Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AbstractThe paper presents the statistical data of the significant parameters of lightning flash, collected by many researchers
over many years around the world. The significant parameters of a
lightning flash are: peak current, waveshape and velocity of the return stroke, the total flash charge and I2 dt. Negative first strokes
have traditionally been considered to produce the worst stress on
the system insulation. The subsequent negative strokes have significantly lower peak current but shorter wavefronts. This may
stress the system insulation more. The positive strokes have about
the same median current value as the negative first strokes and
longer fronts, thus producing less stress. However, their duration
is longer than that of the negative strokes. Therefore, the system
insulation may be damaged because of the lower volt-time characteristic for long-duration waves. The positive strokes may also
cause more thermal damage because of their significantly higher
charge and I2 dt. The relationship between the return-stroke velocity and the current peak is a significant parameter in estimating
lightning-induced voltages and also in estimating the peak current
from the radiated electromagnetic fields of the lightning channel.
For better accuracy, the current and the velocity should be measured simultaneously. Better methods to measure the stroke current need to be developed. Correlation coefficient between various
lightning parameters is another important parameter which will
affect the analysis significantly. Lightning characteristics should be
classified according to geographical regions and seasons instead of
assuming these characteristics to be globally uniform.
Index TermsLightning parameters, lightning statistics.
to the peak value ( , front time) and by the time to its subsequent decay to its half value ( , tail time). The tail time being
several orders of magnitude longer than the front time, its statistical variation is of lesser importance in the computation of the
generated voltage. The generated voltage is a function of the
peak current for both the direct and indirect strokes. For backflashes in direct strokes and for indirect strokes the generated
voltage is higher the shorter the front time of the return-stroke
current [1]. The front time (and the tail time, to a lesser extent),
influence the withstand capability (volt-time characteristics) of
the power apparatus. The charge in a stroke signifies the energy
transferred to the struck object. The ancillary equipment (e.g.,
surge protectors) connected near the struck point will be damaged if the charge content of the stroke exceeds the withstand
capability of the equipment. The return-stroke velocity will affect the component of the voltage which is generated by the induction field of the lightning stroke [1]. Field tests have shown
that the parameters of the first stroke are different from that of
the subsequent strokes.
Lightning being random in nature, its parameters must be expressed in probabilistic terms from data measured in the field.
The objective of this report is to present the statistical data of
the significant parameters collected by many researchers over
many years around the world.
I. INTRODUCTION
347
, and
(1)
(5)
where
. Similarly, if
probability is given by:
, and
, the joint cumulative
(6)
(7b)
(2)
where
where
=standard deviation of
, and
=median value
, the cumulative
of x. Putting,
probability, , that the parameter will exceed x, is given by
integrating (2) between u and , giving:
and
(8a)
(3)
As an example, if the critical current of flashover of an overhead power line is 20 kA, then from Table I,
and
.
(8b)
; or
.
That is, the probability of a negative first-stroke current greater
than 20 kA is 82.11%.
The joint probability density function of two stroke parameters, x and y, can be expressed as:
(4)
or
(8c)
where
(8d)
and
(8e)
where
Such relationships, i.e., (8c), among lightning parameters
have been found and are shown later (Table XI). For cumulative
to :
probability of y from
and
,
By putting
(9)
348
to
TABLE I
STATISTICAL PARAMETERS OF FIRST NEGATIVE RETURN-STROKE
CURRENT [4], [9][11]
(10)
Two examples of the conditional probability are shown below.
In the first example, the limiting current is 20 kA, i.e.,
for a given front time of current,
. Assuming
,
, memedian current from Table I,
and
, and applying
dian front time,
(9), the cumulative probability is shown below for three values
of the correlation coefficient, , between and .
and
.
IV. FIRST NEGATIVE RETURN-STROKE CURRENT
349
Fig. 1.
TABLE II
STATISTICAL PARAMETERS OF LIGHTNING STROKES IN JAPAN [13]
Note:
;
TABLE III
STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF MULTISTROKE NEGATIVE
LIGHTNING FLASHES [10]
2.5-m long rods on the top of the towers. The amplitude of the
peak current was found to be dependent neither on tower height
nor on altitude. The statistical data are shown in Table II.
V. SUBSEQUENT NEGATIVE RETURN-STROKE CURRENTS
A ground flash very frequently consists of multiple strokes.
Based on a survey of almost 6000 flash records from different
regions of the world, Anderson and Eriksson estimated the following percentages (Table III) of multiple strokes in a ground
flash [10].
