Impact of Lightning Strikes on Substation
Grounding Systems
Sudarshan Dahal Ralph Martin
Development Engineer Senior Electrical Design Engineer
Powerlink Queensland Powerlink Queensland
33HaroldStreet, Virginia, QLD 4014 33 Harold Street, Virginia QLD 4014
sdahal@powerlink.com.au rmartin@powerlink.com.au
Abstract—Extreme weather events in power system could lead to
damages resulting into huge financial losses and serious safety
issues. One such event is lightning strikes in which high amount
of current could flow through lines and substations. The
earthing system should be able to discharge such a high amount
of current safely to the ground. This paper investigates impacts
of frequency of lightning voltage on earth potential rise of a
substation. The modelling and simulation of earth and
energization parameters are implemented using the current
distribution, electromagnetic fields, grounding, and soil
structure analysis (CDEGS) tool. The results show that low
frequency lightning strikes and high frequency lightning strikes
result into different voltage gradients on a substation grounding
system. As a result, grounding system designed for a particular
frequency strikes may not provide adequate safety against
strikes at other frequencies. Safety risks can vary with different
frequencies of lightning strikes.
Index Terms—earthing, energization, lightning, frequency, step
touch potential.
I. INTRODUCTION
Outdoor electrical substations are is vulnerable to extreme
weather events due to their exposed location and optimally
designed structures. However, utilities have stringent
obligations to reliability of supply. The formation of
competitive markets and integration of new technologies [1]
have added further pressure on utilities to maintain the supply
quality and reliability. Power utilities prepare proactive
approaches to prevent severe damages to their assets should
the extreme weather events occur in the future. Utilities also
review and update the network planning and design
approaches in line with continually changing reliability
requirements. Similarly, they are always supposed to have
preventive and restorative maintenance plans to ensure
optimal operation of their asset.
Weather events such as lightning strikes could generate
dangerously high voltage on transmission lines and
substations. Utilities’ design criteria generally take into
Sumit Paudyal
Assistant Professor
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI, 49931
Email: sumitp@mtu.edu
account lightning strikes and provide effective mechanisms to
direct lightning strikes safely into the ground [2]. For
example there are shielding wires that protect the network
asset from lightning damage. Similarly earth mats are
provided at substations and transmission towers. However,
the network configuration keeps changing due to changes in
connected equipment such as new VAR compensation
devices, generators, inverters, and battery banks [3]. The
cumulative effect of changing configuration could lead to a
change in fault levels. As a result, a designed earthing grid
could become incapable of handling the new fault level of the
network.
When lightning strikes hit a transmission line, surge of
potential is diverted to the ground by the earth wires and
tower structures [2]. In extreme cases, large voltage
difference could build up across the cross arm and conductor
that is sufficient to flashover the insulator string. Similarly,
high footing resistance of towers could reflect the impulse
wave that could be sufficient to back flashover the insulator
string. Insulator flashover depends on its dielectric strength,
which in turn depends on the frequency of impulse [4].
Therefore, dielectric strength of insulators should be
evaluated against various frequencies of impulse strikes.
During a lightning strike, a large part of the impulse current
is disposed to earth which results in earth potential rise (EPR)
across the substation [5]-[7]. The EPR at the strike point is
higher than any distance point resulting in a voltage gradient
across substation earth grids. Such voltage gradients could
damage and interfere with electronic equipment [8] [9].
Similarly, the voltage gradient could pose serious safety risks
to personnel in terms of dangerous step and touch potentials
[10]-[13].
Modern substations accommodate a large amount of
electronic equipments which share a common earth with the
high voltage system [8] [9]. The electronic equipment work
under various frequencies and therefore it is imperative to
assess the grounding safety of equipment under various
frequencies of impulse. There are a number of literature
presenting the effects of lightning strikes on ground potential
rise and surface potential gradients [5]-[7]. However, there is
little information available on the impact of impulse
frequency on the voltage gradient of the earth grid. This paper
presents investigation results on the impact of various
frequencies of energization voltage on the voltage profile of
the substation grounding system. The main contributions of
the paper are as follows.
a) The paper demonstrates how different frequencies of
lightning strikes can create different voltage gradient in
substation grounding system.
b) The paper also presents the modelling of substation
grounding sysem and lightning strikes suitable for simulation
and analysis.
c) A summary of current industry standards for
earthing system design and analysis is presented.
The organization of this paper is as follows. Section II
presents the design philosophy used in earthing system
designs. Section III presents the earthing design criteria based
on allowable body currents. Section IV presents modelling
and simulation of lightning strikes as well as earthing systems
using current distribution, electromagnetic fields, grounding,
and soil structure analysis (CDEGS) tool. This section also
presents the results of investigation. The conclusions of the
study are presented in section V.
II. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
Electrical safety limits are derived from the body current
levels that cause fibrillation of the human heart [7]-[10]. The
allowable body current limit can be assessed by setting safety
criteria defined by the allowable step and touch potentials.
The safety criteria can be set by probabilistic [7] [8] and
deterministic methods [9] [10].
A. Probabilistic Design
This methodology requires determination of the probability of
fatality, which is the product of probability of coincidence
and probability of heart fibrillation as (1).
Pfatality = Pconc × Pfib (1)
Probability of coincidence is the probability that a person
will be present and in contact with an item at the same time
that the item is affected by a fault. The probability of
coincidence per year can be calculated as (2).
λH × λE × ( LH + LE )
Pconc = (2)
365 × 24 × 60 × 60
where
λH : Hazard rate factor (average number of risk events per
year)
λE : Exposure rate factor (average number of exposures per
year)
LE : Average exposure duration (in seconds)
LH : Average fault duration (in seconds)
Similarly, the probability of fibrillation is the probability
that the heart will enter ventricular fibrillation due to contact
with an external voltage. The heart fibrillation due to applied
voltage depends on various conditions such as weather, soil
resistivity, soil thickness, clothing, footwear, etc. The
fibrillation probability can be extracted from the fibrillation
probability curves. An example of fibrillation probability
curves is shown in Fig. 1.
10000
Applied Voltage (V)
1000
100
10
0.1 1 10
Time (s)
Fig. 1: Fibrillation probability curves for prospective touch, no footwear, wet
and 50 Ω-m soil.
Safety criteria are then selected for the applied voltage at the
hazard point. If the probability of fatality falls below 10-6 per
year, this is taken as negligible risk condition.
B. Deterministic Designs
In this approach, there is no probability of coincidence or
fibrillation of the heart assigned. Deterministic methods for
establishing safety criteria assume that for any fault event
there is a 100% probability of coincidence and approaching
zero probability of heart fibrillation occurring. Safety criteria
are generally calculated using Dalziel’s simplified equation
neglecting the foot contact resistance and assuming a constant
body impedance of 1000 Ohm. This method is generally used
to design a safe earth system within a substation. The area
within a substation poses higher risks due to higher
occupancy of workers under varying circumstances.
C. Design Standards
The major standards used in Australia for the design of
earthing systems are
1) ENA EG-0, Power System Earthing Guide, which is
based on probabilistic approach of earth systems
design [11].
 2) ENA EG-1, Substation Earthing Guide, which is 0.116 
E step 50 = (1000 + 6C s .ρ s )
t s 
based on deterministic approach of earth systems
design [13]. (4)

