Earth Current Experiment - University of Wisconsin–Madison

1

RESULTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN

STRAY VOLTAGE EARTH-CURRENT MEASUREMENT EXPERIMENT

Professor David L. Alumbaugh Dr. Louise Pellerin

Geological Engineering Program University of Wisconsin-Madison

A report submitted to the State of Wisconsin Legislature

Revised version

25 June 2003

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison 1415 Engineering Drive Madison, Wisconsin 53706

608/262-3835 Fax: 608/263-2453 E-mail: [email protected] www.engr.wisc.edu

Revised version - Results of the UW Earth-Current Measurement Experiment Alumbaugh & Pellerin, 3 February 2003

______________________________________________________________________________

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 5 List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 7 Overview......................................................................................................................................... 8 Project Background ......................................................................................................................... 8

The Magnetotelluric (MT) Method............................................................................................. 8 Remote Reference MT............................................................................................................ 9 Instrumentation ....................................................................................................................... 9 Remote Reference Earth Current Analysis (RRECA) .......................................................... 10

Scheduling................................................................................................................................. 11 Farm Selection .......................................................................................................................... 11

Data Acquisition ........................................................................................................................... 12 RRECA Measurement Parameters............................................................................................ 12 Problems.................................................................................................................................... 13 Resistivity Measurements ......................................................................................................... 13

Data Processing............................................................................................................................. 15 Time Domain Data.................................................................................................................... 15 Amplitude Spectrum ................................................................................................................. 15 Farm versus Remote Signal ...................................................................................................... 16

Results ........................................................................................................................................... 17 Mazomaine Wildlife Reserve Remote, Dane County............................................................... 17

Site Description..................................................................................................................... 17 Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data ................................................................ 18 Findings................................................................................................................................. 18

Smokey Hills, Mead Wildlife Reserve Remote, Marathon County.......................................... 19 Site Description..................................................................................................................... 19 Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data ................................................................ 19 Findings................................................................................................................................. 20

Arlington Dairy Farm, Columbia County................................................................................. 21 Site Description..................................................................................................................... 21 Field Layout & Test Conditions ........................................................................................... 21 Power and farm machinery condition................................................................................... 23 Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data ................................................................ 23 Findings................................................................................................................................. 24

Heiser Dairy, Sauk County ....................................................................................................... 24 Site Description..................................................................................................................... 24 Field Layout & Test Conditions ........................................................................................... 25 Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data ................................................................ 26 Findings................................................................................................................................. 27

Newell Dairy Farm.................................................................................................................... 28 Site Description..................................................................................................................... 28 Field Layout & Test Conditions ........................................................................................... 29 Power and farm machinery condition................................................................................... 29 Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data ................................................................ 30


______________________________________________________________________________

3

Findings................................................................................................................................. 31 Zemke Dairy Farm, Marathon County...................................................................................... 32

Site Description..................................................................................................................... 32 Field Layout & Test Conditions ........................................................................................... 32 Power and farm machinery condition................................................................................... 33 Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data ................................................................ 33 Findings................................................................................................................................. 34

Farm-Remote Referencing............................................................................................................ 35 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 37 References ..................................................................................................................................... 38 Appendix A – Arlington Survey................................................................................................... 39

Site Parameters.......................................................................................................................... 39 Summary of Arlington site conditions and equipment description ............................................... 39 Electrical field sensor parameters for sites for the Arlington survey............................................. 39 Magnetic field sensor parameters for sites for the Arlington survey............................................. 39

Tables of Electric Field & Current Density Data...................................................................... 40 Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 101 – transformer................................................. 40 Total current density for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 101 – transformer.............................................. 40 Total electric field for 9-11 tests (Table 4) at site 102 – fans....................................................... 40 Total current density for 9-11 tests (Table 4) at site 102 – fans.................................................... 41 Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 103 – milking parlor. ............................................ 41 Total current density for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 103 – milking parlor.......................................... 41 Total Electrical field and current density for Mazomaine remote – 1R1. ...................................... 42

Appendix B – Heiser Survey ........................................................................................................ 43 Site Parameters.......................................................................................................................... 43

Summary of Heiser site conditions and equipment description .................................................... 43 Electrical field sensor parameters for the Heiser survey.............................................................. 43 Magnetic field sensor parameters for sites for the Heiser survey ................................................. 43

Tables of Electric Field & Current Density Data...................................................................... 44 Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 401 – transformer & milking parlor. ...................... 44 Total current density for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 401 – transformer & milking parlor.................... 44 Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 403 – freestall barn with equipotential plane. ......... 44 Total current density for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 403 – transformer & milking parlor.................... 45 Total Electrical field and current density for remote – 1R2. ........................................................ 45

Appendix C – Newell Survey ....................................................................................................... 46 Site Parameters.......................................................................................................................... 46

Summary of Newell site conditions and equipment description ................................................... 46 Electrical field sensor parameters for sites for the Newell survey ................................................ 46 Magnetic field sensor parameters for sites for the Newell survey ................................................ 46

Tables of Electric Field & Current Density Data...................................................................... 47 Total electric field for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 201 – transformer. ............................ 47 Total current density for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 201 – transformer.......................... 47 Total electric field for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor. .......................... 48 Total electric field for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor. ........................ 48 Total current density for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor........................ 48


______________________________________________________________________________

4

Total current density for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor. ..................... 49 Total electric field for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump. ........................... 49 Total electric field for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump. ......................... 49 Total current density for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump......................... 50 Total current density for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump....................... 50 Total Electrical field and current density for 2,000 sps data for site 204 and remote 2R1. ............. 51

Appendix D – Zemke Survey........................................................................................................ 52 Site Parameters.......................................................................................................................... 52

Summary of Zemke site conditions and equipment description ................................................... 52 Electrical field sensor parameters for the Zemke survey............................................................. 52 Magnetic field sensor parameters for the Zemke survey ............................................................. 52

Tables of Electric Field & Current Density Data...................................................................... 53 Total electric field for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 301 – transformer.................................. 53 Total current density for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 301 – transformer............................... 53 Total electric field for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 302 – fans............................................. 54 Total current density for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 302 – fans.......................................... 54 Total electric field for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 303 – milking parlor. ............................. 54 Total current density for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 303 – milking parlor........................... 55 Total Electrical field and current density for 2,000 sps data for site 304 and remote 2R2. ............. 55


______________________________________________________________________________

5

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Schematic illustrating a plan-view layout of the EMI MT24 instrument...................... 10 Figure 2. Location map of the study farms and remote sites. ....................................................... 12 Figure 3. Schematic of a DC resistivity Wenner array. ................................................................ 14 Figure 4. Geoelectric resistivity soundings for the 4 farms and the 2 remote sites plotted on a log-

log scale................................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 5. Combined electric fie ld spectrum for the three sampling rates from a representative

farm site................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 6. The electric field spectrum for a representative farm and remote site recorded

simultaneously with a 2,000 sps sampling rate..................................................................... 17 Figure 7. Photograph of the Mazomaine remote site in the Lower Wisconsin River Wildlife

Refuge .near Fishers Lake in western Dane County. ............................................................ 17 Figure 8. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order

harmonics for the Mazomaine remote site. ........................................................................... 18 Figure 9. Photograph of the Smoke Hills remote site in the Mead Wildlife Refuge. ................... 19 Figure 10. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order

harmonics for the Smokey Hills remote site. ........................................................................ 20 Figure 11. Photograph of the UW Arlington Dairy. ..................................................................... 22 Figure 12. The schematic of the Arlington Farm showing the location of the three sites: 101, the

transformer –102, the fans –103, the milking parlor. ........................................................... 22 Figure 13. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order

harmonics for site 101 – the transformer site........................................................................ 24 Figure 14. Photograph of the freestall barn at the Heiser Farm. ................................................... 25 Figure 15 The schematic of the Heiser Farm showing the location of the two site: 401 –the

transformer & the milking parlor and 403 the fans.............................................................. 26 Figure 16. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order

harmonics for site 403 – the milking parlor site. .................................................................. 27 Figure 17. Photograph of the Newell Farm. ................................................................................. 28 Figure 18. The schematic of the Newell Farm showing the location of the three site: 201, the

transformer – 202, the milking parlor – 203, the lagoon pump. ........................................... 29 Figure 19. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order

harmonics for 15 test conditions for site 203 – the manure pump. ....................................... 31 Figure 20. Photograph of the Zemke Farm. .................................................................................. 32 Figure 21 The schematic of the Zemke Farm showing the location of the three sites: 201, the

transformer – 202, the fans – 203, the milking parlor. ......................................................... 33 Figure 22. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order

harmonics for 7 test conditions for site 301 – the transformer site....................................... 34 Figure 23. Total current density bar plot for Arlington site 101 for the minimum condition of the

farm non- isolated and off (blue), the maximum condition of non-isolated with a 20 kW load (green), and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Mazomaine recorded in the summer (red). .................................................................................................................. 35

Figure 24. Total current density bar plot for Heiser site 403 for the minimum condition of the farm isolated with no load (blue), the maximum condition of non-isolated with a 20 kW


______________________________________________________________________________

6

load (green), and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Mazomaine recorded in the autumn (red). ................................................................................................ 36

Figure 25. Total current density bar plot for the Newell farm site 203 for the minimum condition of the farm isolated with no load (blue), the maximum condition of isolated with a load (green),and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Smokey Hills (red)..... 36

Figure 26. Total current density bar plot for the Zemke farm site 301 for the minimum condition of the farm off (blue), the maximum condition of the farm on with a load (green),and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Smokey Hills(red). ............................... 37


______________________________________________________________________________

7

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Schedule for the Earth-Current Measurement Experiment ............................................. 11 Table 2. Summary of the survey measurement parameters. ......................................................... 13 Table 3. List of apparent resistivity values for each ‘a’ separation for the 4 farms and 2 remote

sites........................................................................................................................................ 14 Table 4. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Alington farm. ...... 23 Table 5. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Heiser farm. .......... 26 Table 6. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Newell farm. ......... 30 Table 7. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Zemke farm. ......... 33


______________________________________________________________________________

8

OVERVIEW As part of a larger study investigating the possible effects of earth currents on bovine production, electric and magnetic field measurements were made on four Wisconsin dairy farms. Two of the farms considered themselves to possibly have concerns about electrical exposure, while the other two considered did not. Broadband, tensor electric and magnetic field data were collected using geophysical instrumentation developed for the magnetotelluric (MT) method (Vozoff, 1991). Using this equipment, natural electromagnetic fields are measured along with those due to cultural sources from either power utilities or farm equipment.

Several measurement sites were located on each farm in addition to a remote site located within 40 miles of the farm. The remote site was chosen to be as far away from the nearest power line that could reasonably be achieved while being within reasonable driving distance. The purpose was to simultaneously measure data under quiet conditions and at the farm. Measurements were synchronized in time via global positioning system (GPS) clocks. In addition to the electromagnetic field measurements, earth resistivity data were acquired to estimate the near-surface resistivity, which is used to estimate the near-surface current density.

Sets of measurements were made during a series of tests on each farm including:

1. background measurements during normal farm operations;

2. load box (LB) tests performed by the local utility company under different isolation/bonding conditions; and

3. farm equipment tests where the farmer turned on selected pieces of machinery to determined the nature of the equipment’s electrical signature.

After processing the electric field time series, the resulting spectral data for each test condition are presented as electric field and current density amplitudes for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics. In turn, other researchers will use these values to determine the earth current effects on animals.

