30th International Conference on Lightning Protection - ICLP 2010

(Cagliari, Italy - September 13th -17th, 2010)

CALCULATION OF LIGHTNING-INDUCED VOLTAGES ON COMPLEX

LOW-VOLTAGE DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS
Alberto De Conti, Fernando H. Silveira, Silvério Visacro
LRC – Lightning Research Center
UFMG – Federal University of Minas Gerais - Brazil
e-mail: conti@cpdee.ufmg.br

ABSTRACT
In the LV lines, which are illustrated in detail in Figure 2,
This paper presents an investigation of lightning the TN system is assumed. The loads are connected
overvoltages on low-voltage (LV) networks installed in between the phase and neutral conductors, being the latter
urban areas. The combined effect of lightning-induced grounded both at the transformer station (with three
voltages and transferred lightning surges through
grounding rods) and at every service entrance (with a
distribution transformers is taken into account. It is shown
that an accurate estimate of lightning-induced voltages on
single grounding rod). As seen in Figure 2, LV lines 1
LV lines require the consideration of the medium voltage and 2 are identical. They consist each of a 240-m long
line and of its electrical connections with the LV line via the main feeder connected to eight 60-m long laterals and to
distribution transformer. It is also shown that if the stroke twelve three-phase consumers labeled as C1-1 to C1-12
location is relatively close to the evaluated LV line it is (LV line 1) and C2-1 to C2-12 (LV line 2). The main
possible to neglect the influence of other LV lines in the feeder of LV line 3 is slightly longer (300 m) but is
estimation of peak overvoltages on the connected loads. connected to only four 45-m long laterals and nine three-
phase consumers labeled as C3-1 to C3-9. LV line 4
1 INTRODUCTION
consists essentially of a single three-phase consumer load
Lightning overvoltages on LV distribution networks are (labeled as C4-1) connected directly to the transformer
caused by (i) direct strikes, (ii) induced voltages due to secondary via a 15-m long service drop.
nearby strikes, (iii) surge transfer from medium-voltage
(MV) to LV voltage lines through distribution LV line 4 (0,540)
transformers or (iv) direct strikes to nearby structures [1]. MV line configuration P12 LV line configuration
It is accepted that mechanisms ii, iii and iv are the most 1.5 m 0.7 m
MV Line 2
C B A N
likely to occur, but in most cases two or more of such N
P11 R
0.2 m
8.4 m 7.2 m S
mechanisms take place simultaneously [2-9]. The aim of 0.2 m 7.2 m
P10 LV Line 3 T

this paper is to present a theoretical study of the

conductor radius: 0.85 cm conductor radius: 0.47 cm
simultaneous occurrence of mechanisms (ii) and (iii) on
complex LV distribution networks. P1 P2 P3 (0,0) P7 P8 P9
(-630,0) P4 P5 P6 (630,0)
Y
X y
2 DEVELOPMENTS MV Line 1
180 m
LV Line 1 LV Line 2
x
2.1 Simulated System
LEGEND Stroke Location Transformer
The simulated system is illustrated in Figure 1. It consists Consumer Load Pole Grounding
of two medium-voltage lines connected to four three-
phase low-voltage lines via distribution transformers. The Figure 1 – Simulated system and respective (x,y) coordinates.
transformers are protected by ZnO surge arresters at their
primary and secondary sides. Both MV lines have a 2.2 System Modeling
neutral conductor that is grounded at every 180 m with a
single rod with 2.4 m in length, except at the transformer The conductor spacing used in the representation of the
poles where three vertical grounding rods with horizontal MV and LV lines is illustrated in Figure 1 with N
spacing of 3 m are used, and at pole P5 in which a single standing for the neutral conductor and the remaining
rod is used but the distance from poles P4 and P6 is of capital letters referring to the phase conductors. Ground
only 90 m. and conductor losses were neglected in the calculation of

