250 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETICCOMPATIBILITY, VOL 38, NO.

3, AUGUST 1996

round on
es
Farhad Rachidi, Member, IEEE, Carlo Albert0 Nucci, Member, IEEE, Michel Ianoz, Fellow, IEEE,
and Carlo Mazzetti, Member, IEEE

Abstmct- A comprehensive study on the effect of a lossy C‘ per-unit-length transverse capacitance

ground on the induced voltages on overhead lines by a nearby d complex depth in the ground
lightning is presented. The ground conductivity plays a role in erfc complementary error function
both the evaluation of the lightning radiated fields and of the
line parameters. To be calculated by means of a rigorous theory, E, radial (horizontal) electric field
both fields and line constants need important computation time, E, vertical electric field
which, for the problem of interest, is still prohibitive. The aim E,” horizontal component along the wire of the exciting
of this paper is to discuss and analyze the various simplified electric field
approaches and techniques that have been proposed for the E,” vertical component of the exciting electric field
calculation of the fields and the line constants when the ground
cannot be assumed as a perfectly conducting plane. Regarding G’ per-unit-length transverse conductance
the radiated electromagneticfield, it is shown that the horizontal h line height
electric field, the component which is most affected by the ground H lightning-channel height
finite conduc~ivity,can be calculated in an accurate way using HL1),Hi1) Hankel functions
the Cooray-Rubinstein simplified formula. The presence of an
i m p e ~ e c t ~conducting
y ground is included in the coupling equa- i ( z ’ , t ) spatial-temporal distribution of the lightning return
tions by means of two additional terms: the longitudinal ground stroke current
impedance and the transverse ground admittance, which are I ( z ’ ,j w ) Fourier transform of i ( z ’ , t )
both f~equency-dependent.The latter can generally be neglected i ( x , t ) line induced current in the time domain
for typicall overhead lines, due to its small contribution to the I line current in the frequency domain
overall transverse admittance of the line. Regarding the ground
impedance, a comparison between several simplified expressions I, zero-order modified Bessel function of the first kind
used in the literature is presented and the validity limits of these 11 first-order modified Bessel function of the first kind
expressions are established. It is also shown that for typical j = fl imaginary unit
overhead lines the wire impedance can be neglected as regard K1 first-order modified Bessel function of the second kind
to the ground impedance. We also investigate the time-domain L’ per-unit-length longitudinal inductance
representation of field-to-transmission line coupling equations
where the frequency-dependence of the ground is taken into r horizontal distance between lightning channel and obser-
account by the convolution integral. Finally, examples of voltages vation point
induced by a typical subsequent return stroke on an overhead l i e u(t) unit step function
are presented, emphasizing the effect of the finitely conducting v return-stroke speed
ground. It is shown that for lines whose length does not exceed w(z,t)total line voltage in the time domain
a certain ‘critical’ value (typically 2 km), the surge propagation
along the line is not appreciably affected by the ground finite con- V(z) total line voltage in the frequency domain
ductivity which, therefore, can be neglected in the computation ~ ‘ ( 2t , ) scattered line voltage in the time domain
process. V s(x) scattered line voltage in the frequency domain
Y’ transverse per-unit-length line admittance
LISTOF SYMBOLS Y $ per-unit-length ground admittance
z height of the observation point with respect to ground’s
(Boldfaced symbols denote variables in the frequency do-
surface
main.)
z’ height of a dipole with respect to ground’s surface
a wire radius Z’ longitudinal per-unit-length line impedance
B+ azimuthal (horizontal) magnetic induction in the time
z’(t)inverse Fourier transform of 2’
domain
Z$ per-unit-length ground impedance
Bi ( 2 ,z ) v-component of the scattered magnetic induction
z k ( t ) inverse Fourier transform of Z$
c speed of light in free space
2; per-unit-length wire impedance
Manuscript received June 14, 1995; revised April 16, 1996. yo propagation constant in the free space
F. Rachidi and M. Ianoz are with the Laboratoire de RCseaux d’Energie
Electrique, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland. rS propagation constant inside the ground
C. A. Nucci is with the Istituto di Elettrotecnica Industriale, University of 7, propagation constant inside the wire
Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 6, skin depth inside the ground
C. Mazzetti is with the Dip. Energia Elettrica, University of Rome “La
Sapienza,” Rome, Italy. ,S skin depth inside the wire
Publisher Item Identifier S 0018-9375(96)06295-3. E, permittivity of free space

0018-9375/96$05.00 0 1996 IEEE


RACHIDI et aL: INFLUENCE OF A LOSSY GROUND ON LIGHTNING-INDUCED VOLTAGES
E , ~ relative permittivity of the ground
(‘(t) inverse Fourier transform of Z $ / j w
po permeability of free space
o,irair conductivity
og ground conductivity
8, wire conductivity
rg = h2poog
I. INTRODUCTION
L IGHTNING-INDUCED voltages on overhead lines have
been the subject of many theoretical and experimental
investigations since the first decade of the century. Many
assumptions have been made by the various authors in these
studies (e.g. the lightning channel has been considered as
a vertical unidimensional antenna, the line has often been
considered as infinitely long, etc.). The assumption we discuss
in this paper concerns the ground conductivity. Indeed, in most
of studies on the subject, the ground has been assumed as a
perfectly conducting plane. However, the ground conductivity
plays a role in both the evaluation of the lightning radiated
fields and of the line parameters. To be calculated by means of
a rigorous theory, both fields and line constants need important
computation time, which, for the problem of interest, is still
prohibitive. The aim of this paper is to discuss and analyze the
various simplified approaches and techniques that have been
proposed for the calculation of the fields and the line constants
when the ground cannot be assumed as a perfectly conducting
plane, in order to select among the various approximations,
the most appropriate ones for the problem of interest, in terms
of simplicity and accuracy.
In this paper, the assumed time-dependence of the variables
in the frequency domain will be e x p ( j w t ) . It is important to
mention that some authors use a exp( - j w t ) time-dependence.
Thus, to be in agreement with the convention used in this pa-
per, in the equations reported in the above-mentioned papers,
the imaginary unit j should be replaced with - j .
11. EFFECTOF THE FINITEGROUND
CONDUCTIVITY ON THE ELECTROMAGNETIC
FIELDRADIATED BY LIGHTNING RETURNSTROKES
A. Electromagnetic Field for the General Case of
an Impe~ectlyConducting Ground
The study of the effect of an infinite homogeneous ground
plane of finite conductivity on the electromagnetic field ra-
diated by a dipole was first published by Sommerfeld in
1909 [l]. Banos [2] treated the complete problem of the
electromagnetic radiation of a dipole over a finitely conducting
half-space by determining the solution of Maxwell’s equations
for both media in accordance with the boundary conditions
on the air-ground interface. The resulting equations [2], [3]
are obtained in frequency domain and are in terms of slowly
converging integrals (Sommerfeld integrals).
Different numerical techniques (e.g., [4]-[6]) or analytical
approximations (e.g., [7]-[9]) of Sommerfeld integrals have
been proposed in the literature. A discussion on this exact
formulation is given in [3], [lo]. Note that such a formulation
~
25 1
requires a prohibitive CPU running time when using it as
an input for LEMP-to-transmission-line coupling calculations,
since field calculations are to be performed at a number of
points along the line. In [lo], Zeddam and Degauque have also
discussed and compared some sophisticated approximations to
this rigorous theory, in particular the Norton and the Bannister
approaches, and have defined their validity limits in terms
of frequency and distance of the observation point to the
lightning channel. In this section, we shall discuss and compare
other mathematically more simple approximations that can
be easily integrated in a time-domain approach for coupling
calculations, and that do not necessitate important computing
time.
B. Vertical Electric and Azimuthal Magnetic Field
Components Radiated by a Lightning Return Stroke
For the vertical component of the electric field and the
azimuthal magnetic field, several authors have ‘shown (e.g.
[ l l ] , [12]) that at distmces from the lightning channel not
exceeding a kilometer or so, their intensity can be calculated
with reasonable approximation assuming the ground as a
perfect conductor. Making reference to Fig. 1, expressions
for the total vertical electric and azimuthal magnetic field
components radiated by the overall channel and its image read
are given in [ 131. In the frequency domain, these expressions
read
. exp( - j w R / c ) dz‘
.e x p (- j w R / c ) dz’
- LH r2
-jwJ(z’,
c2R3
j w ) exp( - j w R / c ) dz’
1
1
H+(r,z,jw) =-
49~ [LH H r
-J(z’,jw)exp(-jwR/c)
R3
dz’
+ [ H
H r
-jwI(z’,
CR2
j w ) exp( - j w R / c ) dx’
1
where I ( z ’ , j w ) is the Fourier transform of the current distri-
bution along the lightning channel i ( x ’ , t ) ,determined using a
given lightning return stroke current model (e.g. [14]), and,
R = 2/r2+ ( x -z’)~. (3)
For distance ranges beyond several kilometers, the propaga-
tion over a ground of finite conductivity results in a noticeable
attenuation of high frequency components of the fields [15],
[16]. However, for these range of distances, the inducing effect
of lightning becomes less important.
The assumption of a perfect conducting ground allows us
to obtain closed-form expressions for the fields in the time
252 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, VOL. 38, NO. 3, AUGUST 1996

