30th International Conference on Lightning Protection - ICLP 2010

(Cagliari, Italy - September 13th -17th, 2010)

ASSESSMENT OF LIGHTNING CURRENT PARAMETERS

SUITABLE FOR ANALYSIS OF HV SUBSTATION
OVERVOLTAGE PROTECTION
Petar Sarajcev
University of Split
Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture
Rudjera Boskovica bb, HR-21000 Split, Croatia
petar.sarajcev@fesb.hr

ABSTRACT neighboring towers of the incoming overhead

This paper will present theoretical and mathematical
background of the process which aims at evaluation of
lightning current parameters suitable for the analysis of
high voltage transformer station overvoltage protection. It is
a well appreciated fact that the analysis of overvoltage
protection for the high voltage substation stems from the
backflashover analysis on several first neighboring towers
of the incoming overhead transmission line. Statistical
distribution of lightning current parameters is employed in
the process of deriving analytical expression which
expresses a probability of lightning current with specific
parameters (striking several first towers as seen from the
substation) being exceeded only once during the specified
time frame. A typical numerical example will corroborate
the analysis with concrete results.
1 INTRODUCTION
High voltage (HV) transformer stations and
switchyards necessitate overvoltage protection, which is
designed by means of metal-oxide (MO) surge arresters.
Analysis of the HV transformer station (i.e. substation)
overvoltage protection needs to be carried out in regards
to the switching and lightning overvoltages which could
be expected for the site. This analysis is often performed
with a sophisticated software package, such as the well-
known EMTP (ElectroMagnetic Transients Program)
software package, e.g. [1, 2].
Especially important is a lightning surge analysis, due
to its emphasized traveling wave phenomena, which in-
turn results with a confined (i.e. short) protection zones
of the installed MO surge arresters. Hence, lightning
induced overvoltages exert significant stress on the HV
substation equipment [3]. Due to the fact that a direct
lightning strike to the HV substation is not allowed (by
means of the LPS), lighting overvoltages on the incoming
HV overhead power transmission lines provide inputs for
the overvoltage analysis (and arrester selection
procedures). Whence, especially important are the so-
called near-by lightning strikes, hitting one of the first
transmission lines [3]. If they should produce a
backflashover, associated overvoltage wave on the phase
conductor would have a significant steepness of the surge
front (i.e. very short wave crest duration – almost
vertical). Since there is no time for the attenuation of this
wave (due to the short distance), upon its arrival, it exerts
maximum amount of stress on the associated HV
substation equipment. Whence, backflashover analysis on
the several first towers of the incoming HV overhead
transmission lines is often necessary for the efficiency
assessment of the HV substation overvoltage protection
(or as a part of its design process).
For example, lightning protection design for the 275
kV substations in Japan necessitates a lightning stroke of
100 kA amplitude having front duration of 1 µs and wave
duration of 70 µs, hitting the very first tower from the
substation. Such strict lightning current parameters might
not be necessary in all cases of HV substations (e.g.
110 kV and 220 kV), except perhaps in some special
instances.
This paper thus provides a complete mathematical
background of the process which aims at the evaluation
of the lightning surge current parameters (e.g. amplitude,
front duration and wave duration) suitable for the
analysis of the backflashover on the several first towers
of the incoming HV transmission lines. The model itself
stems from the statistical distribution of lightning stroke
current parameters, lightning incidence and geometrical
constraints associated with the HV transmission lines. It
needs to be stated that, apart from lightning surge current
amplitude, other lightning parameters, such as front
duration (or current front steepness), have significant
influence on the probability of occurrence of a
backflashover (as well as tower footing surge impedance
and other associated phenomena), e.g. [4, 5].
This paper therefore provides a statistical probability
of lightning surge current (striking several first
transmission line towers) being exceeded only once

