Electric Power Systems Research 170 (2019) 57–63

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/epsr

Electric charge flow in linear circuits T

a b c,⁎
José Claudio de Oliveira e Silva , Antônio Roberto Panicali , Celio Fonseca Barbosa ,
Carlos Ermídio Ferreira Caetanoc, José Osvaldo Saldanha Paulinoc
a
APTEMC, São José dos Campos, Brazil
b
PROELCO, Campinas, Brazil
c
Graduate Program in Electrical Engineering, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper deals with a fundamental property of circuits that can simplify certain analysis, bring new methods of
Linear circuits measurements and possibly other applications, which has apparently passed unnoticed until now. It shows that
Electric charge the net charge injected by an arbitrary source into a linear circuit is divided among the circuit branches (in-
Surge protective device cluding transmission lines) in the same proportion as the charge would divide among the same branches, if the
circuit was replaced by its equivalent circuit at direct current (DC). The DC equivalent circuit alone will govern
the exact sharing of the net charge, despite current oscillations caused by reactive elements or propagation
effects of transmission lines. In this paper, this property is demonstrated analytically and proved by computer
simulations and laboratory experiments. The paper also exemplifies its application in the calculation of the net
charge distribution among the conductors of an installation struck by lightning. Finally, the paper forecasts other
possible applications for the new circuit property.

1. Introduction invariant and reciprocal.

In recent years, the charge flow through a circuit branch due to
impulsive excitations has gained attention, as it is related to the rating
of surge protective devices (SPDs) used for lightning protection [1–5].
Similarly, the international standards on SPDs [6–8] include the
drained charge as one of the key parameters for specifying an SPD.
During the investigation of the charge distribution among the con-
ductors of a structure struck by lightning, the authors came across an
interesting property of electric circuits. It was found that, although
reactive components (e.g., inductors and capacitors) and transmission
lines can significantly alter the amplitudes and waveshapes of the
currents flowing in the circuit branches, the net charge delivered
through each branch depends only on the circuit resistances. This is a
fundamental circuit property that can be shortly explained by recalling
that a linear circuit comprising any complex association of elements
responds to a signal decomposed in frequency domain according to the
impedance of the circuit at each frequency, and that at 0 Hz, i.e. for the
DC component of the signal, the average current is proportional to the
total flow of electric charge.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, such particular property of
circuits has not been explored neither presented in the literature and it
is applicable to each and every circuit, provided it is linear, time-
An extensive search in the literature was made by the authors, but
no mention to such property has been found. This search included the
database of technical journals and classic textbooks. For instance,
Clarke [9] provides a detailed analysis of basic circuit properties, but it
is restricted to alternating currents (AC). Greenwood [10] presents a
comprehensive analysis of electric circuit transients, but he does not
investigate the net charge distribution among circuit branches. Hallén
[11] presents several circuit theorems, but none of them is similar to
the circuit property described in this paper. Carson [12] derives several
circuit properties based on Kirchhoff’s laws, including its transient be-
havior. These circuit properties include the reciprocity theorem and the
equation of activity, which is similar to the Tellegen’s theorem [13].
However, Carson does not address the net charge distribution in cir-
cuits.
A preliminary description of this property was presented in Ref.
[14], which was restricted to a theoretical analysis of the subject. The
present paper significantly enlarges the treatment of the new circuit
property, by validating it with detailed computer simulations and
controlled laboratory experiments. Moreover, a comparison of its re-
sults with those obtained by the direct solution of Maxwell’s equations
(published in the literature) is included in order to highlight the power
of this new property in dealing with complex situations. The paper is

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: celiofb@ieee.org (C.F. Barbosa).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2019.01.014
Received 14 October 2018; Received in revised form 16 December 2018; Accepted 15 January 2019
0378-7796/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
J.C.d.O.e. Silva et al. Electric Power Systems Research 170 (2019) 57–63

Z12(s): mutual-impedance between Port 1 and Port 2, where Z12(s) =

V1(s) / I2(s), for I1(s) = 0;