- - z and a distance r is given by the following equation in the

frequency domain

Conducting Plane

1
g w l ( z ’ , j w ) e x p ( - j w R / c ) dz’ .

(6)
As discussed in E181 and [19], the horizontal electric field
component at a height z above a perfectly conducting ground is
due to the different distances and different retardation times of
Fig. 1. Geometry for the calculation of lightning return-stroke electromag-
netic fields. the fields produced by each channel dipole and its image. The
horizontal electric field is therefore zero at ground level, and
increases practically linearly [181 with height z over ground.
domain. These are
In time domain, (6) reads
E,(r,zt) =

at d.’]. (7)
(4)

This formula has been used in some studies dealing with

the evaluation of induced voltages on transmission lines by
nearby lightning (e.g. [19], [20]).
2) Wavetilt Formula: The wavetilt formula expresses the
T di(z’,t,- R / c ) ratio of the Fourier transform of the horizontal electric field
dz’]. (5)
at ET&) to that of the vertical field E , @ ) [21] and, thus,
allows to calculate the horizontal component of the electric
C. Ground Effects on the Horizontal Electric Field Component field over a soil of finite conductivity from the knowledge of
the vertical component of the same field
The horizontal component of the electric field radiated by
lightning is more affected by the ground finite conductivity.
Although at some meters above ground its intensity is much
smaller than that of the vertical component, within the context ~- ‘
Erg -
JWEo d +
of certain coupling models (e.g. [17]), the horizontal electric
field plays an important role and, thus, its calculation requires where D ~E , , ~are the ground conductivity and relative pennit-
the use of the rigorous expressions or at least reasonable tivity, respectively.
approximations of those. This approach is valid for radiated fields having a grazing
In this section, we will consider and compare the following angle of incidence with respect to ground [21]. The use of this
simple approximations; namely, a) the perfectly conducting function for the case of lightning is therefore reasonable only
ground assumption, b) the wavetilt formula, c) the approach for far observation points: its application for close distances
proposed by Cooray, and d) the one proposed by Rubinstein. may describe only the first microseconds of the horizontal field
As mentioned earlier, the approximations we here consider can [18]. Thomson et al. [22], who measured simultaneously the
be easily integrated in a time-domain approach for coupling vertical and horizontal electric fields from natural lightnings at
calculations, and do not necessitate important computing time. distances ranging from 7 to 43 km,confirmed the applicability
1) Pelfect Conducting Ground Approximation: Assuming of the wavetilt function for these distance ranges.
the ground as a perfect conductor, the horizontal (radial) This approach has been applied by several authors for the
electric field radiated by the lightning channel, at an altitude calculation of lightning-induced voltages on transmission lines

