TRAINING ON EARTHING

LIGHTNING PROTECTION
& SURGE PROTECTION

FOR

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Trainer
Trainer: Rohit Narayan
 CONTENTS

Course Outline
Module 1 6 Point Plan for Telecommunications

Module 2 Ground Electrode Design

Module 3 Surge Protective Devices

Module 4 Lightning Protection Systems, Theory and

Applications

Module 5 Standards Applicable to Telecommunication

Earthing

APPENDIX

1. Ground Measurement Techniques

2. REDUCING COPPER THEFT IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS

INDUSTRY by Rohit Narayan, Jeff Regan, ERICO
3. K27 ITU GUIDE - PROTECTION AGAINST
INTERFERENCE : Bonding Configurations & Earthing of
Telecommunications Installations Inside a Subscribers
Building

4. K56 ITU Guide PROTECTION AGAINST INTERFERENCE :

Protection of Radio Base Stations Against Lightning
Discharge.
 COURSE TITLE: EARTHING
LIGHTNING PROTECTION
& SURGE PROTECTION

FOR

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Course Outline:

Earthing is an important element in designing a telecommunications

facility. Good earthing systems will protect the telecommunications
network, against the devastating effects of lightning and reduce the noise
level in everyday operations. This course is designed for
telecommunications technicians, engineers and electricians who are
involved in the design, installation and maintenance of earthing, lightning
protection and surge protection equipment. The course will provide
theoretical understanding of telecommunication earthing and bonding. It
will provide real life examples of designs of earthing systems. Practicals
will include testing of soil resistivity and earth resistance and a site visit to
a local telecommunications facility. The site visit will allow the participants
to examine the existing earthing at the facility and then use their
knowledge to make recommendations for improving the site.

Objectives:

To enable the participants to

Develop a theoretical knowledge of earthing, lightning protection

and surge protection.

To learn how to carry out soil resistivity and earth resistance test.

Carry out design of an earthing system

Identify problems of earthing at a typical telecommunications site

Select appropriate surge protection for telecommunications lines

and the power supply feeding telecom facility.

Select appropriate lightning protection for a telecommunications

facility
 Target Audience:

Telecommunication technicians, engineers and electricians.

Prerequisites and requirements:

An appreciation of what a telecommunications facility looks like.
Basic understanding of electrical terminology and electricity.
A scientific calculator.

Outcome:

At the end of this training the participants will:

1. Understand the fundamental principles of earthing
2. Understand how to measure earth resistivity and earth system
resistance.
3. Understand the techniques for improving earth resistance.
4. Understand about conductors and connections used in earthing.
5. Design an earthing system for a telecommunications site.
6. Implement improvements in the earthing at existing sites.
7. Understand the earthing section of AS3015 including equi-potential
bonding.
8. Understand how to select surge protection
9. Understand how to select lightning protection..

Mode Of Delivery:

Powerpoint presentation.

Use of Whiteboards

Field testing in the ground.

Site visit to a typical telecommunication facility.

Report writing in classroom.

Duration : 2 Days
COURSE OUTLINE

Module 1 : Six Point Plan for Telecommunications Sites

This modules looks at the telecommunications facility holistically and

applies a methodology called 6 point plan to understand the layout and
design of an earthing and lightning protection system at a
telecommunications facility.

a. Discuss Single Point and Mesh Method Earthing for

telecommunications.
b. Bonding configurations and earthing inside a
telecommunications buildings . ITU Standard K.27.
c. Environment Engineering (EE); Earthing & Bonding
Configuration inside telecommunication centres ETSI EN 300
253

Module 2: Earth Electrode Design

This seminar captures the essential elements of practical earthing and
discusses products and techniques available to the designer, installer and
maintenance personnel.
d. Explanation of soil resistivity and earth resistance.
e. Impact of soil resistance, electrode depth and electrode
thickness on the earth resistance.
f. Discussion on parallel earth electrodes
g. Methods of testing soil resistivity and earth resistance.
h. Practical 1 Testing and Design
Carry out soil resistivity testing of the soil available. From this
calculate the expected resistance on one rod. Then install one
rod and measure its resistance to ground to verify the calculated
result. Calculate resistance of multiple rods. Install these multiple
rods and measure the resistance to compare with the calculated
resistance.
i. Practical 2 CADWELD
Carry out CADWELD using CADWELD PLUS.
 Module 3: Surge Protection

MODULE 3 : SECTION 1 - OPERATION OF SPD

The selection of appropriate surge protection devices can be simplified if

there was a basic understanding of key yardsticks, that can be used to
size up a surge protection device and core technologies could be
understood. This training will provide this understanding.
a) Introducing the concepts of surge diversion in power circuits.
b) Discussion on various surge protection devices, including Gas
Arrestors, Metal Oxide Varistors and Spark Gaps.
c) Discussion of advantages of surge reduction filters for enhanced
protection.
d) Discuss surge protection for telephone lines
e) Selecting surge protection devices and writing performance
specifications for telecommunications applications
f) Discuss Surge Ratings, Imax (Max Discharge) and In (Nominal
Discharge)
g) Discuss Voltage Ratings Up (Voltage protection Level) and Uc (MCOV)

MODULE 3 : SECTION 2 - SPD for AC POWER

Discuss various component Types

Discuss ERICO technologies including Transient Discriminating,
Triggered Spark Gaps and Surge REduction Filters

MODULE 3: SECTION 3

DC SURGE PROTECTION OF REMOTE RADIO UNITS RRU orREMOTE

RADIO HEAD RRH

Modern cellular and microwave equipment utilize remote radio unit RRU
or remote radio head RRH which is fed from the base station via optical
fiber. This eliminates the loss issues on feeders and allows transmission
to occur at much higher frequencies with larger bandwidth. Power to the
RRU cannot be transferred from the base station to RRU or RRH via the
optical fiber. Hence, power is fed separately as DC on copper cables. The
copper cables are either separate from the fiber or are a composite fiber-
copper cable.

The DC feed acts as a source of lightning surges back into the equipment
room. More precaution needs to be taken on how to control these surges,
than ever before.

In traditional radio, damage to equipment would normally be limited to the

radio equipment. In the modern scenario damage can occur to the
rectifiers or the whole DC power system, which would jeopardize other
equipment installed at the site.

a. Location of SPD The simple solution to this may seem like installing
Transient Voltage Surge Suppressors (TVSS) or Surge Protective
Devices (SPD) on the DC feeds. However, there are intricacies that
involve ground loops & voltage drops associated with cable lengths
that need to be understood before choosing the correct location of
TVSS. This paper will discuss the possible location of the SPD and the
benefit and disadvantages with each location presented.

b. Sizing of SPD There is guidance on the sizing of AC SPD in various

standards, including IEEE C61.42, IEC61643 & ITU K56. There is
some guidance on the sizing of SPDs for coaxial feeders and tower
lights in ITU K56 guidelines. However the application of DC SPD on
RRU is a relatively new concept and standards for sizing of these may
not exist. The paper will look at methods of sizing AC SPDs and SPDs
for traditional feeders and tower lights as a benchmark and propose
suitable values for DC SPD for RRU.

c. Testing of SPD Finally, the application of SPDs in DC applications

poses some unique challenges that are not present in AC applications.
One such challenge is ensuring that the DC voltage present does not
cause the SPD to get into continuous conduction at any time. In AC
systems there are many voltage crossing and hence there is
opportunity for SPD to get out of conduction. This paper will look at a
test setup that simulates the DC application and demonstrate examples
of results obtained
MODULE 3 SECTION 4 : SURGE PROETCTION OF TELEPHONE LINES

a. Typical Telecommunications Surges

b. The nature of telecoms surges
c. Test impulses used to represent typical telecoms surges
d. Telecommunications Surge Protector Topologies
e. Primary Overvoltage Protection
f. Secondary Overvoltage Protection
g. Overcurrent Protection
h. Frequency Response
i. Comparison of some Telecoms Surge Protectors
j. Protectors Compared
k. Physical and Descriptive Comparison
l. Performance Comparison

Module 4: Lightning Protection

There has been a lot of development in the field of lightning protection

especially in the techniques of lightning rod selection and placement.
Some of these developments have already began to have an impact on
practices around the world. This training discuses some new
developments
a) Discussion on lightning formation and the key criteria for lightning to
attach to a target.
b) Discussions of various air terminals and their advantages and
disadvantages
c) Discussions of various down-conductors and their advantages and
disadvantages
Module 5 : Standards Applicable to Telecommunication
Earthing

The application of the following standards will be discussed:

a) AS3015 Electrical Installations Extra low voltage d.c. power
supplies and service earthing within public telecommunications network
b) ETSI EN 300 253 Environmental Engineering, Earthing and bonding
configuration inside telecommunciations centres
c) ITU GUIDE K27- PROTECTION AGAINST INTERFERENCE : Bonding
Configurations & Earthing of Telecommunications Installations Inside a
Subscribers Building
d) ITU Guide K56 PROTECTION AGAINST INTERFERENCE : Protection
of Radio Base Stations Against Lightning Discharge.
 Module 1

6 Point Plan for

Telecommunications
MODULE TITLE: 6 Point Plan for Telecommunications
Module Outline:

This module will help develop an overall understanding of the

telecommunication grounding, bonding and protection system

It will provide a clear method for looking at grounding & bonding

The internal and external grounding system will be discussed,

Objectives:

Understand the 6 point plan

Understand how it is applied to a telecom site

Understand earth loops and the layout of the grounding system

Target Audience:

Telecom Engineers & Technicians

Mode Of Delivery:

Powerpoint presentation.

Excercises

Ground Electrode testing

Duration : 1.5 Hours

1.1 SIX POINT PROTECTION PLAN

There is no single technology that can eliminate the risk of lightning and its transients. A holistic
systems approach is required.
The Six Point Plan recommends:
1. Capture the direct lightning strike at a preferred point on purpose-designed air terminals;
2. Conduct the lightning current to ground safely via a purpose-designed downconductor
system to minimise the dangers of side-flashing;
3. Dissipate the energy into the ground with minimal rise in ground potential through a low
impedance grounding system;
4. Eliminate earth loops and differentials by creating an equipotential grounding plane under
transient conditions;
5. Protect equipment from surges and transients on power lines; and
6. Protect equipment from surges and transients on communications and signal lines to prevent
equipment damage and costly operational downtime.
The figure below shows a representation of comprehensive lightning and surge protection for a
telecommunications facility:

Figure 1 : Six point Plan Applied to a Telecommunications facility

The six point plan is applicable to any facility including buildings. For telecommunications it
serves as better to slightly modify it and look at the problem in these 5 ways.
1. Ideal Indoor Grounding Arrangement
2. Ideal Outdoor Grounding Arrangement
3. AC Surge Protection
4. MDF Surge Protection for Telephone Lines and Coaxial Surge Protection
5. Direct Strike Lightning protection.

Generally, the order of importance of 1 to 4) will remain the same for all sites powered by
mains power. However 5 may go up in the order of priority for sites that have tall masts or
located on a mountaintop.

1.2 Ideal Indoor Grounding Layout

Figure 2, below shows the ideal arrangement of the grounding system inside a
telecommunications equipment room. This arrangement is not always possible due to certain
constraints at the site or if the site is existing. Alternative layouts, can be implemented.
However when that is done efforts should be made to minimize ground loops between the AC
Power ground, telecommunications building earth and telecommunications tower earth.

DC Power to Racks Rectifiers

DC AC
Communications Racks

Communications Racks
5) CEB 7) Battery
Ground

UPS
1) Service Ground
Bar, SEB AC Power to Racks
6) MDF
AC Main AC Distri-
MDF Switch Board bution

3) Telecom
Ground
Electrode 4) AC Power
Ground Electrode
2) Bonding Terminal

Figure 2 : Ideal Layout for the Indoor Grounding in a Telecommunications Equipment Room
Notes:

1) A Service Ground Bar, SEB shall be installed in close vicinity to the MDF, and the AC
Main Switchboard. The case study at the end of this paper discusses, examples which
demonstrate improvised yet effective designs, whereby the SEB is not in close vicinity
of the AC Main Switchboard. The Service Ground Bar shall be a minimum of 50mm x 5
mm.
2) A bonding terminal, CET shall be provided as a means of connecting the SEB to the
ground bar inside the AC Main Switchboard for equipotential bonding. This terminal,
should prefebrably be inside an enclosure out the AC Main Switchboard and clearly be
labeled as Telecommunications Bonding Terminal or Communictations Earth
Terminal. The equipotential bonding conductor shall be a minimum of 35 mm2 and
less than a total length of 5 metres in an ideal layout.
3) Telecommunications Ground Electrode. The resistance to ground for the
telecommunications ground shall be less than 5 ohms. For larger repeater sites the
telecommunications ground resistance shall be less than 2 ohms. For a large
telephone exchange or switch the ground resistance shall be less than 1 ohms. The
recommended layout of the telecommunications ground is discussed later.
4) AC Ground Electrode. The resistance of this electrode shall be as specified by the
local electricity authority or local standards. Many electricity authorities do not specify a
maximum value. If the electricity authority or the standards allow the
telecommunications ground electrode to be used as common grounding, for AC Power,
than this electrode is not required. Most authorities not do allow the use of common
grounds for telecommunications and AC Power.
5) CEB, Communications Ground Bar. For the ease of installation, it is a good practice to
have a communications ground bar close to equipment racks. All the equipment can be
grounded to the CEB and a single run of grounding conductor can be run to the SEB.
THE CEB can be installed below a false floor or and top of equipment racks on cable
trays. In the absence of the CEB, it is an acceptable practice to run individual ground
cables from the equipment to the SEB. The minimum size of the grounding conductors
shall be 35 mm2. Flexible conductors of equal to or greater than 70 mm2 CSA are
preferred.
6) The ground conductor from the MDF to the SEB shall be a minimum of 35mm2.
Flexible conductors of equal to or greater than 70 mm2 CSA are preferred.
7) It is common practice in telecommunications to have positive grounded. The
arrangement will be no different of negative ground is used, other than the change in
polarity. If multiple battery banks exist with opposite polarities they can still be
grounded at the SEB. Figure 2, shows the arrangement of grounding if batteries are
opposite in polarity. The size of the battery grounding conductor is depended on the
Ampere-Hour rating of the batteries and consultation with relevant standards or
standards of battery manufacturers shall be used as a guide to choosing the conductor
size.
 12 Volt Battery
Charger or
Rectifier *

+12 Volts

0 Volts

Telecommunica
tions Service
Ground Bar
ERITECH SEB
6 or SEB10

0 Volts Connect to
Various Telecom
Racks
MDF
Lightning
Protection
- 48 Volts Ground
Cable Screen
Grounds

Rectifier or Rack
Power system *

Note:
* The rectifier or the battery
charger can be substituted for a
Solar Regulator. The grounding Telecommunications
arrangement will be exactly the Ground Electrode
same System

Figure 3: Typical Grounding of Multiple Batteries with Opposite Polarities

1.3 Ideal Outdoor Grounding Layout

Figure 4, below shows the ideal arrangement of the grounding system outside
telecommunications hut. This arrangement is not always possible due to certain constraints at
the site or if the site exists. Where the telecommunication equipment is installed in a large
multi functional building or several floor above the ground floors this layout may not be
possible.
Alternative outdoor ground electrode system needs designing on a case basis if the suggested
layout below is not possible to implement.

Telecommunications Hut or
Building

SEB
6) Feeder Ground Bar, FEB 2) Vertical
5) Feeder 1) Ring Earth Ground
6) Tower Electrode
Ground Ground
Bond 4) Feeders

Communications Figure 4 : Ideal Layout for

Mast
the Outdoor Grounding in a
Telecommunications
Equipment Room
3) Tower
Ground
Notes:

1) Ring Earth, A ring earth around the telecommunications building is recommended, as

this arrangement allows the ground potential rise or the EPR around the building to be
kept as close as possible to equal. Alternative arrangements can be multiple radials or
crows foot design, where there is limitation in implementing a ring earth. The
recommended conductor for the buried ring ground is 25 x 3 mm tinned copper tape.
The recommended depth of burial for the tape is 450 mm below ground level.
2) Vertical ground electrodes, of depth varying from 1.2 metres to, in excess of 10 metres
can be used to improve the ground resistance to the recommended values. As a rule of
thumb, the spacing between these vertical ground rods, shall be a minimum of 2
electrode lengths. Generally these ground electrodes are driven into the ground. It is
not practical to drive very long electrodes in one piece. Sectional rods of 1.2 to 2.4
metre lengths can be used with couplers to join individual sections to achieve greater
driven depths. Where the soil is too hard to be driven into or there is a need to apply
ground enhancement material, GEM, around the electrode, drilled holes can be made
to facilitate the installation. All underground connections shall be CADWELD.
3) Tower ground. The tower ground layout is very similar to the building ground layout.
Radials buried at a depth of 450 mm and made of 25 x 3 mm tinned copper can be
used to reduce ground impedance. The radial lengths can vary from 5 metres to 50
metres.
4) Feeders running from the tower to the building are either coaxial type or waveguides.
These shall be grounded on the top on the mast and at the bottom of the mast using
appropriate grounding kits.
5) Where Coaxial feeders are used, they shall be provided with surge protection and
grounded to the FEB, at the point of entry. Where coaxial surge protectors are not
used, these feeders shall be grounded using appropriate grounding kits, at the FEB.
6) Ideally the tower ground should be connected to the FEB so that it can be
disconnected for the purpose of testing. It is common to have the tower ground
connected to building ground underground, which is acceptable. However this will
mean that the building and the tower ground resistance could not be measured
independently
1.4 AC Surge Protection

This subject is covered in Module 3

1.5 MDF Surge Protection for Telephone Lines and Coaxial Surge Protection

This subject is covered in Module 3

1.6 Direct Strike Lightning protection.

This subject is covered in module 4

1.7 Other Factor to Consider in the design of Grounding and Lightning protection
System for Telecommunications

Some other factors that need considering when designing a grounding and lightning protection
system for a telecommunications site are:
Manufacturers of equipment and various standards call for specific values of ground
resistance for the telecommunications grounding system. These values range from 0.5
ohms to 5 ohms. It is advisable, that prior to installing a grounding system, a soil
resistivity test be carried out. From the results of this test, the size and extent of the
grounding system required can be calculated. The soil resistivity test is carried out on
the surface of the ground and no deep penetration is needed. Specialised ground
testing equipment is needed to carry out this test.
If the desired ground resistance is not achieved, either in the calculation or after
physical installation, the first option would be to seek advise from manufacturers of the
telecommunications equipment on the higher value obtained. If there is a need to
reduce the resistance, then there are specialized product like GEM, ground
Enhancement Material and EGel Earth Gel. The use of Bentonite is also common .
Generally bentonite will not give as much of an improvement as these other
compounds would
The recommendations in this paper are based on an ideal site. In many instances it is
not possible to implement all these recommendations, due to site constraints. For
example the site may be existing with telephone cables entering on one of the building
and terminating at the MDF and the power cables entering the opposite end
terminating at the Main Switchboard. It is not possible in the scope of this paper to
discuss all the permutations that may exist, however the case study, below
demonstrate how an improvised design can still be effective.
 1.8 Case Study

The layout below in Figure 5, existed at a small telephone exchange. The power cables,
entered the AC MSB or the AC Main Switchboard. The AC MSB then supplied the DB or the
AC Distribution board with a power feed. The earth connection between the DB and the
telecommunications SEB did not physically exist. However, there was an incidental earth bond,
through the rectifiers, which feed DC power to the telecom racks, shown in dotted lines. The
problem that exists, is that if there is a lightning surge coming via the power line, it will increase
the Earth Potential rise, EPR of the AC Earth Electrode. At that moment the Telecom Earth will
be close to zero volts. Due to a large potential different between the AC Earth electrode and
the Telecom Earth Electrode, a large current, will flow from the AC MSB, via DB, via rectifiers,
via the telecom racks to the SEB and through to the telecom earth electrode. This current will
flow through small conductors and possibly through the circuit boards within the equipment and
almost certainly cause massive damage. The easy answer to this problem, is that the AS MSB
and the SEB should be next to each other and connected via a bonding terminal. In practice it
is not easy to move the AC MSB and the SEB around that easily.

AC Earth AC MSB
Electrode

MDF Foyer

Telecommunications D
B
Room

Telecom Racks Rectifier

SEB
Telecom
Electrode

Figure 5 A Bad Earth Arrangement Layout

Improvisation Number 1.
The immediate improvement that can be done on this site is that a solid conductor of say, 70
mm2 cable be installed to bond the DB to the SEB. While this is not ideal, as the current flow
from AC MSB to SEB will still occur as previously, but, there is a solid connection between DB
and SEB which will equalize the voltage reasonable quickly.

AC Earth
Electrode AC MSB

MDF Foyer

D
B
Communications Room
Telecom
Electrode

SEB Figure 16 : Slightly Improved Layout

Figure 6 A Improved Earthing Arrangement

Improvisation Number 2

In Figure 7 the SEB has been physically moved close to the AC MSB and an equipotential
conductor of a short length is used to connect the SEB to the AC power earth. The old SEB is
now used as a CEB, or communications earth bar where all the telecommunication racks are
grounded. However, there is no connection between the CEB and the ground electrode system
directly. This connection is via the new SEB. Now if there was an EPR at the AC MSB then the
telecom earth potential will be at a similar level and there will be no flow of current through
equipment. The other improvisation that has been done is that, while we do not have a ring
earth, a partial ring starts near the AC MSB and terminated near the telecommunications room.
Hence the EPR in the ground outside is kept as close as possible to zero between the AC MSB
and the telecommunications room.
 AC Earth
Electrode AC MSB

25 x 3 mm Cu Tape buried 450mm UG

Telecom
Electrode SEB
Equipotential
Bonding using 70
mm2 cable and
disconnect link

D
B

2 x 70 mm2 Green Yellow

Main Telecom Ground
Conductor
CEB
Equipot

1.5 metre Copper Bonded

Roads spaced 2.5 to 3
metres apart

Figure 7: Greatly Improved Layout

1.8 Conclusion

The subject of telecommunications grounding and lightning protection is broad. This paper
provides a summarized, yet comprehensive guide to the design and implementation of an
effective and practical grounding and lightning protection system. While the module does not
cover every possible scenario that may exist, it does provide adequate discussion to enable the
designer to come up with an ideal design or an improvised design if the ideal cannot be
achieved, due to constraints at the site.

In summary the module takes a comprehensive look at the following :

1. Ideal Indoor Grounding Arrangement
2. Ideal Outdoor Grounding Arrangement
3. AC Surge Protection
4. MDF Surge Protection for Telephone Lines
5. Direct Strike Lightning protection
 MODULE 2

Ground
Electrode Design

BASIC THEORY
 MODULE TITLE: Ground Electrode

Design Basic Theory

Module Outline:

This module will help develop the basic understanding of earth electrode
design to the sales engineer. It will provide the theoretical and scientific
explanation of why earth system design are done in a certain way.

Some common methods of soil resistivity testing and earth resistance

testing will be explained.

Examples of electrode designs and modeling will be shown.

The module will provide a basic appreciation of the types of earthing

systems used in electrical substations, telecommunications sites & mining
applications

Objectives:

Understand theory of earth system design

Be able to carry out design of earth electrode system

Target Audience:

Telecom Engineers & Technicians

Mode Of Delivery:

Powerpoint presentation.

Excercises

Ground Electrode testing

Duration : 1.5 Hours

2
2.1 Introduction

The fundamentals of ground electrode design, are seldom taught as part of the
curriculum in universities and colleges. These days we are also seeing a diminishing
level of formal training offered at work place on this subject. As such most new
engineers would have to self-educate themselves on this subject. A lot of information
is available within various standards, on ground electrode and soil testing. This article
offers the reader with the basic theory behind earth electrode design.

This module is in two Parts

PART 1 : Theory of Earth Electrode Design and Soil Resistivity Measurement

PART 2: Calculation and Measurement Techniques of Earth Electrode Resistance

PART 1 : Theory of Earth Electrode Design and Soil Resistivity Measurement

2.2 Distribution of Voltage in Ground- Sheath Theory

To understand grounding principles, the first thing that we will consider, is how the
voltage is distributed in the earth when a current is in injected into a vertical ground
rod. The intuitive understanding of this will enable us to develop better appreciate
why electrode designs are done a certain way. For example, this will help us to
understand why we use deeper earth electrodes or radial electrodes.

The soil is non-uniform in its conductivity and this factor will need to be accounted for
in the design of the earth electrode system. However to develop an understanding of
the principles of the current flow and the voltage distribution in the ground, we will
look a graphical model, which assumes uniform soil. This is called the sheath theory
of expanding soil conductivity. In Figure 1 the hemispherical sheaths depict
imaginary equipotential lines, which form in the ground when a current is injected into
a vertical ground rod.

Figure 1 Equipotential Lines

Caused in Ground when a
Current is injected in a vertical
ground rod.
(Sheath Theory)

3
2.3 The Electrode Resistance

The electrode resistance is that resistance offered to the flow of current into the
ground down to the expanse where the resistance of the ground becomes so low that
it becomes negligible.

Consider the cut away section of the sheaths surrounding the earth electrode in
Figure 1. In simple terms this resistance can be explained by the following
relationship.

R 1/A

where R is the resistance and A the area of each of the sheaths.

As the distance from the ground rod increases, the surface area of the sheaths, get
larger. This means that at some distance, the additional soil area has negligible effect
on the ground resistance.

It is for this reason, when measuring earth resistance to a remote earth, the test only
needs to be confined to few tens, perhaps a few hundred of metres. For example:
When testing a single 2-metre electrode, the test is only referenced to remote earth
at distance of about 60-100 metres. Any greater reference distance than this would
add insignificantly to the resistance. Testing of earth resistance is discussed in more
detail later in this paper.

It is easier to see which dimensions of the earth electrode will have a greater impact
on the electrode resistance, if we consider what happens to the area of the
hemispherical sheaths. In Figure 2, we see that when the electrode is made longer,
the area increases significantly. Hence 1/A reduces giving us a reduction in the earth
resistance. However, if the diameter of the ground rod is increased, this offers very
little change in the area of the hemispherical shells and hence little changes in the
resistance.

Figure 2: Effect of Longer and Deeper Ground Rods on Ground Resistance

This intuitive understanding can be extended to horizontal electrodes. It can be seen

in Figure 3 that making a horizontal electrode longer will increase the surface area of
the sheaths surrounding it. Hence longer electrodes rather than deeper electrodes,
will give a greater reduction in the electrode resistance.

4
 Figure 3: Sheath Theory on Horizontal
Electrodes

Another factor that will have an impact on the earth resistance is the conductivity or
the resistivity of the soil. In fact it is this factor that makes it impossible to have a one
size fit all earthing design for different sites.

2.4 Soil Resistivity

Soil resistivity is another name for the specific resistance of the soil. It is measured in
ohm-metres or ohm centimetres. An ohm-metre is that resistivity of the soil when it
has a resistance of 1 ohm between opposite faces of a cube with 1 m sides.