1268-1
Authorized licensed use limited to: ANNA UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2023 at 11:22:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the line parameters. The adopted transformer, surge were calculated externally and interfaced with the
arrester, and grounding models are illustrated in Figure 3. Alternative Transients Program (ATP) as described in
The transformer model of Figure 3(a) was shown in [3] to [7]. The method of characteristics [16] was used to solve
accurately reproduce the surge response of typical the transients in the line.
30-kVA (13.8 kV/220-127 V) three-phase ∆-Y
distribution transformers in loaded conditions. The VxI R1 C2 L1

curves of ZnO surge arresters illustrated in Figure 3(b) R2 C3 L2 R3 40 2

are typical of surge protective devices used in MV and C4 35

30 Medium-Voltage 1.5

Voltage (kV)
LV lines [6]. Finally, the grounding model of Figure 3(c)
25
20 1
C1 L3 R4 C5 15
is a first order, low-current (linear) approximation to the 10
5
Low-Voltage (right scale) 0.5

frequency response of the grounding configurations PRIMARY SECONDARY

0
0.1 1 10
0

consisting of either one 2.4-m long electrode or three C1=493 pF, C2=94.8 pF, C3=21.5 pF, C4=50 pF, C5=759 pF
R1=14 kΩ, R2=0.8 kΩ, R3=1.1 kΩ, R4=1.6 kΩ
Current (kA)

2.4-m long vertical electrodes with a horizontal spacing L1=16 mH, L2=1.84 mH, L3=50 µH (a) (b)
of 3 m [10]. As in [2], the consumer loads were
R PARAMETERS
represented as 30-Ω resistances. They were connected to
1 rod 3 rods
the LV line through 15-m long service drops modeled as C
R(Ω) 0.346/σ 0,119/σ
twisted conductors. (c) Current injection C(nF) 0.0256εr 0.0743εr

C1-11 C1-12 C1-13 C2-11 C2-12 C2-13

(-150,120) (-30,120) (30,120) (150,120) Figure 3. (a) Transformer model [8], (b) surge arrester model
(-90,120) (90,120)
[11], and (c) grounding model [17] used in the simulations.
C1-8 C1-9 C1-10 C2-8 C2-9 C2-10
(-150,60) (-30,60) (30,60) (150,60)
(-90,60) (90,60)

13,8 kV/127V 13,8 kV/127V 2.3 Simulation Details

∆-Y 30 kVA ∆-Y 30 kVA
(a) C1-7 (b) C2-7
(-90,0) (90,0)
Two stroke locations were considered. Stroke location X
C1-4 C1-5 C1-6 C2-4 C2-5 C2-6 is at coordinate (0, -50). Stroke location Y is at
(-150,-60) (-30,-60) (30,-60) (150,-60)
(-90,-60) (90,-60) coordinate (-50, -540). Both were chosen in order to
C1-1 C1-2 C1-3 C2-1 C2-2 C2-3 simulate conditions in which either the direct illumination
(-150,-120)
(-90,-120)
(-30,-120) (30,-120)
(90,-120)
(150,-120)
of the LV lines (stroke location X) or the transference of
y surges through the distribution transformer (stroke
13,8 kV/127V
(-90,225)
∆-Y 30 kVA
(90,225)
location Y) is expected to prevail in terms of the
C3-2 C3-6 13,8 kV/127V
(0,180) x ∆-Y 30 kVA overvoltages at the consumer loads. A word of caution
(-150,180) (-90,180) (90,180) (150,180) must be however addressed to stroke location X, since it
(0,540)
C3-1
C3-3 C3-7 C3-9 is perhaps too close to some of the laterals of LV lines 1
C3-5
and 2 and a direct strike should be expected instead. For
(c) C3-4 C3-8 (d) C4-1
(-90,135) (90,135) the sake of the analysis presented herein, one should
LEGEND think of it as the result of a lightning strike to a tower,
Transformer Consumer Load Pole Grounding although for simplicity neither the enhancement effect
caused by the propagation of the lightning current along
Figure 2 – Details of the simulated LV lines and respective (x,y) the metallic structure [17] nor the direct injection of
coordinates: LV lines (a) 1, (b) 2, (c) 3, and (d) 4. currents into the LV lines due to the potential rise on the
tower grounding [18] were included in the analysis.
In the calculation of lightning-induced voltages, the
MTLE model with a propagation speed of 1.3×108 m/s For limitations of space but without loss of generality, the
and an attenuation constant of λ=2000 m was used for presented results will concentrate on phase-to-ground
estimating the spatial and temporal distribution of the overvoltages calculated along the MV lines and on phase-
return stroke current [11]. The assumed channel-base to-neutral overvoltages calculated along LV line 2. In all
current closely reproduces the median parameters of simulations, a ground conductivity of σ=0.001 S/m and a
subsequent stroke currents measured at the Morro do ground relative permittivity of εr=10 were assumed.
Cachimbo Station, Brazil, with a peak value of 16 kA and According to Figure 3(c), this leads to grounding
a maximum time derivative of 29.6 kA/µs [12]. The resistances of 346 Ω for a single grounding rod and
effect of a finite ground conductivity on the lightning 120 Ω for three parallel rods.
electromagnetic fields was taken into account by using
the Cooray-Rubinstein approximation [13, 14]. The field-
to-line coupling was performed according to the model of
Agrawal et al. [15]. The incident electromagnetic fields

