2013 International Symposium on Lightning Protection (XII SIPDA), Belo Horizonte, Brazil, October 7-11, 2013
Characteristics of a Tall-Structure Severe
Lightning Storm
A. M. Hussein and S. Kazazi
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
Ryerson University
Toronto, ON, Canada
ahussein@ee.ryerson.ca, skazazi@ryerson.ca
Abstract — Although initial observations of lightning strikes to the
CN Tower commenced in 1978, the comprehensive phase of CN
Tower lightning investigations emerged in 1989. By the summer of
1990, measurement stations started to operate to simultaneously
record all important parameters of CN Tower lightning flashes,
including flash-optical characteristics, return-stroke currents and
the associated lightning electromagnetic pulses. This paper
investigates a remarkably severe CN Tower lightning storm that
contained 52 flashes and lasted for 84 minutes. Flash trajectory
images showed that each of the 52 flashes contained an initial
continuous current (ICC), proving that all flashes were upward
initiated. Current records indicated that 32 flashes (61.5% of all
flashes) contained return strokes. Only one of these 32 flashes
shows a one-stroke positive flash. The remaining 31 flashes are
found to be negative with 1-14 strokes/flash. Statistical analysis
clearly indicates that flashes with ICCs and return strokes have
higher flash durations in comparison with those for flashes that
only contain ICCs. It is also shown that ICCs in flashes containing
return strokes have statistically much lower durations in
comparison with those in flashes containing only ICCs.
Keywords—Tall-structure lightning, severe lightning storms,
lightning flash characteristics, lightning current.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Canadian National (CN) Tower, with its extreme
height (553 m) and slim structure, presents one of the best
options in the world to study tall-structure lightning. This fact
prompted the initiation of the major phase of CN Tower
lightning studies in 1989. By the beginning of the summer of
1990, five measurement stations started to operate to
simultaneously record the return-stroke current derivative at the
tower using a 40-MHz Rogowski coil, connected to a 10-bit
10-ns double-channel digitizer (Tektronix RTD 710A) via a tri-
axial cable; the vertical component of the electric field and the
two horizontal components of the magnetic field, 2km north of
the tower, using three broadband active sensors and two
Tektronix RTD 710A digitizers; the return-stroke velocity
using a photo-diode system; and two 2-dimensional images of
the lightning trajectory using VHS cameras [1]. Improvements
and expansions of CN Tower lightning recording capabilities
have since continued. In 1996, a digital 1000 frames/s imaging
system (Vision Research Phantom v2.0) was acquired and
placed 2km north of the tower. This imaging system
remarkably improved visual observations of CN Tower
978-1-4799-1344-2/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE
lightning flash trajectories in comparison with the images
recorded by the 33.3-ms resolution VHS cameras [2]. In 1997,
a noise-protected current sensing system, consisting of a new
Rogowski coil and an optical fiber link, was acquired. The new
current sensing system has provided a substantial improvement
in the signal-to-noise-ratio of the recorded current in
comparison with that of the current recorded by the old
Rogowski coil [3]. In 1999, a new recording system consisting
of two 2-ns LeCroy LT342L double-channel digitizers with a
memory of 2MB/channel, for recording up to 20 current return
strokes/flash and their associated lightning electromagnetic
pulses [4]. Furthermore, in 2001, four Global Positioning
System (GPS) units were acquired for time-synchronization of
all recording stations. In 2006, a more advanced high-speed
digital imaging system (Vision Research Phantom v5.0) was
acquired. In 2007, 2-Channel National Instruments (NI) PCI-
5114 high-speed (4ns) digitizer, with an extended memory
(64MB/Channel), was acquired for recording all current
components, including low-varying initial continuous currents
and continuing currents.
Although the lightning ground flash density (number of
flashes per square kilometer per year) in the Toronto area is
about two [5], the CN Tower, is usually struck by dozens of
lightning flashes yearly. Video records, 1991-2000, showed
that the tower was, on average, struck by 36.4 flashes per year
[6]. The cumulative probability distribution of the number of
flashes per storm during the 1991-2000 period resulted in a
50% probability value of 3.15 flashes per storm [6].
In an unusually severe storm, video records indicated that
the CN Tower was hit with 24 lightning flashes within 100
minutes during the early morning of July 7, 1991 [6], implying
an average inter-flash time of 3.3 minutes. Since then, this
severe CN Tower lightning storm has always been referred to
as the severest. However, on Aug. 24, 2011, this record was
substantially broken.
This paper is to thoroughly investigate a relatively recent
CN Tower lightning storm that produced 52 flashes within 84
minutes, which translates to an average inter-flash time of 1.6
minutes. In fact this storm produced within 84 minutes what
we observe in a “good” year at the CN Tower. This
extraordinary CN Tower lightning storm, which made news in
Toronto, and beyond, deserved a lot of attention.
102
 II. CN TOWER LIGHTNING DATA
The analysis of this extra ordinary CN Tower lightning
storm, which started around 10:10 PM (local time) on Aug. 24,
2011, is based on video and current derivative records.
Unfortunately, the high-speed digital imaging system (Phantom
v5.0) was not operational during this important storm and thus
the presented analysis is built on flash trajectory images,
recorded at 33.3ms resolution, as well as the corresponding
currents recorded by NI PCI-5114 digitizer. Although video
records show 52 flashes striking the tower, only the currents of
32 flashes were recorded because the current derivative
measurement system was configured to trigger on current rate
of rise and thus recorded flashes that has at least one return
stroke. The recorded currents were accurately matched with
their corresponding 32 video flash records. Through careful
analysis of recoded images it was found that the 20 flashes that
did not trigger the current derivative measurement system
contained only initial continuous currents (ICCs).
current record also proved that this flash is negative. The
Luminosity analysis presented in Fig. 7 also prove the
existence of CCs following the two return strokes, the last CC
duration is substantial.
Figs. 8 and 9, respectively, show the trajectory and
luminosity variation of the only flash that proved to be positive
among the recorded currents (32 flashes). Luminosity analysis
(Fig. 9) and current records point out to a one-stroke flash. It is
interesting to note the long duration of the CC that followed the
single stroke, which is close to 500ms. Fig. 9 also displays
several M-components super imposed on the ICC and another
on the CC.

