Electrical Engineering

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00202-021-01452-w

ORIGINAL PAPER

Transient investigations on lightning overvoltages applied on oil tanks

roof considering grounding configurations
Hamed Neyshabouri1 · Mohsen Niasati1

Received: 18 April 2021 / Accepted: 5 November 2021

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2022

Abstract
This paper is treated with the lightning overvoltages (LOVs) applied to the roof oil tanks in low voltage distribution systems.
Since the oil tanks and electric distribution towers are not usually protected by guard wires, they may be more exposed to
lightning strikes. In this way, the grounding system configurations, soil resistivity, the oil tank diameter and even the inherent
characteristics of lightning strikes play an important role in the possibility of malfunctioning caused by overvoltages. The
simulation results represent that the distance between indirect lightning stroke points discharging to the ground and the oil
tank locations can also create destructive LOVs on them, if the grounding system is not well selected and implemented. Power
system protection equipment such as surge arresters can greatly reduce these effects, but due to economic limitations, it is
not possible to use them extensively and, therefore, it is necessary to limit LOVs using the minimum available facilities like
grounding system variation. This paper represents that using meshed grounding systems can better mitigate the corrosion
and the hazards of lightning surges than conventional vertical rods with effective length. All mathematical equations and
formulations are solved using numerical methods implemented in Fortran.

Keywords Oil tank · Lightning strikes · Overvoltage · Transients

1 Introduction
Due to the increasing in exploration and operation of oil
resources all over the world, the use of large oil storage sys-
tems (oil tanks) has been expanded by growth. In these oil
tanks, floating roofs on the top of oil materials are embed-
ded to prevent rainwater from entering and reduce the oil
evaporation due to sunlight radiations. According to the mini-
mization of the oil evaporation, the floating metal roofs have
been made of conductive metals, which provide a proper
path to discharge the electric currents appeared. Fuel tanks
require a precise maintenance schedule that can be used
to prevent many misfortunes, especially fires and lightning
strikes. However, despite the continuous care of these tanks,
researches show that the risk of fire caused by lightning
strikes is still the most important cause of fire in this sen-
B Mohsen Niasati
mniasati@semnan.ac.ir
Hamed Neyshabouri
H.neyshabouri@semnan.ac.ir
1 Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Semnan
University, Semnan, Iran
sitive equipment [1–3]. Many reports show that 35% of oil
tanks fires utilized with the floating roof are caused by light-
ning. Correspondingly, 95% of the fires created in the air gap
between the floating roof and the tank wall are due to the
lightning current flow with very high amplitude. The air gap
between the floating roof and the tank body makes it easier
to move around any side for better maintenance and easier
operation. However, due to the presence of flammable gases
around the air gaps, if there’s a 3 kV/m electric field, a small
electrical spark also causes a large fire [4, 5].
Another type of lightning spark can be caused due to the
high temperature caused by lightning flow through the tank
body. The high energy of lightning can cause corrosion and
melting of thin metals, result in the production of flammable
particles around the air gap. Since the metal sheets with a
thickness of less than 5 mm melt against the lightning current
and the thickness of the fuel tanks are generally more than
this amount, this type of fire occurs less frequently in these
areas [6]. Lightning protection in oil tanks can be divided
into two parts: primary protection and secondary protection.
Primary protection involves protecting the tank against direct
lightning strikes, which actually prevents lightning strikes to
the tank directly, and creating secondary sparks by absorbing