3) IEEE Guide for Safety in AC substation Grounding 0.157 
E step 70 = (1000 + 6C s .ρ s )
ANSI/IEEE Std80 -2000 which is also based on t s 
deterministic approach of earth system design [12].
where
In this paper, the analyses are based on IEEE Std80 – 2000, E step is the step voltage in V
which is based on deterministic design philosophy as
discussed in Section IIB.
Etouch is the touch voltage in V
III. DESIGN CRITERIA Cs is surface layer derating factor taking into account of
the layer of surface material above earth
A. Step and Touch Potentials
ρs is the surface material resistivity Ω-m
One of the ways to assess the earth safety at a substation is
through the evaluation of step and touch potentials. ts the duration of shock current in seconds
The illustration of these potentials are shown in Fig. 2.
The protective surface layer material such as gravel can
decrease step and touch voltages and enhance safety. If no
protective surface layer is used, Cs =1 and ρ s = ρ , where
1 kΩ ρ is the resistivity of the earth beneath the surface material
in Ω-m.
B. Safe body current
The allowable body current through a human body can be
Touch determined using Dalziel’s equation. Dalziel’s research was
based on individual body weights of 50kg and 70kg. Thus,
the design should be based on these weights. According to
Dalziel’s study, the formula for allowable body current for
50kg and 70kg persons are given by equations (5) and (6)
[12].
1 kΩ

