IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO.

1, JANUARY 2007 381

A Comprehensive Approach to the Grounding

Response to Lightning Currents
Silvério Visacro, Member, IEEE

Abstract—This paper is intended to present a comprehensive

and objective approach to the behavior of grounding electrodes
when subjected to lightning currents.
Index Terms—Grounding, lightning currents, transient
grounding behavior.

Fig. 1. Current components in the electrode and soil.

I. INTRODUCTION

W HEN subjected to lightning currents, grounding elec-

trodes present a very particular behavior. Teaching this
topic in graduate courses, the author has perceived that very fre-
rameters generate a voltage drop along the electrode during the
current flow.
quently engineers have a lack of basic concepts regarding the On the other hand, the leakage current establishes an elec-
grounding behavior. These concepts are fundamental for under- tric field in the soil (a medium with resistivity and permit-
standing most problems involved in lightning protection and to tivity ). This determines the flow of conductive and capaci-
provide solutions for them. tive currents through this medium. The ratio between conduc-
In this paper, the author would like to share his experience in tive and capacitive currents in the soil does not depend on the
this field by presenting a comprehensive and objective approach electrode geometry, but only on the relation “ ”(
to the grounding behavior to lightning currents, as a contribution and are the angular frequencies). The branch with the
to change the mentioned picture. The approach is focused on parallel conductance and capacitance (G, C) in the equivalent
physical aspects, avoiding mathematical developments. circuit of Fig. 1 is able to promote the effects associated with
the leakage current.
II. BASIC CONSIDERATIONS ON GROUNDING BEHAVIOR This description applies only to the single “piece of
grounding” represented by the simplified circuit. In order
Basically, a grounding system is composed of three compo- to consider the whole grounding configuration, the electro-
nents: 1) the metallic conductors that connect the system to the magnetic coupling between all existent elements has to be
electrodes; 2) the electrodes; and 3) the earth surrounding the computed (capacitive, inductive, and resistive coupling). Thus,
electrodes. In order to enable a better understanding of the con- the knowledge of the entire grounding behavior requires the
cepts developed in the following sections, a brief simplified de- solution of a series of circuits similar to the presented one,
scription of grounding behavior is presented as follows, in a cir- connected according to the electrode configuration topology
cuital perspective [1]–[4]. and taking into account mutual effects. The solution of this
A first aspect to consider is that any termination to earth complex circuit gives the impedance seen from the current in-
presents resistive, capacitive, and inductive effects. Fig. 1 shows jection point that corresponds to the ratio between the potential
an equivalent circuit that represents such effects for a single developed at the electrode (in relation to a remote point) and
“piece” of a grounding system, considering a short electrode the applied current.
length and the portion of earth around it. The current in this el- In an electromagnetic perspective, the grounding behavior
ement has two components: the leakage transversal current may be expressed by means of such grounding impedance.
spread into soil and the longitudinal current transferred to the However, it is very common to refer to a grounding resistance
remaining electrode length. instead of grounding impedance. This should be attributed to
The longitudinal current generates internal losses in the con- the fact that reactive effects are negligible for such applications
ductor and establishes a magnetic field inside the electrode and that usually involve low-frequency phenomena (e.g., short
around it. In the circuit of Fig. 1, a series resistance (R) induc- circuits in power systems). In this case, a constant potential
tance (L) (RL) branch is responsible for these effects. Both pa- approach is valid for the electrodes and the equivalent circuit is
reduced to a set of coupled conductances (or equivalent resis-
Manuscript received May 11, 2005; revised November 8, 2005. Paper no. tances in parallel). The ratio between the developed potential
TPWRD-00281-2005. and the injected current results in a real number, the grounding
The author is with the Electrical Engineering Department, Federal University resistance that is defined for a low-current density condition
of Minas Gerais (UFMG) and also with the Lightning Research Center (LRC),
UFMG, Belo Horizonte 31.270-901 MG, Brazil (e-mail: [email protected]).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2006.876707 (1)
0885-8977/$20.00 © 2006 IEEE
382 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 1, JANUARY 2007

Fig. 2. Frequency diagram for the complex grounding impedance

Z(! )(continuous line: impedance value–dotted line: impedance angle).

