3rd CISTEM’18 - Algiers, Algeria, October 29-31, 2018
Longitudinal behaviour of grounding electrodes
subjected to lightning currents using SSR based
TLM
Sofiane Chiheb, Omar Kherif, Madjid Teguar and Abdelouahab Mekhaldi
Laboratoire de Recherche en Electrotechnique (LRE)
Ecole Nationale Polytechnique (ENP)
10 Avenue Hassen Badi, B.P. 182, El-Harrach, Alger, Algérie
Email:sofiane.chiheb@g.enp.edu.dz
Abstract—This investigation is devoted to characterize the lon-
gitudinal behaviour of grounding electrode subjected to first and
subsequent lightning currents. The State Space Representation
(SSR) based Transmission Line Method (TLM) has been used
to obtain current and potential along the electrodes buried in
resistive soils. A new time parameter consists in the ratio of the
potential peak time to the current one has been proposed to
identify the variation of the transient behaviour along grounding
vertical and horizontal electrode. We show that soil resistivity,
electrode length and impulse peak time of injected current are
the most influential parameters.
Index Terms—Grounding system, Transmission Line Method,
soil electrical parameters, transient phenomena, State Space
Representation, grounding system behaviour.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Characterizing by a destructive nature, the lightning strokes
are the most dangerous sources engendering not only damages,
disturbances and malfunctions of electrical equipment, but also
victims in human lives, following the increase of both step
and touch potential [1]. In order to avoid these dangers, many
lightning protection systems are installed to convoy the light-
ning current into the ground through an efficient grounding
system. A reliable evaluation of grounding transient response
requires an effective modelling of such systems. In this light,
several theoretical and numerical investigations have been
presented using three main methods: Finite Elements Method
(FEM), Antenna Theory Method (ATM) and Transmission
Line Method (TLM).
Based on Maxwell equations, some investigations have
focused on the electromagnetic field generated from substation
grounding grid buried in homogeneous soil [2] or determine
transient potential and grounding impedance as function of
frequency by using a rigorous full-wave approach based on
FEM [3].
Several investigations have used ATM to study the transient
behaviour of grounding systems. The Maxwell0 s electromag-
netic field equations have been solved either by Method of
Moments (MoM) [4], [5] or by Finite Difference Time Domain
(FDTD) [6], [7].
Other investigations have examined the behaviour of
grounding systems using TLM taking into account incident
978-1-5386-4988-6/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE
and reflected electromagnetic waves appearing in transients
study [8]. The studies developed in this area take into con-
sideration either soil ionization [9], [10], mutual coupling
phenomena [11], [12], or both phenomena [13], [14]. The
results consist in the potential at injection point, the current
in different points along the conductor, transient impedance or
the electromagnetic field generated from grounding system.
The present investigation deals with the transient behaviour
of grounding electrodes under impulse current employing SSR
based TLM. This behaviour is discussed defining a new index
parameter consisting in the ratio of the peak potential time to
the peak current one. Our paper is organized as follows: In
section 2 we present the formulas simulating different light-
ning currents. Section 3 deals with the initiation of SSR with
simulation results. Section 4 illustrates the nature behaviour
index as new indicator to discuss the longitudinal behaviour
of the grounding electrodes. Finally, section 5 contains the
main conclusions.
II. L IGHTNING C URRENT F ORMULAS
Lightning currents are classified into three principal cat-
egories: the first short stroke current, the subsequent short
stroke current which are related to the first and the subsequent
lightning strokes respectively, and the long stroke current sim-
ulating continuing current [1]. The current frequency should
be the inverse of the rise time [15] or the mean representative
frequency in the range corresponding to the rise time of the
FFT spectrum [16].
According to [17], the lightning current is characterized by
four principal parameters:
• The peak current Im used to design grounding system
configuration. It permits to determine the maximum of
transient voltage.
di
• The maximum current steepness dt is used to estimate
the induced voltage around the impact point.
• The charge Q is the responsible for melting effects at the
attachment points of the lightning channel.
• The specific energy W R which cause the heating effects
arising when the lightning current flows through the
metallic conductor.
 3rd CISTEM’18 - Algiers, Algeria, October 29-31, 2018

The rise time T1 and decay time T2 of the lightning current

are presented in Figure 1 (a) and (b) respectively.

