Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Line
I. Uglešić, A. Xemard, V. Milardić, B. Milešević, B. FilipovićGrčić, I. Ivanković
AbstractThe paper presents the results of a study for the
reduction of the number of flashovers on a 220 kV doublecircuit
line. With known geometry of the tower and groundflash density
it is possible to calculate the number of flashovers. The procedure
for the calculation of flashovers includes three steps: application
of an electrogeometric model, simulation of the electromagnetic
transients due to lightning strokes, and evaluating the flashover
rate. Models of the elements in the calculation are presented:
source of lightning stroke, tower, conductors, insulator string,
line surge arrester (LSA) and tower footing resistance. The case
study for the 220 kV doublecircuit overhead line is conducted in
order to improve its lightning performance. Different mitigation
measures on a line for prevention of flashovers could be applied
and one of the most effective means is the installation of LSAs.
The final choice of the best solution depends on the number of
LSAs, their location and their price. Calculations are conducted
using the software EMTPRV and LIPS.
Keywords: 220 kV doublecircuit line, modeling, EMTPRV,
LIPS, flashover, lightning performance, LSA.
I. INTRODUCTION
HE transmission line faults caused by lightning can be
classified into backflashovers and flashovers due to
shielding failures. The backflashovers on the insulator string
may involve one or more phases and one or more circuits of a
doublecircuit line. To avoid backflashovers due to lightning
strokes to tower or overhead shielding wires, the tower footing
resistance should be as low as possible. In some areas where
the soil resistivity is high, this method is too costly to be really
of practical interest.
Let us add also that a solution, sometimes used for suppression
of doublecircuit simultaneous faults, consists of installing an
unbalanced insulation on a doublecircuit line [1].
These traditional countermeasures are often not effective
enough to prevent simultaneous faults and therefore the
installation of LSA can be helpful in such cases in order to
prevent doublecircuit outages. In this way power supply
I. Uglešić, V. Milardić, B. Milešević, B. FilipovićGrčić are with Faculty of
Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb, Croatia (email
of corresponding author: ivo.uglesic@fer.hr).
A. Xemard is with EDF R&D, Paris, France (email: alain.xemard@edf.fr).
I. Ivanković is with HEPOPS, Zagreb, Croatia (email:
igor.ivankovic@hep.hr).
Paper submitted to the International Conference on Power Systems
Transients (IPST2009) in Kyoto, Japan June 36, 2009
continuity will be secured and the flashover rate of the double
circuit line significantly improved. Experience shows that the
use of LSAs is more efficient than the conventional methods
listed above, especially in cases of doublecircuit faults of
transmission lines, which can be eliminated almost completely
[2].
The case study presented in this paper is related to the
improvement of the lightning performance of a 220 kV
doublecircuit overhead line, which connects a thermo power
plant to the rest of the power system. Several doublecircuit
outages provoked by lightning caused the interruption of
power supply of the power plant and it was necessary to
understand and prevent such outages. Calculation results for
different line configurations, without and with LSAs, are
compared.
II. SIMULATION OF LIGHTNING STROKES IMPACTING THE
TRANSMISSION LINE
Lightning strokes impacting the HV transmission line are
observed in order to determine the density of lightning strokes,
which quantifies the threat of lightning strokes per unit length
of a line during a one year period. The average lighting stroke
density for a given area is defined as the number of strokes per
area unit during the one year period.
The goal of the simulation is to determine the distribution
of lightning current amplitudes which strike HV transmission
line towers and shield wires or the phase conductors directly.
Furthermore, characteristic values, such as minimal, maximal
and critical current amplitudes will be determined. The Monte
Carlo method is used; in the case considered here this method
consists in reproducing numerically a stochastic problem. A
important set of lightning strokes is chosen according to the
probability followed by the basic stochastic variables, then the
effect of each of these lightning strokes is determined
numerically. This method allows avoiding difficult integral
calculations, especially when the range of the integral is huge
and when the frontier of the domain in which the integral is to
be calculated is difficult to determine. By a large number of
simulations it is possible to calculate relevant values which are
statistically arranged and are later used in lightning
overvoltage calculation.
The basic variables needed for simulation are the variables
defining the trajectory of the lightning stroke from the cloud
and the lightning current amplitude, for which the statistical
distribution is known. The lognormal distribution, which is
mostly used [3], can be approximated as following:
T
( ) 1
31
1
1
6 . 2

¹

\

+
=
I
P
Where:
I  lightning current amplitude,
P  probability of occurrence of lightning current amplitude
higher than I.
The above distribution is adopted to represent the
distribution of peakcurrent amplitudes for negative downward
flashes in the normal range of structure heights, [4] and [5].
The general expression for the striking distance is
represented by the equation:
( ) 2
b
I a R ⋅ =
Where:
R  striking distance,
I  lightning current amplitude,
a  constant [3.3 – 10.6],
b  constant [0.5 – 0.85].