0.116
I B 50 = (5)
ts
Step

Fig. 2: Definition of step and touch voltages. 0.157

I B 70 = (6)
ts
Step potential is the surface potential difference between the
two feet of a person that are assumed to be 1m apart. Touch where
potential is the potential difference between the hands and I B 50 is the allowable body current (A) for 50kg person
feet of a person when they are standing 1m away from
earthed structure. I B 70 is the allowable body current (A) for 70kg person
The safety characteristics of a substation earthing system
ts is shock duration in seconds.
depend on the step and touch potentials being less than or
equal to allowable levels. Allowable step and touch potentials For ts = 1s, the allowable body currents for 50kg and 70kg
are calculated using the IEEE Std 80 equations. The persons are 116mA and 157mA respectively.
allowable touch and step voltages for 50kg and 70kg persons
are calculated as (3) and (4) respectively [12]. IV. MODELLING AND SIMULATION
This section demonstrates the impact of lightning strikes in a
0.116 
E touch 50 = (1000 + 1.5C s .ρ s ) earth grid of a utility substation. The earth safety is assessed
t s  (3) by calculating scalar potential distribution across the grid and
 comparing with the prescribed the step and touch potential
0.157 
E touch 70 = (1000 + 1.5C s .ρ s ) calculated using the standards [11]-[13].
t s 
A. Earth Grid Model limited to 99. The results are shown in Figs 4, 5, and 6. What
A model is created for a HV substation using other colors represent?
Electromagnetic Field Analysis HIFREQ module in CDEGS
tool. The substation earth grid layout is shown in Fig. 3. The
soil conditions were set in Soil Resistivity Analysis RESAP
module in CDEGS [14]. In Fig. 3, Feeder 1 and Feeder 2 are
132kV feeders and the Feeder 3 is 275kV feeder.

5 Hz 50 Hz 500 Hz 5 MHz

Feeder 1

50 MHz 500 MHz 5 GHz 50 GHz

Fig. 4. Earth grid voltage gradients for lightning strike at Feeder 1.

Feeder 2 Feeder 3

5 Hz 50 Hz 500 Hz 5 MHz
Fig 3: The earth grid test system.

B. Energisation Model
Energization voltage is the effective voltage magnitude
across the conductor and the earth which is built up during
insulator flashover. The line insulators provide an insulating
medium between tower, earth, and the conductors. When the
50 MHz 500 MHz 5 GHz 50 GHz
voltage across the line insulators is more than a threshold, the
insulators lose their dielectric strength and flashover occurs.
The threshold voltage is called critical flashover voltage Fig 5. Earth grid voltage gradients for lightning strike at Feeder 2.
(CFOV) of the line insulators. In this paper, the energization
voltage to ground is taken to be 1.2X CFOV. For Feeder 1
and Feeder 2 energization voltage is 1110kV and for Feeder 3
the energization voltage is 2004kV.

C. Simulation Results
Simulations are carried out using CDEGS tool. The
energization voltage of 1110kV was applied to Feeder 1 and 5 Hz 50 Hz 500 Hz 5 MHz

Feeder 2. Similarly energization voltage of 2004kV was

applied to Feeder 3. The frequency of energization was varied
from 5Hz to 50GHz. The scalar earth potentials were
calculated using equations (3)-(6). The scalar earth potentials
were plotted using different color bands. Each color band
represents a voltage gradient of 90V. The color bands
represent the unsafe voltage gradients present across the earth 50 MHz 500 MHz 5 GHz 50 GHz

