Crosstalk in Multiconductor Transmission Line in the

Presence of Finitely Conducting Ground

Nelson Theetbayi, Yaqing Liu, R a d Montafio and Rajeev Thottappillil
Division for Electricity and Lightning Research
Uppsala University, Box 539,75121 Uppsala, Sweden

Nelson.Theethayi@,hvi.uu.se, Raieev.Thottauoillil~hvi.uu.se

Abstract: Transient surges in one of the overhead calculations are presented. Finally, the simulation results and a
conductors, due to direct lightning strike, causes crosstalk brief discussion on the simulation results are presented.
in other ndj8cent conductors, This is a common
phenomenon observ~$ in power lines, communication b e s System under Study
and e l c c t r i f ~ milway lints. The presence of finitely
conducting ground influences the magnitude and wave In the three-conductor system one of the conductors is the
shapes of the crosstalk currents and voltages and this finitely conducting half-space with a conductivity value
phenomenon bps not received sufficient attention earlier. representative of soil and the other two conductors are in the
In this paper we investigate the crosstalk io multi- form of metallic wires above the soil surface. The lighming
'
conductor lines above finitely codducting ground as a c m t is assumed to be injected into one of the conductors
function of ground conductivity, bcight of the receptor (emitter) and the crosstalk currents at the loads connected to
conductor, and position of emitter SOUITE It is shown that the two ends of the other conductor (receptor) is studied. A
ground conductivity has a significant influence in the one-kilometer long line at a height of 10 m above the ground
a m p l h d r and wave shape of the cmsstalk currents in ' surface was used as the emitter in the simulations. The current
multiconductor transmission lines. source was a double exponential wave shape with a peak
current of about 31 kA, 10-90%rise time of about 1.4 p,and
Kevwords: Lghtning, Multiconductor lines, Transicot half-peak width of about 7 ps, given by the expression
Analysis, Ground impedance -
1.3013eS*~xp(-3eS)t Exp (-5.8e5) t]. The line is long when
compared to the distance the pulse would travel during the rise
Introduction time. The source was connected to one end of the emitter line
(Case-I) or at the middle (Case-2). Both ends of emitter were
Outages and induced over voltages due to direct and indirect terminated in their self-characteristicimpedance.The receptor
'
lighing strikes on the power lines have been studied line was st a horizontal distance of 1 m h m the emitter line,
extensively in the recent past. The finite conductivity of the but the height of the mceptnr l i e was either 10 m or 0.5 m.
ground influences the bansient surge propagation along the The loads at the ends of the receptor l i e are the surge
line, when compared to the ideal case of infinite ground impedance. The ground conductivity is assumed to be infinity
conductivity. This influence is primarily due to the frequency- (perfect conductor), 0.01 S/m or 0.001 S/m. The relative
dependent peneiration depth fcx the fields in the finitely permittivity of the earth was chosen to be 10, which is a
conducting soil [I]. In the case of indirect lightning strike, that reasonable value for most of the types of the soil.
is, when lightning strike is not on the line, the finite gmund
conductivity of gmund additionally influence the electric and Transient ground impedance
magnetic field incident on the line, when compared to the field
-
in the presence of an ideal infinitely conducting ground 12 51. The probIm of wave propagation on the multiconductor lines
In both cases usually the detailed analysis is done for single can be classified into lossless case and lossy case.The lossless
overhead conductor [3]. There were some limited studies on multi-conductor lines have been analyzed in detail by Paul [7].
induced voltages on multiple overhead lines due to indirect In the present study, lossy multi-conductor lines are those that
lightning strikes [4 - 61. In all these analysis it can be observed have their losses in the system which are fiequencydependant.
that all the conductors are usually at a height of the order of 10 We consider two hequency dependant losses here namely,
m, typical heights for power lines. There are many practical internal loss [7j (due to skin effect in the conductor) and the
systems where the conductors are spread out h m heights of 10 extemal loss (due to finite ground conductivity) [8, 91. The
m to heights as low as 0.5 m above the ground surface. The Telegrapher's equations in time domain are modified to
electrified railway system is an example of such system in include the skin effect of conductors and the time varying
which the rail tracks on a bed of crushed stones (ballast) are at impedance (frequency dependent ground impedance) of the
a height of about 0.5 m above the surface of the ground, where ground. This is given below,
as traction power conductors are several meters high. Lightning
usually attach to the topmost conductor. To understand the
effect of direct lightning sbike on a complicated conductor
system of a railway traction system, it would be interesting to
first study a simple system of three conductors, which is
representative of traction system conductor configuration. The
organization of the paper is as follows. Firstly, the details of the
problendsystem under study are described. Secondly, the
details on the ground transient impedances, skin effect
considerations and their inclusion into the wave propagation