Resistance is directly proportional to soil resistivity. This relationship is not as easy to

compute in real life as it may sound, because soil resistivity will inevitably vary with
depth. The second difficulty in dealing with different locations is that the resistivity
varies greatly with sites.

The tables below give as idea of the resistivity of several mediums that are of interest
for the design of grounding system.

MATERIAL TYPICAL RESITIVITY

Copper 1.72 x 10-8 ohm.m

GEM, Material 0.12 ohm.m

Bentonite 2.5 ohm.m

Concrete 30 to 90 ohm.m

5
 Table C2 From AS1768 Lightning Protection Standard

Factors that will affect the resistivity of the soil are the soil type, compactness,
chemical composition, temperature and water content. Figure 4 shows the effect of
moisture content and temperature on soil resistivity.

FIGURE 4: Effect of Moisture Content and Temperature on the Soil Resistivity

6
2.5 Measurement of Soil Resistivity

There are several methods of measuring the soil resistivity. These include

1) Wenner Array 4 point Method

2) Schlumberger Array
3) Driven Rod Method

The Wenner Array method is discussed in this paper because this is the most
common method of measuring soil resistivity. The scope of this document does not
allow detailed discussion on other soil testing methods.

Using the Wenner Array method, four small electrodes (auxiliary probes) are placed
in a straight line at intervals of a, to a depth of b. A current is passed through the
outer two probes, and the potential voltage is then measured between the two inner
probes. A simple Ohms Law equation determines the resistance. From this
information, it is now possible to calculate the resistivity of the local soil. For most
practical circumstances, a is twenty times larger than b, where we can then make the
assumption that b=0.

Then the Resistivity, is given by:

= 2 a Re

where

= Resistivity of the local soil (-m)

a = distance between probes (m)
b = depth of probes into the ground (m)
Re = resistance value measured by the testing device ()

These values give an average resistivity of the soil to a depth a. It is recommended

that a series of readings be taken at different values of a, as well as in a 90o turned
axis. It is a good practice to tabulate or plot the results because that gives a good
idea of how the resistivity is changing with depth and will give us a better clue on the
type of ground electrode to design.

For example, if the resistivity is very high at the top 3 metres but drastically drops
after that depth, then one would consider designing using electrodes that are driven
or drilled to deeper than 3 metres. Conversely if the resistance does not improve
beyond a certain depth, say 2 metres, then horizontal electrodes may be considered
in the earth electrode design.

Figure 5: Wenner Array (4 Point Method)

7
Figure 6 shows a typical record sheet for resistivity measurements. Experience has
shown that many testers of the soil resistivity often do not have a full appreciation of
the extent to which the test needs to be carried out. It is often noted that only a single
or a handful of values are measured. It is recommended that for the design of ground
electrode, a comprehensive set of results be gathered in the range of 2-40metres.

SPACING a Measured Resistivity R =

Value of Re 2 a Re
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40

Figure 6: Typical Test Record Sheet for Wenner Array Method

8
 PART 2: Calculation and Measurement
Techniques of Earth Electrode Resistance

2.6 Introduction

The fundamentals of ground electrode design, are seldom taught as part of the
curriculum in universities and colleges. These days we are also seeing a diminishing
level of formal training offered at work place on this subject. As such most new
engineers would have to self-educate themselves on this subject. A lot of information
is available within various standards, on ground electrode and soil testing. This article
offers the engineer who is new to the field of earthing with the basic theory behind
earth electrode design.

This article is in two Parts

PART 1 : Theory of Earth Electrode Design and Soil Resistivity Measurement

PART 2: Calculation and Measurement Techniques of Earth Electrode Resistance

2.7 Calculating on Earth Electrode Resistance of a Single Rod.

The ground resistance can either be calculated using empirical formulae, by using
nomograms or by the use of software.

Examples of formulae that are available for use are contained in AS1768 Lightning
protection Standard, Appendix C. The formulae enlisted below, extracted from
AS1768, are two most commonly used.

9
Traditionally software programs have been able to carry out two layer models of
ground resistivity. That means that resistivity measured had to be averaged out to
two values with corresponding depths. Modern softwares can take multi layer
resistivity values as an input.

In fact the real value of the software is not so much in computing resistance values
for single or a few electrodes as this can be done easily with a formulae. However
they can be powerful in calculating resistance of multiple ground electrodes, step and
touch voltages and also simulating fault current injection.

Another method of calculating the resistance of a single earth rod, when the
dimensions and the resistivity are known is using nomograms. In the example in
Figure 7, a 7m earth rod, of diameter 10mm will produce a resistance of 7.6 ohms if
the reading from the Wenner 4 point test is 1 ohm.

Figure 7 Nomogram to calculate resistance of a single earth rod

10
2.8 Calculating on Earth Electrode Resistance of a Multiple Ground Rods

When ground rods are used in parallel it may seem at first that the resistance could
be calculated by simple equation 1/R = 1/R1+ 1/R2+ 1/R3.

However when one takes a closer look at the sheath theory discussed earlier, it
becomes evident that the spacing between the ground rods may have some impact
on the combined resistance. This is because the hemispherical sheaths of each of
the electrode will overlap each other and the overlap area has to be compensated
for. In the extreme case if two electrodes are superimposed to one another the size
of the sheath offered by them will be similar to the sheath offered by one electrode.
That is the resistance of two electrodes will be similar to that of one electrode if they
are installed totally adjacent.

Figure 8 Parallel Ground Rods

Rules of thumbs and utilisation factors are used in everyday calculations to quickly
compute parallel resistances without excessive analysis.

For example when two electrodes are placed 1 electrode length apart, 85% utilisation
of their parallel resistance is achieved. When these electrodes are 2 electrodes apart,
92 % utilisation is achieved. We sometimes see a rule of thumb used in practice that
states that the electrode spacing needs to be at least twice the electrode depth,
based on this utilisation.

Prior to the existence of softwares to carry out calculations, the use nomograms were
the incumbent method of calculating resistance of multiple ground rods. There is no
reason that these cannot be used today for quick calculations.

11
Figure 9 shows a nomogram that can be used to design a multiple electrode system
if the resistance of one electrode was known through calculation or measurement.
This has been extracted from the Handbook of the Electricity Authority of NSW,
1973.

Figure 9 Ground resistance of multiple ground rods

The calculation of the electrode resistance for multiple ground rod system is a trivial
matter when using modern day software. It is essentially a matter of inputting the soil
resistivity, electrode dimensions and the grid size layout and it will churn out a
number, without too much fuss.

2.9 Measurement of Electrode Resistance

When an electrode system has been designed and installed, it is usually necessary
to measure and confirm the earth resistance between the electrode and true Earth.
The most commonly used method of measuring the earth resistance of an earth
electrode is the 3-point measuring technique shown in Figure 10. This method is
derived from the 4-point method, which is used for soil resistivity measurements.

12
 Figure 10 The 3-point Method of Earth Resistance Measurement

The 3-point method, called the fall of potential method, comprises the Earth
Electrode to be measured and two other electrically independent test electrodes,
usually labelled P (Potential) and C (Current). These test electrodes can be of lesser
quality (higher earth resistance) but must be electrically independent of the
electrode to be measured. An alternating current (I) is passed through the outer
electrode C and the voltage is measured, by means of an inner electrode P, at some
intermediary point between them. The Earth Resistance is simply calculated using
Ohms Law; Rg = V/I, internally by the test equipment.

When performing a measurement, the aim is to position the auxiliary test electrode C
far enough away from the earth electrode under test so that the auxiliary test
electrode P will lay outside the effective resistance areas of both the earth system
and the other test electrode (see Figure 11). If the current test electrode, C, is too
close, the resistance areas will overlap and there will be a steep variation in the
measured resistance as the voltage test electrode is moved. If the current test
electrode is correctly positioned, there will be a flat (or very nearly so) resistance
area somewhere in between it and the earth system, and variations in the position of
the voltage test electrode should only produce very minor changes in the resistance
figure.

Figure 11 Resistance areas and the variation of the measured resistance with voltage electrode position

13
The instrument is connected to the earth system under test via a short length of test
cable, and a measurement is taken.

Measurement accuracy can be affected by the proximity of other buried metal objects
to the auxiliary test electrodes. Objects such as fences and building structures,
buried metal pipes or even other earthing systems can interfere with the
measurement and introduce errors. Often it is difficult to judge, merely from visual
inspection of the site, a suitable location for the tests stakes and so it is always
advisable to perform more than one measurement to ensure the accuracy of the test.

Fall of Potential Method

This is one of the most common methods employed for the measurement of earth
resistance and is best suited to small systems that dont cover a wide area. It is
simple to carry out and requires a minimal amount of calculation to obtain a result.

The outer test electrode, or current test stake, is driven into the ground a good
distance away from the earth system, This distance will depend on the size of the
system being tested and the inner electrode, or voltage test stake, is then driven into
the ground mid-way between the earth electrode and the current test stake, and in a
direct line between them.

Maximum dimension Distance from electrical Minimum distance from

across earth system, m centre of earth system to electrical centre of earth
voltage test stake, m system to current test
stake. m

1 15 30
2 20 40
5 30 60
10 43 85
20 60 120
50 100 200
100 140 280

Figure 12 Variation of current and voltage electrode separation with earth grid size
The Fall of Potential method incorporates a check to ensure that the test electrodes
are indeed positioned far enough away for a correct reading to be obtained. It is
advisable that this check be carried, as it is really the only way of ensuring a correct
result.

To perform a check on the resistance figure, two additional measurements should be

made; the first with the voltage test electrode (P) moved 10% of the original voltage
electrode-to-earth system separation away from its initial position, and the second
with it moved a distance of 10% closer than its original position, as shown in Figure
13.

14
 Figure 13 Checking the validity of a resistance measurement

If these two additional measurements are in agreement with the original

measurement, within the required level of accuracy, then the test stakes have been
correctly positioned and the DC resistance figure can be obtained by averaging the
three results. However, if there is substantial disagreement amongst any of these
results, then it is likely that the stakes have been incorrectly positioned, either by
being too close to the earth system being tested, too close to one another or too
close to other structures that are interfering with the results. The stakes should be
repositioned at a larger separation distance or in a different direction and the three
measurements repeated. This process should be repeated until a satisfactory result
is achieved.

The Slope Method

This method is suitable for use with large earthing systems, such as sub-station
earth. It involves taking a number of resistance measurements at various earth
electrode to voltage electrode separations and then plotting a curve of the resistance
variation between the earth and the current. From this graph, and from data obtained
from tables, it is possible to calculate the theoretical optimum location for the voltage
electrode and thus, from the resistance curve, calculate the true resistance.

It is similar to the fall of potential method but several reading are taken by moving the
inner test electrode from very close to the earth grid to the position of the outer test
electrode. The readings obtained are then plotted on a graph. Figure 14 shows and
example of the graph obtained. It can be observed that at approximately 60% of the
distance the slope is the gentlest and the resistance corresponding to this is the true
resistance of the electrode being measured. In this case it is 20 ohms.

Figure 14 Typical Graph, Slope Methods

For full details of this method, refer to paper 62975, written by Dr G.F. Tagg, taken
from the proceedings of IEE volume 117, No 11, Nov. 1970.

15
For full details of this method, refer to paper 62975, written by Dr G.F. Tagg, taken
from the proceedings of IEE volume 117, No 11, Nov. 1970.

2.10 Soil Improvement Techniques

In areas of very high soil resistivity value, low resistance cannot be achieved through
the use of buried and driven earth electrodes alone. There are four techniques
commonly used for the improvement of soil. These include:

Use of soluble additives like common salt or copper sulphate

Use of bentonite or bentonite-gypsum mixture
Use of GEM, Ground Enhancement Material
Use of chemical ground rods.

a) Soluble salts will often give good short-term results and are sometimes necessary.
These are soluble in nature and it is envisaged that these will leach away into the soil
over time. No long-term studies have been done to show their performance over
extended periods.

b) Bentonite and Bentonite-Gypsum mixes are relatively cheap in Australia and

available in abundance. Some caution needs to apply when these are used in very
dry soil conditions as exhibited in large parts of Australia. The IEEE Std 80 2000
Section 14.5 States that

Use of bentonite, a natural clay containing the mineral montmorillionite, which was
formed by volcanic action years ago. It is non-corrosive, stable, and has a resistivity
of 2.5 m at 300% moisture. The low resistivity results mainly from an electrolytic
process between water, Na2O (soda), K2O (potash), CaO (lime), MgO (magnesia),
and other mineral salts that ionize forming a strong electrolyte with pH ranging from
8 to 10. This electrolyte will not gradually leach out, as it is part of the clay itself.
Provided with a sufficient amount of water, it swells up to 13 times its dry volume
and will adhere to nearly any surface it touches. Due to its hygroscopic nature, it
acts as a drying agent drawing any available moisture from the surrounding
environment. Bentonite needs water to obtain and maintain its beneficial
characteristics. Its initial moisture content is obtained at installation when the slurry
is prepared. Once installed, bentonite relies on the presence of ground moisture to
maintain its characteristics. Most soils have sufficient ground moisture so that
drying out is not a concern. The hygroscopic nature of bentonite will take advantage
of the available water to maintain its as installed condition. It may not function well
in a very dry environment, because it may shrink away from the electrode,
increasing the electrode resistance.

c) GEM, or Ground Enhancement Materials usually are poured in drilled holes as a

slurry and set hard over time. This material contains a small percentage of bentonite
and cement, but mostly constitutes a conductive form of carbon. Formulae used for
calculating the resistance for concrete encased electrodes but using the resistivity
value of GEM, can be used to calculate or predict resistances. It is often not possible
to predict the resistance when using other types of soil improvement techniques.
Studies have shown that GEM can produce the excellent long-term results when
used in drilled electrodes in a variety of soil conditions. The IEEE Std 80 2000
Section 14.5 States that

16
 Ground enhancement materials, some with a resistivity of less than 0.12 m
(about 5% of the resistivity of bentonite), are typically placed around the rod in an
augured hole or around grounding conductors in a trench, in either a dry form or
premixed in a slurry. Some of these enhancement materials are permanent and
will not leach any chemicals into the ground. Other available ground enhancement
materials are mixed with local soil in varying amounts and will slowly leach into the
surrounding soil, lowering the earth resistivity.

d) Chemical rods are sometimes used in extreme cases of very high resistivity.
Chemical-type electrodes consist of a copper tube filled with a salt. Holes in the tube
allow moisture to enter, dissolve the salts, and allow the salt solution to leach into the
ground. These electrodes are installed in an augured hole and typically back-filled
with soil treatment.

2.11 Step and Touch Voltages

Step and touch voltages are a concern that needs to be incorporate in the electrode
design and testing regime, at substations, transmission towers, areas frequented by
people and major sites like wind farms. Figure 15 shows how touch and step
voltages can develop in the near vicinity of a structure, which encounters a fault
current. It also depicts how this voltage can be mitigated, by designing a ground grid
in the area of concern.

Figure 15: Step and Touch Voltages

The Standard IEEE80-2000 in Annex B, C and D provide the methodology and the
calculations for computing the maximum step and touch voltages using formulae.

It has become a common practice these days to compute maximum and step
voltages, using software programs, most of which use the formulae from the
Standard IEEE 80. Modern programs can use two layer soil models or multi layer soil

17
models referring to the variation in soil resistivity used as a possible input into the
software.

The example below has been generated by commercially available software and
provided by PhysElec Solutions, Courtesy of Dr Franco DAllesandro.

Grounding Design Example: Generated by PhysElec Solutions

Type:

The earth grid being simulated is made of horizontal

conductors (Grid size is 50 x 50 m with a compression ratio of
0.5, buried at a depth of 0.5 m below ground level) and 3 m
ground rods at all node points.

Soil model used:

LAYER TYPE REFLECTION RESISTIVITY THICKNESS

No. COEFFICIENT (ohm-meter) (METERS)
----- ------ ------------- ------------- -------------
1 Air 0.00000 0.1E+11 Infinite
2 Soil -0.999990 100.000 3.00000
3 Soil 0.666667 500.000 20.0000
4 Soil 0.818182 5000.00 Infinite

Soil type: HORIZONTAL MULTILAYER

Fault current specified: 2000 amperes

Grounding Design Example: Generated by PhysElec Solutions

18
 Grounding Grid (3D - View) [ID:Scenario1]

-12

0 SOIL SURFACE

Z AXIS (METERS) 12

24

36

48

30
Y
AX

18
IS
(M

6
ET
ER

-6
S)

-18

-30

-30 -18 -6 6 18 30

X AXIS (METERS)

3-D View of Conductors

Results:

Resistance of Electrode System: 6.68 ohms

Main Electrode Potential Rise (GPR max.): 13360 volts

13348
13308
13267
13226
13185
13145
13104
13063
13022
12982
12941
12900
12859
12819
12778
12737
12696
12656
12615
12574

19
Grounding Design Example: Generated by PhysElec Solutions

Safety report:

MAXIMUM MAXIMUM
ALLOWABLE COMPUTED OUTCOME
VALUE (V) VALUE (V)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
TOUCH VOLTAGE (on grid): 542 490 ACCEPTABLE
STEP VOLTAGE (on grid): 1700 364 ACCEPTABLE

All computed voltages in the observation zone are below the maximum
allowable values.

Touch voltage profile

1524 .. 1608
1440 .. 1524
1356 .. 1440
1272 .. 1356
1188 .. 1272
1104 .. 1188
1020 .. 1104
936 .. 1020
852 .. 936
768 .. 852
684 .. 768
600 .. 684
516 .. 600
432 .. 516
348 .. 432
264 .. 348
180 .. 264
95 .. 180
11 .. 95

Grounding Design Example: Generated by PhysElec Solutions

Step voltage profile

20
 345 .. 364
326 .. 345
307 .. 326
287 .. 307
268 .. 287
249 .. 268
230 .. 249
211 .. 230
192 .. 211
173 .. 192
154 .. 173
135 .. 154
116 .. 135
97 .. 116
78 .. 97
59 .. 78
40 .. 59
21 .. 40
2 .. 21

2.12 Conceptual Design of an Earth Electrode for a Substation

The IEEE80 Standard for Safety in AC Substation Grounding is a most common

document used to assist with the design of an earthling system. Other documents
like the Australian ENA Earthing Guide and guidelines from local authorities should
be used in conjunction with this standard. Conceptual analysis of a grid system
usually starts with inspection of the substation layout plan, showing all major
equipment and structures. To establish the basic ideas and concepts, the following
points may serve as guidelines for starting a typical grounding grid design:

a) A continuous conductor loop should surround the perimeter to enclose as much

area as practical. This measure helps to avoid high current concentration and, hence,
high gradients both in the grid area and near the projecting cable ends. Enclosing
more area also reduces the resistance of the grounding grid.

b) Within the loop, conductors are typically laid in parallel lines and, where practical,
along the structures or rows of equipment to provide for short ground connections.

c) A typical grid system for a substation may include 120mm2 bare copper
conductors buried 0.30.5 m below grade, spaced 37 m apart, in a grid pattern. At
cross-connections, the conductors would be securely bonded together. Ground rods
may be at the grid corners and at junction points along the perimeter. Ground rods
may also be installed at major equipment, especially near surge arresters. In
multilayer or high resistivity soils, it might be useful to use longer rods or rods
installed at additional junction points.

d) This grid system would be extended over the entire substation switchyard and
often beyond the fence line. Multiple ground leads or larger sized conductors would

21
be used where high concentrations of current may occur, such as at a neutral-to-
ground connection of generators, capacitor banks, or transformers.

e) The ratio of the sides of the grid meshes usually is from 1:1 to 1:3. Frequent cross-
connections have a relatively small effect on lowering the resistance of a grid. Their
primary role is to assure adequate control of the surface potentials. The cross-
connections are also useful in securing multiple paths for the fault current, minimizing
the voltage drop.

Figure 16 shows the typical layout of an earth electrode for an electrical substation.

2.12 Post Installation Measurement of Step on Touch Voltage

Measurements.

Most good quality ground testers can be used as an aid to measure step and touch
voltages at an installed site. The measurements are made direct by the use of test
probes supplied with the equipment. A reference probe is connected to the main
earth bar of the facility when these tests are being done. For example the touch
voltage test can be done between a piece of switchgear and a distance of 1 m from
the equipment. Or the tests for step voltages can be done at several locations with
the spacing of 1 m in the ground, for example, outside the fence line. These readings
are measured in ohms and need to be multiplied by the maximum permissible fault
current to obtain the step and touch voltages.

These values should then be compared to the calculated values for a specified body
mass, commonly 70 kg.

22
 Figure 16 : General Arrangement of an Earth Electrode System at an
Electrical Sub-Station

2.13 Ground Connections

The Standard IEEE 80 makes the following statement regarding the choice of
connectors for use in ground grids for electrical substations

All connections made in a grounding network above and below ground should
be evaluated to meet the same general requirements of the conductor used;
namely, electrical conductivity, corrosion resistance, current carrying capacity,
and mechanical strength. These connections should be massive enough to
maintain a temperature rise below that of the conductor and to withstand the
effect of heating. The connections should also be strong enough to withstand the
mechanical forces caused by the electromagnetic forces of maximum expected
fault currents and be able to resist corrosion for the intended life of the
installation.

IEEE Std 837-1989 provides detailed information on the application and testing
of permanent connections for use in substation grounding. Grounding
connections that pass IEEE Std 837 1989 for a particular conductor size range
and material should satisfy all the criteriaelectrical conductivity, corrosion
resistance, current carrying capacity, and mechanical strengthfor that same
conductor size range and material.

Exothermic Connections (or CADWELD) meet all the requirements of IEEE 837
standard and are the most common method of connection in electrical substations
and telecommunications grounding systems.

Other connection methods that are available and used for other application like
distribution transformer ground, building ground, control equipment ground system.
Other Common connectors include U Bolt Clamps, Hammerloks, Compression
Connections and A Corn Clamps.

13) Materials for Grounding Conductors and Electrodes

Copper is used almost universally used as the grounding conductor although some
legacy use of galvanized conductors is observed from time to time.

Copper theft has become an endemic problem in recent years and there is a growing
use of modern conductors, including copper coated steel and composite conductors
that have tinned copper in the centre and steel outer.

23
 Figure 17 Theft Deterrant Grounding Conductors

The most commonly used ground rods are copper bonded steel. In high salinity soil
conditions, stainless steel ground rods are used. Copper bonded ground rods are
effective in a wide range of soil conditions. Copper Bonded ground rods that comply
with international standards BS7430, and UL467 should be selected to ensure
longevity in the soil.

2.14 Telecommunications Ground Electrode Design

The design of an earth electrode system for a telecommunications facility is covered

in AS3015-2004 Standard.

The calculation and testing of the ground electrode resistance is done in exactly the
same manner as described in this paper. However step and touch voltages are not
usually calculated. This is because risks of step and touch voltages are traditionally
associated with fault currents in power system and these risks do not exist at
telecommunications sites.

24
It is however recognized, that high
ground voltages can occur due to
lightning strikes near
telecommunications towers. It has not
been possible to calculate these ground
voltages due to the complex nature of
lightning impulses and the lack of
simple methodology to calculate it.
These days however, some software
programs can simulate lightning
impulses and calculate step and touch
voltages that may arise from these at
telecom towers and indeed any facility.

One consideration that has been

incumbent in telecommunications earth
electrode design is the need to handle
high frequency noise and lightning
strikes. As such one may find
discussions on the need for low
impedance earthing at
telecommunications sites as opposed to
just low resistance.

While earth impedance measurements

can be performed, there is no uniformity
in the test equipment used to measure
this and no benchmark on what is a
good impedance. As such earth
resistance measurements are done far Figure 18 Typical Earth Electrode Layout at a
more commonly and earth impedance Telecommunications Site
measurement is almost never done. A
more common impact of the high
frequency consideration on the
electrode design is an intuitive one and is exhibited in the widespread use flat tape
(commonly 25 x 3mmm copper tape) as the grounding conductor. Horizontal tape
conductors will provide high capacitive coupling to the ground and hence lower
impedance when compared with round or stranded conductors.

Figure 18 shows the typical layout of the earth electrode at an outdoor

telecommunications site

2.15 Conclusion

The process for the design of the ground electrode starts off with careful planning. A
scaled site drawing showing where equipment, structures and building will be
installed is a good start. The soil resistivity test should be carried at the site and
results recorded. If it is not possible to access site for the soil resistivity testing, then
it may be possible to have a series of design scenarios based on assumed range of
resistivity values.

25
 The key considerations in the design are the resistance and the step and touch
voltages. The understanding of the sheath theory of conductivity helps us decide
upon the geometry of an earth electrode. Empirical formulae, nomograms and
software programs can be used to carry out the calculations. Standard IEEE80 used
in conjunction with country specific guides like the ENA Earthing Guide in Australia
form an excellent reference set for the design of earth electrode for electrical
substations. The AS3015-2004 Standard is an excellent reference for the design of
telecommunications earth electrodes.

The earth grid resistance can be measured using several methods. Fall of potential
methods may be used for small earth grids. Larger grids will require testing using the
slope method or more sophisticated methods. The advantage of the slope method is
that it minimises the chances of error and provides a more accurate result for large
earth electrodes.

Post installation step and touch voltages should be measured where step and touch
voltages are part of the design consideration. The resistances and the step and touch
voltages should be measured after installation and compared with the design values.

Ground improvement materials can be used in soils with high resistivity to reduce the
earth resistance. IEEE 80 2000 standard discussed the advantages of ground
improvement materials like GEM. Care should be taken in the use of bentonite type
materials in dry environments.

The most comprehensive test standard for the pre-qualification of connectors used in
grounding electrodes is Standard IEEE837-2000. Exothermic or CADWELD
connections pass the test regime stipulated in this standard.

The discussion of choice of conductor size is outside the scope of this paper. Various
standards can be referred to for guidance on this. Copper is the most widely used
material for grounding. High incidence of copper theft has led to the development of
other composite materials that are used as grounding conductors.

26
EXERCISES
1) From the Soil Resistivity Data presented below, calculate the resistance that
you would get from a single earth rod of
Dimension 12mm x 1800mm
Dimension 15mm x 1800mm
Dimension 15mm x 2400 mm

SPACING Measured Value of Re Resistivity R = 2 a Re

a

2 30
4 8
6 4
8 2

Does Exercise 1 demonstrate that lower resistance can be obtained by longer rods or
by larger diameter ground rods.

2) How many of the same sized rods as Excercise 1) would you need to reduce
the resistance by 50%.

3) If you were using GEM in predrilled holes of 100mm diameter what value of
resistance will you get for each of the rod sizes in exercise 1.

4) If you were using Bentonite instead of GEM is there a way pf predicting the
resistance values.

27
Bibliography

1) NSW State Electricity Earthing Handbook, 1973.

