energies

Article
Risk Analysis of Lightning and Surge Protection
Devices for Power Energy Structures
Chien-Hsun Liu, Yirga Belay Muna, Yu-Tung Chen, Cheng-Chien Kuo * and Hung-Yi Chang
Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 43, Sec. 4,
Keelung Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan; u019366@taipower.com.tw (C.-H.L.); besufikad@gmail.com (Y.B.M.);
100m05003@stud.sju.edu.tw (Y.-T.C.); boy4211@gmail.com (H.-Y.C.)
* Correspondence: cckuo@mail.ntust.edu.tw; Tel.: +886-920881490; Fax: +886-227376688




Received: 31 May 2018; Accepted: 27 July 2018; Published: 1 August 2018


Abstract: This paper studies the risk data and protection measurements of lightning based on the
IEC62305 standard. In addition, Visual Basic (VB) is used to build a lightning risk calculation program
with a Graphical User Interface (GUI). The data structure, including environment data, line data,
zone data, economic data, and protection measures is designed to simulate risk of loss of human life
(R1) and risk of loss of economic value (R4). To achieve the most economical protection structure
design, additional protection measurements and annual savings are considered. In the practical
application, the main purpose is to discuss effective protection distances of surge protective devices
(SPDs) for low-voltage power distribution. This paper takes advantage of Electromagnetic Transients
Program (EMTP) to simulate the voltage of equipment with different types of loads and length
of the cable. After using the protection measures, the value of risk of human life reduces form
21.299 × 10−5 to 0.439 × 10−5 and the value of risk of economic value reduces from 2696.754 × 10−5
to 98.062 × 10−5 . The results mean that the protection measures let the values of the risk below
the tolerance. By considering the annual cost saving. Assume the cost of protection measures,
the interest rate, the depreciation rate, and the maintenance rate are 150,000 $, 4%, 5%, and 1%,
respectively. The annual cost before using protective measures, the annual cost after using protective
measures, the annual cost of protective measures, and the annual cost saving are $925,000, $33,635,
$15,000 and $876,365, respectively. Consequently, it is feasible that the simulation result can provide
users with great suggestions to choose the best installation location and achieve the most effective
protection design.

Keywords: lightning risk; protection measures; surge protective device

1. Introduction
So far there is no equipment, technology or method that can change the weather to prevent the
occurrence of lighting. Buildings, devices, wiring and humans or animals can be damaged by lightning
no matter whether it strikes directly or indirectly. In order to reduce the risk of loss, lightning protection
measures have become an important issue [1]. The voltage–current characteristics influence the current
sharing and the residual voltages, in an effort to improve, the lightning performance of a distribution
substation and careful selection of the electrical characteristics of the arresters to be connected is of great
importance to achieve an adequate sharing of the lightning current and reduce the failure probability of the
arresters [2]. The installation position of surge arresters and the length of the underground cables influence
significantly the lightning performance of high-voltage/medium-voltage (HV/MV) substations [3].
According to the statistics by Taiwan Power Company in 2016, the average number of annual
lightning strikes is 26,105. If the principles of lightning damage and the lightning risk factors can be
known, some methods can be used to reduce the losses, for example, installing lightning receiving

Energies 2018, 11, 1999; doi:10.3390/en11081999 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2018, 11, 1999 2 of 16

devices (the types of protector include lightning straps, lightning rods, and meshes), grounding grids,
grounding devices, surge protective devices, metal shielding, fire protection measures, and warning
signs. In order to ensure the safety of humans, devices, and buildings, the economic efficiency and the
feasibility need to be considered in the protection measures.
The new trends in lightning protection standardization and an introduction to the use of a new
software (RISK Multilingual 3) to simply apply the IEC 62305-2 standard on the risk assessment
in lightning protection (Protection against lightning−Part 2: Risk management) in its next version
is introduced (edition 2, 2010) [4]. Failure risk of insulation and arresters at each region/node of
the network, can be evaluated simultaneously, if the inputs are known using adaptive neural-fuzzy
inference system (ANFIS). The inputs of ANFIS are the tower footing resistance, CFO and the rate of
lightning occurrence [5]. IEC 62305-2 “Protection against lightning” gives the risk assessment method
and its evaluation. It requires a risk assessment to be carried out to determine the characteristics of any
lightning protection system to be installed [6].
There are studies that address related problems; Parametric studies using a procedure for the
calculation of lightning flashover rates of transmission lines using a Monte Carlo method for lightning
analysis of overhead transmission lines based on new Alternative Transients Program (ATP) capabilities
has been performed to determine the sensitivity of the flashover rate with respect to some parameters
of the transmission line and the return stroke [7]. The Lightning Performance Assessment Tool (LPAT)
simulation tool has been used by electric power utilities as a useful tool for the design and lightning
protection of electric power systems, especially in cases where the transmission lines cross dissimilar
geographic areas [8], but there is no single one to solve the lighting protection problem.
Therefore, it is necessary to study lightning protection standards. The lightning protection
standards include IEC, GB, IEEE, UL, NFPA, AS/NZS and so on. Moreover, the lightning information
about Taiwan and abroad are shown in references [9–13], respectively. This paper aggregates the
zone data, line data, environment data, and protection measures of lightning based on the IEC62305
standard [14]. In addition, a lightning risk calculation program with a Graphical User Interface is used
to improve the efficiency in designing protection measurements. The paper is organized as follows:
Section 2 describes the application of lightning risk and surge protective devices and the flow diagram
of the lightning risk design process. Use of a calculation program simulation and analysis of lightning
risks is provided in Section 3. SPD application and conclusions follow in Sections 4 and 5, respectively.

2. Application of Lightning Risk and Surge Protective Device

The study presents the lightning information from IEC62305-2 (Risk management), IEC62305-3
(Physical damage to structures and life hazard), and IEC62305-4 (Electrical and electronic systems
within structures) and proposes suitable protection measures, which include a lightning protection
system (LPS), and lightning protection measures (LPMs), to divide lightning protection zones and to
calculate gaps. Figure 1 shows the introduction of IEC62305.
Types of loss

• L1: Loss of human life

• L2: Loss of service to the public
• L3: Loss of cultural heritage
• L4: Loss of economic value

Risk types

• The calculation of lightning risk about R1~R4 and Rx: Analyze the lightning location for each risk.
• (LPS) The protection measures about reducing the physical damage and human life, for example,
installing lightning receiving devices, grounding grids, and grounding devices.
• The protection measures for reducing the lightning damage for electrical and electronic systems,
for example, using metal shielding and installing SPD.
 Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 16

Energies 2018, 11, 1999 3 of 16

• The protection measures for reducing the lightning damage for electrical and electronic systems,
for example, using metal shielding and installing SPD.

