Metal Oxide Surge Arrester: A Tool for Lightning
Stroke Analysis
M. Shaban, M. A. Salam, S. P. Ang, Fashuan Wen, Hj
Ismit
Dept. of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Brunei
Brunei Darussalam
Abstract— A surge arrester is used to protect the equipment
of transmission and distribution systems from the effects of
lightning and switching overvoltage. They are very reliable
devices that are able to offer decades of service without causing
any problems, if only they are properly designed and configured.
This paper examines the effects of lightning strokes in an
electrical network and attempts to analyze two different
frequency dependent (FD) models of metal oxide surge arrester
following the IEEE standards. The main objective of this paper is
to create a suitable model of tower which considers propagation
of surge, airgap leaders of two types and footing resistance
phenomenon. It is found that with the identification of
overvoltage, the rate of failure of substation can be determined.
This is done through a comprehensive study that used different
strategies. It was found that all of the strategies generated the
similar transient overvoltage. It is concluded that the range of
values obtained are considered to comply with the standards.
Keywords— Lightening Stroke; Frequency Dependent Model;
Electrical Tower; Surge Arresters; Transient Overvoltage
I. INTRODUCTION
For transient studies, the models are usually different from
the classic models often used in power systems studies. All the
lines, span of the lines, towers, cables and surge arresters are
expected to be frequency dependent (FD). The transformer
should also be very particular model because, for the higher
frequencies, the most important parameter is the surge
capacitance of the primary and secondary winding of the
transformer. Similarly, all the equipment of the sub-station is
expected to be modeled using stray capacitance. Thus, it is a
very detailed way of building a network because here, very
high frequency is under consideration. The lines and spines
inside the sub-station are very short, therefore in order to
simulate this system, time step should be very less to simulate
precisely.
Equipment in the 420 kV systems normally has a standard
lightning impulse withstand level of 1425 kV. According to
IEC standards on insulation coordination [1-3], the highest
occurring voltage in the case of a non-self-restoring insulation
in operation should stay below this value by a factor of 1.15,
that is, not exceed 1239 kV. Nevertheless, the lightning
impulse protection level of 823 kV offers more than enough
protection.
William Voon
Berakas Power Station
Jalan Rimba Link
Kg. Terunjing Barus, BB1514
Brunei Darussalam
Three significant factors can cause the voltage at the
terminals of the equipment to be protected to take on a
considerably higher value: inductive voltage drops, discharge
currents higher than the nominal discharge current and
separation effects by traveling wave processes between the
terminals of the arrester and of the equipment to be protected.
Especially the latter phenomenon has to be taken into account
when planning the optimal location of an arrester [4]. It is
possible to increase the energy absorption capability of the
arrester bank to extreme values by connecting many (up to
100) metal oxide columns in parallel [5]. But, there are many
other options for optimizing the necessary investment against
power supply quality by protecting only part of the towers,
part of the phases, or by choosing less expensive arresters of
low energy absorption capability based on an arrester failure
risk analysis [6].
Lightning faults are of two types: the flashovers, mainly
single-phase, following a screen failure and caused by direct
hitting to the phase conductors and the back flashovers, which
can occur when the lightning strike hits a tower or the ground
wire. In this case, the potential at the top of the tower rises in
an important way and can exceed the dielectric strength of the
insulators string [7-9].
Recently, the polymeric ZnO surge arresters have been
developed and have been put into operations on transmission
lines to limit the overvoltage based on their excellent
characteristics. An important number of line surge arresters is
in service today and an interesting demand exists for their use
at different voltage levels [10-13]. A study aiming to improve
performance of transmission line in the presence of constraints
requires modeling of each line element taking into account the
effect of frequency [14].
This paper has used the modified model of surge arrester
recommended by IEEE [15, 16]. This dynamic model is used
to evaluate lightning overvoltage protection. Lightning
overvoltage is generated by using Cigre I-surge model on the
top of the tower. The resulting overvoltage shape and
magnitude is computed at two different points. The
simulations are repeated with various parameters and with two
types of surge arresters.