Z21(s): mutual-impedance between Port 2 and Port 1, where Z21(s) =

V2(s) / I1(s), for I2(s) = 0;

where V1(s) and V2(s) are the voltages at Port 1 and Port 2, respectively.
Note that, as the circuit is reciprocal, then Z12 = Z21.
Solving the circuit for I2 (s) results:
Z12 (s )
I2 (s ) = I1 (s ) ,
Z22 (s ) + R (1)
and the net charge through R up to an instant t is:
t
q2 (t ) = ∫ i2 (t ) dt.
0 (2)
Fig. 1. Two-port network [N–R] that will be excited through port P1; resistor R Based on Laplace transform for integrals:
is brought out from network [N] and defines output port P2.
I2 (s )
Q2 (s ) = ,
s (3)
organized as follows. Section 2 presents a theoretical demonstration of
the circuit property and Section 3 describes how to circumvent some and the total net charge passing through R is:
singularities that may arise when using perfect components. Sections 4 ∞

and 5 present its validation using computer simulations and laboratory q2 = ∫ i2 (t ) dt.
experiments, respectively. Section 6 compares the results obtained 0 (4)
using the new circuit property with those obtained by the full solution Based on the Final Value Theorem [15]:
of Maxwell's equations. Finally, Section 7 draws the main conclusions.
q2 = limt →∞q2 (t ) = lims → 0 [s⋅Q2 (s )]. (5)
2. Theoretical analysis Replacing (3) in (5):

When impulsive sources are applied to linear circuits, the resulting q2 = lims → 0 [I2 (s )]. (6)
currents flowing can assume complex time variations. However, the net Finally, applying (1) into (6):
charges flowing through the circuit branches depend only on the circuit
resistances. This property is investigated theoretically in the following. Z12 (0)
q2 = I1 (0) .
Referring to Fig. 1, let P1 and P2 denote the ports of an arbitrary Z22 (0) + R (7)
linear two-port network [N–R], that is necessarily reciprocal and time- Following the same steps for q1 from (2) to (6):
invariant. The two ports are selected so that P1 is the input port to
which an arbitrary impulsive current source i1 (t) is connected and P2 is q1 = I1 (0) (8)
the output port where the resulting current i2 (t) through R is wanted. which results in:
The circuit is at rest at t = 0 (i.e., no energy is stored in its reactive
components) and the impulsive source delivers a finite net charge to the Z12 (0)
q2 = q1 .
circuit. Z22 (0) + R (9)
Let q1 be the net charge injected into the network by i1 (t) and q2 the Eq. (9) demonstrates that the charge ratio q2 /q1 is given by a ratio
net charge passing through the resistor R, while q1 (t) and q2 (t) are the of impedances at 0 Hz, namely Z12(0), Z22(0), and R, as expected for DC
referred charges calculated up to an instant t. Finally, let I1 (s), I2 (s), Q1 current division. Clearly, Z12(0) and Z22(0) must come from the asso-
(s) and Q2 (s) denote the Laplace transforms of i1 (t), i2 (t), q1 (t) and q2 ciation of resistors in the [N― R] network, after inductors have been
(t), respectively, where s is the complex frequency (jω). replaced by short-circuits and capacitors by open-circuits.
Given that [N–R] is a linear system, the transfer function between I1
(s) and I2 (s) can be derived from the equivalent T-network shown in
3. Ideal reactive components
Fig. 2. In this figure, the impedances are defined as:

Z11(s): self-impedance at Port 1, where Z11(s) = V1(s) / I1(s), for Singularities may arise when computing the net charge in circuits
I2(s) = 0; with ideal reactive components (e.g., inductors without series re-
sistances and capacitors without shunt resistances) in the absence of
Z22(s): self-impedance at Port 2, where Z22(s) = V2(s) / I2(s), for other circuit components that can naturally suppress the singularities.
I1(s) = 0; This situation is illustrated in Fig. 3, where the net charge conducted by
the circuit branches cannot be determined by the DC equivalent circuit.

Fig. 2. Two-port T-network representing the arbitrary linear network shown in

Fig. 1 in complex frequency domain. Fig. 3. Examples of circuits with ideal reactive components.