Figure 1. The introduction of IEC62305.

Figure 1. The introduction of IEC62305.
2.1. Lightning Risk
Lightning risk means the ratio of annual losses to the value of the protection. The formula is the
2.1. Lightning Risk
multiplication of the number of annual lighting risks, the probability of structure damage, and the
rate of lightning stroke loss. IEC62305-2 defines four types of risk and risk tolerances. The failure risk
Lightning ofrisk means
a network the ratio
component dueof to annual lossespresents
lightning stroke to thethevalue of the
probability thatprotection. The formula is the
the lightning surge
multiplication exceeds
of thethe number
withstoodof annual
voltage [15]. lighting risks,locations
Different lightning the probability of structure
may cause different damage, and the
values of the
risk, which includes touch voltage, step voltage, physical damage, and internal faults, as shown in
rate of lightning stroke loss. IEC62305-2 defines
Table 1. The types of lightning risk are as follows:
four types of risk and risk tolerances. The failure
risk of a network component due to lightning stroke presents the probability that the lightning surge
1. Risk of loss of human life in a structure (R1)
exceeds the withstood
2. Risk ofvoltage [15].to Different
loss of service the public in lightning locations may cause different values of the risk,
a structure (R2)
which includes3.touch Risk of loss of cultural
voltage, stepheritage
voltage, in a structure
physical (R3)damage, and internal faults, as shown in Table 1.
4. Risk of loss of economic value in a structure (R4)
The types of lightning risk are as follows:
The corresponding loss rates for various types of risks are as follows:

1. Risk of loss
1. of human
Loss of humanlife
lifein a structure (R1)
(L1)
2. Loss of service to the public (L2)
2. Risk of loss
3. of service
Loss to heritage
of cultural the public(L3) in a structure (R2)
3. 4. of
Risk of loss Loss of economic
cultural value (L4)
heritage in a structure (R3)
4. The definitions of each lightning
Risk of loss of economic value in a structure risk are as follows:
(R4)
1. The lightning risk value of lightning striking the structure (S1):
The corresponding
a. RA: loss
Shock rates for
to living various
beings due totypes of step
touch and risks are as
voltages follows:
(the distance from inside and
outside of the structure is 3 m).
1. Loss of humanb. life (L1)and explosion effects inside the structure due to mechanical and thermal effects
RB: Fire
including dangerous sparking.
2. Loss of service to the public (L2)
c. RC: Failure of electrical and electronic systems due to LEMP on internal installations and
3. Loss of cultural heritage (L3)
incoming services.

4. Loss of economic value (L4)

The definitions of each lightning risk are as follows:

1. The lightning risk value of lightning striking the structure (S1):

a. RA : Shock to living beings due to touch and step voltages (the distance from inside and
outside of the structure is 3 m).
b. RB : Fire and explosion effects inside the structure due to mechanical and thermal effects
including dangerous sparking.
c. RC : Failure of electrical and electronic systems due to LEMP on internal installations and
incoming services.

2. The lightning risk value of lightning striking the ground near the structure (S2):

a. RM : Failure of electrical and electronic systems due to LEMP on internal installations.

3. The lightning risk value of lightning striking services connected to the structure (S3):
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 4 of 16

a. RU : Injuries of living beings caused by touch voltage inside the structure due to lightning
current injected into a line entering the structure.
b. RV : Fire effects inside the structure due to mechanical and thermal effects including
dangerous sparking between incoming lines and metal installations.
c. RW : Failure of internal systems caused by overvoltage induced on incoming lines and
transmitted to the structure.

4. The lightning risk value of lightning striking the ground near services connected to the structure (S4):

a. RZ : Failure of electrical and electronic systems due to overvoltage induced on incoming

lines and transmitted to the structure.

Table 1. The component of lightning risk value.

Lightning Strike Position S1 S2 S3 S4

Tolerance
The Type of Risk RA RB RC RM RU RV RW RZ
R1 * * * * * * * * 10−5
R2 * * * * * * 10−3
R3 * * 10−3
R4 * * * * * * * * 10−3
*: lightning risk value for each type of risk.

2.2. The Principle of Risk Management

The risk management is the formula as follows:

R X = NX × PX × L X (1)

where RX : Lightning risk, NX : Number of annual lighting risk, PX : Probability of structure damage,
LX : Rate of lightning stroke loss
The rate of lightning stroke loss for the risk of human life and the risk of economic loss are
different because the risk of human life considers time and number of people; the risk of economic loss
considers animal considers the economic value, for example, animals, structures, and internal system.
The comparison is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. The comparison of the rate of loss for R1 and R4.

Loss Type Personal Injury Risk Economic Loss Risk

ca
Lt (the percentage of the touch damage) ct
   
nZ tz (c a +cb +cc +cs )
Lf (the percentage of the physical damage) nt × 8760 ct
cs
Lo (System failure loss rate) ct
ca : the value for animal ($)
nz : the number of people in the zone. cb : the value for structure ($)
Lx = L(t, f ,o) × r a
nt : the total number of people. cc : the value for storage ($)
ra : revised coefficient
tz : People at the place time ct : the total value ($)
cs : the value for internal system ($)

The data of lightning structure is complicated, which contains environment data, line data, zone
data, and economic data.

2.3. Protective Measurements and Cost Saving

The tolerance is needed to be considered after calculating the risk, which is used to select the
correct protective measures and saves cost. The introduction of protective measures and annual cost
savings are as follows:
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 5 of 16

2.3.1. Protective Measures

If the risk value is higher than the tolerance, it may use the protective measures to reduce.
The components of the risk value and the protective measures in IEC62305-2 are as shown in Table 3.

Table 3. The protective measures.