1001-1
during the specified time frame. This lightning surge
current, in addition to the amplitude, has a specific
duration of the surge front (and the wave duration as
well). In other words, correlation between lightning surge
current amplitude and front duration (or steepness) is
taken into account while deriving the probability of
transmission line tower lightning incidence. Only the
downward lightning is considered is this process, as is
customarily done.
2 MATHEMATICAL MODEL
Derivation of the mathematical model for the
assessment of lightning surge current parameters
associated with backflashover analysis on transmission
line towers incoming to the HV substation is hereafter
presented.
2.1 Lightning stroke current parameters
Lightning is a stochastic natural phenomenon, which
has a distinct waveshape, described by four basic
parameters: amplitude, duration of the current front,
duration of the current wave and polarity. It has been
established that a cumulative probability distribution of
the lightning surge parameters (e.g. peak values) follow a
logarithmic - normal distribution [6, 7]. Statistical
variation of the logarithm of random variable from log-
normal distribution follows the normal (Gaussian)
distribution. Hence, one can easily determine the
cumulative probability that a certain value of random
variable will be exceeded, e.g. [7].
In accordance with the above stated facts, mentioned
cumulative probability of log-normal distribution (e.g.
probability that a certain value of lightning current
amplitude will be exceeded) can be evaluated by the
following expression [6, 7]:
P ( I ) = 0.5 ⋅ erfc(u 0 ) (1)
where
2 ∞
(−1) n ⋅ u 02 n+1
erfc(u 0 ) = 1 − ∑ (2)
π n =0 n!⋅( 2n + 1)
represents a complementary error function, with
ln( I ) − ln( I µ )
u0 = (3)
2 ⋅ σ ln I
This expression holds both for negative and positive
polarity lightning strikes. The median value ( I µ ) and
standard deviation ( σ ln I ) of the lightning current peak
values from (3) are defined in e.g. [6, 7], both for the first
negative, subsequent negative and first positive polarity
lightning strikes.
It needs to be stated, however, that this parameters of
the log-normal distribution are not uniquely defined for
the entire world. Significant differences exist between
different regions, influenced by orographic and other
parameters. Additionally, there are appreciable seasonal
differences in some regions, such as for example
infamous winter lightning in Japan [8]. Also, differences
arise between statistical data provided by different
researchers due to differences in measuring equipment
and other factors, which subsequently influence derived
parameters of the log-normal distributions. Whence,
definition of a median value and a standard deviation for
the log-normal distribution of the lightning surge
parameters (e.g. amplitudes) is still a matter of ongoing
research throughout the world.
In order to appreciate the differences between lightning
surge parameter distributions, a brief summary
aggregated from several different sources, is presented in
Table I. Approximately 90% of all lightning strokes are
negative in polarity, while the remaining 10% of the
lightning strokes are positive. Due to the fact that
negative polarity lightning strikes will be hereafter
mainly treated, only the parameters for the statistical
distribution of amplitudes, of the first negative lightning
strokes, are given in Table I. Exclusion of positive
polarity lightning from the analysis renders this paper
more legible, while maintaining full generality of the
matter at hand.
Table I: Parameters of log-normal distribution of lightning
current amplitudes.
Parameter Iµ (kA) σ ln I Lightning stroke type
First negative, from
30.1 0.76
[7, 9]
I (kA) 31.1 0.48 First negative, from [7]
First negative (Japan),
39.2 0.76
from [10]
It needs to be accentuated that Table I presents data for
the lightning current distributions to HV transmission
lines and should not be used instead of the so-called
ground level distributions, e.g. [11, 12].
Above introduced log-normal distribution (first
negative current amplitudes) is often approximated with a
well-known Anderson-Eriksson expression [13, 14]:
1
P( I ) = 2.6
(4)
⎛ I ⎞
1+ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 31 ⎠
A comparison between log-normal distributions given
by: Iµ = 31.1 kA, σlnI = 0.48 and Iµ = 30.1 kA, σlnI = 0.76,
with Anderson-Eriksson expression is given in Figure 1.
1001-2
 It can be appreciated from Figure 1 that there are
significant differences between these distributions, owing
to the adopted median value and standard deviation. First
above given set of values (Iµ = 31.1 kA, σlnI = 0.48) for
the log-normal distribution is often recommended [7],
although better approximation could be obtained for
specific region (and season if needed). Anderson-
Ericsson expression agrees well with a log-normal
distribution described by the parameters Iµ = 30.1 kA,
σlnI = 0.76, which can be nicely observed from Figure 1
