IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation

Vol. 22, No. 1; February 2015

185

Influence of Lightning Flashover Criterion

on the Calculated Lightning withstand Level
of 800 kV UHVDC Transmission Lines at High Altitude
Yongxia Han1, Li Tang1, Licheng Li1, Qiuping He1, Yanpeng Hao1 and Senjing Yao2
1

School of Electric Power, South China University of Technology,

Guangzhou, 510640, P.R. China
2
Shenzhen Power Supply Bureau Limitied. Shenzhen, 518000, P.R. China

ABSTRACT
The operation experiences of power transmission lines show the lightning outage is still the
main part of the total outage rate. So it is very important to calculate the lightning
overvoltage across the insulators precisely and evaluate the lightning outage of the
transmission lines correctly. Lightning flashover criterion of the insulator/gap is one of the
most important factors that influence the precise calculation results of the lightning
withstand level of transmission lines. In China, several 800 kV ultra high voltage direct
current (UHVDC) power transmission projects have been set up in recent years, and the
altitude of the regions that the transmission lines across ranges from 0-3650 m. The paper
mainly analyzed the influence of the modelling methods of insulator/gap on the lightning
withstand level of 800 kV UHVDC transmission lines by PSCAD/EMTDC program. The
compared lightning flashover criteria of insulator/gap include the leader propagation model
recommended by CIGRE, the volt/time curve recommended by IEEE and an improved
leader propagation model, which is proposed based on the lightning flashover experiments
of the 800 kV UHVDC line insulators carried out at an altitude of 2100 m. Meanwhile, the
influences of lightning current waveform and insulator structure were also considered and
compared. The simulation results show that the calculated back-flashover lightning
withstand level is much lower when using the improved leader propagation than that using
other flashover criterions in the paper, it is lower under the 2.6/50 s double exponential
lightning current than that under the 2.0/50 s Heidler function lightning current, and it is
higher when using V-string than that using I-string insulator. Besides, the influences of the
lightning current waveform and the insulator structure on the calculation of shielding
failure lightning withstand level are little, but the flashover criterion has obvious influences
on the shielding failure lightning withstand level.
Index Terms - Lightning flashover criterion, lightning withstand level, 800 kV UHVDC,
leader propagation model, high altitude.

INTRODUCTION

THE operation experiences of power transmission lines at

home and abroad show that the lightning outage is still the main
part of the total outage rate although the lightning protection level
has been gradually improved in recent decades. Compared with
lower voltage level transmission lines, the towers for 800 kV
ultra high voltage direct current (UHVDC) transmission are
higher and their transmission corridors are wider. However, there
are much higher requirements on power supply reliability for
UHVDC power transmission lines. As a result, it is very
important to improve the lightning protection performance,
Manuscript received on 31 December 2013, in final form 13 October
2014, accepted 6 November 2014.

calculate the lightning overvoltage across the insulators precisely

and evaluate the lightning outage of the transmission lines
correctly.
Lightning flashover criterion of the insulator/gap is one of the
most important factors that influence the precise calculation
results of the lightning withstand level of transmission lines [1-2].
Many flashover criteria have been studied around the world,
including the voltage threshold U50, volt/time curve, and leader
propagation model [1-5]. The leader propagation model is more
applicable to long insulators than any others [2], because the
voltage across the insulator can be in any waveforms. However,
the accuracy of these flashover criteria cannot be guaranteed
when they are used in the UHVDC transmission lines
insulators/gaps at high altitude.

DOI 10.1109/TDEI.2014.004537

186

Y. Han et al.: Influence of Lightning Flashover Criterion on the Calculated Lightning withstand Level

In China, several 800 kV UHVDC power transmission

projects have been set up in recent years, and the altitude of the
regions that the transmission lines across ranges of 0-3650 m
[6-7]. As a result, it is necessary to find out the more accurate
lightning flashover criterion of the long insulator/gap at high
altitude.
The paper mainly analyzed the influence of the modelling
methods of the insulator/gap on the calculation results of the
lightning withstand level for 800 kV UHVDC transmission lines
at high altitude by PSCAD/EMTDC program. The compared
lightning flashover criteria of insulator/gap include the leader
propagation model recommended by CIGRE [3], the volt/time
curve recommended by IEEE [5] and an improved leader
propagation model, which is proposed based on the lightning
flashover experiments of the 800 kV UHVDC line insulators
carried out at an altitude of 2100 m. Besides, the influences of
lightning current waveform and insulator structure were also
considered and compared, e.g. the double exponential waveform
and Heidler waveform, the V-string and I-string insulators. The
results show that the influence of flashover criterion of the
insulator/gap on the calculation results of lightning withstand level
is great. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the effects of
insulator structure, insulator material and environmental factors on
lightning flashover criterion of the insulator/gap.