Different values of parameters and modifications of the
above equation are proposed by various investigators [3].
Some authors suggest different values of constants for striking
distance to ground and for striking distance to phase
conductors or shielding wires. In the calculations presented in
this paper the expression above has been used with a=7.2,
b=0.65.
The tower of a doublecircuit 220 kV line and part of a
transmission line is depicted in Fig. 1. Shielding wire and
phase conductors of both circuits are modeled up to four spans
on both sides from the point of impact.
In order to collect enough data for statistical calculation, the
simulation is conducted for a large number of generated
lightning current amplitudes. The random nature of lightning
phenomena can be quantified with a large number of samples
that make more credible results of statistical calculation.
Hence, simulations with large number of strikes are made first
in order to get a better view of the numerical relations between
ground strikes, strikes on shielding wires and towers and phase
conductor strikes.
Calculations were carried out until 1000 simulations
finished with phase conductor strikes. There were a total of
37932 simulations conducted, of which 25635 finished with
ground strikes, 11297 with shielding wire and tower strikes.
According to statistical calculation, the following
characteristics of the crest values of the current for lightning
striking phase conductors are calculated:
 average value: 15.40 kA,
 variance: 98.36 kA,
 standard deviation: 9.92 kA,
 maximal phase conductor strike current: 42.80 kA,
 critical current: 47.30 kA.
Critical current is calculated for the highest conductor on
the tower of the observed part of the transmission line.
According to the simulation results 8.85 % of total lightning
strokes finished with shielding failure – the distribution is
shown in Fig. 2. This confirms a well known fact that an
overhead line with a single shielding wire is only poorly
protected from a direct lightning strike and the current that can
hit a phase conductor can be of high magnitude.
Fig. 1. 3D model of the part of the studied transmission line between towers
62 and 70.
Fig. 2 depicts the distribution of lightning currents striking
phase conductors and Fig. 3 the distribution of currents hitting
top of towers or shielding wire.
Distribution of lightning currents striking phase conductors
0
0,01
0,02
0,03
0,04
0,05
0,06
0,07
0,08
0,09
0,1
13 35 57 79 911 1113 1315 1517 1719 1921 2123 2325 2527 2729 2931 3133 3335 3537 3739 3941 >41
Classes (kA)
P
r
o
b
a
b
ilit
y
Fig. 2. Distribution of lightning currents striking phase conductors
Distribution of lightning currents striking top of towers or shielding wire
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
110
1020
2030
3040
4050
5060
6070
7080
8090
90100
100110
110120
120130
130140
140150
150160
160170
170180
180190
Classes (kA)
P
r
o
b
a
b
ilit
y
Fig. 3. Distribution of lightning currents striking top of towers or shielding
wire
The distribution of lightning strokes per phase shows that
66.18 % of strokes, which strike phase conductors finished in
the upper phases. About 32.35 % of lightning strokes finished
in middle phases and about 1.47 % of lightning currents which
strike the lower phases cannot provoke the flashover (e.g. 2.56
kA, 3.06 kA).
III. MODELING PROCEDURE FOR TRANSIENT SIMULATIONS
In the case study 220 kV doublecircuit line with one
shielding wire is modeled.
The lightning stroke hitting a tower or a phase conductor
can be replaced by a surge current generator and a resistor
(Norton generator). The peak current magnitude and the tail
time are important when observing the LSA energy stresses,
while the influence of the rise time is hardly noticeable in such
a case. In contrast the current wave front is an important
parameter with regard to insulator flashover. The CIGRE
Lightning Current Waveform model [4] can approximate well
the concave form of the lightning current front.
The transmission line, conductors and earth wire is
represented by several multiphase untransposed distributed
parameter line spans at both sides of the point of the lightning
stroke impact. Four line spans at both sides of the point of
impact are modeled in observing the flashovers of the
insulators. To avoid reflection of traveling wave, 10 km of line
is connected on both ends. Fig. 4 depicts the model used for
simulation of lightning striking a doublecircuit 220 kV line.
Tower surge impedances [6] are calculated using equation
(3). Each tower is divided in four parts. First part is from tower
top to upper arm, second one from upper arm to middle arm,
third part from middle arm to lower arm and the last part from
lower arm to ground. On this way it is possible to calculate
transient voltages of tower arms.
( ) ( ) 3 1 ln 60 H R
R
H
Z <<
)
`
¹
¹
´
¦
− 
¹

\

⋅ =
Phase voltages at the instant at which a lightning stroke
impacts the line must be included.
The largest voltage difference across insulator/arrester
terminals occurs during the peak value of phase voltage, which
has the opposite polarity of the lightning surge.
Insulators themselves represent capacitances with only
very moderate influence on the occurrence of overvoltage. The
decisive parameter for the behavior of overhead line insulation
subjected to lightning overvoltages is its corresponding
flashover voltage, which depends on the voltage level due to
different insulation clearances. The area criterion involves
determining the instant of breakdown using the formula (4).