RACHIDI et al.: INFLUENCE OF A LOSSY GROUND ON LIGHTNING-INDUCEDVOLTAGES
situated at far, and also at intermediate (about 1 km) distance
ranges [18], [23]-[25].'
3) Cooray Approach: In [26] Cooray proposed to calculate
the horizontal electric field at the surface of a finitely con-
ducting ground making use of the expression for the surface
impedance of the ground. The horizontal electric field at
ground level can be determined from the azimuthal magnetic
field using the surface impedance expression, as follows [26]
c
Er(r,0 , j w ) = B$(r,0 , j w ) (1 1)
JEoErg + .g/jw&o
where E r ( r , O , j w ) and B q ( r , O , j w ) are the Fourier-
transforms of the horizontal electric field and of the azimuthal
magnetic induction at ground level respectively.
Cooray has also shown that the simplified formula (11)
yields very accurate results at distances as close as about 200
m [26].
4) Rubinstein Approach: In [12], [27], Rubinstein has pro-
posed a new approach according to which the horizontal
electric field can be viewed as decomposed into two terms: the
first one is the horizontal field calculated assuming the ground
to be perfectly conducting; the second one is a correction
factor given by the product of the magnetic field, calculated
assuming the ground to be a perfect conductor, and a function
similar to the wavetilt one, which represents the effect of the
finite ground conductivity. According to this approach, the
horizontal electric field at a distance T and at a height z over
the ground is given by (in the frequency domain) [12]
where Erp(r,z , j w ) and H $ p ( r 0, , j w ) are the Fourier-
transforms of the horizontal component of the electric field
at height z , and of the azimuthal component of the magnetic
field at ground level respectively, both calculated assuming
a perfect conducting ground, and 6, is the skin-depth in the
ground.
The basic assumptions in the Rubinstein approximation are
that ng >> W E ~ and E ~that~ the
~ horizontal magnetic field at
ground level is not affected by the finite ground conductivity.
When the low frequency condition og >> W E ~ E , is~ not
'As the wavetilt formula is expressed in the frequency domain, direct and
inverse Fourier transformations are needed to determine E,(t) starting from
E , ( t ) .However, using the piecewise linear transformation technique [18],
[22], it is possible to treat the wavetilt function directly in the time domain.
This method consists in dividing the vertical electric field into a series of
linear segments such as
L ( t ) = % ( t - t,)u(t - t c ) (9)
where m, is the slope, t , the temporal delay, and u ( t )the unit step function.
It is then possible, as shown in [ 2 2 ] ,to find an analytical formulation for the
corresponding horizontal electric field in the time domain given by
m observation point is 100 m. In Fig. 3(a), the observation point
E,, ( t )= 2( t - t ,)[Io( P ( t - t , ))
V J G
+ I l ( p ( t - t,))lexp(-p(t - tz))u(-
t tz) (10)
where I, and I1 are the modified Bessel functions of the first kind, and
P = Uq12CoErg.
*the factor 1+ ~ / u can
~ 6be~recognized as the ground surface impedance
when ug >> W E ~ E ~ ~ .
~
253
satisfied, (12) can be written in the following more general
form [27, 281
Since that the second term in (13) is identical to the formula
proposed by Cooray for the calculation of the horizontal
electric field at ground level (1 l), and since Cooray too has
proposed in [28] the use of (13), we will call equation (13) as
the Cooray-Rubinstein formula.
Again, applying the piecewise linear transformation, an
equivalent analytical formulation of (13) can be obtained in
the time domain, considering the magnetic field wave shape
as composed by a series of linear segments.
5 ) Validity Assessment of the I ) , 2), and 4 ) Simplijied
Approaches: A systematic application of the approximate
expressions for calculating the return stroke horizontal electric
fields has been performed by the authors in [29] for different
distances and ground conductivities. The calculated results
were compared with the very accurate and mathematically
more complex approximations of the Sommerfeld integrals by
Norton and Bannister.
Additional results are given in this paper in which the
Cooray-Rubinstein formula (13) is used in lieu of (12). Com-
parison of the three approaches are presented in Fig. 2, where
the horizontal electric field is calculated at different distances,
namely 200 m [Fig. 2(a)], 500 m 2(b), and 1.5 km 2(c). The
computed results are compared with those reported in [lo],
which were obtained using very accurate approximations of
Sommerfeld integrals assuming a ground conductivity of lov2
S/m and a relative ground permittivity of 10. The comparison
shows that:
a) at very close distance range ( r = 100 - 200 m), and for
ground conductivities of about S/m or higher, the
perfect conducting ground assumption can be considered
as reasonable for an observation point located at a few
meters above ground;
b) the Cooray-Rubinstein formula permits to obtain satis-
factory results for all the considered ranges. While the
perfectly conducting ground assumption and the wave-
tilt formula predict both a unipolar field (positive for
the first one and negative for the second), the Cooray-
Rubinstein approach is the only one that reproduces
satisfactorily the bipolar waveshape of the horizontal
electric field at intermediate distance ranges.
Fig. 3 shows the effect of the height of the observation
points on the accuracy of the three considered approximations.
The radial distance T from the lightning channel to the
is at ground level ( h = 0 m). For this case, the perfect
conducting ground approach predicts a field equal to zero.
It can be seen that, also for this case, the Cooray-Rubinstein
approach yields accurate approximation of the exact solution.
At 10 m above ground [Fig. 3(b)], the perfect conducting
ground approach results in an accurate computation of the
254 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, VOL. 38, NO. 3, AUGUST 1996

0 5 10 1s 20 2s 30
Time (ps)
(b)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time OLS)
(c)
Fig. 2. Companson of three simplified approaches for the calculation of the horizontal component of the electric field 6 m above ground with results
published in [lo] for a ground conductivity sg = 0.01 S/m. Fields are calculated adopting the Transmission Line model, with a channel-base current
z ( 0 , t ) = I,[exp(--at) - exp(-Dt)] with I,, = 10 kA, CY = 3 . lo4 s-lsp = l o 7 s - ' , and the return stroke velocity u = 1 1 . 10' d s , same
values as those adopted in [lo]. (a) r = 200 m; (h) T = 500 m; (c) T = 1500 m.

horizontal field for the considered distance range and ground
parameters.
111. EFFECT OF THE FINITEGROUNDCONDUCTIVITY
ON TRANSMISSION LINE PARAMETERS
A. Coupling Equations in the Frequency Domain
Field-to-transmission line coupling equations can be ex-
pressed in different but equivalent formulations [17], [30],
[3I]. The difference between these formulations, which have
been summarized in [31], lies essentially in the representation
of the source terms as a function of the exciting electromag-
netic field components [32], [33]. It is worth stating that the
exciting electromagnetic field is given by the sum of the field
radiated by the channel dipoles and the ground reflected field,
both detennined in absence of the overhead wire. The total
field is given by the exciting field plus the scattered field that
is the field produced by the line response.
In the following development, we will use the formulation
proposed by Agrawal et aZ.[17] which is the most popular in
EMC and power literature, and will make reference to the
geometry of Fig. 4. The Agrawal et al. field-to-transmission
line coupling equations extended to the present case of a wire
RACHIDI et al.: INFLUENCE OF A LOSSY GROUND ON LIGHTNING-INDUCED VOLTAGES 255

R 0 E,,Jq=-$RL ~

0 X X 4 X L x
Fig. 4. Geometry for field-to-transmissionline coupling calculations.

The total induced voltage is obtained from the following

equation

0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (ps)
30
V ( X=
) V " ( X-)
Ih E ; ( X Z, ) dZ.

The longitudinal per-unit-length impedance 2' is given by

(16)

(a) WI
z' = jwL' + z;, + z$ (17)
where ZL and Z$ are the wire and the ground impedances,
respectively, and L' is the external per-unit-length inductance
calculated for a lossless wire above a perfectly conducting
ground

where h and a are the wire's height and radius, respectively.

The transverse per-unit-length admittance Y' is given by
[341

y' r
+
(G' jwC')Y$
G' + jwC' + Y $
where C' is the per-unit-length transverse capacitance calcu-
Time @)
lated for a lossless wire above a perfectly conducting ground,
given by
2T&,
Fig. 3. Comparison of three simplified approaches for the calculation of the C' 1
horizontal component of the electric field at ground level with results published cosh-l(h/a)
in [lo] for a ground conductivity ug = 0.01 S/m. The channel-base current
and the return stroke velocity are the same as for Fig. 2(a) T = 100 m, z = 0
m; (b) T = 100 m, z = 10 m.

above an imperfectly conducting ground can be written in the G' is the per-unit-length transverse conductance, given by
frequency domain as (e.g. [34])
dV"(x)
dx
+ Z'I(X) = EZ(X,h )
and Y $ is the so-called ground admittance, given by [34]