1268-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: ANNA UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2023 at 11:22:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS The obtained results are in line with the findings of
Borghetti et al. [9, 19], who have also considered the
3.1 Lightning-Induced Voltages along the MV lines effect of lightning-induced voltages on distribution lines
with complex topologies and observed the reducing effect
of distributed grounding points and surge arresters on the
Figure 4 shows lightning-induced voltages calculated at resulting overvoltages.
the primary of the distribution transformers at poles P4,
P6, P10 and P12 for stroke locations X and Y. For 3.2 Load overvoltages along LV line 2 considering
illustrative purposes, voltages at poles P5 and P2 were or not the presence of the MV lines
also included in Figures 4 (a) and (b), respectively. This
was made to illustrate the peak voltages calculated along
A common simplification adopted in the evaluation of
the MV lines for the different stroke locations (note that
lightning-induced overvoltages on LV networks is to
strictly speaking the peak voltage referring to stroke
disregard the presence of the MV line and assume that for
location Y occurs between poles P1 and P2, but it is does
relatively close stroke locations only the effect of the
not differ significantly from the one calculated at pole
incident lightning electromagnetic field is important. This
P2). As seen in Figure 4, voltage waveforms calculated at
is equivalent to neglecting the surge transfer through the
the primary of the distribution transformers present
distribution transformer in the characterization of load
relatively low magnitudes (below 60 kV) and an overall
overvoltages. In this section this hypothesis is tested with
oscillatory shape. Both features are a consequence of the
the calculation of overvoltages across loads C2-2, C2-5,
periodical grounding points and of the surge arresters
C2-7, C2-9, and C2-12 for stroke locations X (which is
installed at the transformer terminals. Interestingly, the
very close to LV line 2) and Y (which is about 600 m far
peak overvoltages calculated along the MV lines (about
from LV line 2). Figure 5(a) illustrates the resulting load
125 kV for stroke location X and nearly 80 kV for stroke
overvoltages for stroke location X considering the
location Y) are different even though the distance from
complete system of Figure 1, whereas Figure 5(b)
the stroke location to the closest point along the line is
illustrates load overvoltages calculated for the same event
the same (50 m) in both cases. This happens mostly
but without considering the connection of LV line 2 to
because voltages induced along MV line 2 contribute
MV line 1. Figures 6(a) and 6(b) do the same but for
differently to the resulting voltages along the MV line 1
stroke location Y.
depending on the considered stroke location.