( ) ( ) ( ) 4 ) (
0
0
τ τ d U U t Integrate
t
T
k
∫
− =
where:
U(τ) is the voltage applied at time t, to the terminals of the
air gap,
U
0
is a minimum voltage to be exceeded before any
breakdown process can start or continue,
k and U
0
and DE are constants corresponding to an air gap
configuration and overvoltage polarity,
T
0
is the time from which U(τ) > U
0
,
U
0
, k and DE are determined by using the voltagetime
curve and basic impulse insulation level (BIL) of 1050 kV.
Values of the parameters used are:
U
0
= 958 kV, k = 1, DE = 0.3805718.
Flashover occurs when Integrate(t) becomes equal to DE
(constant).
Tower footing resistances are modeled taking into account
ionization [7]. The ionization model according to equation (5)
takes into account the soil ionization that is caused by the
lightning currents. In the EMTP, Fig. 5, calculation the tower
grounding is represented as a nonlinear resistor:
( ) 5
1


¹

\

+
=
g
o
i
I
I
R
R
Where:
R
o
 footing resistance at low current and low frequency, i.e.
50 Hz [Ω],
I  stroke current through the resistance [kA],
I
g
 limiting current to initiate sufficient soil ionization [kA].
The tower footing resistance remains R
i
=R
o
if I < I
g
and
varies according to the given equation if I > I
g
. The limiting
current is given by:
( ) 6
2
2
0
o
g
R
E
I
⋅ ⋅
⋅
=
π
ρ
Where:
ρ  soil resistivity [Ωm];
E
0
 soil ionization gradient, recommended value:
400 [kV/m].
Fig. 4. Model of 220 kV doublecircuit line
Fig. 5. EMTPRV Model of footing resistance ionization [8]
The model of gapless type LSA includes nonlinear and
dynamic behaviour of the arrester. The nonlinear behavior is
represented by the UI characteristic depicted in Fig. 6.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0,1 1 10 100
Current (kA)
V
o
lt
a
g
e
(
k
V
)
Fig. 6. UI characteristic of surge arrester for the 220 kV line (Ur=210 kV)
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
When a lightning strikes the top of a 220 kV tower the
occurrence of the backflashover depends on many parameters
such as: peak current magnitude and maximal steepness, tower
footing resistance, flashover voltage of insulation clearances,
magnitude and phase angle of the voltage, atmospheric
condition (rain, snow, pressure, temperature, humidity) etc.
The main aim of the study conducted was the prevention of
doublecircuit simultaneous outages due to lightning by
installing LSAs in only one circuit. Backflashovers are
considered because the intention was to maintain the
continuity of service of one circuit. Shielding failures were
not specially studied as they could not cause simultaneous
outages of both circuits.
The results presented are related to one circuit of the
doublecircuit line.
Table I shows results of simulation for different tower
footing resistances and peak current magnitudes that could be
exceeded in 50%, 20%, 10%, 5% and 2% of cases. The green
color indicates that backflashover will not occur in any phase
and for any combinations of phase angles of phase voltages.
The grey color indicates the dependence of backflashover on
the phase angle of the voltage. Backflashovers that occur at
least in one phase of the circuit, independent of the phase
angle of the voltage, are marked with the red color in Table I.
Table I confirms the correlation between the tower footing
resistance and the occurrence of backflashover.
Footing resistance is assumed as a parameter and the design
of earth electrode was not specially considered. For relatively
small lightning current amplitude (e.g. 31 kA) the back
flashover will certainly occur in the case of a lightning stroke
to the tower with relatively high footing resistance (e.g. 75 Ω).
If the lightning stroke to the tower has relatively high current
amplitude (e.g. 96 kA) backflashover will certainly occur also
in the case of lower tower footing resistance (e.g. 17 Ω).
Apart from the correlation considered, the backflashover
depends on (maximal) steepness of the front of wave of the
lightning current. If the steepness is higher, for a particular
tower footing resistance, a backflashover will occur also if the
lightning current amplitude is smaller.
TABLE I
BACKFLASHOVERS IN RELATION TO THE LIGHTNING CURRENT MAGNITUDE
AND THE FOOTING RESISTANCE OF A TOWER
ρ
(Ωm)
R
(Ω)
P(31 kA) =
50%
Sm=25.78
kA/µs
P(52.8
kA) =
20%
Sm=34.56
kA/µs
P(72 kA)
= 10%
Sm=40.98
kA/µs
P(96 kA)
= 5%
Sm=48.00
kA/µs
P(138
kA) = 2%
Sm=58.61
kA/µs
100 2.32
200 4.65
300 6.97
400 9.30
500 11.62
600 13.95
700 16.27
800 18.60
900 20.92
1000 23.25
1200 27.90
1400 32.55
1600 37.20
1800 41.85
2000 46.49
2400 55.79
2800 65.09
3200 74.39
3600 83.69
4000 92.99
No backflashover
Backflashover depends on angle of the phase voltage
Backflashover (does not depend on the angle of the
phase voltage)
Fig. 7 depicts simulation results of backflashover
occurrences for different phase angles of phase voltages. The
following parameters are chosen for the simulation: lightning
current amplitude 72 kA, maximal steepness S
m
=40.98 kA/µs
and tower footing resistance R=27.9 Ω. The backflashover
will certainly occur at least in one phase of considered circuit
of the doublecircuit line for the chosen parameters. The phase
angle of the voltage is changed in 7.5 degree steps. The angle
of the voltage in the upper phase (A) is depicted on xaxis in
Fig. 7, which shows that the backflashovers in the middle
phase (B) will occur for the largest range of the phase angles.