where I ( x ) and V s ( x ) are the induced line current and

y' g rS
z$ (22)
the scattered voltage, respectively, E; ( h ,x ) is the horizontal
where 7gis the propagation constant in the ground defined as
component along the wire of the exciting electric field, and
Z' and Y' are the longitudinal and transverse per-unit-length
impedance and admittance respectively.
-
256 IEEE TRANSA(TI0NS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, VOL. 38, NO. 3, AUGUST 1996
It is known [35], [36] that for typical overhead lines (few
meters above ground, og = 10F3 - lop2 S/m,E, = 1 - 10)
the so-called ground admittance Y $ could be considered as
infinite so that (19) becomes
Y’ E (GI + j w C ’ ) .
Expressions for 2; and Z$ will be presented in the next
sections.
B. Wire Impedance Expressions
The per-unit-length internal impedance of a round wire is
defined as the ratio of the tangential electric field at the surface
of the wire to the total current flowing in the wire
Assuming an axial symmetry for the current inside the
wire, the following expression for 2; can be derived (see
for instance [37])
where 7, is the propagation constant in the wire given by
7, = Jjwpo(%J + jWETWEO)
and ow,E,, are the wire conductivity and relative permittivity,
respectively.
C. Ground Impedance Expressions
The problem of propagation along a transmission line com-
posed of a wire above an imperfectly conducting ground was
treated by Carson [38] in 1926. Later, several other authors
have dealt with the same problem (e.g. [39]-[50]). The ground
impedance can be viewed as a correction factor to the line
longitudinal impedance when the ground is not a perfect
conductor and it can be defined as
j u s h BE(x,z) dx
2’ = -02
- jwL‘
9 I
where L’ is the per-unit-length inductance of the wire calcu-
lated assuming a lossless line using (IS), and Bi(x,2 ) is the
y-component of the scattered magnetic induction.
Sunde, neglecting the vertical component of the scattered
field inside the ground, derived the following expression for
the ground impedance [401, p. 1121
where rg is defined by (23).
It is worth noting that a similar expression for the ground
impedance had been derived earlier by Carson [38] but assum-
ing a low frequency approximation (a, >> WE,&,,).
It is possible to express (29) in an equivalent form involving
the modified Bessel function of the second kind, written as
where ‘ 1 ~is a complex argument. Using (30) and after some
straightforward mathematical manipulations, one obtains the
following equivalent expression for the ground impedance
(24)
in which
A = 27, h. (32)
In 1974, King et al. [42] derived the same equation (31) by
taking an appropriate limit for an eccentric insulated antenna.
Figs. 5, 6, and 7 present the influence of ground conduc-
tivity, ground relative permittivity, and the wire height on
the magnitude and phase of the ground impedance, computed
using (31). Even though the computations are performed up
to 100 MHz, it is important to realize that for a line height
h = 10 m, the transmission line (TL) approximationis valid up
to a frequency of about 3 MHz corresponding to X = 10h; for
frequencies higher that about 30 MHz, corresponding in our
case to X = h,the validity of the TL approximation becomes
seriously questionable. For this reason, computed results for
(27) these frequencies are presented in shaded areas.
It can be seen that the ground impedance depends con-
siderably on both ground conductivity and line height above
ground. On the other hand, the influence of the ground relative
permittivity appears only for frequencies higher than some
MHz. It can also be seen that the magnitude of ground
impedance reaches an asymptotic value for high frequencies.
This value is given by
(33)
It is interesting to observe that this asymptotic value does
not depend on the ground conductivity. For a height above
ground h = 10 m, and a ground relative permittivity E, = 10,
this value is about 1.89 Q/m.
(28)
D. Approximations to Ground lmpedance Expression
1) Sunde Approximation: In 1949, Sunde proposed an ap-
proximation for the ground impedance given by [40]
(34)
2) Complex Plane Method: According to the method pre-
sented and discussed by Gary in [45], the ground is replaced
with a perfectly conducting ground plane located at a complex
depth d below the actual ground surface given by
1
(35)
d= JG’
According to this method, the following expression for the
longitudinal impedance of the line has been derived
2(h +d) (36)
2n
RACHIDI et al INFLUENCE OF A LOSSY GROUND ON LIGHTNING-INDUCEDVOLTAGES 257

Frequency (Hz)

(a)

Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)

(b) (b)

Fig. 5. Influence of ground conductivity on the ground impedance Fig. 6. Influence of ground relative permittivity on the ground impedance
( E ~= 1 0 , h = 10 m). (a) magnitude; (b) phase.
(ug = 0.01 S/m, h = 10 m). (a) magnitude; (b) phase.

Using (18), the expression for the ground impedance can presented this formula for the ground impedance [46]
be inferred from (36)

in which Hi1) and Hi1) are Hankel functions.

He also provided approximations of his formula given by
It can be seen that the approximation (37) is equivalent to
Sunde formula (34) when (T, >> WE~E,,. In other words, (37)
is the low-frequency approximation of (34).
__
3) Vance Approximations: Considering the ground as a
2’ E- l + j
27rha,S, = &/%
lossy cylindrical conductor surrounding the wire, Vance for Sg << 2h and ng >> w&,E,, (39)
258 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, VOL. 38, NO. 3, AUGUST 1996

FrrsuewY (W
@) (b)
Fig. 7. Influence of the line height on the ground impedance Fig. 8. Comparison between (31), Sunde (34), and Vance (38) ap-
(cg= 0.01 S/m,&, = 10). (a) magnitude; (b) phase. proximations for the ground impedance. (a) magnitude; (b) phase.

;' (A;gh)
(us = 0.01 S/m,Er = 10.)

2' WPO +jw-log for 6, >> h. (40) accurate results. Fig. 8 presents a comparison of the Sunde
8
~ ~

