IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 25, NO.

4, OCTOBER 2010

3035

Analytical Surveys of Transient and Frequency-Dependent Grounding Characteristics of a Wind Turbine Generator System on the Basis of Field Tests
Kazuo Yamamoto, Member, IEEE, Shunichi Yanagawa, Koichi Yamabuki, Member, IEEE, Shozo Sekioka, Member, IEEE, and Shigeru Yokoyama, Fellow, IEEE
Lightning damage to wind turbine generator systems affects the safety and reliability of these systems. Most breakdowns and malfunctions of the electrical and control systems inside wind turbines are caused by ground potential rise due to lightning [5], [6]. To understand this ground potential rise, we researched the transient characteristics of grounding by experimental and analytical methods using a reduced-size model of current wind turbine foundations [7]. Research using simulations of the transient and steady-state grounding characteristics of wind turbine foundations have already been presented [8][18]. However, few papers which report transient and frequency-dependent grounding characteristics of an actual wind turbine generator system exist [19]. The wind turbine generator system used for the eld test in this study is located at a unique disposal site. When lightning strikes the wind turbine generator system constructed at a site where the grounding resistivity is very low, the potential rise at the wavefront typically becomes larger than that of the steady state. This is because of the inductivity of the grounding system. Therefore, the transient characteristics of the grounding system become more important to its steady-state characteristics. In this paper, experimental studies of the impulse tests conducted on an actual wind turbine generator system at a disposal site are presented. The ground potential rise of the system itself and around its foundations was measured. All measurement results were veried using the nite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method [20]. Numerical simulation was useful to remove instrumental inuences such as the induced voltage on the voltage measuring wire from the measured results. The frequency characteristics were calculated from the numerical calculated results using the Laplace transform [21] to get voltage responses to all types of lightning current waveforms. The responses to step and typical lightning currents were calculated. The grounding system consisted of the foundation, grounding mesh and wires, and foundation feet. The effects from those elements were also researched. II. GROUNDING OF WIND TURBINE GENERATOR SYSTEM A. Importance of Transient Characteristics Both transient and steady-state characteristics are important for understanding the grounding phenomena of a wind turbine generator system. However, the steady state is emphasized in
AbstractTo exploit high wind conditions, wind turbine generator systems are constructed in places with few tall structures; as a consequence, they are often struck by lightning. This results in breakdown and malfunction of electrical, communications, and control systems inside and adjacent to the wind turbine generator system because of ground potential rise. Impulse tests were conducted on an actual wind turbine generator system and analytical surveys based on eld tests were carried out using electromagnetic eld analysis. The ground potential rise of the system and that around its foundation was measured and analyzed. The grounding system employed in this study consisted of the foundation, grounding mesh, and foundation feet. The frequency characteristics were calculated using the Laplace transform to get voltage responses for all types of lightning current waveforms. Step and typical lightning current waveforms were used to calculate potential rise responses. Index TermsElectromagnetic elds, electromagnetic transient analysis, grounding, Laplace transforms, lightning, overvoltage protection, surges, wind power generation.

I. INTRODUCTION

ATURAL disasters, such as lightning and typhoons, have caused much damage to wind turbine generator systems in recent years. Damages caused by lightning are particularly serious [1][4]. Wind turbine generator systems are built in locations where there are few tall structures so as to obtain good wind conditions; thus, they are often struck by lightning. To promote wind power generation, lightning protection methodologies for wind turbine generator systems must be established.

Manuscript received October 09, 2009; revised January 15, 2010. First published March 29, 2010; current version published September 22, 2010. Paper no. TPWRD-00758-2009. K. Yamamoto is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Kobe City College of Technology, Kobe, Hyogo 651-2194, Japan (e-mail: kyamamoto@mem.iee.or.jp). S. Yanagawa is with the Shoden Company, Chiba, Chiba 263-0002, Japan (e-mail: yanagawa@sdn.co. jp). K. Yamabuki is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Wakayama National College of Technology, Gobo, Wakayama 644-0023, Japan (e-mail: yamab@wakayama-nct.ac.jp). S. Sekioka is with the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Shonan Institute of Technology, Fujisawa, Kanagawa 251-8511, Japan (e-mail: sekioka@elec.shonan-it.ac.jp). S. Yokoyama is with the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI), Yokosuka, Kanagawa 240-0196, Japan (e-mail: yokoyama@criepi. denken.or.jp). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPWRD.2010.2043748

