applied

sciences
Article
Lightning Protection of Photovoltaic Systems: Computation of
the Developed Potentials
Katerina Damianaki 1 , Christos A. Christodoulou 1 , Christos-Christodoulos A. Kokalis 1 , Anastasios Kyritsis 2 ,
Emmanouil D. Ellinas 1 , Vasiliki Vita 3, * and Ioannis F. Gonos 1

1 School of Electrical & Computer Engineering, National Technical University of Athens,

15780 Zografou Attica, Greece; [email protected] (K.D.); [email protected] (C.A.C.);
[email protected] (C.-C.A.K.); [email protected] (E.D.E.); [email protected] (I.F.G.)
2 Department of Environment, Environmental Physics, Energy and Environmental Biology Lab,
Ionian University, 29100 Zakynthos, Greece; [email protected]
3 Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering Educators, A.S.PE.T.E.—School of Pedagogical and
Technological Education, 14121 Herakleion Attica, Greece
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: In this paper, the performance of a lightning protection system (LPS) on a grid-connected
photovoltaic (PV) park is studied by simulating different scenarios with the use of an appropriate
software tool. The aim of this paper is to highlight the importance of an LPS and optimize its design
for the protection of equipment and personnel in case of a direct lightning strike. In particular,
developed potential due to lightning strikes is examined considering isolated and non-isolated
external LPS. Moreover, the effect of the separation distance on the lightning performance of the
PV installation is investigated for different soil structures and grounding systems. The extracted
results are expected to support the design and implementation of a secure PV park and endorse its




uninterrupted operation considering techno-economically balanced protection measures.



Citation: Damianaki, K.;

Keywords: lightning protection; grounding system; photovoltaic power systems
Christodoulou, C.A.; Kokalis, C.-C.A.;
Kyritsis, A.; Ellinas, E.D.; Vita, V.;
Gonos, I.F. Lightning Protection of
Photovoltaic Systems: Computation 1. Introduction
of the Developed Potentials. Appl. Sci. Recently, due to the rising crisis of traditional energy sources, new international
2021, 11, 337. https://doi.org/ directives regarding the promotion of energy from renewable sources have been published,
10.3390/app11010337 as it is stated in [1,2]. As a result, research and application of sustainable energy, particularly
photovoltaic (PV) power generation, have attracted more and more attention through
Received: 10 November 2020
various projects (e.g., EU and US Green Deal projects). As it is described in [2,3], the global
Accepted: 28 December 2020
concern for environmental issues and the need to mitigate the effects that result in global
Published: 31 December 2020
warming are the key drivers for enhanced power systems based on renewable energy
sources. For this, as it is stated in [2], renewable energy industries, markets, and policy
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu-
tral with regard to jurisdictional clai-
frameworks are being developed rapidly and national power corporations encourage the
ms in published maps and institutio-
installation of PV systems in an effort to accomplish both financial and environmental
nal affiliations.
benefits. Adapted to cope with these environmental hurdles, during the last ten years PV
capacity has grown worldwide, placing PVs at the forefront of technology development as
it is stated in [4].
PV systems are inherently exposed to atmospheric overvoltages (because of their
Copyright: © 2020 by the authors. Li- installation position), which can damage critical parts of the equipment, resulting in power
censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. supply interruptions, extended failures of vital components of the systems, and serious
This article is an open access article hazards for human life. As it is mentioned in [4], direct lightning strikes on photovoltaic
distributed under the terms and con-
panels or on the external lightning protection system (LPS) may lead to insulation break-
ditions of the Creative Commons At-
down, grounding potential rise, and panel and/or inverter destruction (melting). The
tribution (CC BY) license (https://
aforementioned problems become more intense in the case of stand-alone photovoltaic
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
systems, where there may not be an alternative power supply of the electrical installation.
4.0/).