g -
Notice that (39) can also be obtained by taking the first term
of the power series expansion of (37).
The simplified formula (39) has been used in several studies
on lightning-induced overvoltages (e.g. [181, [5 11).
4 ) Validity of the Different Ground Impedance Approxima-
tions: In [52], Chen and Damrau compared the Sunde (34)
and Vance (38) approximations to the general solution (31)
and they have shown that both these approximations yield
and the Vance approximations with (31) for a wire located at
h = 10 m above a ground characterized by a conductivity of
0.01 S/m and a relative permittivity equal to 10. The computed
results confirm the conclusions of Chen and Damrau.
In Fig. 9 we show for the same case a comparison between
the Complex Plane method (37), and the Vance simplified
formula (39), taking as 'reference' expression (31). It can
be seen that (37) and (39) predict the same values for the
magnitude, accurate up to a frequency of about a few MHz.
Concerning the uhase, (39) Dredicts no variation as a function
RACHIDI et al.:INFLUENCE OF A LOSSY GROUND ON LIGHTNING-INDUCEDVOLTAGES
-^ ...."..I i......... l.l-._l
Frequency (Hz)
1Eh3 1E-b lEhS 1&06 lk07 -1
Frequency (Hr)
@)
Fig. 9. Comparison between (31), Complex Plane method (37), and Vance
simplified (39) approximation for the ground impedance. (a) magnitude; (b)
phase. (ug = 0.01 S/m,Er = 10.)
of frequency, whereas (37) yields accurate results up to about
1 MHz. It is interesting to note that, for the considered case,
the Complex Plane method approximation can be successfully
used when calculating lightning-induced voltages since the
frequency spectra associated with lightning does not have
significant components above a few MHz. However, for poor
ground conductivities, ug < lov3 Slm, the upper frequency
limit for the validity of (37) could become lower that about
1 MHz, and therefore its use in lightning-induced voltage
calculations may not be completely adequate.
In conclusion, (a) if the appropriate form of Sunde's ex-
pression (31) is not used, we recommend, in accordance with
259
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 10. Comparison between ground impedance and wire impedance
(ug = 0.01 S/m,E, = 10).
Chen and Damrau, the use of Sunde (34) expression. (b) The
Complex Plane approximation (37) could be used in lightning-
induced voltage calculations for ground conductivities not
lower than about 0.001 S/m. This approximation fails for
lower ground conductivities, or for faster transient sources (e.g.
NEMP). (c) the Vance simplified formula (39), often used in
the literature, does not predict the ground impedance phase
variation as a function of frequency.
E. Relative Importance of Diflerent Line Parameters
Fig. 10 presents a comparison between the ground and
wire impedances for a copper 10 mm radius wire located
at 10 m above a ground of 0.01 S/m conductivity and a
relative permittivity equal to 10. The results show that within
the frequency range of interest, the wire impedance can be
neglected as regard to the ground impedance. Note that for
poorer conductivities the ratio IZ$/ZLI will become even
more important.
We have also shown in Fig. 11 the ratios IZ$/jwL'I and
lZL/jwL'l. It can be seen that while IZ$I represents a
nonnegligible fraction of wL' over a wide range of frequency,
again, for typical overhead power and telecommunication
lines, 2; can be neglected.
In the above figures, we have neglected any variation of
ground conductivity and relative permittivity as a function of
frequency, even though there is experimental evidence that
these two parameters are frequency-dependent [53].However,
studies on the variation of ground parameters as a function
of frequency [53], [54] show that a) the ground conductivity
variation becomes very appreciable only for frequencies higher
than about 10 MHz, and b) significant variation of the ground
relative permittivity as a function of frequency occurs up to a
few MHz, for which the ground impedance is not appreciably
affected by the value of the ground relative permittivity.
260 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, VOL. 38,’NO. 3, AUGUST 1996
Fig. 11. Comparison between ground impedance, wire impedance, and
j w L ’ ( o , = 0.01 S/m,&, = 10).
LINE
IV. FIELD-TO-TRANSMISSION
COUPLINGEQUATIONSIN THE TNE DOMAIN
Most of the authors dealing with lightning-induced voltage
calculations use a direct time-domain solution of the coupling
equations. A time-domain solution permits to deal in a straight-
forward way nonlinear phenomena such as those produced by
protective devices (e.g. surge arresters) located along the line.
The field-to-transmission line coupling equations presented
in the frequency-domain in Section III-A can be converted
into time-domain. The frequency-dependent parameters, such
as wire and ground impedances, can be represented using a
convolution integral, as discussed, for instance, in [55]. The
coupling equations according to Agrawal et al. formulation in
time-domain read
aqx;r )
dr = Ez(x,h, t)
dr
di(x,t )
+G’v“(x,t)+ C
avyx t)
’ d =0
(42)
dX dt
in which (’(t)is the inverse Fourier transform of
Z$+Z:, 2’
-
N 9
. voltages and currents induced by a nearby lightning on an
jw jw
It is worth noting that, due to the presence of the convolution
integral, a considerable time and computer memory storage
requirements could be needed to carry out a direct time domain
solution. To cope with this problem, several authors have
used constant values for impedances (calculated at a fixed
frequency) in order to avoid the convolution integral (e.g.
[18], [51]). It has been shown that in some circumstances,
this simplification could be a reasonable approximation of
the rigorous approach involving the convolution integral [56],
1281. although the determination of the eauivalent freauencv
is not always straightforward and, further, cannot be related to
physical quantities in a straightforward manner [56].
Another difficulty related to a time-domain solution is
that, in general, the function c’(t) cannot be evaluated in
closed form. However, one can find analytical inverse Fourier
transforms for some approximate forms of ground impedance.
Indeed, Tesche [55] has used the simplified approximation of
Vance (39) which corresponds to the following time-domain
function {’(t)
(43)
However, as we have seen in Section 111, the Vance simplified
formula (39) does not reproduce the variation of the ground
impedance phase as a function of frequency.
Timotin [57], in his paper published in the late ~ O ’ S ,derived
an analytical inverse Fourier transform for Z $ / j w , where Z$ is
determined using Carson’s expression [(29) for og >> W E , E , ~ ]
---I
co e-2hx
2; - Po
jw 7r Jx2+jwpoog+x
dx. (44)
The inverse Fourier transform of (44), the so-called ground
transient resistance, is given by [57],[58]
+ -41 exp(rg/t)erfc (fi);] - (45)
in which rg = h2poog and erfc is the complementary error
function defined as
It is worth noting that the Timotin expression gives very
similar results as those obtained using the Complex Plane
method discussed in Section 111. Indeed, both are based on the
same “low-frequency’’ approximation o >> W E , E , ~ . Therefore,
the applicability of the Timotin expression for the calcula-
tion of lightning-induced voltages is legitimate for ground
conductivities not lower than about 0.001 S/m.
v. DISCUSSION
ON THE INFLUENCE OF A LOSSY
GROUND
ON LIGHTNING-INDUCED
VOLTAGES
Based on the theory presented here, we have developed
a finite difference time-domain computer code to calculate
overhead wire above a lossy ground. The Cooray-Rubinstein
formula (13) has been used to compute the horizontal electric
field and the Timotin expression (45) was adopted for the tran-
sient ground resistance. A numerical example that illustrates
the theory presented in this paper is shown in Fig. 12. We have
considered a 1 km long 10 m high single-wire overhead line. In
order to clearly illustrate the influence of ground conductivity,
a particularly low value equal to 0.001 S/m has been chosen.
The ground relative permittivity is assumed to be equal to 10.
The line is terminated at both ends on resistances of about 500
R (which corremonds to the characteristic imDedance of the
RACHIDI et al. : INFLSJENCE OF A LOSSY GROUND ON LIGHTNING-INDUCEDVOLTAGES
i I
-2s I I
0 2 4 6 8 0
Time @s)
Fig. 12. Calculated voltages on a 1-km matched overhead line induced by
a typical subsequent return stroke. Solid line: ug = 0.001 S/m,&, = 10,
dotted line: perfectly conducting ground.
line when considered as lossless). The lightning strike location
is equidistant from the line terminations and at 50 m from
the line center. The lightning return stroke field is calculated
using the Modified Transmission Line (MTL) model [59], [60],
assuming a channel-base current typical of subsequent return
strokes (12 kA peak amplitude, 40 kA/ps maximum time-
derivative) as used in [20] and a return stroke velocity of
1.3 x 10’ m/s.
The induced voltage calculated at the line end is presented
in Fig. 12. In the same figure, we have also presented the
results obtained for the same configuration but considering
the ground as a perfect conductor. It can be seen that the
ground conductivity significantly affects the induced voltages
in magnitude, shape, and polarity.
As shown earlier, the ground conductivity affects the in-
duced voltages via two mechanisms. In order to shed light
on the contribution of each of these, we have computed the
induced voltages on the above-described line for three cases:
1) When the ground conductivity is taken into account in
both field calculation and surge propagation along the
line (solid line in Fig. 13). The ground parameters are
og = 0.001 S/m and E , = 10;
2) When the effect of the finite ground conductivity is
taken into account only on the surge propagation along
the line (curve “Ideal Field,” Fig. 13). For this case,
both components of the exciting electric field have been
calculated assuming a perfect conducting ground;
3) When the effect of the finite ground conductivity is taken
into account only when calculating the exciting electric
field, neglecting the ground impedance (curve “Ideal
Line,” Fig. 13).
It can be seen that for the considered case, the surge
propagation along the line is not appreciably affected by the
ground finite conductivity and, therefore, it can be neglected in
26 1
2 4 6
Time (p)
Fig. 13. Calculated voltages on a 1 km matched overhead line induced by
a typical subsequent return stroke (ug = 0.001 S/m,c, = 10). Dashed
line (“Ideal Line”): induced voltage calculated taking into account the ground
finite conductivity only when calculating the exciting electric field, neglecting
the ground impedance. Dotted line (“Ideal Field”): results obtained when the
effect of the finite ground conductivity is taken into account only on the surge
propagation along the line.
the computation process. This is an interesting result since the
effect of ground impedance in a direct time domain solution
is taken into account through a convolution integral. Thus, ne-
glecting this effect, when it is possible, results in an important
reduction of computer time and storage requirements.
The influence of the ground on the surge propagation
depends obviously on the line length. In Fig. 14, we show
the variation of a-1 as a function of frequency, where Q
is the line attenuation constant defined as a: = Re{y} =
R e { d m } , Z ’ and Y’ being the per-unit length longi-
tudinal impedance and transverse admittance of the line,
respectively. This figure shows that the inverse attenuation
constant for ground conductivities of 0.01 S/m and 0.001 S/m
is respectively equal to about 4.2 km and 1.5 km at about 1
MHz. This means that, for lines whose lengths are inferior to
these values, the effect of the lossy ground on surge attenuation
along the line is not significant and, therefore, it is sufficient
to take into account the presence of a lossy ground only in the
calculation of the incident electromagnetic field.
In Fig. 15 we present similar results as in Fig. 13, but
considering a 5 km long line. It can be seen that, in agreement
with Fig. 14, the surge attenuation along the line is no longer
negligible and the induced voltages are appreciably affected
by the ground losses through both radiated field and surge
propagation along the line.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
A theoretical analysis on the influence of a lossy ground on
lightning-induced voltages on an overhead wire is presented.
The theory and equations are presented both in frequency and
time domains.
262 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, VOL. 38, NO. 3, AUGUST 1996

