2012 International Conference on Lightning Protection (ICLP), Vienna, Austria

Current distribution and electric field inside a gasometer due to direct lightning
Jrgen Plesch, TU Graz
Institute of High Voltage Engineering and System Management Graz, University of Technology Graz, Austria juergen.plesch@tugraz.at

Stephan Pack, TU Graz

Institute of High Voltage Engineering and System Management Graz, University of Technology Graz, Austria pack@tugraz.at

Kurt Preis, TU Graz

Institute of Fundamentals and Theory in Electrical Engineering Graz, University of Technology Graz, Austria kurt.preis@tugraz.at
Abstract Gasometers are used in Austria to store a big quantity of explosive gas and represent exposed objects due to lightning of their height of several 10 meters. A floating disk on the top of the gas inside the tank divides the gasometer volume into two chambers, one at the bottom filled with gas and one above the disk with seldom explosive gas mixture (gas and air). According to the lightning protection standard EN 62305 on structures are taller than 60 m a lightning stroke to the side of the structures may occur, especially to corners and edges of the surface. Due to the average lighting flash density in Austria it is important to ensure the protection against direct strokes and to ensure no uncontrolled discharge inside the gasometer tank. To evaluate the effect of lightning inside the gasometer shell, a numerical simulation model was performed to investigate the current distribution and electric field strength inside the gasometer. With the distribution of the electric field strength, the voltage potential in several points and furthermore the voltage difference could be calculated. Keywords gasometer, current distribution, electric field strength, direct lightning stroke, voltage difference

Gerd Fritscher, voestalpine

Linz, Austria gerd.fritscher@voestalpine.at

electric field strength inside the gasometer. The evaluation of the electric field strength leads to voltage potential in selected locations and the voltage difference inside the gasometer could be calculated. To estimate and evaluate the effect of a lightning stroke to a gasometer a numerical simulation model was set up. For the supply of the lightning current to the surface of the gasometer a lightning channel with several centimetres of diameter was modelled.

II. STANDARD AND BASIC SIMULATION PARAMETERS In many cases, the lightning flash consists of several multiple strokes. In this context a flash can be separated into first and subsequent strokes. The first stroke ionises the air, builds up a conductive channel between cloud and ground. Subsequent strokes use the conductive channel of the first stroke in many cases. According to European lightning protection standards [1, 2] and the hazard that a lighting stroke into a gasometer may cause uncontrolled discharges; gasometers get classified into the strongest lightning protection level I. Table 1 shows the peak current lightning amplitude and time parameters of first and subsequent strokes.
Table 1: Amplitude and time parameters of first and subsequent stroke [1]

I. INTRODUCTION The aim of this paper is to investigate and evaluate the effect of a direct lightning stroke to a gasometer. Due to the height of such gasometers, lightning stroke into edges and the side of the cylindrical shell may occur. Current density and electric field are consequences of a lightning stroke into the shell. An existing floating disk inside of the gasometer divides the volume into two volumes. The skin depth of the lightning current depends on the frequency and the material parameters. An increase in the frequency decreases by constant material parameters the skin depth of the current and therefore the current density and the

Type

First stroke Subsequent stroke

Amplitude kA 200 50

Time parameters t1/t2 s 10 / 350 0.25 / 100

For the numerical simulation, the lightning impulse can be represented through a sinusoidal wave shape with a frequency of the rise time t1. With the help of (1) a frequency of 25 kHz for the first stroke and 1 MHz [2] for subsequent stroke is calculated. (1) Equation (2) describes the sinusoidal input voltage source for the simulations. (2) The given voltage source causes a current in the modelled lightning channel. Due to the linear conditions between voltage and current, the amplitude of the lightning current is assumed to 100 kA to arise an analogy to 100 %. The simulation results can be related with multiplication and division to other lightning currents. III. SIMULATION MODEL AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS A. Simulation program and basics Modelling numerical calculation and evaluation of the results is done with the help of the numeric calculation program EleFAnt3D. EleFAnt3D is the short version of the Electromagnetic Field Analysis Tools and provide a three dimensional modelling and calculation of electromagnetic fields Three different impact positions of the lightning stroke are investigated and due to symmetrical axis different modelling grade of the gasometer are necessary. Figure 1 shows four simulation models with different lightning stroke positions. For an impact position in the middle of the top disk area (case A) a quarter of the gasometer and for edge (case B) and side (case C) impact a half has to be modelled. A floating disk (case D) inside the gasometer is added, where an impact in the side of the shell is simulated. Case A Case B Case C Case D
Scheme for case A