2) Standard IEEE 80, - 2000: IEEE Guide for Safety in AC Substation Grounding
3) Standard IEEE 837 IEEE Standard for Qualifying Permanent Connections
Used in Substation Grounding
4) Telecom Training Centre Fiji; Course Notes, Earthing Principles PS001
5) Earthing Training Manual ERICO 2001
6) GROUND MEASURING TECHNIQUES: ELECTRODE RESISTANCE TO
REMOTE EARTH & SOIL RESISTIVITY Elvis R. Sverko ERICO, Inc. Facility
Electrical Protection, U.S.A. Revision Date: February 11, 1999
7) Photos and Images are Courtesy of ERICO Inc.
8) 3 D Graphics of Earth Simulation. Images Courtesy of Dr Franco DAllesandro
9) Paper 62975, written by Dr G.F. Tagg, taken from the proceedings of IEEE
volume 117, No 11, Nov. 1970
10) Grounding Design Example: Generated by PhysElec Solutions, Dr Franco
DAllesandro
11) Standard AS3015 Electrical installationsExtra-low voltage d.c. power
supplies and service earthing within public telecommunications networks

28
 Figure3.1.6 : Comparing Two SPDs

It is worth pointing out that there are several schemes that can be used for choosing installation
locations of SPDs. The choice of the scheme depends on cost, the sensitivity of the equipment
being protected, the frequency of the occurrence of surges, the importance of the systems or
the processes being protected.
For example, a simple scheme would have a SPD with low Up and a high Imax and In at the
Main Switchboard an no subsequent downstream protection.

In a larger installation, there may be a need to install a SPD at the main switch board, as coarse
primary protection and SPDs on distribution boards as finer secondary protection.

7
 MODULE 3 : SECTION 2- SPD for AC POWER

3.2.1 Comparison Of Device Types

There are four types surge diverters in the industry, namely spark gaps, gas arrestors,
metal oxide varistors (MOVs) and Silicone diodes (sometimes referred to as Silicone
Avalance Diodes).

Device Energy Voltage Multiple Shot, Follow on Effect

Withstand, Protection In
Imax Level, Up
Traditional Spark Gaps




And GA 100 -200kA 3-4kV Typically 80% of
Imax

Metal Oxide Varistors,

MOV 3-100kA 800V-1.6kV Typically 50 -70% of
Imax Minimal

Zener or Silicone 




Diodes <3kA 800V-1.3kV <3kA
Nil

Triggered Spark Gaps

100 -150kA 2kV Typically 80% of Minimal
Imax

The table above compares these products in general.

1) Traditional Spark Gaps and Gas Arrestors can handle large amounts of energy and
hence have large Imax and Iimp ratings. They are reasonably sluggish device to turn on
and hence the Up is very high. Once this devices turns on, that is on application of a large
surge voltage, then they remain on until about 50-100 V and hence on a sine-wave they
may remain on until the next zero crossing. This can create a prolonged short circuit, and
potentially trip upstream circuit breakers. This effect is called the crow bar effect.

2) Metal oxide Varistors or MOVs can handle a reasonably large energy have high Imax
but lower Iimp. They have reasonably good voltage protection level, and do not have a
follow on effect. Their energy handling is not as high as Spark Gaps but in some products
by careful paralleling and coordination, large total Imax ratings can be achieved. The
voltage protection level is much lower than spark gaps but not as low as silicone diodes.
MOVs can deplete over time at a faster rate than other devices.

3) Silicone diodes cannot handle much energy at all and hence are not suitable for power
applications on their own. They can be used in co-ordination with MOVs. Some products
have parallel silicone diodes to get the Imax rating up but the rating is still relatively low for

8
robust power applications. Silicone diodes are commonly used in telephone line and data
line surge protective devices like ERICO HSP and UTBs.

4) Triggered Spark Gaps or TSG. These are a newer class of product and are in essence a
modified spark gap that overcomes the inherent snags that exist with traditional spark gaps.
The ERICO TSG has a triggering circuit that forces the air inside the combustion chamber
of the TSG to ionize well before the voltage reaches a few kilo volts. An amplified voltage
appears at the trigger electrode of this device allowing the air to ionize and eventually
conduct the surge. Once this phase is concluded the gas and plasma from the combustion
needs to be vented to allow the device to recover back to the sine wave. This venting
overcomes the crow bar effect referred to above. The wave-shape characteristic of a TSG
makes it an ideal front end SPD in a Surge Reduction Filter.

9
3.2.1 Transient Discriminating Technology

10
3.2.3 Surge Reduction Filters

In critical applications, surge reduction filters or SRFs are used as finer protection. The yardsticks
described above, that is, Imax, In, Uc and Up are still be used to define performance of surge
reduction filters, SRFs. But other than lowering the voltage to which the equipment is exposed, the
SRFs also reduces the voltage rise time or dv/dt. It is widely recognised that sensitive electronic
equipment is at danger of being damaged, both, from large amplitudes and high rise time associated
with power surges. While surge diverters or SPDs take care of the amplitude factor only, the SRFs
take care of the amplitude and the dv/dt factors both. Figure 5 below, explains the performance of
CRITEC TSG SRF.

11
12
 MODULE 3: SECTION 3
DC SURGE PROTECTION OF REMOTE RADIO UNITS RRU or
REMOTE RADIO HEAD RRH

3.3.1 Introduction

Traditionally, cellular radio antennae were connected to base station radio equipment using coaxial
feeders. Microwave radio antennae were ether connected with waveguides or coaxial cables, which
will collectively be called feeders herein. The feeders would carry the baseband frequency and the
RF signal. RF feeders have served the industry extremely well. However as the frequency and the
bandwidth transmitted increased, the losses in the feeder and connectors became more significant.
There is a limitation on the length of the RF feeder before losses become intolerable and the error
rate significant.

The next generation of radio equipment utilized remote radio units close to the antennae
which would convert the frequencies to an intermediate frequency and this could be
transmitted more efficiently on smaller coax feeders with losses being less of a problem.
This method is more common, with microwave radio than cellular.

Modern cellular and microwave equipment utilize remote radio unit RRU or remote radio
head RRH which is fed from the base station via optical fiber. This eliminates the loss
issues on feeders and allows transmission to occur at much higher frequencies with larger
bandwidth. Power to the RRU cannot be transferred from the base station to RRU or RRH
via the optical fiber. Hence, power is fed separately as DC on copper cables. The copper
cables are either separate from the fiber or are a composite fiber-copper cable.

The DC feed acts as a source of lightning surges back into the equipment room. More
precaution needs to be taken on how to control these surges, than ever before.

In traditional radio, damage to equipment would normally be limited to the radio equipment.
In the modern scenario damage can occur to the rectifiers or the whole DC power system,
which would jeopardize other equipment installed at the site.

1) Location of SPD The simple solution to this may seem like installing Transient
Voltage Surge Suppressors (TVSS) or Surge Protective Devices (SPD) on the DC
feeds. However, there are intricacies that involve ground loops & voltage drops
associated with cable lengths that need to be understood before choosing the correct
location of TVSS. This paper will discuss the possible location of the SPD and the
benefit and disadvantages with each location presented.

2) Sizing of SPD There is guidance on the sizing of AC SPD in various standards,

including IEEE C61.42, IEC61643 & ITU K56. There is some guidance on the sizing
of SPDs for coaxial feeders and tower lights in ITU K56 guidelines. However the
application of DC SPD on RRU is a relatively new concept and standards for sizing
of these may not exist. The paper will look at methods of sizing AC SPDs and SPDs
for traditional feeders and tower lights as a benchmark and propose suitable values
for DC SPD for RRU.

3) Testing of SPD Finally, the application of SPDs in DC applications poses some

unique challenges that are not present in AC applications. One such challenge is

13
 ensuring that the DC voltage present does not cause the SPD to get into continuous
conduction at any time. In AC systems there are many voltage crossing and hence
there is opportunity for SPD to get out of conduction. This paper will look at a test
setup that simulates the DC application and demonstrate examples of results
obtained.

3.3.2 LOCATION OF TVSS (SPD)

Scenario 1

In this scenario the SPD is connected at each end of the power supply, typically near the
remote radio and near the base station equipment. There is no direct grounding of SPDs to
the ground bar but it is grounded via the base station equipment and racks. The diagram
depicts in a single point or star grounding arrangement installed in accordance with ITU K27
recommendations in ITU Handbook, Grounding & Bonding.

S
P
D

TELECOM BUILDING
OR HOUSING

Other
Loads OPTICAL FIBRE

SPD
DC FEED
RADIO
RACK

DC
RECTIFIER
& BATTERY

Figure 3.3.1 : Scenario 1, SPD Near Base Station

Equipment and near RRU

If the radio rack is very close to the ground bar then this may be an effective location for installing
the SPD. The red dotted lines in the diagram below show the unwanted path of the currents or the
partial currents to the ground if the rack is some physical distance away from the ground bar. The
surges would be forced to go via base station equipment, the DC power system and possibly other
load down to the ground. This would potentially cause damage to equipment as PCB tracks and
components that the surge travels through will not be designed to carry surge currents. Scenario 1 is
undesirable if the radio rack is some distance from the ground bar, and demonstrates that the simple
case of installing SPD on both ends of the DC feed may not eliminate potential damage from
lightning surges.
14
 S
P
D

TELECOM BUILDING
OR HOUSING
OPTICAL FIBRE

Other DC FEED
Loads

Radio SPD
Rack

DC
RECTIFIER
& BATTERY

Figure 2 : Scenario 3.3.2 Flow of Currents if Distance

Between Rack and Ground Bar is Large.

Scenario 2

In this scenario the SPD is connected at each end of the power supply, near the remote
radio and near the base station equipment. The SPDs is directly connected to the ground
bar.

There are two main problems with this installation.

1) While some or even most of the lightning surge may travel to ground as shown by
the red dotted line, additional paths exist as shown by the yellow dotted line. These
paths can be catastrophic and will cause damage to base station equipment, the DC
power system and possibly other load down to the ground.

2) The length of the path shown by the red arrow can potentially be a long path. The
voltage drop across the cable during the conduction of a lightning surge will be in the
15
 order of magnitude of 1-5V per mm. If the cable length in total was 15ft then the total
voltage drop could be in the order of 1000-5000V. This means that the voltage
protection level at the SPD would be this voltage plus the voltage that the SPD
protects to, say 500V. This would mean that there is insufficient voltage control at the
base station equipment and damage may still occur.

S
P
D

TELECOM BUILDING
OR HOUSING

Other
Loads

Base Station SPD OPTICAL FIBRE

DC FEED

DC
RECTIFIER
& BATTERY

Figure 3.3.3 : Scenario 2 SPD Near Base Station

Equipment Directly Grounded and near RRU

Scenario 3

In this scenario, the SPD is mounted very close to the ground bar and connected to ground
via a small piece of cable. The feed to the antennae is directly from the rectifier distribution
past the shunt connected SPD mounted close to the ground bar.

The short distance from the ground bar allows the control of the voltage at the SPD. The non
existence of paths via equipment eliminates risk of damage via ground loops.

The risk of damage to rectifier, base station equipment and other equipment is greatly
minimized . There will be more than one antennae at a site. The next section will
demonstrate a modern distribution block that can be used to provide distributed power to
several antennae, protection by a single SPD.

16
This is the best DC surge protection scenario for protecting equipment in telecom building
or cabinet from potential lightning surges induced on to the DC feeds.

S
P
D

TELECOM BUILDING
OR HOUSING

Other
Loads

Base Station

SPD
DC
RECTIFIER
& BATTERY

Figure 3.3.4 : Scenario 3, SPD Near Ground Bar and near

RRU

17
Method of Distributing Surge Protected DC Supply to Antennae

A distribution method shown below is designed to provide DC feeds via circuit breakers to 6
segments of a cellular 4G antennae. The DC feeds are surge protected using single surge protective
device. This SPD has built in alarm contacts, visual indication for end of life and thermal protection.
The negative feeds are supplied distribution blocks, which replace bus-bars traditionally used for
similar applications. This can be mounted next to the main ground bar.

Figure 3.3.5 : A Method of Distributing Power with SPD

Mounted Close to Main Ground Bar

18
3.3.3 Sizing of SPD

A standard for the application, sizing and testing of a DC SPD for protecting RRUs, does not exist.
The ITU (International Telecommunications Union) has a comprehensive guide for protection
against interference against interference at radio base stations, K56. However this does not contain
c
any guidance on the use of DC SPD on RRU either.

The sizes and the reasoning behind the sizing of SPDs for AC application and for tower lights,
recommended by various international standards and guidelines, is discussed here. The aim of this
discussion is to set a benchmark and start a thought process on what the appropriate ratings of
these DC SPDs should be.

Figure 7 below shows the locations at which consideration needs to be given to the sizing of the
SPD. It should be noted that the magnitude
magnitude of lightning currents used in IEC standards are a lot
larger and with a longer tail than in IEEE Standards.

In reality this may be an academic exercise as often is the case when we try to use mathematical
methods to predicts and model a random phenomenon
phenomenon like lightning. Nevertheless, looking at
industry accepted values is a good starting point.

Figure 3.3.6: Consideration

to the Sizing of SPD at
Various Locations

IEE C62.41 IEEE Guide on Surge Environment in Low Voltage AC Power Circuits.

Analysis referred to in IEEEC62.41.1 demonstrates that the highest est possible surge entering a
building is 30 kA across all the wires. Of course this would split across the wires and depending on
the number of phases, the typical the peak current expected on a phase is 10 kA. This standard
uses an assumption that a 100kA lightning strike on wave-shape
wave shape (8/20us) has struck the power-line
power
immediately outside the building. Hence there is a strong argument to say that this is indeed a rare
and potentially worse case scenarios. We will later analyze the application of similar currents to a

19
telecom tower and use a current split analysis done in an experiment by Barbosa-5 to decide what
the rating of a SPD on tower should be if we used the IEEE reasoning as a guide.

Figure 3.3.7: Magnitude & Distribution of Lightning Currents

Based on IEEE C62.41

IEC62305-1 INTERNATIONAL. STANDARD. Protection against lightning . Part 1: General

principles

The IEC62305 set of standards define the maximum peak current of lightning based on
protection level. The protection level is determined using a risk assessment calculator.
While this calculator may not be ideal for a telecommunication radio site it can be used
within the limits of its constraints.

The worst case peak current of 200kA is at protection level I, but it should be noted that the
wave-shape used here is the longer tail 10/350s wave-shape as opposed to 8/20 in IEEE
standards. The table below from IEC62305-1 shows the lightning maximum peak currents
at other protection levels.

20
Looking at table E.2 of Annex E of IEC62305 (copied in next page) we find that the
expected value of the surge due to coupling for a line directly exposed to a partial direct
lightning current, which is the case of the RRU line mounted along the tower leg. This value
is 5kA (10/350 s) for protection levels III and IV and 10 kA (10/350 s) for protection level
1 and II, if there is a direct flash to the service.

In the case of multiple feeders and multiple DC Feed going up the telecommunication
tower, this value would get divided by the number of physical conductors.

For example, if there was just one DC feed, which is unlikely but just an example to
simulate the worst case, the 10kA for PL 1 and II would divide by 2 to equal 5 kA (10/350
s) . There is no easy way to correlate this wave-shape to the 8/20 s, however if one was
to take an estimate based on energy levels under the curve, this would equate to
approximately 40-50kA 8/20 s.

As this is a reasonable value and not far from 30kA 8/20us worst case value under the
IEEE C62.41, it may be possible to align future standards to both IEEE standards and IEC
standards.

21
 Figure 3.3.8 : Expected Surge Overcurrent as
Predicted in IEC62305 - Table E.2 of Annex E of

ITU K56 PROTECTION AGAINSTS INTERFERENCE: Protection of radio base stations against
lightning discharges

In the APPENDIX, ITU K56 takes into consideration the outcomes of the study & paper by
C.F. Barbosa, FE Nallin, S. Person & A. Zeddam -5. Titled Current Distribution in a
Telecommunication Tower Struck by Rocket Triggered Lightning.

This paper presents the results of the measurement of currents carried out on an
experimental radio base station struck by rocket triggered lightning. The test site is based
on the installation of a rocket platform on the top of a metallic tower and the placement of
current probes at strategic locations. The study measures the lightning stroke currents. It
measures the currents recorded in coaxial feeders that run along the tower where their
waveforms are compared with the waveform of corresponding stroke current, the results
allow an assessment of the fraction of the stroke current that I carried out by coaxial feeder.

It was not clear if the experiment had one or more feeders but this knowledge will not
change the decision of sizing of SPD greatly.

22
The magnitudes of lightning stroke current are lower in rocket triggered lightning. In this
experiment the median was around 12 kA.

The results showed that about 2% of the lightning stroke current flow in the feeder. This
percentage is remarkably low due to the of the shielding effect of the tower and the cable
trays.

At the worst case current at Protection Level 1, of 200kA, the current flowing in feeders
would be expected to be 4kA or less. This would split across multiple feeds. This value is
consistent with the values predicted in IEC62305-1 Standard and again stated are based on
10/350 s waveform. The energy levels would equate roughly to that contained in a 40 kA
8/20 s wave-form.

This is consistent with ITU K56 approximation of surge currents in feeders given by

Surge Current = ILPL TF

Where :

ILPL = Maximum Peak Current at a particular LPL (Lightning Protection Level) and
worst case is 200kA at LPL

T = Shielding factor provided by tower (0.20 for 3 legged tower)

F = Shielding factor provided by cable trays (0.15 for Cable Tray)
Hence Surge Current at Highest Possible Peak Current = 200 x 0.20 x 0.15 = 6kA.

This would equate to 3 kA (10/350s) per DC Cable if only one unshielded DC cable
existed. This would have similar energy levels to 30-40kA 8/20 s wave-shape.

As a different point of comparison, ITU K56 recommends very similar values for protecting
unshielded tower lights. The extract below from ITU K56 shows the values recommended
for various protection levels. This table shows a rating of 40 kA at PL I.

3.3.4 Testing of TVSS (SPD)

The added challenge in the use of SPD in DC power systems is that of ensuring the
devices recover or quench after the application of the surge. A good method of testing for
this is by simulating surges superimposed on a DC voltages created with aid of batteries.

23
 Figure 3.3.9: Test Set Up for DC SPD

A test case study below is courtesy of ERICO Labs, Greg Martinjak

Figure 3.3.10: Testing of Triggered Spark Gap and

Metal Oxide Varistor Based Product in Parallel, ERICO
Labs
The test setup in Figure 11 was design to investigate if these triggered spark gap or the MOV
based SPDs would recover from conduction, after a single or multiple surges are superimposed on
to a DC voltage of 65VDC continuously present across the devices.

Furthermore, the test was carried out to see if there would be good coordination between the
triggered spark gap and the MOV based SPD. And to see if using these two devices used in
parallel would significantly reduce the voltage protection level or the let through voltage.

The preliminary results of these tests show that triggered spark gaps are proven to be able to self-
extinguish internal arcs created during a surge event while a 65VDC voltage is applied to the device.

The tests also showed that significant reduction of the Voltage Protection Level Vpl or Up can be
achieved by paralleling suitable triggered spark gap and MOV based devices correctly. Figure 12
below shows the summary of results of part of the testing.

24
 Figure 3.3.11 : Test Results, ERICO Labs

3.3.5 Conclusion

The requirement to take a DC power feed up to a RRU or a RRH in feeder-less cellular

base stations introduces a new problem of needing surge protection. The purpose of this
surge protection is to protect the radio equipment inside the shelter as well as protecting the
rectifiers and other loads.

The selection and the location of surge protection device may at first seem a trivial design
consideration. However, upon closer examination it becomes clear that the SPD must be
installed close to the main ground bar and ground loops via equipment need to be
minimized. .

After examining Standard IEEE C62.41, Standard IEC62305-1 and Guideline ITU K56, the
author feels that a surge rating Imax of around 40kA 8/20 s would be adequate for DC
Surge Protection of RRU. Higher ratings than this is may be opted for in future North
American standards to provide longevity to the devices. One purpose of this paper is to
commence discussions on this subject.

The test method for DC SPD used to simulate real life existence of continuous voltage is
proposed in this paper. Triggered spark gaps which have previously been dismissed in DC
SPD applications may be a viable device in future. Significant reduction in voltage
protection level can be gained by parallel use of appropriate triggered spark gaps with MOV
based devices.

25
MODULE 3 SECTION 4 : SURGE PROETCTION OF TELEPHONE LINES

Telephone Line Surge Protectors

CONTENTS

3.4.1 Typical Telecommunications Surges................................................................... 3

3.4.1.1 The nature of telecoms surges ..................................................................... 3
3.4.1.2 Test impulses used to represent typical telecoms surges ............................ 5
3.4.2 Telecommunications Surge Protector Topologies ............................................... 7
3.4.3 Primary Overvoltage Protection........................................................................... 8
3.4.4 Secondary Overvoltage Protection...................................................................... 8
3.4.5 Overcurrent Protection ........................................................................................ 9
3.4.6 Frequency Response ........................................................................................ 10
3.4.7 Comparison of some Telecoms Surge Protectors ............................................. 11
3.4.7.1 Protectors Compared ................................................................................. 11
3.4.7.2 Physical and Descriptive Comparison ........................................................ 12
3.4.7.3 Performance Comparison .......................................................................... 13
3.4.8 Conclusions....................................................................................................... 13

26
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

3.4.1 Typical Telecommunications Surges

3.4.1.1 The nature of telecoms surges

The telecoms services considered in this report are transported on twisted pair. Each
service has two wires, or lines, sometimes called the a and b wires.

Surges can thus occur from each line to ground, known as L-G or common mode, or
occur across the lines, known as L-L or differential mode.

The surges that occur from each line to ground, usually do so of the same magnitude
at the same time, hence the name common mode. This is an important observation
and derives from the fact that these twisted pairs are balanced, and hence noise
signals or surge energy is coupled onto both wires equally. The receiving
telecommunications equipment is looking for differential signals, and is most
sensitive to noise and surges in the differential mode. That is, the telecoms
equipment is generally more robust against common mode L-G signals. The
following diagram illustrates the idea of a common mode surge.

We will see later that gas arrester only protection is usually sufficient for L-G
protection.

Surges on balanced pairs usually start out as common mode.

Telecoms equipment is relatively robust to these signals.

That part is the good news. Problems can arise, however, that convert these
common mode signals to differential mode. If one wire in the pair actually breaks
down to ground either through insulation failure or insufficient clearance at a
connection point, that wire drops to ground potential, while the other pair remains at
high voltage potential. Thus, a large voltage then appears across the line, converting
what was a common mode (L-G on each line) surge into a damaging differential
mode (L-L) surge.

In a similar manner, surge protection components applied from each line to ground
must operate at the same time and behave in the same way. If the surge protection

27
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

component on the a wire operated before the surge protection component on the b
wire, then the common mode signal would be converted to a differential signal for the
time period between both surge protection components operating. This phenomena
is worse when independent components are used, such as two independent gas
arresters. To try to minimize this problem, most protectors use a three terminal gas
arrester. However, the problem is not completely eliminated as many suppose. The
following oscilloscope display indicates this.

In this test, an equal impulse is applied from L-G on both leads of a three terminal
gas arrester. The lower, left hand side trace shows this impulse on a scale of 1us per
division, where the absolute peak of this impulse is around 700V (all traces are 200V
per division). The lower, central, two traces show the voltage on each of the leads of
the gas arrester. Both are climbing equally, until at around 600V one half of the gas
arrester fires, rapidly reducing the voltage on that lead. However, the other continues
to climb until around 700V until it fires. The top central waveform shows the
difference between these waveforms it is a pulse of around 600V, resulting in the
damaging L-L, or differential mode!

So, to summarise this, the following points need to be understood:

Differential, or L-L, surges are most damaging.

L-G surges can get converted to damaging L-L surges.

The following diagram illustrates a L-L surge.

28
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

3.4.1.2 Test impulses used to represent typical telecoms surges

In order to develop and test products, various standard waveshapes are commonly
used. For telecoms protectors there are two main generators used as follows:

The first is the ITU (formerly CCITT) type waveform known as the 5kV, 125A,
10/700us waveform. This waveform is a relatively low energy one, and is taken to
represent the type of impulse a protector might be expected to cope with if it were
connected to a pair from an underground, multi-pair cable (where a nearby lightning
strike would couple into, and share amongst, perhaps 200 pairs).

In specifying waveforms and generators, it is important to understand that the

generator only has one output, and that the voltage waveform is actually the open
circuit voltage that the generator puts out, and the current waveform is the current
that flows into a short circuit on the generator terminals. From a surge protection
point of view, the voltage output causes the protector to conduct, and allows us to
measure the maximum voltage that the protector clamps to. Once clamping occurs,
current begins to flow in the surge protector, and we can measure how much surge
current the protector can cope with.

In practice, either waveform lets us measure the let-through or clamping voltage of

a protector, and the 8/20us current waveform lets us measure how rugged the
protector is.

The following two waveforms are for the IEEE type waveform. In specifying the
voltage waveform, the 1.2us is roughly the rise time of the impulse, and the 50us is
the time taken for the pulse to decay to half its peak value. Similarly, for the current
waveform, the 8us is roughly the rise time of the impulse, and the 20us is the time
taken for the pulse to decay to half its peak value.

29
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

Similar graphs could be drawn for the ITU type waveform.

Test waveforms let us test and compare protectors.

We can measure the let-through or clamping voltage.
The current waveform lets us measure how rugged a protector is.

30
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

3.4.2 Telecommunications Surge Protector Topologies

Telecoms protectors can be configured in various ways. Terms often used, mis-
used, and mis-understood, are Points and Stages.

Referring to a protector as a so-many point protector is explained as follows:

For example, consider the circuit diagrams below. The one on the left is a 3-point
protector, and other two are 5 point protectors.

3-Point Protector 5-Point Protector (1) 5-Point Protector (2)

Note that this point term really does not say much about the internal construction of
the protector. The center protector consists of a single gas arrester, but the one on
the right consists of a gas arrester, two series impedances, and a secondary clamp
element. Some people think that a 5-stage protector contains 5 internal elements.
Now that weve looked at these examples, we know better.

Which brings us to Stages. There is no universal agreement on exactly what

constitutes an n-stage protector. The idea is that the more stages, the more complex
the schematic of the protector. Using the above examples, the left two protectors
would be considered single stage protectors, since they contain only a single primary
clamping element. The one on the left would be considered either a 2-stage
protector (because it has a primary and secondary clamping element), or would be
considered a 3-stage protector (because it has a primary clamping element, series

31
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

current-limiting impedances, and a secondary clamping element). A schematic

diagram is really the only way of determining the construction of a surge protector.

Confusion exists with the meaning of Points and Stages.

Use the SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM to determine whats in a protector.

3.4.3 Primary Overvoltage Protection

All telecom surge protectors contain primary overvoltage protection. It is the stage of
protection providing the voltage limiting function, and generally diverts the surge
current to ground. Although this element could be a gas arrester, MOV, or silicon
diode, it is virtually universally recognized that Asian conditions require the primary
protector to be a gas arrester.