0885-8977/$26.00 2010 IEEE

3036

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 25, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2010

planning the grounding system, because it is not easy to measure its transient characteristic; therefore, the transient characteristics are often neglected. When a wind turbine generator system is constructed in a mountain area where the soil resistivity is comparatively high, the steady-state grounding resistance becomes more important than the transient grounding resistance in many cases. A potential rise caused by a lightning strike to a wind turbine generator system is more remarkable at the wave tail than at the wavefront. The potential rise at the wave tail depends on the steady-state grounding resistance. When a wind turbine generator system is constructed at a low resistivity site, such as a coastal area or a disposal site, a signicant potential rise occurs due to the inductivity of the grounding system. The transient grounding resistance at the wavefront, which depends on the inductivity of the grounding system, is larger than the steady-state resistance. The abovementioned contents are qualitatively known in the eld of the grounding; quantitative studies have become very important for wind turbine generator systems constructed in diverse locations. In such studies, the FDTD method, which is one type of electromagnetic eld analysis, was applied to grounding simulations [19], [22]; its applicable accuracy was veried in Chapter IV. B. Grounding of Offshore Wind Turbine Generator System The soil around the actual wind turbine generator system at the disposal site where the measurements were performed had electrical characteristics similar to seawater; this was because the soil at the disposal site contained a lot of seawater. The target wind turbine generator system had four long foundation feet, like those of offshore wind turbines, to increase the bearing capacity of the soil. The grounding characteristics of the foundation constructed on the disposal site exhibited inductivity as explained in the previous section. The construction of offshore wind turbine generator systems has been prohibited in Japan because of shery rights, destruction of the environment, etc. However, there are several wind turbine generator systems in coastal areas. Depending on governmental energy policy, investigations into the feasibility of offshore wind turbine generator systems at Choshi, Chiba are in the ofng. Therefore, the grounding characteristics of the wind turbine foundation at disposal sites should be researched to estimate the grounding characteristics of low-resistivity sites. III. MEASUREMENTS A. Grounding System Including Foundation Fig. 1 shows in detail the foundation of the actual wind turbine generator system, grounding mesh and foundation feet used in our measurements. A quadrangle and octagon exist as the top surface of the foundation. In many cases, the tower foot is buried by a few meters; however, it was not buried in this wind turbine. The grounding system was not connected to any surrounding wind turbines. For many wind turbines in Japan, the lightning current is actively led to the grounding mesh underneath the foundation from the tower through grounding wires covering the foundation, not to the foundation itself. However, the foundation is not explicitly isolated from the tower; these

Fig. 1. Foundation of the actual wind turbine generator system.

are connected through the anchor. When the grounding characteristics of a wind turbine generator system are researched, a grounding system including both the grounding wires and foundation should be considered. As shown in Fig. 1, the shape of the foundation was rectangular and parallel-piped, with dimensions of 8.5 m 8.5 m 2 m. The foundation was constructed with reinforced concrete; the intervals between reinforcing were about 30 cm. The tower was connected to the foundation at ground level. The depth of the foundation was 2 m, and the length and diameter of the foundation feet were 50 m and 1 m respectively to enhance the bearing capacity of soil. The foundation feet were also made of reinforced concrete. A grounding mesh existed underneath the foundation; its size was about 8.5 m 8.5 m, the cross section of the wires for the grounding mesh was 60 mm , and the intervals of the wires were about 4.25 m. It is connected to the foundation feet. The stratiform ground resistivity at the site of the wind turbine generator system is shown in Fig. 2. The Wenner method was utilized to measure the resistivity. The steady-state grounding resistance of the grounding system of the wind turbine generator system was 0.062 . B. Experimental Conditions Fig. 3 shows the experimental setup. The current was led to the foundation from the impulse generator with insulated copper wire (length: 150 m; cross section: 5.5 mm ) as the current lead wire. The height of the current lead wire was about 1 m. The fast front current generated by the impulse generator was injected into the foundation through a resistance of 500 from

YAMAMOTO et al.: ANALYTICAL SURVEYS OF TRANSIENT AND FREQUENCY-DEPENDENT GROUNDING CHARACTERISTICS

3037

Fig. 2. Stratiform ground resistivity at the site of the wind turbine generator system estimated by the Wenner method.