PROJECT BACKGROUND

The Magnetotelluric (MT) Method The MT method was proposed in early 50’s as a method for investigating the geo-electrical structure of the Earth (Tikhonov, 1950; Cagniard, 1953). By measuring orthogonal components of the electric (E) and magnetic (H) fields, the Earth’s electrical resistivity can be determined through the transfer function, or impedance, which in practice is a normalized ratio of E to H. Vector components are measured to resolve two and three dimensional structures in the earth.

Due to a complex interaction of the earth’s magnetic field and the solar winds at frequencies less than 10 Hz, and the channeling of worldwide thunderstorms at frequencies greater than 10 Hz, sheets of currents are induced in the magnetosphere at a distance of approximately 100 km from


______________________________________________________________________________

9

the earth’s surface. These currents support a time varying magnetic field that in turn induces currents in the electrically conductive earth known as telluric currents (Campbell, 1967). The name magnetotellurics therefore refers to the source in the magnetosphere and the resulting telluric currents in the earth. Cultural signals are usually characterized by anomalous high amplitudes at 60 Hz (or 50 Hz in Europe) and the harmonics of these power frequencies.

Using the MT method to estimate the electrical resistivity of the earth assumes a plane wave that is normally incident on the Earth’s surface. High frequency data give information of the near surface while long periods resolve deeper features. For example, if the subsurface resistivity is about 100 ohm-m structures at a depth of 5 km in the earth can be resolved with data at 1 Hz, while structures at a depth of 500m would be detectable with frequencies on the order of 100 Hz. The typical range for natural field plane wave measurement is 0.001 to 10,000 Hz. Worldwide applications include: general geologic mapping and imaging, mineral, geothermal, gas and oil exploration, and ground water investigations. Local cultural sources produce near- field effects (noise and interference) that typically render these low-level signals unusable

Remote Reference MT Because cultural signals distort MT data, a technique called remote reference MT was developed to eliminate, or at least minimize, these undesirable contributions to the recorded signal (Gamble et al., 1979). Cultural signals at one site are usually much different from those that are a few miles away, whereas the natural signal correlates well over large distances. Electrical fields are much more sensitive to the local geology than are the magnetic fields and so time-referenced magnetic data at a ‘remote’ site are used to reference data at the ‘local’ site. Remote referencing can also be used to separate signals originating from local anthropomorphic sources from those with natural origins. With modern technology, remote and local measurements are synchronized with GPS clocks. This technique was originally proposed for the earth current study. The equipment was used to acquire the electric and magnetic field data, but the standard geophysical processing techniques proved inappropriate. Thus other standard signal processing approaches were applied to the electric field data.

Instrumentation Four MT24 systems from Electromagnetic Instruments, Inc. (EMI) were used for the data acquisition. The MT24 has 24-bit resolution that enables the measurement of fields over an amplitude range of eight orders of magnitude. The high end operates to a sampling rate of 48,000 samples per second (sps) kHz. GPS clocks synchronize the three farm sites and remote site measurements. Five acquisition channels are used to measure two, perpendicular, horizontal components of the E field and the three, orthogonal components of the H field.

Electric field measurements are made with ground-referenced wires, also called dipoles. Dipole lengths of 20 m were used at the farms and 100 m at remote sites. Electrical contact is made with non-polarizing, porous-pot electrodes (half-cells). A wire connects two electrodes and a continuous circuit is completed through the earth. The contact resistance between the porous pot electrode and the soil should usually be under a few thousand Ohms. This source resistance in


______________________________________________________________________________

10

series with the input resistance of the data acquisition system of well over one megohm means little attenuation of the signals occurs.

Magnetic field measurements are made with high precision induction coils that are constructed of 10s of thousands of windings around a magnetically permeable core material. These coils are sensitive to magnetic fields values below 1 nanoTesla. They are approximately 1 m long and 4” in diameter. The three coils are leveled, oriented to be mutually perpendicular to each other, and completely buried in the ground roughly 1’ deep to keep them insulate from temperature variations and wind, which can cause noisy signals.

The electrodes and coils are connected to field acquisition modules (FAMs) that digitize and amplify the measured voltages. The signal is then fed into (?) a central storage unit (CSU), which is essentially a hard drive, for archiving. All system and survey parameters are stored and controlled through a laptop computer that is connected to the CSU and the GPS clock. All FAM, CSU and laptop computers are housed in compact, high-density plastic, waterproof boxes. The system is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Schematic illustrating a plan-view layout of the EMI MT24 instrument.

Remote Reference Earth Current Analysis (RRECA) The newly defined RRECA method uses MT instrumentation, but has very different goals. Instead of estimating the subsurface resistivity we want to determine the current density at the surface primarily due to 60 Hz and its associated next order harmonics, so modifications to the traditional method are required. On the farms we measured the electric potential across 20m in contrast to 100 to 200 m in MT traditional measurements. The smaller electrode separation was required as the more traditional separations were found to cause overload of the instrumentation due to the relatively large 60 Hz signal strengths normally found on-farm. However, smaller separations were avoided as that would make measurement of the natural signal more difficult.


______________________________________________________________________________

11

The man-made currents that are present on a dairy can have two general types of sources. Of primary concern are those sources where the currents are galvanically introduced through direct electrical contact with the earth, such as at grounding points. The second source of currents are those that are induced by magnetic fields generated by current s flowing in the on- and off- farm 60 Hz distribution power lines. Only the E field data are being used at this point in the study and therefore we cannot resolve the source of the currents here. However, it is hoped that we can pursue future studies to ana lyze the magnetic field measurements providing insight into the type of sources.

Scheduling The project has been proceeding according to the schedule in Table 1.

Date Goal Summer 2001 Selection of four farms for measurements July and August 2001 Measurements at 3 farms and corresponding remote sites August 2001 Public demonstration of RRECA measurement technique October 2001 Measurements at the 4th farm Nov 2001 to May 2002 Process data and present preliminary results May – August 2002 Complete processing and write report November 2002 Deliver final report

Table 1. Schedule for the Earth -Current Measurement Experiment

Farm Selection The farm selection process was focused in Dane and Marathon counties: Dane was convenient for logistical reasons and one of the larger dairy counties in Wisconsin, and Marathon has the largest number of dairy farms and was the source of many stray voltage concerns in addition to the potential impact of a proposed transmission line. Approximately 1000 questionnaires were sent to dairy farms serviced by Formost and Land of Lakes Cooperatives, and distributed through Dairy Expo and dairy professionals. The questionnaire was designed to determine perception of electrical problems and find farms that would grant us permission to conduct the study.

By mid-July 38 farms had responded, 32 of which were from Marathon county. From the 32 in Marathon, two farms were selected; the Newell and Zemke Farms located about 25 miles west and east of Wausau, respectively Both farms have traditional stanchion style barns more than 60 years old and herds of less than 100 cows. The remote site for these farms was at Smokey Hills in the Mead Wildlife Refuge in southern Marathon County. The UW Arlington Dairy, in Columbia County, was chosen to initiate the study because of easy logistics, and no responses from Dane County farmers expressing interest in participation. The Heiser Farm, in nearby Sauk County, responded at the end of the summer and was the last farm chosen for the experiment. Both of these farms, adjacent to Dane County, have freestall barns with herds larger than 200 animals. The remote site was selected in the Mazomaine Remote, Lower Wisconsin River Wildlife Refuge, located in Dane County. Figure 2 depicts the location of the four farms and two remote sites.


______________________________________________________________________________

12

Figure 2. Location map of the study farms and remote sites.

DATA ACQUISITION

RRECA Measurement Parameters Measurements were made at three sampling rates, 48,000 sps, 9,600 sps, and 2,000 sps, for a variety of tests. The recording parameters are listed in Table 2. The local power companies made load box (LB) tests with the farm bonded and in both non-isolated and isolated conditions, and the farmer switched various machinery on and off. Some measurements were also made at sites roughly 0.1 miles from the farm; these are referred to as walk-away tests.

Survey parameters, such as dipole and coil orientations, gains and various system responses for the field sensors, are unique for each site and are recorded for use in data processing. They are documented in Appendix A through D for the Arlington, Heiser, Newell and Zemke surveys, respectively.


______________________________________________________________________________

13

Band Sampling rates (samples per second)

Recording duration

Data length (Number of Samples)

T (test) 2,000 sps 30 sec 60,000 H (high) 48,000 sps 5 sec 24,000

M (medium) 9,600 sps 25 sec 24,000 L (low) 2,000 sps 250 sec 500,000

Table 2. Summary of the survey measurement parameters.

Problems The MT system was designed to collect a pair of sites with recording time of 1-3 days at sampling rates of 0.001 to 100 sps. We were collecting four sites simultaneously at high sampling rates, under a challenging schedule. Giving the demands we were putting upon the system, the problems we encountered were understandable.

The GPS clocks provided the greatest source of frustration. Synchronization between the different sites was difficult to attain at times, resulting in delays while waiting for the satellite lock. Slight differences in time between the four systems limited our ability to apply some of the advanced geophysical processing techniques we had proposed, such as separation of the natural and cultural signals. Two disks failed in the CSUs. The units were replaced, but because of coordination with the power companies for the load box tests, we lost portions of data from some farm and remote sites. The telemetry was slower than we needed for the volume of data we were attempting to collect and that limited the length of acquired segments as noted in Table 2.

Resistivity Measurements In order to estimate the current density in the near surface we need estimates of the electrical resistivity of the earth near the surface and measurements of the electric field. We cannot infer the earth's resistivity from RRECA measurements because of the cultural interference, so we used another method called geoelectric or DC resistivity (Telford et al., 1995). A small amount of low frequency (essentially DC) current is injected into the ground between two electrodes, and the voltage between another two electrodes is measured. Metal stakes are used for both the current and voltage electrodes and measurements are made for a series of electrode separations. The Wenner array, as depicted in Figure 3, in which the electrode separation, ‘a’, is the same for each measurement, was used with an earth resistivity system manufactured by ABEM. Increasing the electrode separation provides an increasing depth of investigation thereby sounding into the earth. Six ‘a’ separations from 1 to 10 m were used in this study.

The injected current, the measured voltage, and the location of the electrodes are known, and thus we can apply Ohm’s law with a geometric factor to estimate the earth resistivity. A sounding curve is simply the geoelectric apparent resistivity, which is an approximate value of the subsurface resistivity, as a function of electrode separation, ‘a’. Because greater electrode separation yields greater depth of penetration a sounding curve roughly represents the resistivity with respect to depth. Tables of values and sounding curves for the 4 farms and 2 remote sites are shown in Table 3 and Figure 4, respectively. We use the 1m data to compute the current density at the surface.


______________________________________________________________________________

14

Resistivity data can give insight into the character of the subsurface geology. If currents due to 60 Hz power systems are present, the geology can enhance or diminish the magnitude. For example, a thin conductive layer over resistive bedrock will trap currents within that upper layer, whereas a continuously conductive environment will allow currents to diffuse within the three dimensional volume.

Figure 3. Schematic of a DC resistivity Wenner array.

Electrical Resistivity (ohm-m)

Separation (m)

Arlington Farm

Heiser Farm Mazomaine Remote

Newell Farm Zemke Farm Smokey Hills Remote

1 50 13 1068 51 238 221 2 72 29 1007 21 216 135 3 79 39 767 17 237 121 5 116 43 494 17 319 114 7 62 49 398 19 381 117 10 88 75 22 488 151

Table 3. List of apparent resistivity values for each ‘a’ separation for the 4 farms and 2 remote sites.

Figure 4. Geoelectric resistivity soundings for the 4 farms and the 2 remote sites plotted on a log-log scale.