1.1
140 (a) total (transferred+induced) voltages
(a) Stroke location X (x=0, y=-50) 0.9
120
P5 0.7 C2-5
100
P4 and P6 0.5 C2-2
Voltage (kV)

80
Voltage (kV)

60
0.3
C2-9
40 0.1
P10
20 -0.1
0 -0.3 C2-12
C2-7
-20 -0.5
P12
-40 -0.7
0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8
Time (us) Time (µs)
100 1.1
(b) Stroke location Y (x=-540, y=-50) (b) partial (induced-only) voltages
80 0.9
P2
0.7 C2-7 C2-5
60
0.5
Voltage (kV)

Voltage (kV)

40
0.3
P10
20 P4 0.1 C2-2
0 -0.1
C2-9
-0.3
-20
P6 P12 C2-12
-0.5
-40
-0.7
0 2 4 6 8
0 2 4 6 8
Time (us)
Time (µs)

Figure 4 – Phase-to-ground overvoltages along the MV line for Figure 5 – Phase-to-neutral overvoltages across loads connected
two different stroke locations. to LV line 2 for stroke location X (a) considering or (b) not
considering the transformer connection to MV line 1.

1268-3
Authorized licensed use limited to: ANNA UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2023 at 11:22:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 0.2 affect the relative importance of the induced and
(a) total (transferred+induced) voltages
transferred surge components on resulting load
0.15 overvoltages. However, this does not change the
conclusion that a more accurate analysis of lightning-
Voltage (kV)

0.1
C2-7 induced voltages on LV networks should consider the
0.05 C2-2 surge transfer from the MV line to the LV line through
C2-9 C2-5
the distribution transformer.
0
C2-12 3.3 Load overvoltages along LV line 2 considering
-0.05 or not the presence of other LV lines
0 2 4 6 8
Time (µs)
0.2
(b) partial (induced-only) voltages Another useful evaluation regarding the system of Figure
0.15
1 is whether the presence of LV lines 1, 3 and 4 can be
neglected in the calculation of load overvoltages along
Voltage (kV)

0.1 LV line 2. This is important because if such a

C2-7
0.05 C2-5
0
C2-12 C2-2 and C2-9
-0.05
0 2 4 6
Time (µs)
Figure 6 – Same as Figure 5 but for stroke location Y.
It is seen in Figure 5 that even for relatively close stroke
locations, where the induced component is likely to
prevail, the surge transfer from the MV line to the LV
line through the distribution transformer cannot be
neglected. In the evaluated case, this is particularly true
for consumer C2-7, which is directly connected to the
transformer secondary. Also, although overvoltages
across the remaining loads are relatively less sensitive to
the electrical connection of LV line 2 to MV line 1,
nearly all phase-to-ground overvoltages calculated along
LV line 2 were seen to be strongly dependent on the
surge transfer from MV line 1 to LV line 2 (results not
shown here). This suggests that the evaluation of
lightning-induced voltages on LV networks without
considering the presence of the MV line and/or
disregarding its electrical connections with the LV line
through the distribution transformer must be viewed with
caution. As indicated in Figure 6, this conclusion also
holds for a stroke location relatively far from the
evaluated LV line, which was somehow already
expected. Indeed, even though the overall amplitudes
shown in Figure 6 are considerably lower than those
illustrated in Figure 5, it is apparent that load
overvoltages are dominated by the surge transfer through
the distribution transformer if stroke location Y is
considered. Although not shown here, this is also true if
phase-to-ground voltages along LV line 2 are analyzed.
It must be noted that the relative position of the line and
its particular location along the distribution network may
simplification is possible one can save computer time
when performing sensitivity analysis in large systems like
the one considered in this paper. In Figure 7(a), phase-to-
neutral overvoltages across loads C2-2, C2-5, C2-7, C2-
9, and C2-12 are presented for stroke location X
8 considering the whole distribution system of Figure 1,
whereas in Figure 7(b) load overvoltages were calculated
assuming that LV lines 1, 3 and 4 consist only of
distribution transformers plus the corresponding surge
protective devices and grounding connections (note that
for convenience Figure 7(a) actually reproduces Figure
5(a)). Figures 8(a) and 8(b) were plotted under the same
assumptions but for stroke location Y. It is seen in Figure
7 that for a relatively close stroke location the presence of
adjacent LV lines has only a moderate effect on the tail of
the calculated load overvoltages. Although this effect is
more perceptible on consumer C2-7, which is connected
to the transformer secondary, it was not able to change
the resulting peak voltages in the evaluated case.
With regard to Figure 8, which considers stroke location
Y, it is seen that consumer C2-7 is once again the most
affected by the presence of adjacent LV lines. However,
since stroke location Y is relatively far from LV line 2,
not only the tail but also the peak voltage across
consumer C2-7 is affected by the presence of adjacent
LV lines. This is justified as follows. As discussed in
Section 3.2, the effect of surges transferred through the
distribution transformer tends to prevail in LV line 2 if a
relatively far stroke location is assumed. Given the fact
that for stroke location Y LV line 1 is illuminated by the
incident electromagnetic field before any effect is
manifested in LV line 2, a fraction of the currents
induced along LV line 1 is injected back to MV line 1 via
the transformer grounding. This contributes to changing
the resulting overvoltages along LV line 2 earlier than if
the stroke location were closer to the evaluated line. As a
result, the calculated peak voltages on consumer C2-7
present a 10% variation if LV lines 1, 3, and 4 are
neglected. The justification above is confirmed by the