Figure 2. First and subsequent lightning currents waveforms

III. S IMULATION USING S TATE S PACE R EPRESENTATION

The SSR is often used in the control system in order to
describe the behaviour of physical systems when submitted to
an external excitation [18]. Based on transmission line theory
and incorporating soil ionization and mutual coupling phenom-
ena, SSR details are presented in [19]. This method allows
studying the transient behaviour of vertical and horizontal
grounding electrodes. The studied electrode is divided into
numerous segments of ∆l length according to transmission
line theory [20]. Each segment is modelled by a Multi Input-
Multi Output System including electric and magnetic fields
generated by the grounding conductor and heat losses in both
Figure 1. Waveform of lightning stroke current during (a) the rise and (b)
the decay [1] soil and grounding conductor. For each segment, we define
the following equations [19]:
In several investigations, the lightning current is presented
by its peak value and rise and decay times (T1 /T2 ). For the Ẋ(t) = A(t) X(t) + B(t) U (t) (2)
first stroke, the current rise and decay times are around (10/350
µs), while the subsequent strokes are about (2.5/100 µs) [1]. Y (t) = C(t) X(t) + D(t) U (t) (3)
The lightning strokes are defined by the formula [1]: With Ẋ(t) is the state evolution vector; U (t) is the inputs
( τt1 )n vector ; X(t) is the state variables vector ; Y (t) is the output
Im
i(t) = [ ] (1) vector ; A(t) is the time-dependent state matrix; B(t) is
k 1 + ( τt1 )n the time-dependent input matrix; C(t) is the time-dependent
with Im denotes the maximum magnitude of the impulse output matrix and D(t) is the time-dependent input-to-output
current, k is the correlation factor of the peak current, n is the coupling matrix.
current steepness factor (assumed to be 10), and τ1 and τ2 are The results obtained from SSR consist in potential and
constants that determine the current rise time and decay times current along a horizontal grounding conductor. This later is
respectively. The usual values of these parameters according characterized by a length of 10 m and a radius of 8 mm. It
to lightning protection level 1 are presented in Table 1 [1]. is buried at 0.6 m depth in soil of ρ=10 Ωm resistivity and
ε=80 relative permittivity.
Table I Figure 3 (a) and (b) presents the transient potential and
PARAMETERS OF FIRST AND SUBSEQUENT LIGHTNING CURRENTS
ACCORDING TO LIGHTNING PROTECTION LEVEL 1 [1]
the current variations along horizontal grounding conductor
subjected to the first lightning current respectively, while
P arameter F irst lightning Subsequent lightning Figure 4 (a) and (b) illustrates the same parameters (potential
stroke stroke
Im [kA] 200 50
and current) for the same grounding electrode subjected to
k 0.93 0.993 the subsequent lightning current. The first and the subsequent
τ1 [µs] 19 0.454 lightning currents parameters used in this simulation are those
τ2 [µs] 485 143 presented in Table 1.
As shown in Figures 3 and 4, the potential has an impulse
Using the parameters given in Table 1, both first and wave shape similarly to the current one. It can be observed
subsequent lightning currents are illustrated in Figure 2. even with a lower peak current, the potential peak has greatest
 3rd CISTEM’18 - Algiers, Algeria, October 29-31, 2018
Figure 3. Potential and current along the horizontal grounding conductor
subjected to the first lightning current
Figure 4. Potential and current along the horizontal grounding conductor
subjected to the subsequent lightning current
values when injecting the subsequent lightning current. In both
of 3 (b) and 4 (b), the potential keeps the same injection point
impulse waveform, however the current is quickly damped in
the case of the subsequent lightning current.
IV. L ONGITUDINAL NATURE BEHAVIOUR OF GROUNDING
ELECTRODE
A. Impact of injected lightning current on the longitudinal
behaviour of the grounding electrode
As mentioned above, the electrode of 10 m length has
been divided into N elements of ∆l length. For the nth
element (n varies from 0 to N-1), the simultaneous waveforms
representation of current in this segment and the potential in
the first point of the same segment allow determining the
behaviour of the grounding conductor part of [l − n∆l] length.
This part is located between the nth segment point and the end
of the electrode. In our investigation, the grounding conductor
is divided into 9 parts; the segment length ∆l=1 m.
Indeed, the response obtained at injection point (n = 0)
reflects the behaviour of the totality of grounding electrode.
For instance, the applied impulse current and the transient
potential in the injection point of the previously studied
horizontal electrode show predominantly inductive behaviour
of such electrode since the potential peak is in advance of the
current.
Basing on the peak times of both potential and current for
each point of the grounding electrode, we define a new time
parameter Fn defining as the ratio of the potential peak time
to the current one. This time parameter is given as follows:
TPn
Fn = (4)
TIn
TI is the peak current time, TP is the peak potential time
and n is the element position from the injection point.
In fact, this ratio corresponding to deviation of the peak
potential time to the peak current one could be used as an
indicator of the ”dynamic behaviour nature index which
permits to determine the variation of the transient behaviour
along the grounding electrode. Indeed, the behaviour of the
grounding conductor part (from the element n) is: (i) inductive
if Fn < 1, (ii) resistive if Fn = 1 and (iii) capacitive if Fn < 1.
For the above studied horizontal grounding electrode sub-
jected to the first and the subsequent lightning currents, the
Fn has been calculated and presented in Figures 5 and 6
respectively.
Under the first lightning current and from Figure 5, the
grounding conductor buried in conductive soil of 10 Ωm is
characterized by resistive behaviour (F9 =1) at the last segment
of the electrode and inductive elsewhere (i.e. for the other
segments). The behaviour of the grounding electrode subjected
to the first lightning current becomes more resistive when
buried in soil of resistivity 100 Ωm. At the injection point, a
slight decrease of the parameter Fn has been observed which
presents inductive behaviour of entire grounding electrode.
This behaviour becomes resistive from the third element of the
electrode. Finally, the grounding electrode possesses resistive
behaviour when buried in 1000 Ωm resistivity soil.
The results presented in Figure 6 show the impact of the
subsequent lightning current on the nature behaviour index of
grounding conductor. For low resistivity (10 Ωm) the electrode
 3rd CISTEM’18 - Algiers, Algeria, October 29-31, 2018