______________________________________________________________________________

15

DATA PROCESSING The amplitude of the signal at a given frequency, known as the amplitude spectrum, is what is needed in the subsequent stages of this study to determine possible earth current effects on bovines. Specifically, we want to know the amplitude of the electric field and the earth current at 60 Hz and its associated next order harmonics. To produce an amplitude spectrum the data that are collected in the time domain must be transformed to the frequency domain. This is accomplished by using a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) in the MATLAB language of technical computing (Math Works, 1998).

Time Domain Data The raw data, D, are the number of counts measured by the analog to digital (AD) converted. A series of calibration factors are applied to the data including: an AD conversion factor to convert to counts to electric field, ADC, a user- input gain, G, and the dipole length, L, as listed in the Appendices. Thus the quantity to be transformed to the frequency domain is given by

)/( mmVLG

ADCDE

××

= .

Amplitude Spectrum Figure 5 shows the spectrum for the three sampling frequencies from a representative farm site. The Nyquist sampling theory tells us that time series data recorded at 2,000 sps sampling rate can recover frequency content up to 1 kHz. In reality the frequency content is somewhat lower due to filters in the instrumentation. For our datasets the 2,000 sps, 9,600 sps and 48,000 sps sampled data recover frequencies to 800 Hz, 4 kHz and 22,000 sps, respectively. The 60 Hz and higher harmonics have very distinct peaks that are most accurately sampled with the 2,000 sps sampling rate. The higher sampling rates are capable of characterizing higher harmonics, but the amplitudes were found to be low and not important for the purposes of this study. Hence only the 2,000 sps data are reported.

We made a series of tests to determine the accuracy of recovering the amplitude of the 60 Hz signal and harmonics with different FFT filter lengths. Lengths of 65536, 131072, 262144, 500000 and 524288 were used on the 2,000 sps data. The amplitude spectrum transformed with 500000 and 524288 FFT filter length were the same, and greater in values than that of shorter segments of data. Based on this we concluded that the 500000 length produced an accurate spectrum. After processing to the frequency domain the data are binned into 500 point groups centered on 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics. The maximum value in each bin was then tabulated for presentation as bar plots for selected sites and as numerical values reported in tables for all sites in the appendices.


______________________________________________________________________________

16

Figure 5. Combined electric field spectrum for the three sampling rates from a representative farm site.

Farm versus Remote Signal A representative electric field spectrum for 2,000 sps sampled data from a farm and remote recording is shown in Figure 6 to illustrate natural field levels versus man-made levels. The data have not been binned into the values at the harmonics so that the full character, or envelope that includes the background field, of the spectrum is evident. The value of the remote signal, denoted in red, is consistently lower than that at the farm, denoted in blue. However it is interesting to note that near 60 Hz the character is similar for both the farm and the remote whereas the envelope is much narrower for the background field at higher frequencies. The center of the envelope, which represents the natural field strength, is roughly the same for both the remote and the farm. The magnitude of the fields and harmonics range up to 5 times greater than the background field at both the remote and farm.


______________________________________________________________________________

17

Figure 6. The electric field spectrum for a representative farm and remote site recorded simultaneously with a 2,000 sps sampling rate.

RESULTS The recording sites are described and selected electric field and current density data are shown for each farm as histograms of peak values at 60 Hz and 12 next order harmonics. Values of the total electric field and the current density at 2,000 sps for each site are tabulated in the appendices.

Mazomaine Wildlife Reserve Remote, Dane County

Site Description The remote site used for the Arlington and the Heiser Farms is located at the Mazomaine Lower Wisconsin River Wildlife Refuge near Fishers Lake in western Dane County. The UTM coordinates are E272256, N4789085, Section 16N, at an elevation of approximately 308m. The remote site was in a level, open meadow of high grass, as shown in Figure 7, approximately 0.5 miles from the road and a small power line. During July, which was the primary acquisition period for the Arlington farm, the site was buggy and it rained during set-up, but not on acquisition days. In October, during the Heiser survey, the weather was misty, gray and cool.

Figure 7. Photograph of the Mazomaine remote site in the Lower Wisconsin River Wildlife Refuge .near Fishers Lake in western Dane County.


______________________________________________________________________________

18

Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data Electric field and current density at 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics are shown in Figure 8 for 5 recordings made simultaneously with the LB testing at the Heiser farm. Data were also recorded during the Arlington tests and tabula ted values are shown in Appendix A.

Findings Electric field strength and current density at 60 Hz is about 10 µV/m RMS and 10 nanoA/m2, respectively. As we shall see, the natural variations in the field at a distance from the farms and those within approximately 0.5 mile from a power line or other cultural features, is about 100 times less at 60Hz and roughly 1000 times less at the next order harmonics.

Figure 8. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics for the Mazomaine remote site.


______________________________________________________________________________

19

Smokey Hills, Mead Wildlife Reserve Remote, Marathon County

Site Description The remote site for the Newell and Zemke Farm surveys is located in the Smokey Hills, Mead Wildlife Refuge near a wooden viewing platform in southern Marathon County. The site is covered mostly with high grasses as shown in Figure 9. The coordinates are 268290E, 4954824N, datum N16, at an elevation of approximately 318m, as shown in Figure 2. The site was approximately 1.0 miles from the road and a power line. The weather was hot and humid and it was buggy during data acquisition.

Figure 9. Photograph of the Smoke Hills remote site in the Mead Wildlife Refuge.

Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data Electric field and current density at 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics are shown in Figure 10 for 5 recordings made simultaneously with the LB testing at the Zemke farm. These plots show the natural variations in the field at a distance from controlled tests. Electric field strength and current density at 60 Hz is 0.5 mV/m RMS and less than 5 mA/m2, respectively.


______________________________________________________________________________

20

Figure 10. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics for the Smokey Hills remote site.

Findings The electric field data at Mazomaine remote shown in Figure 8 are roughly 100 times less than those at Smokey Hills even though the site is about twice as far away from a power line. There are several reasons for this: the contribution from the power lines can be significantly different, the Mazomaine data in Figure 8 were collected in the fall in contrast to the Smokey Hills data that were collected in summer, and there are spatial and temporal variation in the natural signal strength. There is even a greater difference in current density values because of the relatively higher resistivity of the Mazomaine site.


______________________________________________________________________________

21

Arlington Dairy Farm, Columbia County

Site Description The UW Arlington Dairy, shown in Figure 11, is located in Columbia County just north of the Dane County boundary off Highway 51. The UTM coordinates are E310881, N4796881, Section 16N, at an elevation of approximately 284m. The schematic of the site layout is shown in Figure 12. Approximately 200-300 cows are kept at the Arlington Farm in both a freestall barns and traditional stanchions. One unusual aspect of this site is the robotic milker, the power system for which was not considered a significant source of ground currents. Because this is not typical of an operating dairy farm, and it was not targeted. However, the transformer site (101) was set-up under the drop to the freestall barn containing the robotic milker and directly over an open delta buried primary feed line to the main barn containing the milking parlor, office and other facilities. Hence the milking parlor (103) and (102) fan sites are essentially unaffected by the LB tests. Alliant Energy is the local power company who conducted the LB tests.

Field Layout & Test Conditions Site 101 captures the transformer signature, 102 the fans on the SW corner of the farm and 103 the milking parlor and offices, as shown in Figure 12. The geoelectric resistivity line was on the lawn near site 101 oriented EW. The test conditions are described in Table 4.

In addition to testing to determine the acquisition criteria shown in Table 2, the Arlington farm was used for shake down of the equipment. As a result, we were not able to complete the total data acquisition at the farm in July and remain on schedule. We returned in October to complete the farm-machinery testing phase of the experiment, but problems having to do with manure spraying of the adjacent fields where the MT24 equipment was deployed prevented completion of data acquisition, and limited data from the fan site (102) were collected under various farm conditions. Unfortunately, during the LB testing site 102 was recorded with a 30 Hz low pass filter in line and the data are not useable for this study. Hence, the equipment phase of the testing is limited to 2 ‘standard’ (unknown, but obviously quite different) operating conditions for sites 101 and 103 and 3 controlled tests for site 102. The weather was generally fair for the season during both the summer and fall acquisition phases.


______________________________________________________________________________

22

Figure 11. Photograph of the UW Arlington Dairy.

Figure 12. The schematic of the Arlington Farm showing the location of the three sites: 101, the transformer –102, the fans –103, the milking parlor.


______________________________________________________________________________

23

Test Power and farm machinery condition 1 Standard (unknown) farm operation 1 – high 2 Standard (unknown) farm operation 2 – low 3 Non- isolated/farm off 4 Isolated/farm off 5 Isolated/ farm on/ 10kW load 6 Non- isolated / farm on/ 10kW load 7 Non- isolated / farm on/ 20kW load 8 Isolated/ farm on/ 20kW load 9 Pump, scraper & auger only 10 Fans only 11 Milking machinery only

Table 4. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Alington farm.

Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data In Figure 13 the total electric field for site 101 is shown as a histogram for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics for the 2,000 sps sampling rate. Tabulated values for the 2,000 sps total electric field and current density for each site and conditions, including average values of the corresponding remote can be found in Appendix A.


______________________________________________________________________________

24

Figure 13. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics for site 101 – the transformer site.

Findings There is a complicated power distribution between the freestall barn with robotic milker and main dairy with milking parlor. The open delta three-phase buried power line is under site 101. The fields are generally higher than would be found at other farms without this buried line. At 60 Hz the non-isolated responses were about 3 mV/m RMS less than when isolated. The farm contribution was about 2-3 mV/m RMS. Doubling the load increased the field 3-4 mV/m RMS. The first farm condition was about 4 mV/m higher than the second condition. With one exception, none of the trends seen at 60 Hz is observed at the next order harmonics. Either for farm off or under a 20 kW load, the isolated condition was about 3 mV/m RMS higher than the non- isolated condition at 60 Hz. The only trend seen at 60 Hz that is also observed at the next order harmonics is that a minimum value is measured when the farm is off, but this varies between non- isolated & isolated conditions. Variations in current densities follow that of the electric field with magnitudes greater than 50 µA/m2 observed for various conditions at 60 Hz. A review of the tabulated values in shows that the voltages and current densities are significantly higher at the milking parlor site (103) than those at the other sites.

Heiser Dairy, Sauk County

Site Description The Heiser Brothers Dairy farm, shown in Figure 14, is located in SE Sauk County. The UTM coordinates are 734284.22E, 4802318.23N, datum 16N. The herd, of approximately 200 cows, is kept in a freestall barn roughly 4 years old that has a equipotential plane. Data were acquired from 10/11/01 to 10/15/01 and the weather was cold and windy, with light rain. The Heisers perceived that they had a stray voltage problem. Alliant Energy conducted the LB tests. The remote was located in the Mazomaine Lower Wisconsin River Wildlife Refuge.


______________________________________________________________________________

25

Figure 14. Photograph of the freestall barn at the Heiser Farm.

Field Layout & Test Conditions The sites were selected to capture signatures on the farm due to the power line transformer, milking parlor, and barn with a equipotential plane. The sites at the Heiser farm are depicted in Figure 15. Site 401 captures the transformer signature and milking parlor, and 403 the barn. Site 402 was set up near the lagoon, but was abandoned before any data were acquired because of instrument problems. The geoelectric resistivity survey was performed in the field across road from 401. The power company made load box tests with the farm non- isolated and isolated, and the farmer successively switched various machinery on rather than only turning one on at a time. The tests are summarized in Table 5.