Although some designs use two separate 2-terminal gas arresters, it has been
shown in section 1.1 that this can cause problems, and virtually all designs now use
a 3-terminal gas arrester.

The selection criteria for a gas arrester is its let-through voltage (turn-on time), and
its current handling capability.

When tested to standard waveforms the let-through performance can vary from
around 350V to 800V depending on arrester manufacturer and construction
technique.

The surge handling capability is usually determined by the primary overvoltage

protector, but may actually be limited by wiring that fuses or other weaker link. The
normal values for 3-terminal gas arresters are 5kA or 10kA 8/20us from each line to
ground.

One final point. Some gas arresters are fitted with a fail-safe shorting clip. In the
event that high AC currents find themselves on the pair and the arresters fires and
does not go out, it is possible for it to heat to the point where it could cause a fire.
The function of the fail-safe shorting clip is to react in this situation and irreversibly
short out the gas arrester. This activation usually occurs by melting solder or plastic
piece. This scenario is usually caused by direct contact of the pair with AC voltages,
and generally not by induction.

3.4.4 Secondary Overvoltage Protection

A premium telecoms surge protector will have a secondary overvoltage clamping

element. This is usually configured from line to line and is either a MOV or a silicon
diode. A schematic for such a device is shown:

32
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

The secondary element is generally a purpose-designed telecoms protection

thyristor component. These components have developed to the point where they are
robust, have excellent, instant, clamping performance, and feature low capacitance,
and have rendered MOVs or Transorb diodes obsolete in this application.

The secondary L-L clamp is very important since it provides protection for the
damaging L-L voltages as explained in section 1.1.

The series elements are needed to coordinate the operation of the primary and
secondary clamping elements. When a surge comes along, the thyristor instantly
clamps, and current begins to flow through the secondary protector. In the absence
of the series elements, the thyristor would clamp and prevent the gas arrester from
firing, thus forcing the thyristor to take the entire surge energy. However, the current
flowing through the thyristor flows through the series element (when present)
causing an additional voltage drop, that added to the thyristor voltage, causes the
gas arrester to fire and take the brunt of the surge energy, while the thyristor
provided low let-through voltage.

The series elements need to be rugged, and experience has shown that carefully
selected wire wound resistors offer the best combination of low inductance and high
surge current withstand.

Primary gas arresters provide high energy ability.

Secondary telecoms thyristors provide low let-through voltage.

3.4.5 Overcurrent Protection

Where AC power circuits and telecoms services are run in close proximity for large
distances, usually external to the building, another problem can occur. That is, a line
to ground fault on the AC circuit can cause thousands of amps of fault current to flow
in the AC wiring. This in turn, can couple into the too-close telecoms wiring, causing
several amps of AC current to flow in the telecoms wiring. This current can cause
failure of the telecoms line cards or other terminating equipment.

In many countries, there are agreements between the power utilities and the telecom
providers that ensure adequate separation of these services, so this problem is not a
a very common occurrence.

33
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

The normal way to protect against this problem, is to have PTCs in series with each line of the telecom surge protector. These act
like solid-state resettable fuses, and are normally arranged to operate at around 200mA, a value chosen to be above the normal
line current, yet below the value at which damage occurs.

Like many good ideas, there is a down-side to providing PTCs in the circuit. They need to be carefully matched in resistance value
to avoid unbalancing the line. Not only does their initial un-tripped resistance need to be matched (which is difficult with this type of
component), but these PTCs typically do not return to their initial pre-tripped resistance after resetting. Thus, their degree of
unbalance gets worse with subsequent tripping. Unbalance causes crosstalk into adjacent circuits, with the problem getting worse
with higher frequency services. Impedance Balance and Return Loss are other measures used to assess the degree of unbalance,
and the suitability for high frequency use.

Given that this type of overcurrent protection is often not required, it is not usually provided in order to avoid problems with
Impedance Balance and resultant crosstalk.

Overcurrent protection is often not required due to the cooperative

agreement between power and telecom utilities. Provision of overcurrent protection can cause crosstalk
problems.

3.4.6 Frequency Response

A plain ordinary telephone service provided on 600 Ohm twisted copper pair requires a bandwidth of 300Hz to 3400Hz. At these
low frequencies, provision of Telecoms Surge Protection rarely provides attenuation problems.

However, with the trend to ever higher frequencies required to support digital services, the issue of the attenuation caused by the
surge protection can no longer be ignored.

Surge protectors can inadvertently attenuate the telecoms signal by virtue of series impedance and shunt capacitance.

Series impedance need to be of low resistance and especially of low inductance. The resistance component produces a fixed
attenuation independent of frequency, but any inductance present causes increasing attenuation with frequency. Similarly, shunt
capacitance causes attenuation that gets worse with increasing frequency.

The series impedance problem is generally solved by choosing low inductance resistors. The ideal resistance value from a surge
34
protector point of view is around 8 to 10 ohms, but can be dropped to less than half that with a suitably rugged secondary protection
element. For extremely low attenuation, a gas arrester only protector is used.

As discussed, thyristor elements are typically used for secondary clamping elements as their capacitance is lower than MOVs by
an order of magnitude or more. However, if even more reduction in capacitance is required, an ingenious

ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

arrangement of putting the thyristor within a diode bridge is used. The diodes are chosen to be able to withstand the same surge
energy as the thyristor, but they are inherently very low capacitance devices. The resultant capacitance of a larger capacitance in
series with a smaller one is lower than either one. So, the bridge arrangement gives a very low overall capacitance at the
expense of a few volts added to the let-through voltage (and the cost of the diodes themselves).

Need to consider attenuation of protector on telecoms signals.

Secondary protection CAN be provided with low attenuation.

3.4.7 Comparison of some Telecoms Surge Protectors

3.4.7.1 Protectors Compared

For the purposes of comparing and contrasting the previous points, three surge protectors available from ERICO for the Asian
market for the KRONE-LSA disconnect distribution block have been chosen:

a) CRITEC SLP10-K1F b) CRITEC HSP10-K230 c) CRITEC SLP1-

K2

Note:
KRONE and Krone-LSA are registered trademarks of KRONE GmbH, Germany. CRITEC is a registered trademark of ERICO,
Inc., U.S.A.

35
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge Protectors

3.4.7.2 Physical and Descriptive Comparison

Protector Description Schematic Photos
CRITEC A 230V gas
SLP10-K1F arrester only, 10
pair protector.

CRITEC A 230V primary

HSP10-K230 gas arrester with
decoupled low
capacitance
secondary
thyristor, 10 pair
protector.
CRITEC A 230V primary
SLP1-K2 gas arrester with
decoupled
secondary
thyristor, single
pair protector.

36
 ERICO Telecommunications Surge
Protectors

3.4.7.3 Performance Comparison

Notes:
a) The 10 pair protectors offer much lower per-pair cost than the single pair
protectors.
b) Let-through figures are for the slower rise time ITU 5kV, 125A, 10/700us
impulse. Faster impulses such as the IEEE 6kV
1.2/50us, 3kA 8/20us impulse have the effect of increasing the
performance gap between those protectors with secondary protection
and those without.

3.8.8 Conclusions

In determining the type of protector to employ, it needs to be understood

how the various circuit topologies affect both the level of protection
provided, and the underlying telecommunications signal. Given this, the
three protectors above are rated as follows:

37
Bibliography :

1) Nokia Siemens Networks Single RAN made simple managing site and
frequency evolution to tomorrows mobile broadband world

2) AS3015 2004 : Electrical installationsExtra-low voltage d.c. power

supplies and service grounding within public telecommunications networks

3) RFS Industries OPTIFLEX - Hybrid Custom Cabling Solutions,

4) ITU K27Handbook, Grounding & Bonding

5) C.F. Barbosa, FE Nallin, S. Person & A. Zeddam Current Distribution in

a Telecommunication Tower Struck by Rocket Triggered Lightning

6) ITU K56 protection of radio base stations against lightning discharges

7) IEEECC62.41.1 IEEE Guide on the Surge Environment on Low-Voltage AC

Power Circuits

8) Holger Hecklet, John Ortika Phoenix Contact Comparison of Different

Class I Surge Protective devices for the Protection of Mobile Phone
Stations

9) IEC 62305-1. Edition 2.0 2010-12. INTERNATIONAL. STANDARD.

Protection against lightning . Part 1: General principles

10) Greg Martinjak Engineering Labs, Electrical ERICO International, Solon,

OH, USA Test Report ID #2456 DC Surge Protector Application

11) Julien Brousseau ERICO Application Engineering Surge Protection of

DC-Power Remote Radio Heads

12) IEC 61643-1 Class I, Class II and Class III test Edition 2 ( march 2005):
Surge protective devices connected to low voltage power distribution
systems. Part 1

13) Phil Jones BE (Hons), MTech, MIEAust, CPEng, MIEEE ERICO

Telephone Line Surge Protectors By

14) UL1449 Edition 3 Surge Protection

38
 Module 4

Direct Strike Lightning

Protection Systems for
Telecommunications
 Module 4 Direct Strike Lightning Protection
Systems for Telecommunications

Module Outline:

This module will look at the lightning attachment process. It will look at
minimum requirements for a lightning protection system under standard
ITU K65. Discuss various methods of lightning protection on
telecommunications towers. Discuss bonding methods for radio sites
installed on rooftops of buildings.

Objectives:

Understand the lightning attachment process

Understand basic lightning protection system requirements on ITU K56

Understand the use of bare down-conductors in telecom towers

Understand the concept behind use of isolated down-conductor system

Understand the basic concept of System 3000 LPS.

Target Audience:

Telecom Engineers & Technicians

Mode Of Delivery:

Powerpoint presentation.
4.1 Understanding the Lightning Formation Process

Despite the uncertainties and randomness associated with lightning strikes,

not many would argue that taller objects are more likely to be struck by
lightning than shorter objects.

Figure 4.1 - Lightning Attachment Process - Graphics Courtesy of ERICO Inc.

Image on the Right is a Graphical Depiction of a Real Life Photo from National Geographic Magazine

For the purpose of this discussion, the starting point of the lightning formation
process is where the charges separate in the clouds. The bottom of the cloud
assumes a large but dynamic negative charge. The scope of this document
does not cover the theories that have been developed to explain the reason
for the charge separation or theories that explain the existence of positive
pockets at the bottom of the cloud. At the beginning of the process the electric
field that exists between the cloud and the ground is relatively small.

As the ionisation of the air surrounding the cloud builds up, stepped leaders
start to develop which propagate from the cloud to the air. These stepped
leaders progress in random directions and in discrete steps.

In between the clouds and the ground, the electric fields build up during this
phase. It is well understood that the electric field intensification is higher on
tall and sharp objects that are placed in a charged space. Due to this effect,
taller objects have a higher probability of developing an upward streamer from
the highest point. One of these streamers can develop into a leader which
continues its propagation towards the downward stepped leader if certain
conditions are met. The dominant condition that needs to be present for the
continued propagation of the streamer-leader system is an electric field of
about 500 kV/m ahead of the leader.

Eventually, the two leaders meet (called the final jump). At this point, the
return stroke occurs and the lightning attachment process is complete, and
viewed by the human eye as a lightning strike.

The striking distance is defined as the distance between the tip of the
downward leader and the prospective strike point at the instance of upward
leader initiation.

The two things to take from this basic understanding of the lightning
attachment process is that there is a plausible reason to support the intuition
that taller object are more likely to be struck by lightning than shorter objects
and secondly that the lightning attachment process is completed due to the
leader propagating upwards, when the electric field conditions are optimum.

4.2 Need for Protection

Protection against direct strike effects of lightning protection is a critical
consideration for telecommunications tower because of its relative height.

Of late there is increased use of electronics which is installed on the tower

mainly in form of remote radio units for cellular and other radio
communications. This has led to further consideration for lightning protection
on telecom towers.

There is extensive amount of electronics at all telecommunications sites

including those without telecommunication towers. Some of these facility may
have a need for lightning protection as well. For example, Central Offices,
Data centres & Satelite stations.

4.3 Recommendation on Protection System

ITU K56 Protection of Radio Base Stations from lightning strikes proposes
the following system for lightning protection.

Figure 4.2 Lightning Protection Layout - ITU K56

Under Clause 6.1 of ITU K56 recommendation, a lightning air termination is

recommended on radio towers. However there is no need for lightning down-
conductors on metallic towers. There are many existing practices and
situations whereby down-conductors are used by tower companies and
telecom operators. This will be discussed later.
4.4 Bonding Essential Part of this LPS Scheme

Bonding & Shielding as described in ITU Recommendation K56, will be

discussed in more detail in Module 5 Standards Applicable to
Telecommunication Earthing.

In summary the following parts of the facility need to be bonded as per

recommendations:
Coaxial Feeders
Cable Trays
Tower Members
Tower legs
Shielded Cables
Other feeder cables
Fence Post
RE-inforcement steel
AC & DC Power Systems
Equipment in Shelters & Cabinets
Remote Radio Units
Structural Steel
Indoor and Outdoor mounted ground bars
Main Distribution Frames
Incoming Services
 Incoming power and communication lines
Water pipes

4.5 Shielding

The telecommunications tower and the cable tray provide significant shielding
to feeder cables that are running up the tower. However this effect can be lost
of the feeder tray placement with respect to the tower is not done properly.

If the feeder tray in centred in a middle of a four

legged tower, then this is position where the
electric field are the minimal during a lightning
event. The simple way to look at this is that Cable Tray

electric the field from opposite legs of the mast

cancel out in the middle. Of course the
assumption is that the currents in both legs are
equal. But even in the case of unequal currents,
Opposite E Field
there is cancellation effect in the middle. in the Middle

Figure 4.3 - E-Field Lines

Consideration should be given to running dedicated down-conductors when

the symmetry shown above not achieved.

The Shielding Effects will be discussed in more detail Module 5 Standards

Applicable to Telecommunication Earthing.

4.6 Tower Lightning Protection Systems Utilizing Dedicated Bare

Down Conductors.

As discussed existing practices within telecommunication operators may

involve the use of a dedicated bare down-conductor. These down-conductor
has no real benefit except that it is a known path in instances when there is
uncertanity about conductivity via joints in a tower. This may be due to use of
an aged tower or if there is special coating on the tower.

In any case since the practice already exist this training will discuss types of
conductors used.

1) Copper Tape - Generally 25 x 3 mm copper tape is used on one or more

legs of the tower. These are fixed using purpose made clamps.

Figure 4.4 Copper Tape & Fixings

2) Bare Copper Cable - When used the size of these should be greater than
50 mm2. PVC insulated cables are rated for low volatge and are not
recommended. Any conduction of lightnig will cause insulation damge.

3) Copper Bonded Steel Conductor - Due to high incidence of copper thefts,

either solid copper bonded steel or stranded copper coated steel conductors
are being used more commonly in theft prone areas.

Figure 4.5 Copper Bonded Steel ,

Solid & Stranded
4) Aluminium Bare Cable - The use of aluminium cables is rare in this
application however wider use of this is seen in theft prone areas.

5) Galvanised steel tape - This is quite a common alternative to copper tape.

While this is not as conductive as copper, it does not offer any risk of galvanic
corrosion on galvanised steel tower.

4,7 Tower Lightning Protection Using Isolated Lightning Rods and

Down-conductor

In lightning protection there are two ways of mitigating side flashing and flash
over risk. One is using bonding and the second is isolation. Since it is very
difficult to achieve isolation, bonding has been a more common method.

Isolated system may offer benefits on towers that have remote radio heads or
where the cable or feeder tray is place closed to one leg.

In the case of tower mounted remote radio heads, the isolated system can be
used to bypass the lightning energy and dissipate into the tower leg some
distance down from the radio heads.

In the case of towers where the cable tray is on or close to one leg, the
isolated systems can be used on an opposite leg.

Figure 4.6 shows a typical upper termination arrangement. The lightning air
terminal is mounted on a 2-3 metre tall fibre glass mast and isolated from the
tower.

Figure 4.7 Demonstrates the isolated mast concept.

Figure 4.8 shows a typical application on a large telecommunications tower

Figure 4.6 Typical upper termination arrangement.
Figure 4.7 Isolated mast concept.
Figure 4.8 Typical application on a large telecommunications tower
4.8 Tower Lightning Protection Using ERICO System 3000

On telecommunication towers that carry high value transmission or are critical

to the operation on the network, ERICO System 3000 can be used.

This system uses the Dynasphere air terminal which is a more effective air
terminal that standard air termination.

This is mounted on a fibre glass mast as with isolated system. The Cable
design allows it to have low impedance and hence there is smaller voltage
drops along a length on the cable. There is screening on the cable to
minimise electrical inductance.

The outer sheath of that cable is semi-conductive and is fixed to the mast
using metallic fixings to control capacitive effects of lightning.

Figure 4.9 System 3000 - Dynasphere and ERICORE Downconductor

Figure 4.10 Lightning protection Methods on Telecom Towers
4.9 Lightning Protection of Roof Mounted Radio SItes

Figure 4.11 Lightning protection of roof top installations

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) Collection Volume Method for the placement of air terminals for the
protection of structures against lightning F. D'Alessandro*, J.R.
Gumley Published in Journal of Electrostatics 50 (2001) 279}302

2) IEEE Std 998-1996(R2002) IEEE Guide for Direct Lightning Stroke

Shielding of Substations

3) AS1768 2007 Australian/New Zealand Standard Lightning protection

4) Transmission and Distribution World Publication.

http://tdworld.com/news/Auckland-power-outage/

5) Field Study on Interception efficiency of lightning protection systems

and comparisons with models. Dr Franco DAlessandro and Dr N I
Petrov, Proceedings of the Royal Society, 2005

6) Modern Lightning Protection System for SubstationsBy Rohit Narayan

BE Electrical, MBA, MIEAust Rohit Narayan. Energy 21C Conference,
2009

7) IEC 62305-1. Edition 2.0 2010-12. INTERNATIONAL. STANDARD.

Protection against lightning . Part 1: General principles
8) ITU K27Handbook, Grounding & Bonding

9) C.F. Barbosa, FE Nallin, S. Person & A. Zeddam Current Distribution

in a Telecommunication Tower Struck by Rocket Triggered Lightning

10) ITU K56 protection of radio base stations against lightning discharges

11) ERICO Catalogues , System 3000, System 2000 Isolated Down

Conductors, IOSDC, Grounding, LIghtning Protection & Surge
Protection for Telecommunications.
Module 5 : Standards
Applicable to
Telecommunication
Earthing
INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION

)45 4 +
TELECOMMUNICATION (05/96)
STANDARDIZATION SECTOR
OF ITU

02/4%#4)/. !'!).34 ).4%2&%2%.#%

"/.$).' #/.&)'52!4)/.3 !.$ %!24().'

).3)$% ! 4%,%#/--5.)#!4)/. "5),$).'

)45 4 Recommendation +

(Previously CCITT Recommendation)
 FOREWORD

The ITU-T (Telecommunication Standardization Sector) is a permanent organ of the International Telecommunication
Union (ITU). The ITU-T is responsible for studying technical, operating and tariff questions and issuing Recommen-
dations on them with a view to standardizing telecommunications on a worldwide basis.
The World Telecommunication Standardization Conference (WTSC), which meets every four years, establishes the
topics for study by the ITU-T Study Groups which, in their turn, produce Recommendations on these topics.
The approval of Recommendations by the Members of the ITU-T is covered by the procedure laid down in WTSC
Resolution No. 1 (Helsinki, March 1-12, 1993).
ITU-T Recommendation K.27 was revised by ITU-T Study Group 5 (1993-1996) and was approved under the WTSC
Resolution No. 1 procedure on the 8th of May 1996.

___________________

NOTES

1. In this Recommendation, the expression Administration is used for conciseness to indicate both a
telecommunication administration and a recognized operating agency.

2. The status of annexes and appendices attached to the Series K Recommendations should be interpreted as
follows:
an annex to a Recommendation forms an integral part of the Recommendation;
an appendix to a Recommendation does not form part of the Recommendation and only provides some
complementary explanation or information specific to that Recommendation.

ITU 1996

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from the ITU.
 CONTENTS
Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

Page
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Scope .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
3 Definitions...................................................................................................................................................... 2
3.1 IEC definitions.................................................................................................................................. 2
3.2 Definitions for telecommunication earthing installations ................................................................. 3
4 Principles of bonding and earthing................................................................................................................. 4
4.1 Summary of theory ........................................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Implementation principles ................................................................................................................ 5
4.3 Protection against electric shock....................................................................................................... 7
4.4 Protection against lightning .............................................................................................................. 7
4.5 Functional earthing ........................................................................................................................... 8
5 Power distribution .......................................................................................................................................... 8
5.1 a.c. power distribution ...................................................................................................................... 8
5.2 d.c. power distribution ...................................................................................................................... 8
6 Comparison between IBN and mesh-BN installations ................................................................................... 10
7 Maintenance of bonding networks ................................................................................................................. 11
8 Examples of connecting equipment configurations to the CBN .................................................................... 11
Annex A Brief theory of bonding and earthing networks .................................................................................... 11
A.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................................... 11
Annex B Examples of bonding configurations..................................................................................................... 14
B.1 Mesh-BN .......................................................................................................................................... 14
B.2 Mesh-IBN with a bonding mat configuration ................................................................................... 16
B.3 Star or sparse mesh-IBN with isolation of d.c. power return............................................................ 18
References ................................................................................................................................................................. 21

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) i

Recommendation K.27
Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

BONDING CONFIGURATIONS AND EARTHING INSIDE

A TELECOMMUNICATION BUILDING

(Geneva, 1991; revised in 1996)

1 Introduction

The main subject of the CCITT Handbook on Earthing of telecommunication installations [1], comprises the potential
rise of a telecommunication building and the reduction of the associated voltage drop by combined use of intentional and
incidental earth electrodes. However, the transition from analogue to complex digital telecommunication systems has
indicated inadequacies with earthing techniques of the past and has therefore caused renewed interest in bonding and
earthing techniques and their impact on electromagnetic compatibility (EMC). Consequently, there is a need for a
CCITT Recommendation on bonding configurations and earthing inside a telecommunication building.

Within the field of EMC, regulations restricting electromagnetic emissions must be satisfied, and for acceptable perform-
ance, equipment must possess a specific level of immunity. Electromagnetic compatibility may be achieved by the
construction of a common, earthed, conductive shielding network or structure (the Common Bonding Network: CBN).
The CBN is the principal bonding and earthing network inside the building. The CBN may be augmented with nested
shielding structures having single-point connections to the CBN. These single-point connected structures will be
referred to as Isolated Bonding Networks (IBNs). In a telecommunication building, the bonding and earthing network
takes the form of the CBN, to which equipment is attached by multiple connections (mesh-BN) or by a single point
connection (IBN). The selection of the bonding configuration has an important influence on the responsibility for
achieving EMC. A defined bonding configuration permits clear, structured cable routing and earthing. It facilitates
control of electromagnetic emissions and immunity, which is especially important for buildings containing newly
installed and existing equipment. A comparison of these approaches (IBN and mesh-BN), including their attributes as
functions of frequency are discussed in clause 6 and Annex A. As part of its shielding function, the bonding and earthing
network provides for personnel safety and lightning protection, and helps control electrostatic discharge (ESD).

Since the publication of the Earthing Handbook in 1976, several different bonding and earthing configurations have been
introduced, and it is desirable to promote standardization by defining generic versions of these configurations. Although
there are differences among the configurations, there are many important common aspects. These are discussed in this
Recommendation. In addition, three example configurations are described.

2 Scope

Experience in the operation of telecommunication centres shows that the use of a bonding and earthing network that is
coordinated with equipment capability and with electrical protection devices, has the following attributes:

promotes personnel safety and reduces fire hazards;

enables signalling with earth return;

minimizes service interruptions and equipment damage;

minimizes radiated and conducted electromagnetic emissions;

reduces radiated and conducted electromagnetic susceptibility;

improves system tolerance to discharge of electrostatic energy, and lightning interference.

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 1

Within this framework, this Recommendation:

a) is a guide to bonding and earthing of telecommunication equipment in telephone exchanges and similar
telecommunication switching centres;

b) is intended to comply with safety requirements imposed by IEC [2] or national standardizing bodies on
a.c. power installations;

c) can be used for installation of new telecommunication centres, and, if possible, for expansion and
replacement of systems in existing centres;

d) treats coordination with external lightning protection, but does not provide details of protective measures
specific to telecommunication buildings;

e) addresses the shielding contribution of the effective elements of the building;

f) addresses shielding provided by cabinets, cable trays and cable shields;

g) is intended to encourage EMC planning, which should include bonding and earthing arrangements that
accommodate installation tests and routine diagnostics;

h) does not include:

required values of surge current immunity and insulation withstand voltages;

limits of radiated and conducted electromagnetic emission or immunity;

techniques for verifying and maintaining bonding and earthing networks.

3 Definitions
In this Recommendation, definitions with respect to earthing already introduced by the IEC [3] are used to maintain
conformity. For convenience, they are reproduced in 3.1. Definitions specific to telecommunication installations, and not
covered by the IEC, are added in 3.2.

3.1 IEC definitions

The following definitions are taken from IEC 50 [3]. The term earthing network is defined in Chapter 604, all others
are in Chapter 826.

3.1.1 earth: The conductive mass of the earth, whose electric potential at any point is conventionally taken as equal
to zero (in some countries the term ground is used instead of earth).

3.1.2 earth electrode: A conductive part or a group of conductive parts in intimate contact with and providing an
electrical connection with earth.

3.1.3 earthing network: The part of an earthing installation that is restricted to the earth electrodes and their
interconnections.

3.1.4 main earthing terminal: A terminal or bar provided for the connection of protective conductors, including
equipotential bonding conductors and conductors for functional earthing, if any, to the means of earthing.

3.1.5 earthing conductor: A protective conductor connecting the main earthing terminal or bar to the earth
electrode.

3.1.6 equipotential bonding: Electrical connection putting various exposed conductive parts and extraneous
conductive parts at a substantially equal potential.

3.1.7 equipotential bonding conductor: A protective conductor for ensuring equipotential bonding.

3.1.8 neutral conductor (N): A conductor connected to the neutral point of a system and capable of contributing to
the transmission of electrical energy.

2 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

3.1.9 protective conductor (PE): A conductor required by some measures for protection against electric shock by
electrically connecting any of the following parts:

exposed conductive parts;

extraneous conductive parts;

main earthing terminal;

earth electrode;

earthed point of the source or artificial neutral.

3.1.10 PEN conductor: An earthed conductor combining the functions of both protective conductor and neutral
conductor.

3.2 Definitions for telecommunication earthing installations

3.2.1 bonding network (BN): A set of interconnected conductive structures that provides an electromagnetic shield
for electronic systems and personnel at frequencies from d.c. to low rf. The term electromagnetic shield, denotes any
structure used to divert, block or impede the passage of electromagnetic energy. In general, a BN need not be connected
to earth but all BNs considered in this Recommendation will have an earth connection.