Fig. 4. Measuring point of the potential rise around the foundation.

Fig. 3. Experimental setup.

m from the edge of the foundation, as shown in Fig. 4) for further distance. The potential rise was measured at 21 locations. The bottom of the conductive rod (length: 0.3 m; diameter: 10 mm) was buried about a 0.1 m depth at each measured point to measure the potential rise, the ground terminal of the passive probe was connected to conductive rod so that the case of the oscilloscope can be same potential at the measuring point. As shown in Fig. 3, the current lead wire and voltage measurement wire were not orthogonalized around the wind turbine. Mutual electromagnetic induction between the current lead and voltage measuring wires may have existed. C. Measuring Instruments The impulse generator had a capacitance of 1.5 F, and it was discharged using a gap switch. The charging voltage was about 30 kV for these measurements. A TDS3054C oscilloscope (Tektronix) was used to measure the voltage and current waveforms; its bandwidth was dc-500 MHz. A P5100 passive probe (Tektronix) was used for voltage measurements; its bandwidth was dc-250 MHz, and its input capacitance was up to 2.75 pF. A PEARSON 150 was used as the current probe; its bandwidth and usable rise time were 40 kHz20 MHz and over 20 ns, respectively. The measurements performed using these instruments were accurate, with a rise time of several hundred nanoseconds. D. Measured Results The measurement results are shown in Fig. 5. Fig. 5(a) and (b), respectively, shows the injected current and potential rise at the top of the foundation. The injected current showed a ramp wave which includes wide frequency component, and its peak value and rise time were approximately 60 A and 0.3 s, respectively. The voltage was inductive at the wavefront. The ratio of the maximum voltage at the wavefront to the current at the same time was approximately 13 V/A. This value was greater than the steady-state grounding resistance. The voltage waveform oscillated after the wavefront. The medium value of the voltage gradually decreased to the steady-state grounding resistance of 0.062 . We believe that the oscillations were caused by the inductance and capacitance of the grounding system and the traveling wave phenomena on the tower and down conductors in the blades.

a current lead wire, as shown in Fig. 3. The peak value of the current was 60 A, and the wavefront was about 0.3 s. The comparatively large resistance of 500 was connected in series with the impulse generator; the power source could therefore be considered as a current source. The resistance worked as a matching impedance to reduce the current reections on the current lead wire. The impulse generator was grounded by several grounding rods (length: 1.5 m; diameter: 20 mm); the steady-state grounding resistance was 7.5 . The injected current was measured at the end of the current lead wire near the foundation with a current probe, as shown in Fig. 3. The potential rise of the foundation was measured as the voltage difference between the top of the foundation and the voltage measurement wire (length: 70 m; cross-section: 2 mm ). The ground terminal of the passive probe was connected to the top of the foundation so that the case of the oscilloscope can be same potential at the measuring point. The height of the voltage measurement wire was 1 m, and it was grounded at the remote end through a matching impedance. The surge impedance of the voltage measuring wire was about 500 ; therefore, the 400 resistance was connected between the remote end of the voltage measuring wire and a grounding rod (length: 0.5 m; diameter: 20 mm). The bottom of the grounding rod was buried about a 0.1 m depth, and the grounding resistance was about 100 . This was how the noise induced on the voltage measuring wire was discharged to the ground readily. The potential rise around the wind turbine generator system was measured as the voltage between the conductive rods and the voltage measurement wire at intervals of 1 m (0 to 10 m from the edge of the foundation, as shown in Fig. 4) around the foundation, and 24 m (over 10

3038

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 25, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2010

Fig. 5. Transient characteristic of the grounding system for an actual wind turbine generator system. (a) Injected current into the foundation. (b) Potential rise of the foundation.