as well. It can also be deduced from Figure 1 that this
later distribution as well as equation (4) give higher
probabilities for high-amplitude lightning currents.
Figure 1. Statistical distribution of lightning current
amplitudes.
Apart from amplitude, lightning current is defined with
a front duration (or steepness) and wave duration (as well
as with polarity, which is here chosen to be negative).
Detailed treatment of these additional lightning current
parameters, especially the current front duration, will be
given later in this paper.
2.2 Tower lightning stroke incidence
Figure 2 graphically depicts a situation of the several
first transmission line towers from the HV substation.
This portion of the line (several first towers as seen from
the substation) is under scrutiny for the backflashover
analysis, and subsequent assessment of the HV substation
overvoltage protection.
Figure 2. Graphical depiction of the transmission line
towers incident to the HV substation.
Portal of the transmission line in the substation is
numbered with 0, while subsequent towers bear
consecutive numbers; with arbitrary tower described by
the value k. Span lengths between neighboring towers are
also denoted in this figure, with spans associated with k-
th tower having lengths ℓk (left) and ℓk+1 (right).
An expected number of lightning strikes into the
arbitrary k-th span of the HV overhead transmission line,
during the specific time window, can be determined by
the following general expression:
k
N s = N g ⋅k S s ⋅τ (5)
where:
Ng - ground flash density, nr. strokes /( km 2 ⋅ year ) ,
k
Ss - surface of the electric shadow (attractive
surface) of the k-th span, km2,
τ - time window, years.
Ground flash density can be obtained from the
following well-known expression [14]:
N g = 0.04 ⋅ Td1.25 (6)
where Td signifies a average number of thunderstorm
days per year, usually obtained form the isokeraunic
maps of the region.
Attractive surface for the k-th span of the transmission
line is (in case of single shield wire) defined by the
following expression [15]:
k
S s = 28 ⋅ hk0.6 ⋅ l k ⋅ 10 −3 (7)
where:
ℓk - length of the k-th span, km,
hk - average height of the shield wire along the k-th
span, m; this value is obtained from the height of
the towers at both end of the span, m.
By introducing (6) and (7) into (5), following
expression is obtained:
k
N s = 1.12 ⋅ 10 −3 ⋅ Td1.25 ⋅ hk0.6 ⋅ l k ⋅ τ (8)
According to the analysis, similar to that outlined
above, another expression is obtained, which defines an
average number of lightning strikes into the (k+1)-th
span:
k +1
N s = 1.12 ⋅ 10 −3 ⋅ Td1.25 ⋅ hk0+.61 ⋅ l k +1 ⋅ τ (9)
Lightning stroke incidence (stroke probability density)
is not uniformly distributed along the span of the
transmission line shield wire. More frequent are lightning
strikes into the tower tops and parts of the span close to
the towers. According to [16], only 20% - 25% of all
direct lightning strikes end-up near the mid-span sections
of the shield wire, while almost 75% - 80% of the
1001-3
lightning strikes end-up on tower tops and shield wires in
the near-vicinity of the towers. More elaborate analysis of
the lightning stroke distribution along the transmission
line spans can be found in [17]. Hence, expected number
of lightning strikes into the k-th tower (and shield wire in
its near-vicinity) can be approximated with a following
expression:
k
Nt = ξ ⋅ (N
k
s+
k +1
Ns ) (10)
Here, a coefficient ξ is introduced in order to account
for the above mentioned facts, regarding the distribution
of the lightning stroke incidence into the shield wire,
along the spans of the transmission line. In accordance
with [16], this coefficient can be drawn from the
following range:
ξ ∈ [0.375 − 0.4] (11)
Furthermore, according to [17], following equation has
been derived for the estimation of the lightning stroke
incidence to the HV transmission line towers:
ξ = 5.486 ⋅ 10 −7 ⋅ l 2 − 7.452 ⋅ 10 −4 ⋅ l + 0.3587 (12)
where ℓ is the length of the transmission line span. It
needs to be stated that expression (12) is valid for 230 kV
transmission lines and above. For the lower voltages, the
value obtained from (12) should be increased by 0.02,
[17]. Hence, this expression relates the span length with
the probability of lightning strikes to the tower (and its
vicinity). According to this relation, the probability of
lightning strikes to towers (i.e. tower lightning incidence)
decreases with longer spans.
By introducing (8) and (9) into (10), following
expression is obtained:
k
N t = 1.12 ⋅ 10 −3 ⋅ ξ ⋅ Td1.25 ⋅
( )
(13)
⋅ hk0.6 ⋅ l k + hk0+.61 ⋅ l k +1 ⋅ τ
It has been already mentioned that negative polarity
lightning currents account for the 90% of all lightning
strikes. Whence, a number of (negative polarity)
lightning strikes, ending-up on the k-th tower top and its
near-vicinity, accompanied with currents which exceed a
certain value I (kA), can be estimated by the following
expression:
k
nt = 0.9⋅ N t ⋅ P ( I )
k
(14)
Here, a probability function P(I) of the current amplitudes