III. ANALYSIS OF VIDEO IMAGES

The analysis of CN Tower lightning flashes is carried out
by studying the lightning channel luminosity variation along
successive frames within each flash [7].
Fig. 1 shows one of the 52 flashes that struck the CN
Tower on Aug. 24, 2011. The 33.3ms video recording camera,
with image resolution of 1920 x 720 pixels, was placed 2.287
km north-east of the tower.
Another CN Tower flash is presented in Fig. 2. The figure
includes a horizontal line at pixel level y = 200, along which
the average luminosity across the width of the channel is
calculated over successive frames [7]. Fig. 3 displays the time
variation of the average luminosity across the width of the
channel. The channel luminosity time variation reveals the
existence of only an initial continuous current (ICC) that Fig. 1. A typical upward flash to the CN Tower, Aug. 24th, 2011.
slightly exceeded one second. It is worth mentioning that this
flash did not trigger the current derivative measurement system
confirming the nonexistence of return strokes. Because of the
absence of a corresponding current record, the polarity of this
flash could not be determined. Furthermore, due the luminosity
saturation at the 256 level, the luminosity variation beyond
such level is not possible to be retrieved.
Figs. 4 and 5, respectively, present the trajectory and
channel luminosity time variation of the 31st CN Tower flash.
Luminosity analysis points out to a one-stroke flash, which is
confirmed from the correspondindg time-matched current
record. The current record also proved that this flash is
negative. It is important to mention that the end of the ICC is
not visible in Fig. 5 because of the 33.3ms resolution
limitation. In the past, the use of CN Tower high-speed
imaging systems, at 2ms resolution, displayed clearly the end
of ICCs [7]-[9]. The Luminosity analysis shown in Fig. 5 also
prove the existence of several M-components and a continuing
current (CC) following the return stroke.
Figs. 6 and 7, respectively, show the channel trajectory
and luminosity time variation of the 22nd flash. Luminosity
analysis points out to a two-stroke flash, which is confirmed Fig. 2. Channel trajectory image of the 30th flash.
from the corresponding time-matched current record. The

103
 It is worth mentioning that 31 out of the 32-flash current
250
records are found to only have negative return strokes. The
number of return strokes in each of the 31 negative flashes
varies from 1 to 14. However, the only classified positive flash 200
contains one stroke.

Channel Luminosity
IV. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 150

The statistical analysis presented here is based on the

video images of 52 CN Tower lightning flashes, recorded at 30 100
frames per second, during the severe storm of Aug. 24, 2011. It
started around 10:10 PM and lasted for 84 minutes.
50

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
250 Time [s]

Fig. 5. Channel luminosity along the line y = 250 (Fig. 4).

200
Channel Luminosity

150

100

50

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
Time [s]

Fig. 3. Channel luminosity along the line y = 200 (Fig. 2).

Fig. 6. Channel trajectory image of the 22nd flash.

250

200
Channel Luminosity

150

100

50

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
Fig. 4. Channel trajectory image of the 31st flash. Time [s]

Fig. 7. Channel luminosity along the line y = 300 (Fig. 6).