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11010337 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 2 of 12

In [5], the necessity of a risk management analysis according to the International Standards,
and the importance of an extensive study of lightning protection systems are highlighted in
order to apply appropriate protection measures against external surges. Considering that
inadequate protection against lightning phenomena can delay the investment return of the
PV system, it is highly recommended to take into account techno-economically balanced
protection measures. Indeed, the design and implementation of an efficient LPS are of great
importance for the secure operation of PV installations, of which the capital investments
are significant. In fact, as it is highlighted in [5], the cost of installing an LPS may be
proven insignificant when compared to the revenue losses incurred due to damages in
case of a lightning strike. The amplitude and the steepness of the lightning current, the
characteristics of the LPS, the soil resistivity of the installation area and the geometrical
and electrical characteristics of the grounding system are critical factors that influence the
lightning protection of the PVs. In [5], some of the aforementioned design parameters of
an LPS on large-scale PV plants are studied, but without an in-depth review of the impact
of multi-layer soil structures on the developed potential in case of a lightning strike.
Research, as described in a recent review on the performance of lightning protection on
photovoltaic systems (roof mounted or solar farms) has just started due to high penetration
on the power distribution grids [6]. In [4], the impact of a standard impulse lightning
strike on the performance of single PV modules is evaluated. The impact of distributed
generation on the lightning protection of distribution lines is examined in [7–9]. Case
studies are described in [10] regarding the performance of an LPS on a Greek hybrid power
network and in [11,12] regarding the effects of a lightning strike on different parts (AC
or DC) of a PV park in Malaysia. Moreover, in [13], a solar grid-connected PV module
without LPS is modeled and simulations are performed under various scenarios, in order
to assess its lightning performance and to highlight the importance of an LPS. In [14], a
new computer algorithm is presented that can be used to evaluate the risk of damage in
PV systems and the need for installation of a lightning rod. Analysis of touch potentials
in solar farms and recommendations to reduce them are presented in [15] and the effect
of group grounding on the potential rise across a solar farm during a lightning strike is
simulated with the PSPICE software tool in [16]. Finally, in [17], PV generation connected
to high-voltage generation and its impact on the proper operation of the protection systems
of the power grid is studied. In [18], the design of the grounding system on a hybrid power
station (wind, PV, energy storage) is studied considering the soil structure.
In this paper, the developed potential caused by lightning surges in a 100 kWp PV
system are estimated by using an appropriate simulation software. This is a particularly
advantageous approach as it enables the evaluation of three lightning protection systems’
setups, i.e., an attached, a non-attached, and a modified non-attached lightning protection
system, considering different soil structures and characteristics of the grounding system. In
addition, the impact of the perimeter grounding and the grounding electrode length on the
developed potential are investigated in this work. Finally, in the case of a non-attached and
a modified non-attached system, simulation results are presented for a variable distance
between the lightning rod and the metallic structure of the installation, as well as for
different types of insulators.
It is worth mentioning that a thorough literature survey reveals that there is still little
research that has been done on the impact of various parameters of an LPS (geometrical
and/or structural) and of soil structure (single- or multi-layer with different resistivities
and heights), on the developed potential, on a large-scale grid-connected PV park, in case
of a lightning strike [6]. In particular, based on previous years related scientific work, as it
is described in [5,19], there is a necessity for further research on the optimal design of an
LPS on large-scale solar applications.
Moreover, in the literature, various software tools are used for simulating the lightning
performance of a grid-connected PV system. In [5], simulation models are developed for
an external LPS on a 150 kW PV park in order to assess the lightning current distribution
across the PV park. In [11,12] the PSCAD software tool is used to model the LPS and the
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 3 of 12

lightning strokes on PV systems and in [20] multiple simulations are performed utilizing
CDEGS in order to examine the safety voltage of critical facilities for large-scale PV parks
in case of a ground fault. In this paper, the customization features of the widely known
CDEGS software tool are taken advantage of, in order to investigate the performance of an
LPS under the influence of various combinations of the aforementioned parameters. The
outcomes of the current work are expected to contribute to the optimal techno-economical
design of a reliable and effective lightning protection system on a grid-connected PV
park, in an effort to improve its lightning performance and restrain the hazardous, for the
equipment and personnel, developed potential in case of a lightning strike.