The following definitions of BN configurations are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2.

3.2.2 common bonding network (CBN): The CBN is the principal means for effecting bonding and earthing inside
a telecommunication building. It is the set of metallic components that are intentionally or incidentally interconnected to
form the principal BN in a building. These components include: structural steel or reinforcing rods, metallic plumbing,
a.c. power conduit, PE conductors, cable racks, and bonding conductors. The CBN always has a mesh topology and is
connected to the earthing network.

3.2.3 mesh-BN (MBN): A bonding network in which all associated equipment frames, racks and cabinets, and
usually, the d.c. power return conductor, are bonded together as well as at multiple points to the CBN. Consequently, the
mesh-BN augments the CBN.

3.2.4 isolated bonding network (IBN): A bonding network that has a single point of connection (SPC) to either
the common bonding network or another isolated bonding network. All IBNs considered here will have a connection to
earth via the SPC.

3.2.5 single point connection (SPC): The unique location in an IBN where a connection is made to the CBN.
In reality, the SPC is not a point but, of necessity, has sufficient size to accommodate the connection of conductors.
Usually, the SPC takes the form of a copper bus-bar. If cable shields or coaxial outer conductors are to be connected to
the SPC, the SPC could be a frame with a grid or sheet metal structure.

3.2.6 SPC window (SPCW): The interface or transition region between an IBN and the CBN. Its maximum
dimension is typically 2 metres. The SPC bus-bar (SPCB), or frame, lies within this region and provides the interface
between IBN and CBN. Conductors (e.g. cable shields or d.c. return conductors) that enter a system block and connect to
its IBN must enter via the SPCW and connect to the SPC bus-bar or frame.

3.2.7 mesh-IBN: A type of IBN in which the components of the IBN (e.g. equipment frames) are interconnected to
form a mesh-like structure. This may, for example, be achieved by multiple interconnections between cabinet rows, or by
connecting all equipment frames to a metallic grid (a bonding mat) extending beneath the equipment. The bonding mat
is, of course, insulated from the adjacent CBN. If necessary the bonding mat could include vertical extensions, resulting
in an approximation to a Faraday-cage. The spacing of the grid is chosen according to the frequency range of the
electromagnetic environment.

3.2.8 star IBN: A type of IBN comprising clustered or nested IBNs sharing a common SPC.

3.2.9 system block: All the equipment whose frames and associated conductive parts form a defined BN.

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 3

3.2.10 isolated d.c. return (d.c.-I): A d.c. power system in which the return conductor has a single point connection
to a BN. More complex configurations are possible, see 5.2.

3.2.11 common d.c. return (d.c.-C): A d.c. power system in which the return conductor is connected to the
surrounding BN at many locations. This BN could be either a mesh-BN (resulting in a d.c.-C-MBN system) or an IBN
(resulting in a d.c.-C-IBN system). More complex configurations are possible (see 5.2).

T0506760-95/d01

Star topology Mesh topology

Rack, equipment, module

Bonding conductor

FIGURE 1/K.27
Bonding network configurations forming a system block

FIGURE 1/K.27.....[D01] = 8 cm

4 Principles of bonding and earthing

4.1 Summary of theory

Bonding and earthing refer to the construction and maintenance of Bonding Networks (BNs) and their connection to
earth. In this Recommendation the acronym BN implies that a connection to earth exists. Also, BN is used to refer to
CBNs and IBNs collectively.

The primary purpose of a BN is to help shield people and equipment from the adverse effects of electromagnetic energy
in the d.c. to low rf range. Typical energy sources of concern are lightning, and a.c. and d.c. power faults. Of generally
lesser concern are quasi steady-state sources such as a.c. power harmonics, and function sources such as clock signals
from digital equipment. All of these sources will be referred to generically as emitters. People and equipment that
suffer adversely from the energy from the emitters will be referred to as susceptors. The coupling between a particular
emitter and a particular susceptor may be characterized by a transfer function. The purpose of a BN is to reduce the
magnitude of the transfer function to an acceptable level. This may be achieved by appropriate design of the CBN, and
the MBNs and IBNs attached to that CBN. Theoretical and quantitative aspects are discussed in Annex A. Practical
aspects are discussed below.

Other purposes of a BN are to function as a return conductor in some signalling applications, and as a path for power
fault currents. The capability of the BN to handle large currents helps to rapidly de-energize faulted power circuits. Also
the BN and its connection to earth is used in ground return signalling (see 4.5).

4 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

 Star configuration Mesh configuration

Single point

may be of
Integration of the BN into the CBN

zero length

SPCW SPCW
Star -IBN Mesh-IBN
Multiple point

Not applicable

Mesh-BN

Rack, equipment, module, etc.

BN Bonding Network
Bonding conductor CBN Common Bonding Network

Nearby elements of CBN IBN Isolated Bonding Network

SPCW Single Point Connection Window

Connection to CBN

FIGURE 2/K.27
Connection of system block to the CBN

FIGURE 2/K.27.....[D02] = 19.5 cm

4.2 Implementation principles

4.2.1 Implementation principles for the CBN

The theoretical concepts of Annex A are confirmed by practical experience and lead to the general principles listed
below. A consequence of applying these principles is that the number of conductors and interconnections in the CBN is
increased until adequate shielding is achieved. Concerning the important issue of electric shock, the following
implementation principles apply to mitigation of electric shock as well as to equipment malfunction. Electric shock is
discussed further in 4.3.

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 5

 a) All elements of the CBN shall be interconnected. Multiple interconnections resulting in a three-
dimensional mesh are especially desirable. Increasing the number of CBN conductors and their
interconnections, increases the CBN shielding capability and extends the upper frequency limit of this
capability.

b) It is desirable that the egress points for all conductors leaving the building (including the earthing
conductor), be located close together. In particular, the a.c. power entrance facilities, telecommunications
cable entrance facilities, and the earthing conductor entry point, should be close together.

c) The facility should be provided with a main earthing terminal located as close as possible to the a.c.
power and telecommunications cable entrance facilities. The main earthing terminal shall connect to:

an earthing electrode(s) via a conductor of shortest length;

the neutral conductor of the a.c. power feed (in TN systems);

cable shields (at the cable entrance) either directly or via arresters or capacitors if required by
corrosion considerations.

d) The CBN shall be connected to the main earthing terminal. Multiple conductors between CBN and the
main earthing terminal are desirable.

e) As contributors to the shielding capability of the CBN, interconnection of the following items of the CBN
is important:

1) metallic structural parts of the building including I-beams and concrete reinforcement where
accessible;

2) cable supports, trays, racks, raceways, and a.c. power conduit.

f) The coupling of surges into indoor cabling (signal or power) is reduced, in general, by running the cables
in close proximity to CBN elements. However, in the case of external surge sources, the currents in
the CBN will tend to be greater in peripheral CBN conductors. This is especially true of lightning down-
conductors. Thus, it is best to avoid routing cables in the periphery of the building. When this is
unavoidable, metallic ducts that fully enclose the cables may be needed. In general, the shielding effect of
cable trays (etc.) is especially useful, and metallic ducts or conduit that fully enclose the cables provide
near perfect shielding.

g) In steel frame high-rise buildings, advantage may be taken of the shielding effects that the steel frame
provides against lightning strokes. For cables extending between floors, maximum shielding is obtained
by locating the cables near the centre of the building. However, as implied above, cables enclosed in
metallic ducts may be located anywhere.

h) Where the facility to use over-voltage primary protection [4] on telecommunication wires is provided, it
should have a low impedance connection to the cable shield, if it exists, and also to the surrounding CBN.

i) Over-voltage protectors may be provided at the a.c. power entrance facility if the telecommunication
building is located in an area where power lines are exposed to lightning. These protectors should be
bonded with low impedance to the CBN.

j) Mechanical connections in a protection path of the CBN whose electrical continuity is questionable shall
be bypassed by jumpers that are visible to inspectors. These jumpers shall comply with IEC requirements
for safety. However, for EMC applications, the jumpers should have low impedance.

k) The CBN facilitates the bonding of cable shields or outer conductors of coaxial cables at both ends by
providing a low impedance path in parallel and in proximity to the cable shields and outer conductors.
Thus most of the current driven by potential differences is carried by the highly conductive members of
the CBN. Disconnection of one cable shield for inspection should minimally affect the current distribution
in the CBN.

4.2.2 Implementation principles for a mesh-BN

The main feature of a mesh-BN is the interconnection, at many points, of cabinets and racks of telecommunications and
other electrical equipment, and also multiple interconnections to the CBN.

6 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

If the outer conductor of a coaxial cable interconnection between mesh-BN equipment has multiple connections to
the CBN, it may need additional shielding. If the shielding provided by a cable tray is insufficient, additional shielding
may be provided by use of shielded coaxial cable (triax), enclosing ducts, or conduit.

Bonding methods, in increasing order of EMC quality are: screw fastenings, spot welds, and welded seams. The highest
level of EMC shielding is provided by equipment cabinets and any sheet-metal enclosures within these cabinets.

A proven countermeasure to undesirable emission or reception of electromagnetic energy, especially at high frequencies,
is a shield that totally encloses the electronic circuit. Effective shielding of cables, especially when the shields are
extensions of shielding cabinets, depends on shielding material, shield geometry, and especially the connection of the
shield to the cabinet panels at which the shield terminates.

It is easy to add shielding to a mesh-BN configuration. The need for additional shielding may arise for example, if a
broadcast transmitter were installed nearby.

In some situations, it may be advantageous to augment the mesh-BN by connecting all equipment frames of a system
block to a conductive grid (a bonding mat) located either below or above a collection of equipment cabinets. This
optional use of a bonding mat is shown in Figure B.1.

4.2.3 Implementation principles for an IBN

The main feature of an IBN is that it is isolated from the surrounding CBN except for a single-point connection
where conductors entering the system block enter via the transition region between the IBN and CBN (see definition
of SPCW).

Within the confines of an IBN, the importance of multiple interconnections between cabinets and racks, etc., depends on
the details of d.c. power distribution and signal interconnection. For example, if the d.c. power return conductor has
multiple connections to cabinet frames, then multiple interconnection of cabinet frames and racks is desirable for the
following reason: it will tend to reduce surge coupling in the event of a d.c. fault in equipment within the IBN.

Concerning cable shields of twisted pair cables, if a shield is left open-circuit at the end that terminates on IBN
equipment, while the other end is connected to the CBN, surges in the CBN may result in induced common mode surges
on the pairs in that cable. If those pairs terminate on devices that can operate satisfactorily in the presence of a steady
state common mode (e.g. opto-isolators, transformers, or surge protectors), and if those devices can also withstand
common mode surges, then there may be an advantage in having the electrostatic shielding afforded by an open circuited
shield.

In the case of coaxial cable, the outer conductor will, of necessity, terminate on the interface circuits at each end.
Interface circuits containing transformers or opto-isolators may be used to isolate the outer conductor. If a shielded cable
or waveguide enters the IBN from the CBN, the most generally effective strategy is to connect each end of the shield or
waveguide to the equipment frame and to bond the shield or waveguide to the single point connection.

4.3 Protection against electric shock

A densely interconnected BN, together with its connection to earth, substantially reduces the likelihood of significant
voltages appearing between adjacent metallic components. However, additional measures need to be taken, especially in
regard to a.c. power distribution (see 5.1). IEC [2] discusses protection against electric shock, and installations should
conform to its recommendations.

4.4 Protection against lightning

A CBN conforming to 4.2.1 should adequately shield against lightning surges arriving at the building on conductors
such as cable shields and power lines. However, in the event of a direct stroke to the building, the CBN may not provide
sufficient shielding. Consequently, buildings without steel frames or reinforcements may require external lightning
protection; especially so if the building has a radio tower on its roof. Concerning the protective measures against the
effects of a direct lightning stroke to a building, refer to IEC [5]. Where necessary to further reduce risk, these protective

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 7

measures may have to be enhanced, e.g. by conductive roof layers, closer spacing of down-conductors, interconnection
of the reinforcement of concrete buildings, and interconnection of metallic faade elements. It is advantageous to
introduce all conductive elements of services, e.g. cables and pipes, into the building at one location and in close
proximity.

4.5 Functional earthing

Telecommunication techniques sometimes use circuits for signalling with earth return, e.g. lines with ground start, three
wire inter-exchange connection, etc. Equipment interconnected by these circuits needs functional earthing.The signalling
range is normally determined by the resistance of the current path. Most of this resistance is contributed by the earth
electrodes. The performance provided by the earthing network via the main earthing terminal is generally sufficient for
this signalling purpose [1].

5 Power distribution
A.c. and d.c. power distribution in telecommunication buildings should be designed to limit coupling to telecommuni-
cation circuits arising from:
mutual impedance of shared conductors;
mutual inductive coupling (especially during short circuit conditions);
common source impedances.

5.1 a.c. power distribution

It is recommended that the indoor mains installation within a telecommunication building be of type TN-S as specified
by the IEC [5] in order to improve the EMC performance of the telecommunication installation. This requires that there
shall be no PEN conductor within the building. Consequently, a three-phase network within a telecommunication
building is, physically, a five-wire installation (L1, L2, L3, N, PE).

Depending on the type of outdoor mains distribution network serving a telecommunication building, one of the
following requirements shall apply:
a) Service by a TN-S section of the outdoor mains distribution network:
1) solely the protective conductor (PE) shall be connected to the main earthing terminal (see Figure 3,
mode 1).
b) Service by a TN-C section of the outdoor mains distribution network:
1) the PEN conductor shall be connected to the main earthing terminal only;
2) from the main earthing terminal to and within customer locations inside the building, the neutral
conductor (N) shall be treated as a live conductor;
3) a dedicated PE shall be provided (see Figure 3, mode 2).
c) Service by a TT or IT section of the outdoor mains distribution network:
1) the PE shall be derived via the main earthing terminal from the earthing network;
2) the dimensioning of the PE shall follow the rules of the TN-S system.

If the outdoor mains distribution is of type IT or TT, a separation transformer dedicated to that building allows for the
recommended TN-S installation. In this case the indoor mains installation must conform to mode 1, Figure 3.

5.2 d.c. power distribution

In telecommunication buildings, d.c. power is generally distributed from a centralized d.c. power plant, with the positive
terminal connected to the CBN. This polarity is chosen to minimize corrosion in the outside cable plant. There may be
exceptions for specific transmission systems.

The d.c. power return network may be connected to its surrounding BNs at a single point only. This case will be referred
to as an isolated d.c. return system (d.c.-I).

8 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

 -ODE  4. 34. 3

Output to indoor
mains installation (TN-S) PE DC-return ring conductor
Outdoor mains distribution

N PE PE

N PE

Main earthing terminal

Input from outdoor Earthing network
mains distribution (TN-S)

NOTE Mode 1 is obligatory if a separation transformer is dedicated to the building and the TN-S system
consequently originates at the transformer load side.

-ODE  4. #4. 3

Output to indoor
mains installation (TN-S) PE DC-return ring conductor
Outdoor mains distribution

N PE PE

PEN
Main earthing terminal
Input from outdoor Earthing network
mains distribution (TN-C)

-ODE  )4)4 OR 4444

Output to indoor
mains installation (IT or TT) PE DC-return ring conductor
Outdoor mains distribution

N PE PE

Main earthing terminal

earthing network
Input from outdoor
mains distribution (IT or TT)
T0506990-96/d03

FIGURE 3/K.27
Arrangements for the transition from the outdoor mains distribution
system to the indoor a.c. distribution systems other than TN-S

FIGURE 3/K.27.....[D03] = 23 cm (page pleine)

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 9

Alternatively, the d.c. return may connect to the BN at multiple points (in which case some d.c. current will be
conducted by the BN). This system will be referred to as a d.c. return common to a BN and denoted by d.c.-C-BN.
Typical configurations are d.c.-C-CBN (d.c. return common to the CBN), and d.c.-C-IBN (d.c. return common only to
an IBN). Also, a d.c. return could, for example, traverse both the CBN and an IBN, and be common to the CBN but
isolated from the IBN. This case is denoted by d.c.-C-CBN : d.c.-I-IBN. These are discussed in Annex B. Other more
complicated interconnections of BNs and d.c. returns are also in use.

The advantage of a d.c.-C-BN system is that it cannot support a d.c. feed common-mode and hence unwanted coupling
via this mode cannot occur. On the other hand, there will be coupling between the BN and the d.c. feed. The advantage
of the d.c.-I-BN system is that it avoids BN to d.c. feed coupling. However, it supports a common-mode and may
introduce unwanted coupling. The choice between the two systems depends on the overall design strategy. Some
recommendations are given below.

A d.c.-C-CBN feed may be used in systems in which the d.c. feed-to-CBN coupling has been minimized by the
following measures:

d.c. feed conductors have large cross-sections enabling them to carry high currents with minimal
temperature rise;

voltage drop at maximum load current is low;

there is low source impedance, and low mutual impedance between the branches of the d.c. feed system.

The use of a d.c.-I feed results in a much lower d.c. feed-to-CBN coupling and is preferable in d.c. distribution networks
designed with:

loads in more than one system of electronic equipment (i.e. shared battery plant); and

loads that are sensitive to transients occurring during short circuit conditions.

6 Comparison between IBN and mesh-BN installations

The advantage of installing equipment in an IBN is that a high level of shielding is attainable from d.c. through tens of
kilohertz or perhaps hundreds of kilohertz depending on the size of the IBN (see A.1.2). The reason is that, within this
frequency range, the single point connection between the IBN and CBN results in negligible current flowing between
CBN and IBN. Some digital switches are designed specifically for installation within an IBN.

Mesh IBNs and star IBNs are both currently in use. Subclause B.2 describes a mesh-IBN in the form of a
bonding-mat, and B.3 describes a star IBN system. Sparsely interconnected mesh IBNs have also been used
successfully, and this is mentioned in B.3.

To limit the risk of electric shock between an IBN and the surrounding CBN, it is necessary to limit the size of the IBN
(both horizontal and vertical extent). Passageways that form the boundary between IBN and CBN, should have a
minimum width imposed.

Disadvantages of IBN installation are cable routing restrictions and the additional expense (compared to mesh-BN) of
maintaining the isolation.

The advantage of installing equipment in a mesh-BN configuration is that equipment frames may be connected to the
surrounding CBN without restriction. Also, shielded cables and coaxial cables may be routed, and their shields or outer
conductors connected to cabinet frames, without restriction. If the CBN design and equipment susceptibility has been
coordinated, the CBN provides shielding from d.c. through several megahertz. A mesh-BN installation also has
maintenance advantages as described in the next clause.

A disadvantage of the mesh-BN installation is the need for quantitative design procedures and appropriate immunity data
for equipment.

10 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

7 Maintenance of bonding networks
One advantage of mesh-BN installation is that small changes that occur in the CBN generally have only a small effect on
its shielding capability. Moreover, when necessary, additional shielding may be obtained by introduction of additional
conductors (e.g. bonding conductors, cable trays, and conduit). Such modifications are usually straightforward.

IBN systems are more difficult to maintain, because craft-person activity is liable to result in inadvertent intercon-
nections between IBN and CBN, violating the desired single point connection, and introducing surge currents into
the IBN. Closely related to this is maintenance of d.c.-I power systems. Verification of single point connection in a
d.c.-I system is facilitated if this connection is made with a conductor, around which, a d.c. clamp-on ammeter can be
clamped. Zero current confirms single point connection.

It is recommended that systematic verification be performed on all bonding configurations and earthing connections
inside a telecommunications building.

8 Examples of connecting equipment configurations to the CBN

The bonding configuration that is used depends upon the type of equipment to be connected to the CBN.

Three examples are described in Annex B. They are:

mesh-BN (see B.1);

mesh-IBN with a bonding mat configuration (see B.2);

star, or sparse mesh-IBN with isolation of d.c. power return (see B.3).

Annex A

Brief theory of bonding and earthing networks

A.1 Overview

The basic theoretical notions of shielding apply to the entire electromagnetic spectrum extending from d.c. through
microwave frequencies. The essence of these basic notions is represented by the circuit model of Figure A.1 a).
The description of energy sources as emitters, and susceptible equipment (and people) as susceptors is taken from
Keiser [6]. In Figure A.1 a), Vem is the frequency domain representation of the emitter (e.g. a Laplace or Fourier
transform), and Zem is the emitter source impedance. The susceptor is represented by its impedance Zsu. The electro-
magnetic interaction between emitter and susceptor is modelled by a two-port network (port A with terminals A0,
and A1, and port B with terminals B0, and B1). In Figure A.1 a) this two-port is represented by a T-network, but a
representation is often useful, as is a Norton equivalent for the emitter.

Although Figure A.1 a) is a simplification of reality, it is usually an adequate model for any specific emitter-susceptor
pair. Moreover, it can be used as the starting point whenever a more complex model is necessary.

Figure A.1 a) illuminates the two main strategies for increasing the shielding of the susceptor from the emitter: the
short-circuit and open-circuit strategies. It is clear that if ZC is zero, no energy from the emitter Vem can reach the
susceptor and Vsu = 0. The energy that leaves the emitter is reflected by the short-circuit and dissipates in the resistive
components of Zem and ZA. (Energy can also be returned to the source but this is not significant here.) Similarly, it is
clear that if either ZA or ZB are infinite in magnitude (i.e. open circuit), no emitter energy will reach the susceptor (and
again Vsu = 0). In this case, the energy that leaves the emitter is reflected by the open circuit. Suppose ZB is the open
circuit. Then ZB = , and the energy will dissipate in the resistive parts of Zem, ZA and ZC. Note that in general, Vsu and
all impedances are functions of frequency.

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 11

The two-port in Figure A.1 a) (A1, A0, B1, B0) will be referred to as the shielding network relative to some specific
emitter and susceptor. If a different emitter or susceptor were considered, new impedance functions ZA, ZB and ZC would
apply.

A most useful characterization of the shielding network is a frequency domain transfer function. Here, the transfer
function T() will be defined as either Isu()/Vem() or Vsu()/Vem(). Thus T(), as defined here, is a function of Zem
and Zsu as well as ZA, ZB and ZC.

To summarize, for each emitter-susceptor pair there is a transfer function T() that characterizes the shielding network.

Returning to the topic of shielding strategies, note that in general, perfect short and open circuits are not possible to
achieve, since the best implementations possess inductance and capacitance respectively. As a result, instead of perfect
shielding, the most that can be achieved is a transfer function T() whose magnitude is less than some prescribed value
over some prescribed frequency range.

A.1.1 Application to BNs in general

In typical bonding networks, resistive components are small, and for transient events with spectra in the 1 kHz to 1 MHz
range, the shielding network is primarily inductive. Consequently, the general representation of Figure A.1 a) reduces to
Figure A.1 b). As noted above, the specific component values depend on a particular emitter-susceptor pair. However,
the LA, LB and LC in Figure A.1 b) are constants: they are not functions of frequency. An observation of fundamental
importance is as follows: Increasing the number of conductors and interconnections in the BN (especially in the region
lying between the emitter and susceptor) will, in general, reduce LC and hence reduce the transfer function of the BN
relative to that emitter-susceptor pair. In the limiting case, the susceptor could be given near-total shielding by enclosing
it in an unbroken sheet of metal (i.e. a Faraday cage).

A susceptor may be characterized by a susceptibility threshold Isut(), or Vsut(). Sinusoidal excitation will be
assumed, but the following theory may be adaptable to pulse excitation. As an example, consider as a susceptor,
equipment whose frame is connected to the CBN at several points. Choose one of these points to be the test point.
Suppose the CBN connection at the test point is made by a conductor, around which split-core transformers can be
clamped for purposes of excitation and current measurement. Let the current at the test point be sinusoidal with angular
frequency and amplitude Isu(). [Isu() real and positive.]

Suppose that for each , an Isut() is found such that the equipment functions normally for those Isu() that satisfy:

Isu () < Isut () for 1 < < 2

and functions abnormally for Isu() that fails to satisfy this inequality. Then Isut() is the equipment susceptibility
threshold for the frequency range [1, 2], and for that specific test point and connection configuration.

Also, suppose a worst-case emitter has been characterized (e.g. let Vem be that worst case), then the design of a bonding
and earthing network may now be expressed quantitatively as follows: for every emitter-susceptor pair of concern, the
network's transfer function shall satisfy the following inequality:

T()Vem() < Isut () for 1 < < 2

where 1 and 2 specify the frequency range of concern. Typically, 1 0 and 2 1 MHz.

Note that Isut() is specific to a particular test point, and to the particular configuration of equipment-to-CBN intercon-
nections. It may not apply if the equipment or its interconnections are modified.

A.1.2 Some important features of IBNs

Isolated bonding networks use an open-circuit shielding strategy. However, because IBNs are invariably installed within
an enclosing CBN, short and open circuit strategies operate in cascade as shown in Figure A.1 c). Here, node B2 could,
for example, represent the frame of an equipment (Zsu) that is isolated except for a single point connection to the CBN at
node B0. Node B1 represents all of the immediately surrounding CBN metalwork. The capacitor C represents the

12 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

capacitance between the equipment frame and the surrounding CBN. Figure A.1 c) shows clearly that for low
frequencies, T() will be small (it has a zero at = 0), but at a sufficiently high frequency there will be one or more
resonances where T() will have maxima. In the neighbourhood of these resonant frequencies, shielding will be poor.
However, if there are no significant emitters in these spectral regions, or if the equipment has additional shielding that is
effective in these spectral regions, then no malfunctions will occur.

ZA ZB Vsu

A1 B1 Isu
Zem
ZC Z su

Vem

A0 B0
A &UNDAMENTAL SHIELDING MODEL

LA LB

A1 B1

Zem
LC Z su

Vem

A0 B0

B 3HIELDING MODEL FOR INTRA #". COUPLING

C
LA LB

A1 B1 B2

Zem
LC Z su

Vem

A0 B0
T0505780-91/d04
C 3HIELDING MODEL FOR #". )". COUPLING

FIGURE A.1/K.27

FIGURE A.1/K.27.....[D04] = 20 cm

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 13

 Annex B

Examples of bonding configurations

B.1 Mesh-BN

A mesh-BN is a densely interconnected BN in which equipment frames are an extension of the CBN. In this example,
which is shown in Figure B.1, the d.c. power system is of type d.c. C-MBN.

B.1.1 Components of a mesh-BN

In mesh-BNs, extensive interconnection among the following conductive elements is recommended:

cabinets and cable racks of telecommunications and peripheral equipment;

frames of all systems housed within the telecommunication building;

the protective conductor PE of the TN-S type a.c. power installation;

all metal parts, which according to IEC Publications [2] must be connected to the protective conductor
(PE);

the main earthing terminal, including earthing conductors and earth electrodes;

each d.c. power return conductor along its entire length.