Q2003 IEEE.
0-7803-7779-6/03/$17.00 1003
 In (1) L and C are the usual transmission line parameters for
that of lossless system. Internal losses due to skin effect in the
conductors are handled in the mabices A and B, similar to the
Ones that are used by Paul [7]. The matrix <(t) represent the
parameter corresponding to the external loss due to the f ~ t
ground conductivity [8,9]. Following the previous engineering
-
models [2 6, 81 for the transmission line analysis, the C is
computed with ground surface at a referenced potential zero.
This was necessary for getting a point with respect to which the
potential can be applied on to the line. The transient admittance
matrix is unimportant uniess the conductors ate touching the
ground. The transient impedance can be explained from the
total mutual impedance and it is described in (2) starting h m
Sunde's formula for mutual impedances between two lines k
and 1, (where hL and hl are the conductor height above the
ground, r is the radius of the conductor, dkl is the horizontal
distance between the two conductors).
1 and there is no contribution h m either the late time (equation
L A
When k=I in (2), the self impedance (use radius of conductor
suitably with dn = 0) is obtained and when kA, the mutual
impedance is obtained. The frequency dependant part in (2) is,
r
In principle, equation (3) can be used to get the time domain
iraniient impedance given by (4).
(4)
Researchers have developed different expressions for the
ground transient impedance. Low hquency approximation of
(3), i.e. if uB<<mB,is referred to as Carson's equation [I] and
the time domain transient impedance based on this late time
approximation is given by (5) [IO].
1
__
4 Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) technique [7, 81. The
1
On the contrary, the time domain transient impedance with
early time approximation is given by (6) [SI. In (6), b is the
Bessel function of the first kind of order zero.
It is to be noted that there is a region, where both the early time
and the late time contribute together to the transient impedance
known as the transition region, which appears after the early
02003 IEEE.
0-7803-7779-6/03/$17.00 1004
time region [I I]. The region after the transition region is only
due to the late time contribution of the transient impedance and
is known as the Carson's region [ I l l . The possibte
demarcation of the above three regions is difficult.
e Aranea and Celozzi [SI have given the general expressions for
imnsient impedances as below,
1
rL= m i { s ; o , l c + J (76)
2m8 nd:+(hk+h)l
It is said that (7) is a reasonable approximation for wide range
of frequencies and can be thought of as the best approximation
that is available. In principle for times close to t = 0 (i.e. early
time), only early time approximation (equation (6)) is valid
(5)) or combination of late time and early time (equation (7))
[S, 9, 1 I]. It was observed that the equation (7) predicts values
that are slightly higher than the equation (6) in the possible
early time region, even though the difference is negligible in
the case treated in this paper. In the transition region equation
(7) can be conveniently used because it uses effectively both
the early time and late time approximations. There is another
approximation proposed by Rachidi et a1 (equation (8)) [Sj,
which is also a good approximation to obtain the transient
impedance as a function of time, as it uses the minimum of
asymptotic value of the transient impedance and the late time
approximation.
The main drawback of (8) is that it uses the asymptotic value
of the transient impedance in the entire early time region rather
than using equation ( 6 ) , and in the possible transition region it
uses the late time approximation. We feel that the transient
impedance at any time can be either equal to or less than the
early time bansient impedance depending upon the time under
consideration. Thus considering the a h v e said factors and
models, we calculate the transient impedances using minimum
of the early time approximation and Araneo and Cellozzi's
equation (7), as shown below in equation (9).
It should be mentioned that whether one uses equation (7) or
the more exact equation (9), the choice do not have any
significant influence on the transient impedance.
Telegrapher's equation (1) is solved numerically using the
solution o f (1) can be carried out by means of FDTD equations
and recursive convolution techniques [SI. Next we present the
simulationsresults and sec how the cross talk can be explained
in terms of fields.
Simulation Results and Discussions
The parameters that are changed in the simulations are I)
ground conductivity, 2) height of the receptor and 3) current
injection point at the emitter. As mentioned earlier, Case I
indicates source at one end of the emitter and Case 2 indicates
source at the middle of the emitter. For Case I , the crosstalk
 1.

currents at the ends of the receptor are shown in Figs. 1 and 2.
Throughout this paper the following polarity convention is
adopted. At the near end the current directed &om the p u n d
to the line is positive, and at the far end the current directed
from the line to the gmund is positive.
...........
...... ..........
end, except the polarity. Only the far end waveforms are
shown in Figs. 3 and 4. Let us first by to see how changing
each o f the three parameters may affect the electromagnetic
interaction between the receptor and emitter circuits. The
return of both emitter and receptor is through the ground. The
emitter and ground together is a long transmission line. As a
fvst approximation, the source is considered as a vertical
current or voltage wwce connected between the emitter line
and ground. The Poynting vector (rate of energy flow) in this
line is directed along the line and points away h m the source.
Since the distance between the receptor circuit and the emitter
circuit i s very smatl ( I m) compared to the length of line (1000
m) the Poynting vector is almost along the receptor line a h .