U3

U1

U4

U2

Scheme for case B, C and D

Figure 2: Evaluation points of the voltage potentials in different locations

B. Gasometer tank and simulation model Figure 3 shows a picture of a gasometer tank. The tank itself can be modelled by approximation to a hollow cylinder. This modelling is due to the proportion of outer diameter to wall thickness allowed.

Figure 1: Simulation model with different lightning stroke positions

The evaluated electrical field strength is used to calculate the voltage potential and to evaluate the voltage difference inside the gasometer. The voltage potential towards ground is calculated with the line integral of over the way (3). Two different heights are used for analysing the voltage potential 40 and 60 m. (3)

Figure 3: Gasometer tank (Height: 60 m, diameter: 50 m)

The voltage in the symmetrical case A is evaluated on one side of the gasometer (Figure 2 left) and in the cases B, C and D on both sides (Figure 2 right).

Figure 4 shows the whole simulation volume with the dimension of 600 x 300 x 300 m. The yellow structure represents the gasometer tank itself with a diameter of 50 m and a height of 60 m. The simulation model is divided into macroelements and furthermore subdivided into small finite elements.

C. Boundary conditions The boundary conditions in the simulation model are necessary that the current flow from the artificial cloud to the ground is defined. All in all four boundary conditions are essential to describe the behaviour of the electromagnetic field and the current density and two boundary conditions define the amplitude of the lightning current. Equation (4) describes a perfect electrical conductor at the ground of the volume. (4) The magnetic field should not leave the border of the calculation volume. Equation (5) also describes the direction of the magnetic flux density.
Figure 4: Simulation volume divided into macroelements

Tank

(5)

Figure 5 shows enhanced the gasometer tank with a floating disk inside.

Due to the symmetric behavior of the simulation task (6) and (7) describes the magnetic field strength and the current density at the axis of symmetry. (6) (7)

Top disk Floating disk Cylindrical shell

Figure 5: Structure of the gasometer tank with floating disk (level 40 m)

With the two additional boundary conditions, (8) and (9) a voltage source is defined. Equation (8) defines the peak value of the voltage at the lightning channel and (9) the perfect grounded conductor. The given voltage leads to a current flow from the lightning channel to the ground. (8) (9)

The lightning discharge to the gasometer shell is realised with a lightning channel (diameter: 5 cm, average length: 240 m). The chosen material parameters for the conductive lightning channel avoid the skin effect and leads to a homogenous current density over the whole cross section of the channel. Table 2 shows geometrical and electrical parameters for the simulation model.
TABLE 2:GEOMETRICAL AND ELECTRICAL PARAMETERS OF THE GASOMETERS

Equation (10) is used to calculate the lightning current caused from the given voltage source (8), (9). (10)

Figure 6 shows the boundary conditions around the simulation model.

V = const.

Bn = 0
Lightning channel

Value Geometrical parameters Material S235JRG2 (construction steel) Outer diameter 50000 Height 60000 Wall thickness 5 Disk thickness 4 Electrical parameters Electrical 45x106 conductivity Relative 1000 permeability r

Type

Unit mm mm mm mm S/m -

Bn = 0
Tank

Bn = 0

V = 0, Et = 0
Figure 6: Electric and magnetic boundary conditions for the simulation volume, specification of a constant voltage

D. Skin effect An electric current produces a magnetic field inside and outside a wire. In case of direct current the whole cross section of a wire is used and the current density is homogenous. Alternating current produces also a magnetic field and additionally eddy current. The generated eddy current is in opposite direction to the alternating current and the total

current density is influenced. In the inner region of a wire the current density gets decreased and increased in the surrounding region. The frequency of alternating current and also the material parameters (electrical conductivity and permeability ) influence the skin depth of the current. Equation (11) calculates generally the skin depth of the current into the material.