______________________________________________________________________________

26

Figure 15 The schematic of the Heiser Farm showing the location of the two site: 401 –the transformer & the milking parlor and 403 the fans.

Test Power and farm machinery condition

1 Isolated, no load 2 Isolated with load 3 Non-isolated with load 4 Non-isolated no load / farm off 5 Minimal farm conditions 6 Fans & lights 7 Fans, lights & vacuum pump 8 Fans, lights, vacuum pump & milking compressor

Table 5. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Heiser farm.

Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data Electric field and current density data for Site 403, the barn with the equipotential plane, are present in Figure 16 as histograms for each of the test conditions. Tabulated values for the 2,000 sps total electric field and current density for each site and conditions, including average values of the corresponding remote can be found in Appendix B.


______________________________________________________________________________

27

Figure 16. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics for site 403 – the milking parlor site.

Findings Electrical voltages in the earth due to the distribution network were about 2-3 mV/m RMS at 60 Hz, and the farm contribution was about 3-4 mV/m RMS at 60 Hz. The minimum condition, which was isolated with no load at 60 Hz, varied at different frequencies. There is a difference of about 2 mV/m RMS between the isolated and non-isolated conditions with or without a load, with the non- isolated being greater.

The barn has an equipotential plane and the signal strength was higher at the barn site (403) than at the transformer & parlor site (401). Although not shown, the electric field signal in the component along the barn was greater than that for the perpendicular component. Current density


______________________________________________________________________________

28

was over 100 µAmp/m2 when the farm was fully operational. It is interesting to note that the earth voltages increase when the farm was non- isolated.

Newell Dairy Farm

Site Description The Newell Family Dairy is located in Marathon County approximately 25 mile west of Wausau. The UTM coordinates are E729148, N4979411, datum 15N, with an elevation of approximately 284m, shown in Figure 17. Approximately 70-80 cows were kept at the Newell Farm in traditional stanchions; approximately 40 cows were being milked. There was also a calf barn near the manure lagoon. The sites were selected to capture signatures of the power line transformer, milking parlor, and pumps. XCel Energy conducted the LB tests. The remote was located in Smokey Hills remote, Mead Wildlife Refuge SW of Wausau. Data were acquired from 7/31/01 to 8/3/01, and the weather was extremely hot and humid. Curtis Newell perceived that he had a stray voltage problem, and was concerned that the proposed transmission line would be located near his property.

Figure 17. Photograph of the Newell Farm.


______________________________________________________________________________

29

Field Layout & Test Conditions Site 201 captures the transformer signature, 202 the milking parlor and 203 the lagoon pump as shown in Figure 18. There was also one step-out site (204) collected about 0.1 miles north of the farm directly under a three-phase transmission line. The geoelectric resistivity survey was performed on the lawn near site 201 oriented EW. Measurements were made for 15 test conditions. The power company made load box tests with the farm not isolated and isolated, and the farmer switched machinery on and off as summarized in Table 6. No data were acquired for LB tests at the transformer site due to instrument problems.

Figure 18. The schematic of the Newell Farm showing the location of the three site: 201, the transformer – 202, the milking parlor – 203, the lagoon pump.


1 Farm off, LB off, isolated 2 Farm off, LB off, non- isolated 3 Farm off, LB on, isolated 4 Farm off, LB on, non- isolated 5 Farm on. LB on, isolated 6 Farm on, LB on, non- isolated 7 Farm on, LB off, isolated 8 Farm on, LB off, non- isolated 9 Farm quiet 10 Scraper on


______________________________________________________________________________

30

11 Lagoon pump on 12 Milker on 13 Old silo on 14 New silo on 15 Everything on but silos

Table 6. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Newell farm.

Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data Data from site are shown in Figure 19 from site 203, as histograms for the 15 test conditions. Tabulated values for the 2,000 sps total electric field and current density for each site and conditions, including average values of the corresponding remote can be found in Appendix C.


______________________________________________________________________________

31

Figure 19. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics for 15 test conditions for site 203 – the manure pump.

Findings The contribution of the earth voltage due to the farm is about 3 mV/m RMS at 60Hz and the contribution due to the distribution about 3 mV/m RMS at 60 Hz. The maximum total E field is 10 mV/m, and the maximum current density is about 10 mAmp/m2 at 60 Hz. There was no significant difference between the non-isolated and isolated conditions, or a dominant equipment response. Maximum signal was recorded at the manure pump site (203).


______________________________________________________________________________

32

Zemke Dairy Farm, Marathon County

Site Description The Zemke Brothers Hidden Z Farm, shown in Figure 20, is located in Marathon County Approximately 25 mile east of Wausau. The UTM coordinates are E303599, N4989725, section 15N, at an elevation of approximately 420m. Approximately 30-40 cows are kept at the Zemke Farm in traditional stanchions. The older barn was renovated approximately 3 years prior to the study. There is also a calf barn near the transformer site. Wisconsin Public Service Cooperative conducted the LB tests. Data were acquired from 8/5/01 to 8/9/0, and the weather was very hot and humid. The remote was located in the Smokey Hills, Mead Wildlife Refuge SW of Wausau. There was no perceived stray voltage problem.

Figure 20. Photograph of the Zemke Farm.

Field Layout & Test Conditions The sites were selected to capture signatures on the farm such as the power line transformer, milking parlor, fans, and pumps. The sites at the Zemke farm are depicted in Figure 20. Site 201 captures the transformer signature, 202 the fans and 203 the milking parlor. There was also two step out sites collected about 0.1 miles north and NW of the farm in the fields. The geoelectric


______________________________________________________________________________

33

resistivity survey was performed on the lawn near site 302 oriented EW. The power company made load box tests with the farm non- isolated and isolated, and the farmer switched various machinery on and off. The tests are summarized in Table 7. Some measurements were also made at sites roughly 0.1 miles from the farm, called walk-away tests.

Figure 21 The schematic of the Zemke Farm showing the location of the three sites: 201, the transformer – 202, the fans – 203, the milking parlor.


1 Milker & fans on 2 Silo & fans on 3 Scraper & fans on 4 Fans only 5 LB Testing under standard farm conditions (fans only) 6 Farm off 7 Farm on with 25 kW LB

Table 7. Summary of conditions for power and farm machinery tests at the Zemke farm.

Selected Electric Field and Current Density Data Electric field and current density data for Site 301, the transformer site, are present in Figure 22 as histograms for each of the test conditions. Tabulated values for the 2,000 sps total electric field and current density for each site and conditions, including average values of the corresponding remote can be found in Appendix D.


______________________________________________________________________________

34

Figure 22. Total electric field and current density values for 60 Hz and the 12 next order harmonics for 7 test conditions for site 301 – the transformer site.

Findings There is less than 2 mV/m RMS variation in electric field value at 60 Hz for all conditions but the farm on with the 27 W LB. Signal strength for the 5th harmonic (300 Hz) is greater than that of the 3rd (180 Hz), which is unusual but probably not significant. The current density is about 7 mAmp/m2 at 60 Hz. The Zemke farm has the lowest current densities of the four measured farm, because it has the highest near surface resistivity.


______________________________________________________________________________

35

FARM-REMOTE REFERENCING To illustrate the difference in signal strength between the farm and remote sites, the total current density for a site at each farm is plotted for two different power conditions during load box testing along with an average value of the corresponding remote data. Because each power utility company conducted different tests, the minimum and maximum condition for the load box test at 60 Hz is shown for each farm.

On the Arlington farm the minimum power conditions were achieved at site 101 when the farm was non- isolated and off, and maximum when the farm was non-isolated with a 20 kW load as shown in Figure 23. At 60 Hz the difference between the maximum and minimum LB condition is about 50 µA/m2, or about 50%. The relative difference is more dramatic at 420, 540, 660 and 780 Hz. The average Mazomaine remote signal, recorded in the summer, is always several orders of magnitude below the farm signal and is progressively less for higher order harmonic relative to the farm values. Note that the field amplitude at the remote appears to reach a constant level at frequencies above 600 Hz.

Figure 23. Total current density bar plot for Arlington site 101 for the minimum condition of the farm non-isolated and off (blue), the maximum condition of non-isolated with a 20 kW load (green), and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Mazomaine recorded in the summer (red).

At site 403 on the Heiser farm the maximum condition is non- isolated with a 20 kW load, and the minimum is isolated with no load for 60 Hz. Values for these conditions for 60 Hz and the higher order harmonics are plotted along with the average Mazomaine values recorded in the autumn in Figure 24. The maximum difference between the farm signals is slightly more than 10 µA/m2 at 60 Hz. At 180 Hz the difference is insignificant. At 180, 300, and 420 Hz, the non-isolated with load values are essentially the same. At 540 and 780 Hz values for the isolated, no load condition (the minimum at 60 Hz) are greater than for the non- isolated with load condition. This is probably not important, but it is interesting to note the variation. The average Mazomaine remote values in the cool autumn are about 1.5 orders of magnitude lower than are those recorded during the summer, which is consistent with higher demands on the power system in the heat of July 2001.


______________________________________________________________________________

36

Figure 24. Total current density bar plot for Heiser site 403 for the minimum condition of the farm isolated with no load (blue), the maximum condition of non-isolated with a 20 kW load (green), and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Mazomaine recorded in the autumn (red).

Turning to site 203 at the Newell farm in Marathon county, we find the minimum current density at 60 Hz is found when the farm is isolated with no load and the maximum values are when the farm is isolated with a load. These values along with the average values from the Smokey Hills remote are plotted along with the higher order harmonics in Figure 25. The difference between the values of the current density is quite small for all frequencies; at 60 Hz the difference is only 3-4 µA/m2. At 120, 180 and 300 Hz the isolated with no load conditions has higher values than the isolate with a LB, and the current density is the same for both conditions at 540 Hz. The Newell farm was the quietest electrically, and values of current densities were only about an order of magnitude or so greater than that of the average value of the corresponding Smokey Hills remote.

Figure 25. Total current density bar plot for the Newell farm site 203 for the minimum condition of the farm isolated with no load (blue), the maximum condition of isolated with a load (green),and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Smokey Hills (red).


______________________________________________________________________________

37

The minimum condition at 60 Hz on the Zemke farm was at the fan site, 302, when the farm was off and the maximum condition was when the farm on with a LB. Bar plots are shown for current density under these conditions along with the average value at the corresponding Smokey Hills remote in Figure 26. Values and trends are similar to that at the Newell farm, except the values for the farm on with load condition are higher. For harmonics higher than 480 Hz the current densities are larger for the farm-off condition than for the on with load, although the values are similar. Current densities at the remote are less than 1 to 2 orders of magnitude for both conditions indicating that the Zemke’s is also an electrically quiet farm.

Figure 26. Total current density bar plot for the Zemke farm site 302 for the minimum condition of the farm off (blue), the maximum condition of the farm on with a load (green), and the average value for the corresponding remote site at Smokey Hills(red).

CONCLUSIONS Earth currents and the corresponding electrical voltages at 60 Hz and its next order harmonics are anomalous relative to the remotes at all farm sites. The LB and machinery testing were inconsistent from farm to farm making comparisons not possible. Electric fields at the farms range from roughly 1 to 10 mV/m RMS at 60Hz, and the current density ranges from about 5 to 50 µA/m2. Because of the nearness of the power supply, average values at the farm are roughly 10-1000 times stronger than at the corresponding remote sites. Comparison of signal strength from the two remote sites shows that variations in the natural field and contributions from distant manmade structures can be significant. Even though man-made signals were larger than the naturally occurring currents, levels are significantly lower than what is considered sufficient earth current strength to develop step potentials anywhere near the Public Service Commission “level of concern”.

