Clamp-On Ground Testing Comparison
			
		On April 14, 2002, a ground resistance test was conducted to
			compare the results obtained from the Fall-of-Potential 3-Point testing
			method to the clamp-on testing method. The grounding system
			consisted of four copper clad rods installed in an approximate 20 ft
			square. Three of the rods are 5/8" in diameter and 10 ft in length. The
			fourth rod is 1/2" in diameter and 8 ft in length. All rods were coupled
			together with #3 AWG solid aluminum wire with brass mechanical
			connections. Figure 1 shows the schematic of the system.
			
			The tests were conducted with the following equipment manufactured by AEMC® Instruments	
			
			
			
			Additionally, we used the AEMC® Model 6240, a micro-ohmmeter to verify the
			bonding of the aluminum wire to the individual ground rods.
			
			The soil conditions in the test area were predominately loam with some gravel.
			Conditions on the day of the test were dry and sunny, some light rain had
			occurred the day previous to the test. Therefore, the soil was somewhat moist at
			the surface.
			
			The AEMC® Model 6240 Micro-Ohmmeter was used to measure bonding
			resistance at each rod and was the first test completed. Measurements from
			each conductor to the rod were taken as well as measurements from conductor
			to conductor through the rod and clamp. Readings on rod number three ranged
			from 615 to 733µΩ at each bonding point, indicating that all connections were
			good. See Figure 2 for full results.
			
| Measurement Point | Resistance (µOhms) | 
| A to B | 713 | 
| C to B | 615 | 
| A to C | 733 | 
		The AEMC® Model 6470-B was used as 3-Point ground tester. Rod number three was first disconnected from the other rods in the system so that its individual resistance could be measured. The X lead was attached to rod number three (see Figure 3). The Z lead was attached to an auxiliary electrode 100 feet away and the Y lead was initially connected to the auxiliary electrode 60 feet away. Readings were taken with the Y electrode at 90, 80, 70, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20 and 10 feet. Figure 3 shows the results of this test.
			
		| Y Rod | Resistance | 
| 10% | 79.4 | 
| 20% | 81.7 | 
| 30% | 83.1 | 
| 40% | 83.9 | 
| 50% | 84.3* | 
| 60% | 84.8* | 
| 70% | 85.6* | 
| 80% | 87.3 | 
| 90% | 94.1 | 
*The average of the resistances between 50% and 70% is 84.6Ω
		The same test was repeated using the AEMC® Model 4630 fall-of-potential ground tester. The results are shown in Figure 5.
| Y Rod | Resistance | 
| 10% | 71.5 | 
| 20% | 82.3 | 
| 30% | 83.2 | 
| 40% | 83.6 | 
| 50% | 83.7* | 
| 60% | 84.1* | 
| 70% | 84.6* | 
| 80% | 85.3 | 
| 90% | 94.8 | 
*The average of the resistances between 50% and 70% is 84.1Ω
		Finally, the AEMC® Model 3731 was used to measure the resistance at rod number three with all other rods detached from it. A temporary cable was installed between rod number three and the municipal grounding system thus setting up the required parallel paths necessary for accurate measurement using a clamp-on ground tester (see Figure 6).
Under these conditions, the reading was 84.5Ω.
The results of these tests showed that the clamp-on ground tester is indeed an effective tool in measuring ground resistance when used under the proper conditions. Readings between the clamp-on ground testing and the fall-of-potential ground testing method correlate. The advantages of using the clamp-on tester were the ability to test without disconnecting the rod from service and the ability to test without the need for auxiliary ground electrodes. These two points saved considerable amount of time in conducting the test.