58
J.C.d.O.e. Silva et al. Electric Power Systems Research 170 (2019) 57–63

Indeed, by replacing L1 and L2 by short-circuits, it is not possible to

assess the net charge that flows through each inductor in Fig. 3(a).
Similarly, by replacing the capacitors C1 and C2 by open-circuits in
Fig. 3(b), it is not possible to assess the net charge that flows through
each capacitor. In order to circumvent these singularities, it is sufficient
to replace each ideal inductor by a resistor RL according to
RL = kL, (10)
and replace each ideal capacitor by a resistor RC according to
1
RC = ,
kC (11)
then take the limit for k → 0. Considering that a charge q0 is injected in
the circuits of Fig. 3, the net charge through the inductor L1 and the
capacitor C1 are given by (13) and (14), respectively
(kL1)−1 L2
qL1 = q0 limk → 0 = q0
(kL1)−1 + (kL2)−1 + R1−1 L1 + L2 (12)

C1 C1
qC1 = q0 limk → 0 = q0 .
C1 + C2 ( 1 + kR1 C1
1 + kR2 C2 ) C1 + C2
(13)

4. Validation by computer simulations

This section presents an example intended to validate the referred

circuit property using the ATP/EMTP [16] simulation software. The
results from computer simulations are compared to those calculated
from the DC equivalent circuit.
Consider the following 6-branch circuit given in Fig. 4. The resistors
subscripts n (Rn) indicate branch n. The current source I produces a
unidirectional waveform according to Heidler’s time function [17],
whose peak value (34.95 kA) was adjusted (through a numerical
iterative process) to inject 10.00 C charge into the circuit. Its waveshape
is 1/200 μs.
Fig. 5 shows the current waves on the circuit of Fig. 4, i.e., the total
applied current I and the currents in all six branches. The resulting Fig. 5. Currents in the circuit of Fig. 4; (a) all currents; (b) zoom showing
applied voltage (25 kV peak) follows the same waveshape as the current currents on branches 2–6; (c) currents on branches 6 and 3 (current amplitude
on branch 6 is multiplied by 10).
on branch 1 (Fig. 5(a)), since it is represented by 1 Ω resistor. All other
current waveshapes are affected by the reactive elements and by the
transmission line (TL) propagation effects on branch 6.
The current on branch 6 is computed at the end of the line, i.e., at
resistor R6. Note in Fig. 5(c) that the first current step is around 100 A,
which comes from the applied voltage (25 kV) divided by the char-
acteristic impedance of the line (500 Ω) and multiplied by 2, since the
line is practically short-circuited. The current wave goes bouncing back
and forth while growing slowly, resulting in a very long wave with
about 1 ms duration.
As expected, currents amplitudes and waveshapes are strongly in-
fluenced by reactive elements and TL effects. The net charge per
branch, however, can be easily determined by means of the circuit

Fig. 6. DC equivalent circuit for the circuit shown in Fig. 4. Inductors and TLs
are replaced by short-circuits and capacitors are replaced by open-circuits.

property presented in this paper. To this aim, the DC equivalent circuit

(of Fig. 4) is shown in Fig. 6, where inductors and lossless TLs are re-
placed by short-circuits and capacitors are replaced by open-circuits.
The charge sharing among branches 1–6 of the DC equivalent circuit
(Fig. 6) is given in Table 1, together with the EMTP calculated net
charges on the complete circuit (Fig. 4). It can be seen an excellent
agreement between the net charges calculated by the two methods,
which is in line with the referred circuit property. It is worth to mention
that the calculation of the net charge for the DC equivalent circuit is
rather simple, i.e., it is given by:
Fig. 4. Example of circuit including resistors, inductors, capacitors and a loss-
less transmission line (TL).

59
J.C.d.O.e. Silva et al. Electric Power Systems Research 170 (2019) 57–63

Table 1 Table 2
Net charge distribution: simulated with EMTP (Fig. 4); calculated with the DC Values of Fig. 7 components.
equivalent circuit (Fig. 6).
Component Value Unit
Branch R (Ω) Simulated (C) Calculated (C)
R1 213.9 ± 0.1 Ω
Source – 10.0 10.0 (given) R2 268.0 ± 0.1 Ω
1 1 4.88 4.88 R3 330.5 ± 0.1 Ω
2 2 2.44 2.44 R4a 149.6 ± 0.1 Ω
3 Open ˜0a 0 R4b 150.0 ± 0.1 Ω
4a 4 1.22 1.22 R5 470.2 ± 0.1 Ω
4b Short ˜0a 0 RL2 0.39 ± 0.04 Ω
5 5 0.976 0.976 L1 18.0 ± 0.3 μH
6 10 0.488 0.488 L2 130 ± 2 μH
C1 18.5 ± 0.3 nF
a C2 1.60 ± 0.02 nF
Asymptotically decaying, reaching about 10–15 C at t = 50 ms.

