IEEE Transactions

on

Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-97, no.

January/February 1978

1,

LIGHTNING PERFORMANCE - I
SHIELDING FAILURES SIMPLIFIED
Gordon W. Brown, Senior Member
U. S. Energy Research and Development Administration
Washington, D. C.

ABSTRACT AND CONCLUSIONS

good approximation, the number of shielding failures is

This
function only of the maximum strike distance.
is true forall realistic transmission line structures.
Calculations were made for heights to 50m and shielding angles to 45, and a variety of conductor to ground
wire distances. Parameter variations were smooth, and
height extrapolations to 75m are realistic with little
Results are given in
or no additional error expected.
Stroke angles are assumed distributed ac-.
Figure 2.
cording to cosm, with m=2 (cf. References 1-3).

A radically simplified method for determining

shielding failure- and'' shielding failure _ outage rates
The method is shown to have excellent
is presented.
correlation with over 120,000 km-yrs of actual line
For lines of realoutage rates (1974 CIGRE Survey).
istic design, total shielding failure rate is found to
be afunction dependent only on the maximum strike distance, which is governed by line configuration and
height. Shielding failure outage rate depends on line
configuration and CFO, and depends heavily on the statistical distribution of heights along the line. Methodology is developed to utilize or to approximate such
distributions.

c.

INTRODUCTION

a)

(a

In a recent paper (Reference 1) it was shown that

for shielded situations the frequency distribution of
stroke current magnitudes was dependent only on the 1
maximum strike distance, rs max for which a stroke
could hit the phase wire. This is illustrated in Fig-C)
N
ure 1.

v~~~S

r s^

'

*-

Le
c

>e

a)

.4

/-

'

~///

A//

A//

- for example #1-

(D
S.-

/,

expanded
scal e

to
.

limits of
s catt
tt

-1

Cv

1-c

rS

SFR
Both Outer Phases
IKL= 40

10

U-

,/

l-~~~~~
IO

10

__-I

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Maximum Strike Distance in Meters

Shielding Failure Rate: SFR

(Includes both -outer phases)

Figure 2.
1Ficrnure 1.

Shieldings Parameters

The calculations were made for an isokeraunic

(IKL) of 40, and assumes a stroke density of

The calculations of Reference 1 were, however, for distribution lines shielded by nearby transmission lines
The present work extends the calculaor structures.
tions for distances and heights typical of HV, ENV and
Frequency distributions are
UHV transmission lines.
still found to be a function only of rs max0

I.
(A)

SHIELDING FAILURE RATE

AND FREQUECY DISTRIBUTION

level

= 0.16 -IKL strokes/(sq.km-yr)

N
0

gives the correct expression

as a function of line parameters:

Reference 1

rs

f\N<

max

c2 (,y+h)

rs max

2cxTl h

2(h-y)2

for

csinS

Rate of Shielding Failures

c =Jx2

The ternm "shielding failures"here means all those

strokes which "sneak by" the shield wires, whether or
not they cause outages. It was discovered that, to a

Fortunately, a much simpler expression has been found.

Though an approximation, it is excellent over the entire range of possible parameters. The formula and its
basis are shown in Figure 3.

r 77 015-1.
A paper recar-nded and aDDr'ved by,
the IEE Transmissicn and Distribution Ccvrvittee of
the
Pcawer Engineering Society for presentation
at the IFEE PES Winter Moeeting, NJew Yor3z, N.Y., January 30-February 4, 1977. Manuscript submitted
July 9, 1976; made available for printing October 28,
1976.

0018-9510/78/0100-0033$00.75 01978

IEEE

Example 1:

40m

25m

200

40(+25

r
s

33

max

For this

721-sin2,
r5

max'

4
9=rn
the

number of shielding

failures is (Figure 2)
SFR = 2.7 failures/100km-yr.

Z = surge impedance for a surge on the

phase conductor.

Example 2:

For the previous example, there were 2.7

shielding failures per lOOkm-yr for an
r

Error is significant
only if h-y is greater
than about r7/2.

es

rsi

rs

max

max

IFO

h+y

2-CF
Z = 3000
375

8.0kA

From Figure 4 (dashed lines), for r

49m, about 30% of the shielding faslumres
are over 8kA. Thus the shielding failure

sing s )

outage rate is
sfo

Figure 3.