123

Lightening
flash
Current flows
down outside
of shell
Ground level
(a)
Lightening
flash to the
ground
Ground level
(c)
Fig. 1 Four possible lightning flashes to the oil tanks
the lightning current away from the tank and conducting it
to the ground. Eliminating the voltage difference between
the floating roof and the tank body is another major way to
prevent fires from being struck by lightning. Lightning strikes
leading to a safe path to discharge to the ground before hitting
the floating roof or tank walls can be the best way to reduce
the voltage differences. Ensuring that there is no oxygen or
flammable gases as the main cause of combustion around air
gaps is another way to control fires caused by lightning [7].
Unfortunately, there are not many reports concentrated on
oil tank overvoltage caused by the lightning current. Authors
in [8] represent a finite difference time domain (FDTD)
method to analyze the effects of indirect lightning on large
floating roof oil tanks; however there are no investigations
about grounding configurations to the overvoltage magni-
tude applied. The laboratory implementation of the direct
lightning protection scheme is experienced in [9], where
the authors model the lighting current with a spark gap and
illustrate something about the oil tank corrosion. The risk
assessment of fire accidents in large-scale oil tanks is repre-
sented in [10] concentrating the probabilistic solutions. The
authors in [11] examine the primary protection routes for oil
tanks, using the rolling sphere method (RSM) to locate the
installation site of the Franklin rod and the suspended wire
around the fuel tanks. There is also a program that specifies
the location of the Franklin bar and its height by entering
the dimensions of the tank and the amount of protection. In
[12], the authors calculate the electric field amplitude and
123
Electrical Engineering
Lightening
flash to the
roof
Ground level
(b)
(d)
the potential applied, when the lightning strikes to the oil
tank body and inside it. In this literature, several numeri-
cal methods have been used for calculations. The authors
in [13] examine the laboratory effect of shunt and elastic
wires on fuel tank performance when lightning strokes are
existed. It has been concluded that due to improper connec-
tion and hard maintenance of the shunt conductors, it is better
to remove them and use flexible wires for equipotentializa-
tion. The slight reduction in the risk of lightning strikes on
oil tanks by installing Franklin bars is examined in [14]. The
Monte Carlo method has been used to calculate the number
of lightning strikes on fuel tanks while installing Franklin
wires and rods. Lightning parameters in this method are the
amplitude of the current and the location of the lightning
strike occurrence. The authors in [15] use analytical rela-
tionships to calculate the number of elastic wires to protect
tanks. In this literature, the amount of lightning amplitude is
considered as a constant value, while the maximum ampli-
tude current that can be applied to the floating roof depends
on its height.
In this paper, the LOVs investigations applied to the oil
tanks are analyzed, which cause serious firing around the air
gap. The effect of the type of grounding grids on the discharge
of lightning current is also analyzed to identify the impor-
tance of electrical parameters in reducing direct/indirect
overvoltages to the floating roof or tank body. Formerly, by
comparing the output results of each method, the best tech-
nique for protecting oil reservoirs will be introduced.
Electrical Engineering
2 Problem concept
Due to the significant strategic nature of crude oil storage
tanks around the world and the protection against natural
disasters such as lightning, the use of appropriate protection
methods to reduce the casualties and damages is necessary
[16]. Oil tanks with floating roofs are exposed to direct and
indirect lightning due to being located outdoors. Lightning
strikes on these reservoirs and the fires caused by them real-
ize irreparable damage to oil companies annually. Therefore,
first of all, the types of lightning strikes on oil reservoirs
should be described, as can be divided into the following
categories [1–5]:
• Lightning may strikes to the upper parts of the tanks or
floating roofs. In this case, the lightning current is trans-
mitted to the ground by discharging through the floating
roof and the body. Figure 1.a shows the possible locations
of the lightning strikes to the tanks and the discharging
paths. According to this figure, the discharging path is not
in one direction to the ground; however varies in different
ways depending on the tank body inductance. The down-
ward wave of lightning current coming from the clouds
crashes the high altitude structures as well as the floating
roof. The red routes are the only parts of the tank that can
be struck by lightning. The higher the height of the roof
causes the vulnerable areas larger and in fact, the possibil-
ity of the lightning strikes discharged to the floating roof
will be increased.
• The electric field between the lightning surge and the
ground causes an electric charge with opposite polarity
on the floating roof and the body of the tank. Then, due
to the high inductance of the equipotentialization wire, the
electric charge existed on the roof, and the body is dis-
charged through the body with a large time constant, as
shown in Fig. 1.b. Therefore, if a lot of electric charges are
induced, an electric spark between the floating roof and
the body of the tank may produce a path to discharge cur-
rent, which has less energy than direct lightning strikes.
The effect of the electric charge value is estimated at a dis-
tance of fewer than 150 m. It should be noted that the fuel
in the tanks can be considered as an insulator with regard
to the floating roof conductors and the tank body. There-
fore, some very low amplitude current may flow through
the fuel as much as the insulator leakage current, which is
safe.
• Lightning strikes to the oil tanks may create induced
currents in cables or electrical equipment around the
tanks, which could cause electric ignitions. The pres-
ence of flammable gases in these areas can cause fires
affected by these sparks. As shown in Fig. 1.c, the light-
ing current is discharging to the near ground of oil tanks
indirectly.
• The high potential created on the floating roof, pro-
duces a corona effect around the roof. In the pres-
ence of flammable gases in the environment, the corona
discharging can be dangerous and cause fires. How-
ever, this phenomenon happens more often when the
floating roof altitude is more than 60% of the tank
height.
3 Lightning strike
There are several current functions with mathematical for-
mulations which have been proposed to model the lightning
behavior such as ‘Double Exponential’, ‘Jones Modifica-
tion’, ‘CIGRE’ and ‘Pulse’ functions [17–19]; however, a
proper function that can accurately model the lightning strike
must have the following characteristics:
• Shape the lightning waveform with a very good approxi-
mation as the base shape described in [18].
• It must be able to provide the typical parameters of the
lightning waveform, such as the maximum current peak,
the maximum current slope, rise time and settling time.
• No discontinuity should occur in the first and second
derivatives of the current lightning model over time (espe-
cially at the instant t  0, due to magnetic and electric field
calculations).
• The current lightning model must be differentiable in order
to calculate the electric and magnetic fields generated.
• It should be as simple as possible.
In this paper, the waveform of lightning current is mod-
eled by the widely used Heideler function [20], applied to
an ideal source paralleled with a 400  resistance [21], as
mathematically represented in (1).
 n
t  n
Imax τ1 − τt
i Lightning (t)    e 2 (1)
ϑ 1+ t n
τ1
where τ1 ∈ [0.1, 0.5], τ2 ∈ [1, 300] and n is considered to
be around 7. ϑ is a parameter determined by the first order
derivative from the current waveform to represent the cor-
rection factor. When the lightning strikes to a distribution
line pole or an oil tank, the current flows to the ground-
ing grid, directly. The Maxwell equations integrated with
Pocklington equations can model the lightning current flows
to any grounding electrodes or rods [22, 23]. These set of
Pocklington-Maxwell equations will be solved and evaluate
the high frequency
 exc  grounding grid behaviors. The excitation
function E sm (s) in the loss-full medium is derived by the
following equation.
123
 Electrical Engineering