In general, there is no correlation between the first and the
subsequent stroke peak amplitudes. The median value of the
subsequent stroke is significantly lower than that of the first
stroke. Assuming log-normal distribution, the median value and
the standard deviation of the subsequent stroke have been proposed by Eriksson as [9]:
and
(12)
350
TABLE IV
COMPARISON BETWEEN TWO STUDIES ON NEGATIVE SUBSEQUENT-STROKE CURRENT PARAMETERS [10], [15]
Note:
TABLE V
STATISTICAL PARAMETERS OF POSITIVE STROKES [8]
Note:
; is the time interval between the start
of the wave and the 50% of peak current on tail.
at Fukui (at sea level) in Japan [17]. The height of the measurement tower was 200 m. The statistical data on the winter
positive lightning strokes are given in Table VI. No statistical
difference was found between the cumulative statistical distributions of the peak values of the positive- and negative-polarity
currents. All these incidents were upward strokes.
Two types of lightning were reported in Fukui [17]: one type
with high peak currents and strong luminosity of the lightning
channel (type-A), and the other type with small current peaks
and weak lightning-channel luminosity (type-B).
Comparing Tables IVVI, it should be noticed that the front
time and duration of the positive strokes are significantly longer
and the front steepness is lower than that of the negative strokes.
The same is true for the winter positive strokes compared to that
of the summer positive strokes.
351
TABLE VII
STATISTICAL PARAMETERS OF STROKE/FLASH CHARGE [8], [15]
TABLE VIII
STATISTICAL PARAMETERS OF FLASH
E = I dt [8], [15]
352
TABLE IX
COMPOSITE FIELD DATA ON VELOCITY OF RETURN STROKES NEAR GROUND [19], [21], [22]
TABLE X
COMPOSITE FIELD DATA ON RETURN-STROKE VELOCITY [19], [21], [22]
DATA FROM REF. [22] FOR CHANNEL LENGTH OF AT LEAST 0.7 km
Fig. 3.
= 31:1 kA,
equation.
353
tional Lightning detection network (NLDN) by Global Atmospherics, Inc. The recent improvements of NLDN has been described in [33], [34]. The data shown in Tables XII and XIII
are from the central, northwest and southeast regions of U.S.A.
for four lightning seasons, represented in two 2-year periods
(19971998 and 19992000). These three regions were selected
to represent the most extreme differences in the characteristics.
The areas of the three regions are rectangular, designated with
the southwest and northeast corners by the latitudes and longitudes of these corner points. The log-normal plots of the cumulative probabilities are shown in Figs. 57.
The absolute uncertainty in peak current is 2030% which
is due mainly to modeling errors. The random error between
regions is small due to the large number (typically 67) of sensors that are used to estimate the peak current for each individual
flash.
were
The median current and the standard deviation
computed from the raw data provided by Global Atmospherics,
Inc. As there is no significant regional variation in the instrumentation, the differences in the lightning parameters are predominantly due to the difference in the climates in the three regions. It should be noted that the cumulative probability profiles do not entirely fit the log-normal distribution. They seem
to have different slopes in the entire range of current, similar
to the two-slope characteristic of the Berger data [4]. It should
also be noticed that the median value of the positive strokes does
not always exceed that of the negative strokes, e.g., southeast
region of the USA. The small percentage of positive flashes is
probably biased by the misclassification of some small positive
cloud to-cloud discharges as cloud-to-ground flashes [33].
XII. DISCUSSION
Fig. 4.
= 0:48.
= 31:1 kA,
the current and another parameter, y, is known, then the effective median value of the variate can be found from (8a), and
the probability density function can be estimated from (7b). It
should be borne in mind that certain uncertainties exist in the estimation of . Table XI shows , a and d of (8c), and
of (8a). was taken from [4] and [8]; a and d were computed
was computed from
from (8d) and (8e), respectively;
was taken from Tables I and V for the negative
(8a) where
first strokes and the positive strokes. The values of
for the
negative subsequent strokes were computed from the 95% and
5% cumulative probabilities given in Table I of [8].
XI. REGIONAL VARIATION OF RETURN-STROKE CURRENT
The regional variation of the return-stroke current is illustrated in Tables XII and XIII. The data was taken from the Na-
354
TABLE XI
CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS AND DERIVED FUNCTIONS
j
CONDITIONAL MEDIAN,
y x = ax
TABLE XII
REGIONAL VARIATION OF NEGATIVE RETURN-STROKE CURRENT IN THE USA.
TABLE XIII
REGIONAL VARIATION OF POSITIVE RETURN-STROKE CURRENT IN THE USA.
426.8 km from the trigger site [36]. The tests were later repeated
with about three fold larger data set [37]. A relationship between
the peak current and the magnetic signal strength was proposed
[2]:
(21)
where SS is the signal strength of the magnetic field in arbitrary
. This assumed a return-stroke velocity to
units and
355
Fig. 5.
