697.0V 1026.0V 2342.0V
0.20s 334.6V 357.4V 385.9V 442.9V 614.0V 899.1V 2039.5V
0.25s 289.6V 308.8V 332.7V 380.6V 524.1V 763.4V 1720.4V
0.30s 245.1V 260.8V 280.5V 319.9V 438.OV 634.9V 1422.4V
0.35s 193.8V 205.9V 221.0V 251.2V 341.9V 493.2V 1098.0V
0.40s 152.9V 162.2V 173.9V 197.3V 267.3V 384.1V 851.3V
0.45s 128.8V 136.3V 145.6V 164.3V 220.4V 313.9V 687.7V
0.50s 116.0V 122.5V 130.5V 146.6V 194.9V 275.4V 597.3V

Table 6: Permissible step voltages per IEC 479-1,5% body resistance values, probability of
ventricular fibrillation 0.5%, hand to two feet

Shock Soil resistivity

duration 108rn 50Bm 1008m 200Bm 5008m 10008rn 3000Qrn

0.05s 367.5V 501.2V 668.3V 1002.5V 2005.3V 3676.5V 10361.5V
0.10s 341.7V 462.7V 614.0V 916.4V 1823.9V 3336.4V 9386.2V
0.15s 307.2V 412.5V 544.1V 807.3V 1596.9V 2913.0V 8177.1V
0.20s 273.8V 365.1V 479.1V 707.2V 1391.4V 2531.8V 7093.2V
0.25s 236.5V 313.1V 408.8V 600.2V 1174.4V 2131.5V 5959.6V
0.30s 199.7V 262.7V 341.5V 499.0V 971.5V 1759.1V 4909.3V
0.35s 157.8V 206.2V 266.7V 387.7V 750.6V 1355.4V 3774.8V
0.40s 128.7V 166.1V 212.8V 306.2V 568.5V 1053.6V 2922.3V
0.45s 106.7V 136.6V 174.0V 248.7V 473.1V 846.9V 2342.4V
0.50s 93.7v 119.5V 151.7V 216.1V 409.2V 731.1V 2018.7V

Table 7: Permissible step voltages per IEC 479-1,50% body resistance values, probability of
ventricular fibrillation 0.5%. hand to two feet

Shock Soil resistivity

duration 109m 50Qm 1008rn 2008rn 5008m 1000Qm 30008m
0.05s 474.5 608.2 775.3 1109.5 2112.3 3783.5 10468.5
0.1os 438.2 559.2 710.4 1012.9 1920.4 3432.9 9482.7
0.15s 394.3 499.6 631.2 894.4 1684.0 3000.0 8264.2
0.20s 351.7 442.9 557.0 785.1 1469.3 2609.6 7171.1
0.25s 304.0 380.6 476.3 667.7 1241.9 2198.9 6027.1
0.30s 256.9 319.9 398.6 556.1 1028.7 1816.2 4966.4
0.35s 202.8 251.2 311.7 432.7 795.6 1400.4 3819.8
0.40s 159.9 197.3 244.0 337.4 617.7 1084.9 2953.5
0.45s 134.4 164.3 201.7 276.5 500.8 874.7 2370.1
0.50s 120.9 146.6 178.8 243.2 436.3 758.2 2045.8

Figs. 9-12 provide the data of Tables 2-7 in graphical
form. The coordinates are the permissible touch or step
voltages of the two standards, respectively. Each point rep-
resents permissible voltages, as allowed by the two stand-
ards computed for the same parameters of soil resistivity
and shock duration. By construction, then, each point on
the diagonal of the graph represents a case where the two
standards yield the same permissible voltages. Points above
the diagonal represent cases where the IEC 479-1 is more
conservative than the IEEE Std 80, whde points below the
598
diagonal represent cases where the IEEE Std 80 is more
conservative than the IEC 479-1. Note that the points are
about evenly distributed around the diagonal. Finally,
Figs. 13 and 14 compare the body resistance value used for
the computation of the permissible touch and step voltages
with the two standards. Note that for the usual shock dura-
tions 0.25-0.5s, the 5% body resistance of the IEC 479-1
standard is near 100052 or higher. Ths is useful informa-
tion for persons questioning the use of 100OQ in the IEEE
Std 80.
IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 144, No. 5, September 1999
 1600 -
1400 -
IEC 479-1 more