104
 for all 52 flashes. Fig. 10 shows that the overwhelming
majority (94%) of inter-flash time interval varies within the
range 0.5 – 3 minutes.
Each point on the cumulative distribution graph (Fig. 11)
represents the probability of having an inter-flash time interval
value that equals or exceeds the abscissa. It is possible to infer
from the figure that the inter-flash time interval varies in the
range: 10.6s – 4.57min, with 50% probability level at 1.5min
(Table 1).
Figs. 12 and 13, respectively, present the frequency and
cumulative probability distributions of flash time duration. Fig.
12 shows that the majority (84.6%) of flash durations varies
within the range 0.8 – 2s.
The cumulative probability distributions of flash duration
are shown in Fig. 13 for all 52 flashes (grey line), 32 flashes
with return strokes (blue line) and 20 flashes with only ICCs
(red line). The cumulative probability distributions indicate
Fig. 8. Channel trajectory image of the 19th flash. clearly that flashes with ICCs and return strokes have generally
higher flash duration in comparison with those for flashes that
only contain ICCs. Table 1 summarizes important flash
duration parameters, such as the range (0.1 – 2s), mean (1.2s)
250 and the 50% probability level (1.2s) considering all 52 flashes.
Figs. 14 and 15, respectively, present the frequency and
cumulative probability distributions of flash ICC time duration.
200
Fig. 14 shows that the overwhelming majority (94%) of ICC
Channel Luminosity

time durations are within the range 0.2 – 1.4s.

150 The cumulative probability distributions of ICC time
durations are shown in Fig. 15 for all 52 flashes (grey line), 32
flashes containing return strokes (blue line) and 20 flashes
100 containing no return strokes (red line). The cumulative
probability distributions indicate clearly that ICCs in flashes
containing return strokes have statistically much lower
50
durations in comparison with those in flashes containing only
ICCs. Table 2 summarizes important ICC duration parameters,
such as the range (0.1 – 1.835s), mean (0.77s) and the 50%
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 probability level (0.72s) for all ICCs.
Time [s]

Fig. 9. Channel luminosity along the line y = 330 (Fig. 8).

16
Image analysis showed that each of the 52 flashes contained
an initial continuous current (ICC). In addition to the visibility 14
of upward branches in many cases, the existence of ICCs
Number of Inter-Flash Intervals

proved that all flashes, recorded at that night, were upward 12

initiated. The corresponding perfectly time-matched current

10
records also proved that only 32 flashes out of the 52 contained
return strokes (61.5%), because the current derivative recording
8
system has always been configured to only record return
strokes. The time variation of channel luminosity for every 6
flash was carried out for classification and statistical purposes
(Figs. 3, 5, 7, 9). 4

Furthermore, the analysis of current records enabled the

2
classification of the polarities of the recorded 32 current
flashes. It is found that 31 out of the 32 current flashes are
0
negative, each containing between 1 and 14 return strokes. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Only one one-stroke positive flash was found. Inter-Flash Duration [min]

Figs. 10 and 11, respectively, present the frequency and

Fig. 10. Frequency distribution of inter-flash time intervals.
cumulative probability distributions of inter-flash time intervals

105
 100
12
90
Number of Inter-Flash Intervals [%]

80 10

70

Number of Flashes
8
60

50
6
40

30 4

20
2
10

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 0
Inter-Flash Interval [min] 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2
ICC Duration [s]
Fig. 11. Cumulative probability distribution of inter-flash time intervals.
Fig. 14. Frequency distribution of ICCs in 52 flashes.

14

100 All 52 ICCs

12 32 ICCs with RS
90
20 ICCs without RS
10 80
Number of Flashes

70
Number of ICCs [%]

8
60

6 50

40
4
30

2 20

10
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 0
Flash Duration [s] 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
ICC Duration [s]
Fig. 12. Frequency distribution of flash duration (52 flashes). Fig. 15. Cumulative probability distributions of ICC duration.

100 All 52 Flashes

32 Flashes with RS
90 Table 1. Summary of statistical analysis of inter-flash time and flash duration.
20 Flashes without RS
80
Flash Duration [s]
Number of Flashes [%]

70
Inter-Flash
60 Intervals [s] All With RSs No RSs
50
Data Size 51 52 32 20
40
Min 10.6 0.100 0.534 0.100
30
Max 274.3 2.135 2.135 1.835
20
Mean 98.0 1.225 1.335 1.050
10 50%
89.9 1.201 1.301 1.135
Probability
0 Standard
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 49.9 0.430 0.400 0.426
Flash Duration [s]
Deviation

Fig. 13. Cumulative probability distributions of flash duration.