Table II shows simulation results for the case when one
LSA is installed in the middle phase (B), which improves
flashover characteristics of the HV line, which is obvious from
comparison of Table I and Table II. It can be seen for two
cases of the same lightning current (of 31 kA), that the tower
footing resistance, for which the backflashover will certainly
occur, is now greater than 230 Ω.
Dependence of the backflashover on the phase angle of the line voltage
0
1
2
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Phase angle of the line voltage
B
a
c
k

f
la
s
h
o
v
e
r
Y
E
S

1
, Y
E
S
in
b
o
t
h
c
ir
c
u
it
2
Phase A
Phase B
Phase C
Fig 7. Dependence of backflashover on the phase angle of the voltages
computed for I=72 kA, Sm=40.98 kA/µs, R=27.9 Ω
TABLE II
BACKFLASHOVERS IN RELATION TO THE LIGHTNING CURRENT MAGNITUDE
AND FOOTING RESISTANCE OF A TOWER, WITH SURGE ARRESTER IN MIDDLE
PHASE (PHASE B)
ρ (Ωm) R (Ω)
P(31 kA) =
50%
Sm=25.78
kA/µs
P(52.8 kA)
= 20%
Sm=34.56
kA/µs
P(72 kA) =
10%
Sm=40.98
kA/µs
P(96 kA) =
5%
Sm=48.00
kA/µs
P(138 kA)
= 2%
Sm=58.61
kA/µs
400 9.30
500 11.62
600 13.95
700 16.27
800 18.60
900 20.92
1000 23.25
1200 27.90
1400 32.55
1600 37.20
1800 41.85
2000 46.49
2400 55.79
2800 65.09
3200 74.39
3600 83.69
4000 92.99
5000 116.24
6000 139.48
7000 162.73
8000 185.98
9000 209.23
10000 232.47
Installation of a LSA can be compared to other mitigation
measures such as the decrease of the tower footing resistance.
Because of that, it is important to evaluate which tower footing
resistances could be improved, before deciding whether to
install LSAs. The cost of improving the tower footing
resistance, if possible, should be compared with the cost of
installing LSAs. The result of the comparison can help to make
a decision regarding which footing resistances should be
reconstructed and on which towers LSAs should be installed.
In some cases the installation of LSAs is the best solution for
flashover prevention.
The following number of lightning strokes (per 100 km and
per year) on a 220 kV line is adopted: N
L
= 11.011. Fig. 8 and
Fig. 9 are obtained by EMTPRV LIPS simulations. LIPS has
been developed in partnership by EDF, RTE and HYDRO
QEBEC. It calculates the flashover rate of a line launching
automatically EMTPRV [9].
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Tower resistance (Ohms)
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
B
a
c
k

f
la
s
h
o
v
e
r
R
a
t
e
s
(
a
n
n
u
a
l, p
e
r
1
0
0
k
m
o
f
lin
e
)
NO LSA
LSA in B
LSA in C
LSAs in B and C
Fig. 8. Backflashover rate of one circuit of the 220 kV line when it is not
protected by LSAs, protected by LSA in middle phase (B), LSA in lower phase
(C) and LSAs in lower and middle phases (B and C)
Total flashover rate (back and shielding failure) of one circuit
of the 220 kV line is slightly higher then rate shown on Fig. 8.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Tower resistance (Ohms)
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
F
la
s
h
o
v
e
r
R
a
t
e
s
(
a
n
n
u
a
l, p
e
r
1
0
0
k
m
o
f
lin
e
)
NO LSA
LSA in B
LSA in C
LSAs in B and C
Fig. 9. Total flashover rate (back and shield failure) of 220 kV line when it is
not protected by LSAs, protected by LSA in middle phase (B), LSA in lower
phase (C) and LSAs in lower and middle phases (B and C)
The following should be mentioned. If there is one tower
with very high footing resistance (e.g. 250 Ω) then installation
of three LSAs in one circuit will only prevent backflashover
in that circuit on that tower. Backflashovers could occur on
neighboring towers independently of lower footing resistance
of these towers. This is a consequence of very high transient
overvoltages on phase conductors, which travel to the
neighboring towers and flash over.