1200 -
d
5
c
.I
p!
1000 -
800 -
- - IEEEStd 80

A
U
600 -
IEEE Std 80 more
conservativethan 13 400-
200 -
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 01
0
I
0.10
I
0.20
I
0.30
I
0.40

0.50
permissible touch voltage, kV (IEC 479-1)
electric shock duration, s
Fi 9 Permissible touch voltages er IEEE Std 80 against IEC 479-1; 5%
bog resistunce values, probability ofvenntricular fibrillation 0.5% hand to two Fi . I 3 Body resistance against electric shock duration at mwcimm permis-
feet sib! touch voltage; 5% body resistance values, hund to two@et

11
10 IEC 479-1 more IEC 479-1

g 1000

1
IEEE Std 80

2 800
x5 600
400
3 IEEE Std 80 more
conservativethan
2
IEC 479-1
A 0 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 electric shock duration, s
permissible step voltage, kV (IEC 479-1)
Fi . I 4 Body resistance aguinst electric shock h a t i o n at mm permis-
Fig. 10 Permissible step voltages per IEEE Std 80 vs IEC 479-1; 5% body sib!! t a c h voltage; 50Y( I body resistance values, hand to twofeet
resistme values, probubility of ventriculrufbrilhtion 0.596, hund to two feet

6 Summary and conclusions

6
3.0
2.5 -
r IEC 479-1 more
conservativethan
The safety criteria of the IEC 479-1 and IEEE Std 80 have
been compared and their differences have been quantified.
B IEEE Std EO There are cases in whch the IEEE Std 80 is more conserv-
86 ative than the IEC 479-1 and vice versa. The IEC 479-1
m 2.0 -
co
SQ safety criteria are rather complex, while the safety criteria
1.5- of IEEE Std 80 are simplified. The opinion of the authors
2g is that simplicity is important. Given the fact that the safety
.g 2 1.0 - x x / ,LEE Std 80 more criteria include comfortable safety margins, one can con-
Conservativethan clude that the simplicity of the IEEE Std 80 does not com-
0.5 IEC 479-1 promise safety in grounding system design. Another major
difference is that the IEC 479-1 does not address all rele-
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
vant computational issues, while the IEEE Std 80 provides
permissible touch voltage, kV (IEC 479-1)
approximate equations and formulas which are useful to a
Fi .I1 Permissible touch voltagesper IEEE Std 80 ugaht IEC 479-1; 50% designer. The IEEE Std 80 also provides useful procedures
b a resistance values, probability of ventricular fbrilhtion 0.5%, hand to two
feet for grounding systems safety assessment.

References
11
ANSVIEEE Std 80-1986: IEEE guide for safety in AC substation
IEC 479-1 more grounding. 1986
conservativethan SAKIS MELIOPOULOS, A.P.: Power system grounding and tran-
IEEE Std 80 sients: an introduction (Marcel Defier, Inc., New York, 1988), pp.
7 119-133
International Electrotechnical Commission IEC Report: Effects of
6 current passing through the human body, part 1: general aspects. 479-
5 t / x
1, IEC 1984
SAKIS MELIOPOULOS, A.P., XIA, F., JOY, E.B., and COKKI-
IEEE Std 80 more NIDES, G.J.: An advanced computer model for grounding system
conservativethan analysis, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 1993, 8, (l), pp. 1%23
IEC 479-1
Appendix: Analytical expressions of body
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 resistance vs. body voltage
permissible step voltage, kV (IEC 479-1)
Fi .I2 Peimirsible step voltages er IEEE Std 80 against IEC 479-1; 50% This Appendix presents analytic expressions for the volt-
bo!y resistance values, probability of ventricularfibrillation 0.5%, hund to two age-dependent body resistance which closely match the IEC
feet 479-1 data. These formulae can be used in lieu of the
IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 146, No. 5, September 1999 599