Fig. 4. Voltage–current characteristic for a soil sample.

III. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS: EXPLAINING GROUNDING

BEHAVIOR FOR LIGHTNING CURRENTS

A. Introduction
In order to describe the grounding behavior, two main as-
pects should be taken into account, namely: 1) the soil behavior
in the conditions determined by the imposing electromagnetic
phenomenon and 2) the electromagnetic coupling between the
whole grounding components, including propagation effects.
The first aspect depends only on soil properties, but the
Fig. 3. Effect of current front time on the impulsive grounding impedance.
second one is very influenced by the geometric configuration
of electrodes. The computation of both aspects is a very com-
plex task. In the following sections, the fundamental concepts
Nevertheless, in general, grounding should be represented as regarding both aspects are discussed.
an impedance. In the frequency domain, for each specific fre-
quency, a complex grounding impedance may be accurately de- B. Current Composition and Frequency Dependence of Soil
termined, as the solution of the grounding equivalent circuit Parameters
. Fig. 2 illustrates such an aspect for a Most works assume the soil as a predominantly conductive
50-m-long electrode buried in 2500- m soil. Details of this medium. As a consequence, displacement currents (capacitive)
figure are commented on later, in Section III-B. are disregarded. This assumption is reasonable only for slow oc-
In time domain, for impulsive waves such as lightning-re- currences (e.g., short circuits). For fast phenomena, capacitive
lated currents, it is very usual to employ the impulsive grounding currents may reach the same magnitude of resistive currents,
impedance to represent the grounding behavior. This param- mainly in high resistivity soils. Experimental data show that
eter is the ratio between the voltage and current peaks developed the ratio between conductive and capacitive currents in the soil
at the current injection point varies widely in the frequency range that is representative for
lightning currents [5], [6]. Fig. 4 shows
(2) the voltage–current characteristic measured for a soil sample
subjected to an impulsive current (1.2/50- s double exponen-
Despite the usual nonsimultaneous occurrence of such peaks, tial). The voltage wave was applied over two coaxial cylin-
this representation has a very attractive aspect: the maximum ders spaced by a compact soil sample, determining the flow of
developed voltage may be obtained by simply multiplying the low-amplitude current between them.
current peak value by . This is very appropriate for sensitivity The curve was built from registered current and voltage waves
analyses. such as those of Fig. 3. For each instant of time , the si-
The impulsive grounding impedance is dependent on the cur- multaneous values of voltage and current were taken from those
rent waveform and on front-time parameters. This aspect is il- waves and were placed together in the curve. The resulting
lustrated by Fig. 3 that shows the grounding response of a given curve is similar to the response of a parallel RC circuit to an
electrode configuration to two different current waves. impulsive current. The derivative (in the curve) allows
The ratio of voltage and current peaks is larger for the fast a rough approximation of the soil impedance, as it is obtained
wave (1.57 ) compared to the slow wave (1.43 ). Despite the from a voltage-to-current ratio . A double exponen-
variance of the impulsive impedance as a function of the front tial current presents its maximum derivative near , and
time, the instantaneous ratio between the voltage and current this derivative decreases to zero when the curve reaches its crest.
values is practically constant along the wave tail for Thus, at the first instants, as the rising current has its maximum
both waves. In this time range, such a ratio approaches the low- derivative, the capacitive branch is responsible for decreasing
frequency grounding resistance. This impedance variation is il- the total impedance of the equivalent circuit. This explains the
lustrative and valid only for a specific grounding configuration. minimum derivative of the curve in this region. While the
VISACRO: COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO THE GROUNDING RESPONSE 383