106
 Table 2. Summary of statistical analysis of ICC duration. The performed video analysis points out to the importance
of utilizing high-speed imaging systems, with 1ms resolution
or better in addition to the inexpensive 33.3ms cameras, in
ICC Duration [s]
order to clearly characterize the different components of the
lightning flash.
All With RSs No RSs

Data Size 52 32 20
Min 0.100 0.202 0.100
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Max 1.835 1.113 1.835 The authors acknowledge the contributions of M. Anwar, P.
Weiss, M. Yusouf, and P. Liatos for CN Tower lightning data
Mean 0.770 0.596 1.050
acquisition related to Aug. 24, 2011, lightning storm.
50% Probability 0.720 0.571 1.135
Standard Deviation 0.396 0.254 0.426

V. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented an in-depth analysis of a remarkably
sever CN Tower lightning storm that contained 52 flashes. The
storm continued for 84 minutes on the night of Aug. 24, 2011.
The characteristics of this storm (inter-flash time, flash
duration, polarity, flash components and initiation direction)
have been analyzed based on video records and the
corresponding perfectly time-matched current records.
Image analysis showed that each of the 52 flashes
contained an initial continuous current (ICC), proving that all
flashes were upward initiated.
Current and video records indicated that 32 flashes
contained return strokes, 31 of which proved to be negative and
one was found to be positive. Since the current derivative
measured system has always been configured to trigger on
return strokes, it was not possible to record the currents of 20
flashes because of the absence of return strokes. Therefore, the
polarities of these 20 flashes were not possible to determine.
The frequency distributions of inter-flash time intervals
and ICC durations showed that the overwhelming majority
(94%) of inter-flash time intervals and ICC durations varied
within the ranges 0.5 – 3 minutes and 0.2 – 1.4s, respectively.
For flash durations, the frequency distribution showed that the
majority (84.6%) of flash durations varied within the range 0.8
– 2s.
The cumulative probability distributions of the inter-flash
time interval, flash duration and ICC duration for all flashes
showed that they have 50% probability levels at 1.5min, 1.2s
and 0.72s, respectively.
The cumulative probability distributions of the flash
duration clearly indicated that flashes with ICCs and return
strokes have statistically higher flash durations in comparison
with those for flashes that only contain ICCs. Furthermore, the
cumulative probability distributions of the ICC duration
showed that ICCs in flashes containing return strokes have
statistically much lower durations in comparison with those in
flashes containing only ICCs.
REFERENCES
[1] A.M. Hussein, W. Janischewskyj, J.S. Chang, V. Shostak, W.
Chisholm, P. Dzurevych, and Z.I. Kawasaki, “Simultaneous
measurement of lightning parameters for strokes to the Toronto
CN Tower,” Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmosphere, vol.
100, no. 5, pp. 8853-8861, May 1995.
[2] A.M. Hussein, M. Milewski, A. Abdelraziq, W. Janischewsky, F.
Jabbar, “Visual characteristics of CN Tower flashes,”
International Conference on Lightning Protection (ICLP), pp. 89-
94 , Kanazawa, Japan, Sept. 18-22, 2006.
[3] A.M. Hussein, W. Janischewskyj, M. Milewski, V. Shostak, J.S.
Chang and W. Chisholm, “Current waveform parameters of CN
Tower lightning return strokes,” Journal of Electrostatics, Vol.
60, Nos. 2-4, pp. 149-162, March 2004.
[4] A.M. Hussein, M. Milewski, W. Janischewskyj, “Correlating the
characteristics of the CN Tower lightning return-stroke current
with those of its generated electromagnetic pulse,” IEEE Trans.
on Electromagnetic Compatibility, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 642-650,
Aug. 2008.
[5] A.M. Hussein, S. Jan, V. Todorovski, M. Milewski, K.L.
Cummins and W. Janischewskyj, “Influence of the CN Tower on
the lightning environment in its vicinity,” Proceedings of the
International Lightning Detection Conference (ILDC), pp. 1-19,
Orlando, FL, USA, April 19-20, 2010.
[6] A.M. Hussein, “CN Tower Lightning Parameters,” invited paper,
Proceedings of the X International Symposium on Lightning
Protection (SIPDA), pp. 107-133, Curitiba, Brazil, Nov. 9-13,
2009.
[7] A.M. Hussein and M. Milewski, “CN Tower Lightning Flash
Components,” Proceedings of the International Symposium on
lightning Protection (SIPDA), pp. 7-13, Fortaleza, Brazil, Oct. 3-
7, 2011.
[8] A.M. Hussein, M. Milewski, and W. Janischewskyj
“Characteristics of CN Tower Lightning Flashes Based on High-
speed Imaging System Records,” Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Winter Lightning (ISWL), pp. 211-216, Sapporo,
Japan, June 15-16, 2011.
[9] A.M. Hussein, M. Milewski, and W. Janischewskyj,
“Characteristics of CN Tower Lightning Flash Components,”
Proceedings of the International Conference on Ground & 4th
Lightning Physics and Effects, pp. 1-7, Salvador, Brazil, Nov. 8-
11, 2010.

107