grid. The maximum displayed voltage is limited to 9kV (red

band). The maximum number of displayed color bands was Fig 6. Earth grid voltage gradients for lightning strike at Feeder 3.
 It can be observed that voltage gradients across the
substation earth grid vary with the frequency of energization
voltage. As the frequency of energization increases, the
voltage gradient across the earth grid moves from substation
[5].
boundary towards the point of energization. In Fig. 4,
energization at 5Hz creates the 9kV potential difference
across substation boundary and remote earth and the
[6].
energization at 50GHz creates 9kV potential difference right
at the point of energization. Similar observations are made in
Fig. 5 and 6. This shows that substation equipment
experience higher potential differences across its earth as the
frequency of strike increases. Therefore, the earth grid [7].
designed for low frequency energization reveals different
fault handling characteristics than the earth grid designed for
high frequency energization.
[8].
V. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented the impact of frequency of lightning
strikes on ground potential gradients across substations. The
substation earth grid and the lightning strike were modelled in
[9].
CDEGS tool. The various frequencies of strikes were applied
from various locations within the substations. The voltage
gradients resulting from the strikes at various frequencies
were observed. [10].
The results showed that when the insulator flashover occurs
near a substation earthing system due to lightning strikes, a
high amount of fault current is dispersed to the ground
through the substation earth electrodes. Such influx of high [11].
impulse current generates gradients of voltage across the
substation grounding system. Such voltage gradients could be
dangerous to personnel and equipment within the substation. [12].
Further, the distribution of voltage gradients under impulse
current is dependent on the frequency of impulse voltage.
The lower the frequency of strike voltage, the lower number [13].
of voltage gradients are present across the substation. The
higher the frequency of impulse voltage, a higher number of [14].
voltage gradients are present in the substation. The results
also demonstrated that low frequency lightning strikes
generate more distributed voltage gradients across the
substation than high frequency lightning strikes.
VI. REFERENCES
[1]. M. Panteli and P. Mancarella, "The Grid: Stronger, Bigger,
Smarter?: Presenting a Conceptual Framework of Power System
Resilience," in IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol.
13, no. 3, pp. 58-66, May-June 2015. doi:
10.1109/MPE.2015.2397334
[2]. IEEE Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity, Ground Impedance,
and Earth Surface Potentials of a Grounding System," in IEEE
Std 81-2012 (Revision of IEEE Std 81-1983) , vol., no., pp.1-86,
Dec. 28 2012, doi: 10.1109/IEEESTD.2012.6392181
[3]. A. K. Srivastava, A. A. Kumar and N. N. Schulz, "Impact of
Distributed Generations With Energy Storage Devices on the
Electric Grid," in IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.
110-117, March 2012. doi: 10.1109/JSYST.2011.2163013
[4]. Z. Zhao, C. Yao, X. Zhao, N. Hashemnia and S. Islam, "Impact of
capacitive coupling circuit on online impulse frequency response
of a power transformer," in IEEE Transactions on
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, vol. 23, no. 3, pp.
1285-1293, June 2016.
doi: 10.1109/TDEI.2015.005518
M. Mousa, "The soil ionization gradient associated with discharge
of high currents into concentrated electrodes," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1669-1677, Jul
1994. doi: 10.1109/61.311195
O. E. Gouda and A. Z. El Dein, "Ground potential rise of faulty
substations having equal and unequal spacing grounding grids
conductors," in IET Generation, Transmission &
Distribution, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 18-26, 1 5 2017. doi:
10.1049/iet-gtd.2016.0263
S. G. Patel, "A Complete Field Analysis of Substation Ground
Grid By Applying Continuous Low Voltage Fault," in IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol.
PAS-104, no. 8, pp. 2238-2243, Aug. 1985. doi:
10.1109/TPAS.1985.318804
L. Jike, Z. Xinghai, H. Jinliang, Q. Zheng, S. Dan and W.
Zhigang, "Influences of power frequency magnetic fields when a
110kV high voltage substation and a cloud data center exist in the
same building," 2015 7th Asia-Pacific Conference on
Environmental Electromagnetics (CEEM), Hangzhou, 2015, pp.
447-453. doi: 10.1109/CEEM.2015.7368620
L. D. Grcev and M. Heimbach, "Frequency dependent and
transient characteristics of substation grounding systems,"
in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 12, no. 1,
pp. 172-178, Jan 1997. doi: 10.1109/61.568238
J. G. Sverak, W. Wang, Y. Gervais, X. D. Do and D. Mukhedkar,
"A probabilistic method for the design of power grounding
systems," in IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol.
7, no. 3, pp. 1196-1206, Jul 1992.
doi: 10.1109/61.141831
Energy Network Australia, “EG-0 Power System Earthing Guide
part 1 : Management Principles version 1”. ENA DOC 025 -
2010
IEEE Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding," in IEEE Std
80-2013 (Revision of IEEE Std 80-2000/ Incorporates IEEE Std
80-2013/Cor 1-2015) , vol., no., pp.1-226, May 15 2015
doi: 10.1109/IEEESTD.2015.7109078
Energy Network Australia, “Substation Earthing Guide”. ENA
EG1-2006.
Safe Engineering Service and technologies ltd,
“Current Distribution, Electromagnetic Fields, Grounding
and Soil Structure Analysis (CDEGS)”, Software Package, 2016.