The simulations are performed with renowned transient
software named Alternative Transient Program (ATP) version
of Electromagnetic Transient Program Revised Version 3.1
(EMTP-RV).
 Fig. 1. HV Surge arrester.
II. SURGE ARRESTER MODELLING TABLE I. SURGE ARRESTERS CHARACTERISTICS.

Usually, the surge arrester is modelled using ZnO arrester

High Voltage Medium
which is in nonlinear library of ATP Draw. In its data
Side Voltage Side
function, the rating voltage of surge arrester and desired
voltage rating is entered. Surge arrester cannot be considered
Rated Voltage 36 kV 12 kV
simply a nonlinear resistor as it is in EMTP library, but it has
to be modified as described in [17] IEEE working group
3.4.11. After the modification, it will be a frequency Continuous operating 30.04 kV 10.02 kV
dependent (FD) model of surge arrester and will give much Voltage
better response for lightning transients as compared to simple
model present in the library of ATP Draw. The frequency Nominal Discharge 8/20 us, 10 kA 8/20 us, 10 kA
dependency is built by RL and RLC filter as shown in Fig. 1. Current
In this case, two surge arresters are used one at the primary
of transformer and the other at the secondary of transformer. Residual Voltage at 116.6 kV 40 kV
Table 1 shows the surge arresters characteristics. Surge Nominal Current
arrester should be modelled according to these characteristics.
Most of the time, manufacturer provides these standard values.
The values of R0, L0, C0, R1 and L1 are given in IEEE
working group. The formulae for the values are given below:

L1 = 15 d/n uH
R1 = 65 d/n ohms
L0 = 0.2 d/n uH
R0 = 100 d/n ohms
C = 100 n/d pF
Where “d” is the estimated height of the arrester in meters
which is 0.56 m and “n” is the number of columns of arresters
in parallel which is only 1 in this case. The circuit shown in Fig. 2. HV Arrester energization.
Fig. 1 is converted into a sub-circuit which is shown in the
form of horizontal lines in Fig. 2. All the values of parameters It is observed that the pulse is same as defined by the
are defined in the mask. standard which can be seen in Fig. 3. Then, the voltage
I-surge is taken from the library of sources and connected generated as a result of this current and the current itself are
with the arrester to verify it. The scope is used to see the compared as shown in Fig. 4.
voltage or in the I-surge source itself, voltage and current The maximum voltage is identified using delta cursor
waveform options are there. After running the simulation, command in scope view and calculated the residual voltage at
current output is generated using scope view command in the nominal current which is exactly the same as described in
software. Table I by the standard.
 Fig. 3. Impulse defined by standard.
Fig. 4. Impulse and voltage at source.
Fig. 5 shows the maximum value of residual voltage at
nominal current for high voltage side. This maximum voltage
is according to the standard so the desired surge arrester that is
to be used in the network for lightning study is successfully
modelled.
III. ELECTRICAL TOWER
When the lightning strikes on the tower, there will be surge
inside the tower with reflection so it is important to model the
tower which considers reflection especially for the towers
higher than the height of 50 meters. The towers are generally
represented as ideal single conductor distributed-parameter
(CP model in EMTP-RV) [18]. However, more complex
models are needed to be considered when towers are taller
than 50 meters. The surge impedance for the proposed
conductor can be calculated using equations (1) and (2).
 1  R 
Z surge  60 ln  cot  tan 1  avg    (1)
  h1  h2   
 2
Where
r1  h2  r2  h1  h2   r3  h1
Ravg  (2)
h1  h2
R1 = Tower top radius (m),
R2 = Tower midsection radius (m),
R3 = Tower base radius (m),
h1 = Height from base to midsection (m),
h2 = Height from midsection to top (m).