total current rises, the impedance of the capacitive branch is in-

creased, leading also to an increase of the curve derivative.
The straight line in Fig. 4 expresses the resistive behavior of soil
in the low-frequency range. Its slope corresponds to the low-fre-
quency resistance between the coaxial conductors.
Fig. 5. Attenuation of current and voltage wave along the electrode.
Fig. 4 denotes very clearly the relevance of capacitive cur-
rents in the soil. The advance of the current peak in relation to
the voltage peak reveals this capacitive effect and justifies the
shape of the curve. Also, the diagram of the grounding
impedance in Fig. 2 shows this aspect. As frequency in-
creases, the impedance value diverges from the low-frequency
resistance value, becoming lower due to capacitive effects. Fol-
lowing this, the impedance continues decreasing once the in-
ductive effect begins to influence. It reaches a minimum value
around a frequency where capacitive and inductive effects com-
pensate each other . After that, the inductive effect Fig. 6. Divergent behavior of field.
prevails and the impedance increases.
In most cases, the magnetic permeability of soil has a value
similar to the permeability of air . However, the soil elec- For concentrated electrodes (short compared to typical wave-
trical conductivity and permittivity (responsible for conductive length of imposing signal), this divergent behavior prevails.
and capacitive currents, respectively) are strongly frequency de- As a consequence of attenuation, the current that is dispersed
pendent [5], [7]. Experimental data obtained for specific soil to ground along the electrode presents a nonuniform distribu-
categories show the soil resistivity to decrease to around its tion. The linear current density (A/m) decreases along the elec-
half value when the frequency rises from to . The trode. The concept of effective length of electrode (or effec-
order of the relative permittivity is observed to decrease from tive radius for grids), which was very clearly introduced by
to in the same range [5]. As no accurate general for- Gupta [8], is just derived from such considerations. It corre-
mulation is provided in the literature for expressing the fre- sponds to a limiting electrode length. Longer lengths are not
quency dependence of soil parameters, the effect is usually ne- able to reduce the grounding impedance value. This behavior
glected. In a conservative approach, the soil resistivity is as- is explained by the fact that from this limiting length on, the
sumed as the value measured by conventional measuring instru- high-frequency components of current present negligible am-
ments, which employ low-frequency signals. In the same ap- plitude. Thus, despite conductor length availability, practically
proach, the soil relative permittivity is assumed to vary from 4 no high-frequency current component is further dispersed to
to 81, according to the soil humidity. The computation of re- soil. The effective length decreases with soil conductivity
alistic values for the conductivity and permittivity, including and frequency rise. This is explained as both parameters are re-
their frequency dependence, leads to a reduction in the impul- sponsible for increasing ground losses, leading to an increase
sive grounding impedance (around 10% to 30%). The reduction in the attenuation of the current and voltage waves that propa-
is larger for high resistivity soils. gate along the electrodes. This becomes evident if a transmis-
sion-line approach is adopted for the electrode embedded in the
soil. The attenuation constant corresponds to the real compo-
C. Field Distribution and Propagation Effects in the Soil
nent of propagation constant . It increases with frequency
When current or voltage waves are applied to a long buried and conductance . The
electrode, the corresponding electromagnetic wave propagates conductance is proportional to soil conductivity.
along the electrode. This system works as a transmission line In the frequency domain, the value of is defined for each
embedded in a lossy medium. While the wave is propagating, frequency. It is different for impulsive currents, as they involve
energy losses promote the attenuation of its amplitude. On the a large spectrum of frequency components. In this case, is
other hand, its frequency components present different propa- usually assumed as that electrode length corresponding to the
gation velocities and are subjected to different levels of attenu- minimum impulsive impedance. Longer electrodes are not able
ation. Such attenuation increases with frequency and with soil to reduce this impedance. The effective length may be obtained
conductivity, as energy losses do. In summary, the current and from the beginning of a flat region in curves expressing impul-
voltage waves that propagate along the electrode have their am- sive impedance as function of electrode length. In Fig. 7, this
plitude attenuated and are also distorted, with a reduction of the type of curve is shown for a long horizontal electrode buried in
front-wave slope along the propagation direction. These aspects different soils [9]. The curves were built determining from
are illustrated in Fig. 5. the resulting voltage waves for an applied 1.2/50- s impulsive
As the electrode length is limited, such behavior should be current, considering different values for the electrode length.
superimposed to another behavior, which is related to the diver-
gent field associated with the current flowing from the electrode D. Effect of Current Density
to remote earth. Fig. 6 illustrates this aspect by means of curves In practical conditions, for a wide range of current intensities,
that show the distribution of electric scalar potential in the soil. the soil presents a linear behavior. This means that the ratio
384 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 1, JANUARY 2007