Ri−1
qi = q0 n ,
∑ j = 1 R−j 1 (14)

where q0 is the total injected charge, qi is the net charge in the branch i,
Ri−1 and R−j 1 are the conductances of the branches i and j, respectively,
and n is the number of circuit branches.

5. Experimental validation

In order to further validate the new circuit property, this section

presents some experimental results. In all cases, the currents were
measured by Pearson current monitors model 4100, having bandwidth
from 140 Hz to 35 MHz. The current monitors were connected to a
Fig. 8. Current applied to the circuit of Fig. 7.
Rhode & Schwarz RTB2004 oscilloscope, with 10 bits resolution. The
resistors values were measured with a precision HP 34401A meter, with
61/2 digits resolution. The uncertainties of the measurements were
combined according with the procedure described in Ref. [18], whereas
the values expressed in this paper are the expanded uncertainties ob-
tained with coverage factor equal to 2, which gives a confidence level of
95.5%.

5.1. Circuit with lumped components

The first circuit considered is composed only by lumped compo-

nents, as shown in Fig. 7. The resistor RL2 represents the inherent series
resistance of the inductor L2, whereas the inherent resistance of the
inductor L1 was added to the resistance of the resistor R2. Table 2 shows
the measured values of the circuit components.
The circuit of Fig. 7 was subjected to an impulsive source that de-
livered the current shown in Fig. 8. The currents measured in the circuit
of Fig. 7 are shown in Fig. 9, where can be seen that the currents
through R1, R2, and R5 are unidirectional and the currents through R3
and R4b are bidirectional, due to the series capacitor and shunt in-
ductor, respectively. Fig. 10 shows the charges through the branches of
Fig. 7, where can be seen that the charges through R1, R2, and R5 tend
to a final positive value, whereas those through R3 and R4b approach
zero.

Fig. 9. Currents in the circuit components of Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Circuit with lumped components for the experimental validation.
The total charge delivered by the source and the charge through one
component were obtained simultaneously by integrating the current
recorded at each surge application. Each pair of measurements was
repeated 10 times, in order to better characterize the uncertainties re-
lated to these measurements. The average value recorded for the total
charge was 64.32 μC.
Table 3 shows the net charge measured in the relevant components
of Fig. 7, alongside with their uncertainties. The same table shows the
values of the net charges calculated according to (14), i.e., considering

60
J.C.d.O.e. Silva et al. Electric Power Systems Research 170 (2019) 57–63

Fig. 11. Circuit with distributed parameters for the experimental validation.

Table 4
Values of Fig. 11 components.
Component Description Value (Ω)

R1 Resistor near the source 100.68 ± 0.05

R2 R2 = Z0 50.09 ± 0.05
R2 < Z0 21.96 ± 0.05
R2 > Z0 98.80 ± 0.05
RCI Inner coaxial conductor resistance 2.50 ± 0.01
RCO Outer coaxial conductor resistance 1.72 ± 0.01

Fig. 10. Charges in the circuit components of Fig. 7. with a circuit-simulation software (PSpice), which agree almost exactly
with those from the DC equivalent circuit.