TABLE I
SUMMARY OF THE RECOMMENDED METHODSFOR THE
CALCULATION OF LIGHTNING-INDUCED
VOLTAGES
ON AN OVERHEAO WIREABOVE A LOSSYGROUND

HorimntalEfield I Coomy-Rubinsteinformula
Equation (13)

for o8 20.001Slm”
I
I I

* forli&dngsnckcanor f ” t h a n e few Lilomuwsaway from thc line.

** f a p x dlower ~OMll~S/m, no eloscd f- expressioncan be used and ooe has to
~ than
twaseW5hU~ylhegraundlmpedaneeexpresslo
Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 14. Variation of the inverse attenuation constant as a function of calculated with reasonable approximation assuming the
frequency for two values of ground conductivity (E, = 10). ground as a perfect conductor.
2 ) The Cooray-Rubinstein simplified formula can be used
to calculate in an accurate way the horizontal electric
field. While the perfectly conducting ground assumption
and the wave-tilt formula predict both a unipolar field
(positive for the first one and negative for the second),
the Cooray-Rubinstein approach is the only one that
reproduces satisfactorily the bipolar waveshape of the
horizontal electric field at intermediate distance ranges,
as predicted by the rigorous theory.
Regarding point b), the presence of an imperfectly conduct-
ing ground is included in the coupling equations by means
of two additional terms: the longitudinal ground impedance
and the transverse ground admittance. We have presented a
comparison between several approximations of the ground
impedance and we have shown that:
1) if the appropriate form of ground impedance expression
(31) is not used, we recommend the use of Sunde (34)
-60 I
j
3