\
Table 8 Total body impedance, per IEC 479-1 (data from IEC tabular data of the IEC 479-1. Table 8 presents a reproduc-
479-1 (1984)) tion of body resistance data in the IEC 479-1. The Table
contain three sets of data corresponding to the stafistical
Values for the total body impedance (9)that are not values of 5%, 50% and 95% of population (see IEC 479-1).
Touch exceeded for a percentage (percentile rank) of Each one of the sets can be approximated with one analytic
voltage (v) 5% of the 50% of the 95% of the function of the form
population population population
Rb,model(Z) = R b , m o d e l (a1> b l >c 1 , 210)
25 1750 3250 6100
50 1450 2625 4375
75 1250 2200 3500
1200 1875 3200
&,model (z)= &,model ( ~ 2b ,2 ~ 2 ~ 2 0 )
100
125 1125 1625 2875 = U 2 -k bzib -k C2 *
220 1000 1350 2125 The coefficients a l , bl, c1 and vo or the vector X = [al, bl,
700 750 1100 1550 c1, vo] and the coefficients q,b2, c2 and i,, or the vector X =
[a2,b2, c2, io] will be different for each one of the three sets
1000 700 1050 1500
of data. For each data set, the unknown vectors x = [al, bl,
2000 677 1084 1464 c1, volT and x = [a2, b2, c2, &IT are computed by the
weighted least squares method, i.e. by solving the following
Table 9: Computed coefficients of the analytic expressions optimisation problem.
for body resistance m
Minimise J = wir: = rTWr
5% of the 50% of the 95% of the
i= 1
population population population
where r = w iis weight for the resid-
- Rb,mode,(~),
a1 668.381 1080.02 1 1427.296
ual ri, and W is a diagonal matrix, the diagonal elements
bl 15344.426 7751.063 73049.270 being the weights w i
C1 515.588 2552.197 21 19.462 The solution to the above nonlinear estimation problem
Vn 311.673 80.182 131.727 is obtained with the following algorithm
5"" = X u - (HTWH)-lWTWIRb,modei(Zu)
- b]
Table IO: Computed coefficients of the analytic expressions
for body voltage where b = Rb,mpanued,
Rb(xV+')- R&") + H.(x"+~
- x"), and
H = dRb(X)/aXIX=XO
5% of the 50% of the 95% of the The computed analytic expression for the three sets of
population population population data, using the above algorithm with wi = 1.0 for all i, are
a2 140.6 63.1 77.8 listed in Tables 9 and 10.
9 0.6 1.o 1.4 The accuracy of the derived analytic expressions as com-
pared to the IEC 479-1 data is illustrated in Tables 11 and
Q -130.1 -50.5 -68.0
12. For all practical purposes, the analytic expressions can
io 241.1 48.1 26.9 be used in lieu of the data of Table 8.

Table 11: Comparison of the proposed formula for resistance to the IEC 479-1
data

Values for the total body impedance (a)that are not exceeded for a percentage
(percentilerank) of
Touch
voltage 5% of the population 50% of the population 95% of the population
.-.
IVI
Proposed
Proposed IEC 479-1 Proposed
IEC 479-1 formula formula IEC 479-1 formula
25 1750 1758.0 3250 3258.6 6100 6102.3
50 1450 1414.4 2625 2603.1 4375 4338.3
75 1250 1278.3 2200 2185.0 3500 3600.7
100 1200 1195.9 1875 1890.8 3200 3149.8
125 1125 1136.4 1625 1678.9 2875 2832.2
220 1000 992.7 1350 1279.4 2125 2158.3
700 750 744.9 1100 1091.5 1550 1542.1
1000 700 704.6 1050 1087.8 1500 1501.4
2000 677 668 1084 1080.0 1464 1427.0

600 IEE Proc-Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 146, No. 5, September 1999
 Table 12: Comparison of the proposed formula for body current vs. body voltage to the IEC 479-1 data

Values for the body voltage (V) that are not exceeded for a percentage (percentile rank) of

5% of the population 50% of the population 95% of the population

Body Body Body
current IEC 479-1 Proposed current IEC 479-1 Proposed current IEC 479-1 Proposed
formula formula formula
(mA) (mA) (mA)
14.3 25 26.5 7.7 25 27.7 4.1 25 25.1
34.5 50 48.6 19.0 50 47.9 11.4 50 49.1
60.0 75 75.2 34.1 75 71.9 21.4 75 76.7
83.3 100 98.7 53.3 100 99.2 31.3 100 99.7
111.1 125 125.4 76.9 125 128.9 43.5 125 124.3
220.0 220 220.8 163.0 220 222.5 103.5 220 219.4
933.3 700 677.7 636.4 700 692.2 451.6 700 701.8
1428.3 1000 1000.1 952.4 1000 1004.6 666.7 1000 998.9
2954.2 2000 1913.1 1845.0 2000 1908.1 1366.1 2000 1990.3

IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib.. Vol. 146, No. 5, September 1999 60 1