the DC equivalent circuit. It can be seen in Table 3 that the calculated

values agree very well with the measured ones, whereas the small
differences are within the uncertainties of the measurements. This re-
sult is an experimental validation of the circuit property described in
this paper, considering lumped components. The table also shows the
charge values obtained with a circuit-simulation software (PSpice),
which agree almost exactly with those from the DC equivalent circuit.
5.2. Circuit with distributed parameters
This section considers a distributed parameters circuit, as shown in
Fig. 11. The transmission line (TL) is made by 60 m long coaxial cable
with 50 Ω nominal characteristic impedance (Z0). The currents i1 and i2
were simultaneously measured (see Fig. 11). The components values
are shown in Table 4, where three different values were considered for
R2. In addition to these values, it was also considered R2 = 0 and
R2 = ∞.
Fig. 12 shows the currents i1 and i2 for the conditions R2 = Z0,
R2 < Z0, and R2 > Z0, where the propagation effects on the TL can be
clearly seen. The net charges obtained for the cases considered are
shown in Table 5, alongside with those calculated using (14), i.e., with
the DC equivalent circuit for Fig. 11. In the DC equivalent circuit, the
resistances of the coaxial cable conductors (RCI and RCO) are in series
with R2.
Table 5 shows that the calculated values agree very well with the
measured ones, whereas the small differences are within the un-
certainties of the measurements. This result is another experimental
validation of the circuit property described in this paper, considering
propagating waves. The table also shows the charge values obtained
6. Example of application
A recent paper from Heidler and Camara [19] presented an analysis
of the lightning current distribution among the conductors of the
lightning protection system (LPS) and the internal electric lines of a
building. Several parameters were calculated and, as highlighted by the
authors, "The most important parameter is the maximum transferred
charge", which was calculated with a computer code based on the
Method of Moments (MoM) [20] that solves the full Maxwell equations
in the frequency domain. The time-domain solutions were obtained
from the inverse Fourier transform, whereas the skin effect was auto-
matically treated by the software.
In order to compare the results from [19] with those calculated
using the circuit property described in this paper, it is chosen the
Configurations (a) and (b) of the "single family house", as shown in
Fig. 13. The LPS is represented by the thin lines installed along the
corners of the roof and walls, whereas the electric line, one for each
configuration, is represented by bold lines. In both configurations, it is
assumed that the electric lines and the LPS are bonded at the striking
point by a copper bonding conductor 0.3 m long and having 16 mm2
cross-section area. Of course, the electric line shall be bonded through
an SPD, but its effect was neglected in the simulations presented in Ref.
[19]. The ground plane was supposed as perfectly conducting.
To apply the referred circuit property to this structure, it is neces-
sary to build its DC equivalent circuit. Due to symmetry, the two halves
of the LPS present the same resistance from the striking point to ground.
Moreover, the horizontal LPS sections along the top of the walls do not
contribute to the resistance to ground. Therefore, the equivalent LPS

Table 3
Net charges in the circuit of Fig. 7: calculated with the DC equivalent circuit; simulated with PSpice.
Component Calculated (μC) Measured (μC) Diff. (%) Simulated (μC) Diff. (%)

R1 17.49 17.43 ± 0.25 −0.34 17.48 −0.06

R2 13.95 13.87 ± 0.20 −0.57 13.95 0.00
R3 0.00 0.01 ± 0.05 – 0.01 –
R4b 0.071 0.07 ± 0.05 −1.4 0.07 −1.4
R5 7.95 7.87 ± 0.11 −1.0 7.95 0.00

61
J.C.d.O.e. Silva et al. Electric Power Systems Research 170 (2019) 57–63

Fig. 13. LPS representing a single family house and two electric line config-
urations.
Adapted from Ref. [19].

Fig. 14. DC equivalent circuit of the LPS (RLPS) and electric line (REL) of Fig. 13.

The DC equivalent circuit is shown in Fig. 14, where RLPS and REL
are the LPS and the electric line resistances from the striking point to
ground, respectively, which are calculated as

Fig. 12. Currents recorded in the circuit of Fig. 11. (a) R2 = Z0; (b) R2 < Z0; (c) ρLPS LLPS
RLPS = ,
R2 > Z0. ALPS (15)

length from the striking point to ground is given by: ρEL LEL
REL = ,
n AEL (16)
1 6 5
LLPS = ⎛7.5 + + ⎞ = 6.5 m
2⎝ 2 2⎠ where ALPS and AEL are the cross-section areas of the LPS conductor and
of a single electric line conductor, respectively, and n is the number of
The length of the electric line from the striking point to ground (LEL) conductors of the electric line. The electric line is considered as made of
is 17.2 m and 9.17 m for the Configurations (a) and (b), respectively. copper, with resistivity ρEL = 17.8 nΩ m. For the LPS, it is considered
The LPS is made of round conductors with 8 mm diameter (nominal here two materials: steel, with resistivity ρLPS = 120 nΩ m and stainless
50 mm2 area). For the electric line, two options were considered: single- steel, with resistivity ρLPS = 700 nΩ m.
phase circuit made of 3 conductors, i.e., phase, neutral, and protective The net charge qEL that flows through REL in Fig. 14 is:
earth (PE) with 1.4 mm diameter each (nominal 1.5 mm2 area); and
three-phase circuit made of 5 conductors with 1.8 mm diameter each RLPS
qEL = Q ,
(nominal 2.5 mm2 area). REL + RLPS (17)

Table 5
Net charges in the circuit of Fig. 11: calculated with the DC equivalent circuit; simulated with PSpice.
Condition Comp. Calculated (nC) Measured (nC) Diff. (%) Simulated (nC) Diff. (%)