i I

j
I
I

j
I
1

]
t
I or Vance (38), in agreement with conclusions reported
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Tme ols)
Fig. 15. Calculated voltages on a 5-km matched overhead line induced by
a typical subsequent retum stroke. (ug = 0 001 S/m,ET = 10). Dashed
line (“Ideal Line”): induced voltage calculated,taking into account the ground
finite conductivity only when calculating the exciting electric field, neglecting
the ground impedance Dotted line (“Ideal Field”): results obtained when the
effect of the finite ground conductivity is taken into account only on the surge
propagation along the line.
In the determination of lightning-induced voltages, the
ground effect appears at two levels: a) in the calculation of
the exciting electromagnetic fields and, b) in the calculation
of line parameters. Regarding point a), the results and the
discussion presented in the paper allow us to draw the
following conclusions:
1) At distances from the lightning channel not exceeding
about one kilometer, the vertical component of the
electric field and the azimuthal magnetic field can be
by Chen and Damrau;
2) the Complex Plane approximation could be used in
lightning-induced voltage calculations for ground con-
ductivities not lower than about 0.001 S/m. This ap-
proximation fails for lower ground conductivities, or for
faster transient sources (e.g., NEMP);
3) the Vance simplified formula (39), often used in the
literature, does not predict the ground impedance phase
variation as a function of frequency;
4) for typical overhead power and telecommunication lines
and within the frequency range of interest, the wire
impedance can be neglected as regard to the ground
impedance.
Concerning the ground admittance, this parameter can gen-
erally be neglected for typical overhead lines, due to its small
contribution to the overall transverse admittance of the line.
In Table I we present the summary of the approximate
methods that we recommend to use for the determination of
RACHIDI et al.: INFLUENCE OF A LOSSY GROUND ON LIGHTNING-INDUCED VOLTAGES
various field components and line parameters when calculating
lightning-induced voltages.
Calculated voltages induced by a typical subsequent retum
stroke presented in Section V have shown that for lines whose
length does not exceed a certain ‘critical’ value (typically 2
km), the surge propagation along the line is not appreciably
affected by the ground finite conductivity which, therefore, can
be neglected in the computation process.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to thank V. Cooray, M. Rubinstein, and
F.M. Tesche for valuable discussions, and S . Guerrieri and D.
Orzan for their comments on the manuscript.
REFERENCES
[l] A. Sommerfeld, “Uber die ausbreitung der Wellen in’ der drahtlosen
Telegraphie,” Ann. Phys., vol. 28, p. 665, 1909.
[2] A. Banos, “Dipole radiation in the presence of a conducting half-space,”
Pergamon Press, 1966.
[3] C. Leteinturier, “Champ BlectromagnBtique Bmis par une dBcharge
orageuse. Modele thkorique integrant les variations de la rdsistivitk du
sol,” Centre National #Etude de TBICcommunications, Note technique
NTLAA/RLM/66, Nov. 1980.
[4] W. C. Kuo and K. K. Mei, “Numerical approximations of the Som-
merfeld integral for fast convergence,” Radio Sci., vol. 13, no 3, pp.
407-415, May-June 1978.
[5] P. Parhami, Y. Rahmat-Samii, R. Mittra, “An efficient approach for
evaluating Sommerfeld integrals encounteredin the problem of a current
element radiating over lossy ground,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat.,
vol. AP-28, pp. 100-104, Jan. 1980.
[6] J. R. Mosig, “Integral equation technique,” in Numerical Techniquesfor
Microwave and Millimeter Wave Passive Structures. New York Wiley
Interscience, T. Itoh, Ed., pp. 132-213, 1989.
[7] A. Norton, “The propagation of radio waves over the surface of the
earth and in the upper atmosphere,”in Proc. Inst. Radio Eng., vol. 25,
no 9, Sept. 1937, pp. 1203-1236.
[8] T. K. Sarkar, “Analysis of arbitrarily oriented thin wire antenna arrays
over imperfect ground planes,” in Proc. IEEE, Dec. 1975, pp. 4-13.
[9] P. R. Bannister, “New formulas that extend Norton’s far field elementary
dipole equations to the quasinear field range,” NUSC, technical report
59007, 1984.
[lo] A. Zeddam and P. Degauque, “Current and voltage induced on telecom-
munications cable by a lightning return stroke,” in Lightning EZectro-
magnetics. R. L. Gardner, Ed., New York Hemisphere, pp. 377400,
1990.
[ I l l B. Djebari, J. Hamelin, C. Leteinturier, and J. Fontaine, “Comparison
between experimentalmeasurements of the electromagneticfield emitted
by lightning and different theoretical models. Influence of the upward
velocity of the return stroke,” in Proc. 4th Int. Symp. Tech. Exhib.
Electromag. Compat., Zurich, 1981.
[I21 M. Rubinstein, “Voltages induced on a test power line from artificially
initiated lightning: theory and experiment,” Ph. D. thesis dissertation,
University of Florida, Gainesville, 1991.
[I31 M. A. Uman, D. K. McLain, and E. P. Krider, “The electromagnetic
radiation from a finite antenna,” Amer. J. Phys., vol. 43, pp. 33-38,
1975.
[14] C. A. Nucci, G. Diendorfer, M. A. Uman, F. Rachidi, M. Ianoz, and
C. Mazzetti, “Lightning retum stroke current models with specified
channel-base current: a review and comparison,” J. Geophys. Res., vol.
95, pp. 20395-20408, Nov. 1990.
[15] M. A. Uman, C. E. Swanberg, J. A. Tiller, Y. T. Lin, and E. P. Krider,
“Effects of 200 km propagation on lightning retum stroke electric fields,”
Radio Sci., vol. 11, pp. 985-990, 1976.
[I61 V. Cooray, “Effects of propagation on the retum stroke radiation fields,”
Radio Sci., vol. 22, no 5, pp. 757-768, Sept.-Oct. 1987.
[17] A. K. Agrawal, H. J. Price, and S. H. Gurbaxani, “Transient response
of multiconductor transmission lines excited by a nonuniform electro-
magnetic field,” IEEE Trans. Electromag. Compat., vol. EMC-22, pp.
119-129, 1980.
[18] M. J. Master and M. A. Uman, “Lightning induced voltages on power
lines: Theory,” IEEE Trans. Power Apparatus Syst., vol. PAS-103, pp.
2502-2518, Sept. 1984.
263
[19] G. Diendorfer, “Induced voltage on an overhead line due to nearby
lightning,” IEEE Trans. Electromag. Compat., vol. 32, pp. 292-299,
Nov. 1990.
[20] C. A. Nucci, F. Rachidi, M. Ianoz, and C. Mazzetti, “Lightning-induced
voltages on overhead power lines,” IEEE Trans. Elecfromag. -~ComDat.,
vol. 35, Feb. 1993.
~- J. Zenneck, Wireless TelearaDhv. New York McGraw Hill, English
1211 - . I -
translation by A. E. Seelig, 1915.
[22] E. M. Thomson, P. J. Medelius, M. Rubinstein, M. A. Uman, J.
Johnson, and J. W. Stone, “Horizontal electric fields from lightning
return strokes,” J. Geophys. Res., vol. 93, pp. 2429-2441, 1988.
[23] H. Koga, T. Motomitsu, and M. Taguchi, “Lightning surge waves
induced on overhead lines,” Trans. ZECE Japan, vol. E 62, no 4, Apr.
1979.
[24] F. de la Rosa, R. Valdivia, H. Perez, and J. Loza, “Discussion about the
inducing effects of lightning in an experimental power distribution line
in Mexico,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 3, July 1988.
[25] M. Ianoz, C. Mazzetti, C. A. Nucci, and F. Rachidi, “Tension induite par
une dcharge de foudre sw une ligne arienne. Modelization et validation
expkrimentale,” CoZloque Inr. Compat. Electromag. Evian, Sept. 1989.
[26] V. Cooray, “Horizontal fields generated by retum strokes,” Radio Sci.,
vol. 27, pp. 529-537, July-Aug. 1992.
[27] M. Rubinstein, “An approximate formula for the calculation of the
I horizontal electric field from lightning at close, intermediate and long
ranges,” IEEE Trans. Electromag. Compat., vol. 38, 1996.
[28] V. Cooray, “Lightning-inducedovervoltages in power lines. Validity of
various approximations made in overvoltage calculations,” in 22nd Int.
Cons Lightning Protect., Budapest, Hungary, Sept. 19-23, 1994.
[29] F. Rachidi, M. Ianoz, C. A. Nucci, and C. Mazzetti, “Calculationmeth-
ods of the horizontal component of lightning retum stroke electric fields,”
in Int. Wroclaw Symp. Electromag. Compat., Wroclaw, Sept. 1992.
[30] C. D. Taylor, R. S. Sattenvhite, and W. Jr. Harrison, ‘The response
of a terminated two-wire transmission line excited by a nonuniform
electromagnetic field,” IEEE Trans. Antenna Propagat., vol. AP- 13, pp.
987-989, 1965.
[3 I] F. Rachidi, “Formulation of the field-to-transmission line coupling equa-
tions in terms of magnetic excitation field,” IEEE Trans. Electromag.
Compat., vol. 35, Aug. 1993.
[32] C. A. Nucci, F. Rachidi, M. Ianoz, and C. Mazzetti, “Comparison of two
coupling models for lightning-inducedovervoltage calculations,” IEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 10, pp. 33C339, Jan. 1995.
[33] C. A. Nucci and F. Rachidi, “On the contribution of the electromagnetic
field components in field-to-transmission line interaction,”IEEE Trans.
Elecfromag. Compaf., vol. 37, pp. 505-508, Nov. 1995.