2. Protection of PV Systems against Lightning Overvoltages

As it is described in [4,19], PV modules are more vulnerable to direct lightning strikes
than conventional low-voltage power distribution systems, due to installation on roofs,
facades of buildings, and, in general, on unsheltered areas. For this, a risk assessment must
be taken into account [10] and if it is deemed necessary, a thorough study of the LPS of
PV park must be conducted [7]. Lightning and surge protective measures are described
in IEC 62305 Standard (Parts 1 to 3) for conventional low-voltage distribution systems.
Part 1 [21] lists damages due to lightning, protection needs and measures and basic criteria
for protection of structures. Part 2 [22] provides the risk management procedure in order
to evaluate the need of an LPS. Part 3 [23] concerns the lightning protection system (LPS).
A necessary requirement for the efficient design of an LPS is to perform the previous
stated risk assessment using the procedures and data stated in [22]. The most susceptible
parts of the PV installation should be taken into consideration and the consequences of a
direct or indirect lighting flash should be studied. In general, lightning strikes result in
breakdown of the insulation, serious damage of the electrical equipment, and rise of the
grounding potential [15]; the severity of the consequences are strongly influenced by the
geometry of the PV system, the LPS, the peak current [8], and the duration of the lightning
flash and the lightning strike position [24].
LPSs are divided into external and internal. Basic components of an external LPS are the
air termination system, the down conductors, and the ground system. The air termination
system captures the lightning discharge current and dissipates it harmlessly to earth via the
down conductor and the ground termination system. Thermal and explosive effects caused
at the occasion of a lightning strike and the consequences to the installation must be a guide
in choosing the type of air termination system (isolated or non-isolated) [23] (Figure 1).
The earth termination system has a vital significance for the dispersion of the lightning
current safely and effectively into the ground. According to [14], grounding resistance
lower than 10 Ω is recommended. To avoid galvanic corrosion, earth electrode material
and connection clamps should be chosen carefully, taking into account PV frame and
support structure materials. Open-field PV installation electrode arrangements are used
for lightning protection. Moreover, the fundamental role of the internal LPS is to ensure
avoidance of dangerous sparking due to the lightning current flowing through the external
LPS or other conductive parts of the installation. The electrical interconnection can be
achieved by equipotential bonding and surge protective devices, in the case that the direct
connection with bonding conductors is not suitable.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 4 of 12

Figure 1. External lightning protection system of a photovoltaic (PV) installation (s: separation
distance that depends on the class of the lightning protection system (LPS) as defined in IEC 62305,
d: distance between the lightning rod and the support structure, the insulation characteristics, the
length along the air termination and the down conductor and the lightning current flowing in the air
termination and the down conductor).

3. System Configuration
One grid-connected, ground-installed PV plant of 100 kWp nominal power was
selected as the case study for the lightning performance investigation. This is a typical small
PV application that is found across Europe [25]. Such a PV system is usually connected into
the low-voltage distribution system. Additionally, considering the current PV market trend,
wafer-based crystalline silicon PV modules were selected for the modelling of the under-
study PV application. More precisely, in total 400 poly-crystalline mainstream PV modules
of 250 Wp nominal power were selected, forming 20 strings of 20 PVs. Additionally, five
multi-string inverters of 20 kW nominal power were selected, while four PV strings were
connected to the two DC inputs of each inverter. Considering the electrical characteristics
of mainstream poly-Si PV modules, it was concluded that the nominal voltage of each
string would be roughly 615 V (assuming that inverter operates under MPPT (maximum
power point tracker) control and standard test conditions (STC) e.g., irradiance 1000 W/m2 ,
module temperature 25 ◦ C and AM = 1.5), while the open circuit string voltage was
estimated at approximately 690 V at STC and 835 V at module temperature equal to −10 ◦ C.
Additionally, the nominal string current and the short-circuited string current (assuming
that inverter operates under MPPT control and standard test conditions) would be 8.15 A
and 8.65 A, respectively. The dimensions of each PV module were 1640 mm by 992 mm.
The metallic frame of PV modules and the metallic support construction were supposed to
be connected, while the support construction was installed with steel beams, in a depth
of 1.5 m under the ground [26]. The perimeter coppery grounding system was installed
approximately 0.5 and 0.7 m away from the support construction [27].