MODELING AND SIMULATIONS

In order to study the influence of different flashover criteria

on the calculation results of lightning withstand level of 800
kV UHVDC transmission line at high altitude by using
PSCAD/EMTDC program, all the equivalent models of
transmission lines, towers, insulators, the earth and the
operation voltage are set up. The parameters of the transmission
lines are based on the Nuozhadu to Guangdong 800 kV
UHVDC power transmission project. The average earth
resistivity along the lines is taken to be 1000 m, and the
ground resistance of the tower is set to be 10 . The length of
the I-string composite insulator for the line is 7.6 m, and the
distance between the grading rings on both ends of the insulator
is 7.1 m. The distance from the grading ring in the lower end of
the V-string composite insulator to the cross arm is 7.1 m. The
type of the overhead ground wire is LBGJ-180-20AC, and the
type of the conductor is 6LGJ-630/45. It is supposed that the
average span between every two towers is 450 m, and the DC
source is 10km away from the last modeled tower, as shown in
Figure 1. The influence of the reflect overvoltage of the DC
source can be neglected then.

2.1 LIGHTNING STROKE CURRENT

Considering the great influence of lightning stroke current
waveform on the calculation of overvoltage across the
insulators, the selection of lightning stroke current waveform
becomes a very key step in the simulation and calculation [2,
8-9]. The practically measured lightning current waveforms
are very different from each otherand there is no test
lightning stroke current waveform in this project. So the paper
mainly uses two mathematical expressions of lightning
current waveform which are widely used to study the
influence of lightning current waveforms on lightning
withstand level of the transmission lines. The double
exponential current waveforms is widely used in the
engineering calculation of lightning withstand level in the
world because of its simplicity, while the Heidler function
gives more realistic results. The initial slope of Heidler
function is zero, it is more applicable to the calculation of
lightning electromagnetic pulse (LEMP), so it is also widely
used [1, 10-14]. As a result, the double exponential current
waveform with 2.6/50s front and tail time and the Heidler
function waveform are both adopted in the paper for
comparison. The Heidler function is shown in equation (1)
[12].
Im

(t / 1 ) n

(1)
exp( t / 2 )
(t / 1 ) n 1
where i(t) is the lighting current function, Im is the peak
current, 1 is the rise time constant, 2 is the tail time constant,
n is the concave factor and is the peak correction factor. It is
supposed in the paper that 1 =2.0 s, 2=50 s, n=5 and
=0.898.
In order to facilitate comparison, the hypothetical lightning
current of Heidler function is supposed to start from t=0,
while the double exponential current waveform is supposed to
begin from t=1s, as shown in Figure 2.
i (t )

(a) 2.6/50 s double exponential

(b) 2.0/50 s Heidler function

Figure 2. The 2.6/50 s double exponential and the 2.0/50 s Heidler

function waveform with an amplitude value of 300 kA.

The channel surge impedance of the lightning current is

supposed to be 300 in the calculation of the back-flashover
lightning withstand level, while in calculating the shielding
failure lightning withstand level it is supposed to be 800
[15].

Figure 1. Diagram of the 800kV DC transmission lines.

2.2 TRANSMISSION TOWER

The tower model plays an essential part in the calculation
of back-flashover lightning withstand level of the overhead
transmission lines, because it influences the waveform and
magnitude of voltage across the insulator strings [9].

IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation

Vol. 22, No. 1; February 2015

There are many studies on the tower modeling at home and

abroad, and many tower models are put forward, such as the
single surge impedance model, the layered surge impedance
model which has considered the tower attenuation, the
electromagnetic field calculation method proposed by Wagner
and Lundholm and the multiple-conductor layered surge
impedance model, etc. Among all these models, the
multiple-conductor layered surge impedance model is widely
used for its higher accuracy in calculation [1-2, 15-16]. The
model was proposed by Yamada and Hara T, it has not only
considered the change of the tower parameters with the
change of height, but also included the propagation
characteristics of wave on the tower. Figure 3 shows a
multiple-conductor model of the tangent tower which is used
in this paper. In the model, ZA represents the impedance of the
cross arm, and ZTK and ZLK represent the impedance of the k
th main leg and the bracing parallel to it respectively. The
calculation methods of different impedances in the model can
refer to the reference [16], and the calculation is on the basis
of the real structure of the tower used in 800 kV UHVDC
transmission lines, so the tower model is relatively precise.
The calculation results of the impedance as follow: ZA=290 ,
ZT1=200 , ZT2=123 , ZT3=112 , ZT4=88 and ZLK= 9ZTK.
rT2

rT1

ZT1

ZT1
RT2
ZA

ZA

ZA

ZA

ZL2

ZT2
RT3
r T3

ZT3

h3

h2

h1

ZT4

R`B
RB

ZL4

rB
r` B

Figure 3. Tangent Tower models in simulations.

2.3 INSULATOR MODEL

The insulator model and the flashover criterion influence
the computational accuracy of the lightning withstand level.
In order to study the influence of the flashover criterion on the
calculated lightning withstand level of the UHVDC
transmission line at high attitude, the ideal controllable switch
S is used to simulate the I-string and V-string insulator
respectively in this paper, as shown in Figure 4.

Cross arm
S

Tower body
Conductor

Figure 4. Insulator models in simulations.

The flashover criterion of the switch S is a key and very

difficult problem, many flashover criteria have been studied
around the world, such as the voltage threshold U50, volt/time
curve, area criterion, linear or nonlinear inductance with a
time controlled switch model, and leader propagation method
[1, 3, 4, 10, 17]. Compared with other methods, the leader
propagation method has its unique advantages that it is based
on the physical process of long air gap discharge, and the
waveform of the voltage across insulator is not limited, while
the voltage threshold and volt/time curve is more precise used
in the standard lightning impulse overvoltage situation [17,
18]. Therefore, the leader propagation method is more proper
as the flashover criterion for long insulators.
In this paper, to compare the influences of different
flashover criteria on the calculation of lightning withstand
level of the transmission lines, both leader propagation and
volt/time curve methods are used as flashover criterion. The
equation of volt/time curve expression recommended by IEEE
is shown in equation (2) [1, 18].

Vs t 400d

710d

(2)

t 0.75

where Vs-t is the median flashover voltage in kV, t is the time

to flashover in s, and d is the length of the insulator/gap in
m.
In the leader propagation model research, various formulae
have been proposed for the leader velocity. As a practical
simplification, the equation (3) proposed by CIGRE was
introduced as a best-fit to the considered model [1, 3].

v(t ) ku(t )(

ZL3

187

u (t )
E0 )
d l

(3)

where v(t) is the velocity of the leader in any time in m/s, u(t)
is the voltage across the insulator/gap in kV, d is the length of
the insulator/gap in m, l is the length of the leader in m, E0 and
k are coefficient recommend by CIGRE obtained by
experiments, as shown in Table 1. When u(t)/(d-l)>E0, the
leader starts and continues, otherwise, the leader stops to
progress.
Table 1. Values of k and E0 recommended by CIGRE.
Configuration
Polarity
k(m2v-2s-1)
E0(kVm-1)
Air gaps, post and long rod
insulators
Cap and pin insulators

0.810-6

600

1.010

-6

670

1.210-6

520

-6

600

1.310

However, whether the two flashover criteria above are

proper for long insulator/gap at high altitude areas has not
been verified yet, and the paper mainly analyzes the lightning
protective performance of the 800 kV UHVDC transmission
line at high altitude.
The authors have carried out the experimental research on
the flashover criterion of the 7.1 m I-string and V-string
composite insulator for 800 kV UHVDC transmission line in
the National Engineering laboratory (Kunming) for UHV
Engineering Technology, the altitude there is 2100 m, the
voltage threshold U50 and volt/time curve are obtained from