this increase of section to vary along the electrode length [12].

However, for very concentrated electrodes, the effect computa-
tion is more difficult, as the ionized channels may entirely alter
the field configuration near the electrode.

E. Simultaneous Computation of All Influential Factors

For lightning currents, one aspect makes the understanding of
Fig. 7. Definition of the effective length from impulsive impedance curves.
grounding behavior more complex: usually, all previously con-
sidered effects occur simultaneously. Each of them influences
the grounding behavior. However, depending on the character-
istics of the stressing current, one effect may prevail over the
others. In several cases, it is very difficult to correctly iden-
tify the main source of a determined behavior. This partially
explains the usual misunderstandings concerning the interpre-
tation of the grounding behavior. In this respect, it is remark-
able that the usual overestimation of the ionization process is
a source of grounding impedance reduction for impulsive cur-
rents. As seen, even in the absence of this effect, the impulsive
impedance value can be lower than the low-frequency resistance
value.
The analytical approach, employed in the past for describing
the transient grounding behavior, was very limited for computing
all of these effects. Fortunately, the huge computational advance,
Fig. 8. Aspects of ionization process in the soil.
regarding memory capability and processing speed, allowed
the development of very efficient numerical approaches based
between the amplitudes of the resultant voltage and the applied on field equations to substitute the analytical approach. In
current waves is constant. However, for concentrated electrodes the beginning of the 1990s, several consistent computational
and very intense currents, the current density near the electrode models formulated from such approaches were presented in
surface can reach very pronounced values. The corresponding literature to determine the transient grounding behavior [6],
electric field in this region may exceed a critical limit. Above it, an [13], [14]. These models have been improved and, these days,
ionization process takes place in the soil and electrical discharges they allow computing all of the referred effects [15], [16]
are established in this medium [Fig. 8(a)]. The so-called critical to calculate the quantities of interest to grounding design.
electric field ranges from 0.2 to 1.7 MV/m, depending on
soil resistivity and humidity [10]. The phenomenon is similar
IV. PRACTICAL REMARKS
to the corona effect, though it is much more nonuniform
due to the soil characteristics. For impulsive currents, the These previous simple considerations are sufficient for re-
resulting effect is the reduction of the ratio between voltage marking on some important practical aspects and to emphasize
and current peaks for large current densities, as shown in the significance of certain concepts of interest for this text.
Fig. 8(b) [6], [11]. This behavior is explained by an increase First, in principle, the grounding behavior has the nature of
in the electrode dissipation area. As the ionized discharge an impedance. Only for very particular imposing phenomenon
channels present high conductivity in comparison to soil, they (low frequency), it can be properly represented by a resistance.
contribute to dissipating current to soil, enlarging the dissipation The very usual reference to a “dynamic resistance” to describe
area. Fig. 8(c) shows how this effect is able to affect the the transient grounding behavior should be avoided, as it actu-
curve of Fig. 4. ally hides the real nature of the grounding behavior.
The computation of the nonlinear soil ionization effect For lightning currents, the grounding behavior is quite dif-
presents two main complexities. The first one concerns the ferent from that of a resistance, even when nonlinearities are
definition of the critical electric-field value, corresponding to disregarded. This fact leads directly to a question: “Why the
the onset of the ionization process. Second, the distribution of term grounding resistance is the usual reference for problems in-
the effect along the electrode is nonlinear, as the voltage (and volving lightning protection instead of grounding impedance?”.
corresponding electric field) is attenuated along the electrode This seems to be a reasonable practice that is derived from the
surface, due to propagation effects. practical restrictions to measure grounding impedances in field
Nevertheless, the dynamics of such phenomenon have al- conditions. For ordinary engineering personnel, this is a quite
ready been explained by different approaches [11], [12]. In complex task. On the other hand, the measurement of grounding
cases where the electric-field configuration is not substantially resistance is a feasible task for such personnel and the knowl-
disturbed by the ionization process, experimental evaluations edge about this parameter and about the electrode configuration
have shown the possibility to compute the effect by an equiv- may allow developing estimates for the grounding impedance
alent increase of the electrode transversal section, allowing value.
VISACRO: COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO THE GROUNDING RESPONSE 385