4. Simulation Results
The simulations were performed using CDEGS (Current Distribution, Electromagnetic
Fields, Grounding and Soil Structure Analysis) software suite [28]. In detail, the system
under examination was modeled implementing the HIFREQ computation module. The
FFTSES computation module decomposed the selected time domain lightning signal in
some computation frequencies, by means of the Fourier Transform, for the electromagnetic
fields response (HIFREQ) and then reconstituted the time-domain response from the
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 5 of 12

HIFREQ results (Inverse Fourier Transform). The scalar potential and electromagnetic field
in the time domain are given by:
Z+∞ Z +∞
1 +∞ 1
V(t1) = +∞ V(ω)eiωt dω
𝑖𝜔𝑡
1 = (ω)I(ω)eiωt dω
Vo 𝑖𝜔𝑡 (1)
𝐸(𝑡) = ∫ 2π𝐸(𝜔)𝑒
−∞ 𝑑𝜔 = ∫ 𝐸2π𝑜 (𝜔)𝐼(𝜔)𝑒
−∞ 𝑑𝜔
2𝜋 −∞ 2𝜋 −∞
Z +∞ Z +∞
E (1t) =+∞1 E
𝑖𝜔𝑡 ( ) e iωt 1
dω
+∞ 1
= Eo (𝑖𝜔𝑡 I (ω )eiωt dω
ω )𝑑𝜔 (2)
𝐻(𝑡) = ∫ 𝐻(𝜔)𝑒 𝑑𝜔 = ω ∫ 𝐻𝑜 (𝜔)𝐼(𝜔)𝑒
2𝜋 −∞2π −∞ 2𝜋 −∞ 2π −∞
Z +∞ Z +∞
1 1
H (t) = H (ω )eiωt dω = Ho (ω ) I (ω )eiωt dω (3)
2π −∞ 2π −∞
+∞
where 𝐼(𝜔) = ∫ 𝐼(𝑡)𝑒 Z −𝑖𝜔𝑡
+∞ 𝑑𝑡
−∞
I (ω ) = I (t)e−iωt dt (4)
−∞
𝑉𝑜 (𝜔), 𝐸𝑜 (𝜔), 𝐻𝑜 (𝜔)
stands for the frequency spectrum of the lightning surge current and Vo (ω ), Eo (ω ), Ho (ω )
are the unmodulated scalar potential, electric field, and magnetic field in the frequency
domain, respectively [28]. Figure 2 shows the 3D CDEGS model for both isolated and
non-isolated LPSs. An example of the potential developed waveforms obtained from IFFT
(Inverse Fast Fourier Transform) in the time domain for one observation point on the
ground surfaceμsislightning
shown incurrent
Figure waveform
3. The comparison
accordingresults
to IECof the maximum potential
developed for the standard 10/350 µs – lightning current waveform according to IEC 62305
(Figure 4), for different cases, are presented in Figures 5–8.

(a)

(b)
Figure 2. Basic 3D simulation model with (a) isolated LPS and (b) non
Figure 2. Basic 3D simulation model with (a) isolated LPS and (b) non-isolated LPS.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 6 of 12

Figure 3. Example of the results obtained for one observation point from IFFT.

μs).µs).
μs).
Figure 4. Lightning current waveform (50 kA, 10/350
μs).

soil structure A soil structure B soil structure C soil structure D

900

800

700
Potential [kV]

600

500

400

300
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

Separation distance [m]

Figure 5. Maximum values of the soil surface potential calculated at a 1 m distance from the air
termination rod for different soil structures.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 7 of 12

soil structure A soil structure B soil structure C soil structure D

700

600

Potential [kV]
500

400

300
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

Separation distance [m]

Figure 6. Maximum values of the soil surface potential calculated at a 1.5 m distance from PV panels,
for alternative separation distances and soil structures.