As mentioned above, the grounding characteristics of the system showed strong inductiveness at the wavefront; the steady-state grounding resistance was as low as 0.062 . For offshore wind turbine generator systems, similar grounding characteristics should be observed. Transient phenomena obviously become more important than steady-state phenomena for lightning protection design. The potential around a wind turbine generator system increases when it is struck by lightning. To investigate the potential rise, the fast-front current was injected into the grounding system, as shown in Figs. 3 and 4. The injected current was much the same as the results shown in Fig. 5(a), where the peak value was 60 A and the wavefront was about 0.3 s. Fig. 6(a) shows the measured potential rise around the wind turbine generator system at several points. Fig. 6(b) shows the relationship between the maximum potential rise and the distance. The waveshape shown in Fig. 6(a) was almost analogous to the potential rise shown in Fig. 5(b). If the skin effect of the ground is not considered and the shape of the grounding system is assumed to be a semisphere, the grounding impedance is assumed to be a pure resistance, the maximum potential rise is found to be inversely proportional to the distance from the foundations. A few differences existed in comparison with the inversely proportional waveform because the measurement results in Fig. 6(a) showed surge behavior.

Fig. 6. Potential rise around the wind turbine generator system. (a) Waveforms of the potential rise. (b) Peak values of the potential rise.

The time characteristics of the wind turbine grounding system are shown in Fig. 5. Its frequency characteristics are shown in Fig. 7(a) and (b). The grounding characteristics of the wind turbine were inductive over 10 kHz. From the transfer function of the grounding system, the time responses to all the different lightning waveshapes could be calculated. The abovementioned measured results included the inuence of the surge propagations on the tower and blades, the induced voltage on the voltage measuring wire, an input capacitance of the voltage probe, the position of the current lead wire, and so on. If we want to obtain the independent grounding characteristics of the foundation, a model of a wind turbine with a grounding system should be established in numerical electromagnetic eld analysis such as through the FDTD method, and the independent model of the grounding system should be calculated. In the following section, the FDTD calculated results are presented.

YAMAMOTO et al.: ANALYTICAL SURVEYS OF TRANSIENT AND FREQUENCY-DEPENDENT GROUNDING CHARACTERISTICS

3039

Fig. 7. Frequency responses of the grounding system on the actual wind turbine generator system. (a) Absolute value of the grounding impedance. (b) Phase value of the grounding impedance. The frequency responses are calculated from the measurements shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 8. Analytical setup for the FDTD analyses.

IV. ANALYTICAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Analytical Conditions The measurements presented in Section III were reproduced by using electromagnetic eld analysis through the FDTD method. The analytical setup is shown in Fig. 8. The dimensions of the analytical space were 120 m 90 m 200 m, and it was divided into cube cells with a side length of 1.0 m. The absorbing boundary condition was 2nd order Liao. The ground level was 100 m from the bottom of the analytical space; the resistivity of the ground was the same as that shown in Fig. 2. Thin-wire models to model the current lead wire, voltage measuring wire, grounding mesh, and lightning conductors in blades were used [23]. The nacelle was a rectangular parallelepiped conductor of 2 m 2 m 5 m, and the tower was a tube conductor with a stair-like surface, 3 m in diameter and 43 m in height. The foundation was a rectangular parallelepiped of dimensions 8 m 8 m 2 m; the foundation foot was also modeled as a rectangular parallelepiped of 1 m 1 m 50 m. The current source parallel with the resistance of 500 was connected between the foundation and current lead wire. The current lead wire and voltage measuring wire were connected to the absorbing boundaries. B. Comparisons of Measurements and Calculations Fig. 9(a) shows the calculated and measured injected currents. The rise time and peak value were approximately 0.3 s and 60 A, respectively. Compared with the measurements shown in

Fig. 5(a), the calculated injected current agreed well with the measured current. At the wavefront, there were a few differences. However, the potential rise of the foundation as shown in Fig. 9(b) showed inductive characteristics, which also agreed well with the measured values overall. Fig. 10 shows comparisons of the potential rise around the foundation at several points. As seen in the potential rise of the foundation, inductivity was observed in the FDTD simulations. Fig. 11 shows the comparisons of the calculated and measured peak values of the grounding potential rise. The calculated results near the foundation agreed well with the measured results, as shown in Fig. 6. However, the values at points far from the foundation had small differences. The straiform ground resistivity measured by Wenner method as shown in Fig. 2 doesnt agree with the actual stratiform ground resistivity completely. It is an approximate result, and might inuence the above mentioned differences. C. Pure Characteristics of the Grounding System and Effects of Each Element Composing the Grounding System The FDTD calculations were performed without the tower and down conductors in the blades. Other calculated conditions were the same as the calculation shown in Fig. 8. Compared with the calculated results of the potential rise in Fig. 9(b), there was about a 10% difference at the wavefront, as shown in Fig. 12, because of the positive reection of the voltage traveling wave from the tips of the blades.