R2 = Z0 R1 44.20 44.06 ± 0.40 −0.32 44.20 0.00

R2 81.93 82.07 ± 0.60 0.17 81.93 0.00
R2 < Z0 R1 31.32 31.34 ± 0.40 0.06 31.32 0.00
R2 120.43 120.41 ± 0.80 −0.02 120.43 0.00
R2 > Z0 R1 53.89 53.83 ± 0.50 −0.11 53.89 0.00
R2 52.67 52.73 ± 0.50 0.11 52.67 0.00
R2 = 0 R1 7.97 8.12 ± 0.30 1.9 7.97 0.00
R2 190.22 190.07 ± 1.20 −0.08 190.22 0.00
R2 = ∞ R1 71.50 71.47 ± 0.60 −0.04 71.45 −0.07
R2 0 0.029 ± 0.200 – 0.046 –

62
J.C.d.O.e. Silva et al. Electric Power Systems Research 170 (2019) 57–63

Table 6 This property may apply to the dimensioning of SPDs, especially

Net charges in the electric line conductors. when the SPDs are subjected to the flow of part of the lightning current
LPS Conf. Circuit Calculation method (see Section 6). Note that the property fits well in the cases of uni-
directional impulses like those specified by IEC 62305-1 [21] and when
DC circuit MoM [20] Dif. (%) the SPD equivalent resistance (though non-linear) is much smaller than
the other resistances in the same circuit branch. This is particularly true
Steel a 1 phase 3.22 3.31 −2.7
3 phases 3.98 4.02 −1.0 for spark-type SPDs, whereas the arc voltage drop is usually negligible.
b 1 phase 5.17 5.28 −2.1 However, if the SPD voltage is not negligible (e.g., clamping type SPD)
3 phases 5.54 5.48 1.1 or if the current through the SPD is oscillatory, then the net charge
Stainless steel a 1 phase 9.83 9.91 −0.81 calculation may not be appropriate for SPD rating.
3 phases 8.07 8.04 0.37 Another possible application concerns the measurement of earthing
b 1 phase 12.2 12.1 0.83 resistances, to which this circuit property may give rise to a new
3 phases 8.94 8.80 1.6
method with some advantages in comparison with the traditional
methods. In fact, preliminary measurements by the authors in actual
earthing systems have already produced excellent results [22]. More-
where Q is the total charge injected in the circuit. For the calculation of
over, it is expected that this property may be helpful in the dealing with
the charge through the power conductors, Heidler and Camara [19]
electrical behavior of complex circuitry, particularly in the field of in-
considered the positive first return stroke defined in IEC 62305-1 [21],
strumentation. These and other applications are under study by the
which has 100 kA peak value and 10/350 μs waveshape. The total
authors.
charge delivered by this stroke current is obtained by integrating the
current time function as per Ref. [17], which gives Q = 51.2 C.
Acknowledgments
Inserting these values in (17) yields the net charge through the
power conductors. The net charge through a single conductor can be
This work was supported in part by the Brazilian National Council
obtained by dividing qEL from (17) by the number of conductors (n).
for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) and by the
The calculated values according to the equivalent DC circuit depicted in
Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate
Fig. 14 are shown in Table 6, alongside with those computed from the
Education (CAPES).
complete electromagnetic equations applied to the conductor config-
urations of Fig. 13 using the MoM and presented in Ref. [19].
References
It can be seen a very good agreement between the two sets of data,
as the differences range from −2.6% to +1.6%. These small differences
[1] J. Birkl, C.F. Barbosa, Modeling the current through the power conductors of an in-
could be justified by small errors in the representation of the structure stallation struck by lightning, Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on
by the DC equivalent circuit. It shall be highlighted that the results Lightning Protection - SIPDA (2011).
obtained with a sophisticated software are replicated by the application [2] T. Kisielewicz, C. Mazzetti, G.B. Lo Piparo, F. Fiamingo, Stress to surge protective devices
system due to direct flashes to low voltage lines, Electr. Power Syst. Res. 129 (Dec) (2015)
of the simple circuit property described in this paper. 44–50.
It is worth mentioning that in Ref. [19] there are also results for [3] T. Kisielewicz, G.B. Lo Piparo, C. Mazzetti, Surge protective devices efficiency for ap-
paratus protection in front of direct flashes to overhead low voltage lines, Electr. Power
aluminum and copper LPS, but the charge values reported for these Syst. Res. 134 (May) (2016) 88–96.