feature prominently. It can be taken either from
expression (1) or from approximate expression (4).
If one should assume a single lightning strike into the
k-th tower (and its near-vicinity) during the period of τ
years, i.e.:
k
nt ( I = I k ) = 1 (15)
then equation (14) yields the associated probability, as
follows:
1.11
P( I k ) = k
(16)
Nt
By introducing (13) into equation (16), it yields:
992
P( I k ) = (17)
ξ ⋅ Td1.25 ⋅ ( hk0.6 ⋅ l k + hk0+.61 ⋅ l k +1 ) ⋅ τ
From the obtained value of probability, given by (17),
one can subsequently obtain the warranted value of the
lightning stroke current amplitude (which should not be
exceeded within the observed time frame), i.e.:
P( I k ) ⇒ I k (18)
This can be done graphically (e.g. by using Figure 1),
or even analytically in case of using the expression (4).
For the known value of P(Ik), in this latter case, one can
obtain lightning current amplitude as follows:
1
⎛ 1 ⎞ 2.6
I k = 31 ⋅ ⎜⎜ − 1⎟⎟ (19)
⎝ P( I k ) ⎠
Previously introduced analysis is given for the negative
polarity lightning strikes, but could be easily
reconfigured and extended to account for the positive
lightning strokes as well. As has been already mentioned,
the exclusion of positive polarity lightning from this
theoretical analysis renders this paper more legible, while
maintaining full generality of the matter at hand.
Additionally, one needs to acknowledge the fact that
there are cases where the overhead transmission line
terminates in short cable connection to the switchyard
(transformer station). Here a similar analysis could be
carried out as presented above. In the mentioned case,
only strikes to the first tower (closest to the substation
warrants different treatment, since from this tower a
(buried) cable line connects to the HV substation. Hence,
expression (17), for the first tower, in case of a cable
termination, transforms into the following expression:
992
P ( I1 ) = (20)
ξ ⋅ Td1.25 ⋅ h20.6 ⋅ l 2 ⋅ τ
where h2 is an average height of the shield wire in the
second span (including sag correction), m, while ℓ2 is a
length of the second span, km.
All other towers (except this first one) are treated even
in this case in the same way as above, which means that
expression (17) holds for every one of them.
1001-4
2.3 Correlation of lightning current parameters Equation (21), with introduction of (22) – (24), present
conditional probability for the first positive lightning
Analysis carried out in the previous section does not
stroke as well, only the parameters of the statistical
say anything about front duration (or steepness) of the
distributions are different, along with a correlation
lightning current front or wave duration, associated with
coefficient, [7]. Table II summarizes several median
a direct lightning strike into the tower top and its vicinity.
values and standard deviations for the log-normal
Hence, any lightning surge current front / crest duration
distribution of the (negative polarity) lightning current
(or steepness) and wave duration can be associated with
front duration.
this negative lightning strike current amplitude.
It is a known fact that the front duration of the Table II: Parameters of log-normal distribution of lightning
lightning current has a significant influence on the current front durations.
backflashover analysis, e.g. [5, 7]. Lightning strikes with
shorter front times generate larger voltages across
insulator strings during backflashover phenomenon, and Parameter t fµ (µs) σ ln t Lightning stroke type
vice versa. Additionally, a lightning protection design of
First negative, from
a substation is greatly affected by the assumed lightning 3.83 0.55
[7, 9]
stroke current front duration [11]. Whence, it would be
appreciable to correlate probability of lightning strike t f (µs) 5.5 0.70 First negative, from [7]
amplitude occurrence with a specific wave crest (front) First negative (Japan),
4.5 0.37
duration (or steepness). Less important is the lightning from [10]
current wave duration, which might be of interest in cases
where the energy absorption of the MO surge arrester is In order to emphasize the influence of the current front
studied. duration on the distribution of the lightning current
In order to achieve this correlation of lightning surge amplitudes, conditional distribution obtained from
current parameters one needs to employ a conditional equations (21) – (24) with several different lightning
probability. Conditional probability of two mutually current front durations, is plotted in Figure 3. Here, eight
dependent lightning stroke current parameters, e.g. different (consecutive) current front durations were
amplitude and front / crest duration, both drawn from the selected, ranging from 1 µs to 8 µs. Following values of
log-normal distribution, is given by the following the statistical distributions were utilized: Iµ = 30.1 kA,
equation [7]: σlnI = 0.76, tfµ = 3.83 µs, σlnt = 0.55 and ρc = 0.47, as
P ( I ≥ I k | t = t f ) = 0.5 ⋅ erfc(u 0 ) (21) recommended in [7].