V. CONCLUSIONS
For prevention of flashovers on a line different mitigation
measures could be applied and one of the most effective means
is the installation of LSAs. Doublecircuit line outages could
be significantly reduced by proper use of LSAs on one of the
circuits. The final choice of the best solution depends on the
number of LSAs, their location, their price and the practical
Line voltages
200
150
100
50
0
50
100
150
200
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Phase angle
(kV
)
Phase A
Phase B
Phase C
constraints due their installation. Calculations are conducted
for the doublecircuit 220 kV line using the software EMTP
RV and LIPS.
The locations of the arresters were assessed to optimize their
effect on total outage rate; selected basically on magnitude of
towerfooting resistance and experience from earlier lightning
incidences.
The following recommendations can be given for the case
study conducted, for the purpose of optimization of the
number of LSAs:
1. Improvement of footing resistances on towers if
economically justified.
2. No LSA (tower footing resistance < 21 Ω)
3. LSA in the lower phase (tower footing resistance > 21
Ω and < 47 Ω)
4. LSAs in the middle and lower phases (tower footing
resistance > 47 Ω < 150 Ω)
Arresters installed in all 3 phases at selected towers with
tower footing resistance > 150 Ω. The installation of three
LSAs in one circuit will only prevent backflashover in that
circuit on that tower and backflashovers could occur on
neighboring towers.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] WeiGang H., “Lightning performance of 500 kV doublecircuit line
schemes for the ThreeGorge project”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 736743, Apr. 2006.
[2] Shigeno T., “Experience and effectiveness of transmission line
arresters”, Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exhibition
2002: Asia Pacific. IEEE/PES, vol.1, 636 – 639, Oct. 2002.
[3] Hileman R. A., “Insulation coordination for power systems”, Power
Engineering Book, Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1999.
[4] CIGRE WG 01 Lightning: Guide to procedure for estimating
performance of transmission lines, brochure 63, October 1991.
[5] Sargent, M.A: "The Frequency Distribution of Current Magnitudes of
Lightning Strokes to Tall structures", IEEE Transactions on PAS, 1972,
pp 22242229.
[6] IEC 600714: “Insulation coordination – Part 4: Computational guide
to insulation coordination and modelling of electrical networks”, 2004.
[7] IEEE Working Group: “A Simplified method for estimating lightning
performance of transmission Lines”, IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, vol: PAS – 104, no. 4, July 1985.
[8] EMTPWorks Version 2.1.0, www.emtp.com
[9] A. Xemard, S. Dennetiere, J. Michaud, P.Y. Valentin, Q. BuiVan, A.
Dutil, M. Giroux, J. Maheserdjian, "Methodology for the calculation of
the lightning flashover rate of a line equipped or not with line arresters”,
report of the study committee C4, CIGRE general session 2006, Paris.
The tower of a doublecircuit 220 kV line and part of a transmission line is depicted in Fig. About 32.02 0.90 10 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 80 90 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Classes (kA) Fig. According to statistical calculation. Distribution of lightning currents striking phase conductors 0. 3D model of the part of the studied transmission line between towers 62 and 70.6 (1) Where: I .06 Probability 0. simulations with large number of strikes are made first in order to get a better view of the numerical relations between ground strikes. 3.maximal phase conductor strike current: 42.08 0. According to the simulation results 8.2.92 kA.47 % of lightning currents which strike the lower phases cannot provoke the flashover (e.average value: 15.60 50 60 70 70 80 0 60 70 10 50 20 30 80 90 40 .lightning current amplitude. 2. of which 25635 finished with ground strikes. 1. b=0. Hence.constant [3. The above distribution is adopted to represent the distribution of peakcurrent amplitudes for negative downward flashes in the normal range of structure heights. Calculations were carried out until 1000 simulations finished with phase conductor strikes. a . Some authors suggest different values of constants for striking distance to ground and for striking distance to phase conductors or shielding wires. [4] and [5]. The random nature of lightning phenomena can be quantified with a large number of samples that make more credible results of statistical calculation. This confirms a well known fact that an overhead line with a single shielding wire is only poorly protected from a direct lightning strike and the current that can hit a phase conductor can be of high magnitude. strikes on shielding wires and towers and phase conductor strikes.07 0. the following characteristics of the crest values of the current for lightning striking phase conductors are calculated: .critical current: 47.50 40 . 2.85 % of total lightning Fig. P .35 % of lightning strokes finished in middle phases and about 1.6]. Distribution of lightning currents striking top of towers or shielding wire The distribution of lightning strokes per phase shows that 66. the simulation is conducted for a large number of generated lightning current amplitudes. Different values of parameters and modifications of the above equation are proposed by various investigators [3].04 0.lightning current amplitude.striking distance.03 0.3 – 10. which strike phase conductors finished in the upper phases. In the calculations presented in this paper the expression above has been used with a=7.probability of occurrence of lightning current amplitude higher than I.g. 1.standard deviation: 9.18 % of strokes. Shielding wire and phase conductors of both circuits are modeled up to four spans on both sides from the point of impact. b . Where: R . In order to collect enough data for statistical calculation.65. 3. . I .30 kA.56 kA. R = a⋅ Ib (2) Fig. .40 kA.06 kA).01 0 13 35 57 79 911 1113 1315 1517 1719 1921 2123 2325 2527 2729 2931 3133 3335 3537 3739 3941 Classes (kA) >41 Fig.15 Probability 0.5 – 0. The general expression for the striking distance is represented by the equation: strokes finished with shielding failure – the distribution is shown in Fig. There were a total of 37932 simulations conducted.09 0.1 0. 2. Distribution of lightning currents striking phase conductors Distribution of lightning currents striking top of towers or shielding wire 0.05 0.2 0.constant [0. 11297 with shielding wire and tower strikes. Critical current is calculated for the highest conductor on the tower of the observed part of the transmission line.P= 1 I 1+ 31 2.05 0 11 0 10 20 30 20 4 30 0 .80 kA. .1 0.25 0. . 2 depicts the distribution of lightning currents striking phase conductors and Fig.variance: 98. 3 the distribution of currents hitting top of towers or shielding wire.85].36 kA. .