0.5m depth soil surface no perimeter grounding

1400

1200
Touch Voltage [kV]

1000

800

600

400

200
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Separation distance [m]

Figure 7. Touch voltages for soil structure D and three examined perimeter grounding cases.

conductive isolator attached LPS insulating isolator

900

800

700
Potential [kV]

600

500

400

300
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Separation distance [m]

Figure 8. Maximum potential for soil structure D and three investigated external LPS systems
(attached system, non-attached system with insulating isolator, and non-attached system with
conductive isolator).
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 8 of 12

The computational method employed by HIFREQ module to solve Maxwell’s electro-

magnetic fields equations includes an improved version of the electric field point-matching
approach and the moment method. Both the aboveground and buried conductors of the
actual size computer model that was used were subdivided in small segments so that the
thin wire approximation of the antenna theory could be met. After the current distribution
calculation in the conductor network, the scalar potentials and the electromagnetic fields
could be computed [28].
A 50 kA, 10/350 µs lightning strike (Figure 4) on the air termination conductor (as
shown in Figure 2a,b) was simulated considering the two-layer soil structures indicated
in Table 1. In the case of the two-layer soil structure, ρ1 is the resistivity of the first layer
(starting from the soil surface), ρ2 is the resistivity of the second soil layer and h1 is the
thickness of the upper soil layer. The second layer thickness is assumed to be infinite.
The calculated grounding resistance (steady state) for the alternative soil structures is
shown in the last column of Table 1. The separation distance between the non-attached air
termination rod (Figure 2a) and PV panels is set at 0.1, 0.5, 0.75, and 1 m.

Table 1. Simulated soil structures.

ρ1 h1 ρ2 R
Soil Structures
[Ωm] [m] [Ωm] [Ω]
A 100 2 1000 12.66
B 100 3 1000 10.60
C 1000 2 100 18.13
D 1000 3 100 21.21

Figures 5 and 6 depict the calculated maximum values of the soil surface potential
as a function of the distance between the air termination rod and the PV panels (system
of Figure 2a) for the aforementioned soil structures. The potential was calculated on the
ground surface 1.5 m away from PV installation (Figure 5) and at a 1 m distance from the
air terminal struck by the lightning (Figure 6). Touch voltages (Figure 7) were computed
considering a 70 kg human body standing on the ground surface at a 1 m distance from
the air termination rod, touching the exposed metallic parts connected to the grounding
system. As illustrated in Figures 5 and 6 the separation distance affects soil structures C
and D (greater upper layer resistivity) more than A and B.
Touch voltages for soil structure D (see Table 1), Figure 2a system, and three examined
perimeter grounding cases (perimeter grounding buried at a depth of 0.5 m, on soil surface,
and no perimeter grounding) are indicated in Figure 7. The obtained results highlight
that a perimeter grounding, depending on its depth below the ground, can significantly
contribute to decreasing the developed touch voltages.
Attached and non-attached lightning protection systems are compared in Figure
8 through the developed potential for soil structure D considering three systems i.e.,
attached system, non-attached system with insulating isolator, and non-attached system
with conductive isolator. It should be noted that for the case of the attached system
the distance between the air termination rod and the metallic support structure is fixed;
therefore, the potential values are independent of the separation distance.
The developed potential for soil structure D was calculated for different depths of rod
A (grounding electrode connected with the air termination rod), rods B (mounting poles
of structural base), and rods C (grounding electrodes at the four edges of the perimeter
grounding) resulting in six alternative grounding systems as presented in Table 2 and
Figure 9. The maximum developed potential for soil structure D for each grounding system
is presented in Figure 10.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 9 of 12

Table 2. Examined grounding systems (gs) characteristics (see Figure 9 for rods A, B, and C).

Depth of Rod A Depth of Rods B Depth of Rods C

Grounding System
[m] [m] [m]
gs1 1 1.5 -
gs2 3.2 1.5 -
gs3 4 1.5 -
gs4 5 1.5 -
gs5 3.2 3.2 -
gs6 4 1.5 4

Figure 9. 3d simulation model indicating the structure of the examined grounding systems.

gs1 gs2 gs3 gs4 gs5 gs6

th of
900

800

700
Potential [kV]

600

500

400

300

200
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

Separation distance [m]

Figure 10. Maximum potential for soil structure D and grounding systems of Table 2.