Cumulative probability distribution of lightning strokes in the central region of U.S.A. (a) Negative strokes; (b) positive strokes.
Fig. 6.
Cumulative probability distribution of lightning distribution in the northwest region of the USA. (a) Negative strokes; (b) positive strokes.
rent [30]. However, the analysis of [30] showed the relationship between the luminosity and current is neither linear nor
quadratic. Although a definite correlation was found in [17], no
mathematical formulation was given. However, as was pointed
out in [17], atmospheric conditions, such as rain and fog, will
distort the luminosity and will pose a problem in the calibration.
Another possibility is the spectroscopic study of the lightning
channel to determine its electrical characteristics.
The front time of the return-stroke current is another important parameter which is often overlooked. Shorter front time will
produce higher voltages across insulators for both direct and indirect strokes [1]. Therefore, this parameter needs to be measured accurately, and an analytical expression which closely follows the field data should be specified.
The present standards specify a double-exponential mathematical expression to represent the lightning return-stroke
356
Fig. 7. Cumulative probability distribution of lightning distribution in the southeast region of the USA. (a) Negative strokes; (b) positive strokes.
357
Because of this significant influence of the correlation coefficient, , on the lightning performance of power lines, this parameter needs to be estimated accurately.
XIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
tude of the center of the negatively-charged region in the cumu) may contribute to the higher peak
lonimbus cloud (at
current in the southern latitudes. Apart from the meteorological
conditions, the soil resistivity may also be a factor in influencing
the lightning stroke characteristics (e.g., front time). Therefore,
it may be appropriate not to have global statistical parameters
for lightning, but regional and seasonal.
358
and to recognize that approximations are inevitable. It is recommended that until more data are available:
1) The CIGRE waveshape (Fig. 1) be used whenever possible.
2) Table I be used for negative first strokes, the AndersonEriksson part of Table IV be used for negative subsequent
strokes, and Tables V and VI be used for positive strokes.
3) The field-test return-stroke velocity as a function of return-stroke current in Fig. 4 be tentatively adopted.
4) The NLDN data on stroke magnitudes be viewed with
caution until the validities of the various assumptions
made in the analysis can be resolved.
5) The approximation equations [(11) and (13)] and
[(15)(19)] be used for cases where local data are
not available. However, it should be recognized that the
extreme values at very low and high magnitudes are
inadequate.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The raw data of the NLDN system was provided by the
Vaisala-GAI, Inc. The Task Force acknowledges the fruitful
critique provided by Dr. K. L. Cummins.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Chowdhuri, Electromagnetic Transients in Power Systems. Taunton,
U.K.: Research Studies, 1996.
[2] Performance Evaluation of the National Lightning Detection Network
in the Vicinity of Albany, New York, Electric Power Research Institute,
Palo Alto, CA, EPRI Rep. TR-109 544, 1997.
[3] A. R. Hileman, Insulation Coordination for Power Systems. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 1999.
[4] R. B. Anderson and A. J. Eriksson, Lightning parameters for engineering applications, Electra, no. 69, pp. 65102, Mar. 1980.
[5] A. Hald, Statistical Theory With Engineering Applications. New York:
Wiley, 1952.
[6] R. V. Hogg and A. T. Craig, Introduction to Mathematical Statistics, 5th
ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1995.
[7] M. Bernardi, L. Dellera, and E. Garbagnati, Lightning parameters for
protection: an updated approach, in Proc. Int. Conf. Lightning Protection, Birmingham, U.K., 1998.
[8] K. Berger, R. B. Anderson, and H. Kroninger, Parameters of lightning
flashes, Electra, no. 41, pp. 2337, Jul. 1975.
[9] A. J. Eriksson, Notes on Lightning Parameters for System Performance
Estimations, CIGRE Rep. 33-86 (WG 33-01)IWD, 1986.
[10] R. B. Anderson and A. J. Eriksson, A summary of lightning parameters
for engineering applications, in Proc. CIGRE, 1980, Paper no. 33-06.
[11] Guide to Procedure for Estimating the Lightning Performance of Transmission Lines, CIGRE Brochure 63, Oct. 1991.
[12] J. G. Anderson, Lightning performance of transmission lines, in Transmission Line Reference Book 345 kV and Above, 2nd ed. Palo Alto,
CA: Elect. Power Res. Inst., 1987, ch. 12.
[13] T. Narita, T. Yamada, A. Mochizuki, E. Zaima, and M. Ishii, Observation of current waveshapes of lightning strokes on transmission towers,
IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 15, pp. 429435, Jan. 2000.
[14] IEEE Guide for Improving the Lightning Performance of Transmission
Lines, IEEE Std. 1243-1997.