Lightning Risk Suggestions

Install LPS,
RA : (parameter definition has been mentioned before,
Take protective measures (such as
please refer to Section 2.1)
warning signs)
S1 Install LPS,
RB : (ibid.) Take protective measures
(e.g., fire extinguishers)
RC : (same as above) Install SPD
Install SPD,
S2 RM : (ibid.)
Improve circuit withstand voltage
Install SPD,
RU : (ibid.) Take protective measures (such as
warning signs)
Install SPD,
S3 RV : (ibid.) Modify line, shield,
equipotential bonding
Install SPD,
RW : (ibid.) Modify line, shield,
equipotential bonding
Install SPD,
S4 RZ : (ibid.) Modify external line and
entrance connections

2.3.2. Annual Cost Savings

The calculation process of the annual cost saving is as follows:
(a) The annual cost before using protective measures ($)

CL = R4(Before taking protective measures) × ct (2)

(b) The annual cost after using protective measures ($)

CRL = R4(After taking protective measures) × ct (3)

(c) The annual cost of protective measures ($)

CPM = CP × (i + a + m) (4)

(d) The annual cost saving ($)

S M = CL − (CRL + CPM ) (5)

where ct is the total cost, CP is the cost of protective measures, i is the percentage of the interest
rate, a is the percentage of the depreciation rate, m is the percentage of the maintenance rate.

2.4. Design Process of the Lightning Risk

The flow diagram of design process of the lightning risk is shown in Figure 2 and the introduction
is as follows:
(1) Structure selection
(2) Data collection

(a) Structure diagram

2.4. Design Process of the Lightning Risk
The flow diagram of design process of the lightning risk is shown in Figure 2 and the
introduction is as follows:
(1) Energies
Structure2018, selection
11, 1999 6 of 16
(2) Data collection
(a) (b)
Structure diagram
Standard about the project
(b) Parameter
(3) Standard aggregation
about the project
(3) Parameter aggregation
(a) The environment data
(a) The
(b) environment
The structuredata
data
(b) The structure
(c) data
The line data
(c) The line
(d) Thedata
zone data
(d) The zone
(e) The data
economic data
(e)
(4) The economic
Input parameterdata
of the risk
(4) (5)
InputThe computation
parameter of risk
of the risk
(5) The computation of risk
(a) Risk of human life
(a) (b)
Risk ofRisk
human life
of economic value
(b) (c)
Risk ofTolerance
economic value
check
(c) Protective
(6)
Tolerancemeasures
check selection
(6) Protective measures selection
(a) Correct protective measures selection
(a) (b)
Correct
LPSprotective
and LPM measures
conform toselection
IEC Standard
(b) (c)
LPS and
TheLPM conform
structure to IEC
is already Standard
protected
(c) The structure is already protected

Choose the Evaluated Structure

Select Data

Collect the Related Parameters

Input the Risk Parameters

Calculate the Risk

Yes
Choose the Appropriate Assessment
If the Structure Need Protection ?
(LPS and LPM meet IEC standards.)

No

Successful Protection

Figure 2. The
Figure flow
2. The flowdiagram
diagramof
of design processofofthe
design process the lightning
lightning risk.
risk.
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 7 of 16

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16

3. Simulation and Analysis for Lightning Risk
3. Simulation and Analysis for Lightning Risk
This paper
Energies evaluates
2018, 11, x FOR PEERthe lightning risk based on the IEC62305 standard and uses Visual
REVIEW 7 of 16 Basic
This paper evaluates the lightning risk based on the IEC62305 standard and uses Visual Basic
(VB) to design a suitable graphical interface. For this simulation case, the length, width, and height
(VB) to design aand
3. Simulation suitable graphical
Analysis interface.
for Lightning For this simulation case, the length, width, and height
Risk
of the building are 100 m, 50 m, and 15 m, respectively. There is another building, power line,
of the building are 100 m, 50 m, and 15 m, respectively. There is another building, power line, and
This paper line
and communication
communication evaluates
aroundthe the
lightning risk based
building, on the
as shown in IEC62305
Figure 3.standard and uses
This section will Visual
use theBasic
structure
line around the building, as shown in Figure 3. This section will use the structure as
as an (VB) to design a suitable graphical interface. Forand
thisthe
simulation case, the length, width, and height
an example to simulate the risk to human life and the risk to economic value. The setting values of of
example to simulate the risk to human life risk to economic value. The setting values
of the building are 100 m, 50 m, and 15 m, respectively. There is another building, power line, and
the parameters
the parameters refer to to
refer thethe
data
dataofofIEC62305.
IEC62305.
communication line around the building, as shown in Figure 3. This section will use the structure as
an example to simulate the risk to human life and the risk to economic value. The setting values of
Main Structure Nearby Structure
the parameters refer to the data of IEC62305.

Main Structure Nearby Structure

Power Line

Power Line
Telecom Line

Telecom Line

Figure 3. The simulation model.

Figure 3. The simulation model.
3.1. Risk Parameters Setting Figure 3. The simulation model.
3.1. Risk Parameters Setting
3.1.Because the riskSetting
Risk Parameters parameters are quite complicated, this paper uses Figures 4 and 5 to show the
Because
setting the of
values risk
theparameters are quite
risk parameters in thecomplicated,
simulation. this paper uses Figures 4 and 5 to show the
Because the risk parameters are quite complicated, this paper uses Figures 4 and 5 to show the
settingsetting
values of the risk parameters in the simulation.
values of the risk parameters in the simulation.

Figure 4. The environment data.

Figure 4. The environment data.
Figure 4. The environment data.
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 8 of 16
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 16

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 16

Figure 5. The line data.

Figure 5. The line data.
3.2. Result and Analysis Figure 5. The line data.
3.2. Result After
and Analysis
inputting the risk parametera, the result of the simulation for risk to human life and risk
3.2. Result and Analysis
to economic value
After inputting the risk are shown in Figures 6 and
parametera, the7,result
respectively.
of theInsimulation
addition, thefor researchers verified the
risk to human life and
After inputting
calculation program’s the risk parametera,
accuracy with manualthe result of the simulation
calculations, which gavefor therisk to human
same results.life and risk
Calculating
risk totoeconomic value are shown in Figures 6 and 7, respectively. In addition, the researchers
theeconomic
lightningvalue are shown
risk using in Figures
the IEC62305 sta6 and 7, respectively. In addition, the researchers verified the
verified the calculation
calculation program’s accuracy with manual which calculations,
gave thewhich gave the same results.
ndard is burdensome and takes time, andcalculations,
program’s accuracy with manual therefore to solve/simplify same
this forresults. Calculating
quick calculations
Calculating
the the
lightning lightning
risk using risk
the using
IEC62305 the
sta IEC62305 standard is burdensome
we design this study as shown in Figures 4–10. The lightning risk calculation program with graphical and takes time, and
therefore ndard is burdensome and takes time, and therefore to solve/simplify this for quick
user interface based on IEC62305 standard is discussed. A graphical user interface or calculation 4–10.
to solve/simplify this for quick calculations we design this study as shown calculations
in Figures
we designrisk
The lightning
program this make
can study as
workshown
calculation easy in and
Figures
program 4–10.
with
save The lightning
graphical
time because userrisk calculation
interface
calculation program
based
lightning with graphical
on numerically
risk IEC62305 standard
or
user
is discussed. interface based
manuallyAisgraphical
complicatedon IEC62305
andinterface
user standard
takes time.or is discussed.
It becomes
calculation A
easy programgraphical
and saves time user
can when
makedoneinterface
work withora calculation
easy calculation
and save time
program
program. can make work easy and save time because calculation lightning risk numerically or
because calculation lightning risk numerically or manually is complicated and takes time. It becomes
manually is complicated and takes time. It becomes easy and saves time when done with a calculation
easy and saves time when done with a calculation program.
program.