The influence of the increasing depth of the grounding electrode A connected to the
air termination rod on the developed potential diminished for a rod height greater than 4 m
(results of gs3 and gs4 were almost identical). Furthermore, the level of calculated potential
was lower in the case of four grounding electrodes at the edges of perimeter grounding (gs6)
than in the case of lengthening the mounting poles of the support construction (gs5), which
is rather impractical as PV support constructions are manufactured in certain dimensions.

5. Discussion
To achieve an accurate picture of the lightning performance of the system under study,
several issues need to be addressed, concerning different parameters (separation distance,
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 10 of 12

depth of rods, soil structure, and grounding grid) that determine the developed potentials.
According to the above simulations, the following outcomes are concluded:
• The increase of the separation distance, s, has greater impact on the developed poten-
tial in the case of soil structures with greater upper layer resistivity compared to those
with a lower one. (Figures 5 and 6).
• The installation of a perimeter grounding grid can significantly decrease the devel-
oped touch voltages (Figure 7). An installed perimeter grounding grid increases the
grounding area and leads to a lower grounding resistance value and, consequently to
diminished developed touch voltages.
• The lowest values of the developed potential are achieved in the case of non-attached
LPS system with conductive isolator (Figure 8). This result contributes to the design
of grounding systems, as the reduction of hazardous overvoltages is a significant
criterion for the selection of a lightning protection system.
• The installation of rods on the perimeter grounding can contribute to decreasing the
developed potential (Figure 9) considering the soil structure. In case the soil resistivity of
the upper layer is higher, compared to the bottom layers, the installed rods’ length should
be such that part of them is buried beyond the upper layer boundaries. On the contrary,
in case of a lower soil resistivity value of the upper layer, a horizontal grounding area
increase would restrict the developed overvoltages rather than buried electrodes.
The results of the present work, the mounting position of the PV park, the geometrical—
structural characteristics of the LPS, and the soil resistivity must always be taken into
account in order to construct an efficient lightning protection system in a techno-economical
way. Future work can include the examination of various soil structures (multi-layer
horizontal or vertical with different values of resistivity), separation distances, and depths
of rods and perimeter grounding grids in order to achieve the optimal design of the LPS
and to minimize, as far as possible, the developed potentials, touch and step voltages.

6. Conclusions
In this paper, the developed potentials and touch voltages due to a lightning strike
on a 100 kWp PV system were estimated, examining alternative scenarios. To mitigate
the consequences and to avert dangers to human life because of an inefficient LPS system,
critical parameters of the system configurations need to undergo detailed examination. The
knowledge of the impact of all the possible parameters on the expected overvoltages helps
the designer to make important decisions during the design of the PV systems; indeed,
the accurate examination of the lightning performance of a PV installation is essential
to achieve reliable and safe operation. In response to these challenges, we discussed the
ramifications of various design choices in order to develop a conceptual understanding of
the lightning performance of a PV, emphasizing safety goals.
The performed analysis reveals the impact of various factors, i.e., the type of external
LPS, the separation distance, the holder materials that ensure the separation distance, the
grounding system, and the soil resistivity, on the magnitude of the expected potential and
touch voltages. The above parameters have a prominent effect on the magnitude of the
arising overvoltages. In detail, a separation distance increase induces potential values
reduction considering soil structures of greater first layer soil resistivity. Furthermore, a
conductive insulator provides a lesser overvoltages result than in the case of an insulating
isolator and perimeter grounding influences developed touch voltages enhancing lightning
current distribution. Based on the simulation, the preferred option in order to protect a
PV park against lightning strikes is a non-attached LPS with a conductive isolator with
a perimeter grounding grid mounted with rods and a separation distance of 1 m. The
extracted results are expected to support the optimal design and implementation of an
effective PV park and endorse its safe and uninterrupted operation.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 11 of 12