with variable u0 now given by the following expression:

ln( I k ) − b
u0 = (22)
2 ⋅σ
where:

b = ln( I µ ) + ρ c ⋅
σ ln I
σ ln t
[
⋅ ln(t f ) − ln(t fµ ) ] (23)

σ = σ ln I ⋅ 1 − ρ c2 (24)

Here, Iµ and σlnI again represent median value and

standard deviation for the log-normal distribution of the
lightning current amplitude, respectively. These values
were introduced in Table I. Values tfµ and σlnt represent
median value and standard deviation for the log-normal
distribution of the lightning current front duration,
respectively. The coefficient ρc in equations (23) and (24)
represent a correlation coefficient between these random
variables, depicting lightning current amplitude and front
duration. This parameter has the following value [7]:
ρ c = 0.47
Figure 3. Statistical distribution of lightning current
amplitudes with different front duration.
It can be seen from Figure 3 that there is a higher
probability of occurrence of lightning strokes with large
amplitudes having longer front durations. Whence,
lightning strokes with very high current amplitudes,
(25) having front duration of 1 µs or less, are far less probable

1001-5
than those with longer front duration. At the same time,
shorter front duration of lightning stroke current produces
greater probability of the backflashover (especially in
combination with other unfavorable tower parameters,
e.g. high footing resistance). Additionally, conditional
probability relating lightning current amplitude and other
lightning parameters, such as: front steepness and stroke
charge (again both for the negative and positive polarity
lightning strokes) is given by the expression analog to
(21), but with different median values and standard
deviations of log-normal distributions (as well as
different correlation coefficients between statistical
parameters), [7].
However, it needs to be stated here that, apparently,
there is no correlation between lightning current
amplitude and wave duration, which means that they are
treated as two independent statistical variables [7]. This Figure 4. Statistical distribution of lightning current
means that following equation for expressing cumulative amplitudes exceeding different wave durations.
probability holds:
Previously presented mathematical model,
P( I ≥ I k , t ≥ t h ) = 0.25 ⋅ erfc(u 0 I ) ⋅ erfc(u 0t ) (26) accompanied with conditional probabilities of occurrence
with of lightning stroke currents having different front
durations (or steepness) as well as wave durations, gives
ln( I k ) − ln( I µ ) a basis for the estimation of probabilities associated with
u0 I = (27) occurrence of lightning currents striking several first
2 ⋅ σ ln I
transmission lines towers extending from the HV
ln(t h ) − ln(t hµ ) transformer station (switchyard). Hence, this
u 0t = (28) mathematical model facilitates definition of all lightning
2 ⋅ σ ln th stroke parameters of negative polarity (i.e. amplitude,
front duration and wave duration), associated with direct
Here, Iµ and σlnI again represent median value and
lightning strikes into the transmission line towers
standard deviation for the log-normal distribution of the
incoming to the HV substation.
lightning current amplitude, respectively. These values
were introduced in Table I. Values thµ and σlnth represent 3 NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
median value and standard deviation for the log-normal
distribution of the lightning current wave duration, A rather typical double-circuit 2x220 kV overhead
respectively. Table III summarizes two different set of transmission line, incoming to the TS 220/110 kV, will
parameters for the log-normal distribution of the be employed for the numerical example. This
(negative polarity) lightning current wave duration. transmission line has a single shield wire. Table IV
presents average heights (hk) and span lengths (ℓk) of the
Table III: Parameters of log-normal distribution of lightning shield wire for the several first transmission line spans, as
current wave durations. seen from the transformer station at hand.