Figure 6. The risk of human life (R1).

Figure 6. The risk of human life (R1).

Figure 6. The risk of human life (R1).
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 9 of 16
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 16

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 16

Figure 7. The risk of economic value (R4).

Figure 7. The risk of economic value (R4).
Parameter P means power line and T means communication line in the result of the simulation.
Because
Parameter thePvalue
means of R1 is caused
power line by
andRBT and RV, and
means the value of R4 is
communication caused
line in theby result
RB, RC, of
and RV,simulation.
the both
are higher than the tolerance. Figure 7. The
Therefore, LPSrisk
andof SPD
economic
are value (R4).
needed to install so as to reduce the value
Because the value of R1 is caused by RB and RV , and the value of R4 is caused by RB , RC , and RV ,
of the risk, as shown in Table 3. The protection measurements are as follows:
both are higher thanP the
Parameter meanstolerance. Therefore,
power line and T means LPScommunication
and SPD are line needed
in thetoresult
install so simulation.
of the as to reduce the
(1) Corresponding
value Because
of the risk, as shown
the value with
of R1 in the lightning
Table 3.
is caused byThe protection
protection
RB and system
RV, and the of LPL
measurements I (P B = 0.02).
are as by
value of R4 is caused follows:
RB, RC, and RV, both
(2) Corresponding
are higher with the lightning
than the tolerance. Therefore,protection
LPS and SPDsystem
areof LPL III-IV
needed (PEB =so0.03).
to install as to reduce the value
(1) Corresponding with the lightning protection system of LPL I (PB = 0.02).
of theAfter
risk,using
as shown in Table 3.measures,
the protection The protection measurements
the value are as life
of risk to human follows:
reduces from 21.299 × 10−5 to
(2) Corresponding with the lightning protection system of LPL III-IV (P = 0.03).
0.439 × 10−5 and the value of risk of economic value reduces from 2696.754 ×EB10−5 to 98.062 × 10−5, as
(1) Corresponding with the lightning protection system of LPL I (PB = 0.02).
shown in Figures
(2) Corresponding
After using 8 and
with9.the
the protection The results mean
measures,
lightning that the
the value
protection of protection
risk of
system to LPLmeasures
human
III-IVlife place
reduces
(PEB the from
= 0.03). values21.299
of the ×risk10−5 to
below the tolerance.
0.439 × 10−After
5 and the value of risk of economic value reduces from 2696.754 × 10−5 to 98.062 × 10−5,
using considers
the protection measures,
This paper the annual costthe value ofAssuming
savings. risk to human life reduces
the cost from 21.299
of protection × 10−5the
measures, to
as shown in
0.439 Figures
× 10 and 8 and 9. The results mean that the protection measures place the values of the
10−5risk
, as below
thethedepreciation
value of riskrate,
of economic
and the value reduces from 2696.754 × 10$, to
4%,98.062
5%, ×and
−5 −5
interest rate, maintenance rate are 150,000 1%,
the tolerance.
shown in Figures
respectively, 8 and
by using 9. The results
Equations mean
(2)–(5), that thecost
the annual protection measures
before using place measures,
protective the values the
of the risk
annual
below
This the using
cost paper
after tolerance.
considers
protectivethemeasures,
annual the costannual
savings.
cost ofAssuming the cost of
protective measures, andprotection
the annual measures,
cost
the interestThis
saving paper
rate,
are theconsiders
$925,000, the$15,000
depreciation
$33,635, annual
rate, cost
andand savings. Assuming the
the maintenance
$876,365, respectively. costare
rate of 150,000
protection$,measures,
4%, 5%, the and 1%,
interest rate, the depreciation rate, and the maintenance rate are
respectively, by using Equations (2)–(5), the annual cost before using protective measures, 150,000 $, 4%, 5%, andthe1%,annual
respectively, by using Equations (2)–(5), the annual cost before using protective measures, the annual
cost after using protective measures, the annual cost of protective measures, and the annual cost saving
cost after using protective measures, the annual cost of protective measures, and the annual cost
are $925,000, $33,635, $15,000 and $876,365, respectively.
saving are $925,000, $33,635, $15,000 and $876,365, respectively.

Figure 8. The R1 after using protection measures.

Figure 8. The R1 after using protection measures.

Figure 8. The R1 after using protection measures.
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 10 of 16
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 16

Figure 9. The R4 after using protection measures.

Figure 9. The R4 after using protection measures.
3.3. Summary
3.3. Summary
For the lightning risk, the selection of LPS, fire protection measures, and SPD are important.
Because
For the the protection
lightning measures
risk, are related
the selection to thefire
of LPS, cost,protection
the main points for the calculation
measures, and SPD are of the risk
important.
is as follows:
Because the protection measures are related to the cost, the main points for the calculation of the risk is
as follows:
(1) Main point for installation the lightning protection system (LPS)

(1) LPS
Main is associated
point with RAthe
for installation andlightning
RB, the functions are formulated
protection as follows:
system (LPS)

LPS is associated with RA and RB , the functions × × ×

are formulated as follows: (6)
= ×( × )×( )
8760
nZ
rt × L T × nt × tz
R A = ND × ( PTA ×
× PB×) ℎ× ×
( × 8760
× ) (6)
= ×( )×( ) (7)
8760 nZ
r p × r f × hz × L F × nt × tz
The functions show R Bthat
= Nthe impact factor for RA is PTA (structure
D × ( PB ) × (
protection
) measure). If the (7)
8760
frames of the structure are used to be the grounding grids, the value of PTA is zero and the value of
The
RA is functions
also zero. Inshow thatthe
addition, theimpact
impact factor
factor RB isfor RA fire
rf (the is Prisk).
TA (structure protection
If the structure measure).
is without fire load,If the
the value of r and R is zero. Another case is when the fire load is below than 400
frames of the structure are used to be the grounding grids, the value of PTA is zero and the value of RA
f B MJ/m 2, the value of