before increasing progressively until reaching the unit at 9

m, indicating that the last segment has a resistive behaviour.
However, for the high resistivity (of 1000 Ωm), the grounding
electrode has predominately capacitive behaviour at injection
point; the index F0 exceeds the unit. Such capacitive behaviour
is accentuated due to the increase of Fn with the electrode
length.
Similar results have been obtained in the vertical electrode
case (Figure 8). It is observed that for 10 and 100 Ωm, anal-
ogously to the horizontal electrode results, the same evolution
of the behaviour nature index along the vertical electrode
length has been recorded. At the injection point, F0 = 0.19;
the electrode has predominant inductive behaviour. This index
Figure 5. Fn evolution along 10 m electrode buried at different resistivities
soil subjected to first lightning current
decreases to 0.1 for the next element and increases elsewhere.
The last segment possesses a resistive behaviour since the
index value becomes equal to 1. For 1000 Ωm, the obtained
capacitive behaviour increases gradually distancing from the
injection point.

Figure 6. Fn evolution along 10 m electrode buried at different resistivities

soil subjected to subsequent lightning current

has an entirely inductive behaviour. This behaviour becomes

Figure 7. Fn evolution along 10 m horizontal electrode subjected to
more significant for elements closer to the injection point. For subsequent lightning current
grounding electrode buried in soil of resistivity 100 Ωm, the
behaviour is resistive in the last three segments and this in-
ductive for the others. This behaviour becomes more inductive
when approaching to injection point. The grounding electrode
buried in high resistivity soil (1000 Ωm) is characterized by
the preponderance of capacitive behaviour where the nature
behaviour index along the grounding conductor is greater than
the unit. This capacitive behaviour becomes more significant
at injection point.
B. Impact of grounding electrode disposition on the longitu-
dinal behaviour
Since the subsequent lightning current has an important
impact on the longitudinal behaviour of the grounding elec- Figure 8. Fn evolution along 10 m vertical electrode subjected to subsequent
trode than the first lightning current one, we have adopted the lightning current
use of the subsequent lightning current analyse the impact of
grounding electrode disposition (vertical or horizontal) on the
V. C ONCLUSION
longitudinal behaviour of the same grounding electrode (10 m
of length and 8 mm of radius). This paper deals with the study of the longitudinal behaviour
In the case of horizontal electrode (Figure 7) and for of horizontal and vertical grounding electrodes in time domain.
resistivities not exceeding 100 Ωm, the electrode has pre- Using SSR based TLM, we have determined the variation of
dominantly inductive behaviour since at the injection point the transient potential and the current along the grounding
(n = 0), F0 = 0.17 and 0.21 for 10 and 100 Ωm respec- electrodes subjected to the first and the subsequent lightning
tively. This index decreases for the next electrode element current. Such behaviour has been discussed through the propo-
 3rd CISTEM’18 - Algiers, Algeria, October 29-31, 2018