Approximation to Maximum Strike Distance

(B)

The other major need for determination of shielding

failure outage rate is the frequency distribution of
the shielding failure stroke currents.

(B)

49m.

of

Suppose the CFO were 1500kV, and the surge

impedance 375. Then

30%? of 2 .7
0.8 outages per 100km-yr.

The Outage Rate Improved

Since both the shielding failure rate and I

are functions of r
, Figures 2 and 4 can be coMbined. This is done na Figure 5.

Frequency Distribution of Shielding Failure

Currents

As noted, the distribution is a function only of

(or I ), and is extremely insensitive to variotmax parameters. The overall results are shown
aimonxof other
in Figure 4.
90

20

sfo _ 0 .1 .3 .5
Shielding Failure Outage Rate:
Outages Per 100 km-yr. (sfo.)

~~~~IKL=41J

Cl)

80

15-

70

2~ 60
-)

50

0)
V

V)

20

102

04

07

0f

-~.
4/,

o w

100

s-u

Maximum Stri ke Di stance

in

Figure 5.
10

20

(C)

Stroke Current in kA
Figure 4.

(A) Current Required

for Flashover

is
If the maximum current to the line, I m
greater than the stroke current required fora flashover, IFO, then an outage occurs.

where

IFO

IFO
CFO

=
=

Shielding Failure Outage Rate

The Problem of Maximum Strike Distance

As we proceed alonga line, heights vary with terrain. One is tempted to use the average height tlo calculate the SFO rate. Ideally, we desire a full distriIf the frequency
bution of heights along the line.
distribution of ground wire height h, and conductor
height y, is known, then a distribution of strike distances can be found. Let that distribution be

Frequency Distribution of
Shielding Failure Stroke Currents

SHIELDING FAILURE OUTAGE RATE

II.

M'eters

f(r5

*.CFO

) =

frequency distribution of
maximum strike distances
along the line.

Then the shielding failure rate is

stroke current required for flashover

critical flashover voltage

SFO =

34

sfo
O

f(r

adr s max
f(rs max

For a given r5 max and IFO, the rate is sfo. Note

that sfo is zero for r s max less than

RFo

= 7. 1(IFO)*75

Also, there is, for any line, some absolute maximum

(There would also be some fistrike distance, R ax.
nite minimum.) Hence we can write

(a) Flat Terrain

(max
SFO -

I
r smax
R max P
1.1 to 1.3 Rt

Rt

Rmin

m
dr s max
sfo f(r max)
fis

Rmax

)RBFO

(b)Rolling

Consider, as in Figure 6, a hypothetical distribution

of strike distances. The illustration is chosen for a
case of low shielding failure rate..

Only these
Contribute to
the outage rate.

Rt

(c) Mountainous Terrain

Estimated Form of
Frequency Distribution

Figure 7.

R?FO

max

2.

effective value R*
Figure 6.

,<)
; FO

for flat
max at midspan

at tower dimensions

Rmax

strike distance for which flash-

shaded area,
total area,

of all strike

Figure 6
Figure 6

rate is then

SFO = eFO sfo*

Rmax = maximum of all r s max ("worst"

or greatest conductor heights)

(Note: An approximate method for determining

given in Section III(A) following.)

7.1(IFO) *75

(b) The outage

terrain

rax

2CzO

P
(a) Estimate the fraction
el.
distances between RTO and R

(Rmax).

R*:

(b) EstimateR*, placing it near, but slightlying

ly greater than, the mean value of those r a
between R . and R
max
FO
3. Determine the outage rate:

(a) Determine the values of maximum strike

distance under the following conditions: the smallest