Y. Han et al.: Influence of Lightning Flashover Criterion on the Calculated Lightning withstand Level

the positive and negative lightning impulse tests. On the basis

of the leader propagation model recommended by CIGRE, an
improved leader propagation model is proposed for the
UHVDC line insulator at the altitude of 2100 m. The velocity
formula of the improved leader propagation is shown in
equation (4), and the parameters in equation (4) are shown in
Table 2. Also the altitude correction method is proposed by
introducing into this model [19-20].

v(t ) k (u (t ) El l )(

u (t ) El l
E0 )
d l

(4)

where El is the average field along the leader channel, is the

relative air density, and it is 0.7848 at the altitude of 2100 m.
The other parameters have the same meaning with those in
equation (3).
Table 2. Values of k and E0 deduced by experiments.
Configuration
Polarity
k(m2v-2s-1)
E0(kVm-1)
V-string
I-string

0.5310-6

345

0.6410-6

459

0.7310-6

388

0.7010-6

455

When the residual gap length is less than the height of the
final jump, the final jump will occur. The height of the final
jump hf is supposed to be one third of the gap length in this
model.
All the three kinds of flashover criteria of insulator/gap
above are used in this paper for comparison.

[14]. Thus, the Heilder function whose wave front is concave

will be more accordant with the practical situation when
applied to the calculation of back-flashover lightning
withstand level. Of cause, it is better to measure the real
lightning current parameters based on actual geographical
environment for the accurate lightning performance
calculation of the transmission lines.

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Simulations based on the Nuozhadu to Guangdong 800

kV UHVDC transmission lines by using PSCAD/EMTDC
program have been carried out in this paper. For comparison, the
lightning withstand level have been calculated by using
different flashover criteria, different lightning stroke current
waveforms and different insulator types.
3.1 THE BACK-FLASHOVER LIGHTNING
WITHSTAND LEVEL
Figure 5 shows the voltages across the insulators under
different stroke lightning current waveforms with the same peak
value of 200 kA, and it is clear that the voltage across the
insulator caused by 2.6/50 s double exponential current
waveform has shorter front time and higher peak value than
the one caused by Heidler function lightning current. It is
obvious that the lightning current waveforms have great
influence on back-flashover lightning withstand level no
matter which flashover criterion is adopted.
It can be seen from Figure 2 that the slope of double
exponential waveform is much greater than that of Heidler
function at the initial stage, thus the overvoltage amplitude
produced by double exponential waveform is greater and its
peak time is shorter. The wave front of lightning current
waveform recommended by IEEE and CIGRE is concave [1,
18]. The wave front of the measured lightning current stroking
on the transmission line tower by Jun Takami is also concave

(a) 2.6/50 s double exponential

(b) Heidler function

Figure 5. Voltages across the insulator with different stroke lightning current
waveforms with the same 200 kA peak value.

When the improved leader propagation model is used as the

flashover criterion of the insulator, the voltage across the
insulator caused by 2.6/50 s double exponential and Heidler
function lightning current with the same peak values of 310
kA stroking on the shielding wires on the tower top are
respectively shown in the Figures 6a and 6b. Figure 7 shows the
voltages across the insulators when using the volt/time curve as
the flashover criterion under different lightning current
waveforms with the same peak value of 358 kA.
It can be seen from Figure 6 and Figure 7 that no matter
which lightning current is adopted, the flashover time is longer
and the voltage at the flashover time is lower when the leader
propagation is used as the flashover criterion. Meanwhile, no
matter which flashover criterion is used, the flashover time is
shorter and the voltage at the flashover time is higher when the
2.6/50 s double exponential lightning current is adopted.

(a) 2.6/50 s double exponential

(b) Heidler function

Figure 6. Voltages across the insulators with different stroke lightning

current waveforms with the same 310 kA peak value, with the improved
leader propagation as flashover criterion.
Voltage across the insulators
(MV)

188

(a) 2.6/50 s double exponential

(b) Heidler function

Figure 7. Voltages across the insulators with different stroke lightning

current waveforms with the same 358 kA peak value, with the volt/time curve
as flashover criterion.

IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation

Vol. 22, No. 1; February 2015

The calculated back-flashover lightning withstand levels of

the 800 kV UHVDC transmission lines calculated by
PSCAD/EMTDC are shown in Table 3. The starting point of
the overvoltage caused by Heidler function lightning current
is not clear, so the back-flashover lightning withstand level
with the volt/time curve as flashover criterion isnt given
when adopting Heidler function lightning current.
Table 3. The calculated back-flashover lightning withstand level (kA).
Leader
propagation
model
recommended
by CIGRE
289

Lightning
current shape

Configur
ation

2.6/50s
double
exponential

I-string

The
improved
leader
propagation
model
237

V-string

262

289

349

I-string

274

343

--

V-string

296

343

--

Heidler
function

Volt/time
curve by
IEEE
349

When the 2.6/50 s double exponential waveform

lightning current is adopted, the lightning back-flashover
lightning withstand level of V-strings is 11% higher than
that of I-strings when using the improved leader
propagation model as flashover criterion. When the leader
propagation model recommended by CIGRE is used as
flashover criterion, the calculated back-flashover lightning
withstand level of I-string and V-string are the same, and
they are 10 and 22% higher than the results calculated by
the improved leader propagation model respectively. These
results caused by the constants k and E0 of the V-string (air
gap) and I-string (long-rod insulator) are same in Table 1,
while the constants are different in Table.2. When the
volt/time curve recommended by IEEE is used as flashover
criterion, the calculated back-flashover lightning withstand
level of I-string and V-string are also the same, and they
are 47 and 33% higher than the results calculated by the
improved leader propagation model respectively. The
reason is that the dry arcing distances of V-string and
I-string are same (7.1 m) and the configuration differences
of V-string and I-string cannot be distinguished in formula
(2), while the configuration differences can be
distinguished in the improved leader propagation, as shown
in formula (4) and Table 2.
It can be concluded that the calculated back-flashover
lightning withstand levels using the improved leader
propagation are much lower than the calculated results
using the other two kinds of flashover criteria, and the
former is more precise than the latter at high altitude
because the improved leader propagation is deduced by the
experimental results on the actual insulator/gap in high
altitude areas. Besides, compared to the improved leader
propagation model, the other two kinds of flashover criteria
cannot distinguish the configuration of the insulator, which
will also introduce calculation errors.
The results have the same rule when Heidler function
lightning current is adopted. But the calculated
back-flashover lightning withstand level is about 40 kA
higher than the results calculated with the 2.6/50 s double

189

exponential waveform lightning current. The lightning

stroke current waveform has great influence on
back-flashover lightning withstand level calculation,
because it directly influences the peak value and waveform
of overvoltage across the insulators. The back-flashover
lightning withstand level calculation results using the
Heidler function is more precise, because it is a more
realistic result of the lightning current waveform compared
to the double exponential waveform. Of course, the
measured lightning current waveform and parameter is the
best choice if we have conditions.
3.2 THE SHIELDING FAILURE LIGHTNING
WITHSTAND LEVEL
Compared with the back-flashover lightning withstand level
calculation, the influences of the lightning stroke current
waveform on the shielding failure lightning withstand level are
relatively small, because there is no voltage waveform
reflection/refraction before the insulator flashovers. The voltage
across the insulator caused by different lightning current
waveforms with the same peak values of 30 kA stroking on the
lines under the negative working voltage are respectively shown
in Figure 8.
It can be seen from Figure 8 that there are almost no
difference between the voltages across the insulators caused
by different lightning current waveforms with the same peak
value. The calculated shielding failure lightning withstand
levels of the 800 kV UHVDC transmission lines are shown in
Table 4.

(a) 2.6/50 s double exponential

(b) Heidler function

Figure 8. Voltages across the insulators with different stroke lightning

current waveforms with the same 30 kA peak value stroke on the line with the
negative working voltage -800 kV.
Table 4. The shielding failure lightning withstand level (kA).
Leader
propagation
model
recommended
by CIGRE
33

Lightning
current shape

Configur
ation

2.6/50s
double
exponential

I-string

The
improved
leader
propagation
model
22

V-string

23

33

25

I-string

21

32

--

V-string

22

32

--

Heidler
function

Volt/timecu
rve
25

It can be seen from Table 4 that the difference of the

calculated shielding failure lightning withstand level caused by
lightning current and insulator type is very small, but the
flashover criterion has great influence. When the 2.6/50 s
double exponential waveform lightning current is adopted, the

190

Y. Han et al.: Influence of Lightning Flashover Criterion on the Calculated Lightning withstand Level

shielding failure lightning withstand levels of I-string and

V-string are 50 and 43% higher by using the leader propagation
in equation (2) than the calculated results using the improved
leader propagation model in equation (4) as flashover criterion
respectively. When the volt/time curve recommended by IEEE is
used as flashover criterion, the shielding failure lightning
withstand level of I-string and V-string are respectively 14 and 9%
higher than the calculated results using the improved leader
propagation model as flashover criterion.
It can be concluded that the calculated shielding failure
lightning withstand levels using the improved leader
propagation are lower than the calculated results using the other
two kinds of flashover criteria, and the former is more precise
than the latter at high altitude. Thus, the other two kinds of
flashover criteria are not suitable in high altitude areas.

CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, a simulation model of 800 kV UHVDC

transmission
line
was
established
by
using
PSCAD/EMTDC program. The lightning withstand level of
800 kV UHVDC transmission lines in high altitude areas
was calculated and the influence of lightning flashover
criterion on the calculation of lightning withstand level was
studied, also the lightning current and the insulator type
were considered. The modelling methods of insulator
flashover criterion and the lightning stroke current have
great influence on the lightning withstand level calculation.
The conclusions are as follows:
1. The back-flashover lightning withstand level calculated
by using the improved leader propagation model presented in
this paper is 27-69 kA lower than the results calculated by
using the leader propagation model recommended by CIGRE,
and it is 87-112 kA lower than the calculated results by using
volt/time curve method recommended by IEEE. The shielding
failure lightning withstand level calculated by using the
improved leader propagation model presented in this paper is
10-11 kA lower than that calculated by using the leader
propagation model recommended by CIGRE and it is 2-3 kA
lower than that calculated by using volt/time curve method
recommended by IEEE.
2. The improved leader propagation model, which is
deduced by actual experimental results of 800 kV line
insulators at high altitude, is more proper as flashover
criterions for 800 kV UHVDC transmission lines at high
altitude, while the other two kinds of flashover criteria will
introduce large errors at high altitude.
3. It is necessary to consider the effects of insulator
structure, insulator material and environmental factors on
lightning flashover criterion of the insulator/gap. The design
of lightning protection should consider the actual lightning
parameters along the transmission lines, and the Heidler
function is more precise than the double exponential
waveform when there is no real lightning current parameters.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We gratefully acknowledge the financial support by the
national high technology research and development program

(863 Program) of P. R. China (project No. 2013AA050104),

the national engineering laboratory (Kunming) for UHV
engineering technology foundation and the fundamental
research funds for the central universities.