RBzero.
is also will change to 0.001the
In addition, so as to reduce
impact the value
factor RB is of RB. When
rf (the the value
fire risk). of R
If the A and RB are low, it means
structure is without fire load,
that the demand of LPS measure is not required. 2
the value of rf and RB is zero. Another case is when the fire load is below than 400 MJ/m , the value of
(2) change
RB will Main point for installation
to 0.001 the fire
so as to reduce theprotection
value of system
RB . When the value of RA and RB are low, it means
that the demand
The fire of LPS measure
protection measure is not required.with RB and RV. The function of RV is formulated as
is associated
follows:
(2) Main point for installation the fire protection system
× ×ℎ × × ×
The fire protection ) × (is associated
= ( + measure × × with)R× (8)follows:
B and RV . The function of RV is formulated as
8760
nZ !
r p × r f × hz × L F × nt × tz
= ( Nof
RV value
For the L+ × ( Ppoint
DJ )main
RV,Nthe B×P isLD ×(the
CLD ) ×of external wire line and the factor of entrance (8)
CLDtype
8760
connection) and rf. If using lightning protected cable, equivalent potential connection or structure
without fire load, one of CLD and rf decrease to zero and RV is also zero. When the value of RB and RV
For the value
are low, of R
it means V , the
that the main
fire protection CLD (thedemand
point is measure type of external wire line and the factor of entrance
is not required.
connection) and rf . If using lightning protected cable, equivalent potential connection or structure
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 11 of 16

without fire load, one of CLD and rf decrease to zero and RV is also zero. When the value of RB and RV
are low, it means that the fire protection measure demand is not required.
nZ
LO × nt × tz
RC = ( ND ) × ( PSPD × C LD ) × ( ) (9)
8760
nZ
LO × nt × tz
R M = ( NM ) × ( PSPD × PMS ) × ( ) (10)
8760

rt × L T × nnZt × tz
RU = NL + NDJ × ( PTU × P EB × PLD × C LD ) × ( ) (11)
8760
n

LO × nZt × tz
RW = NL + NDJ × ( PSPD × PLD × C LD ) × ( ) (12)
8760
nZ
LO × nt × tz
R Z = ( NI ) × ( PSPD × PLI × C LI ) × ( ) (13)
8760

(3) Main point for installation SPD

The parameters associate SPD are RC , RM , RU , RV , RW , and RZ . The main point of RV is discussed
in Equation (2) and the other functions of risk are formulated as follows:
For the value of RC , RU , and RW , the main point is CLD . If using lightning protected cable and
equivalent potential connection, RC , RU , and RW can reduce to zero. For RM , the main point is PMS ,
which contains KS1 (the width of the external shielding), KS2 (the width of the internal shielding),
and KS3 (the arrangement of internal wire). If the width of the shielding is decreased or the arrangement
of wire uses shielding cable or let the wire in the metal tube, the value of RM will reduce. For RZ ,
the main point is CLI (the type of internal wireline and the factor of entrance connection). If using
shielded cable and has equivalent potential connection with the device, the value of RZ can reduce
to zero.

(4) The Main point for lightning risk

Table 4 shows the condition that the value of risk parameter is zero. The demand of protection
measure may decrease as the risk decreases.

Table 4. The main point for the lighting risk.

Main Factor Lightning Risk Improvement Results

PTA (Structure frame as a conductor) RA = 0 Reduced protection requirements for LPS
And fire protection measures reduce
RB = 0
protection requirements for LPS
rf (No fire load)
Reduced protection requirements for fire
RV = 0
protection measures
CLD (Use lightning protection cables or wiring RC , RU , RV , RW = 0 Reduced protection requirements for SPD
in lightning protection cable pipes, metal pipes, Reduced protection requirements for fire
and equipotential bonding with equipment) RV = 0
protection measures
CLI (Use shielded cables and connect the device
RZ = 0 Reduced protection requirements for SPD
to the equipotential)

4. SPD Application
If a wireline connects SPD and device is too long, the voltage across the device may increase twice
as originally due to overvoltage, electromagnetic oscillation, and effect of loop inductance so as to
the device will damage. However, in response to the demand for increased the number of device
installation, Taiwan Power Company hope to develop the smart grid and replace traditional E/M relay
4. SPD Application
4. SPDEnergies
Application
2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 16
If a wireline connects SPD and device is too long, the voltage across the device may increase
twiceIfas a SPD
4. wireline
originally connects SPD and device
due to overvoltage,
Application is too long, oscillation,
electromagnetic the voltageand across theofdevice
effect may increase
loop inductance so
twice as device
as to the originally will due to overvoltage,
damage. However, electromagnetic
in response to theoscillation,
demand and
for effect ofthe
increased loop inductance
number of so
device
If a wireline connects SPD and device is too long, the voltage across the device may increase
as to the device
installation, will damage.
Taiwan Power However, hope
Company in response to thethe
to develop demand for
smartandgridincreased the number
andofreplace traditionalof device
Energies
twice11,
2018,
as 1999
originally due to overvoltage, electromagnetic oscillation, effect loop inductance so12 E/M
of 16
installation,
relay by as an Taiwan
intelligent
to the Power
device willelectronic Company hope
device (IED).
damage. However, to develop the
Thistosection
in response the demandsmart
usesfor grid
EMTP and
increased replace
to simulate
the number traditional
and E/M
discuss the
of device
relay
effect by
of an intelligent
loads
installation,andTaiwan electronic
the connection
Power Companydevice
distance (IED).
hopeon to This
effectivesection
develop uses grid
protection
the smart EMTP andtoreplace
distance simulate
of SPD. and discuss
traditional E/M the
by an of
effect intelligent
loads
relay by and
electronic device
the connection
an intelligent electronic
(IED).
distance This
onsection
device (IED). effective uses EMTP
protection
This section
todistance
uses EMTP
simulate ofand
to simulateSPD. discuss the effect of
and discuss the
loads andeffecttheof connection
loads distance on effective protection distance of SPD.
4.1. Simulation Modeland the connection distance on effective protection distance of SPD.
4.1. Simulation Model
4.1. Simulation
The ModelModel
4.1.simulation
Simulation model is the low-voltage single-phase power system in this paper. The source,
which Theis simulation
regarded as model
lightning is the low-voltage single-phase power system in this paper.flowsThe source,
The simulation
The simulationmodel is the surge
model is current
low-voltage
the low-voltage and SPD are
single-phase
single-phase inpower
power parallel.
system
system The
in insurge
this paper.
this current
TheThe
paper. source,
source, to load
which is
which
through is regarded
the
which wireline,as
is regarded lightning
as shown surge
as lightning in current
Figure 10. and
The SPD
modelare in
1 parallel.
is used to The surge
simulate current
case 1 toflows
3.load load
to
Model 2,
regarded as lightning surge currentsurge current
and SPD areand SPD are inThe
in parallel. parallel.
surgeThe surge flows
current currenttoflows
loadtothrough the
through the the
which through
adds wireline,
thefull-waveas shown in Figure
rectifier Figure10.
circuit, DC The model
load, and 1isisused
usedto to
1capacitor simulate case 1 to 3. case
Model 2,
wireline, as shown wireline,
in Figure as shown
10. Thein model 110.
is The
used model
to simulate case6μH,
simulate
1 to 3.usedcaseto
Model 1 simulate
to2,3. Model
which 2, 4,the
adds as
which adds
shown which the
addsfull-wave
in rectifier
Figure the full-wave
11. rectifier circuit,
rectifier circuit,DCDCload,
load, and capacitor6μH,
and capacitor 6μH, usedused to simulate
to simulate case 4,case
as 4, as
full-wave circuit, DC load, and capacitor 6µH, used to simulate case 4, as shown in Figure 11.
shown shown
in Figure in Figure
11. 11.