represent the propagation constant in air and loss-full ground,

respectively, in which they are defined with the following
formulations.

k02  ω2 μ0 ∈0
 σ
k12  ω2 μ0 ∈efec  ω2 μ0 ∈0 ∈r − j (5)
ω

where ωr and σ are Earth permeability and conductivity coef-

ficients. Since ω  2π f represent the angular frequency, the
→
− 
G s s, s  could be extracted through electric dipoles using
Somerfield integral law [25].

4 Grounding grid configurations

The different types of grounding systems greatly affect the

amplitude of induced lightning overvoltages strike to the
Fig. 2 a A typical grounding grid, b schematic view of a horizontal oil tank or the floating roof. Because important parameters
electrode and a vertical rod [24] such as the type of meshed ground grid, the configuration of
⎧ the vertical and horizontal electrodes used, soil ionization,
NW ⎪
 ⎨ variation in electrical parameters ρg and εg , as well as the
  2   
exc
E sm (s) C · In s  · s  
n · k1 + ∇∇ gon sm , sn · ds
m · s

amplitude of the lightning waveform influence the amount of
⎪
n1⎩ Cn damage to oil tanks. For example, as the distribution tower
 height increases, the time needed to return the reflected light-
    
+R· I sn sm · sn ∗ · k12 + ∇∇ gon sm , sn∗ · ds  ning wave to the top of the tower is raised and so that, the
Cn amplitude of the overvoltage at the top of the tower increases,
⎫
 ⎪
⎬ correspondingly. In this study, three kinds of grounding grids
  →
− 
+ In s  · s 
m · G s sm , sn · ds

(2) are used for oil tanks protection as listed here, a single ver-
⎪
⎭
 tical rod, a single horizontal rod and a meshed grounding
Cn
grid.
where
4.1 Single vertical rod
m  1, 2, . . . , N W
1 As mentioned in many research projects before, a single ver-
C − tical rod could be modeled by an inductance which is in
j4π ω ∈efec
connection series with a parallel RC branch [25, 26]. The
k02 − k12 configuration is shown in Fig. 3, and brief formulations are
R 2 (3)
k0 + k12 mathematically derived in (6).
     