Only the E field data are being used at this point in the study and therefore we can not resolve the source of the currents here. However, we hope to pursue future studies to analyze the magnetic field measurements that will provide insight into the type of sources.


______________________________________________________________________________

38

REFERENCES Cagniard, L., 1953, Basic theory of the magneto-telluric method of geophysical exploration: Geophysics, 18, 605-635.

Campbell, W.H., 1967, Geomagnetic Pulsation: in Physics of Geomagnetic Phenomena, Eds. Matsushita and Campbell, 822-909.

Gamble, T.D., Goubau, W.M. and Clarke, J., 1979, Magnetotellurics with a remote reference: Geophysics, 44, 53-68.

Math Works, 1998, MATLAB, The Language of Technical Computing User Guide, version 5, The Math Works, Inc.

Telford, W.M., Geldart, L.P., and Sheriff, R.E., 1995. Applied Geophysics. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Tikhonov, A.N., 1950, On determining electrical characteristics of the deep layers of the earth’s crust, Dokl. Acad. Nauk, USSR, 73, 295-297.

Vozoff, K., 1991, The Magnetotelluric Method, in Electromagnetic Methods in Applied Geophysics, Volume 2, Application, Part B, Ed. Nabighian, M.N.: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Investigation in Geophysics 03, 641-712.


______________________________________________________________________________

39

APPENDIX A – ARLINGTON SURVEY

Site Parameters

Summary of Arlington site conditions and equipment description Site Description CSU ID PC ID Dates Comments 101 Transformer 9052 1277 7/23-26/01 Tests 1-7 102 Fans 9018 1685 7/23-26/01 Tests 1-7, 30 Hz LP IN 102a Fans 9018 1685 10/19/01 Tests 8-10 103 Milking Parlor 9019 1200 7/23-26/01 Tests 1-7 1R1 Mazomaine 9027 1256 7/23-26/01 Tests 1-4 only, bad disk, mowed E-

line

Electrical field sensor parameters for sites for the Arlington survey Site Dipole

length Azimuth Channel Gain Contact

resistance Comments

meters Degrees ohms 101-Ex 20 0 415 1X 460 W directed 101-Ey 20 90 416 1X 260 N directed 102-Ex 20 0 028 4X 137 S directed 102-Ey 20 90 030 4X 163 E directed 102a-Ex 20 0 031 1X 137 S directed 102a-Ey 20 90 033 1X 163 E directed 103-Ex 20 0 170 4X 172 S directed 103-Ey 20 90 179 4X 223 E directed 1R1-Ex 98 0 182 4X 2700 S directed 1R1-Ey 100 90 243 4X 2100 E directed

Magnetic field sensor parameters for sites for the Arlington survey Site Coil ID Azimuth Channel Gain Comment

degrees 101-Hx BF10-9803 0 413 1X W directed 101-Hy BF10-9910 90 554 1X N directed 101-Hz BF10-0003 Down 193 1X 102-Hx BF6-9938 0 043 1X S directed 102-Hy BF6-9616 90 045 1X E directed 102-Hz BF6-9901 Down 044 1X

102a-Hx BF6-0117 0 043 1X S directed 102a-Hy BF6-0114 90 045 1X E directed 102a-Hz BF6-0115 Down 044 1X 103-Hx BF6-9404 0 139 1X S directed 103-Hy BF6-9705 90 138 1X E directed 103-Hz BF6-9939 Down 217 1X 1R1-Hx BF10-0005 0 586 1X S directed 1R1-Hy BF10-9810 90 589 1X E directed 1R1-Hz BF6-8812 Down 582 1X


______________________________________________________________________________

40

Tables of Electric Field & Current Density Data Data for each site are tabulated as total electric field and current density at 60 Hz and the following 12 harmonics at a sampling rate of 2,000 sps for the test conditions summarized in Table 4.

Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 101 – transformer. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8

Hz mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS

60 3.4876 1.4799 1.2802 2.9100 3.2079 2.1289 3.2690 6.1820 120 0.0114 0.0071 0.0033 0.0025 0.0040 0.0067 0.0088 0.0119 180 0.1440 0.1379 0.0259 0.1493 0.0887 0.1058 0.0948 0.2265 240 0.0045 0.0023 0.0029 0.0020 0.0036 0.0040 0.0044 0.0119 300 0.2220 0.1060 0.0482 0.0920 0.0985 0.1551 0.1588 0.0927 360 0.0036 0.0034 0.0029 0.0019 0.0028 0.0034 0.0050 0.0024 420 0.1051 0.0676 0.0089 0.0467 0.0296 0.0886 0.1143 0.0427 480 0.0045 0.0033 0.0016 0.0013 0.0015 0.0034 0.0052 0.0039 540 0.0520 0.0432 0.0085 0.0229 0.0056 0.0453 0.0646 0.0202 600 0.0022 0.0015 0.0009 0.0004 0.0008 0.0013 0.0025 0.0012 660 0.0289 0.0245 0.0046 0.0032 0.0079 0.0249 0.0269 0.0031 720 0.0022 0.0019 0.0007 0.0005 0.0008 0.0020 0.0025 0.0010 780 0.0219 0.0192 0.0030 0.0070 0.0126 0.0256 0.0278 0.0083

Total current density for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 101 – transformer. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8

Hz µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2

60 69.8204 29.6268 25.6281 58.2577 64.2196 42.6188 65.4445 123.7613 120 0.2275 0.1416 0.0657 0.0500 0.0804 0.1351 0.1766 0.2386 180 2.8830 2.7602 0.5193 2.9891 1.7767 2.1189 1.8978 4.5352 240 0.0901 0.0457 0.0572 0.0400 0.0712 0.0798 0.0888 0.2374 300 4.4452 2.1217 0.9645 1.8417 1.9710 3.1060 3.1800 1.8554 360 0.0720 0.0672 0.0590 0.0382 0.0551 0.0681 0.1000 0.0481 420 2.1043 1.3543 0.1779 0.9345 0.5935 1.7734 2.2885 0.8541 480 0.0907 0.0670 0.0327 0.0259 0.0291 0.0678 0.1045 0.0788 540 1.0417 0.8640 0.1711 0.4594 0.1130 0.9073 1.2924 0.4041 600 0.0442 0.0301 0.0180 0.0079 0.0159 0.0270 0.0508 0.0237 660 0.5781 0.4901 0.0911 0.0643 0.1572 0.4994 0.5381 0.0614 720 0.0439 0.0371 0.0144 0.0099 0.0164 0.0394 0.0510 0.0195 780 0.4378 0.3843 0.0594 0.1408 0.2531 0.5123 0.5567 0.1665

Total electric field for 9-11 tests (Table 4) at site 102 – fans. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11

Hz mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS

60 2.6649 2.6426 2.8706 120 0.0090 0.0175 0.0156 180 0.0908 0.1931 0.0473 240 0.0017 0.0033 0.0034


______________________________________________________________________________

41

300 0.1211 0.1432 0.0481 360 0.0044 0.0062 0.0034 420 0.0200 0.0762 0.0225 480 0.0016 0.0039 0.0017 540 0.0243 0.0457 0.0192 600 0.0002 0.0005 0.0006 660 0.0060 0.0150 0.0097 720 0.0004 0.0011 0.0008 780 0.0034 0.0096 0.0051

Total current density for 9-11 tests (Table 4) at site 102 – fans. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11

Hz µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2

60 53.3498 52.9037 57.4670 120 0.1804 0.3499 0.3120 180 1.8177 3.8660 0.9474 240 0.0345 0.0652 0.0688 300 2.4248 2.8673 0.9630 360 0.0877 0.1243 0.0686 420 0.3999 1.5246 0.4495 480 0.0313 0.0771 0.0337 540 0.4868 0.9143 0.3849 600 0.0031 0.0110 0.0118 660 0.1210 0.3003 0.1949 720 0.0086 0.0211 0.0152 780 0.0672 0.1923 0.1022

Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 103 – milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 24.5822 9.1120 10.2969 10.7695 10.3552 11.1968 17.2330 16.4635 120 0.1439 0.7293 1.0536 0.8125 1.7170 2.3517 2.5149 1.7751 180 2.5792 0.9667 0.9877 1.1023 0.9999 1.2618 2.1577 3.2348 240 0.0480 0.1397 0.1807 0.0888 0.0767 0.4490 0.6918 0.7360 300 0.3866 0.2722 0.3753 0.3655 0.3719 0.3515 0.3494 0.4341 360 0.0276 0.0927 0.0774 0.0834 0.0671 0.0855 0.1180 0.0640 420 0.1549 0.0942 0.0930 0.1355 0.1114 0.1277 0.1814 0.0914 480 0.0116 0.0481 0.0316 0.0451 0.0640 0.0683 0.1796 0.2081 540 0.0811 0.0540 0.0451 0.0745 0.0388 0.0424 0.0988 0.0290 600 0.0108 0.0263 0.0281 0.0381 0.0241 0.0548 0.0516 0.0880 660 0.0370 0.0219 0.0252 0.0453 0.0283 0.0175 0.0398 0.0265 720 0.0061 0.0094 0.0104 0.0099 0.0140 0.0333 0.0383 0.0203 780 0.0298 0.0120 0.0165 0.0202 0.0210 0.0280 0.0453 0.0568

Total current density for 8 tests (Table 4) at site 103 – milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 492.1231 182.4185 206.1395 215.6007 207.3067 224.1550 344.9956 329.5914


______________________________________________________________________________

42

120 2.8815 14.6010 21.0935 16.2662 34.3742 47.0791 50.3475 35.5370 180 51.6339 19.3530 19.7738 22.0676 20.0167 25.2616 43.1966 64.7597 240 0.9611 2.7964 3.6168 1.7786 1.5351 8.9886 13.8504 14.7339 300 7.7389 5.4488 7.5142 7.3161 7.4449 7.0369 6.9941 8.6913 360 0.5531 1.8562 1.5497 1.6693 1.3441 1.7118 2.3613 1.2821 420 3.1012 1.8863 1.8609 2.7126 2.2305 2.5573 3.6320 1.8289 480 0.2327 0.9638 0.6320 0.9026 1.2811 1.3679 3.5953 4.1659 540 1.6230 1.0820 0.9021 1.4918 0.7771 0.8483 1.9773 0.5800 600 0.2168 0.5266 0.5620 0.7629 0.4832 1.0971 1.0328 1.7622 660 0.7398 0.4389 0.5054 0.9072 0.5669 0.3513 0.7962 0.5309 720 0.1216 0.1889 0.2077 0.1984 0.2800 0.6659 0.7677 0.4068 780 0.5965 0.2406 0.3294 0.4052 0.4201 0.5612 0.9067 1.1368

Total Electrical field and current density for Mazomaine remote – 1R1. Freq Etotal Currenttotal

Hz mV/m RMS microA/m2 60 0.0976756 0.0914565

120 0.0001127 0.0001055 180 0.0012024 0.0011258 240 0.0000367 0.0000343 300 0.0003399 0.0003182 360 0.0000288 0.0000270 420 0.0000696 0.0000651 480 0.0000210 0.0000196 540 0.0000981 0.0000918 600 0.0000146 0.0000137 660 0.0000155 0.0000145 720 0.0000130 0.0000121 780 0.0000124 0.0000115