Multiple interconnections between CBN and each d.c. return along its entire length is usually a feature of the mesh-BN
configuration. The d.c. return conductor of such a configuration may be entrusted with the functions of protective
conductor (PE) for systems associated with a.c. loads or sockets, provided that continuity and reliability complies with
the IEC Publications [2].

B.1.2 General design objectives

Safety requirements supersede all other requirements. To ensure continuity of bonding conductors, reliable connection
methods shall be used, e.g. crimping, welding, etc. However, if several options exist for fulfilling safety requirements,
only that one shall be used which best coordinates with EMC requirements.

B.1.2.1 Non-telecommunication installations

Within the whole telecommunication building, there shall be no exception from the TN-S-type a.c. power instal-
lation [2]. This requires, except at the main earthing terminal for a TN-C to TN-S transition at the entrance of the
building, that the neutral conductor (N) and protective conductor (PE) are nowhere interconnected in the building,
neither in permanently connected equipment, nor in equipment connected by plug and socket.

B.1.2.2 Telecommunication equipment and systems

Telecommunication equipment with electronic circuitry is generally provided with a potential reference metallization
that extends widely over the surface of the Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs). If PCBs are connectorized, a number of pins
are used to interconnect to adjoining cabling, backplanes, or motherboards. At this interface there starts the
interconnection to the mesh-BN via equipment frames, shelf-racks, etc.

14 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

 Support column of the building

Reinforcement
Bonding ring conductor
System block 1
Mesh-BN equipment
Floor n+1

Floor
Interconnection

Connection of cable shield Bonding mat

to the rack is recommended

Interconnected
reinforcement

Floor n

Mesh-BN
equipment

System block 2
mesh-BN equipment

Lower floor L1 L2 L3 N PE
Plumbing

PE
AC distribution
Aircon
48 V dc
service panel

Frame of dc
powerplant

Basement

Main earthing terminal T0506060-92/d05

PE
DC return conductor (+48 V)
Telecom Interconnected reinforcement
cables and building steel
Bonding ring conductor
(recommended) Intra-system cabling
Shielded inter-system cabling
Bonding conductor
To earth
electrode To foundation
reinforcement/ring
conductor
FIGURE B.1/K.27
Mesh-BN installation inside a telecommunication building FIG
URE B.1/K.27.....[D05] = 23.5 cm (page pleine)

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 15

The equipment racks shall be interconnected by low impedance leads or copper bars. Since the mesh-BN technique
usually incorporates the d.c. return conductor into the CBN, the leads or bars can serve as the d.c. return. The leads or
bars of each row have to be interconnected via the shortest route to minimize inductance. One or more d.c. return
conductors may be used to interconnect the system to the centralized common power distribution cabinet or an
intermediate power distribution panel. It is recommended that these leads be paired in close proximity with the
corresponding negative d.c. power feed leads to reduce loop areas and enhance EMC. Small gauge d.c. power
conductors should be twisted.

D.c./d.c. converters generally have one input conductor and one output conductor connected to the mesh-BN. There may
be exceptions in specific equipment.

An independent a.c. power supply network, derived from the d.c. supply by d.c./a.c. converters, is best implemented as
a TN-S type [2].

Unrestricted fastening of the system to the floor and walls provides, in general, sufficient bypassing of stray capacitance
for acceptable EMC performance of the system.

B.1.3 Cabling

Regarding EMC, cables can act as antennas, and support common modes than can transport extraneous energy into
otherwise well-designed equipment. This antenna and common-mode propagation phenomenon can be mitigated by
proper routing and shielding.

Routing of indoor cabling shall be in close proximity to conductive elements of the CBN and follow the shortest possible
path. The shielding afforded by interconnected cable racks, trays, raceways, etc., shall be intentionally used. This
shielding is effective only if it is continuous.

B.1.4 EMC performance

Equipment in an appropriately designed mesh-BN configuration, together with the use of d.c. power distribution with a
return that is common to the mesh-BN (i.e. d.c.-C-MBN), is known to give acceptable EMC performance.

The incorporation of d.c. power return conductors into the mesh-BN limits voltage drops caused by short circuit currents
in the d.c. power distribution network.

B.2 Mesh-IBN with a bonding mat configuration

A high level of shielding may be obtained by connecting all equipment frames within a system-block into a bonding-mat
configuration. This configuration is isolated from the surrounding CBN. The result is a very effective type of mesh-IBN;
an example is shown in Figure B.2.

The technical goals of this installation method are:

a) prevention of CBN currents from flowing in the bonding-mat or any other part of the system-block;

b) achievement of satisfactory EMC performance by controlled interconnection of system-blocks;

c) provision of bonding and cabling facilities that allow for:

systematic EMC planning;

use of well-defined and reproducible EMC test methods.

16 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

 Low impedance cable duct (CBN Element)
Interconnection between Frames of system block 1
SPC1 and cable duct interconnected by the
bonding mat

Floor

SPC1
Bonding mat 1

Connection of cable screen

to the frame is recommended

Steel reinforcement Insulation between bonding

of the floor mat and CBN to prevent
System block 3 flow of foreign currents

SPC3
SPC2 Existing
equipment
installed on CBN
(system 4)

T0505750-90/d06
System block 2

SPC Single Point Connection

Equipotential bonding conductor
Steel reinforcement
Unshielded intra-or inter-system cabling

Shielded intra-or inter-system cabling

Dots ( ) along the edge at a bonding mat denote its SPC
Inter-system cabling entering the system block must enter close to the SPC

NOTES
1 System blocks 1, 2 and 3 are new installations conforming to the mesh-IBN method. They may be connected
to existing installations (system 4) that use any method of bonding.
2 The SPC is the only metallic interface between the mesh-IBN and the CBN. It must be directly connected to
the reinforcement of the floor. All cables leading to the system enter here. All conductors that are bonded to the
mesh-IBN must be connected to the SPC (e.g. cable screens, battery return, etc.).

FIGURE B.2/K.27
Mesh-IBN with bonding mat FIGURE
B.2/K.27.....[D06] = 22.5 cm (page pleine)

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 17

B.2.1 Equipment configuration

The system block comprises equipment agreed by the operating agencies and manufacturer(s) to be interconnected to the
mesh-IBN [Figure 1 d)]. (Note that this agreement facilitates assignment of responsibility to either the supplier or the
operating agency.)

Peripheral equipment denotes equipment location beyond the boundaries of the system block, but which relies
functionally on a connection to the IBN.

Equipment serving air conditioning, lighting, etc., is considered to be external to the system block and may be installed
or operated as part of the CBN of the building.

However, provision for the following is recommended:

protective earthing;

a.c. power distribution;

d.c. power distribution up to the SPC, with the d.c. power return conductor(s) incorporated into the CBN
(d.c.-C-CBN).

B.2.1.1 Single point connection

It is recommended that the SPC be established in the vicinity of its system, serving as the only connection between IBN
and CBN.

B.2.1.2 Cabling

All conductors and cables connecting to the system block shall pass near to the SPC (i.e. through the SPC window).
Metalwork near the system block shall be bonded to the SPC to avoid electric shock or flash-over in the event of a
lightning strike to the building. Installation of a distribution frame at the SPC is recommended since this facilitates
connection of cable shields to the SPC. It is recommended that the shields of all cables passing the SPC be connected to
the SPC.

Alien cables crossing the area of the IBN must be spaced sufficiently from cables connecting to the SPC and the system
block.

B.2.1.3 Equipment powered by external a.c. sources

Equipment with IEC class II certification (no PE connected) may be used without restriction within the system block
area or at its periphery.

Equipment with IEC class I certification (relying on PE protection methods) shall be powered via isolating transformers,
if not connected to d.c./a.c. converters or a.c. power sockets belonging to the system block.

B.2.2 EMC performance

Equipment in an appropriately designed mesh-IBN configuration, together with the use of the d.c. power distribution
with a return that is common to the mesh-IBN (i.e. d.c.-C-IBN), is known to give acceptable EMC performance.

B.3 Star or sparse mesh-IBN with isolation of d.c. power return

In this configuration, the framework of the switch is connected to form either a star or a mesh-IBN (see Figure 1). The
cabinet framework and metallic panels are the major components of this IBN (there is no bonding mat). This type of IBN
(whether star or mesh) will be denoted by frame-IBN. The mesh topology is typically achieved by the cross-aisle
interconnections afforded by cable trays. The result is a sparse-mesh IBN. The single point interconnection between a
frame-IBN and the CBN is made at the SPC bus-bar (SPCB) located within the SPC window (SPCW). The SPCW has
a fixed dimension that allows the SPCB to be of sufficient size for connecting conductors, while limiting the voltage
drop across the SPCB in the event of lightning surges or power system faults.

18 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

An example of this configuration (in its star form) is shown in Figure B.3. The d.c. feed section leaving the power plant
is isolated (i.e. of type d.c.-I-CBN). This feed splits into a d.c.-I-IBN feed serving the frame-IBN equipment (the system
block), and a d.c.-C-CBN feed serving mesh-BN equipment. For the branch feeding the mesh-BN equipment, a
connection between d.c. return and CBN is made at the SPCB. Beyond the SPCW, this branch is of type d.c.-C-CBN
(i.e. it has multiple connections to the CBN). The d.c. feed to the frame-IBN equipment need not pass through the SPCW
since, within the frame-IBN, it is isolated. However, it is advantageous if most of the d.c. feed cable is in close proximity
to bonding conductors, because this will reduce surge voltages that appear across the isolation barriers of the
d.c./d.c. converters on which the d.c. feed terminates.

To summarize, the main features of the system are:

insulation of the frame-IBN from the surrounding CBN;
connection of the frame-IBN to the CBN only at the SPCB;
isolation of the d.c. return within the frame-IBN and between the power plant and the SPCW.

Systems of this type (both star and mesh configurations) have shown satisfactory EMC performance.

Note that this example demonstrates how this bonding and earthing network combines, in one building, systems using
IBNs and mesh-BNs. The example also shows how all systems may share one d.c. power plant.

B.3.1 The d.c. power return configuration

In the d.c. power system, the frame-IBN branch and the power plant branch are isolated, resulting in no conductive
coupling from the CBN in these branches. However, surges (e.g. lightning and short circuit fault currents) arising in the
d.c.-C-CBN branch (that feeds mesh-BN equipment) can couple indirectly into the frame-IBN equipment via the
common source impedance presented by the power plant and the d.c.-I-CBN section. This impedance is kept to a low
value by running the 48 V conductors and d.c. return conductors in close proximity.

The bonding conductor from the SPCB to the frame of the power plant is run in close proximity to all d.c. feed
conductors in the d.c.-I-CBN section. This reduces d.c. feed common-mode surge voltages at the power plant and
enables fault clearing in the event of a fault between 48 V and frame in the power plant.

B.3.2 System installation

Cable shields from outside the IBN that terminate within the IBN (i.e. on the system block) have their shields:
a) bonded to the frame-IBN and to no other point (such cables shall not extend more than one floor from the
SPC); or
b) bonded to the frame-IBN, bonded to the SPCB, and, outside of the system block, bonded to the CBN.

Sub-systems that are part of the system block should be located within one floor of the SPC of the main system. This
avoids excessive voltage differences between the extremities of the IBN and nearby CBN.

Peripheral equipment that is to use an IBN and that is located more than one floor from the SPC of the main system shall
use a dedicated SPC that is within one floor. The equipment shall be powered through an isolation barrier, e.g. by using
d.c./d.c. or a.c./d.c. converters.

The isolation barrier inside any d.c. power equipment must have sufficient voltage withstand capability to meet local
authority requirements. Installation and wiring of converters should comply with these isolation requirements.

Framework of equipment, and metal structural components, in a CBN that is located within 2 metres of an IBN should
be bonded to the SPCB for reasons of personnel safety.

Other equipment that is in the telecommunications building, and that uses the mesh-BN configuration, is installed using
the techniques of B.1, with or without an isolated d.c. return.

B.3.3 Maintainability of isolated bonding networks

IBNs need careful installation and ongoing surveillance to assure isolation. Also, the use of an isolated d.c. power return
may require ongoing monitoring to check its isolation, especially if maintenance work is performed on different or
mixed configurations by the same personnel. Violation of isolation during, or as a consequence of, maintenance work,
may lead to failures in system operation or even to physical damage during lightning or power fault events.

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 19

 Mesh-BN equipment (may be
Support column FGB more than one floor from SPCB)
of building
IBN (dc return
conductor not shown)
Floor N+1

Building steel Insulation

(CBN)

SPCB
FGB Unshielded twisted
SPCW pair to switch
Main distributing
frame (mesh-BN
Floor N equipment)

Mesh-BN equip-
ment (dc return
conductor not IBN
shown)
Closely Shielded twisted
FGB coupled pair to cable
entrance facility

Insulated dc return
bus-bar
Lower floor
(may be more
than one floor Frame of principal
from SPCB) power plant

T0506070-92/d07
To Earth electrode

Interconnected reinforcement & bldg. steel

Bonding conductor
dc return conductor (+48 V)
(48 V conductor, not shown, closely parallels this)
Intra-or inter-system cabling
FGB Floor Ground Bar (part of CBN)
SPCB Single Point Connection bus-bar
SPCW Single Point Connection window

FIGURE B.3/K.27
Star-IBN with isolation of d.c. power return FIGURE
B.3/K.27.....[D07] = 22.5 cm (page pleine)

20 Recommendation K.27 (05/96)

References
[1] CCITT Handbook, Earthing of telecommunication installations, Geneva, 1976.
[2] IEC Publication 364, Electrical installations of buildings.
IEC Publication 364-4-41, Protection against electric shock, 1982.
IEC Publication 364-5-54, Earthing arrangements and protective conductors, 1980, Amendment 1, 1982.
[3] IEC Publication 50, International electrotechnical vocabulary; Chapter 826, 1982 and Chapter 604, 1987.
[4] CCITT Recommendation K.20 (1988), Resistibility of telecommunication switching equipment to overvoltages
and overcurrents.
[5] IEC Publication 1024, Protection of structures against lightning.
IEC Publication 1024-1, General principles, 1990, Part 1.
[6] KEISER (B.): Principles of electromagnetic compatibility, 3rd edition, Artech, 1987.

Recommendation K.27 (05/96) 21

I n t e r n a t i o n a l T e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n U n i o n

ITU-T K.56
TELECOMMUNICATION (01/2010)
STANDARDIZATION SECTOR
OF ITU

SERIES K: PROTECTION AGAINST INTERFERENCE

Protection of radio base stations against

lightning discharges

Recommendation ITU-T K.56

Recommendation ITU-T K.56

Protection of radio base stations against lightning discharges

Summary
Recommendation ITU-T K.56 presents the techniques applied to a telecommunication radio base
station in order to protect it against lightning discharges. The need of protection is obtained from the
methodology contained in IEC 62305-2, which is used to determine the relevant lightning protection
level (LPL) for the installation. The protection techniques for the external area cover the lightning
protection system (LPS), bonding procedures, earthing and the installation of surge protective
devices (SPDs) at the power meter station. The protection techniques for the equipment building
cover the feeder and lighting cables, the electric power conductors, the telecommunication cabling
and the earthing/bonding procedures applied to cable trays and equipment frames. This
Recommendation also provides guidelines in order to achieve adequate protection of the
telecommunication equipment based on the coordination between equipment resistibility, SPD
protection level and installation characteristics.

History
Study
Edition Recommendation Approval
Group
1.0 ITU-T K.56 2003-07-29 5
2.0 ITU-T K.56 2010-01-13 5

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) i

 FOREWORD
The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is the United Nations specialized agency in the field of
telecommunications, information and communication technologies (ICTs). The ITU Telecommunication
Standardization Sector (ITU-T) is a permanent organ of ITU. ITU-T is responsible for studying technical,
operating and tariff questions and issuing Recommendations on them with a view to standardizing
telecommunications on a worldwide basis.
The World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (WTSA), which meets every four years,
establishes the topics for study by the ITU-T study groups which, in turn, produce Recommendations on
these topics.
The approval of ITU-T Recommendations is covered by the procedure laid down in WTSA Resolution 1.
In some areas of information technology which fall within ITU-T's purview, the necessary standards are
prepared on a collaborative basis with ISO and IEC.

NOTE
In this Recommendation, the expression "Administration" is used for conciseness to indicate both a
telecommunication administration and a recognized operating agency.
Compliance with this Recommendation is voluntary. However, the Recommendation may contain certain
mandatory provisions (to ensure e.g., interoperability or applicability) and compliance with the
Recommendation is achieved when all of these mandatory provisions are met. The words "shall" or some
other obligatory language such as "must" and the negative equivalents are used to express requirements. The
use of such words does not suggest that compliance with the Recommendation is required of any party.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

ITU draws attention to the possibility that the practice or implementation of this Recommendation may
involve the use of a claimed Intellectual Property Right. ITU takes no position concerning the evidence,
validity or applicability of claimed Intellectual Property Rights, whether asserted by ITU members or others
outside of the Recommendation development process.
As of the date of approval of this Recommendation, ITU had not received notice of intellectual property,
protected by patents, which may be required to implement this Recommendation. However, implementers
are cautioned that this may not represent the latest information and are therefore strongly urged to consult the
TSB patent database at http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/ipr/.

ITU 2010
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, by any means whatsoever, without the
prior written permission of ITU.

ii Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 CONTENTS
Page
1 Scope and purpose ........................................................................................................ 1
2 References..................................................................................................................... 1
3 Definitions .................................................................................................................... 2
4 Abbreviations and acronyms ........................................................................................ 2
5 Need of protection ........................................................................................................ 2
6 External area ................................................................................................................. 3
6.1 Lightning protection system (LPS) ................................................................ 3
6.2 Bonding in the tower ...................................................................................... 4
6.3 Earthing .......................................................................................................... 7
6.4 Power meter station ........................................................................................ 8
7 Equipment building ...................................................................................................... 9
7.1 Feeder and lighting cables .............................................................................. 9
7.2 Power conductors ........................................................................................... 11
7.3 Telecommunication conductors...................................................................... 14
7.4 Earthing and bonding of metallic elements .................................................... 16
8 Protection of RBS equipment ....................................................................................... 18
8.1 Inductive voltage drop across the SPD connecting leads ............................... 20
8.2 Voltage induced in the internal cabling .......................................................... 20
Annex A Shielding factor () of cable trays ......................................................................... 22
Annex B Shielding factor () of building walls .................................................................... 24
Annex C Example of earthing and bonding configuration inside an RBS ........................... 25
Appendix I Results of tests with rocket-triggered lightning on a radio base station ............ 26
I.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 26
I.2 Description of the test site .............................................................................. 26
I.3 Recordings of the lightning current ................................................................ 27
I.4 Shielding factor of tower and feeder tray ....................................................... 27
I.5 Bonding the feeder to the tower at ground level ............................................ 28
I.6 Current flowing through service conductors .................................................. 29
I.7 Inductive voltage drop in the SPD connecting leads ...................................... 30
Bibliography............................................................................................................................. 31

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) iii

Recommendation ITU-T K.56

Protection of radio base stations against lightning discharges

1 Scope and purpose

This Recommendation addresses radio base stations (RBSs) made of a shelter or small building to
house the equipment and a nearby tower to hold the antennas. The purpose of this Recommendation
is to provide a set of procedures to protect the RBS against lightning discharges. [ITU-T K.71]
gives information on the protection of antenna installations in or on a customer building.

2 References
The following ITU-T Recommendations and other references contain provisions which, through
reference in this text, constitute provisions of this Recommendation. At the time of publication, the
editions indicated were valid. All Recommendations and other references are subject to revision;
users of this Recommendation are therefore encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the
most recent edition of the Recommendations and other references listed below. A list of the
currently valid ITU-T Recommendations is regularly published. The reference to a document within
this Recommendation does not give it, as a stand-alone document, the status of a Recommendation.
[ITU-T K.12] Recommendation ITU-T K.12 (2006), Characteristics of gas discharge tubes
for the protection of telecommunications installations.
[ITU-T K.27] Recommendation ITU-T K.27 (1996), Bonding configurations and earthing
inside a telecommunication building.
[ITU-T K.35] Recommendation ITU-T K.35 (1996), Bonding configurations and earthing at
remote electronic sites.
[ITU-T K.44] Recommendation ITU-T K.44 (2008), Resistibility tests for telecommunication
equipment exposed to overvoltages and overcurrents Basic Recommendation.
[ITU-T K.46] Recommendation ITU-T K.46 (2008), Protection of telecommunication lines
using metallic symmetric conductors against lightning-induced surges.
[ITU-T K.47] Recommendation ITU-T K.47 (2008), Protection of telecommunication lines
using metallic conductors against direct lightning discharges.
[ITU-T K.66] Recommendation ITU-T K.66 (2004), Protection of customer premises from
overvoltages.
[ITU-T K.71] Recommendation ITU-T K.71 (2007), Protection of customer antenna
installations.
[ITU-T K.72] Recommendation ITU-T K.72 (2008), Protection of telecommunication lines
using metallic conductors against lightning Risk management.
[IEC 61643-1] IEC 61643-1 (2005), Low-voltage surge protective devices Part 1: Surge
protective devices connected to low-voltage power distribution systems
Requirements and tests.
[IEC 61643-11] IEC 61643-11 (2004), Low-voltage surge protective devices Part 11: Surge
protective devices connected to low-voltage power distribution systems
Performance requirements and testing methods.
[IEC 61643-12] IEC 61643-12 (2008), Low-voltage surge protective devices Part 12: Surge
protective devices connected to low-voltage power distribution systems
Selection and application principles.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 1

[IEC 61643-22] IEC 61643-22 (2004), Low-voltage surge protective devices Part 22: Surge
protective devices connected to telecommunications and signalling networks
Selection and application principles.
[IEC 62305-1] IEC 62305-1 (2006), Protection against lightning Part 1: General principles.
[IEC 62305-2] IEC 62305-2 (2006), Protection against lightning Part 2: Risk management.
[IEC 62305-3] IEC 62305-3 (2006), Protection against lightning Part 3: Physical damage to
structures and life hazard.

3 Definitions
The definitions contained in the references apply to this Recommendation. Additional definitions
needed for the protection of radio base stations (RBSs) are as follows:
3.1 cable tray: Rigid structural system used to securely fasten or support cables.
3.2 feeder cable: Wave-guide or coaxial cable that conducts signals to an antenna.
3.3 lightning protection system (LPS) rod: Metallic rod that makes part of the LPS and is
intended to intercept a lightning strike. It is also designated as "lightning air termination" or
"lightning finial".
3.4 radio base station: Installation intended to provide access to the telecommunication system
by means of radio waves.
3.5 shielding factor: Factor that represents the attenuation of the voltage or current in a
conductor due to the presence of a nearby shielding conductor.
3.6 single-pulse peak current: Rated maximum current value which may be applied for a
single impulse of specified waveshape, without causing surge protective device (SPD) failure.
Typically, this rating is defined using either an 8/20 or 10/350 impulse current waveshape.

4 Abbreviations and acronyms

This Recommendation uses the following abbreviations and acronyms:
GDT Gas Discharge Tube
LPL Lightning Protection Level
LPS Lightning Protection System
MEB Main Earthing Bar
PE Protective Earth
RBS Radio Base Station
SPD Surge Protective Device

5 Need of protection
The risk assessment of the RBS shall be performed according to [IEC 62305-2] in order to
determine a lightning protection level (LPL) for the design of the protection procedures. Table 1
shows some lightning flash parameters associated with each LPL.

2 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Table 1 Lightning flash parameters from [IEC 62305-1]
LPL
Parameter Unit
I II III IV
Maximum peak current kA 200 150 100 100
Maximum current rate of rise kA/s 200 150 100 100
Radius of electro-geometric sphere m 20 30 45 60
Probability of flash % 99 98 95 90
NOTE The risk assessment may indicate an LPL for the design of the LPS that is different from the LPL
considered for the design of the other protection procedures.

6 External area
Figure 1 shows the main earthing and bonding procedures applied to the external area. These
procedures, as well as others not shown in the figure, are detailed in the subsequent clauses.

6.1 Lightning protection system (LPS)

In order to protect the antennas and auxiliary equipment from a direct strike, it may be necessary to
install an LPS in the tower. If the nearby tower does not protect the shelter, it may be necessary to
install an LPS in the shelter too. The assessment of the need for an LPS and the determination of its
positioning shall be performed with the rolling sphere method described in [IEC 62305-3]. The
following clauses give some procedures for the installation of the LPS.
6.1.1 Metallic tower
The LPS rod(s) shall be connected directly to the structure of the metallic tower. Therefore, the
structure of the metallic tower will conduct the stroke current to ground and there is no need to
install lightning down conductors.
NOTE If the total cross-section of the tower structure is less than 125 mm2, then the tower shall be treated
as a non-metallic tower, as described in clause 6.1.2.
6.1.2 Non-metallic tower
If the structure that supports the antennas is not metallic (e.g., wood pole) or if it is metallic but its
cross-section is less than 125 mm2, it is necessary to install two down-conductors to earth the LPS
rod(s). The down conductors shall not be insulated from the tower and they shall have a minimum
cross-section of 50 mm2 each. The down conductors shall be installed on opposite sides of the
tower.
6.1.3 Building
In the majority of the cases, the nearby tower will protect the building against direct strikes.
However, the need for an LPS in the building shall be investigated with the rolling sphere method
described in [IEC 62305-3]. If the building requires an LPS, it shall be earthed in the earthing
system of the RBS, which is described in clause 6.3.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 3

 Figure 1 General view of earthing and bonding procedures in the external area

6.2 Bonding in the tower

6.2.1 Feeder cables
The wave-guide and the external conductor of coaxial cables, henceforth referred as feeder cables,
shall be bonded to the metallic tower (or to the feeder tray) near the antenna, as shown in Figure 1.
A weatherproof connector shall make the connection to the feeder cable in order to avoid corrosion,
and the connection to the tower (or feeder tray) structure shall also be protected to avoid ingression
of moisture. Usually, the cable manufacturers provide appropriated earthing kits for these
connections. The earthing kits shall have a connector to be attached on the bare outer surface of the
feeder (the feeder plastic outer jacket shall be removed), another connector to be attached to the
tower structure (paint shall be removed) and a conductor bonding the two connectors. The earthing
kit shall also contain protective coatings to be applied on the connections. Figure 2 shows
schematically the installation of an earthing kit before the application of the protective coating.
NOTE 1 For non-metallic towers or metallic towers with a cross-section smaller than 125 mm2, the
bonding shall be made to the lightning down conductor.
NOTE 2 Some types of antenna are inherently connected to the tower by design. In this case, it is not
necessary to use an earthing kit to bond the feeder to the tower (or feeder tray), as it is already bonded
through the antenna structure.

4 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Figure 2 Example of installation of earthing kit on feeder cable
(protective coating not shown)

Depending on the length of the horizontal section of the feeder tray (from the tower to the
equipment building), it is recommended to bond the feeder cables to the tower (or to the feeder tray)
at the point where they leave the tower (bending point). The minimum length of the horizontal
section that requires this bonding is given in Table 2.