3805718. Tower surge impedances [6] are calculated using equation (3). The area criterion involves determining the instant of breakdown using the formula (4). In contrast the current wave front is an important parameter with regard to insulator flashover. Model of 220 kV doublecircuit line . Each tower is divided in four parts. The tower footing resistance remains Ri =Ro if I < Ig and varies according to the given equation if I > Ig. to the terminals of the air gap. The limiting current is given by: ρ ⋅ E0 Ig = (6) 2 2 ⋅ π ⋅ Ro Where: ρ . Integrate(t ) = ∫ (U (τ ) − U T0 t 0 )k dτ (4) where: U(τ) is the voltage applied at time t. In the EMTP.footing resistance at low current and low frequency. Flashover occurs when Integrate(t) becomes equal to DE (constant). calculation the tower grounding is represented as a nonlinear resistor: Ro Ri = (5) I 1+ Ig Where: Ro . U0 is a minimum voltage to be exceeded before any breakdown process can start or continue. Values of the parameters used are: U0 = 958 kV. The transmission line. I . The largest voltage difference across insulator/arrester terminals occurs during the peak value of phase voltage. 10 km of line is connected on both ends. 4. The peak current magnitude and the tail time are important when observing the LSA energy stresses. 4 depicts the model used for simulation of lightning striking a doublecircuit 220 kV line. Four line spans at both sides of the point of impact are modeled in observing the flashovers of the insulators. First part is from tower top to upper arm.III. DE = 0. E0 . which depends on the voltage level due to different insulation clearances. To avoid reflection of traveling wave. Tower footing resistances are modeled taking into account ionization [7].limiting current to initiate sufficient soil ionization [kA]. 50 Hz [Ω]. Ig . recommended value: 400 [kV/m]. k and U0 and DE are constants corresponding to an air gap configuration and overvoltage polarity.e. The decisive parameter for the behavior of overhead line insulation subjected to lightning overvoltages is its corresponding flashover voltage. The CIGRE Lightning Current Waveform model [4] can approximate well the concave form of the lightning current front. while the influence of the rise time is hardly noticeable in such a case. On this way it is possible to calculate transient voltages of tower arms. Fig. which has the opposite polarity of the lightning surge.soil ionization gradient. conductors and earth wire is represented by several multiphase untransposed distributed parameter line spans at both sides of the point of the lightning stroke impact.stroke current through the resistance [kA]. i. k = 1. second one from upper arm to middle arm. H Z = 60 ⋅ ln − 1 (R << H ) (3) R Phase voltages at the instant at which a lightning stroke impacts the line must be included. T0 is the time from which U(τ) > U0. third part from middle arm to lower arm and the last part from lower arm to ground. MODELING PROCEDURE FOR TRANSIENT SIMULATIONS In the case study 220 kV doublecircuit line with one shielding wire is modeled. k and DE are determined by using the voltagetime curve and basic impulse insulation level (BIL) of 1050 kV. 5. U0.soil resistivity [Ωm]. Insulators themselves represent capacitances with only very moderate influence on the occurrence of overvoltage. The lightning stroke hitting a tower or a phase conductor can be replaced by a surge current generator and a resistor (Norton generator). Fig. The ionization model according to equation (5) takes into account the soil ionization that is caused by the lightning currents. Fig.