As a second aspect, the usual assumption of potential equal-

ization along the electrode length is only a reasonable approach
for slow occurrences (low frequency) or for very short electrode
length. For transients and high-frequency phenomena, propa-
gation effects and a voltage drop due to inductive and internal
resistive effects establish significant potential differences along
electrodes. Therefore, for lightning currents, the potential varies
along grounding electrodes and the metallic connection of buried
conductors does not ensure the potential to be equalized. As a
consequence, it is prudent to avoid connecting electrically linked
equipment (connected by aerial loops, such as cable shielding)
to electrodes at different points of the grounding grid. This may Fig. 9. Influence of earth termination position on grounding impedance.
generate destructive current loops.
In grounding design, the response of electrodes to light-
ning currents is evaluated in terms of three parameters: the Concerning this effect, three main practical aspects should
grounding potential rise (GPR) (always verified at the current be observed. First, in terms of lightning protection (and only
injection point), the voltage profile along electrodes and the in this respect), employing electrodes longer than the effec-
voltage distribution over soil surface at electrode vicinities. In tive length is wasteful. Second, special care is recommended
most situations, the practical interest concerns the knowledge for those applications where the grounding impedance value
about critical conditions, which are usually given by the peak is estimated from the measured grounding resistance. This
value of developed voltages. In these cases, very commonly, is typical for transmission lines, where a limiting value of
the grounding impedance is approximated by the impulsive tower-footing grounding resistance is observed (very usually
grounding impedance . As an attractive aspect, this repre- 20 in Brazil) with the expectation that this would limit
sentation allows determining the maximum GPR simply from the grounding impedance value. Sometimes, a reduced value
the product of times the current peak value. This possibility of grounding resistance does not lead to a reduced value of
is very appropriate in evaluations regarding lightning protec- grounding impedance. When the electrode length is increased,
tion. In general, this impulsive impedance is quite different its resistance is decreased. This behavior holds even after the
from the low-frequency resistance, due to reactive effects (ca- effective length is exceeded. Therefore, this resistance may
pacitive and inductive currents), to the frequency dependence reach very low values, while the grounding impedance value
of soil parameters and attenuation effects. In some cases, it is limited to that value obtained for the effective length. In this
is possible to estimate the impedance from this resistance, case, a false expectation of reduced value for impedance may
which is usually the measured parameter. As an example, be generated. As a third aspect, the definition of the position to
for long horizontal electrodes, certain references suggest the connect earth termination to the electrode is very relevant. Even
impedance to be a little lower than the low-frequency resistance for the same electrode configuration, the impedance value may
, if the effective length is not exceeded and largely vary according to the position of earthing connections to
the ionization process is not relevant [9]. the buried electrode. Fig. 9 illustrates it for two configurations
Another aspect that deserves attention concerns the concept that assume electrodes longer than the effective length (for the
of the effective length of electrode. As explained before, the particular soil where they are buried).
minimum grounding impedance value is obtained for the effec- For the horizontal electrode, an earthing connection to point
tive length, even if the electrode is longer. This concept is very A (electrode extremity) results in a grounding impedance
important when the attenuation of current waves along the elec- value around twice that obtained for a connection to point B
trode is significant. This is the usual case for long electrodes (midpoint). This is explained as, in the second case, the current
(or for short ones when they are buried in low-resistivity soils). “sees” two parallel impedances, whose individual values are
The effective length is not a constant parameter for a given elec- similar to the impedance of the first case. For the grid, the
trode configuration buried into a determined soil. Naturally, cur- connection to the central point results in an impedance value
rent waves with different front time lead to different effective around one-quarter to one-third of the value found for a con-
lengths. Fast waves, whose frequency components are typically nection to a corner. The same behavior is expected if aerial
high, have a shorter effective length, as they are associated with conductors are employed to distribute lightning current through
more pronounced attenuation effects in the soil. Only as a rough connections to the four corners.
reference, for soils whose resistivity has values of 100, 500, It is worth noting that this effect is very pronounced only
1000, 2000, and 5000 m, the effective length has, respectively, for cases where the electrode exceeds the effective length. For
the order of 10, 23, 34, 50, and 85 m, considering a fast current high-resistivity soils, this effect tends to decrease, since the cur-
wave (1.2/50 s) [9]. For slower waves (for example, 3/70 s), rent wave attenuation becomes lower, leading to longer elec-
the values are a little larger. However, in lightning protection, trode effective lengths.
it seems reasonable to adopt the cited values, even for slower In most applications, low values are usually recommended
current waves. The linear density of current dissipated to soil is for grounding impedance. However, there are a few special
very reduced, close to the effective length and, therefore, it is cases where there may be a practical interest in increasing the
not an efficient practice to reach such a length. impedance of an earth termination. This practice may allow
386 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 22, NO. 1, JANUARY 2007