According to lightning protection standard the frequency of the first stroke is 25 kHz and of subsequent stroke 1 MHz is given. Due to the skin depth of the current into the material of the tank, three representative frequencies were chosen for the calculations, which cover the aim of these investigations (1, 10, 100 kHz). IV. RESULTS Case A: Lightning stroke in the middle of the top disk

(11)

In case of constant material parameters the frequency determines the skin depth of the current into the material. A rise in the frequency decreases the effective cross section and increases the current density. The current density is calculated with (12) and describes the current per unit of area. (12) Table 3 shows calculated skin depth of the current into the material of the gasometer wall. Figure 7 shows the skin depth as a function of frequency.
Table 3: Calculation points of the skin depth of the current

Table 5 shows the voltage potentials inside the gasometer tank by a lightning stroke into the middle of the top disk. The calculated voltages are in the symmetrical case of a few millivolts.
Table 5: Voltages on the inner side of the gasometer shell caused from a lightning stoke in the middle of the top disk

Frequency Hz 100 1k 10k 25k 100k 1MHz

Skin depth of the current mm 0.237 0.075 0.024 0.015 0.007 0.002

Measuring point U1 U2

Height m 0 60 0 40

Voltage V 0 002 0.001

Figure 8 shows the current distribution at the inner side of the gasometer. The unit in this case is A/m2, which is the same as A/(106 mm2). The peak value of the current density of about 10 kA/m2 is the same as 10 mA/mm2.

Figure 7: Skin depth of the current into construction steel over the frequency plotted in double logarithmic scale

With the investigation of the skin depth of the current into construction steel dominant bases for the frequency are chosen. Table 4 shows the realized simulations with different models.
Table 4: Simulation model versus lightning current and frequency

Figure 8: Current distribution at the inner wall of the gasometer, peak current density of 10 mA/mm2

Simulation model Middle (case A) Edge (case B) Side, without disk (case C) Side, with disk (case D)

Lightning current kA 100 100 100 100 1

Case B: Lightning stroke into the edge of the gasometer shell

Frequency Hz 10k 10k 1k 10k 10k 100k

The current distribution and voltage potential in case B is no longer symmetrical and depends on the location of the lightning stroke. Table 6 shows the voltage potentials on the left and right side of the gasometer. The greatest voltage

potential is in comparison to the other voltages next to the lighting stroke.

Table 6: Voltages on the inner side of the gasometer shell caused from a lightning stroke at the edge of the gasometer

Measuring point U1 U2 U3 U4

Height m 0 60 right 0 40 right 0 60 left 0 40 left

Voltage V 0.147 0.020 0.030 0.021

Figure 9 shows the current density in the gasometer. Cause of the induction effect the current density is at the edge higher than in the other regions.

Figure 10: Current distribution at the inner wall of the gasometer, peak current density of 100 mA/mm2

Case D: Lightning stroke in the side of the shell with floating disk

With the added floating disk the evaluated voltage potentials are slightly higher see Table 8.
Table 8: Voltages on the inner side of the gasometer shell caused from a lightning stroke at the side of the gasometer shell at the level of the floating disk

Figure 9: Current distribution at the inner wall of the gasometer, peak current density of 100 mA/mm2

Case C: Lightning stroke in the side of the shell

Measuring point U1 U2 U3 U4

Height m 0 60 right 0 40 right 0 60 left 0 40 left

Voltage V 0 546 0.276 0.017 0.012

Table 7 shows the voltage potential in the gasometer.

Table 7: Voltages on the inner side of the gasometer shell caused from a lightning stroke at the side of the gasometer shell

Figure 11 shows the current distribution inside the gasometer with an added floating disk. Compared to Figure 10 the added floating disk does not influence the current.

Measuring point U1 U2 U3 U4

Height m 0 60 right 0 40 right 0 60 left 0 40 left

Voltage V 0.454 0.179 0.026 0.018

The same behaviour of the current density is obvious in Figure 10. The current density is also, as in case B, at the edge higher than in other region of the surface.