In s  is the current induced along a horizontal ρg 8li
   electrode Ri  ln − 1 []
and a vertical rod as shown in Fig. 2, and go s, s  represent 2πli d
 
the half power Green function while the gi s, s  encrease μg li 4li
according to image theory [24]. Li  ln [H ]
2π d
Thus, they are found by (4). 2π εg li
Ci    [F] (6)
   e1− jk1 Ro ln 4ldi − 1
go s, s 
Ro
 −
 e jk1 R1
g1 s, s ∗  (4) 4.2 Single horizontal electrode
R1

where R0 and R1 are the distance between reference point Horizontal electrodes are commonly used in soils that are
and the image point to the observer. Furthermore, k 0 and k 1 soft and have almost high humidity. Also deep in the ground

123
Electrical Engineering

Li R g (I ) R ii,l R ii,m
li 1/ G ii,0
C ii,0 ....
d
Ri Ci C ii,l C ii,m

Fig. 5 A meshed grounding grid used for an oil tank grounding [27]
Fig. 3 A single vertical rod used for an oil tank grounding

i (t ) L where ‘s’ is the Laplace operator, and cn and an coefficients

represent the residuals and fitted poles, respectively. More-
over, k1 and k2 are real numbers which show the constant
R C R C system impedance. The Eq. (8) can be updated to (9), in
2 2 2 which the self-impedance Z ii is frequency dependent. Z ii
2
in ‘s’ domain can be approximated by rational functions in
rational polynomial, pole-zero or pole-residue form, as:

Fig. 4 A single horizontal rod used for oil tank grounding


N
s
Z ii (s) ∼
 rii,m + Rii,o + s L ii,o (9)
s − aii,m
n1
should be rocks that cannot use the vertical electrode. The
configuration of a single horizontal electrode buried in
ground depth (h) is shown in Fig. 4, which the basic equations
shown in (7) are also derived. 5 Mathematical formulations of lightning
    overvoltage
ρg 2li
R ln √ − 1 []
li dh The effect of ground conductivity on the lightning-induced
   
μg li 2li overvoltages in many studies related to this issue has been
Li  ln √ − 1 [H ] neglected. In the initial studies, due to the complexity of solv-
2π dh
π εg li ing the electromagnetic problem, for easily solve the problem
Ci    [F] (7) assumed that the conductivity is infinite (lossless ground),
ln √2li − 1 and the effect of ground conductivity has not been consid-
dh
ered in the calculation of lightning induced voltages. This
assumption is not true because the ground has an electrical
4.3 Meshed grounding grid conductivity. Subsequent studies performed in this field have
demonstrated that the electrical conductivity is an influential
For those oil tanks that are located in sensitive areas, the factor in the lightning-induced overvoltages.
meshed ground systems are used to provide better protection In [28–30], the lightning-induced voltages on overhead
against lightning. The relationships and formulations of this lines are divided into two parts, the first part of the induced
model are also stated in [27], which can convert a meshed voltage (Ui) regardless of the ground conductivity and the
grounding grid to the schematic shown in Fig. 5. Therefore, second part of the induced voltage (Uσ ) are affected by the
G ii,0 could be considered as the conductance of grounding ground conductivity, as follows:
segment i under a dc current. Thus, element for G ii,0 is rep-
resented as a resistor with the resistance that equals to dc U (x, t)  Ui (x, t) + Uσ (x, t) (10)
ground resistance of the segment. In order to incorporate
the ionization effect in the circuit analysis, this resistance is
In (10), Ui (x, t) and Uσ (x, t) are defined as follows,
approximated by nonlinear resistance Rg (I) [27]. Therefore,
respectively:
we have: Rii,m  − rii,m /bii,m , and Cii,m  1/rii,m , where
this has been derived from (8).
Ui (x, t) ≈ Ai (x, t) − b · Ai (x, t − t f ) (11)

N
cn
Z ii (s) ∼
 + k1 + sk2 (8)
s − an Uσ (x, t) ≈ Aσ (x, t) − b · Aσ (x, t − t f ) (12)
n1

123
 Electrical Engineering

(a)

Voltage (kV)
Fig. 6 Single line view of model system Time (µs)

(b) 200
⎛ ⎞

t−1
t /
Im ·
t ⎝ Ui (x, t) ⎠ d = 40 m
Ai (x, t)  · Ui (x, i ·
t) + lim · u(t)
I0 · t f x→∞ 2 150 d = 60 m
i0
d = 100 m
(13)