Table IV: Average heights and span lengths of the shield

Parameter t hµ (µs) σ ln th Lightning stroke type wire for the several first transmission line spans.
First negative, from
77.5 0.58 Span
[7, 9] l k (km) hk (m)
th (µs) (k)
75 0.58 First negative, from [7]
1 0.100 26.6

Figure 4 presents cumulative (i.e. joint) probability of 2 0.260 34.3

exceeding lightning current amplitude having (exceeding) 3 0.250 34.8
several different values of lightning current wave
durations, according to the equation (26) and parameters 4 0.250 33.8
of log-normal distribution: Iµ = 30.1 kA, σlnI = 0.76, thµ = 5 0.260 34.4
77.5 µs, σlnth = 0.58.

1001-6
 Keraunic level of the region where this portion of the tower, while other three towers have basically identical
transmission line (as well as associated transformer current amplitude distributions, as a function of time.
station) is located has a level of Td = 50. Furthermore,
due to small variations in span length and other
uncertainties in tower parameters, the coefficient ξ is
chosen to have a value of 0.3 in all cases.
According to the presented theoretical background and
above derived mathematical model, probability of
occurrence of the lighting current amplitudes, striking
first four towers from the substation at hand, have been
computed by equation (17). Computation results are
presented in Table V, for three different time windows of
100, 200 and 400 years. From these probabilities, in
accordance with expression (19), current amplitudes were
derived. These current amplitudes, of negative polarity,
will not be exceeded more than once during the selected
time windows of 100, 200 and 400 years. These
computation results are presented in Table VI. It needs to
be mentioned at this point that currents with amplitudes
from Table VI could have arbitrarily long front durations Figure 5. Expected lightning current amplitudes, striking
as well as wave durations. first four transmission line towers, as a function of time.

Table V: Probability of exceeding lightning current In order to associate the specific lightning current front
amplitudes striking first four transmission line towers, durations with above computed lightning current
during time window of 100, 200 and 400 years. amplitudes (according to the data presented in Table V
and Table VI), a conditional probability, graphically
Tower P( I k ) depicted in Figure 3, must be employed. Hence, by using
(k)
τ = 100 years τ = 200 years τ = 400 years
data from Table V and Table VI in combination with
Figure 3, specific front durations associated with each of
1 0.0862 0.0431 0.0216 the current amplitudes have been obtained. Computed
results are presented in Table VII.
2 0.0582 0.0291 0.0146

3 0.0596 0.0298 0.0149 Table VII: Expected lightning current front durations
striking first four transmission line towers, during time
4 0.0587 0.0293 0.0147 window of 100, 200 and 400 years.

Table VI: Expected lightning current amplitudes striking Tower

t f (µs)
first four transmission line towers, during time window of (k)
τ = 100 years τ = 200 years τ = 400 years
100, 200 and 400 years.
1 4 4.2 4.8
Tower Ik (kA)
2 4 4.5 5.2
(k)
τ = 100 years τ = 200 years τ = 400 years
3 4 4.5 5
1 77 102 134
4 4 4.5 5
2 90 119 157

3 90 118 155
4 90 119 156
Additionally, Figure 5 presents expected lightning
current amplitudes striking first four transmission line
towers as a function of time window. Again, these current
amplitudes could have arbitrarily long front duration and
wave duration. It can be seen from this figure that lower
values of current amplitudes are associated with the first
It can be seen from Table VII that the expected front
duration for lightning currents ranges mainly between
4 µs and 5 µs.
If one should for example warrant a lightning current
with 100 kA amplitude and front duration of exactly 1 µs,
than the above described mathematical model could
produce an expected number of lightning strikes (during
specified time window) into the treated towers. Analysis
carried out with the input data from Table IV suggests
that it would take, statistically speaking, over 8000 years