Fig. 5. Residual voltage at nominal current.
The propagation velocity in the towers is estimated at 80 %
of the speed of light [19]. CP line can represent each section of
the tower. For branch, only inductance can be used if they are
short in length or CP line can be used as well depending upon
the length of the branch. Fig. 6 shows how the case is going to
be as the first step for electrical network.
For the length of 20 m, 3 m, 3 m and 4.65 m, CP lines are
used and inductors are used for branches. The airgap leader to
support the phasor and the footing resistance are also to be
used. For the resistance, because of the ionization of the soil,
the footing resistance changes with the value of the current at
a certain point. So for low current, constant footing resistance
is used and when the current becomes higher, the resistance
changes according to the equation (3).
For footing resistance, control resistance in nonlinear
library is used. In this controlled resistance, input the values of
admittance and current. There are two types of resistances
possible here, either constant or the one which depends on the
current so for that input selector is used. If input selector pin is
1 then the resistance will be constant and the second input is
the function of the resistance that depends on the current. This
is how footing resistance is built.
 Fig. 6. Electrical tower in EMTP. Fig. 7. Disruptive effect model along with ground resistance.
Ro
Ri  (3)
 I 
1  
 Ig
 
Ro – footing resistance at low current and low frequency, i.e.
50 or 60 Hz [  ];
I – Stroke current through the resistance [kA];
 .E0
Ig  - limiting current to initiate sufficient soil
2. .R0 2
ionization [kA]; Fig. 8. Air gap leader.
 - Soil resistivity [  m];
Eo – is the soil ionization gradient, recommended value: 400 The disruptive effect model with same equation can be
[kV/m]. found in switches library with the name airgap. Same airgap is
After building the footing resistance, airgap leader is to be used for all the three phases. The purpose of the input to air
modelled, for which there are two different models that can be gap is to reset it after the flashover so insert zero as input,
used. which means it will never reset itself. After that, stray
capacitance between the tower and the phase is used because
every stray capacitance has an influence while dealing with
A. Disruptive Effect Model high frequencies. The typical value for capacitor is 80 pF.
The first one is called disruptive effect model [20]. After making all the connections, produce a sub-circuit and
Flashover occurs when the equation (4) becomes true. can copy a nice drawing of the tower from the example given
k in EMTP-RV.

  V  t   V  dt  D
t

gap 0 (4)
to
-to is the time point at which Vgap becomes greater than Vo.
When the voltage Vgap goes below Vo the integral is reset.
The gap is an ideal open switch before flashover and it
becomes an ideal closed switch after flashover. The gap
remains closed after flashover until the control signal becomes
greater than 0, in which case it will reset (open) the gap. Fig. 7
shows the disruptive effect model along with ground
resistance.
B. Air Gap Leader
This is even more advanced model that is why the
simulation time will be higher and simulation will be slow
when this type of air gap is used [21]. The airgap is shown in
Fig. 8. This model is not in the library but exists in the
examples with the name airgap leader which is the validation
example of this airgap. Same tower is used but only the
replacement of the disruptive model with this airgap model is
done as shown in Fig. 9.
 Fig. 9. Airgap model along with ground resistance. Here, the stray capacitance becomes important and the
values of stray capacitance were taken from [22] which are 5
IV. ELECTRICAL NETWORK
nF, 15 nF and 20 nF. For the lightning, Cigre current source
In this section, each span of the tower where the lightning from sources library is used and connected this current source
strike can occur is modelled. FD model of line is used and will to one of the towers. In the data case of current source, input
copy the tower that was built using the first airgap i.e. the data like starting time and ending time of the lightning
disruptive effect model. Line data case is used to enter the date strike. Subsequent strikes can also be observed just by adding
for FD lines. Four conductors are used i.e. three phases and current sources in parallel and by changing the start time.