7.30 11. Table I confirms the correlation between the tower footing resistance and the occurrence of backflashover. The grey color indicates the dependence of backflashover on the phase angle of the voltage. are marked with the red color in Table I. 31 kA) the backflashover will certainly occur in the case of a lightning stroke to the tower with relatively high footing resistance (e. 75 Ω).32 4.98 kA/µs and tower footing resistance R=27. 6. snow. for a particular tower footing resistance. EMTPRV Model of footing resistance ionization [8] The model of gapless type LSA includes nonlinear and dynamic behaviour of the arrester. atmospheric condition (rain. Table II shows simulation results for the case when one LSA is installed in the middle phase (B). The green color indicates that backflashover will not occur in any phase and for any combinations of phase angles of phase voltages.99 P(72 kA) = 10% Sm=40.61 kA/µs kA/µs No backflashover Backflashover depends on angle of the phase voltage Backflashover (does not depend on the angle of the phase voltage) Fig.8 P(31 kA) = kA) = R 50% 20% (Ω) Sm=25. The phase angle of the voltage is changed in 7. which is obvious from .25 27. flashover voltage of insulation clearances.9 Ω.g. humidity) etc. independent of the phase angle of the voltage.g. The results presented are related to one circuit of the doublecircuit line. 7 depicts simulation results of backflashover occurrences for different phase angles of phase voltages. The following parameters are chosen for the simulation: lightning current amplitude 72 kA. The main aim of the study conducted was the prevention of doublecircuit simultaneous outages due to lightning by installing LSAs in only one circuit. UI characteristic of surge arrester for the 220 kV line (Ur=210 kV) IV.62 13. tower footing resistance.09 74. which improves flashover characteristics of the HV line.78 Sm=34.20 41. a backflashover will occur also if the lightning current amplitude is smaller.55 37.65 6.49 55. pressure.85 46. The backflashover will certainly occur at least in one phase of considered circuit of the doublecircuit line for the chosen parameters.1 1 Current (kA) 10 100 Fig. which shows that the backflashovers in the middle phase (B) will occur for the largest range of the phase angles. TABLE I BACKFLASHOVERS IN RELATION TO THE LIGHTNING CURRENT MAGNITUDE AND THE FOOTING RESISTANCE OF A TOWER 600 ρ (Ωm) 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2400 2800 3200 3600 4000 500 Voltage (kV) 400 300 200 100 0 0. 800 700 of earth electrode was not specially considered.69 92.Fig.79 65.60 20. 5% and 2% of cases. 5.90 32. maximal steepness Sm=40. the backflashover depends on (maximal) steepness of the front of wave of the lightning current. Shielding failures were not specially studied as they could not cause simultaneous outages of both circuits. Backflashovers that occur at least in one phase of the circuit.97 9. The angle of the voltage in the upper phase (A) is depicted on xaxis in Fig. Table I shows results of simulation for different tower footing resistances and peak current magnitudes that could be exceeded in 50%. temperature. If the lightning stroke to the tower has relatively high current amplitude (e. 17 Ω). Apart from the correlation considered.39 83.5 degree steps. magnitude and phase angle of the voltage.00 Sm=58.95 16. The nonlinear behavior is represented by the UI characteristic depicted in Fig.27 18. For relatively small lightning current amplitude (e. Backflashovers are considered because the intention was to maintain the continuity of service of one circuit.g.g. 6.56 kA/µs kA/µs 2.92 23.98 kA/µs P(96 kA) P(138 = 5% kA) = 2% Sm=48. SIMULATION RESULTS When a lightning strikes the top of a 220 kV tower the occurrence of the backflashover depends on many parameters such as: peak current magnitude and maximal steepness. If the steepness is higher. 20%. 10%. Footing resistance is assumed as a parameter and the design P(52. 96 kA) backflashover will certainly occur also in the case of lower tower footing resistance (e.