1001-7
for a single lightning stroke with 100 kA amplitude and
1 µs front duration to be expected to strike the first
transmission line tower (as seen from the substation).
This is a very long time frame, which suggests that
lightning current with such strict parameters (100 kA
amplitude and 1 µs front duration) is highly unlikely to
strike the first tower in the concrete example.
Additionally, a single lightning stroke with 100 kA
amplitude and 2 µs front duration is expected to strike the
first tower once every 950 years. Hence, less severe
lightning stroke current parameters are more appropriate
in this case, such as for example: 134 kA amplitude with
front duration of 4.8 µs for the first transmission line
tower. This analysis could be extended to and any other
transmission line tower as well.
In order to facilitate a complete definition of lightning
stroke current, the current wave duration should be
provided as well, although it is less important for the
mentioned backflashover analysis. Hence, by using data
from Table V and Table VI, along with Figure 4,
mathematical model produces expected duration of the
current wave for the first four towers within the same
time windows of 100, 200 and 400 years. Obtained
computation results are presented in Table VIII.
Table VIII: Expected lightning current wave durations
striking first four transmission line towers, during time
window of 100, 200 and 400 years.
t ≥ th (µs)
Tower
(k)
τ = 100 years τ = 200 years τ = 400 years
1 45 45 40
2 50 42 20
3 48 42 20
4 50 42 20
Finally, from the above presented results, one can
conclude that lightning stroke parameters appropriate for
the transmission line tower backflashover analysis (and
subsequent HV substation overvoltage protection
analysis) could be selected as follows:
- negative polarity direct lightning stroke into the
top of the first transmission line tower,
- 134 kA amplitude,
- 4.8 µs front duration,
- wave duration in excess of 40 µs.
A lightning stroke current with these parameters will
occur (statistically speaking) only once every 400 years.
Additionally, if one of the neighboring transmission line
towers have significantly high tower footing resistance
(i.e. impulse impedance), it should be considered as a
viable candidate for the HV substation overvoltage
protection analysis, with its associated lightning stroke
current parameters. This is due to high probability of
occurrence of a backflashover on this tower.
4 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
It is quite obvious that the selection of parameters for
the log-normal distribution of lightning currents will
affect the above presented analysis. This is due to
differences found between these parameters, emanating
from measurements carried out on different structures,
with different measuring equipment and conducted in
different regions of the world. The correlation coefficient
between lightning current amplitude and front duration
(or front steepness) is of paramount significance. It can
be appreciated from the above presented data that it
varies in a rather broad range, which further complicates
lightning related analysis. Additionally, lightning current
distributions to HV transmission lines and those to
ground level differ substantially. Hence, notwithstanding
the huge amount of research carried out in this field, it is
still obvious that a unified set of parameters for the log-
normal distributions of lightning current parameters are
needed. However, this might prove to be a difficult task
to accomplish, especially in the light of the different
influential factors affecting these statistical variables. The
numerical example given in this paper is thus processed
with the latest set of parameters of the associated log-
normal distribution, proposed by the IEEE Working
Group [7].
Furthermore, a distribution of lightning strikes along
the HV transmission line spans is of significant
importance. It is known that this distribution is not
uniform and that the lightning strikes tend to be
concentrated around the transmission line towers. A
value of 0.6 (i.e. ξ = 0.3) has been often associated with
the probability of lightning strikes to the towers and their
vicinity, although with longer spans this probability
decreases in accordance with the equation (12). It needs
to be accentuated here that the exactly defined boundary
on the transmission line span, beyond which a lightning
strike would not produce a backflashover on the tower,
does not exist. Statistically speaking, even the lightning
strikes on the middle of the span could produce a
backflashover on the associated towers. However, this
imaginary length of the span, which determines the above
mentioned probability of lightning strikes to the tower, is
according to [17] estimated to be a 55% of the half span
on each side of the tower.
In order to appreciate the influence of the lightning
strike distribution along the transmission line span, the
lightning incidence of the second tower from the treated