______________________________________________________________________________

43

APPENDIX B – HEISER SURVEY

Site Parameters

Summary of Heiser site conditions and equipment description Site Description CSU ID PC ID Dates Comments 401 Transformer &

milking parlor 9052 9018

1277 10/13-15/01 Smoked CSU* – used 402 equipment*

402 Lagoon 9018 Lost site* 403 Barn 9019 1200 10/13-15/01 Equipotential plane 1R4 Mazomaine 9904 1687 10/13-14/01 No farm tests

* used CSU & E FAM from 402 for 401

Electrical field sensor parameters for the Heiser survey Site Dipole length Azimuth Channel Gain Contact

resistance Comments

meters Degrees ohms 401-Ex 20 351 028 1X 176 S directed 401-Ey 20 261 030 1X 200 E directed 403-Ex 20 351 170 1X 1300 N directed 403-Ey 20 261 179 1X 212 E directed 1R4-Ex 98 0 193 4X 1850 S directed 1R4-Ey 100 90 231 4X 1430 E directed

Magnetic field sensor parameters for sites for the Heiser survey Site Coil ID Azimuth Channel Gain Comment

Degrees 401-Hx BF6-0117 351 043 1X S directed 401-Hy BF6-0114 261 045 1X E directed 401-Hz BF6-0115 Down 044 1X 403-Hx BF6-0110 351 139 1X E directed 403-Hy BF6-0112 261 138 1X N directed 403-Hz BF6-0113 Down 217 1X 1R4-Hx BF10-9810 0 256 1X S directed 1R4-Hy BF10-9510 90 257 1X E directed 1R4-Hz BF6-0116 Down 258 1X


______________________________________________________________________________

44


Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 401 – transformer & milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 0.1053 0.3631 1.2992 0.7409 0.3980 1.1183 2.3967 2.4309 120 0.1321 0.0012 0.0005 0.0004 0.0006 0.0042 0.0036 0.0038 180 0.0024 0.0049 0.0112 0.0089 0.0148 0.0176 0.0573 0.0907 240 0.0011 0.0004 0.0004 0.0006 0.0005 0.0010 0.0012 0.0013 300 0.0105 0.0118 0.0052 0.0169 0.0156 0.0213 0.0449 0.0507 360 0.0071 0.0003 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0007 0.0011 0.0004 420 0.0007 0.0085 0.0131 0.0105 0.0090 0.0299 0.0621 0.0447 480 0.0005 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0003 0.0007 0.0003 540 0.0040 0.0030 0.0061 0.0052 0.0043 0.0098 0.0202 0.0140 600 0.0082 0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0003 0.0004 0.0003 660 0.0005 0.0016 0.0027 0.0016 0.0015 0.0036 0.0072 0.0055 720 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 780 0.0009 0.0011 0.0013 0.0010 0.0013 0.0007 0.0016 0.0016

Total current density for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 401 – transformer & milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 8.0992 27.9319 99.9382 56.9915 30.6167 86.0207 184.3587 186.9903 120 10.1625 0.0890 0.0369 0.0282 0.0450 0.3216 0.2737 0.2902 180 0.1871 0.3792 0.8612 0.6872 1.1376 1.3537 4.4061 6.9736 240 0.0876 0.0293 0.0319 0.0472 0.0422 0.0798 0.0896 0.1028 300 0.8103 0.9072 0.3994 1.3007 1.2033 1.6367 3.4559 3.8994 360 0.5479 0.0223 0.0078 0.0135 0.0182 0.0502 0.0870 0.0315 420 0.0550 0.6565 1.0057 0.8084 0.6935 2.3026 4.7761 3.4373 480 0.0365 0.0117 0.0176 0.0132 0.0174 0.0234 0.0507 0.0226 540 0.3097 0.2297 0.4723 0.3973 0.3295 0.7540 1.5513 1.0807 600 0.6337 0.0076 0.0162 0.0090 0.0110 0.0204 0.0293 0.0233 660 0.0402 0.1255 0.2053 0.1214 0.1124 0.2769 0.5526 0.4222 720 0.0140 0.0041 0.0051 0.0053 0.0118 0.0103 0.0095 0.0070 780 0.0694 0.0882 0.0992 0.0765 0.0971 0.0556 0.1237 0.1201

Total electric field for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 403 – freestall barn with equipotential plane. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 0.1573 0.2300 2.1569 1.2321 0.7151 1.5585 3.6951 3.8224 120 0.0002 0.0007 0.0008 0.0003 0.0009 0.0056 0.0061 0.0060


______________________________________________________________________________

45

180 0.0186 0.0121 0.0273 0.0094 0.0231 0.0383 0.1033 0.1597 240 0.0004 0.0004 0.0007 0.0010 0.0011 0.0022 0.0045 0.0042 300 0.0054 0.0014 0.0254 0.0061 0.0060 0.0335 0.0666 0.0805 360 0.0003 0.0002 0.0005 0.0008 0.0009 0.0013 0.0014 0.0006 420 0.0043 0.0028 0.0178 0.0161 0.0135 0.0375 0.0774 0.0560 480 0.0003 0.0001 0.0001 0.0004 0.0004 0.0006 0.0009 0.0009 540 0.0074 0.0021 0.0053 0.0053 0.0029 0.0101 0.0242 0.0163 600 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0004 0.0003 0.0004 0.0009 0.0007 660 0.0006 0.0011 0.0022 0.0034 0.0033 0.0040 0.0084 0.0074 720 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0003 0.0009 0.0005 780 0.0027 0.0015 0.0019 0.0030 0.0053 0.0032 0.0012 0.0014

Total current density for 8 tests (Table 5) at site 403 – transformer & milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 12.0967 17.6923 165.9134 94.7783 55.0049 119.8841 284.2360 294.0294 120 0.0168 0.0524 0.0652 0.0256 0.0729 0.4295 0.4686 0.4603 180 1.4321 0.9332 2.1002 0.7239 1.7758 2.9480 7.9479 12.2811 240 0.0334 0.0320 0.0516 0.0777 0.0813 0.1674 0.3428 0.3247 300 0.4152 0.1046 1.9533 0.4710 0.4590 2.5787 5.1247 6.1934 360 0.0216 0.0127 0.0372 0.0648 0.0668 0.0986 0.1094 0.0494 420 0.3281 0.2152 1.3683 1.2403 1.0409 2.8821 5.9511 4.3055 480 0.0226 0.0107 0.0105 0.0281 0.0306 0.0428 0.0725 0.0677 540 0.5713 0.1628 0.4075 0.4060 0.2235 0.7788 1.8651 1.2553 600 0.0150 0.0107 0.0080 0.0336 0.0248 0.0288 0.0668 0.0520 660 0.0453 0.0822 0.1718 0.2602 0.2530 0.3100 0.6436 0.5704 720 0.0121 0.0054 0.0076 0.0069 0.0096 0.0226 0.0668 0.0400 780 0.2058 0.1157 0.1436 0.2281 0.4041 0.2443 0.0944 0.1075

Total Electrical field and current density for remote – 1R2. Freq Etotal Currenttotal

Hz µV/m RMS nanoA/m2 60 0.0123629 0.0115758

120 0.0000399 0.0000373 180 0.0002772 0.0002595 240 0.0000125 0.0000117 300 0.0000928 0.0000869 360 0.0000075 0.0000071 420 0.0000336 0.0000315 480 0.0000028 0.0000026 540 0.0000291 0.0000273 600 0.0000011 0.0000011 660 0.0000028 0.0000026 720 0.0000006 0.0000006 780 0.0000020 0.0000018


______________________________________________________________________________

46

APPENDIX C – NEWELL SURVEY

Site Parameters

Summary of Newell site conditions and equipment description Site Description CSU ID PC ID Dates Comments 201 Transformer 9052 1277 7/31-8/3/01 Bad CSU – lost LB for tests

1-8* 202 Milking parlor 9018 1685 7/31-8/3/01 203 Manure pump 9019 1200 7/31-8/3/01 204 Step out 9019 1200 8/3/01 3-phase line

0.1 mi North 2R2 Smokey Hills 9707 1256 7/31-8/3/01 CSU & PC used for 201 – lost

tests 9-15* * used remote CSU & PC for 201 until replacement arrived

Electrical field sensor parameters for sites for the Newell survey Site Dipole length Azimuth Channel Gain Contact

resistance Comments

Meters Degrees ohms 201-Ex 20 0 415 1X 254 S directed 201-Ey 20 90 416 1X 300 W directed 202-Ex 20 0 028 1X 363 S directed 202-Ey 20 90 030 1X 178 W directed 203-Ex 20 0 170 1X 190 N directed 203-Ey 20 90 179 1X 175 E directed 204-Ex 20 0 170 1X 630 S directed 204-Ey 20 90 179 1X 790 W directed 2R2-Ex 99 0 182 4X 1700 N directed 2R2-Ey 96 90 243 4X 1300 E directed

Magnetic field sensor parameters for sites for the Newell survey Site Coil ID Azimuth Channel Gain Comment

Degrees 201-Hx BF10-9803 0 592 1X S directed 201-Hy BF10-9910 90 593 1X W directed 201-Hz BF10-0003 Down 193 1X 202-Hx BF6-9938 0 043 1X S directed 202-Hy BF6-9616 90 045 1X W directed

Intermittent 202-Hz BF6-9901 Down 044 1X 203-Hx BF6-9404 0 139 1X N directed 203-Hy BF6-9705 90 138 1X E directed 203-Hz BF6-9939 Down 217 1X 204-Hx BF6-9404 0 139 1X S directed 204-Hy BF6-9705 90 138 1X W directed 204-Hz BF6-9939 Down 217 1X


______________________________________________________________________________

47

2R2-Hx BF10-10005 0 586 1X N directed 2R2-Hy BF10-8812 90 587 1X E directed 2R2-Hz BF10-9810 Down 582 1X


Total electric field for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 201 – transformer. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11 Test 12 Test 13 Test 14 Test 15

Hz mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS MV/m RMS mV/m RMS

60 0.2628 1.2972 1.1086 1.9235 1.2642 1.8429 2.1414 120 0.0014 0.0092 0.0010 0.0013 0.0112 0.0067 0.0017 180 0.0260 0.0406 0.0229 0.0390 0.0451 0.0433 0.1045 240 0.0007 0.0042 0.0010 0.0013 0.0042 0.0036 0.0016 300 0.0199 0.0230 0.0123 0.0121 0.0303 0.0291 0.0581 360 0.0005 0.0016 0.0004 0.0003 0.0026 0.0014 0.0005 420 0.0131 0.0213 0.0055 0.0113 0.0137 0.0129 0.0156 480 0.0007 0.0008 0.0004 0.0007 0.0007 0.0014 0.0009 540 0.0118 0.0143 0.0070 0.0067 0.0117 0.0113 0.0132 600 0.0004 0.0008 0.0001 0.0002 0.0009 0.0004 0.0005 660 0.0111 0.0091 0.0033 0.0024 0.0071 0.0075 0.0059 720 0.0004 0.0005 0.0001 0.0002 0.0005 0.0006 0.0003 780 0.0068 0.0067 0.0016 0.0017 0.0053 0.0070 0.0034

Total current density for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 201 – transformer. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11 Test 12 Test 13 Test 14 Test 15