(kV)
d = 200 m
 100
Im ε0 ·
t
Aσ (x, t)  · Voltage
I0 · t f π ·σ
⎡ 50

t−1
t /
W (x, i ·
t)
·⎣ 
0

t − i
t
i0
 
1
+ −0.22 · k 3 + · W (x, t −
t) -50
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
6
   Time (µs)
4
+ −1.07 · k + 0.22 · k 3 + · W (x, t) · u(t)
3 Fig. 7 Wave shape of the lightning induced voltages by different dis-
(14) tance of lightning channel from overhead line; a results of [28],
b obtained results from CST software
In (11)–(14), Im is the maximum
 amplitude of the light-

ning current, while k  εr · ε0 (π · σ ·
t) and b  the middle of the overhead line. To evaluate the validity, the
 
t f 2 · (tt − t f ) . Considering (10) to (14) are clearly vis- model system studied, and results are shown in Fig. 7.
ible that the amount of electrical conductivity (σ) directly
effects on the lightning induced voltages on overhead lines.
In this study to illustrate this matter, simulation is performed 6 Simulation results
by (Computer Simulation Technology) CST software which
applies (Finite Difference Time Domain) FDTD method for In this section, the effects of direct and indirect lightning
solving the electromagnetic equations. The single-line view strikes on the oil tanks and their floating roofs are examined.
of the model system is shown in Fig. 6. With regard to the size and overvoltage protection of light-
This system consists of a copper wire overhead line with a ning voltage variations in the four modes described in Sect. 2,
length of 1200 m and a radius of 0.5 mm, which is located at this paper examines the amount of possible damage caused
a height of 10 m above the ground. In the simulations carried by lightning in Sect. 5. The block diagram of the studied dis-
out in [27] both ends of the overhead line terminated to 498 tribution network is shown in Fig. 8, in which the oil tanks
 adaptive resistance. Moreover, the ground conductivity is are placed at a distance of 150 m from the 380 V distribution
equal to 0.01 s/m, and the relative permittivity of the ground network feeders with a total length of 300 m. The distribution
is considered as 10. As it is assumed, the lightning channel towers and the oil tank body are modeled by J-Marti equa-
with a length of 600 m straight and perpendicular struck tions in high frequency conditions [28]. For the base case, the
to ground and velocity of the current in lightning channel length of the electrodes is considered as 4 m with diameter
is one-third of the speed of light in free space. The wave of 3 cm, the soil resistivity is 250  m, the lightning charac-
shapes of lightning induced voltage are calculated exactly in teristics are 10 kA and 1.2 μs/50 μs. According to Fig. (34)

123
Electrical Engineering

Distribution Distribution
Cable impedance system system Source impedance
Upstream
~ network
Load
roof
Lightning

Copper cable for

Oil tank “Equipotential Bonding”

Grounding
system

Fig. 8 The distribution network under consideration including an oil tank

on the page (64) of the BS Standard [14], fuel tanks and 6.2 Indirect overvoltage
buildings with explosive or highly flammable contents can
be located adjacent to the distribution network. It is worth In this section, the lightning current is injected besides the
noting that their protection must be done in accordance with oil tanks, results in GPR increment of grounding grid which
the permitted instructions and standards. causes the LOV on electrical equipment. Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
investigate the indirect LOV generated at different parts of the
electrical system regarding to effective parameters variations.
6.1 Direct overvoltage
It is expected that LOVs are mitigated rather than the direct
LOVs, due to discharging to the ground depth rapidly.
In this part, the direct impact of lightning strikes hitting to
the oil tanks is analyzed, and the overvoltages generated in
different parts of the network are evaluated in the following (a) Lightning front time duration variations
sections. As mentioned in Sect. 6.1.a, the front time decreasing
can produce more harmful LOV applied to the electri-
cal system. Tables 6, 7 represent the output results of
(a) Lightning front time duration variations
indirect LOV injected near to the oil tanks.
In this case, it is assumed that the front time dura-
(b) Soil resistivity variations
tion in Heidler waveform increases from 1.2 μs to
In this section, it is expected that increasing the soil
10 μs. Formerly, the overvoltages applied to the network
resistivity will impact on grounding impedance growth,
will be investigated and evaluated in different cases of
results in long term discharging lightning current flow
the grounding grid configurations in accordance with
and higher LOV creation. As shown in Tables 8, 9 the
Tables 1 and 2. It is observed that whatever the light-
indirect LOVs are varied correspond to ρg increment.
ning front time duration increases, the LOV applied are
(c) Lightning amplitude increment
less dangerous.
Here it is expected that the LOVs will be so much higher
(b) Soil resistivity variations
than the base case due to lightning amplitude increment
In this case, the soil resistivity is increased from 400 .m
from 10 kA to 30 kA, as the output results are shown in
to 1000 .m. It is observed that the impedance of the
Table 10.
lightning discharge path will increase, and the overvolt-
ages applied to the oil tanks will also raise. However,
the output results of meshed grounding grid are more
acceptable than the other grounding configurations.
(c) Lightning amplitude increment 7 Comparison and evaluation
Definitely, changing the amplitude of the lightning cur-
rent waveform can change the overvoltages accordingly. As mentioned before, the lightning induced voltages on over-
The output results represented in Tables 3, 4, 5 indicate head lines are strongly dependent on the ground conductivity.
that the overvoltages will do upsurge as the intensity of To illustrate this issue for the system that shown in Fig. 6,
the lightning injected into the oil resources increases, assuming a lightning strike hit the ground at a distance of
than the base case which is considered as I max  10 kA. 100 m from overhead line for different values of the ground