REFERANCES
[1] IEC TR 60071-4, Insulation Co-ordination, Part 4, Computational
guide to insulation co-ordination and modeling of electrical
networks, 2004.
[2] Y. X. Han. L. C. Li, H. X. Chen and Y. X. Lu, Influence of
modeling methods on the calculated lightning surge overvoltages
at an UHVDC converter station due to back-flashover, IEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 1090-1095, 2012.
[3] CIGRE Working Group 01 of SC 33, Guide to procedures for
estimating the lightning performance of transmission lines,
Electra Vol. 138, pp. 171, 1991.
[4] Electric Power Research. Institute (EPRI), EPRI AC transmission
lines reference book-200 kV and above, 3 rd edition. 2005, USA,
CA: EPRI product No. 1011974, 2005.
[5] IEEE Standard 1243-1997, IEEE guide for improving the
lightning performance of transmission lines, 1997.
[6] Z. Y. Sun, W. M. Liao, Z. Y. Su and X. J. Zhang, Test Study on
the Altitude Correction Factors of Air Gaps of 800kV UHVDC
Projects, Power System Technology, Vol. 32, No. 22, pp. 13-16,
2008 (in Chinese).
[7] H. L. Yang, F. Z. Zhang, F. Zhao, L. M. Wang and Z.C. Guan,
DC Flashover Performance of 800kV Composite Post Insulator
in High Altitude Area, High Voltage Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 4,
pp. 749-753, 2009 (in Chinese).
[8] S. Okabe, J, Takami. Evaluation of improved lightning stroke
current waveform using advanced statistical method, IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 2197-2205, 2009.
[9] F. H. Silveira, A. D. Conti, and S. Visacro, Lightning overvoltage
due to first strokes considering a realistic current representation,
IEEE Trans. Electromagnetic Compatibility, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp.
929-935.2010.
[10] IEC TR 60071-2, Insulation Co-ordination, Part 2, Application
Guide, 1996.
[11] F.
Heidler,
Analytische
Blitzstromfunktion
zur
LEMP-berechnung, in Proc.18th Int. Conf. Lightn. Protec.
(ICLP), Munich,Germany, Sep.1985, pp. 6366.
[12] F. Heidler, J.M. Cvetic and B.V. Stanic. Calculation of lightning
current parameters, IEEE Tans. Power Delivery, Vol. 14, No. 2,
pp. 399-404, 1999.
[13] Lightning and Insulator Subcommittee of the T&D Committee.
Parameters of Lightning Strokes: A Review, IEEE Tans. Power
Delivery, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.346-359, 2005.
[14] J. Takami and S. Okabe, Observational Results of Lightning
Current on Transmission Towers, IEEE Tans. Power Delivery,
Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 547-556, 2007.
[15] T. Yamada, A. Mochizuki, J. Sawada, E. Zaima, T. Kawamura, A.
Ametani, M. Ishii and S. Kato, Experimental evaluation of a
UHV tower model for lightning surge analysis, IEEE Trans.
Power Delivery, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 393-402, 1995.
[16] T. Hara and O. Yamamoto. Modeling of a transmission tower for
lightning surge analysis, IEE Proc. Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, Vol. 143, No. 3, pp. 283-289, 1996.
[17] A. Ametani and T. Kawamura, A method of a lightning surge
analysis recommended in Japan using EMTP, IEEE Trans. Power
Delivery, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 867-875, 2005.
[18] IEEE Standard 1410-2010, IEEE Guide for Improving the
Lightning Performance of Electric Power Overhead Distribution
Lines, 2010.
[19] F.A.M. Rizk, Critical switching impulse strength of long air gaps:
modelling of air density effects, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,
Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 1507-1515, 1992.
[20] South China University of Technology, The experimental
research on lightning impulse flashover characteristic of
insulators/gaps, The national engineering laboratory (Kunming)
for UHV engineering technology foundation report, 2013 (in
Chinese).

IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation

Vol. 22, No. 1; February 2015

Yongxia Han was born in Kaifeng, Henan

province, China, in 1982. She received the
B.Sc., M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and
electronic engineering of Huazhong University
of Science and Technology (HUST), Wuhan,
China, in 2004, 2006, and 2009, respectively.
She is now a lecturer in South China University
of Technology. Her research interests are
overvoltage and insulation coordination, and gas
discharge.
Li Tang was born in Hunan province, China, in
1990. He received the B.Sc. degrees in Wu Han
University, Wuhan, China, in 2012. He is
studying for the masters degree at South China
University of Technology. His research interests
are overvoltage and insulation coordination.

Licheng Li (Corresponding author) was born in

Jiangsu province, China in 1941. He received the B.S.
degree from the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Tsinghua University, Beijing, China in 1967. He was
the director of the first 800 kV transmission line
project in the world. He once participated in the
development of the first 330 kV and 500 kV ac
transmission lines and the first 500 kV dc
transmission lines in China. He is now an academician
of the Chinese Academy of Engineering (CAE), a
professor and doctoral supervisor in South China University of Technology.
He is the secretary of the expert committee of China Southern Power Grid.

191

Qiuping He was born in Hubei province, China, in

1990. She received the B.Sc. degree in Hai Nan
University, Hainan, China, in 2013. She is studying
for a masters degree at South China University of
Technology. Her research interests are overvoltage
and insulation coordination.

Yanpeng Hao was born in Hebei Province, China in

1974. She received the MSc. and Ph.D. degrees in
electrical engineering from Xi'an Jiaotong University,
China in 1998 and 2003, respectively. She worked as
a postdoctoral fellow in Tsinghua University from
2003 to 2005. She is a professor and Ph.D. tutor in
South China University of Technology now. Her
major research fields are insulation condition
monitoring and life evaluation of electrical power
equipments, insulation performance of UHV/EHV
Transmission lines under lighting, icing and pollution, and dielectric barrier
discharge under atmospheric pressure and its low temperature plasma
application.
Senjing Yao is a senior engineer and an associate
director in Shenzhen Electric Power Technology
Research Center. His research interests are high
voltage technology and high voltage equipments.