for which the backflashover will certainly occur.62 600 13. If there is one tower with very high footing resistance (e. In some cases the installation of LSAs is the best solution for The following should be mentioned.8 kA) P(72 kA) = P(96 kA) = P(138 kA) 50% = 20% 10% 5% = 2% ρ (Ωm) R (Ω) Sm=25.20 1800 41.73 8000 185. 7 Number of Backflashover Rates (annual.g.79 2800 65. The result of the comparison can help to make a decision regarding which footing resistances should be reconstructed and on which towers LSAs should be installed. Dependence of the backflashover on the phase angle of the line voltage 2 Line voltages 200 150 Phase A Phase B Phase C Backflashover YES1. It calculates the flashover rate of a line launching automatically EMTPRV [9]. should be compared with the cost of installing LSAs.011. Sm=40. Total flashover rate (back and shield failure) of 220 kV line when it is not protected by LSAs.78 Sm=34. that the tower footing resistance. their price and the practical .95 700 16. protected by LSA in middle phase (B). WITH SURGE ARRESTER IN MIDDLE PHASE (PHASE B) P(31 kA) = P(52.00 Sm=58. R=27. 9 are obtained by EMTPRV LIPS simulations.39 3600 83.48 7000 162.61 kA/µs kA/µs kA/µs kA/µs kA/µs 400 9. YES in both circuit 2 100 50 Phase A (kV) 0 0 50 100 150 200 Pha se angle 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 Phase B Phase C flashover prevention.9 Ω TABLE II BACKFLASHOVERS IN RELATION TO THE LIGHTNING CURRENT MAGNITUDE AND FOOTING RESISTANCE OF A TOWER. 8. Dependence of backflashover on the phase angle of the voltages computed for I=72 kA. 8. The final choice of the best solution depends on the number of LSAs. Doublecircuit line outages could be significantly reduced by proper use of LSAs on one of the circuits.99 5000 116. if possible. 8 and Fig.09 3200 74. 8 NO LSA LSA in B LSA in C LSAs in B and C Number of Flashover Rates (annual. RTE and HYDROQEBEC.98 9000 209.69 4000 92.55 1600 37.24 6000 139. Because of that.56 Sm=40. The following number of lightning strokes (per 100 km and per year) on a 220 kV line is adopted: NL = 11.98 kA/µs. per 100km of line) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Tower resistance (Ohms) Fig. their location.27 800 18. LSA in lower phase (C) and LSAs in lower and middle phases (B and C) Installation of a LSA can be compared to other mitigation measures such as the decrease of the tower footing resistance.47 1 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Tower resistance (Ohms) Fig.comparison of Table I and Table II.30 500 11. The cost of improving the tower footing resistance. before deciding whether to install LSAs. 9.90 1400 32. CONCLUSIONS For prevention of flashovers on a line different mitigation measures could be applied and one of the most effective means is the installation of LSAs. 250 Ω) then installation of three LSAs in one circuit will only prevent backflashover in that circuit on that tower. Fig. It can be seen for two cases of the same lightning current (of 31 kA).60 900 20.25 1200 27. per 100km of line) NO LSA LSA in B LSA in C LSAs in B and C 6 1 5 4 3 0 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 Phase angle of the line voltage 2 Fig 7. LIPS has been developed in partnership by EDF.85 2000 46. Backflashovers could occur on neighboring towers independently of lower footing resistance of these towers. which travel to the neighboring towers and flash over. This is a consequence of very high transient overvoltages on phase conductors.92 1000 23. it is important to evaluate which tower footing resistances could be improved.98 Sm=48.23 10000 232. Backflashover rate of one circuit of the 220 kV line when it is not protected by LSAs. protected by LSA in middle phase (B).49 2400 55. is now greater than 230 Ω. V. LSA in lower phase (C) and LSAs in lower and middle phases (B and C) Total flashover rate (back and shielding failure) of one circuit of the 220 kV line is slightly higher then rate shown on Fig.
J. BuiVan. no.A: "The Frequency Distribution of Current Magnitudes of Lightning Strokes to Tall structures". Apr. “Experience and effectiveness of transmission line arresters”. 1972. pp. report of the study committee C4. for the purpose of optimization of the number of LSAs: 1. vol: PAS – 104.. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] . Improvement of footing resistances on towers if economically justified. Power Engineering Book. Dennetiere. Marcel Dekker. LSAs in the middle and lower phases (tower footing resistance > 47 Ω < 150 Ω) Arresters installed in all 3 phases at selected towers with tower footing resistance > 150 Ω. A. IEEE/PES. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems. EMTPWorks Version 2. CIGRE general session 2006. 2002. P. Michaud. Valentin. The locations of the arresters were assessed to optimize their effect on total outage rate. VI. July 1985. Maheserdjian. Oct.. 636 – 639. Paris. S. vol. Q. 1999. M. 2006. Dutil.1. Hileman R. brochure 63.com A. vol. selected basically on magnitude of towerfooting resistance and experience from earlier lightning incidences. IEEE Transactions on PAS.constraints due their installation. J. www. M. A. LSA in the lower phase (tower footing resistance > 21 Ω and < 47 Ω) 4. 21. Giroux. IEC 600714: “Insulation coordination – Part 4: Computational guide to insulation coordination and modelling of electrical networks”. No LSA (tower footing resistance < 21 Ω) 3. Inc..Y. Xemard. The installation of three LSAs in one circuit will only prevent backflashover in that circuit on that tower and backflashovers could occur on neighboring towers. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery.0. IEEE Working Group: “A Simplified method for estimating lightning performance of transmission Lines”. “Lightning performance of 500 kV doublecircuit line schemes for the ThreeGorge project”.1. The following recommendations can be given for the case study conducted. 2. Shigeno T. 4. CIGRE WG 01 Lightning: Guide to procedure for estimating performance of transmission lines.emtp.. pp 22242229. Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exhibition 2002: Asia Pacific. Calculations are conducted for the doublecircuit 220 kV line using the software EMTPRV and LIPS. REFERENCES [1] WeiGang H. 2004. "Methodology for the calculation of the lightning flashover rate of a line equipped or not with line arresters”. no. Sargent. 2. 736743. “Insulation coordination for power systems”. October 1991.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.