Hz µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2 µA/m2

60 5.1539 25.4351 21.7380 37.7157 24.7890 36.1360 41.9885 120 0.0273 0.1811 0.0196 0.0252 0.2194 0.1316 0.0325 180 0.5095 0.7968 0.4486 0.7656 0.8853 0.8498 2.0491 240 0.0137 0.0828 0.0206 0.0256 0.0821 0.0700 0.0319 300 0.3909 0.4514 0.2410 0.2366 0.5937 0.5703 1.1389 360 0.0098 0.0320 0.0076 0.0059 0.0515 0.0265 0.0106 420 0.2571 0.4172 0.1069 0.2213 0.2684 0.2537 0.3062 480 0.0139 0.0152 0.0082 0.0133 0.0144 0.0273 0.0176 540 0.2308 0.2795 0.1374 0.1320 0.2291 0.2223 0.2595 600 0.0087 0.0165 0.0028 0.0036 0.0180 0.0085 0.0107 660 0.2176 0.1793 0.0639 0.0476 0.1397 0.1474 0.1160 720 0.0076 0.0093 0.0028 0.0031 0.0095 0.0113 0.0057 780 0.1331 0.1318 0.0317 0.0325 0.1038 0.1367 0.0663


______________________________________________________________________________

48

Total electric field for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 0.1326 0.0825 0.8221 0.6008 0.5634 0.4669 0.9580 0.8109 120 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0007 0.0085 0.0028 0.0014 0.0069 180 0.0218 0.0124 0.0231 0.0252 0.0880 0.0755 0.0750 0.0706 240 0.0006 0.0004 0.0007 0.0007 0.0046 0.0009 0.0008 0.0038 300 0.0038 0.0036 0.0099 0.0076 0.0255 0.0290 0.0242 0.0248 360 0.0003 0.0002 0.0004 0.0003 0.0038 0.0005 0.0006 0.0030 420 0.0039 0.0019 0.0030 0.0034 0.0098 0.0120 0.0084 0.0080 480 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0023 0.0004 0.0004 0.0020 540 0.0065 0.0047 0.0055 0.0052 0.0057 0.0038 0.0038 0.0037 600 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 0.0012 0.0004 0.0004 0.0011 660 0.0011 0.0009 0.0017 0.0023 0.0040 0.0042 0.0040 0.0047 720 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0005 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 780 0.0018 0.0015 0.0019 0.0020 0.0038 0.0044 0.0038 0.0041

Total electric field for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11 Test 12 Test 13 Test 14 Test 15

Hz mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS MV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS

60 0.8538 0.4854 0.7285 0.6289 0.5891 0.3060 0.7303 120 0.0084 0.0013 0.0045 0.0010 0.0008 0.0052 0.0026 180 0.0842 0.0292 0.0483 0.0303 0.0249 0.0402 0.0518 240 0.0055 0.0005 0.0018 0.0004 0.0006 0.0017 0.0012 300 0.0334 0.0114 0.0161 0.0083 0.0085 0.0088 0.0130 360 0.0042 0.0004 0.0008 0.0003 0.0003 0.0011 0.0008 420 0.0101 0.0126 0.0188 0.0073 0.0053 0.0123 0.0188 480 0.0023 0.0004 0.0005 0.0003 0.0003 0.0004 0.0004 540 0.0049 0.0052 0.0071 0.0043 0.0037 0.0062 0.0072 600 0.0011 0.0004 0.0005 0.0002 0.0002 0.0005 0.0002 660 0.0042 0.0049 0.0042 0.0025 0.0024 0.0047 0.0048 720 0.0005 0.0003 0.0003 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 780 0.0038 0.0028 0.0032 0.0008 0.0010 0.0023 0.0035

Total current density for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 2.6007 1.6185 16.1190 1.7813 11.0480 9.1549 18.7841 15.9000 120 0.0065 0.0061 0.0068 0.0132 0.1666 0.0542 0.0279 0.1350 180 0.4271 0.2431 0.4537 0.4941 1.7260 1.4811 1.4710 1.3845 240 0.0109 0.0083 0.0142 0.0134 0.0912 0.0168 0.0159 0.0752 300 0.0747 0.0713 0.1949 0.1497 0.4992 0.5686 0.4742 0.4855 360 0.0062 0.0046 0.0076 0.0063 0.0742 0.0106 0.0110 0.0586 420 0.0764 0.0377 0.0594 0.0674 0.1929 0.2362 0.1640 0.1564 480 0.0054 0.0040 0.0047 0.0046 0.0460 0.0087 0.0083 0.0388 540 0.1282 0.0916 0.1082 0.1029 0.1109 0.0746 0.0743 0.0735 600 0.0059 0.0044 0.0057 0.0071 0.0226 0.0085 0.0086 0.0216


______________________________________________________________________________

49

660 0.0210 0.0182 0.0334 0.0454 0.0788 0.0824 0.0790 0.0924 720 0.0041 0.0031 0.0044 0.0043 0.0089 0.0073 0.0076 0.0087 780 0.0360 0.0300 0.0377 0.0383 0.0745 0.0865 0.0748 0.0808

Total current density for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 202 – milking parlor. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11 Test 12 Test 13 Test 14 Test 15


60 16.7421 9.5176 14.2837 12.3310 11.5508 6.0005 14.3186 120 0.1650 0.0264 0.0874 0.0204 0.0166 0.1011 0.0518 180 1.6517 0.5725 0.9468 0.5947 0.4875 0.7874 1.0148 240 0.1076 0.0101 0.0351 0.0088 0.0114 0.0324 0.0241 300 0.6546 0.2226 0.3150 0.1626 0.1660 0.1732 0.2551 360 0.0814 0.0078 0.0164 0.0052 0.0062 0.0224 0.0148 420 0.1990 0.2475 0.3694 0.1438 0.1036 0.2412 0.3685 480 0.0450 0.0087 0.0096 0.0050 0.0068 0.0072 0.0088 540 0.0964 0.1023 0.1386 0.0847 0.0733 0.1216 0.1404 600 0.0208 0.0071 0.0092 0.0030 0.0030 0.0107 0.0042 660 0.0827 0.0955 0.0827 0.0496 0.0475 0.0915 0.0937 720 0.0094 0.0051 0.0056 0.0022 0.0023 0.0048 0.0052 780 0.0749 0.0543 0.0625 0.0166 0.0201 0.0458 0.0684

Total electric field for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 0.4017 0.2950 1.0335 0.7565 0.6681 0.5838 1.0033 1.0860 120 0.0006 0.0006 0.0010 0.0011 0.0019 0.0003 0.0012 0.0018 180 0.0314 0.0189 0.0365 0.0394 0.0216 0.0208 0.0189 0.0239 240 0.0004 0.0003 0.0005 0.0006 0.0017 0.0006 0.0010 0.0016 300 0.0092 0.0068 0.0109 0.0088 0.0055 0.0048 0.0045 0.0072 360 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0004 0.0008 0.0005 0.0006 0.0008 420 0.0037 0.0021 0.0037 0.0042 0.0068 0.0058 0.0042 0.0054 480 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003 0.0003 0.0005 0.0002 0.0004 0.0004 540 0.0081 0.0057 0.0081 0.0081 0.0091 0.0079 0.0079 0.0112 600 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003 0.0005 0.0004 0.0002 0.0002 0.0003 660 0.0008 0.0007 0.0012 0.0018 0.0019 0.0020 0.0025 0.0017 720 0.0002 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 780 0.0016 0.0014 0.0012 0.0010 0.0017 0.0021 0.0021 0.0022

Total electric field for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11 Test 12 Test 13 Test 14 Test 15

Hz mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS

60 0.6028 0.8175 0.7194 0.8377 0.6206 1.2895 1.4836 120 0.0004 0.0006 0.0003 0.0007 0.0009 0.0009 0.0005 180 0.0257 0.0337 0.0240 0.0236 0.0287 0.0273 0.0391 240 0.0004 0.0007 0.0004 0.0005 0.0005 0.0008 0.0006 300 0.0160 0.0233 0.0134 0.0141 0.0216 0.0201 0.0135 360 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0006 0.0004 420 0.0032 0.0047 0.0021 0.0017 0.0024 0.0044 0.0057


______________________________________________________________________________

50

480 0.0004 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0004 0.0004 540 0.0085 0.0102 0.0074 0.0069 0.0081 0.0087 0.0103 600 0.0003 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004 660 0.0022 0.0024 0.0013 0.0015 0.0026 0.0025 0.0028 720 0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 780 0.0018 0.0018 0.0011 0.0009 0.0018 0.0025 0.0020

Total current density for test 1-8 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8


60 7.8764 5.7836 20.2656 14.8332 13.0996 11.4468 19.6726 21.2934 120 0.0109 0.0122 0.0197 0.0218 0.0371 0.0057 0.0243 0.0346 180 0.6154 0.3696 0.7151 0.7718 0.4245 0.4082 0.3712 0.4690 240 0.0087 0.0067 0.0107 0.0110 0.0341 0.0119 0.0201 0.0314 300 0.1812 0.1341 0.2130 0.1734 0.1071 0.0941 0.0886 0.1407 360 0.0070 0.0053 0.0067 0.0079 0.0163 0.0098 0.0113 0.0157 420 0.0730 0.0418 0.0719 0.0824 0.1334 0.1144 0.0827 0.1054 480 0.0053 0.0037 0.0052 0.0054 0.0096 0.0037 0.0070 0.0085 540 0.1585 0.1124 0.1585 0.1582 0.1785 0.1547 0.1556 0.2190 600 0.0062 0.0043 0.0062 0.0091 0.0071 0.0041 0.0046 0.0066 660 0.0162 0.0131 0.0237 0.0360 0.0381 0.0396 0.0494 0.0334 720 0.0034 0.0029 0.0039 0.0038 0.0034 0.0027 0.0031 0.0035 780 0.0310 0.0266 0.0232 0.0203 0.0335 0.0419 0.0405 0.0429

Total current density for test 9-15 conditions (Table 6) at site 203 – manure pump. Freq Test 9 Test 10 Test 11 Test 12 Test 13 Test 14 Test 15


60 11.8197 16.0294 14.1058 16.4263 12.1678 25.2852 29.0910 120 0.0070 0.0122 0.0056 0.0129 0.0176 0.0168 0.0095 180 0.5040 0.6616 0.4698 0.4631 0.5620 0.5349 0.7665 240 0.0086 0.0136 0.0073 0.0102 0.0093 0.0159 0.0123 300 0.3142 0.4573 0.2623 0.2758 0.4228 0.3948 0.2639 360 0.0072 0.0078 0.0070 0.0054 0.0061 0.0108 0.0080 420 0.0624 0.0913 0.0412 0.0326 0.0475 0.0871 0.1120 480 0.0073 0.0082 0.0050 0.0058 0.0056 0.0084 0.0075 540 0.1676 0.2009 0.1446 0.1357 0.1583 0.1712 0.2016 600 0.0056 0.0061 0.0035 0.0039 0.0046 0.0059 0.0082 660 0.0428 0.0469 0.0257 0.0302 0.0517 0.0487 0.0552 720 0.0029 0.0031 0.0017 0.0020 0.0025 0.0030 0.0030 780 0.0350 0.0353 0.0209 0.0174 0.0350 0.0500 0.0384


______________________________________________________________________________

51

Total Electrical field and current density for 2,000 sps data for site 204 and remote 2R1. Newell site 204 Average Remote 2R1

Freq Etotal Currenttotal Freq Etotal Currenttotal Hz mV/m RMS µA/m2 Hz mV/m RMS µA/m2

60 0.8311 16.2970 60 0.5007 2.2706 120 0.0007 0.0146 120 0.0005 0.0022 180 0.0749 1.4684 180 0.0199 0.0900 240 0.0008 0.0161 240 0.0002 0.0009 300 0.0110 0.2149 300 0.0022 0.0100 360 0.0004 0.0083 360 0.0002 0.0008 420 0.0026 0.0506 420 0.0021 0.0097 480 0.0006 0.0118 480 0.0001 0.0005 540 0.0063 0.1228 540 0.0009 0.0041 600 0.0001 0.0021 600 0.0001 0.0002 660 0.0041 0.0803 660 0.0001 0.0006 720 0.0001 0.0028 720 0.0000 0.0001 780 0.0029 0.0570 780 0.0002 0.0010