value (Rmi ), the value at the tower (Rt), and the

RFO

which is the minimum

over can occur.

Estimate the frequency distribution of r s max

= r
Rmin 5l

R%oF

Determine IFO
and

(D) Recommended Calculation Procedure

maximum,value

Determine

(a)

Frequency Distribution of
Maximum Strike Distances

It is clear that if some "effective" maximum strike

distance (R*) is to be used, it must lie between RFO
It is suggested that the following proce.
and R
dure beaused to determine the SFO rate.

1.

Terrain

1.3 to 1.6 Rt

where sfo* = sfo at R* (from Figure 5). (Note: Approx,

from R
imate methods for estimating R* and 0
m
are given in III (A) foAXowing.)
RmaxI R and

RFo

is

III.

COMPARISON WITH REALITY

In the March 1974 issue of ELECTRA, E. R. Whitehead3 reported a CIGRE Survey of EHV Transmission Line
Outage Rates. Calculations have been made for each of
the "41 representative reporting units" of Table III of
that article.

(b) Estimate the shape of the distribution

(i.e., histogram) of r m . It should closely para-

In parllel the distribution (iis-%gram) of height.

An approxticular, estimate $, the average. (Note:
imation for determining R is given in part III(A) fol-

lowing.)

(A)

Typical estimated shapes of the frequency dis-

Treatment of the

"Input"

Data

1. R: Sufficient information was available in

. Terrain percentthe table to determine Rt and R
Let thelPract ions of the line
ages were also given.

tributions of maximum strike distances for flat, rolling, and mountainous terrain are illustrated in Figure 7.

35

Then a point slightly above RX is used for R*:

under flat, rolling, and mountainous conditions be f

f
and fN respectively. The average of r5 max' called
R, for the line, was approximated as
R

fFRF +R

with

2.5-3
RR

fMRM

min

R*

R* +

Rmax - R*
10

(b) eFO:

3t

R0 -RF
(R-Rmin) (Rmax
mmn
:Po-

R
Rt

RM 1.5Rt
%
(Rmax -- RFO)(

The 1.05 in RF attempts to account for the fact that

no terrain is "flat," and the tendency would be to
build from hill to hill, however slight.

Rmax Rmax
(B)

2. R ax Por purposes of estimating the distribution, R maxfor flat, rolling, and mountainous terrain were ersnimated at

RF max

1.2R t

RR max

1*4 Rt

The Results

The results are shown in Table I. It seems clear

that the correlation between calculation and actual
data is remarkably good, with few exceptions (notably,
lines #43 and 44).

Table I
Comparison of Calculated SFO Fate
vs. Actual Total Outage Rate
(cf. Table III of Reference 3)

=t- 1.8 Rt
RMRNmax

With mixed terrain, the value used for the distribution

was the square root of the squared sums, or

(both at an IKL of 40)

Line

Rmax - Rt

1.44fF +

1.96fR + 328fM

.50

33

.35

.75

.16

36

39
40
43
44
45
51
52

(a) Line#52

R* 47,

20

50

PFO

60

40

RO

.14

.40
0

.30
0
0

0
0

.59
.77

.10
.10
.10
.30
0

.80

.70
.75
.70

.60
.60
.80
.80
.24

.35

.24

.20

.o8

1.00
.70

1.00
.50

.50

.20

.20
.20

18.5

18.5

16.0

.30
.30

.20
.20

.05 23.6
.10 23.6
.10 22.1
.10 22.1
0
0

24.8
24.8

.63 27.8
.43 27.8
.14 .62 27.8

.13
.22

.08
.92

.72 27.8
0

50.7

Rt
36.3
66.8

102.1

44.1
44.1

44.1

44.1

23.0
31.8
49.0

49.0

49.4
50.1
50.1
50.1
50.1
50.1

40.2
40.2
40.2
40.2
40.2

41.6
50.8
50.8

50.9
44.1

44.1
43.3
43.3

44.6
44.6

45.4

45.4

47.4

47.4
43.5

43.5
43.5
43.5
70.3

RM..

RF

R*

32.2 30.6 40.0

37.1 33.8 62.6 66.0