123
 Electrical Engineering

Table 1 Direct LOV

investigation according to τ1  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
1.2 μs applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 13.4 12.6 17.5 9.8

Midpoint of 19.1 16.5 21.4 14.7
distribution line
Load 6.5 6.1 7.8 4.9
Oil tank body (1) 22.7 20.3 24.9 18.8
Oil tank body (2) 20.5 18.5 22.6 15.6
Floating roof 23.6 21.1 25.8 18.9

Table 2 Direct LOV

investigation according to τ 1  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
10 μs applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 10.2 8.8 11.5 6.5

Midpoint of 16.8 14.5 18.1 12.2
distribution line
Load 3.3 2.7 3.9 2.1
Oil tank body (1) 15.6 12.6 16.6 10.5
Oil tank body (2) 14.8 13.1 15.9 11.7
Floating roof 7.4 6.3 8.8 5.1

Table 3 Direct LOV

investigation according to ρ g  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
400  m applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 17.5 16.2 21.3 12.2

Midpoint of 25.6 23.1 29.8 19.7
distribution line
Load 8.9 7.6 13.1 5.8
Oil tank body (1) 24.7 21.6 27.5 17.5
Oil tank body (2) 23.5 20.1 26.4 16.2
Floating roof 14.2 12.9 17.8 10.8

Table 4 Direct LOV

investigation according to ρ g  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
1000  m applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 29.8 26.5 34.9 22.3

Midpoint of 48.6 44.2 51.2 37.6
distribution line
Load 15.2 13.2 18.3 11.7
Oil tank body (1) 50.1 47.8 57.4 42.9
Oil tank body (2) 48.6 45.9 55.5 40.1
Floating roof 55.8 54.4 59.9 48.8

123
Electrical Engineering

Table 5 Direct LOV

investigation according to I max Overvoltages Grounding configurations
 30 kA applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 32.2 27.8 36.9 24.5

Midpoint of 51.7 46.9 55.6 40.2
distribution line
Load 16.5 14.6 19.5 12.6
Oil tank body (1) 54.6 50.2 59.8 45.8
Oil tank body (2) 50.3 48.5 57.1 42.1
Floating roof 59.6 57.6 62.3 54.3

Table 6 Indirect LOV

investigation according to τ 1  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
1.2 μs applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 6.2 5.5 7.1 4.1

Midpoint of 14.2 12.4 14.8 9.8
distribution line
Load 3.1 2.6 4.5 1.4
Oil tank body (1) 11.1 9.2 13.8 8.7
Oil tank body (2) 9.3 7.8 10.9 6.5
Floating roof 15.5 12.2 17.0 10.1

Table 7 Indirect LOV

investigation according to τ 1  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
10 μs applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 4.4 3.8 5.7 1.9

Midpoint of 10.7 8.9 11.6 6.4
distribution line
Load 2.7 2.1 3.5 1.2
Oil tank body (1) 9.1 7.6 10.4 6.2
Oil tank body (2) 8.6 6.3 9.9 5.1
Floating roof 12.1 9.5 13.6 7.5

Table 8 Indirect LOV

investigation according to ρ g  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
400  m applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 9.9 8.7 11.2 6.8