Figure 10. The

The low-voltagesingle-phase
low-voltage single-phase power system (Model 1). 1).
Figure
Figure 10.
10. The low-voltage single-phase power
power system
system (Model
(Model 1).
Figure 10. The low-voltage single-phase power system (Model 1).

Figure 11. The low-voltage single-phase power system (Model 2).

The information
Figureof11.
Figure combination
11. The waveform
The low-voltage
low-voltage to simulate
single-phase
single-phase lightning
power
power system
system surge
(Model
(Modelis that
2). the open-circuit
2).
voltage is 1.2/50Figure
μs and11.
theThe
short-circuit
low-voltagecurrent is 8/20 μs.power
single-phase According to ANSI/IEEE
system (Model 2). Std. C62.41-2002
[16]information
The and ANSI/IEEE Std. C62.42-2002
of combination [17], the zone
waveform in the house
to simulate can besurge
lightning divided into: the
is that (1) zone A
open-circuit
The information
contains all
Theisinformation of of
the combination
sockets
ofthe and
combinationthewaveform
distance
waveform to
from simulate
zone B lightning
is more thansurge
10 m is that
and the
from open-circuit
zone C is more voltage
voltage 1.2/50 μs and short-circuit current isto8/20 simulate lightningtosurge
μs. According is that Std.
ANSI/IEEE the open-circuit
C62.41-2002
is 1.2/50
voltage µs
than and
20 m; the
(2) short-circuit
zone B containscurrent
feeders is 8/20
and the µs. According
secondary to ANSI/IEEE
switchboard; (3) zone Std.
C C62.41-2002
contains the [16]
main and
[16] andisANSI/IEEE
1.2/50 μs and theC62.42-2002
Std. short-circuit[17],
current
the is zone8/20inμs.the
According
house can to ANSI/IEEE
be divided Std. into:C62.41-2002
(1) zone A
switchboard
ANSI/IEEE Std. and the entrance
C62.42-2002 [17], wire.
the Zone
zone inAthe
and B maycan
house be damaged
be divided byinto:
6 kV voltage
(1) zone and
A zone C may
contains all of the
[16] and all
contains ANSI/IEEE
of the by Std. C62.42-2002
sockets and the [17], from
distance the zone zone in the
B paper
is house
more thancan 10 be
m divided
and frominto: zone (1)
C zone
is moreA
sockets be
anddamaged
the distance the voltage
from above
zone B is10 kV.
more Because
than 10 this
m and fromdiscusses
zone Canis application
more than for
20 a
m; house
(2) zone B
contains all(2)
of the
than 20interior,
m; the6sockets
zone kAand
B contains
kV/3 the distance
feeders
combination and thefrom
waveform iszone
secondary B isas
selected, more than
switchboard;
shown 10(3)
in Figuresm zone
and
12 and from
C13. zone Cthe
contains is more
main
contains
than feeders
20 m; (2)andand the
zone secondary switchboard; (3) zone C contains the main switchboard and thethe
entrance
switchboard theBentrance
contains feeders
wire. ZoneandAthe
andsecondary
B may be switchboard;
damaged by 6(3) kVzone C contains
voltage and zone Cmain
may
wire. Zone
switchboard A and
and B may
the be damaged
entrance wire. by
Zone 6 kV
A voltage
and B and
may bezone C may
damaged be
by damaged
6 kV by
voltagethe
andvoltage
zone C above
may
be damaged by the voltage above 10 kV. Because this paper discusses an application for a house
10
be kV. Becauseby
damaged thisthe
paper discusses
voltage an application
above 10 for a house
kV. Because interior,
this paper the 6 kV/3
discusses ankA combination
application waveform
interior, the 6 kV/3 kA combination waveform is selected, as shown in Figures 12 and 13.for a house
is selected, as shown in Figures 12 and 13.
interior, the 6 kV/3 kA combination waveform is selected, as shown in Figures 12 and 13.

Figure 12. The open-circuit voltage waveform of 6 kV.

Figure 12. The open-circuit voltage waveform of 6 kV.

Figure 12. The open-circuit voltage waveform of 6 kV.
Figure 12. The open-circuit voltage waveform of 6 kV.
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 13 of 16
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 16

Figure 13. The short-circuit current waveform of 3 kA.

Figure 13. The short-circuit current waveform of 3 kA.