3040

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 25, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2010

Fig. 9. FDTD calculated results of the grounding system compared with the measured results. (a) Injected currents into the foundation. (b) Potential rises of the foundation.

To get the pure characteristics of the grounding system, the FDTD calculation was performed without the tower and the down conductors in the blades. In these calculations, the current was led from the -direction wire connected to the overhead boundary to the foundation to reduce electromagnetic induction to the ground surface and voltage measuring wire, as shown in Fig. 13. The current waveform also changed a little at the wavefront, as shown in Fig. 14(a), because the direction of the current injection was changed; the inuence from the current in the ground was reduced. As shown in Fig. 14(b), the potential rises were compared for four conditions. Case 1 was a fundamental case that included the foundation, grounding mesh, and foundation feet. Case 2 studied the inuence of the grounding mesh underneath the foundation and included the foundation and foundation feet. Case 3 studied the inuence of the foundation feet connected to the bottom of the foundation and included the foundation and grounding mesh. Case 4 had just the foundation. As shown in Fig. 14(b), there was not much difference in the waveforms. The skin depth of the ground was about 2 m at a frequency of 1 MHz and grounding resistivity of 15 m; therefore, the current in the ground mainly owed on the surface at the wavefront. At the wave tail, there was also not much difference in the wave forms. The ground resistivity was very low, as shown in Fig. 2, thus the potential rise at the wave tail was far smaller than that at the wavefront; the differences in the potential rises at the wave tail were not remarkable. Fig. 15 shows the calculation result for the ground with a resistivity of 100 m. Other calculated conditions were the same

Fig. 10. Comparison of measured and calculated potential rises around the wind turbine generator system. (a) 0 m from the edge of the foundation as shown in Fig. 4. (b) 5 m from the foundation. (c) 10 m from the foundation.

as shown in Figs. 13 and 14. The results in Fig. 15 show the effects of the incidental, such as the grounding mesh and foundation feet. Depending on the grounding resistivity, the foundation feet affected the grounding impedance at the wave tail but not so much at the wavefront. The grounding mesh underneath the foundation did not affect the grounding impedance signicantly at both wave tail and wavefront. From these results, it is clear that the inductance of the foundation caused the steep potential rise at the wavefront. The frequency characteristics of the grounding system in Case 1, as shown in Fig. 13 and 14, are shown in Fig. 16(a) and (b). The frequency characteristics of Cases 24 also had the same results. The grounding characteristics of the wind turbine were inductive over 10 kHz. From the transfer function of the grounding system, the time responses to all the different lightning wave shapes can be calculated. As examples, potential rise responses to a step current with a peak value of 1 A and a

YAMAMOTO et al.: ANALYTICAL SURVEYS OF TRANSIENT AND FREQUENCY-DEPENDENT GROUNDING CHARACTERISTICS

3041

Fig. 11. Comparisons of the calculated and measured results of the peak value of the grounding potential rise.

Fig. 13. Analytical setup for the FDTD analyses. The current is led from the z direction wire connected to the overhead boundary. Fig. 12. FDTD calculated results to study the inuence of the tower and down conductors in the blades. Injected current into the foundation was the same as that shown in Fig. 9(a). Above gure is the potential rises of the foundation in cases with and without the tower and down conductors.

typical lightning current with a peak value of 30 kA, the wavefront of 5.5 s and the stroke duration of 75 s [24] are shown in Fig. 17. The step current is adopted because the waveform includes wide frequency component. The above mentioned measured results do not include the inuence of surge propagations at the tower and blades; they are the independent and pure characteristics of the grounding system. V. CONCLUSION This paper has presented the results of experimental and analytical studies investigating the grounding characteristics of an actual wind turbine generator system at a disposal site and the potential rise around it. The analytical results using the FDTD method agreed well with the measured results of the eld tests. The characteristics of the grounding system showed strong inductivity at the wavefront. The tower and down conductors in the blade clearly affect the transient of the potential rise at the wavefront. Depending on the grounding resistivity and wavefront, the foundation feet affect the grounding impedance at the wave tail but not so much at the wavefront. The grounding mesh underneath the foundation does not signicantly affect the grounding impedance at either the wave tail or front. The inductance of the foundation causes the steep potential rise at the wavefront.