Table 2 Minimum length of the horizontal section of the feeder tray that requires
bonding of feeders at the bending point
LPL I II III-IV
Feeder tray length 10 m 15 m 20 m
NOTE Regardless of the bonding at the bending point, the feeder cables shall always be bonded to the
bonding bar installed near the feed-through window, as described in clause 6.2.3.

6.2.2 Cable supplying power to the tower lights

The cable used for supplying power to the lights of the tower shall be protected from the lightning
current by one of the options described in this clause. When the power to the lights is supplied by an
equipment (e.g., AC/DC converter), an SPD set may be required close to this equipment, in addition
to the protection measures described in the following.
6.2.2.1 Metallic duct
An unshielded cable should be installed inside a metallic duct and this duct shall be electrically
continuous for its entire length. The duct shall be bonded to the tower at least at its upper end. The
length of cable that may run outside the metallic duct shall be as short as possible. Preferably, the
cable should run inside the metallic duct up to the lighting hardware. The metallic duct can be made
of galvanized steel and shall have a cross-section area not less than 16 mm2. The openings in the
duct shall be adequately sealed in order to prevent the ingression of moisture. The metallic duct
shall also be bonded to the earthing bar installed near the feed-through window.
6.2.2.2 Shielded cable
A shielded cable can be installed directly along the tower, i.e., without a metallic duct. The shield of
the cable shall be electrically continuous for its entire length and shall be bonded to the tower at its
upper end. The shield shall be terminated as close as possible to the lighting hardware and shall be
bonded to the earthing bar installed near the feed-through window.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 5

6.2.2.3 Unshielded cable
The use of unshielded cable installed without a metallic duct requires the installation of adequate
SPDs close to the lighting hardware and connected between the conductors and the tower structure.
Another set of SPDs is also required at the point where the lighting conductors enters the building
and these SPDs shall be bonded to the earthing bar installed below the feed-through window.
Requirements for these SPDs are given in clause 7.1.2.
6.2.3 Feeder tray
The feeder cables are supported by a metallic structure, here designated as a feeder tray. The feeder
tray shall be kept continuous in its trajectory along the tower and it shall be bonded to the tower by
its supporting hardware (i.e., screws, clamps or welding). In the upper side of the tower, the feeders
shall leave the feeder tray as close as possible to the antennas.
The feeder tray shall be continuous when it leaves the tower towards the building, preferably using
a curved section as shown in Figure 3. In the trajectory between the building and the tower, the
feeder tray shall be continuous and bonded to the tower and to the earthing bar located near the
feed-through window of the building. The objective of this bonding is to provide a path to the
lightning current in parallel to the feeders, which reduces significantly the current carried by the
feeders. The bonding shall be made at least in the two sides of the tray, as shown in Figure 4. On the
tower side, the bonding between the feeder and the tower frame is normally achieved by mounting
clamps or bolts. On the building side, it is necessary to install bonding conductors between the
feeder tray and the earthing bar.

Figure 3 Curved section used to maintain the continuity of the feeder tray

Figure 4 Feeder tray bonded at both ends

6 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

6.3 Earthing
6.3.1 Earthing configuration
The earthing system of the RBS is intended to provide a safe path for the lightning current to earth
and to reduce the potential gradient at the earth surface around the RBS. The earthing resistance (or
impedance) of the earthing system is not of prime importance for the protection of the RBS.
However, this resistance (or impedance) has an important influence on the surges transferred from
the RBS to its neighbourhood through the metallic services connected to it (e.g., power lines). In
order to reduce these surges, the earthing resistance (or impedance) shall be as low as possible.
NOTE A low value of earthing resistance may not be feasible in areas with high resistivity soil. In these
situations, it is recommended to apply measures in order to reduce the current exiting the RBS on the service
conductors. One possibility for power conductors is to use a dedicated medium voltage/low voltage
transformer to feed power to the RBS. Alternatively, shielding techniques should be applied to the service
cables, as described in [ITU-T K.47].
Figure 5 shows the configuration of an earthing system that fulfils the requirements for the
protection of the RBS. The main characteristics of this earthing system are:
A bare conductor forms a ring electrode around the building and another ring around the
tower. Multiple earthing conductors are used to interconnect the two rings (three, in the
figure).
The distance of the buried conductor from the associated structure shall be approximately
1.0 m, and the depth of the conductor shall be at least 0.5 m.
Vertical rods should be installed along the ring electrode, as shown in Figures 1 and 5.
These rods should be made of steel covered with copper or made of galvanized steel, and
they shall be attached to the earth electrode by appropriate connectors.
The legs of a metallic tower (or the down conductors of a non-metallic tower) shall be
bonded through short connections to the tower's earthing ring. The steel reinforcement of
the tower's basement, if any, shall also be connected to the earthing ring (see Figures 1
and 5).
The steel reinforcement of the building's structure shall be bonded to the earthing ring at
least at its four corners. If the building is metallic, its feet shall be bonded to the earthing
ring.
The earthing ring of the building shall be connected to the main earthing bar (MEB) located
inside the building, preferably on the wall that faces the tower. The earthing conductor shall
be as short as possible and have 50 mm2 as the minimum cross-section area.
All conductors in contact with the earth should be made of copper or steel covered with
copper and have 50 mm2 as the minimum cross-section area. Galvanized steel conductors
could also be used, with 90 mm2 as the minimum cross-section area.
If the earthing system of a given installation does not fulfil the minimum length of earthing
electrodes determined by [IEC 62305-3], additional earthing electrodes shall be installed. These
additional electrodes should preferably be in the form of horizontal conductors extending from the
tower earthing ring.
Any large metallic object in the vicinity of the earthing system shall be bonded to it. This applies to
fuels tanks, stacks, pipes, air conditioning, reinforcing steel, etc., located within 3 m of the earthing
electrodes. The bonding should be made by a copper conductor and connected to the nearest earth
electrode. Alternatively, a steel conductor covered with copper or galvanized steel conductors could
also be used. The length of the bonding conductor shall be as short as possible.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 7

 Fence earthing ring Fence Bonding between
fence and ring

Building
earthing ring Feeder tray Gate
earthing
Tower earthing ring

Vertical
RBS building rod

Power meter
station

K.56(10)_F05

Figure 5 Earthing system of the RBS

6.3.2 Surface covering
A risk analysis carried out according to [IEC 62305-2] shows that the risk of injury to people is
much less than the tolerable risk due to the fact that only seldom persons are present in the RBS. In
any case, it is recommended that the area around the RBS be covered with a crushed-stone layer.
This procedure increases significantly the resistivity of the upper layer of the soil and, therefore,
reduces the harm from the voltage gradient in the soil. The crushed-stone layer also helps in
keeping the humidity of the soil, thus maintaining the soil conductivity stability during the dry
season. The thickness of the crushed-stone layer shall be at least 0.08 m. The covered area shall be
as large as possible and shall extend at least 1 m beyond the earthing electrodes.
6.3.3 Fences
A fence usually surrounds the terrain where the RBS is located. If the fence is metallic, some
precautions have to be taken in order to minimize the hazard due to the voltages transferred by the
fence. Figure 5 shows the recommended procedures, which are as follows:
A ring earthing electrode shall be installed along the fence, and the fence shall be bonded to
this electrode at regular intervals.
If the gate is metallic, it shall also be bonded to the ring electrode by a flexible conductor.
The fence ring electrode shall be bonded to the earthing system of the RBS at regular
intervals. In the example of Figure 5, a section of electrode is shared by the building and the
fence rings.
All electrodes in contact with the earth should be made of copper or steel covered with
copper and they shall have 50 mm2 as the minimum cross section area. Alternatively,
galvanized steel conductors having 90 mm2 as the minimum cross section area could be
used.
The crushed-stone layer described in clause 6.3.2 shall be extended up to the fence.
However, if a risk analysis carried out according to [IEC 62305-2] shows that the risk of
injury to people standing outside the fence and touching the fence is higher than the
tolerable risk, complimentary protective measures shall be taken. These measures may
include extending the crushed-stone layer at least 1 m beyond the fence.

6.4 Power meter station

The electric utility usually delivers power to the RBS up to a power meter station located at the
boundary of the terrain. This station is usually equipped with a power meter and a set of circuit
breakers. In addition to the earthing procedures that may be required by the power utility
(e.g., installation of an earthing rod close to the station), the earthing bar of the power meter station
shall be bonded to the RBS earthing system. The bonding conductor shall extend from the power
meter station up to the closest point of the RBS earthing system and, when applicable, it shall be in

8 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

contact with the soil. This conductor shall be treated as part of the RBS earthing system and shall
have a minimum cross section equal to 50 mm2. In many situations, this bonding is made to the
fence's earthing ring.
Surge protective devices (SPDs) shall be installed at the RBS side of the power meter station
(i.e., downstream of the circuit breakers). These SPDs shall comply with [IEC 61643-1] and
withstand the current:
I LPL
I SPD = (1)
2nm
where:
ISPD is the 10/350 s single-pulse peak current of the SPD;
ILPL is the maximum lightning peak current given in Table 1;
n is the number of metallic services entering the RBS;
m is the number of conductors of the power line.
NOTE Field experience shows that it is possible to use a device rated for an 8/20 s waveshape, provided
it has an adequate current rating.
The continuous operating voltage (service voltage) of the SPD shall be sufficiently high so that it
will not operate under normal operation or fault conditions of the power line. [IEC 61643-11]
provides guidelines for the selection of the SPD continuous operating voltage.

7 Equipment building
All conductors that enter the equipment building shall be treated in order to limit the voltages and
currents that they can carry to the interior of the building. Furthermore, equipment frames and
metallic ducts and trays shall be adequately earthed and bonded in order to control the surges
induced in the internal cabling. This clause describes the procedures to be applied.

7.1 Feeder and lighting cables

7.1.1 Bonding at the feed-through window
Wave-guides and the outer conductor of coaxial cables shall be directly bonded to the bonding bar
located near the feed-through window. This bonding shall be made by means of short connections
and using a weatherproof connector to make contact with the feeder cable. The cable manufacturers
usually provide appropriate earthing kits for these connections. Figure 6 shows schematically this
installation.
The earthing bar located near the feed-through window shall be connected to the earthing system
through a low-impedance connection. A possibility to achieve a low-impedance connection is to
install parallel conductors between the earthing bar and the earthing electrode (see Figures 1 and 6).

If the conductors supplying power to the tower lights (lighting cable) are installed inside a metallic
duct (see clause 6.2.2.1) or if they are shielded (see clause 6.2.2.2), the metallic duct or the shield
shall be bonded to the earthing bar located near the feed-through window. In both cases, the
bonding shall be made by means of a conductor as short as possible.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 9

 Figure 6 Example of earthing the feeder cable at the feed-through window
7.1.2 Use of SPDs
The need of SPDs on the feeder coaxial cables depends on the intensity of the highest stroke current
corresponding to the selected LPL, the resistibility level of the radio interface connected to the
coaxial cable and the transfer impedance of the system. The transfer impedance of the system is the
impedance that relates the voltage appearing at the end of the coaxial cable to the stroke current. It
is made by three components:
The shielding factor of the tower (T), which determines the fraction of the stroke current
that flows through the feeder tray and the conductors attached to it.
The shielding factor of the feeder tray (F), which determines the fraction of the current in
the feeder tray that flows through a specific feeder cable.
The transfer impedance (ZT) of the feeder coaxial cable, determined by its construction.
The exact values of T can be calculated from the tower and feeder geometry. Typical values are:
Tubular tower (mast): T = 0.30
Three-legged tower: T = 0.20
Four-legged tower: T = 0.15
The exact values of F can be calculated from the feeder tray dimensions, number of feeders and
their radius. The following equation provides an approximate value, where n is the number of
cables in the feeder tray:
1
F = (2)
n + 3.5
NOTE 1 This simplified equation assumes that the feeder tray is continuous along the tower and bonded to
the tower structure, as described in clause 6.2.3.
In the frequency bandwidth of stroke current, the transfer impedance of a tubular coaxial cable is
very close to its DC resistance. Therefore, the value of ZT can be calculated by multiplying the DC
resistance of the external conductor of the coaxial cable by its length. Table 3 gives some typical
values of DC resistance of coaxial cables for the RBS. For single-braided coaxial cables, the
transfer impedance is also a function of the frequency, as part of the magnetic flux generated by a
current flowing in the external conductor coupled with the differential circuit. However, single-
braided coaxial cables are normally not used in RBSs due to other disadvantages they present, such
as undesired interference between circuits.

10 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Table 3 Typical values of DC resistance of the external conductor of
coaxial feeder cables (ZT)
External diameter (mm) 7.8 10.2 13.7 27.5 39.0 50.3 59.9
DC resistance (/km) 6.6 5.3 3.4 1.04 0.62 0.47 0.31

The peak voltage expected at the end of the feeder cable is given by:
VT = I LPL T F ZT l (3)
where:
ILPL is the peak lightning current associated with the LPL (see Table 1);
l is the length of the feeder cable.
If VT is higher than the resistibility level of the equipment, then an SPD is necessary close to the
junction between the feeder and the equipment. Otherwise, an SPD is not necessary. The SPD
selected for this application shall not interfere with the radio-frequency signal in the feeder.
If the conductors supplying power to the tower lights are unshielded and installed without a metallic
tube, it is necessary to install SPDs close to the lighting hardware and at the point where the
conductors enter the building, as described in clause 6.2.2.3. These SPDs shall comply with
[IEC 61643-1] and have current rating complying with Table 4.

Table 4 8/20 s single-pulse peak current of SPD for unshielded lighting cable
LPL I II III IV
Current (kA) 40 30 20
NOTE 2 If the power to the tower lights is supplied with AC voltage from the electric board, the SPD
installed at the building entrance (on the conductor supplying power to the tower lights) shall be coordinated
with the SPD installed in the electric board. Refer to [IEC 61643-12] for the relevant information.
NOTE 3 If the power to the tower lights is supplied with DC voltage from an AC/DC converter, an SPD
set may be necessary at the AC/DC converter. Refer to clause 8 in order to assess the need for this SPD set.

7.2 Power conductors

The power conductors can endanger the RBS equipment in case of a lightning flash striking the
tower as well as in case of a flash striking at or near the power line. The protection procedures for
any of these cases consist of limiting the surges between the power conductors and the RBS
earthing. The installation of surge protective devices and the adequate bonding of cable trays and
ducts provide adequate protection.
7.2.1 Electric board
Power conductors shall enter the RBS close to the electric board. The electric board shall contain
circuit breakers, surge protective devices (SPDs) and one earthing bar. The earthing bar shall be
connected to the building ring electrode by a short earthing conductor having a 50 mm2 minimum
cross-section area. The SPD and the board frame shall be connected to the earthing bar. For TN-C
systems, the neutral wire shall also be connected to the earthing bar. Figure 7 shows an example of
an electric board. The following aspects shall be considered:
If the power cable is shielded, its shield shall be bonded to the electric board's earthing bar.
Preferably, the power conductors shall leave the electric board inside metallic ducts or trays
that shall be bonded to the board frame. The use of plastic duct to carry the power
conductors may require the installation of another set of SPDs close to the AC powered
equipment (e.g., the power supply). The need of this set of SPDs is assessed in clause 8.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 11

 The selection of the primary circuit breakers shall take into account that they shall not trip
due to surge currents originated by the operation of the SPD.
The conductors for supplying power to the tower lights shall derive from an exclusive
secondary circuit breaker and, preferably, run inside a dedicated duct or tray. See
clause 6.2.2 for detailed information on these conductors.
The earthing bar of the electric board shall be connected to the main earthing bar (MEB)
through a bonding conductor with a cross-section area not less than 16 mm2, and the length
of this conductor shall be as short as possible.

Figure 7 Diagram of the electric board

7.2.2 Installation of SPD in the electric board
The installation of SPDs in the electric board depends on the type of electric power system used.
Figure 8 shows the diagram for SPD installation for a TN-C system, where the neutral conductor is
directly bonded to the earthing bar and the phase conductors are protected by SPDs. Figure 9 shows
two diagrams for an TN-S, TT or IT system, where the phases and neutral conductors are connected
to the SPD. The length of leads connecting the power conductors to the SPD and the SPD to the
electric board's earthing bar shall be as short as possible. The effect of the SPD lead length is
evaluated in clause 8.1.
NOTE Annex A of [ITU-T K.66] gives information on SPD installation for different power systems.

12 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Figure 8 Scheme for SPD installation on TN-C power systems

Figure 9 Schemes for SPD installation on TN-S, TT or IT power systems

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 13

7.2.3 Selection of SPDs
If the installation does not have a power meter station equipped with SPDs as required in clause 6.4,
then the SPD of the electric board shall comply with the requirements of clause 6.4. Otherwise, the
SPD of the electric board shall comply with [IEC 61643-11] and have the current rating given in
Table 5.

Table 5 8/20 s single-pulse peak current of the electric board SPD

LPL I II III IV
Current (kA) 60 40 30
NOTE The current rating of SPD2 in Figure 9 shall be determined considering that it carries the total
current that flows through the service conductors.
The continuous operating voltage (service voltage) of the SPD shall be sufficiently high so that it
will not operate under the normal operation or fault conditions of the power line. [IEC 61643-11]
provides guidelines for the selection of the SPD continuous operating voltage. The SPD installed in
the electric board shall coordinate with the SPD installed in the power meter station (see clause 6.4).
Refer to [IEC 61643-12] for the relevant information to achieve this coordination.

7.3 Telecommunication conductors

The telecommunication conductors can endanger the RBS equipment in case of a lightning flash
striking the tower as well as in case of a flash striking at or near the telecommunication line. The
protection procedures for any of these cases consist of limiting the surges between the
telecommunication conductors and the RBS earthing. The installation of surge protective devices
and adequate earthing of the conductors provides this protection.
NOTE The procedures for the protection of telecommunication lines against direct and indirect lightning
discharges can be found in [ITU-T K.47] and [ITU-T K.46], respectively, taking into account [ITU-T K.72].
7.3.1 Distribution frame
The telecommunication cables shall enter the RBS close to the distribution frame. The distribution
frame shall have an earthing bar connected to the building ring electrode by a short earthing
conductor having a 50 mm2 minimum cross-section area. The earthing bar shall also be connected
to the main earthing bar (MEB) by a conductor as short as possible having a 16 mm2 minimum
cross section area. Inside the cabinet, the following components shall be connected to the
distribution frame's earthing bar:
metallic sheath of the telecommunication cable;
metallic strength element of the telecommunication cable (if any);
surge protective devices connected to the metallic symmetric pairs;
metallic structure of the distribution frame.
The internal cable that leaves the distribution frame and goes to the equipment shall preferably be
supported by a metallic duct or tray, and this duct or tray shall be bonded to the earthing bar of the
distribution frame (e.g., through the metallic structure of the distribution frame) and to the
equipment frame. Figure 10 shows a diagram of the telecommunication distribution frame and its
earthing connections.
NOTE If the internal cable is shielded, the shield shall be continuous and bonded at both ends, i.e., to the
distribution frame and to the equipment frame.

14 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Input Cross-connect Output
frame frame

(SPD)

Earthing bar

From the To the

external line To the ring To the main equipment
electrode earthing bar
K.56(10)_F10

Figure 10 Diagram of the telecommunication distribution frame

7.3.2 Installation of SPDs in the distribution frame
A three-terminal SPD should be used for symmetric pair lines, as shown in Figure 11. The SPD
should be equipped with a fail-safe device which short-circuits it in case of overheating. The
minimum DC turn-on voltage of the SPD shall be selected by the operator based on the maximum
working voltage that can be applied to the line-to-earth circuit.
NOTE 1 The minimum DC turn-on voltage should not be too low in order to avoid frequent and
unnecessary operation of the SPD due to distant lightning activity or power-frequency induction, which may
reduce the throughput of the communication channel and the service life of the SPD.
The impulse current rating of the SPD is assessed by the following approximate equation:
I LPL
I SPD = (4)
2 n (m + ms )
where:
ISPD is the 10/350 s single-pulse peak current of the SPD;
ILPL is the maximum lightning peak current given by Table 1;
n is the number of metallic services entering the RBS;
m is the number of conductors in the telecommunication cable;
mS is the number of conductors equivalent to the shield.
NOTE 2 Field experience shows that it is possible to use a device rated for an 8/20 s waveshape, provided
it has an adequate current rating.
The value of mS can be obtained by making the resistance of the shield equal to the resistance of mS
conductors. If the cable is unshielded, then mS = 0. A representative value of mS for standard
aluminium shield is mS = 30. For example, for LPL III (ILPL = 100 kA), two services (e.g., power
and telecommunication) and twenty conductors in the telecommunication cable (10 pairs),
equation 4 gives ISPD = 500 A.
The capability of the telecommunication conductors to withstand the impulse current shall be
investigated using [ITU-T K.47], and some protection procedures may be necessary in order to
protect the external telecommunication cable.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 15

 Telecommunication cable

To the equipment

SPD

Fail safe
To the main
earthing bar
Distribution frame
earthing bar K.56(10)_F11

Figure 11 Installation of SPD in the distribution frame

7.4 Earthing and bonding of metallic elements

The earthing and bonding of the metallic elements inside the equipment building (cable trays,
equipment frames, equipotential bonding conductors, etc.) aim to minimize the voltages between
accessible metallic parts (for personnel safety) and to reduce the transfer impedance of the
installation, i.e., part of the lightning current may flow through the metallic elements, but the
voltages transferred to the equipment ports are controlled within acceptable levels. In order to
achieve this, it is necessary to connect the metallic elements as follows:
An equipotential bonding conductor should be installed inside or outside the cable trays and
bonded to the equipment frames and to the cable trays. This conductor should also be
connected to the main earthing bar (MEB), as shown in Figure 12. Alternatively, this
equipotential bonding conductor could be installed around the room (forming a ring) and
connected to the equipment frames and trays by short conductors (see Figure 13). This ring
equipotential bonding conductor may be installed near the ceiling (as described in
[ITU-T K.35]) or near the floor (as described in [ITU-T K.27]).
The metallic shield of shielded cables shall be connected to equipment metallic frames at
both ends.
The external conductor of feeder cables shall be connected to equipment frames.
The metallic ducts or trays that carry the cabling shall be connected to the equipment
metallic frame (or structure) at both ends, as shown in Figure 14.
The metallic ducts and trays shall be electrically continuous for their entire length. The
continuity at joints shall be achieved at least in two symmetrically spaced points (e.g., by
the use of two bonding clamps on the sides of the tray), as shown in Figure 15.
Annex C shows an example of the earthing and bonding inside an RBS. More information on the
implementation of earthing and bonding configurations can be found in [ITU-T K.27] and
[ITU-T K.35], including the treatment of the protective earth (PE) conductor.

16 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Building wall

Equip. bonding conductor

Cable tray
MEB
Equipment Equipment
To the
earthing
system
Equipment Equipment
Cable tray

K.56(10)_F12

Figure 12 Equipotential bonding conductor in the cable trays

Building wall

Cable tray
MEB
Equipment Equipment
To the
Equipotential bonding
earthing
conductor
system
Equipment Equipment
Cable tray

K.56(10)_F13

Figure 13 Equipotential bonding conductor around the equipment room

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 17

 Figure 14 Lateral view of the RBS showing the bonding between
internal tray and equipment frame

Figure 15 Detail of the electrical continuity in trays and equipment frame

8 Protection of RBS equipment

The RBS equipment usually presents high common-mode impedance at its input port. In some
cases, low impedance may be found if there are secondary SPDs installed in a common-mode
configuration within the equipment and these SPDs operate. Alternatively, an analysis according to
this clause may require the installation of an SPD close to the equipment port (secondary SPD). In
both cases, coordination between the secondary SPD and any primary SPD installed upstream
(e.g., at the electric power board or telecommunication distribution frame) needs to be achieved.
[ITU-T K.44] and [IEC 61643-22] give procedures to coordinate primary and secondary SPDs in
telecommunication lines and [IEC 61643-12] gives procedures for power lines. This clause refers to
the common-mode overvoltage (henceforth referred to simply as overvoltage) applied to an
equipment port that is not equipped with secondary SPDs.

18 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

The protection of RBS equipment is achieved whenever the overvoltage at its port is equal to or
lower than its withstand voltage (resistibility level). One or a combination of the following
procedures can protect RBS equipment:
select a primary SPD with adequate protection level;
improve the installation in order to reduce the overvoltage developed across the SPD
connecting leads;
improve the installation in order to reduce the overvoltage induced in the internal cabling;
install a set of secondary SPDs close to the equipment.

This clause guides the design of the electric installation inside the RBS equipment building in order
to achieve adequate protection of the equipment against lightning discharges. It considers that the
overvoltage applied to the equipment port may have three components:
the effective protection level of the SPD (UP);
the peak value of the inductive voltage drop across the SPD connecting leads (UD);
the peak value of the voltage induced in the cabling section between the SPD and
equipment (UI).
The equipment resistibility is quantified by its withstand voltage UW, which is the voltage that the
equipment can withstand without suffering damage or leading to spark-over of its insulation. It is
considered that there is a safety margin between the value of UW declared by the equipment
manufacturer and the voltage that will produce damage or spark-over, so it is not necessary to
introduce any additional safety margin. Therefore, the equipment is protected whenever the
overvoltage applied to the equipment port is equal to or lower than the withstand voltage declared
by the manufacturer. Depending on the SPD type, one of the following criteria applies:
For clamping type SPD (e.g., varistor):
UW U P + U D + U I (5)
For switching type SPD (e.g., GDT):
UW U P + U I and UW U D + U I (6)
In the derivation of equations 5 and 6, it is conservatively considered that, for clamping type SPDs,
the voltages UI , UP and UD are simultaneous, while for switching type SPDs, the voltage UI may be
simultaneous with UP or UD. In both cases, it is considered that the voltages UI , UP and UD have the
same polarity. Overvoltage due to the reflection of UI , UP and UD at high impedance equipment
ports is neglected because it is considered that, for typical RBS, the duration of this overvoltage is
too short to cause breakdown of insulation or to impair SPD coordination.
The value of the SPD protection level (UP) is usually provided by its manufacturer in the product
data sheet. For clamping type SPDs (e.g., varistor), the protection level is the voltage across the
device when it carries its single-pulse peak current. For sparking type SPDs (e.g., GDT), the
protection level is the impulse sparking voltage. The following clauses are aimed to quantify the
other parameters involved in the coordination criteria described in equations 5 and 6.
NOTE The impulse sparking voltage of GDTs is determined to be under 1 kV/s (see [ITU-T K.12]).