1268-4
Authorized licensed use limited to: ANNA UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2023 at 11:22:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
fact that peak overvoltages along LV line 1 are not LV line under consideration, the inclusion of nearby LV
affected by the presence of the remaining LV lines if lines may be of some importance for the characterization
stroke location Y is considered (results not shown here). of load overvoltages especially if those lines are
This happens because LV line 1 is in this case the first to illuminated by the incident electromagnetic field before
be illuminated by the incident electromagnetic field, the the line under analysis.
effect of the remaining LV lines on load overvoltages
being experienced on the tail of the calculated waveforms 0.2
(a) Complete system
as in Figure 7.
C2-7
0.15

Voltage (kV)
0.9
(a) Complete system 0.1
0.7 C2-5

0.5 0.05 C2-5

C2-2
C2-9
Voltage (kV)

0.3
C2-9 0
0.1
C2-12 C2-2
-0.1 -0.05
-0.3 C2-12 0 2 4 6 8
C2-7 Time (µs)
-0.5
0.2
-0.7 (b) Incomplete system C2-7
0 2 4 6 8
0.15
Time (µs) Voltage (kV)
0.9
(b) Incomplete system 0.1
0.7 C2-5
0.5 0.05 C2-5
C2-2
C2-9
Voltage (kV)

0.3
C2-9 0
0.1
C2-12
-0.1 C2-2
-0.05
-0.3 C2-12 0 2 4 6 8

-0.5 C2-7 Time (µs)

-0.7 Figure 8 – Same as Figure 7 but for stroke location Y.

0 2 4 6 8
Time (µs)

Figure 7 – Phase-to-neutral overvoltages across loads connected

to LV line 2 for stroke location X either (a) considering the
complete system of Figure 1 or (b) neglecting LV lines 1, 3, and
4.
4 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, an attempt was made to evaluate lightning
overvoltages on loads installed in complex distribution
networks considering the simultaneous effect of surges
transferred from MV lines to LV lines through
distribution transformers and lightning-induced voltages.
It was shown that, while the relative importance of the
induced and transferred components may vary depending
on the position of the stroke location respective to the
line and on system particularities, both the MV line and
its electrical connections with the LV line via the
distribution transformer should always be considered for
a more accurate estimation of lightning-induced voltages
on LV lines. It was also shown that, for stroke locations
relatively close to a given LV line, the presence of nearby
LV lines can be neglected without affecting the peak
values of estimated load overvoltages significantly. On
the other hand, for stroke locations relatively far from the
5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The work of Alberto De Conti had the financial suport of
FAPEMIG – Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado
de Minas Gerais.
6 REFERENCES
[1] C. Mirra, A. Porrino, A. Ardito, and C. A. Nucci “Lightning
overvoltages in low voltage networks”. Proc. Int. Conf. on
Electricity distribution, 1997.
[2] W. Bassi and J. M. Janiszewski, “Evaluation of currents and
charges in low-voltage surge arresters due to lightning
strikes”, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 18, no. 1, 2003.
[3] A. Piantini, A. G. Kanashiro “A distribution transformer
model for calculating transferred voltages”, Proc. 26th ICLP
– Int. Conf. on Lightning Protection, Cracow, Poland, 2002.
[4] R. Montaño and V. Cooray, “Penetration of lightning
induced transient from high voltage to low voltage power
system across distribution transformers”, Proc. 27th ICLP
Int. Conf. on Lightning Protection, Avignon, France, 2004.
[5] T. Noda, M. Sakae, and S. Yokoyama, “Simulation of
lightning surge propagation from distribution line to
consumer entrance via pole-mounted transformer”, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 442-444, 2004.