______________________________________________________________________________

52

APPENDIX D – ZEMKE SURVEY

Site Parameters

Summary of Zemke site conditions and equipment description Site Description CSU ID PC ID Dates Comments

301 Transformer 9028 1256 8/6-9/01 302 Fans 9018 1685 8/6-9/01 303 Milking parlor 9019 1200 8/6-9/01 304 Step-out 9018 1685 8/6-9/01 0.1 mi NW 305 Step-out 9019 1200 8/6-9/01 0.1 mi west – no E 2,000 sps data 2R3 Smokey Hills 9707 1256 8/6-9/01 rocky soil, Hz half buried & covered

with trash can

Electrical field sensor parameters for the Zemke survey Site Dipole

length Azimuth Channel Gain Contact

resistance Comments

meters degrees ohms 301-Ex 20 0 532 1X 955 N directed 301-Ey 20 90 533 1X E directed 302-Ex 20 0 028 1X 930 N directed 302-Ey 20 90 030 1X 575 E directed 303-Ex 20 0 170 1X 345 N directed 303-Ey 20 90 179 1X 603 W directed 304-Ex 20 0 028 1X 1170 S directed 304-Ey 20 90 030 1X 1100 E directed 305-Ex 20 0 170 1X 619 N directed 305-Ey 20 90 179 1X 510 E directed 2R3-Ex 98 0 182 4X 1700 N directed 2R3-Ey 100 90 243 4X 1300 E directed

Magnetic field sensor parameters for the Zemke survey Site Coil ID Azimuth Channel Gain Comment degrees 301-Hx BF10-9803 0 144 1X N directed 301-Hy BF10-9910 90 183 1X E directed 301-Hz BF10-0003 Down 527 1X 302-Hx BF6-9938 0 043 1X N directed 302-Hy BF6-9616 90 045 1X E directed 302-Hz BF6-9901 Down 044 1X 303-Hx BF6-9404 0 139 1X N directed 303-Hy BF6-9705 90 138 1X W directed 303-Hz BF6-9939 Down 217 1X 304-Hx BF6-9404 0 139 1X S directed 304-Hy BF6-9705 90 138 1X E directed 304-Hz BF6-9939 Down 217 1X 305-Hx BF6-9404 0 139 1X N directed


______________________________________________________________________________

53

305-Hy BF6-9705 90 138 1X E directed 305-Hz BF6-9939 Down 217 1X 2R3-Hx BF10-10005 0 586 1X N directed 2R3-Hy BF10-8812 90 587 1X E directed

Low signal strength 2R3-Hz BF10-9810 Down 582 1X


Total electric field for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 301 – transformer. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7

Hz mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS mV/m RMS

60 1.2471 1.7396 1.5893 0.9857 1.2837 1.4402 3.5324 120 0.0089 0.0145 0.0129 0.0089 0.0053 0.0058 0.0231 180 0.0459 0.0783 0.0610 0.0321 0.0495 0.0252 0.0868 240 0.0055 0.0122 0.0077 0.0050 0.0029 0.0021 0.0068 300 0.0849 0.1743 0.0977 0.0655 0.0903 0.0843 0.0812 360 0.0033 0.0079 0.0044 0.0039 0.0023 0.0023 0.0030 420 0.0373 0.0421 0.0216 0.0161 0.0205 0.0205 0.0382 480 0.0023 0.0055 0.0026 0.0023 0.0021 0.0021 0.0021 540 0.0185 0.0323 0.0212 0.0163 0.0160 0.0284 0.0215 600 0.0018 0.0046 0.0024 0.0018 0.0017 0.0020 0.0012 660 0.0101 0.0191 0.0129 0.0092 0.0101 0.0261 0.0187 720 0.0012 0.0030 0.0014 0.0011 0.0012 0.0026 0.0010 780 0.0125 0.0171 0.0114 0.0079 0.0112 0.0267 0.0128

Total current density for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 301 – transformer. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7


60 5.2509 7.3244 6.6915 4.1502 5.4050 6.0639 14.8730 120 0.0375 0.0610 0.0545 0.0373 0.0223 0.0244 0.0971 180 0.1933 0.3299 0.2570 0.1351 0.2082 0.1060 0.3656 240 0.0230 0.0514 0.0324 0.0212 0.0123 0.0089 0.0287 300 0.3576 0.7339 0.4112 0.2757 0.3804 0.3550 0.3417 360 0.0138 0.0333 0.0187 0.0164 0.0097 0.0095 0.0128 420 0.1569 0.1771 0.0910 0.0677 0.0862 0.0862 0.1610 480 0.0098 0.0234 0.0108 0.0096 0.0089 0.0088 0.0086 540 0.0778 0.1362 0.0893 0.0688 0.0675 0.1198 0.0907 600 0.0078 0.0193 0.0103 0.0075 0.0073 0.0083 0.0050 660 0.0426 0.0806 0.0543 0.0389 0.0427 0.1101 0.0788 720 0.0051 0.0124 0.0058 0.0048 0.0052 0.0111 0.0042 780 0.0525 0.0721 0.0482 0.0333 0.0473 0.1122 0.0537


______________________________________________________________________________

54

Total electric field for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 302 – fans. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7


60 1.6522 2.6939 2.1019 1.5835 1.9688 2.8689 3.2115 120 0.0209 0.0228 0.0162 0.0043 0.0807 0.0070 0.1702 180 0.0535 0.1167 0.0887 0.0654 0.0771 0.0613 0.0726 240 0.0051 0.0076 0.0050 0.0021 0.0087 0.0047 0.0401 300 0.0870 0.1805 0.0941 0.0681 0.1233 0.0839 0.1040 360 0.0037 0.0056 0.0030 0.0015 0.0107 0.0036 0.0175 420 0.0291 0.0341 0.0146 0.0130 0.0145 0.0272 0.0294 480 0.0018 0.0040 0.0018 0.0015 0.0022 0.0032 0.0060 540 0.0104 0.0185 0.0099 0.0071 0.0103 0.0150 0.0113 600 0.0018 0.0034 0.0019 0.0015 0.0016 0.0035 0.0024 660 0.0089 0.0131 0.0110 0.0075 0.0141 0.0405 0.0104 720 0.0014 0.0033 0.0016 0.0011 0.0021 0.0043 0.0026 780 0.0043 0.0065 0.0038 0.0024 0.0054 0.0208 0.0059

Total current density for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 302 – fans. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7


60 6.9566 11.3424 8.8499 6.6673 8.2895 12.0793 13.5218 120 0.0880 0.0960 0.0680 0.0179 0.3400 0.0295 0.7165 180 0.2251 0.4915 0.3734 0.2755 0.3248 0.2581 0.3059 240 0.0215 0.0322 0.0209 0.0087 0.0364 0.0198 0.1690 300 0.3664 0.7600 0.3960 0.2866 0.5192 0.3533 0.4379 360 0.0155 0.0237 0.0126 0.0062 0.0452 0.0153 0.0737 420 0.1227 0.1434 0.0614 0.0547 0.0610 0.1145 0.1238 480 0.0076 0.0169 0.0074 0.0063 0.0095 0.0134 0.0253 540 0.0439 0.0778 0.0417 0.0298 0.0433 0.0633 0.0477 600 0.0075 0.0142 0.0079 0.0062 0.0069 0.0147 0.0102 660 0.0374 0.0550 0.0462 0.0314 0.0596 0.1704 0.0439 720 0.0059 0.0138 0.0065 0.0047 0.0087 0.0182 0.0110 780 0.0182 0.0275 0.0160 0.0100 0.0228 0.0874 0.0250

Total electric field for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 303 – milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7


60 0.5205 0.7104 0.6103 0.3674 0.7020 0.8774 2.0725 120 0.0030 0.0062 0.0039 0.0029 0.0072 0.0062 0.0082 180 0.0284 0.0497 0.0365 0.0229 0.0446 0.0443 0.0710 240 0.0013 0.0030 0.0019 0.0011 0.0020 0.0019 0.0017 300 0.0488 0.1006 0.0507 0.0351 0.0552 0.0600 0.0536 360 0.0007 0.0016 0.0009 0.0009 0.0010 0.0008 0.0009 420 0.0156 0.0203 0.0091 0.0068 0.0081 0.0138 0.0242 480 0.0006 0.0016 0.0007 0.0006 0.0007 0.0013 0.0008 540 0.0129 0.0231 0.0129 0.0104 0.0104 0.0172 0.0118 600 0.0006 0.0013 0.0007 0.0005 0.0007 0.0011 0.0005 660 0.0078 0.0130 0.0080 0.0061 0.0081 0.0240 0.0114


______________________________________________________________________________

55

720 0.0004 0.0011 0.0005 0.0004 0.0005 0.0008 0.0004 780 0.0080 0.0136 0.0083 0.0054 0.0095 0.0244 0.0084

Total current density for 7 test conditions (Table 7) at site 303 – milking parlor. Freq Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7


60 2.1915 2.9911 2.5696 1.5471 2.9556 3.6941 8.7261 120 0.0125 0.0260 0.0164 0.0124 0.0302 0.0262 0.0347 180 0.1196 0.2093 0.1537 0.0965 0.1876 0.1865 0.2990 240 0.0055 0.0127 0.0078 0.0046 0.0086 0.0082 0.0070 300 0.2055 0.4234 0.2136 0.1480 0.2324 0.2527 0.2256 360 0.0029 0.0066 0.0039 0.0037 0.0043 0.0036 0.0039 420 0.0657 0.0853 0.0385 0.0286 0.0341 0.0580 0.1018 480 0.0024 0.0069 0.0031 0.0025 0.0030 0.0054 0.0035 540 0.0544 0.0972 0.0543 0.0439 0.0436 0.0725 0.0497 600 0.0023 0.0055 0.0029 0.0021 0.0029 0.0047 0.0023 660 0.0327 0.0548 0.0337 0.0255 0.0341 0.1010 0.0479 720 0.0019 0.0044 0.0021 0.0018 0.0021 0.0033 0.0019 780 0.0338 0.0572 0.0348 0.0226 0.0399 0.1027 0.0354

Total Electrical field and current density for 2,000 sps data for site 304 and remote 2R2. Zemke site 304 Average Remote 2R2

Freq Etotal Currenttotal Freq Etotal Currenttotal Hz mV/m RMS µA/m2 Hz mV/m RMS µA/m2 60 0.6283 2.6454 60 0.5324 2.4142

120 0.0062 0.0260 120 0.0006 0.0026 180 0.0351 0.1480 180 0.0190 0.0862 240 0.0023 0.0097 240 0.0002 0.0011 300 0.0382 0.1608 300 0.0022 0.0099 360 0.0015 0.0063 360 0.0002 0.0007 420 0.0055 0.0231 420 0.0028 0.0127 480 0.0014 0.0058 480 0.0001 0.0005 540 0.0112 0.0474 540 0.0010 0.0047 600 0.0010 0.0041 600 0.0001 0.0004 660 0.0073 0.0306 660 0.0002 0.0011 720 0.0010 0.0040 720 0.0001 0.0004 780 0.0036 0.0150 780 0.0002 0.0009

Documents

Earth Current Experiment - University of Wisconsin–Madison