controlling the distribution of large currents (and associated V. CONCLUSION

overvoltages) through systems with several connections to
This paper presented a contribution to a better understanding
earth. Undesirable interferences of surge currents in the region
of the grounding response to lightning currents by means of
close to one termination may be avoided by such a practice.
an objective and didactic approach. The author hopes it may
One practical example of such a situation refers to the surge
be useful to lightning protection engineers and to academics
transference from medium-voltage distribution networks to
involved with numerical models for predicting the transient
consumer facilities through distribution transformers [17].
grounding response, as a reference to keep a commitment with
When a voltage wave (associated with a lightning-induced
the physical nature of grounding behavior.
overvoltage or a distant direct strike) reaches the primary of
a protected distribution transformer, surge arresters operate
and the associated current is drained to soil. This current is REFERENCES
also partially transferred to the low-voltage network through [1] S. Visacro, Grounding and Earthing: Basic Concepts, Measurements
the neutral and phase conductors. If the grounding impedance and Instrumentation, Grounding Strategies (in Portuguese), 2nd ed.
value of a close service entrance is lower than that of the trans- São Paulo, Brazil: ArtLiber Edit., 2002, pp. 1–159.
[2] R. Rudenberg, Fundamental Considerations on Grounding Currents,
former, the surge current tends to be drained to the consumer Electrical Engineering, vol. 64, no. 1, Jan. 1945.
grounding [17]. Unless the service entrance is protected, it may [3] E. D. Sunde, Surge Characteristic of a Buried Bare Wire, AIEE Trans.,
be subjected to dangerous voltage levels. vol. 59, pp. 987–991, 1940.
[4] L. V. Bewley, “Theory and test of the counterpoise,” Elect. Eng., pp.
The main factor that influences decreased grounding 1163–1172, Aug. 1934.
impedance is the area covered by the grounding electrodes. [5] S. Visacro and C. Portela, “Soil permittivity and conductivity behavior
However, for fast phenomena, field attenuation makes the in- on frequency range of transient phenomena in electric power systems,”
presented at the Symp. High Voltage Engineering, Braunschweig, Ger-
crease of the grounding dimension over a determined extension many, 1987.
(effective length) not effective in decreasing its impedance. [6] S. Visacro and C. Portela, “Modeling of earthing systems for light-
In this case, the action to reduce the grounding impedance ning protection applications, including propagation effects,” in Proc.
Int. Conf. Lightning Protection, Berlin, Germany, 1992, pp. 129–132.
value should be concentrated in a limited region around the [7] C. Portela, “Measurement and modeling of soil electromagnetic be-
current injection point, though mutual effects tend to reduce havior,” presented at the IEEE Int. Symp. Electromagnetic Compati-
the effectiveness of this action due to electrode proximity. bility, Seattle, WA, 1999.
[8] B. R. Gupta and B. Thapar, “Impulsive impedance of grounding grids,”
As cited before, the position of the earth termination may be in IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., Nov./Dec. 1980, vol. PAS-99, no. 6,
important. When long electrodes are involved, the number of pp. 2357–2362.