cases do not match those calculated with the DC equivalent circuit. A [4] W. Bassi, J.M. Janiszewski, Evaluation of currents and charges in low-voltage surge ar-
personal communication with the authors of Ref. [19] revealed that the resters due to lightning strikes, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 18 (January (1)) (2003) 90–94.
[5] T. Kisielewicz, G.B. Lo Piparo, C. Mazzetti, A. Rousseau, Dimensioning of SPD for the
current waveforms for these cases were bidirectional, whereas the protection against surges due to lightning to LV overhead lines, Proceedings of the 32nd
current waveforms for steel and stainless steel LPS were unidirectional. International Conference on Lightning Protection (ICLP) (2014).
[6] IEC 61643-11, Low-voltage Surge Protective Devices — Part 11: Surge Protective Devices
As the charge values reported in Ref. [19] are the integral of the ab-
Connected to Low-voltage Power Systems — Requirements and Test Methods, (2011).
solute value of the current and the net charge is defined as the integral [7] ITU-T K.77, Characteristics of Metal Oxide Varistors for the Protection of
of the current, the values are not comparable for this case. Of course, if Telecommunication Installations, (2011).
[8] IEC 61643-22, Low-voltage Surge Protective Devices — Part 22: Surge Protective Devices
the net charge values were calculated for the aluminum and copper Connected to Telecommunications and Signalling Networks — Selection and Application
LPS, they should match those provided by the equivalent DC circuit. Principles, (2015).
[9] E. Clark, Circuit Analysis of AC Power Systems vol. 1, John Wiley & Sons, 1948, pp.
38–41.
7. Summary and conclusion [10] A. Greenwood, Electrical Transients in Power Systems, John Wiley & Sons, 1971, pp.
32–70.
[11] E. Hallén, Electromagnetic Theory, John Wiley & Sons, 1962 (Chapter 24).
This paper presented a fundamental circuit property that governs [12] J.R. Carson, Electric Circuit Theory and the Operational Calculus, Chelsea Pub. Co., 1953,
the distribution of the net charge in a linear circuit, due to an impulsive pp. 1–12.
excitation. If written in the form of a theorem, it may read as: [13] P. Penfield Jr, R. Spence, S. Duinker, A generalized form of Tellegen’s theorem, IEEE
Trans. Circuits Syst. I: Fundam. Theory Appl. ct-17 (3) (1970).
“For a linear, reciprocal and time-invariant circuit excited by an [14] J.C.O. Silva, A.R. Panicali, C.F. Barbosa, Electric charge flow in linear circuits,
Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Lightning Protection (SIPDA)
arbitrary time limited source, the net charge carried by each circuit (2017).
branch is the same as the one computed for the DC equivalent cir- [15] M.R. Spiegel, Mathematical Handbook of Formulas and Tables, McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
1968.
cuit, where inductors and lossless transmission lines are replaced by
[16] ATP/EMTP, Electromagnetic Transient Program, http://eeug-test.hostingkunde.de/.
short-circuits and capacitors are replaced by open-circuits.” [17] F. Heidler, Analitsche blitzstromfunktion zur LEMP-berechnung, Proceedings of the 18th
International Conference on Lightning Protection (ICLP) (1985).
For the application of this property, the following conditions must [18] Evaluation of Measurement Data — Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in
be fulfilled: Measurement, (2008) JCGM 100:2008, Sept..
[19] F. Heidler, A. Camara, Currents on electric installation lines in case of equipotential
bonding at roof level, Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Lightning
• The circuit shall be at rest at t = 0 (i.e., no energy is stored in its Protection (ICLP) (2018).
[20] H. Singer, H.-D. Bruens, A. Freiberg, CONCEPT II — Manual of the Program System,
reactive components);
• The source shall deliver a finite charge to the circuit;
University Hamburg, Harburg, Germany, 2005 Apud Heidler and Camara [19].
[21] IEC 62305-1, Protection Against Lightning — Part 1: General Principles, (2010).
• The currents shall be computed until the circuit comes back to its [22] C.E.F. Caetano, J.O.S. Paulino, C.F. Barbosa, J.C.O. Silva, A.R. Panicali, A new method for
grounding resistance measurement based on the drained net charge, IEEE Trans. Power
state of rest. Deliv., in press, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRD.2018.2879838.

63