132.7 33.8 85.8 go.o

47.3

64.0 45.3 45.5

69.0 45.3 51.7
54.2 45.3 34.0
65.4 45.3 47.2
27.6 36.6 44.5 33.5 31.8
69.0 36.3 47.0
69.0 36.3 47.0
68.5 47.6 49.4
69.8 34.3 45.0
65.9 34.3 39.5
60.2 34.3 32.1
64.1 34.3 37.5
63.5 34.3 36.7
64.4 36.0 48.7
57.4 36.0 40.7
55.5 36.0 38.7
55.5 36.0 38.7
61.4 36.0 43.6
55.5 36.7 37.9
99.6 28.9 50.8
99.6 28.9 50.8
99.8 62.0 50.9
57.5 39.9 36.2
57.5 39.9 36.2
53.8 39.1 29.7
56.9 39.1 35.6
57.0 39.1 36.4
58.6 39.1 38.1

IFO
7.5

8.o

FO
.45

1.00

8.o 1.00

53.0 11.8
57.0 11.8
49.0 11.8

.5

8.9

60.6 39.1 39.2

60.6 39.1 39.2
58.9 39.1 36.6
58.9 39.1 36.6
71.0 27.6 55.1
66.6 27.6 49.8
70.9 27.6 54.9
72.9 27.6 57.4
97.4 39.7 69.5

55.0

11.8

37.5

7.9

56.0
56.0

8.8

8.8
55.0 12.7

50.0
47.0
44.0
45.0
45.0
52.0

46.5

46.0
46.0

8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2

8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7

47.0

.4
.72
.72
.70
.78
.78
.4
.4
.4
.9
.7
.7
.7
.72
.73

50.0

9.7
9.7
9.7

.5
.5
.4

56.5
59.0

73.0

9.7
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.9

7.2

.23

.13

.3

50.0
48.0
48.0
57.0
51.5

.24
3.4

2.6

.65

9.7
9.7

ACTUAL

.18

.15
.34

48.0

48.0

SF0

.7

8.7
8.9
55.0 6.5 1.00
55.0 6.5 1.00
72.0 18.0
.075
45.0 10.0 .35
45.0 10.0 .35
47.0 9.7 .15
47-0 9.7 .27

46.5

CALC

.3

.4
1.00
1.00
1.00

1.00
1.00

.013
0

STR

5.7
.24
.38
0
.76

.072

.19
.09

.58

.47

.69

.5

.20
.20
.22
.23
1.8

.19

.72
.72
.14

.45
.17
.18
.18
.21

1.8

.02

.05
.05
.01

.08

.09

.09

.25
.25
.14
.14

2.2
1.5
2.2

2.7
2.8

0
0

.04

.34
.39
.33
.4

.36

.23

.51

1.04

1.60
0

.20
.31
.21

.42
.45
.19
0

.38
.64

.40

2.47

1.48

2.57
2.88
3.55

In addition to the high correlation, in 28 out of 41

cases the calculated shielding failure rate is less
than the "STR" or total outage rate for the line. This
is well within the bounds of reason.

(C) Sample Calculations

Low Shielding Failure Rate

Consider a 345kV line with the following data:

CFO =
Z=

9St

Rmin

Yt

mln)(R
F. Rmax
a(R
min
max

29.9

.20 .10 20.0

(a) R*: First the average (R*)of all'r5 max

is estimated:

16.2

109

Frequency Distribution for

Lines No. 52 and 80

- R, RF, <

24.2
24.2

.50
.50

106
107
108

After estimating all the frequency distributions,

patterns were sought for approximating R* and 9FO from
the other strike distances. The following were found
to give excellent results:

above

55.0

.40 .25 24.2

.35 .45 24.2

88
89

99
105

R*,,.46.5, PFO 5.72

.09

46.4

.60

96
97
98

(b) Line#80

Figure 8.

30

.86

.30
1.00
0
.20
.20
.20

16.2

0
0

67
80
84
85
86

65
66

92
93
94
95

40

.20

.50

fM Rmi

17.1
.10 13.7
.70 .10 13.7
.75 .05 36.8
.19 .22 20.8
.10 .13 20.8
0
0
20.9
.13 .07 20.8
.11 .06 20.8
.40 .50 15.4
.80 .10 15.4
.90 0 15.4
.90 0 15.4
.30 .40 15.4
.30 .10 24.8
1.00 0 32.5
1.00 0 32.5

87

30

.50

56 1.00
.80
57
58 .83
64 .10

3. The outage rate; The shapes of the frequency

Two
distributions were then estimated for each line.
examples are shown in Figure 8.

fR

.50

35

(such as for
This is likely to be less than actualR
a case with all flat terrain plus one cieep valley). In
terms of estimating the shielding failures, however,
something like the above approximation would be more
appropriate than the actual value, unless the entire
histogram of heights were used.

fF

30

31
32

34

20

min

st
ht

16qokv
360Q1