The wireline is a solid conductor and has no insulation tube. The diameter of metal-core is 1.6
mm andThethe
wireline is aofsolid
thickness metalconductor
layer 0.6 mm and and
has the
no value
insulation tube. The
of resistivity diameter
is 1.724 × 10−8 of metal-core
Ω/m. The value is
− 8 Ω/m.
1.6equivalent
of mm and the thickness
resistance, of metal and
inductance layer 0.6 mm and
capacitance arethe valueΩ/m,
0.008574 of resistivity and×42.069
is 1.724
0.3145 μH/m, 10 pF/m,
The value
respectively.of equivalent resistance, inductance and capacitance are 0.008574 Ω/m, 0.3145 µH/m,
and 42.069 pF/m,
IEC60664-1 respectively.
defines four types to correspond to the rated voltage (UW) of the device, as shown in
Table 5: (1) class I is thefour
IEC60664-1 defines typesfor
location to correspond
the electronicto the rated voltage
equipment; (UWII
(2) class ) ofisthe
thedevice,
locationas for
shown
the
in Table 5: (1) class I is the location for the electronic equipment; (2) class II is the location
residential appliances; (3) class III is the location for the distribution wires; (4) class IV is the location for the
residential
for appliances;
the entrance (3) classall,
wires. Above IIIUisWthe location
is 1.5 kV and forUthe distribution wires; (4) class IV is the location
P of SPD is 1.2 kV in this simulation case.
for the entrance wires. Above all, UW is 1.5 kV and UP of SPD is 1.2 kV in this simulation case.
Table 5. The withstand voltage of the device.
Table 5. The withstand voltage of the device.
Type IV III II I
The value of tolerated voltage
Type 6 kV IV 4 kVIII 2.5
II kV I 1.5 kV
The value of tolerated voltage 6 kV 4 kV 2.5 kV 1.5 kV
4.2. Test Cases
TheCases
4.2. Test load type in case 1 to three is a resistive load, capacitive load, and inductive load,
respectively. The resistive load values include 10 Ω, 100 Ω, and 1000 Ω and the open circuit. The
The load type in case 1 to three is a resistive load, capacitive load, and inductive load, respectively.
value of inductive load contains 1 μH, 10 μH, and 100 μH. The value of inductive load includes 1 μH,
The resistive load values include 10 Ω, 100 Ω, and 1000 Ω and the open circuit. The value of inductive
10 μH, and 100 μH. Using different distances between the load and SPD (1 m, 10 m, and 100 m) we
load contains 1 µH, 10 µH, and 100 µH. The value of inductive load includes 1 µH, 10 µH, and 100 µH.
examine whether the voltage exceeds the tolerated voltage. The results, in Table 6, show that the
Using different distances between the load and SPD (1 m, 10 m, and 100 m) we examine whether the voltage
voltage will exceed the tolerated voltage. The load type in case 4 includes 10 Ω, 100 Ω, and 1000 Ω
exceeds the tolerated voltage. The results, in Table 6, show that the voltage will exceed the tolerated voltage.
and the open circuit. In addition, the discussion is same as the mentioned above. The results are
The load type in case 4 includes 10 Ω, 100 Ω, and 1000 Ω and the open circuit. In addition, the discussion is
shown in Table 7 and the values are all the maximum voltages of the load.
same as the mentioned above. The results are shown in Table 7 and the values are all the maximum voltages
of the load.
Table 6. The results in case 1 to 3 (Unit: V).

Case Case 1Table 6. The results in case 1 to23 (Unit: V).

Case Case 3
Load (Length of Wire = 1 m) (Length of Wire = 10 m) (Length of Wire = 100 m)
10 Ω Case Case 1
1212.05 Case 2
1193.49 Case992.28
3
100Load
Ω (Length of Wire = 1 m) (Length of1214.32
1216.17 Wire = 10 m) (Length of Wire = 100 m)
1195.81
1000 Ω10 Ω 1216.58
1212.05 1453.3
1193.49 1907.99
992.28
Open100 Ω 1216.17
1216.62 1214.32
1730.47 1195.81
2249.97
10 pF1000 Ω 1216.58
1220.96 1453.3
1968.07 1907.99
2461.42
103 pFOpen 1216.62
1667.46 1730.47
2175.54 2249.97
2309.93
10 pF 1220.96 1968.07 2461.42
105 pF 3 1833.63 2239.96 2269.48
10 pF 1667.46 2175.54 2309.93
1 μH 5 516.38 176.06 134.42
10 pF 1833.63 2239.96 2269.48
10 μH 1111.55 984.73 933.4
1 µH 516.38 176.06 134.42
100 μH 10 µH 1204.96
1111.55 1609.92
984.73 2308.85
933.4
100 µH 1204.96 1609.92 2308.85
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 14 of 16

Table 7. The results in case 4 (Unit: V).

Case
(Length of Wire = 1 m) (Length of Wire = 10 m) (Length of Wire = 100 m)
Load
10 Ω 1720.74 1926.53 669.13
100 Ω 1763.44 2078.67 806.97
1000 Ω 1767.82 2095.14 824.07
Open 1768.31 2096.98 826.19

4.3. Results Comparison

The results in case 1 are as follows: for the resistive load, the length of the wire is too short so that
the value of resistance is small and the changes in the load hardly effect the tolerated voltage of the
device, which means the voltage of the device and SPD are same. For the capacitive load, the oscillation
is found although the length of wire is only 1 m. As the value of capacitor increases, the amplitude
of the oscillation increases but the frequency of the oscillation decreases. For the inductive load,
the voltage of the device is equal to half of the residual voltage of SPD, when the value of inductance
is small. The voltage of the device approaches the residual voltage of SPD (1200 V) only if the value of
inductance increases.
The results in case 2 are as follows: for the resistive load, the oscillation is found when the value
of resistance increases. The voltage of the device is 1453 V when the load is greater than 1000 Ω.
If the voltage exceeds the tolerated voltage, the device will be broken. For the capacitive load, all the
values of voltage are greater than the voltage limit. As the value of capacitor increases, the amplitude
of the oscillation increases but the frequency of the oscillation decreases. For the inductive load,
the oscillation is found when the value of inductance increases. The voltage of the device is 1609.92 V
when the load is 100 µH. If the voltage exceeds the rated voltage, the device will be broken.
The results in case 3 are as follows: for the resistive load, as the value of resistance increases,
the amplitude of the oscillation increases but the frequency of the oscillation decreases. The voltage
of the device is 1907.99 V when the load is 1000 Ω. For the capacitive load, the value of capacitance
increases as the voltage of device decreases. For the capacitive load, as the value of inductance
increases, the amplitude of the oscillation increases but the frequency of the oscillation decreases.
The voltage of the device is 2308.85 V when the load is 100 µH. If the voltage exceeds the tolerated
voltage, the device will be broken.
After the comparison of each case, increasing the length of the wire may cause the results to
change as follows: for the resistive load, the voltage of the device and the amplitude of the oscillation
will increase but the frequency of the oscillation will decrease. For the capacitive load, when the
voltage increases, the amplitude of the oscillation will decrease, but the voltage increases only if the
inductance is 100 µH.
The results in case 4 are as follows: when the value of the resistance increases, the voltage of the
device only increases slightly. For 1 m length of the wire, the resistance of the load is 10 Ω can destroy
the device. For 100 m length of the wire, the device can be protected by SPD. In addition, when the
load is constant, when the length of wire increases, the voltage of the device will increase at first and
then decrease.