Figure 11: Current distribution at the inner wall of the gasometer, peak current density of 100 mA/mm2

Comparison of different lightning stroke frequencies

difference exists. In the other cases the voltage difference is not higher than 0.6 V.
Table 10: Voltage difference of the four simulation models at a frequency of 10 kHz

Table 9 shows calculated voltage potentials inside the gasometer depending on a variation in the frequency. In case of nearly direct current distribution 1 Hz - the whole cross section of the gasometer wall is available for the current flow and the voltage potential of nearly 10 V towards ground exists. The increase of the lightning frequency decreases the available cross section decreases and also the electric field strength inside the gasometer.
Table 9: Comparison of the voltages on the inner side of the gasometer shell caused by a lightning stroke at the edge of the gasometer by different frequency bases

Model Middle (case A) Edge (case B) Side, without disk (case C) Side, with disk (case D)

Height m 0 60 0 40 0 60 0 40 0 60 0 40 0 60 0 40

Voltage difference V 0 0 0.117 0.001 0.428 0.161 0.529 0.264

Measuring point U1 U2 U3 U3 1 10.212 7.494 0.946 0.689

Frequency Hz 1k 0.522 0.258 0.180 0.120

10k 0.454 0.179 0.026 0.018

100k 0.487 0.202 0.020 0.014

Table 11 show the voltage difference inside the gasometer caused from a lightning stroke at the edge of the gasometer in case of different frequency bases. In case of nearly direct current stress (frequency 1 Hz) the voltage difference is in both evaluation points about 7 and 10 V. In the other cases with higher lightning frequencies the voltage difference is lower than 0.5 V.
Table 11: Voltage difference caused form a lightning stroke at the edge of the gasometer by different frequency bases

V.

CONCLUSION

The investigations of this paper were focused on the current distribution and electric field strength inside a gasometer tank. With the help of a numerical calculation program a simulation model of the gasometer was created. Instead of a transient lightning wave shape a sinusoidal wave shape with representative frequency was used. The evaluated simulation results show that the electrical field strength inside the gasometer depends on the available cross section for the current distribution. An increase in the frequency reduces the available cross section and increase the current density. Furthermore the electric field strength inside the gasometer gets reduced. Four different situation cases were calculated to evaluate the voltage potential inside the gasometer. All calculations have shown a negligible electrical field strength and a negligible voltage potential inside the gasometer tank in both volumes, which would cause any uncontrolled discharge inside the tank. The floating disk inside the gasometer did not significantly influence the current distribution and furthermore the voltage potential. As an example, for a representative frequency of a lightning impulse of 10 kHz the voltage potential inside the gasometer is below 1 V. Detailed results are summarized in Table 10 and Table 11. Table 10 shows the calculated voltage difference inside the gasometer tank. Due to the symmetrical case A, no voltage

Height m 0 60 0 40 0 60 0 40 0 60 0 40 0 60 0 40

Frequency Hz 1 1 1k 1k 10k 10k 100k 100k REFERENCES

Voltage difference V 9.266 6.805 0.342 0.120 0.428 0.161 0.467 0.188

[1] [2] [3]

[4] [5]

VE / NORM EN 62305 1: Blitzschutz, Teil 1: Allgemeine Grundstze, 2008-01-01, Austrian Standard VE / NORM EN 62305 3: Blitzschutz, Teil 3: Schutz von baulichen Anlagen und Personen, 2008-01-01, Austrian Standard A.O. Filho, W. Schulz, M.M.F. Saba, O. Pinto Jr., M. G. Ballarotti, First and subsequent strok electric field peaks in negative cloud to ground lightning, IX Int. Symposium on Lighting Protection (SIPDA), Foz do Iquaco, Brazil 2007 W. Schulz and G. Diendorfer, Flash Multiplicity and Interstroke Intervals in Austria, ICLP, Kanazawa, Japan 2006 S. Pedeboy, Identification of the mulitple ground contacts flashes with lightning location system, Cigre C4 Colloquium on Power Quality and Lightning, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 13. 16. May, 2012