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, K.D. and A.K.; methodology, K.D. and C.-C.A.K.; soft-
ware, K.D. and E.D.E.; validation, K.D. and C.A.C.; formal analysis, C.A.C. and V.V.; investigation,
K.D.; data curation, C.A.C. and K.D.; writing—original draft preparation, K.D. and V.V.; writing—
review and editing, I.F.G.; visualization, E.D.E.; supervision, I.F.G.; project administration, I.F.G. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The authors acknowledge financial support for this work from the Special Account for Re-
search of ASPETE, through the funding program “Strengthening research of ASPETE faculty members”.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the
study.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Kyritsis, A.; Voglitsis, D.; Papanikolaou, N.; Tselepis, S.; Christodoulou, C.; Gonos, I.; Kalogirou, S.A. Evolution of PV systems in
Greece and review of applicable solutions for higher penetration levels. Renew. Energy 2017, 109, 487–499. [CrossRef]
2. Tigas, K.; Giannakidis, G.; Mantzaris, J.; Lalas, D.; Sakellaridis, N.; Nakos, C.; Vougiouklakis, Y.; Theofilidi, M.; Pyrgioti, E.;
Alexandridis, A.T. Wide scale penetration of renewable electricity in the Greek energy system in view of the European decar-
bonization targets for 2050. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 42, 158–169. [CrossRef]
3. Bilgili, M.; Ozbek, A.; Sahin, B.; Kahraman, A. An overview of renewable electric power capacity and progress in new technologies
in the world. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 49, 323–334. [CrossRef]
4. Naxakis, I.; Pyrgioti, E.; Perraki, V.; Tselepis, E. Studying the effect of the impulse voltage application on sc-Si PV modules. Sol.
Energy 2017, 144, 721–728. [CrossRef]
5. Charalambous, C.; Kokkinos, N.; Christofides, N. External Lightning Protection and Grounding in Large-Scale Photovoltaic
Applications. IEEE Trans. EMC 2014, 56, 427–434. [CrossRef]
6. Ahmada, N.I.; Ab-Kadira, M.Z.A.; Izadia, M.; Azisa, N.; Radzib, M.A.M.; Zainia, N.H.; Nasira, M.S.M. Lightning protection
on photovoltaic systems: A review on current and recommended practices. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 1611–1619.
[CrossRef]
7. Vita, V.; Ekonomou, L.; Christodoulou, C.A. The impact of distributed generation to the lightning protection of modern
distribution lines. Energy Syst. 2016, 7, 357–364. [CrossRef]
8. Vita, V.; Maris, T.I. Sensitivity analyses of parameters that affect the lightning performance of distribution networks with
distributed generation. J. Multidiscip. Eng. Sci. Stud. 2016, 2, 774–781.
9. Li, Z.; Lu, J.; Zhu, Y.; Jiang, W. Ground-Fault Characteristic Analysis of Grid-Connected Photovoltaic Stations with Neutral
Grounding Resistance. Energies 2017, 10, 1910. [CrossRef]
10. Kern, A.; Krichel, F. Considerations about the lightning protection system of mains independent renewable energy hybrid-
systems–practical experiences. J. Electrostat. 2004, 60, 257–263. [CrossRef]
11. Zaini, N.H.; Ab-Kadir, M.Z.A.; Izadi, M.; Ahmad, N.I.; Radzi, M.A.M.; Azis, N.; Hasan, W.Z.W. On the effect of lightning on
a solar photovoltaic system. In Proceedings of the 2016 33rd International Conference on Lightning Protection (ICLP), Estoril,
Lisboa, Portugal, 25–30 September 2016.
12. Fallah, S.N.; Gomes, C.; Mehdi, I.; Ab Kadir, M.Z.A.; Rebaz, J.; Ahmed, J.J. Minimum Separation Between Lightning Protection
System And Non-Integrated Metallic Structures. In Proceedings of the 2018 34th International Conference on Lightning Protection
(ICLP), Rzeszow, Poland, 2–7 September 2018.
13. Zaini, N.H.; Ab-Kadir, M.Z.A.; Radzi, M.A.M.; Azis, N.; Ahmad, N.I.; Nasir, M.S.M.; Izadi, M.; Ab Aziz, N.F.; Ali, Z. Lightning
Surge on the DC and AC Side of Solar PV System. In Proceedings of the 2019 11th Asia-Pacific International Conference on
Lightning (APL), Hong Kong, China, 12–14 June 2019.
14. Ittarat, S.; Hiranvarodom, S.; Plangklang, B. A computer program for evaluating the risk of lightning impact and for designing
the installation of lightning rod protection for photovoltaic system. Energy Procedia. In Proceedings of the 10th Eco-energy and
Materials Science and Engineering Symposium, Ubon-ratchathani, Thailand, 5–8 December 2012; Volume 34, pp. 318–325.
15. Enrique, E.H.; Walsh, J.D. Analysis of Touch Potentials in Solar Farms. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2015, 51, 4291–4296. [CrossRef]
16. Mohamed, F.P.; Siew, W.H.; Mahmud, S. Effect of group grounding on the potential rise across solar PV panels during lightning
strike. In Proceedings of the 2019 11th Asia-Pacific International Conference on Lightning (APL), Hong Kong, China, 12–14 June
2019; pp. 1–5.
17. Zhang, Y.; Chao, Q.; Wang, H.; Li, Y.; Wang, Y. Grounding distance protection based on adaptive branch coefficient for grid-
connected PV power station. Dianli Zidonghua Shebei/Electr. Power Autom. Equip. 2015, 35, 113–117.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 337 12 of 12