Fig. la. Case-1 Near end currents for receptor height of IOm

........... ........... ........... ........

- -______I-

cap& FarWC1m&nt(I+=O.Smd.Rt2=2~2)
...... ........... ........... ........... :..........

Fig. 1b. Case-IFar end currents for receptor height of 1Om

...............

jm .................... !..............................................

....... 0 =I(hruq

-"n 05 1 IS I 2%

_ _ l _ _ _ _ _ l .--__I___
l
"
~
?lnrelsecr) ' 11$

-mO 95 I '$6 " 2 Z6 3'. Fig. 4. Case-2 Far end currents for receptor height of 0.5m

Ground conhctivity

When ground is perfectly conducting, there is no magnetic

{ ..................................................
........ .....................
............... ...........
Fig. 2b. Case-l Far end currents for receptor height of 0.5m
For Case 2, because of the symmetry of the problem, one (amplitude change) of the traveling current waves arriving at
would expect the same current wave at the near end and the far the far end and near end. Distortion and attenuation increases
field penetration into the ground and the return current is along
the surface of the ground. When the ground conductivity is
reduced, there will be field penetration into ground and the
penetration depth is more for lower frequency components
..........
f
i '1 :
than higher frequency components (skin depth increases with I
.......... decreasing hquency). With decreasing ground conductivity
there is simnger magnetic field coupling between the emitter
and receptor circuit because the per unit length area of the
circuit is now larger. Increased magnetic field coupling is
equivalent to larger distributed series voltage sources in the
receptor conductor. Therefore we can expect a general
tendency for increased crosstalk current at the ends as the
ground conductivity is reduced, keeping all other parameters
constant. This can be seen by comparing the three panels,
corresponding to different conductivity, in each of the figur~s
(e.g., Fig. la). The frequency dependent penetration of
magnetic field into ground, and the resultant losses in the
ground causes distortion (rise time change) and attenuation