1268-5
Authorized licensed use limited to: ANNA UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2023 at 11:22:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[6] A. De Conti and S. Visacro, “Evaluation of lightning surges
transferred from medium voltage to low-voltage
networks”, IEE Proc. Gen. Transm. Distrib., vol. 152, no.
3, pp. 351-356, doi:10.1049/ip-gtd:20041306, 2005.
[7] A. De Conti, S. Visacro, “Calculation of Lightning-Induced
Voltages on Low-Voltage Distribution Networks”, Proc.
VIII SIPDA – Int. Symp. on Lightning Protection, São
Paulo, Brazil, pp. 483-488, 2005.
[8] A. Piantini, J. M. Janiszewski, A. Borghetti, C. A. Nucci,
and M. Paolone, “A scale model for the study of the LEMP
response of complex power distribution networks”, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 710-720, 2007.
[9] A. Borghetti, A. Morched, F. Napolitano, C. A. Nucci, and
M. Paolone, “Lightning-induced overvoltages transferred
through distribution power transformers”, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 360-372, 2009.
[10] A. De Conti and S. Visacro, “A Simplified Model to
Represent Typical Grounding Configurations Applied in
Medium-Voltage and Low-Voltage Distribution Lines”,
Proc. IX SIPDA – Int. Symp. on Lightning Protection, Foz
do Iguaçu, Brazil, 2007.
[11] C. A. Nucci, C. Mazzetti, F. Rachidi, and M. Ianoz, “On
lightning return stroke models for LEMP calculations”,
Proc. 19th ICLP – Int. Conf. Lightning Protection, Graz,
Austria, 1988.
[12] A. De Conti and S. Visacro, “Analytical representation of
single- and double-peaked lightning current waveforms”,
IEEE Trans. EMC, vol. 49, no. 2, doi:
10.1109/TEMC.2007.897153, 2007.
Authorized licensed use limited to: ANNA UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2023 at 11:22:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[13] V. Cooray, “Horizontal fields generated by return strokes”,
Radio Sci., vol. 27, pp. 529-537, 1992.
[14] M. Rubinstein, “An approximate formula for the
calculation of the horizontal electric field from lightning at
close, intermediate, and long range”, IEEE Trans. EMC,
vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 531-535, 1996.
[15] A. K. Agrawal, H. J. Price, and S. H. Gurbazani,
“Transient response of a multiconductor transmission line
excited by a nonuniform electromagnetic field”, IEEE
Trans. EMC, vol. EMC-22, no. 2, pp. 119-129, 1980.
[16] C. R. Paul, “Analysis of multiconductor transmission
lines”, John Wiley and Sons, 1994.
[17] D. Pavanello, F. Rachidi, M. Rubinstein, J. L. Bermudez,
W. Janischewskyj, V. Shostak, C. A. Nucci, A. M.
Hussein, and J. S. Chang, “On return stroke currents and
remote electromagnetic fields associated with lightning
strikes to tall structures: 1. Computational models”, J.
Geophys. Res., vol. 112, D13101,
doi:10.1029/2006JD007958, 2007.
[18] F. H. Silveira and S. Visacro, “Lightning effects in the
vicinity of elevated structures”, J. Electrostatics, vol.65,
2007.
[19] A. Borghetti, C. A. Nucci, and M. Paolone, “Indirect-
lightning performance of overhead distribution networks
with complex topology”, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 24,
no. 4, pp. 2206-2213, 2009.
1268-6