18. Cheng, L.; Wang, S.; Li, Z.; Wang, J.; Zhang, B.; Shi, W. Design of grounding system for wind-photovoltaic-energy storage Hybrid
power station. In Proceedings of the ICHVE 2014—2014 International Conference on High Voltage Engineering and Application,
Poznan, Poland, 8–11 September 2014.
19. Hernández, J.; Vidal, P.; Francisco, J. Lightning and surge protection in photovoltaic installations. IEEE Trans. PWRD 2008, 23,
1961–1971. [CrossRef]
20. Lee, C.-U.; Kim, J.-C. An analysis and comparison of safety voltage (step voltage and touch voltage) according to isolation and
common grounding system of large-scale photovoltaic power plant. Trans. Korean Inst. Electr. Eng. 2019, 68, 1458–1464. [CrossRef]
21. IEC Std. 62305-1: Protection Against Lightning—Part 1: General Principles. Available online: https://webstore.iec.ch/
publication/6793 (accessed on 30 December 2020).
22. IEC Std. 62305-2: Protection Against Lightning—Part 2: Risk Management. Available online: https://webstore.iec.ch/
publication/6794 (accessed on 29 December 2020).
23. IEC Std. 62305-3: Protection Against Lightning—Part 3: Physical Damage to Structures and Life Hazard. Available online:
https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/6795 (accessed on 29 December 2020).
24. Youping, T.; Zhang, C.; Jun, H.; Wang, S.; Sun, W.; Lin, H. Research on lightning overvoltages of solar arrays in a rooftop
photovoltaic power system. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2013, 94, 10–15.
25. Christodoulou, C.A.; Damianaki, K.D.; Kontargyri, V.T.; Gonos, I.F.; Kyritsis, A.C.; Papanikolaou, N.P. Protection of 100kWp
photovoltaic system against atmospheric overvoltages: A case study. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference
on High-Voltage Engineering and Application (ICHVE 2016), Paper P-1-27, Chengdu, China, 19–22 September 2016.
26. Christodoulou, C.A.; Ekonomou, L.; Gonos, I.F.; Papanikolaou, N.P. Lightning protection of PV systems. Energy Syst. 2016, 7,
369–382. [CrossRef]
27. Christodoulou, C.A.; Kontargyri, V.T.; Damianaki, K.D.; Kyritsis, A.C.; Gonos, I.F.; Papanikolaou, N.P. Lightning Performance
Study for Photovoltaic Systems. In Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on High-Voltage Engineering (ISH 2015),
Paper 365, Pilsen, Czech Republic, 23–28 August 2015.
28. HIFREQ and FFTSES User’s Manuals; Safe Engineering Services & Technologies Ltd.: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2012.