5 degrees at tower

34m (at t ower), sag = 7m

27m (at tower), sag = 17.3m

Terrain: 50% Flat, 50% Rolling
h
- estimated to be 50m at several crossings

i)

max

ya =43m
36

were deliberately chosen a bit higher

than'might be'normal for purposes of illustration.)
Rolling Terrain assumes the qualitative definition
that the terrain "typically" follows conductor sag.

and y

(h

IFO
SF0

Calculation of strike distances:

ht

sag

Ymin

Yt

sag = 12.7m

2.7m

(ht

yt)tang 7tan50
=

(G )

.612m
with fF

At midspan, then,

=27-12.7

tang

.043,

or

2.45

Since

Thus
m
1

R
min

22(-singsin)

(b) Rmax
tower, we use Gst*

With IFO =

RFO

likely

occurs at

1.05[3(2.07)

RR

33.4

*5' f

.063

Estimating

3(33X4)]

= 26.2

.5

A.5(26.2)

Rmax

.5(33.4)

(50m),

is known

R*

2(1-sin57

2908

=40.8

29.8

we estimate

3-6.6-j20.7 (50-29.8) = 40.8

50-20.7

= 42m

10

eFO (50-29.8)(50-20.7)

= 51m

IFO

8.9kA,

.30(0.2)

.06

From Figure 5, with

sfo*

= 7.1(IF0)*75

SF0

21 600) = 8.9ka,
360

=
=

been
Had R
the erroneous

= 36.6m

and

3+7
=3(c)(c Rtt =2 (1-sin5)=33*
(d)

.25(.25)

and

50+4

max

20*7m

Rmax

Since

e'Fosfo*

RF

R
=

8.9kA

Method using estimated R*.

3.

Q at midspan is calculated from the tower angle

and sag data:
x

4
43

(about 32 or 33m from

Had the average value of r
Figure 9) been used, a rate soiazero would have been det ermined.

(a) Rmin

hm

yields sfo* = .25 and

(see, e.g., Reference 3)

1.

=R*

s max

max

2. Method using frequencydistribution(histogram)

Starting with an estimated histoof tower heights.
gram of tower heights, assuming the frequency distrito have the same shape, and "smoothbution of r
ing," yieldss Te sketch below.

30

0.2

calculated as done for the table, (i.e.,

Rmax used),

the results would be

=133.4 .5(1.44)+.5(1.96)
=

+ 36.62C

29.8

7(44-29.8)

44m

39.5

and
R*

39.5

FO

r44-29.8) (44-20. 7.717

44-39_=
40
10

and
Estimate
of R*
0

20

10

.
min

Figure 9.

40

30
J

f
R St

RFo

50

at R*
s max

40, sfo*

0.1.

So that

Rmax

SF0

>

.17(.1)

t .02

T'his example illustrates

that for accuracy at low

shielding failure rates, it is particularly important
toknowthe distribution of heights (strike distances).

Estimated Frequency of Maximum Strike

Distances for the Sample Calculations

The shaded area is estimated at 25% of the total. Thus

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

eF0 -0.25

The author wishes to acknowledge the generous help

of his former colleague and co-author (Reference 1) at
Joslyn Mfg. Co., Mr. Steven Thunander. He carried out
the necessary computationsto verify that the frequency

R* is estimated at 43m.

Entering Figure 5 with

37

January 1976.

distributions were not significantly a function of

height of a line, and to calculate shielding failure
rates for realistic transmission shielding configurations.

2.

Whitehead, E. R. and G. W. Brown, "Field and Analytioal Studies of Transmission Line Shielding: Part
II," IEEE PAS Transactions, May 1969, pp. 617-20.

3.

Whitehead, E. R., "CIGRE Survey of the Lightning

Performance of EHV Transmission Lines," ELECTRA,
March 1974, pp. 63-89.

RE?ER1NCES

1.

Brown, Gordon W. and Steven Thunander, "Frequency

of Distribution Arrester Discharge Currents," IEEE
Transactions, presented at Winter Power Meeting,

For Combined Discussion see page 48

38