example is again computed, but now with three different
values of the parameter ξ. Different values of this
parameter in turn define different concentrations of the
lightning strikes in the near-vicinity of the tower at hand.
1001-8
Computed results are graphically displayed in Figure 6.
Figure 5. Expected lightning current amplitudes striking the
second tower computed with different values of the
parameter ξ.
Hence, it can be appreciated from this figure that there
are differences between computed lightning currents on
the second tower, which are a direct consequence of the
selected value of the parameter ξ. This value depends on
the transmission line tower and span geometry and other
factors [17].
5 CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented a generally applicable
mathematical model for the assessment of the probability
of occurrence of the (negative polarity) lightning strike
currents, having specific parameters (i.e. amplitude, front
duration and wave duration), and striking the several first
transmission line towers as seen from the HV substation,
within the certain time window. Hence, this mathematical
model facilitates computation of lightning stroke current
amplitude, with associated front duration (or steepness)
and wave duration, which will strike several first towers
only once during the certain (selected) time frame. These
lightning current parameters could represent input data
for the backflashover analysis and subsequent analysis
(or design) of the HV substation overvoltage protection.
This model, if needed, could be easily extended to
include the positive lightning strikes as well, although
these are far less important.
Here presented analysis acknowledges once more the
fact that the parameters of the log-normal distributions
(including the associated correlation coefficient) of
lightning currents need to be scrutinized with care.
Furthermore, distribution of lightning strikes along the
transmission line spans is of significant importance, as it
influences both the backflashover analysis and the
subsequent HV substation overvoltage protection design.
6 REFERENCES
[1] H. W. Dommel, "Electromagnetic Transients Program
Theory Book", MicroTran Power System Analysis
Corporation, Vancouver, British Columbia, 1992.
[2] L. Prikler, H. K. Høidalen, "ATPDRAW version 3.5 for
Windows 9x/NT/2000/XP – Users’ Manual", European
EMTP ATP Users Group, 2002.
[3] IEEE TF, “Modeling Guidelines for Fast Front
Transients”, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol.
11, No. 1, pp. 493-506, 1996.
[4] A. Ametani, T. Kawamura, “A Method of a Lightning
Surge Analysis Recommended in Japan Using EMTP”,
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.
867-875, 2005.
[5] F. M. Gatta, A. Geri, S. Lauria, “Backflashover Simulation
of HV Transmission Lines With Concentrated Tower
Grounding”, Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 73,
pp. 373-381, 2005.
[6] IEC 62305-1, Protection against lightning - Part 1: General
principles, 2006.
[7] Lightning and Insulator Subcommittee of the T&D
Committee, “Parameters of Lightning Strokes: A Review”,
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.
346-358, 2005.
[8] Y. Yasuda, N. Uno, H. Kobayashi, T. Funabashi, “Surge
Analysis on Wind Farm When Winter Lightning Strikes”,
IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 23, No. 1,
pp. 257-262, 2008.
[9] R. B. Anderson, A. J. Eriksson, “Lightning Parameters for
Engineering Applications”, Electra, No. 69, pp. 65-102,
1980.
[10] T. Narita, T. Yamada, A. Mochizuki, E. Zaima, M. Ishii,
“Observation of Current Waveshapes of Lightning Strokes
on Transmission Towers”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 429-435, 2000.
[11] G. W. Brown, “Joint Frequency Distribution of Stroke
Current Rates of Rise and Crest Magnitude to
Transmission Lines”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 97, No. 1, pp. 53-58, 1978.
[12] A. M. Mousa, “The Frequency Distribution of the
Amplitudes of Lightning Currents”, presented to IEEE
Task Force on Parameters of Lightning Strokes, San
Francisco, USA., July 1994.
[13] IEEE WG, “A Simplified Method for Estimating Lightning
Performance of Transmission Lines”, IEEE Transactions
on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 104, No. 4, pp.
919-932, 1985.
[14] IEEE WG, “Estimating Lightning Performance of
Transmission Lines II – Updates to Analytical Models”,
IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp.
1254-1267, 1993.
[15] L. L. Grigsby, "The Effective Power Engineering
Handbook", IEEE Press, Alabama, 2001.
[16] CIGRE WG 33.01, "Guide to Procedures for Estimation of
the Lightning Performance of Transmission Lines",
CIGRE Monograph No. 63, 1991.
[17] A. M. Mousa, K. D. Srivastava, "The distribution of
lightning strokes to towers and along the span of shielded
and unshielded power lines", Canadian Journal of
Electrical & Computer Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp.
115-122, 1990.
1001-9