one neutral. The length is 300 meters for each line. The After running the simulation, observe the voltage at the
lightning will strike on the tower and there is going to be a tower top, current through the airgap, voltage inside the
back flashover, so tower should be modelled in a way such substation and the energy through surge arrester. For
that there is no back flashover after the last tower modelled. simulation, the time step have to be very small for lightning
After the lightning strikes, there will be a reflection between i.e. 0.005 us and simulation time is 300 us. Simulation was
towers. Something should be modelled after the last tower so very slow and energy during the event was plotted and it is
that there will be no reflection, so to get rid of undesirable deterministic approach.
reflections, just put the line which will be very long. The
length of this line will be 100 km and it is assumed that this V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
line is transposed. Then there will be a voltage source of 64 So, by considering weather forecast, one can determine the
kV connected using BUS. worst lightning strike that can happen. When the overvoltage
is identified, the probability of chance of failure of the
To model substation, every element should be modelled e.g. equipment considering this voltage can be calculated so that
Circuit Breakers (CB): 2*50 pF rate of failure of substation can be determined. Fig. 11 shows
Capacitive voltage transformers (CVT): ~4400 pF the waveform for the energy through surge arresters.
Current transformers (CT): 200-800 pF
Power transformer: 1-6 nF
Fig. 10 shows the detailed circuit diagram drawn in EMTP-
RV using cables, lines and transformer. Many examples for
typical capacitance values for various equipments are
explained in Annex B IEEE C37.0111-2011. But, the
preferred data is the one provided by manufacturer and
especially for the transformer, it is very critical. Use a short
cable to connect the tower with substation and it can be
modelled with RL. Then connect the surge arrester with all
three phases and these surge arresters can be grounded using
another small cable.
For the cables going through substation, CP model must be
used for the cable lengths more than 50 m which will
reproduce the propagation. Therefore, there is no need to use
the FD model for short cable lines because it can create some
Fig. 11. Energy through surge arresters.
convergence problem. Use CP model for a 50 m cable that
connects the phases with CVT and model CVT with a
capacitor with a value of 4400 pF. The transformer used is Similarly, the voltage at tower top and on the substation is
three phase YgD+30o but actually the transformer is not valid observed in Fig. 12 and it is seen that the voltage is almost
for high frequency because transformer has a lot of inductance smooth at substation because of the surge arrester.
of high value and for high frequency the inductances are like
open circuit.
 Fig. 10. Electrical network using cables, lines and towers.
Fig. 12. Voltage at tower top and at substation.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the surge arrester is modelled according to
IEEE standard and is found suitable for all types of
overvoltage studies. Energy calculation during the event is
deterministic approach and can be used for weather forecast;
one can determine the worst lightning strike that can happen.
It is concluded that with the identification of overvoltage, the
rate of failure of substation can be determined.
The obtained results indicated that the lightning current
(amplitude) and the tower footing resistance must be taken
into account in lightning protection studies. The major part of
the surge current was dissipated through the ground. The study
showed that several alternatives can improve line
performances and compromise between these alternatives
must be made. Moreover, it is recommended that the
secondary protections should also be made as the
improvement of the transmission line performances alone does
not ensure complete protection of a power system.
REFERENCES
[1] IEC 60099-4, Edition 1.1, “Surge arresters – Part 4: Metal-Oxide Surge
Arresters without gaps for A.C. Systems”, pp. 19-23, 1998.
[2] IEC 60071-1, Seventh edition, “Insulation Co-ordination – Part 1:
Definitions, Principles and Rules”, pp. 09-14, 1993.
[3] IEC 60071-2, Third edition, “Insulation Co-ordination – Part 2:
Application Guide”, pp. 28-32, 1996.
[4] IEC 60099-5, First edition, “Surge Arresters – Part 5: Selection and
Application Recommendations”, pp. 01-10, 1996.
[5] Mainville J., Rofffon P., Rillin L.P. and Hinrichsen V., “Pressure Relief
Tests on Varistors for the Series Compensation Banks Installed at the
Montagnais Substation”, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9,
No. 2, pp.781-787, 1994.