Midpoint of 20.3 18.6 24.3 16.3
distribution line
Load 5.1 4.7 7.5 3.9
Oil tank body (1) 17.6 15.2 20.1 13.2
Oil tank body (2) 16.2 13.5 18.7 11.5
Floating roof 22.1 19.8 26.8 17.8

123
 Electrical Engineering

Table 9 Indirect LOV

investigation according to ρ g  Overvoltages Grounding configurations
1000  m applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 21.5 18.1 24.1 15.4

Midpoint of 43.6 38.7 47.5 33.5
distribution line
Load 17.7 16.5 21.3 13.5
Oil tank body (1) 49.9 45.3 51.6 41.4
Oil tank body (2) 46.3 41.2 49.5 37.5
Floating roof 51.2 44.5 55.3 42.3

Table 10 Indirect LOV

investigation according to I max Overvoltages Grounding configurations
 30 kA applied on ↓
One vertical Four vertical One horizontal Meshed
electrode (kV) electrodes (kV) electrode (kV) grounding grid
(kV)

Main feeder 23.1 19.9 25.6 17.8

Midpoint of 45.6 39.2 49.5 35.6
distribution line
Load 18.9 17.5 22.7 15.9
Oil tank body (1) 51.1 47.9 53.6 42.5
Oil tank body (2) 47.8 45.6 52.4 40.1
Floating roof 53.6 49.1 57.9 38.9

80
electrical conductivity values the dissipation factor would be
70 great. In other words, the soils with large amount of electri-
60 cal conductivity are a lossy environment for electromagnetic
Voltage (kV)

waves.
50

40

30

20
10
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Time (µs)
Fig. 9 Induced voltage wave shapes obtained for different values of the
ground conductivity and the distance of the lightning channel 100 from
overhead line
conductivity, software computing is repeated, and the results
are shown in Fig. 9. According to Fig. 9, it can be seen that the
peak value of the lightning induced voltage is reached from
47.30 kV for σg  0.1 s/m to 74.18 kV for σg  0.001 s/m.
According to studies can be stated that change the value of the
induced voltages on overhead lines by changing the electrical
conductivity of the soil is due to the fact that by changing the
electrical conductivity the soil dissipation factor changes. In
soils with a small amount of electrical conductivity, the value
of dissipation factor would be low, and also in soils with high
8 Conclusion
In this paper, a complete framework is presented to investi-
4 gate the overvoltages applied to the oil tanks and their floating
roofs. Since the soil resistivity significantly affects the total
grounding grid impedance, so that, with increasing ρ g , the
applied overvoltages will also increase accordingly. In high-
altitude mountainous areas where the intensity of lightning
strikes entering into the oil tanks is high, the amplitude of the
current will also increase, and the overvoltages will become
more dangerous. The shorter the peak time of the lightning
current, causes the lightning waveform is sharper compared
with the main one, result in more protection requirements for
fuel reservoirs. In cases where LOVs are applied indirectly to
the system under consideration, if the lightning current path
is not properly provided to discharge to the earth depth, it can
obligate more destructive effects than the direct LOVs. Even-
tually, it is figured out that whatever the grounding system is
modeled in more detail, it can reduce the effects of LOVs in a