5. Conclusions
The user interface in this paper offers a calculation of lightning risk and it based on the IEC62305
standard. To achieve the most economical protection design for a structure, additional protection
measures and annual savings are considered. In order to improve the benefits of SPD installation,
the low-voltage single-phase power system is simulated in this paper and the test cases are used
to discuss the effective protection distance of SPD. The results indicate that the changes in the type
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 15 of 16

of loads and the connection distance will affect the effectiveness of SPD. Therefore, the correct SPD
installation and the selection of the distance can protect the device and lower the cost.
The results show that after using the protective measures, the value of the risk to human life
reduces from 21.299 × 10−5 to 0.439 × 10−5 and the value of the economic value risk reduces from
2696.754 × 10− 5 to 98.062 × 10− 5 meaning that the protection measures set the values of the risk
below the tolerance. Considering the annual cost savings, we assume the cost of protection measures,
the interest rate, the depreciation rate, and the maintenance rate are $150,000, 4%, 5%, and 1%,
respectively. The annual cost before using protective measures, the annual cost after using protective
measures, the annual cost of protective measures, and the annual cost savings are $925,000, $33,635,
$15,000, and $876,365, respectively. Consequently, it is feasible that the simulation result can provide
users with good suggestions to choose the best installation location and achieve the most effective
protection design.
Manually/analytically, calculating the lightning risk using IEC62305 standard is burdensome and
takes time, so to address this problem we use Visual Basic (VB) to design a suitable Graphical user
interface and a calculation program has been designed and it can make the task easy and save time.

Author Contributions: C.-H.L. and Y.B.M.; Software, Writing—original draft and review & editing, Investigation,
Software validation, Data curation and Validation; Y.-T.C., Conceptualization, Software edition, Writing—graphical
editing; C.-C.K.; Methodology, Writing—review & editing, Leading and commenting the team; H.-Y.C.; Software
validation, Methodology, Data curation
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Mounir, M.M.; Mahmoud, A.E. Development of Lightning Risk Assessment Software in Accordance with
IEC 62305-2. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Computing, Electrical and Electronic
Engineering (ICCEEE), Khartoum, Sudan, 26–28 August 2013.
2. Christodoulou, C.A.; Vita, V.; Maris, T.I. Lightning protection of distribution substations by using metal
oxide gapless surge arresters connected in parallel. Int. J. Power Energy Res. 2017, 1, 1–7. [CrossRef]
3. Trainba, M.; Christodoulou, C.A.; Vita, V.; Ekonomou, L. Lightning overvoltage and protection of power
substations. WSEAS Trans. Power Syst. 2017, 12, 107–114.
4. Bouquegneau, C.; Lecomte, P. New Lightning Protection Standardization Trends for the Lightning Risk
Assessment; Use of the Risk Multilingual 3 Software. In Proceedings of the 2010 Asia-Pacific International
Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Beijing, China, 12–16 April 2010.
5. Shariatinasab, R.; Safar, J.G.; Mobarakeh, M.A. Development of an adaptive neural-fuzzy inference system
based meta-model for estimating lightning related failures in polluted environments. IET Sci. Meas. Technol.
2014, 8, 187–195. [CrossRef]
6. Shariatinasab, R.; Vahidi, B.; Hosseinian, S.H. Statistical evaluation of lightning-related failures for the
optimal location of surge arresters on the power networks. IET Gen. Transm. Distrib. 2009, 3, 129–144.
[CrossRef]
7. Martinez, J.A.; Castro-Aranda, F. Lightning performance analysis of overhead transmission lines using the
EMTP. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2005, 20, 294–300. [CrossRef]
8. Karampelas, P.; Ekonomou, L.; Panetsos, S.; Chatzarakis, G.E. LPAT: An interactive simulation tool for
assessing the lightning performance of Hellenic high voltage transmission lines. Appl. Soft Comput. 2011, 11,
1380–1387. [CrossRef]
9. Orille-Fernández, Á.L.; Khalil, N.; Rodríguez, S.B. Failure Risk Prediction Using Artificial Neural Networks
for Lightning Surge Protection of Underground MV Cables. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2006, 21, 1278–1282.
[CrossRef]
10. IEC. Low-Voltage Surge Protective Devices: Surge Protective Devices Connected to Low-Voltage Power Distribution
Systems—Selection and Application Principles; IEC 61643-12; IEC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.
11. IEC. Insulation Coordination for Equipment within Low-Voltage Systems—Principles, Requirements and Tests;
IEC 60664-1; IEC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2002.
Energies 2018, 11, 1999 16 of 16

12. IEC. Testing and Measurement Techniques—Surge Immunity Test; IEC61000-4-5; IEC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2010.
13. IEC. Protection against Lightning—Part 1–4; IEC 62305; IEC: Geneva, Switzerland, 1995.
14. Stefanescu, S.; Botezan, A. Overview of the Protection Lightning Standards Suite EN/IEC 62305.
In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference and Exposition on Electrical and Power Engineering
(EPE), Iasi, Romania, 20–22 October 2016.
15. IEEE Guide on the Surge Environment in Low-Voltage (1000 V and Less) AC Power Circuits; ANSI/IEEE Std.
C62.41.1-2002; IEEE Standard Association: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2002.
16. IEEE Recommended Practice on Characterization of Surges in Low-Voltage (1000 V and Less) AC Power Circuits;
ANSI/IEEE Std. C62.41.2-2002; IEEE Standard Association: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2002.
17. IEEE Guide for the Application of Surge-Protective Components in Surge Protective Devices and Equipment
Ports—Part 2 Metal-Oxide Varistors (MOVs); ANSI/IEEE Std. C62.42.2-2002; IEEE Standard Association:
New York, NY, USA, 2016.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).