Fig. 14. FDTD calculations to study the inuence of the incidental elements. (a) Injected currents into the foundation. (b) Potential rises of the foundation. Case 1 includes the foundation, grounding mesh, and foundation feet. Case 2 includes the foundation and foundation feet. Case 3 includes the foundation and grounding mesh. Case 4 includes just the foundation.

The frequency responses of the pure characteristics of the grounding system were presented to obtain voltage responses to

3042

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY, VOL. 25, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2010

Fig. 15. FDTD calculated results of the grounding system when the ground has 100
m resistivity. (a) Injected currents into the foundation. (b) Potential rises of the foundation.

Fig. 17. Potential rise responses to step and typical lightning currents. (a) Potential rise response to a step current. (b) Typical lightning current waveform. (c) Potential rise response to the typical lightning current.

will provide useful basic data for lightning protection of wind turbine generator systems at low resistivity sites, including offshore wind turbine generator systems. REFERENCES
[1] I. Cotton, B. Mcniff, T. Soerenson, W. Zischank, P. Christiansen, M. Hoppe-Kilpper, S. Ramakers, P. Pettersson, and E. Muljadi, Lightning protection for wind turbines, in Proc. 25th Int. Conf. Lightning Protection, 2000, pp. 848853. [2] Wind turbine generator systemsPart 24: Lightning protection, IEC Tech Rep. 61400-24, 2002. [3] Wind turbine failures and troubles investigating committee annual report, (in Japanese) 2006, NEDO. [4] Wind turbine failures and troubles investigating committee annual report, (in Japanese) 2007, NEDO. [5] K. Yamamoto, T. Noda, S. Yokoyama, and A. Ametani, An experimental study of lightning overvoltages in wind turbine generation systems using a reduced-size model, Elect. Eng. Jpn., vol. 158, no. 4, pp. 2230, Mar. 2007. [6] K. Yamamoto, T. Noda, S. Yokoyama, and A. Ametani, Experimental and analytical studies of lightning overvoltages in wind turbine generator systems, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 436442, Mar. 2009, ISSN:0378-7796. [7] K. Yamamoto, T. Noda, S. Yokoyama, and A. Ametani, Grounding characteristics of a wind turbine generation system and voltage rise around it, in Proc. Int. Conf. Grounding and Earthing, pp. 415419.

Fig. 16. Frequency responses of the grounding system on the actual wind turbine generator system. (a) Absolute value of the grounding impedance. (b) Phase value of the grounding impedance. The frequency responses are calculated from the analytical results shown in Fig. 14.

all types of lightning current waveforms. As examples, the potential rise responses to step and typical lightning currents are calculated. The installation features of the wind turbine generator system employed in this study were very similar to those used at sea. The long foundation feet were much like those of an offshore wind turbine generator system. The results given in this paper