sition of a new time parameter index consisting in the ratio of
potential peak time to the current one.
As main results, under the first lightning current, the ground-
ing electrode buried in low resistivity soil has an inductive
behaviour. The transient behaviour becomes resistive gradually
as the soil resistivity increases. Under the subsequent light-
ning current, the behaviour of the electrode is predominantly
inductive when buried in low resistivity soil and entirely
capacitive when it is buried in high resistivity soil. However,
the grounding electrode disposition (vertical or horizontal)
has no effect on the longitudinal behaviour of grounding
electrodes.
[17] IEC. Protection Against Lightning Part 1: General Principles. IEC
62305-1, Ed. 1.0b, 2006.
[18] Hangos, K.M., Lakner, R., Gerzson, M.: Intelligent control systems
(Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, 2004)
[19] S. Chiheb, O. Kherif, M. Teguar, A. Mekhaldi and N. Harid. Transient
behaviour of grounding electrodes in uniform and in vertically stratified
soil using State Space Representation. IET Science, Measurement &
Technology. Volume 12, Issue 4, July 2018, PP. 427 435.
[20] E. D. Sunde, Earth Conducting Effects in Transmission Systems, New
York: Dover publications Inc, 1968.

R EFERENCES
[1] Vernon Cooray. Lightning protection. Institution of Engineering and
Technology, London, United Kingdom. 2010
[2] B. Nekhoul, C. Guerin, P. Labie, G. Meunier, R. Feuillet, X. Brunotte.
A Finite Element Method For Calculating The Electromagnetic Fields
Generated by Substation Grounding Systems. IEEE Transaction On
Magnetics; VOL. 31, NO.3, PP:2150-2153.May 1995.
[3] M. Akbari, K. Sheshyekani, M. R. Alemi: The effect of frequency
dependence of soil electrical parameters on the lightning performance
of grounding systems, IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compat-
ibility. VOL. 55, NO.4, PP:739746. 2013.
[4] L. Grcev, M. Popov. On high-frequency circuit equivalents of a vertical
ground rod, IEEE Transaction on Power Delivery. VOL, 20, NO. 12,
PP: 15981603. 2005
[5] L. Grcev. Time and frequency dependent lightning surge characteristics
of grounding electrodes . IEEE Transaction on Power Delivery; VOL.
24 NO. 4 PP:2186-2196 October 2009.
[6] R. Xiong, B. Chen, J.-J. Han, Y.-Y. Qiu, W. Yang, and Q. Ning. Transient
resistance analysis of large grounding systems using the fdtd method.
Progress In Electromagnetics Research, Vol. 132, PP:159175, 2012.
[7] Run Xiong, Bin Chen, Cheng Gao, Yun Yi, and Wen Yang. FDTD
calculation model for the transient analyses of grounding systems. IEEE
Transaction On Electromagnetic Compatibility, VOL. 56, NO.5 ,PP
:1155-1162. 2014.
[8] F. F. da Silva and C. LethBak. Electromagnetic Transients in Power
Cables . Springer-Verlag London 2013.
[9] A. Geri, G. M. Veca, E. Garbagnati, G. Sartorio.Non-linear behaviour of
ground electrodes under lightning surge currents: computer modelling
and comparison with experimental results . IEEE Transactions On
Magnetics, Vol. 28, no.2, pp. 1442-1445. 1992.
[10] A. Geri. Behaviour of grounding systems excited by high impulse
currents: the model and its validation. IEEE Transaction on Power
Delivery ;vol. 14 no. 3. pp:1008-1017. 1999.
[11] G. Celli , E. Ghiani and F. Pilo .Earth Conducting Effects in Trans-
mission Systems .Electric Power Systems Research vol 85 pp. 24-29,
2012.
[12] L. Yang ,W. N. Wu, X. B. Cao. An optimized Transmission Line Model
of Grounding Electrodes Under Lightning Currents . Science China
Technological Science, No 56. PP: 335-341. 2013.
[13] S. Chiheb, O. Kherif , M. Teguar, A. Mekhaldi. Incorporation of
soil ionization and mutual coupling in transient study of horizontal
grounding electrode using TLM. International Conference on Electrical
Engineering. October 29-31, 2017, Boumerdes, Algeria.
[14] O. Kherif , S. Chiheb, M. Teguar, A. Mekhaldi. On the Analysis
of Lightning Response of Interconnected Wind Turbine Grounding
Systems. International Conference on Electrical Engineering. October
29-31, 2017, Boumerdes, Algeria.
[15] P. H. Pretorius. Engineering Perspectives on Soil Properties Important
to the Design and Performance of Earth Electrodes at Low and High
Frequency. in Prod. Int. Symp. High Volt. Eng., Pilsen, Czech Republic,
2015.
[16] O. Kherif, S. Chiheb, M. Teguar, A. Mekhaldi and N. Harid. Time-
domain modeling of grounding systems impulse response incorporating
nonlinear and frequency-dependent aspects. IEEE Transactions on Elec-
tromagnetic Compatibility VOL. 60, NO. 4, PP:907-916. 2017.