[34] F. M. Tesche, “Comparison of the transmission line and scattering
models for computing the HEMP response of Overhead cables,” IEEE
Trans. Electromag. Compat., vol. 34, May 1992.
[35] J. M. Fontaine, A. Umbert, B. Djebari, and J. Hamelin, “Ground effects
in the response of a single wire transmission line illuminated by an
EMP,” in Proc. 4th Int. Symp. Tech. Exhibit. Electromag. Compat.,
Ziirich, 1981. .
[36] M. Ianoz, C. A. Nucci, and F. M. Tesche, “Transmission line theory for
field-to-transmission line coupling
- - calculations,”Electromag, vol. 8, no
2-4, pp. 171-211, 1988.
. . S . Ramo, J. R. Whinnew, and T. Van Duzer, Fields and Waves in
1371
Communication Electroni& New York Wiley, 2nd Edition, 1984.
[38] J. R. Carson, “Wave propagation in overhead wires with ground return,”
Bell Syst. Tech. J., vol. 5, pp. 539-554, 1926.
[39] F. Pollaczek, “On the field produced by an infinitely long wire carrying
alternating current,” Elektrische NachfrichfenTechnik, (in German), vol.
111, 1926, no. 9, pp. 339-359, french translation by J. B. Pomey, Revue
Gnrale de 1’8lectricit6, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 851-867, 1931.
[40] E. D. Sunde, Earth Conduction Effects in Transmission Systems. New
York: Dover, 1968.
[41] J. R. Wait, “Theory of wave propagation along a thin wire parallel to
an interface,” Radio Sci., vol. 7, pp. 675-679, June 1972.
[42] R. W. P. King, T. T. Wu, and L. C. Shen, “The horizontal wire antenna
over a conducting or dielectric half space: Current and admittance,”
Radio Sci., vol. 9, pp. 701-709, July 1974.
[43] M. C. Perz and M. R. Raghuveer, “Generalized derivation of fields,
and impedance correction factors of lossy transmission lines. Part 11.
Lossy conductors above lossy ground,” IEEE Trans. PAS, vol. 93, pp.
1832-1 841, 1974.
[44] D. C. Chang and R. G. Olsen, “Excitation of an infinite antenna above
a dissipative earth,” Radio Sci., vol. 10, pp. 823-831, Aug., Sept. 1975.
[45] C. Gary, “Approche complte de la propagation multifilaire en haute
frkquence par I’utilization des matrices complexes, EDF Bulletin de la
direction des &tudes er recherches, SCrie B, no. 314, pp. 5-20, 1976.
264 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY, VOL 38, NO 3, AUGUST 1996
[46] E. F. Vance, Coupling to Shielded Cables. New York: Wiley Inter-
science, 1978.
[47] L. M. Wedepohl and A. E. Efthymiadis, “Wave propagation in transmis-
sion lines over lossy ground A new, complete field solution,” in Proc.
ZEE, vol. 125, June 1978, pp. 510.
[48] R. G. Olsen and T. A. Pankaskie, “On the exact, Carson and image
theories for wires at or above the earth’s interface,” ZEEE Trans. PAS,
vol. 102, pp. 769-778, Apr. 1983.
[491 K. C. Chen, “Time harmonic solutions for a long horizontal wire over
the ground with grazing incidence,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat.,
V O ~ .AP-33, Mar. 1985.
[50] M. D’Amore and M. S. Sarto, “A new formulation of lossy ground return
parameters for transient analysis of multiconductor dissipative lines,’’
presented at the 1996 ZEEE-PES Winter Meeting, Baltimore, MD, Jan.
21-25, 1996.
[51] M. Rubinstein, A. Y. Tzeng, M. A. Uman, P. J. Medelius, and E.
M. Thomson, “Lightning-inducedvoltages on an overhead wire,” ZEEE
Trans. Electromag. Compat., vol. 31, Nov. 1989.
[S2] K. C. Chen and K. M. Damrau, “Accuracy of approximate transmission
line formulas for overhead wires,” IEEE Trans. Electromag. Compat.,
V O ~31,. pp. 396-397, 1989.
[531 J. H. Scott, “Electrical and magnetic properties of rock and soil,” Note
18 in AFWL EMP 2-1, Electromagnetic Pulse Theoretical Notes. Apr.
1971.
[S4] C. L. Longmire and J. L. Gilbert, “Theory of EMP coupling in the
source region,” DNA Report, Contract DNA 001-79-C-0186, 1980.
[5S] F. M. Tesche, “On the inclusion of loss in time-domain solutions of elec-
tromagnetic interaction problems,”,IEEE Trans. Electromag. Compat.,
vol. 32, pp. 1 4 , Feb. 1990.
[56] F. Rachidi, M. Ianoz, and C. A. Nucci, “On the inclusion of loss in
time-domain solutions of field-to-transmission line coupling,” Nuclear
Electromag. Meet., 21-24 May 1990, Albuquerque, NM.
[57] A. Timotin, “Longitudinal transient parameters of a unifilar line with
ground return,” Rev. Roum. Sc. Tech., Electrotech. Energie, vol. 12, no.
4, pp. 523-535, Bucarest, 1967.
[58] E. S . M. Mok and G.I. Costache, “Skin-effectconsiderationson transient
response of a transmission line excited by an electromagnetic pulse,”
IEEE Trans. Electromag. Compat., vol. 34, pp. 320-329, Aug. 1992.
[59] C. A. Nucci, C. Mazzetti, F. Rachidi, and M. Ianoz, “On lightning
retum stroke models for LEMP calculations,”in19th lnt. Con$ Lightning
Protec., Graz, Apr. 1988.
[60] C. A. Nucci and F. Rachidi, “Experimental validation of a modification
to the Transmission Line model for LEMP calculation,” in 8th Symp.
Tech. Exhibit. Electromag. Compat., Zurich, Mar. 1989.
Farhad Rachidi (M93) was born in Geneva,
Switzerland,in 1962. He received the M.S. degree in
electrical engineering and the Ph.D. degree from the
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, in
1986 and 1991, respectively.
He is currently working at the Power Systems
Laboratory of the same institute. His research
interests concern lightning and EMP interactions
with transmission lines. He has authored or co-
authored more than 40 scientific papers published
in reviewed journals and presented at international
conferences.
He is a member of the Task Force 33.01.01 “Lightning-induced
overvoltages” of the CIGRE Workmg Group 33.01 “Lightnmg,” and of
the Joint Task Force CIRED/CIGRE “Protection of distnbution networks
against lightning”
Carlo Albert0 Nucci (M’91) was born in Bologna,
Italy, in 1956. He received the degree in electncal
engineenng in 1981 from the University of Bologna.
In 1982, he joined the same university as Re-
searcher in the Power Electrical Engineenng Insti-
tute, where he i s now Associate Professor of Power
Systems. His research interests concem lightning
and nuclear EMP impact on power lines, power sys-
tem simulation, and the study of power components
including medium voltage capacitors and traction
batteries. He is the author or co-author of about
70 scientific papers presented at international conferences and published in
reviewed joumals.
He is the responsible member of the Task Force 33.01.01 “Lightning-
induced overvoltages” of the CIGRE Workmg Group 33.01 “Lightning,” and
member of the Joint Task Force CIREDKIGRE on “Protection of dlstnbution
networks against lightning.”
Michel Ianoz (SM’85SF96) was born in 1936. He received the B.S. degree
in electrical engineenng in 1958 from the Bucharest Polytechnic Institute,
Rumania, and the Ph.D. degree in 1968 from the Moscow University.
He has worked on magnew field calculations for p m c l e accelerators and
focusing devices in different Nuclear Research Centers, among them the
European Center for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva In 1975 he joined
the Power Systems Laboratory of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
in Lausanne, where he is presently teaching electromagnetic compahbrhty as
a Professor of the Electrical Engineenng Department. His research activities
concem electromagnetic fields computation, transient phenomena, lightning
and EMP effects on power and telecommunication networks. He is co-author
of a book on high voltage engineering, editor of a book on electromagnetic
compatibility, and author or co-author of about 100 scientific papers.
Prof. Ianoz is the President of the Swiss Committee of the URSI, member
of the Study Committee 36 “EMC” of CIGRE and of the WG1 of the
TC77 (EMC) of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). He
is also an Associate Editor of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTROMAGNETIC
COMPATIBLm.
Carlo Mazzetti (M’90) was born in Rome, Italy
in 1943. He received the Dr Ing. degree in electri-
cal engineering from the University of Rome “La
Sapienza,” Italy, in July 1967.
In October 1967 he joined the University of
Rome first as a Scientist and then as Assistant
Professor of Advanced Electrical Engineering. In
1974 he became Associate Professor on high voltage
engineenng and is currently Full Professor in the
same field. From 1986 to 1989 he was director of the
Electrical Engineenng Department of the University
of Rome “La Sapienza,” and in 1989 became Director of the HV group of the
Italian National Research Council. His main areas of interests are HV transient
analysis and measurements, with particular reference to lightning effects and
diamostic tests on electncal insulation. His activities include desien and test
exGnence on fluid insulations and studles on lightning electromagnkhcfields.
He is author and co-author of more than 80 scienhfic papers.
Prof. Mazzetti is a member of the Italian Electrotechnical Committee
(CEU81) and of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC/81) on
Lightning Protechon.