123
Electrical Engineering
more favorable way, even where the surge protective devices
(SPDs) are not installed.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.
References
1. Seok BY (2020) Electrical breakdown characteristics in non-
uniform electrode system with bakelite barrier under the lightning
impulse voltage. Electr Eng 102(4):2363–2368
2. Mahmood F, Rizk ME, Lehtonen M (2019) Risk-based insu-
lation coordination studies for protection of medium-voltage
overhead lines against lightning-induced overvoltages. Electr Eng
101(2):311–320
3. Cao X, Li R, Tao X, Yang X, Sun X, Han H (2021) Lightning
flashover characteristics of metro viaduct section with contact rail
power supply system. Electr Eng 103(2):983–991
4. Man-hai LJGG (2011) Characteristics of oil fuel tank protection
for the conversion design from VLCC to VLOC. J Ship Des 1:136
5. Chang JI, Lin CC (2006) A study of storage tank accidents. J Loss
Prev Process Ind 19(1):51–59
6. Adekitan AI (2013) Lightning protection of floating roof tanks. Am
J Eng Res 2(10):11–21
7. Zhao XG, Zhou Y, Li SM (2008) Integrative lightning protecting
method of nonmetal oil tanks. Petrol Eng Constr 34:1–3
8. Liu Y, Fu Z, Jiang A, Liu Q, Liu B (2016) FDTD analysis of the
effects of indirect lightning on large floating roof oil tanks. Electric
Power Syst Res 139:81–86
9. Ren X, Fu Z, Yan N, Sun W (2013) Analysis and experimental
investigation of direct lightning protection for floating roof oil
tanks. Electric Power Syst Res 94:134–139
10. Wu D, Chen Z (2016) Quantitative risk assessment of fire acci-
dents of large-scale oil tanks triggered by lightning. Eng Fail Anal
63:172–181
11. Qiu S, Si X, Li Z, Zhang S, Duan Z (2016) Lightning strike pro-
tection performance research of early streamer emission terminal
based on contrastive discharge test. In: 2016 IEEE international
power modulator and high voltage conference (IPMHVC), pp
688–694. IEEE
12. Buccella C (2002) An accurate numerical method to compute the
effects of the protections against direct lightning on charged liquid
tanks. In: Conference record of the 2002 IEEE industry applications
conference. 37th IAS annual meeting (Cat. No. 02CH37344), Vol
2, pp 1006–1011. IEEE
13. Ren XM, Fu ZC, Liu QZ, Liu BQ, Sun W (2011) Experimental
analysis of direct lightning protection for floating roof oil tanks.
Gaodianya Jishu/ High Voltage Eng 37(4):867–873
14. British Standard 6651 (1999) Code of practice for protection of
structures against lightning, pp 58–65
15. Mohamed FM, Abdelaziz AY (2017) Protection of floating roof
petroleum storage tanks against lightning strokes. Int J Electr Com-
put Eng 11(3):239–243
16. Furgał J (2020) Influence of lightning current model on simulations
of overvoltages in high voltage overhead transmission systems.
Energies 13(2):296
17. Wooi CL, Abul-Malek Z, Rohani MNKH, Yusof AMB, Arshad
SNM, Elgayar AI (2019) Comparison of lightning return stroke
channel-base current models with measured lightning current. Bull
Electr Eng Inf 8(4):1478–1488
18. Yang G, Yu Z, Zhang Y, Chen S, Zhang B, He J (2017) Evaluation
of lightning current and return stroke velocity using measured far
electric field above a horizontally stratified ground. IEEE Trans
Electromagn Compat 59(6):1940–1948
19. Nematollahi AF, Vahidi B (2021) The effect of the inclined light-
ning channel on electromagnetic fields and the induced voltages on
overhead lines. Electr Eng 2:1–14
20. Tossani F, Borghetti A, Napolitano F, Piantini A, Nucci CA (2017)
Lightning performance of overhead power distribution lines in
urban areas. IEEE Trans Power Delivery 33(2):581–588
21. Datsios ZG, Mikropoulos PN, Tsovilis TE (2019) Effects of light-
ning channel equivalent impedance on lightning performance of
overhead transmission lines. IEEE Trans Electromagn Compat
61(3):623–630
22. Barrera-Figueroa V, Sosa-Pedroza J, López-Bonilla J (2005) Sim-
plification of Pocklington’s integral equation for arbitrary bent thin
wires. WIT Trans Model Simul 39:1063
23. Mittra R (Ed.) (2013) Computer techniques for electromagnetics:
international series of monographs in electrical engineering, Vol 7.
Elsevier
24. Meliopoulos AS (2017) Power system grounding and transients:
an introduction. Routledge, New York
25. Nahman J, Paunovic I (2006) Resistance to earth of earthing grids
buried in multi-layer soil. Electr Eng 88(4):281–287
26. Sengar KP, Chandrasekaran K (2021) Transient behavior of
grounding systems in multilayer soil under lightning strikes. Electr
Eng 20:1–14
27. Chen H, Du Y (2018) Lightning grounding grid model con-
sidering both the frequency-dependent behavior and ionization
phenomenon. IEEE Trans Electromagn Compat 61(1):157–165
28. Martinez-Velasco, J. A. (Ed.). (2017). Power system transients:
parameter determination. CRC press.
29. Boufenneche L, Nekhoul B, Kerroum K (2014) Analysis of the
response to a lightning strike of a towers cascade equipped with its
grounding systems. Electr Eng 96(3):211–225
30. Jimenez V, Montaña J, Candelo J, Quintero C (2018) Estimation
of the shielding performance of transmission lines considering
effects of landform, lightning polarity and stroke angle. Electr Eng
100(2):425–434
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
123