earthing connections may be influential and the use of aerial [9] A. Soares, Jr. and S. Visacro, “Lightning response of typical Brazilian
transmission line tower-footing arrangements,” in Proc. Int. Conf.
cables to distribute the current through different earthing con- Grounding and Earthing, Brazil, 1998, pp. 98–102.
nections may play an important role on reducing the grounding [10] A. M. Mousa, “The soil ionization gradient associated with discharge
impedance value. For the specific condition of a layered soil of high currents into concentrated electrodes,” IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1669–1677, Jul. 1994.
whose second layer presents a low-resistivity value (in compar- [11] A. C. Liew and M. Darveniza, “Dynamic model of impulse character-
ison to that of the first layer), the use of rods to reach such a istic of concentrated earths,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 121, no. 2, pp.
layer can also have a significant influence. 123–135, Feb. 1974.
[12] S. Visacro and A. Soares, Jr., “Sensitivity analysis for the effect of light-
The ionization process is able to reduce the grounding ning current intensity on the behavior of earthing systems,” in Proc. Int.
impedance value, but only for very concentrated (short) elec- Conf. Lightning Protection, Hungary, 1994, pp. R3a-01(1–5).
trodes and very high values of lightning current. For large [13] L. Grcev and F. Dawalibi, “An electromagnetic model for transients
in grounding systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 5, no. 4, pp.
electrodes, this effect is not able to affect the impedance value. 1773–1781, Nov. 1990.
This is the usual case for high-voltage transmission lines. To [14] S. Visacro and C. Portela, “Investigation of earthing systems behavior
have a rough idea about the intensity of this effect, a reference on the incidence of atmospheric discharges at electrical systems,”
in Proc. Int. Conf. Lightning Protection, Switzerland, 1990, pp.
is provided for the results of an experimental work [12]. From 3.8.1–3.8.5.
such results, the transient behavior of a long horizontal electrode [15] L. Grcev, “Computer analysis of transient voltages in large grounding
(0.5-cm radius) buried in 800- m soil was simulated. The systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 815–823, Apr.
1996.
effect was detected only after the linear current density reached [16] S. Visacro and A. Soares, Jr., “HEM: a model for simulation of light-
200 A/m. A 10% reduction in the grounding impedance value ning-related engineering problems,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20,
requires the current density to exceed 600 A/m. A 20-m-long no. 2, pp. 1026–1208, Apr. 2005.
[17] A. De Conti and S. Visacro, “Evaluation of lightning surges trans-
counterpoise (4 legs-80 m) requires a 16-kA crest current ferred from medium voltage to low voltage distribution lines,” Proc.
for the onset of the ionization process (for this estimate, the Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 152, no. 3, pp. 351–356, May 2005.
attenuation effect was disregarded, once the effective length is
around 30 m). A grounding impedance reduction of about 10% Silvério Visacro (M’00), photograph and biography not available at the time of
would require a 48-kA crest current to be injected into the soil. publication.