YAMAMOTO et al.: ANALYTICAL SURVEYS OF TRANSIENT AND FREQUENCY-DEPENDENT GROUNDING CHARACTERISTICS

3043

[8] N. Jenkins and A. Vaudin, Earthing of wind farms, Wind Eng., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 3743, 1994. [9] M. Lorentzou, I. Cotton, N. Hatziargyriou, and N. Jenkins, Electromagnetic analysis of wind turbine grounding systems, in Proc. Eur. Wind Energy Conf., 1997, CD-ROM. [10] N. Hatziargyriou, M. Lorentzou, I. Cotton, and N. Jenkins, Windfarm earthing, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Colloq. Lightning Protection of Wind Turbines, Nov. 1997, IEE Publ. 97/303. [11] N. Hatziargyriou, M. Lorentzou, I. Cotton, and N. Jenkins, Transferred overvoltages by windfarm grounding systems, in Proc. Int. Conf. High Quality Power, 1998, pp. 342347. [12] I. Cotton, Windfarm earthing, in Proc. 11th Int. Symp. High Voltage Engineering, 1999, vol. 2, pp. 288291. [13] I. Cotton and N. Jenkins, Windfarm earthing, in Proc. Eur. Wind Energy Conf., 1999, pp. 725728. [14] M. Lorentzou, N. Hatziargyriou, and B. Papadias, Analysis of wind turbine grounding systems, in Proc. 10th Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conf., 2000, pp. 936939. [15] J. M. Prousalidis, M. P. Philippakou, N. Hatziargyriou, and B. Papadias, The effects of ionization in wind turbine grounding modeling, in Proc. 10th Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conf., 2000, pp. 940943. [16] V. T. Kontargyri, I. F. Gonos, and I. A. Stathopulos, Frequency response of grounding system of wind turbine generators, in Proc. 24th Int. Symp. High Voltage Engineering, 2005, p. B-13. [17] B. Hermoso, Wind farm earthing installations: Rated and lightning frequencies behaviour, in Proc. Int. Conf. Grounding and Earthing, 2006, pp. 411414. [18] O. Ukar, I. Zamora, R. Idiondo, and A. Mugica, Analysis for high frequencies of grounding systems, for wind turbines, in Proc. 27th Int. Conf. Lightning Protection, 2004, vol. II, pp. 10531057. [19] K. Yamamoto and S. Yanagawa, Analytical and experimental studies of grounding characteristics of wind turbines, in Proc. Int. Conf. Grounding and Earthing, 2006, pp. 391395. [20] K. S. Yee, J. S. Chen, and A. H. Chang, Conformal nite-difference time-domain (FDTD) with overlapping grids, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 10681075, Sep. 1992. [21] N. Nagaoka and A. Ametani, A development of a generalized frequency-domain transient programFTP, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 19962004, Oct. 1988. [22] M. Tsumura, Y. Baba, N. Nagaoka, and A. Ametani, FDTD simulation of a horizontal grounding electrode and modeling of its equivalent circuit, IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat., vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 817825, Nov. 2006. [23] T. Noda and S. Yokoyama, Thin wire representation in nite difference time domain surge simulation, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 840847, Jul. 2002. [24] H. D. Betz, U. Schumann, and P. Laroche, Lightning: Principles, Instruments and Application: Review of Modern Lightning Research. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2009. Kazuo Yamamoto (M98) was born in Osaka, Japan in 1974. He received the B.E., M.E., and Ph.D. degrees in engineering from Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, 2000, and 2007, respectively. He was with Nara National College of Technology from 2000 to 2006. He was an Assistant Professor at Kobe City College of Technology from 2006 to 2007, where he is currently an Associate Professor. From 1998 to 1999, he was a Visiting Researcher at the Manitoba HVDC Research Centre, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. Since 2008, he has been a Research Fellow

with the Infrastructure Research Center at Doshisha University. His research interests include lightning protection.

Shunichi Yanagawa was born in Kanagawa, Japan, in 1961. He received the Bachelors degrees in engineering from Tokai University, Kanagawa, Japan, in 1985. He joined Shoden Corp., where he is currently an Executive Research Scientist. He had been the Director of the Techno Center at Shoden Corp. from 2004 to 2008. Currently, he is a Manager of the Technology Development Department. His research interest includes the research and product developments concerning lightning protection.

Koichi Yamabuki (M99) was born in Osaka, Japan, in 1970. He received the B.E., M.E., and Ph.D. degrees in engineering from Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan in 1994, 1997, and 2000, respectively. In 1999, he jointed Wakayama National College of Technology, where he is currently an Associate Professor. From 2006 to 2007, he was a Visiting Researcher at University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. His research interest includes lightning protection. Dr. Yamabuki is a Research Fellow with the Infrastructure Research Center at Doshisha University.

Shozo Sekioka (M00) was born on December 30, 1963. He received the B.Sc. and Dr.Eng. degrees in electrical engineering from Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan in 1986 and 1997, respectively. He joined Kansai Tech Corp. in 1987. He was an Associate Professor at Shonan Institute of Technology from 2005 to 2007, where he is currently a Professor. He has been engaged in lightning surge analysis in electric power systems.

Shigeru Yokoyama (M83S91F96) was born in Sendai, Japan, on March 5, 1947. He received the B.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, in 1969 and 1986, respectively. He joined the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI), Japan, in 1969. Since then, he has been engaged in the research of lightning protection on power systems, buildings, and wind turbines. He holds posts of Research Advisor at CRIEPI. He was Professor at Kyushu University from 2001 through 2007. He was a Vice President at the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan in 2001. Dr. Yokoyama is a chairman of the IEC TC 81 (Lightning Protection) Japanese committee.