1005
 with the number of times the wave travels back and forth
between far end and near end (e.g., Fig. 2a). The phase
velocities of the wave under the ground surface and in the air
above ground are different. Generally waves below ground
travel slower than speed of light, and the speed increases with
increasing fkquency and decreasing conductivity. The vertical
electric field and the horizontal electric field (or magnetic field)
produces currents that aid each other in the near end load and
oppose each other in the far end load. Therefore a shift in the
direction of total crosstalk current at the far end could
sometimes be observed when the ground conductivity is
reduced h m infinity (which increases the magnetic field
coupling, but the e l e h c field coupling is largely unchanged)
(e.g., Fig. Ib).
Height of receptor
When the receptor is at the same height as the emitter (10 m),
there is maximum magnetic coupling between the two circuits.
When the height of receptor is reduced to 0.5 m, with the
emitter at the same height as 10 m, the magnetic coupling is
weaker. When ground conductivity is infinite, the near end and
far end crosstalk current waveshapes are almost identical for
both receptor heights IO m and 0.5 m, but the magnitudes are
proportional to the heights, ratio of 20 (Compare Fig. 1 with
Fig. 2 corresponding to perfect conductivity). The gmund
conductivity has a larger influence on the crosstalk when the
receptor is close to the ground. A larger portion ofthe magnetic
flux is now below the ground, especially at low fi-equencies.
The reduced phase velocity for the portion of the wave under
the ground become very important at low ground
conductivities. Due to all these reasons the near end and far end
crosstalk currents suffer h m very large distortion and
attenuation for receptor height of 0.5 m, when compared to
those for receptor height of 10 m (Compare Fig. 1 with Fig. 2,
and Fig. 3 with Fig. 4).
Current injectionpoint at the emi~er
The point of injection of the current in the emitter has a great
influence in the amplitude and waveshapes of the crosstalk
currents. When the injection point is in the middle, the waves
travel in opposite direction towards the ends and create
identical crosstalk currents, but opposite in directions at the
ends. The attenuation and distortion of the waveforms are less
when the source is in the middle of the receptor. If one
compares the near end currents in the Case 1 and Case 2 it can
be seen that the values are almost comparable (Compare initial
magnitudes in Fig. l a with Fig. 3, and Fig. 2a with Fig. 4).
However, the far end currents are much different probably
because the major portion of the wave that was traveling in the
foward direction is removed due to the cancellation of the
oppositely traveling currents.
Conclusions
In this paper we have presented a modified expression for the
time varying transient impedance of the ground. We have
described the various factors that could influence the crosstalk
currents in a multiconductor transmission Iine above ground.
The investigated factors are the ground conductivity, proximity
of receptor and emitter-wire to the ground, and the position of
the current injection point, whether it is at the end or in the
middle. The possible conclusions that can be made are,
1) When the height of the receptor was close to the ground (0.5
m) the decreased ground conductivity (0.01 S/m and 0.001
S/m) caused increase in crosstalk currents at both near end and
far end of the 1 h line, even though far end crosstalk currents
02003 IEEE.
0-7803-7779-6/03/$17.00 1006
were more affected. This behavior is different from that of a
pulse propagating along a single line above ground in which
case the pulse amplitude reduces with distance.
2) For receptor lime close to the ground (0.5 m) and finite
ground conductivity if one calculates the energy dissipation in
the load, it can be found that the energy dissipated in the near
end cros&k was less than the far end crosstalk.
3) Severe distortions of the waveforms were observed in both
near end and far end crosstalk currents when the receptor was
close to the ground and the ground was fmitely conducting
The cross talk problem presented here can be also extended to
many conductors. The methodology of solving the wave
propagation still remains the same as described in the earlier
sections for the three-conductor system.
Acknowledgement: This research is p d y fmanced by
Banverket, Sweden (Contact persons: Per Andes Lindeberg,
Ulf Hellstrim). Discussions with Farhad Rachidi is greatly
appreciated.
References
[I] A. Deri, G. Tevan, A. Semlyen & A. Castanheira, “The
Complex Ground Retum Plane A Simplified Model for
Homogenous & Multilayer Earth Return”, IEEE Trans. On
Power Apparatus & Systems, Vol. PAS-100, No. 8, 1981,
3686-3693.
[2] A. K. Agrawal, H. J. Price & S. H. Gurbaxani, “Transient
Response of Multiconductor Transmission Lines Excited by a
Nonuniform Electromagnetic Field”, IEEE Trans., on
Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. EMC-22, No. 2, 1980, pp.
119-129.
[3] V. Conray, V. Scuka, “Lightning-induced overvoltages in
power lines: validity of various approximations made in
overvoltage calculations“, IEEE Trans., on Electromagnetic
Compatibility, Vol. 40, No. 4, Part-l, I99S, pp. 355-363.
[4] F. Rachidi, C. A. Nucci, M. Ianoz & C. Mazzetti,
‘Tnfluence of Lossy Ground on Lightning Induced Voltages on
Overhead Lines”, IEEE Trans., on Electromagnetic
Compatibility, Vol. 38, No. 3, 1996, pp. 250-264.
[5] F. Rachidi, C. A. Nucci, M. lanoz & C. Mazzetti,
“Response of Multicondcutor Power Lines to Nearby
Lightning Return Stroke Electromagnetic Fields”, IEEE
Trans., on Power Delivery, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1997, pp. 1404-
1411.
[6] F. Rachidi, C. A. Nucci & M. lanoz,‘‘Transient Analysis of
Multiconductor Lines Above a Lossy Ground”, IEEE Trans.,
on Power Delivery, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1999, pp. 294-302.
[7] C. R Paul, “Analysis of Multiconductor Transmission
Lines”, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1994.
[8] R Araneo & S. Celozzi, “Direct Time Domain Analysis of
Transmission Lines Above a Lossy Ground”, LEE Proc.-Sci.
Meas. Technal. Vol. 148, No. 2,2001, pp. 73-79.
[9] F. Rachidi, S. L. b y k a , C, A. Nucci & M.lanoz, ‘Wn the
Singularity of the Ground Transient Resistance Expression for
Overhead Transmission Lines”, Conference Proceedings 25*
ICLP 2000, Rhodes-Greece,5.17, pp. 474-477.
[IO] D. Orzan, “Time-Domain Low Frequency Approximation
for the Off-Diagonal Terms of the Ground Impedance Matrix”,
IEEE Trans., on Elechomagnetic Cornapatibility, Vol. 39, No.
1, 1997, pp. 64.
[ I11 A. Semlyen, ’‘Ground Return Parameters of Transmission
Lines an Asysmptotic Analysis for Very High Frequencies”,
IEEE TEXIS., on PAS, Vol. PAS-100, NO. 3, 1981, pp. 1031-
1038.