[6] Tarasiewicz Eva J., Finn Rimmer and Atef S. Morched, “Transmission
Line Arrester Energy, Cost, and Risk of Failure Analysis for Partially
Shielded Transmission Lines” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 919-924, 2000.
[7] J. G. Anderson, “Lightning Performance of Transmissions Lines”,
Transmission line reference book 345 kV and above, pp 545-578, 1982.
[8] CIGRE 33.01, “Guide to Procedures for Estimating the Lightning
Performance of Transmission Lines”, October 1991.
[9] IEEE Working Group on LPTL,“Estimating Lightning Performance of
Transmission Lines II – Updates to Analytical Models”, IEEE
Transactions Power Delivery, Vol. 8, No. 3, July 1993.
[10] Gatta F. M., F. Iliceto and S. Lauria, “Lightning Performance of HV
Transmission Lines With Grounded or Insulated Shield Wires”,
Proceedings of 26th International Conference on Lightning Protection
(ICLP 2002), Cracow, Poland, pp. 475-480. 2002.
[11] Tarchini J. A. and W. Gimenez, “Line Surge Arrester Selection to
Improve Lightning Performance of Transmission Lines”, IEEE
Conference Proceedings on Power Technology, Vol. 2, pp. 6-12, 2003.
[12] Dudurych I. M., T. J. Gallagher, J. Corbett, and M. Val Escudero,
“EMTP Analysis of the Lightning Performance of a HV Transmission
Line”, IEEE Proceedings on Generation, Transmission and Distribution,
Vol. 150, No. 4, pp. 501-506, 2003.
[13] Ito Takamitsu, Toshiaki Ueda, Hideto Watanabe, Toshihisa Funabashi
and Akihiro Ametani, “Lightning Flashovers on 77-Kv Systems:
Observed Voltage Bias Effects and Analysis”, IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 545-550, 2003.
[14] Imece Ali F., Daniel W. Durbak and Hamid Elahi, “Modeling
Guidelines for Fast Front Transients”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 11, No. CONF-950103, 1996.
[15] A. Bayadi, K. Zehar, S. Semcheddine and R. Kadri, “A Parameter
Identification Technique for a Metal-Oxide Surge Arrester Model based
on Genetic Algorithm”, WSEAS transactions on Circuits and Systems,
Issue 4, Vol 5, pp 549-554, April 2006.
[16] A. Bayadi, “Parameter Identification of ZnO Surge Arrester Models
Based on Genetic Algorithms”, Electrical Power Systems, Vol 78, No. 7,
pp 1204-1209, July 2008.
[17] IEEE Working Group 3.4.11, “Modeling of Metal Oxide Surge
Arresters”, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp.
302-309, Jan. 1992.
[18] Chisholm W.A., Chow Y. L. and Srivastava K.D., “Lightning Surge
Resonse of Transmission Towers”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 9, pp. 3232-3242, Sept. 1983.
[19] Uglesic Ivo, “Modelling of Transmission Line and Substation for
Insulation Coordination Studies” In 3 days training: “Simulation &
Analysis of Power System Transients with EMTP-RV” in cooperation
with Graz University of Technology, University of Zagreb and
University of Sarajevo, Dubrovnik, Hrvatska, 27-29/04/2009.
[20] Rioual Michel, “Measurements and Computer Simulation Of Fast
Transients through Indoor and Outdoor Substations”, IEEE Transactions
on Power Delivery, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 117-123, Jan. 1990.
[21] Shindo Takatoshi, Megumu Miki, Yoshinori Aihara and Atsushi Wada,
“Laser-Guided Discharges in Long Gaps”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 2016-2022, Oct. 1993.
[22] Das J. C., “Transients in Electrical Systems: Analysis, Recognition, and
Mitigation”, McGraw Hill Professional, pp. 384-389, 2010.