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 19

8.1 Inductive voltage drop across the SPD connecting leads
The installation of SPDs in the electric board and in the telecommunication distribution frame shall
minimize the length of the leads connecting the conductor to the SPD and the SPD to the
frame/board earthing bar. If the internal cabling leaves the electric board or the telecommunication
distribution frame in a non-metallic duct, the length of the connecting lead between the frame/board
earthing bar and the MEB shall also be considered. Equation 7 allows the evaluation of the
inductive voltage drop (UD):
R d I LPL LD l L
UD = (7)
(R + Z ) d t 2 n m
where:
dILPL/dtis the maximum current rate of rise determined by the LPL (see Table 1);
LD is the inductance per unit length of a connecting lead (LD 1 H/m);
lLis the length of the connecting lead;
m is the number of line conductors protected with SPDs or directly connected to
the earthing bar at the board/frame (e.g., m = 4 in Figure 8); if a section of the
connecting leads has a single conductor, then m = 1 for this section (e.g., leads
of SPD2 in Figure 9);
n is the number of services connected to the RBS;
R is the resistance of the RBS earthing system;
Z is the surge impedance of the outside service line (Z = 400 and 100 for
aerial and buried lines, respectively).

8.2 Voltage induced in the internal cabling

If the internal conductors run inside shielded cables and the shield is bonded to the equipment frame
at both ends, the induced voltage can be disregarded (UI = 0). The same applies to unshielded cables
installed inside metallic ducts or closed trays. For unshielded cables installed in metallic open trays,
the magnetic field from the lightning current gives rise to an induced voltage UI, which may be
relevant. This voltage can be calculated by:
dI LPL d + lT
U I = 0. 2 h p ln (8)
dt d
where:
dILPL/dt is the maximum current rate of rise determined by the LPL (see Table 1);
h is the height of the cable;
is the shielding factor of the walls (see Annex B);
p is a factor to take into account the metallic connection between the tower and
the building (p = 1.5 for a typical RBS);
d is the shortest distance between the tower axis and the cable (see Figure 16);
lT is the length of the cable in a radial direction from the tower (see Figure 16);
is the shielding factor of the cable tray (see Annex A).

20 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Building wall

Cable
Tower
axis

d lT

K.56(10)_F16

Figure 16 Plan view representation of the distance d and length lT

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 21

 Annex A

Shielding factor () of cable trays

(This annex forms an integral part of this Recommendation)

The shielding factor of a metallic tray is the attenuation in the voltage induced in a internal cable
due to its placement in a metallic tray which is continuous and bonded to an earthing bar/equipment
frame at both sides. The shielding factor of a metallic duct or a channel tray with cover is close to
zero ( 0). On the other hand, the shielding factor of a tray that is not continuous from a
equipment frame to another is unity ( = 1). The same applies to unshielded cables carried in non-
metallic trays or ducts. Tables A.1 to A.4 give some shielding factor values for different sizes of
open metallic trays, described by Figures A.1 and A.2.

a K.56(10)_FA.1

Figure A.1 Ladder cable tray

Table A.1 Shielding factor for ladder cable trays (b = 50 mm)

Position of the Width of ladder cable tray (a) in mm

cable (s) in mm 100 200 300 400
50 0.08 0.13 0.15 0.16
100 0.15 0.19 0.22
150 0.13 0.21 0.24
200 0.19 0.25

Table A.2 Shielding factor for ladder cable trays (b = 100 mm)

Position of the Width of ladder cable tray (a) in mm

cable (s) in mm 100 200 300 400
50 0.04 0.08 0.09 0.11
100 0.10 0.13 0.16
150 0.08 0.14 0.18
200 0.13 0.18

22 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 b s
b
a
a
K.56(10)_FA.2

Figure A.2 Channel cable tray

Table A.3 Shielding factor for channel cable trays (b = 50 mm)

Position of the Width of channel cable tray (a) in mm

cable (s) in mm 100 200 300 400
2.5 0.008 0.006 0.005 0.005
5 0.016 0.012 0.010 0.009
10 0.030 0.024 0.021 0.018
20 0.057 0.047 0.040 0.035
30 0.079 0.069 0.059 0.052
40 0.099 0.088 0.077 0.068
50 0.115 0.107 0.094 0.084

Table A.4 Shielding factor for channel cable trays (b = 100 mm)

Position of the Width of channel cable tray (a) in mm

cable (s) in mm 100 200 300 400
2.5 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004
5 0.010 0.009 0.008 0.008
10 0.020 0.018 0.016 0.015
20 0.038 0.036 0.032 0.029
30 0.053 0.052 0.047 0.043
40 0.066 0.066 0.062 0.057
50 0.080 0.080 0.075 0.070

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 23

 Annex B

Shielding factor () of building walls

(This annex forms an integral part of this Recommendation)

Depending on the conductive characteristics of the building walls, they can provide a shielding
effect against electromagnetic fields from lightning, which attenuates the voltages and currents
induced inside the building. This attenuation is represented by the shielding factor . Some
shielding factor values for different shields are summarized in the following:
Metallic container: = 0.01. The metallic container shall have its metallic sheaths
connected together at several points along the joints, forming a closed metallic cage (floor,
ceiling and walls).
Metallic grid: = w/8.5. The grid width w is in metres and it shall form a cage around the
building (8.5 < w < 0.085).
Steel reinforcement of a concrete structure: = 0.5. The steel reinforcement of a concrete
framework shall be electrically continuous.
Non-screening: = 1. This applies to walls made of non-conductive materials, such as
wood, bricks and concrete without continuous steel reinforcement.
NOTE [IEC 62305-2] designates this shielding factor as factor Ks1.

24 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Annex C

Example of earthing and bonding configuration inside an RBS

(This annex forms an integral part of this Recommendation)

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 25

 Appendix I

Results of tests with rocket-triggered lightning on a radio base station

(This appendix does not form an integral part of this Recommendation)

I.1 Introduction
A test site with rocket-triggered lightning in Cachoeira Paulista (Brazil) was active from 2000-2007.
This test site had the participation of several institutions with different research interests, including
the protection of telecommunication installations against lightning. The tests on the
telecommunication installations were carried out under a cooperation among Fundao CPqD
(Brazil), France Telecom R&D (France), Telstra Corp. (Australia), Federal University of Minas
Gerais (Brazil) and University of Campinas (Brazil). Some tests were aimed at the investigation of
the behaviour of a radio base station (RBS) under direct lightning strikes. In order to do that, an
RBS was constructed at the test site, following the guidelines of this Recommendation. A rocket
platform was installed on the top of the tower, in order to trigger the lightning discharges. The
tower and the equipment building were instrumented with current and voltage probes, and
oscilloscopes, so that the overcurrents and overvoltages could be measured at strategic locations.
This appendix presents a summary of the results and compares them with the theoretical predictions
from this Recommendation.

I.2 Description of the test site

The site is described in detail in [b-Barbosa 2], and this clause describes only its main features. The
RBS is a 5 m 6 m masonry building with a 30 m metallic tower nearby, as shown in Figure I.1.
The RBS earthing and bonding system is made according to this Recommendation. At the top of the
tower, there is a rocket platform with the capacity to fire up to four rockets during the same
thunderstorm, which is also shown in Figure I.1. The platform is insulated from the tower, in such
way that the current is forced to pass through a current probe that is connected to a well-shielded
oscilloscope nearby. This oscilloscope is remotely controlled by a fibre-optic link and powered by
battery and solar panel. Another fibre-optic link controls the firing of the rockets. Inside the RBS,
there are oscilloscopes connected to current and voltage probes. The power line that feeds the RBS
is made of three conductors (two phases and one neutral) and the external line has a buried section
up to the power meter station and then an aerial section up to a power generator.

Figure I.1 General view of the RBS and detail of the rocket
platform on the tower top

26 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

I.3 Recordings of the lightning current
The experiments presented here are related to five flashes successfully triggered from the RBS, with
an average of three strokes per flash. Figure I.2 shows a photograph of one of those flashes and the
currents recorded at the tower top for two different strokes (with different rising times). Although
rocket-triggered lightning differs from natural lightning in the initial stages of the return-stroke
formation, it is generally recognized that its characteristics are very similar to subsequent strokes
from natural lightning. The median peak value of the recorded lightning currents was 12 kA and the
median time to half value was 30 s. The median and maximum di/dt recorded were 40 kA/s and
270 kA/s, respectively.

Figure I.2 Photograph of rocket-triggered lightning and two current

waveforms recorded at the tower top

I.4 Shielding factor of tower and feeder tray

As described in clause 7.1.2, the shielding factor of the tower (T) gives the fraction of the stroke
current that flows through the feeder tray (and the conductors attached to it), while the shielding
factor of the feeder tray (F) gives the fraction of the current in the feeder tray that flows through a
specific feeder. Therefore, the product T F gives the fraction of the stroke current that flows
through a specific feeder. Clause 7.1.2 presents an approximate procedure to calculate the values for
T and F for typical towers and feeder trays. At the test site, it was possible to measure
simultaneously the stroke current at the tower top and the current in a feeder cable just before it
entered the equipment building. Some results are shown in Figure I.3 for the stroke currents of
Figure I.2.
The fast-rising stroke current of Figure I.2 leads to a peak in the feeder current, due to the stroke
current reflection at the tower base, which is almost absent in the case of a slow-rising current. As
the highest peak voltage transferred to the interior of the feeder is due to the first stroke, it comes
out that the slow-rising current is more representative for the assessment of this voltage. The ratio
between the peak values of the feeder current to the stroke current is 175 A/7000 A = 0.025. The
tower used at the test site has three legs (T = 0.20) and the feeder tray has three feeders (F = 0.15),
then the product T F = 0.03. Therefore, the shielding factor value given by the approximate
procedure from clause 7.1.2 agrees reasonably well with the value measured in the test site. It is
interesting that the calculated value is slightly above the measured one, which provides a design on
the safe side. [b-Barbosa 2] gives detailed information on these measurements.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 27

 Figure I.3 Feeder currents for fast-rising (left) and slow-rising
(right) stroke currents

I.5 Bonding the feeder to the tower at ground level

The need to bond the feeders to the tower (or to the feeder tray) at ground level has been
investigated at the test site by measuring the current in the feeder cable with and without this
bonding. For each feeder current measurement, the stroke current at the tower top was
simultaneously measured. Figure I.4 shows the feeder current for the bonded (earthed) and
un-bonded (unearthed) conditions. As each current refers to a different stroke, their amplitudes are
normalized by the peaks of the respective stroke current, which have similar waveforms.
These measurements show that bonding the feeder to the tower at ground level increases the current
in the feeder by about 1/3 or, alternatively, un-bonding the feeder reduces the current by 1/4. This
current change is designated as i. Therefore, considering only the feeder current, this bonding
should not be done.
However, the voltage between the feeder and the tower frame at the bending point could, under
certain conditions, break down the insulation of the feeder cable. This voltage may be assessed if it
is considered that the feeder/tower voltage is null for the bonded condition and that the un-bonded
condition can be obtained from the bonded condition by injecting i in the feeder. The
feeder/tower voltage is then given by the current i flowing through the inductance between the
feeder and the feeder tray in the horizontal section between the tower and the feed-through window.
This inductance is estimated as being equal to or lower than 0.5 H/m. The feeder current is
estimated as 3% of the stroke current (it is considered to have three feeders and a three-legged
tower). For LPL I, the stroke current rate of rise is 200 kA/s, so that the voltage between the feeder
and tower is about 1 kV/m. From the feeder cable data-sheets, the minimum withstand voltage of
the feeder outer sheath is 8 kVrms, which gives a 11 kV peak. Therefore, 11 m of tray is necessary to
lead to a peak impulse voltage between the feeder and tower equal to the cable withstand voltage.
This value is aligned with the minimum length of the horizontal section of the feeder tray to require
bonding of feeders as given in Table 2. [b-Barbosa 2] provides detailed information on these
measurements.
NOTE There is a reasonable safety margin between the power-frequency withstand voltage of the cable
insulation and its breakdown voltage under impulse, so the values in Table 2 are conservative.

28 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Figure I.4 Feeder current as a function of the bonding
procedure at ground level

I.6 Current flowing through service conductors

This Recommendation uses the approximate procedure from [IEC 62305-1] in order to assess the
fraction of the total lightning current that flows through the service conductors, i.e., it is assumed
that half of the current flows through the earthing system and the other half is distributed evenly by
the metallic services connected to the installation. This distribution was verified at the test site by
measuring the current that flows through the service conductors during a strike and measuring
simultaneously the total stroke current. At the test site, there was only the power service and no
SPD at the power meter station. The currents in the power conductors are shown in Figure I.5,
corresponding to the fast-rising stroke current shown in Figure I.2. The peak current flowing
through the power conductors is 1.9 kA for the phases and neutral. Therefore, the total current is
3.8 kA, which represents 32% of the stroke current. This value is somewhat lower than the 50% that
would be expected by the approximate calculation, which indicates that the calculation provided a
conservative value. The measured current may have been influenced by the relatively short length
of the power line and by the good earthing system of the RBS.
Figure I.5 also shows that the neutral current is about twice the phase current, which may have been
influenced by the direct bonding of the neutral conductor to the RBS earthing bar (TN-C system),
while the phases were bonded through the SPD. If the neutral was equipped with an SPD, due to
symmetry, it is expected that the current would divide evenly among the conductors. [b-Barbosa 1]
provides detailed information on these measurements.

Figure I.5 Currents in the power conductors for the fast-rising stroke current

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 29

I.7 Inductive voltage drop in the SPD connecting leads
The surge current flowing through the SPD connecting leads generates an inductive voltage drop in
these leads, which is proportional to the inductance of the leads and the time derivative of the
current flowing through the SPD. Comparing the currents in Figure I.5 to the fast-rising stroke
current in Figure I.2, it is clear that currents in the power conductors have a time-derivative much
lower than the stroke current. [b-Barbosa 1] gives a rationale for assessment of the time derivative
of the SPD current, which is given by:
diP R diS
=
dt MAX (R + Z ) dt AVE
(I.1)

where:
(diP/dt)MAX is the maximum di/dt on the SPD connecting leads;
(diS/dt)AVE is the average di/dt of the lightning stroke current;
R is the earth resistance of the installation;
Z is the surge impedance of the line.
At the test site, the power line leaves the RBS underground, so that its surge impedance is
Z 100 . The earthing resistance is R = 20 and the average rate-of-rise of the stroke current is
39 kA/s, for the fast-rising current of Figure I.2. Inserting these numbers in equation I.1 gives the
maximum rate-of-rise of the current in the power line equal to 6.5 kA/s. This value agrees very
well with the sum of the maximum di/dt measured on the power line conductors, which is given by:
1.7 + 1.7 + 2.8 = 6.2 kA/s. This equation is used in clause 8.1 in order to assess the inductive
voltage drop in the SDP connecting leads.

30 Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010)

 Bibliography
[b-Barbosa 1] Barbosa C.F., et al (2005), Current distribution on power conductors of an
installation struck by rocket-triggered lightning, Proceedings of the VIII
International Symposium on Lightning Protection, So Paulo, Brazil, November.
[b-Barbosa 2] Barbosa C.F., et al (2007), Current distribution in a telecommunication tower
struck by rocket-triggered lightning, Proceedings of the IX International
Symposium on Lightning Protection. Foz do Iguau, Brazil, November.

Rec. ITU-T K.56 (01/2010) 31

 SERIES OF ITU-T RECOMMENDATIONS

Series A Organization of the work of ITU-T

Series D General tariff principles

Series E Overall network operation, telephone service, service operation and human factors

Series F Non-telephone telecommunication services

Series G Transmission systems and media, digital systems and networks

Series H Audiovisual and multimedia systems

Series I Integrated services digital network

Series J Cable networks and transmission of television, sound programme and other multimedia signals

Series K Protection against interference

Series L Construction, installation and protection of cables and other elements of outside plant

Series M Telecommunication management, including TMN and network maintenance

Series N Maintenance: international sound programme and television transmission circuits

Series O Specifications of measuring equipment

Series P Terminals and subjective and objective assessment methods

Series Q Switching and signalling

Series R Telegraph transmission

Series S Telegraph services terminal equipment

Series T Terminals for telematic services

Series U Telegraph switching

Series V Data communication over the telephone network

Series X Data networks, open system communications and security

Series Y Global information infrastructure, Internet protocol aspects and next-generation networks

Series Z Languages and general software aspects for telecommunication systems

Printed in Switzerland
Geneva, 2010
I n t e r n a t i o n a l T e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n U n i o n

ITU-T K.67
TELECOMMUNICATION (02/2006)
STANDARDIZATION SECTOR
OF ITU

SERIES K: PROTECTION AGAINST INTERFERENCE

Expected surges on telecommunications and

signalling networks due to lightning

ITU-T Recommendation K.67

ITU-T Recommendation K.67

Expected surges on telecommunications and

signalling networks due to lightning

Summary
This Recommendation gives the characteristics (waveshapes and peak values) of the expected surges
(overvoltages and overcurrents) due to lightning on telecommunication lines of the access network
and on signalling lines at customers' premises using metallic conductors. These values of the
expected surges are presented as a function of a set of lightning current parameters which define
lightning as the source of damage by any type of electromagnetic coupling on a telecommunication
or signalling line.
This Recommendation allows evaluation of the effectiveness of the protective measures (e.g., surge
protective devices) that are intended to withstand the expected surge current at the installation point.

Source
ITU-T Recommendation K.67 was approved on 13 February 2006 by ITU-T Study Group 5
(2005-2008) under the ITU-T Recommendation A.8 procedure.

Keywords
Lightning, overcurrent, overvoltage, surge, transition point.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) i

 FOREWORD
The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is the United Nations specialized agency in the field of
telecommunications. The ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) is a permanent organ of
ITU. ITU-T is responsible for studying technical, operating and tariff questions and issuing
Recommendations on them with a view to standardizing telecommunications on a worldwide basis.
The World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (WTSA), which meets every four years,
establishes the topics for study by the ITU-T study groups which, in turn, produce Recommendations on
these topics.
The approval of ITU-T Recommendations is covered by the procedure laid down in WTSA Resolution 1.
In some areas of information technology which fall within ITU-T's purview, the necessary standards are
prepared on a collaborative basis with ISO and IEC.

NOTE
In this Recommendation, the expression "Administration" is used for conciseness to indicate both a
telecommunication administration and a recognized operating agency.
Compliance with this Recommendation is voluntary. However, the Recommendation may contain certain
mandatory provisions (to ensure e.g. interoperability or applicability) and compliance with the
Recommendation is achieved when all of these mandatory provisions are met. The words "shall" or some
other obligatory language such as "must" and the negative equivalents are used to express requirements. The
use of such words does not suggest that compliance with the Recommendation is required of any party.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

ITU draws attention to the possibility that the practice or implementation of this Recommendation may
involve the use of a claimed Intellectual Property Right. ITU takes no position concerning the evidence,
validity or applicability of claimed Intellectual Property Rights, whether asserted by ITU members or others
outside of the Recommendation development process.
As of the date of approval of this Recommendation, ITU had not received notice of intellectual property,
protected by patents, which may be required to implement this Recommendation. However, implementors
are cautioned that this may not represent the latest information and are therefore strongly urged to consult the
TSB patent database.

ITU 2006
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, by any means whatsoever, without the
prior written permission of ITU.

ii ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

 CONTENTS
Page
1 Scope ............................................................................................................................ 1
2 References..................................................................................................................... 1
3 Definitions .................................................................................................................... 2
4 Abbreviations................................................................................................................ 3
5 Reference configuration................................................................................................ 3
6 Protective measures ...................................................................................................... 4
6.1 Inherent protection.......................................................................................... 4
6.2 Primary protection .......................................................................................... 5
6.3 Bonding, earthing and shielding..................................................................... 5
7 Expected surges due to lightning.................................................................................. 6
7.1 Direct lightning flashes to a structure (source of damage S1): Lightning
current flowing through telecommunication or signalling lines entering
the structure (exchange or customer's building or remote site)...................... 6
7.2 Lightning flashes near, or to, a structure (source of damage S1 or S2):
Induced surges in telecommunication or signalling lines inside the
structure (exchange or customer's building or remote site)............................ 7
7.3 Direct lightning to the telecommunication or signalling lines ....................... 9
7.4 Lightning flashes near telecommunication lines ............................................ 10
Annex A Induced surges inside the structure due to lightning near, or to, the structure ...... 13
A.1 General ........................................................................................................... 13
A.2 Lightning near the structure............................................................................ 13
A.3 Lightning to the structure ............................................................................... 17
Annex B Induced surges on telecommunication lines due to lightning near the line:
Perfectly conducting soil .............................................................................................. 20
Appendix I Induced surges inside the structure due to lightning near, or to, the
structure: Experimental setup and results ..................................................................... 23
I.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 23
I.2 Theoretical model........................................................................................... 23
I.3 Experimental test site and test set-up ............................................................. 25
BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................... 30

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) iii

Introduction
The origin of dangerous overvoltages and overcurrents on telecommunication and signalling
networks is lightning (direct and indirect lightning strikes), induction from fault currents in power
lines (including traction systems), contact with power lines, and the rise of earth potential.
Methods of protection, called "protective measures", are relevant to "lines" (e.g., use of shielded
instead of unshielded cable) or to specific parts of the system. The latter fall broadly into 3 classes:
the use of installation practices such as bonding, earthing, and shielding in the facility and
on external lines to reduce the coupling of the lightning energy to the line;
the use of protective devices which prevent excessive energy from reaching vulnerable
parts either by diverting it (for example, spark gaps) or by disconnecting the line (for
example, fuses); these protective devices are defined as "primary protection";
the use of equipment with suitable dielectric strength, current carrying capacity and
impedance so that it can withstand the conditions applied to it; this characteristic is defined
as "inherent protection".
Protective devices (primary protection) are used against overvoltages (surge protective devices,
(SPDs), e.g., air-gap protectors with carbon or metallic electrodes; gas discharge tubes (GDTs),
semi-conductor protective devices) and against overcurrents (e.g., fuses, heat coils, self-restoring
overcurrent protectors, fusible links).
For the specification of protective components and apparatus, the threat due to surges at their
particular installation points need to be determined. The threat due to these surges must be lower
than the withstand level of the affected protective components and equipment. This withstand level
is determined by suitable tests.
This Recommendation deals with the expected surges due to lightning at different installation points
of these protective components and equipment on telecommunication and signalling networks.
Certain formulas or assumptions for expected surges evaluation are severe approximations, and
further refinement could improve them.

iv ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

ITU-T Recommendation K.67

Expected surges on telecommunications and

signalling networks due to lightning

1 Scope
The scope of this Recommendation is to define the expected surges (overvoltages and overcurrents)
due to lightning at different transition points of the telecommunication access network and
signalling lines, both outside and inside structures, i.e., exchanges customers' buildings and remote
sites.
The objects of this Recommendation are the effects of overvoltages and overcurrents on
telecommunication and signalling networks that use metallic conductors due to lightning current as
a source of damage, which depend on the position of the point of strike with respect to the line
under consideration (see 3.6).
The expected surges are defined by their peak values and waveshapes as a function of the surge
protection level (SPL, see 3.7) for each type (S1, S2, S3 and S4) of source of damage (see 3.6). The
waveshape of the expected surges is assumed to be a double exponential described by its front time,
(T1), and time to half value, (T2).
This Recommendation allows evaluation of the effectiveness of the protective measures (e.g., surge
protective devices) that are intended to withstand the expected surge current in the installation
point.

2 References
The following ITU-T Recommendations and other references contain provisions which, through
reference in this text, constitute provisions of this Recommendation. At the time of publication, the
editions indicated were valid. All Recommendations and other references are subject to revision;
users of this Recommendation are therefore encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the
most recent edition of the Recommendations and other references listed below. A list of the
currently valid ITU-T Recommendations is regularly published. The reference to a document within
this Recommendation does not give it, as a stand-alone document, the status of a Recommendation.
[1] ITU-T Lightning Handbooks, Chapter 10 (1995), Overvoltages and overcurrents measured
on telecommunication subscriber lines.
[2] ITU-T Recommendation K.46 (2003), Protection of telecommunication lines using metallic
symmetric conductors against lightning-induced surges.
[3] ITU-T Recommendation K.47 (2000), Protection of telecommunication lines using metallic
conductors against direct lightning discharges.
[4] ITU-T Recommendation K.56 (2003), Protection of radio base stations against lightning
discharges.
[5] IEC 62305-1:2006, Protection against lightning Part 1: General principles.
[6] IEC 62305-2:2006, Protection against lightning Part 2: Risk management.
[7] IEC 62305-4:2006, Protection against lightning Part 4: Electric and electronic systems
within structures.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 1

3 Definitions
This Recommendation defines the following terms:
3.1 dangerous surge voltage due to lightning: A surge voltage whose peak value Up is greater
than or equal to the surge voltage withstand level of the equipment or of the conductor insulation of
the telecommunication line.
3.2 equivalent decay time to half value (T2) [1]: The time to half value (T2) of an impulse
voltage or current is the time interval between the virtual origin and the first instant at which the
voltage or current has decreased to half the peak value. (The virtual origin of an impulse voltage or
current is the instant preceding that at which the voltage or current is 30% or 10% of the peak value
by a time 0.3 or 0.1T1 respectively.)
3.3 front time or rise time (T1) [1]: The front time or rise time T1v of an impulse voltage is
defined as 1.67 times the time interval between the instants when the impulse is 30% and 90% of
the peak value.
The front time T1i of an impulse current is defined as 1.25 times the interval between the instants
when the impulse is 10% and 90% of the peak value.
3.4 lightning protection level (LPL): A set of parameters that define protection levels against
sources of damage represented by lightning current [4].
NOTE Lightning protection level is used to design lightning protection components (e.g., cross section of
conductors, thickness of metal sheets, current capability of SPD, separation distance against dangerous
sparking) and to define test parameters simulating the effects of lightning on such components, according to
the relevant set of lightning current parameters. Four lightning protection levels (I to IV) are introduced in
the IEC 62305 standards. For each LPL, a set of maximum lightning current parameters is fixed (Table 1).
3.5 peak value (xp) [1]: The peak value (xp) of a surge voltage/current is defined as the
maximum value observed during the surge.
3.6 source of damage: The source of damage depends on the position of the point of strike
relative to the line being considered:
Source of damage S1: flashes to the structure (the exchange or the customer's building or
remote site) where the telecommunication or the signalling line enters;
Source of damage S2: flashes near the structure (the exchange or the customer's building or
remote site) where the telecommunication or the signalling line enters;
Source of damage S3: flashes to the telecommunications line entering the structure (the
exchange or the customer's building or remote site);
Source of damage S4: flashes near the telecommunication line entering the structure (the
exchange or the customer's building or remote site).
3.7 surge protection level (SPL): Peak values and waveshape of the expected dangerous surge
voltages or currents which could appear in different points of the telecommunication networks due
to the lightning current as source of damage.
NOTE Three Surge Protection Levels (I to III) are introduced in this Recommendation. For each SPL, the
peak values and the waveshape of the expected dangerous surge voltages and currents are estimated.
3.8 steepness of the front, or rate of rise (S) [1]: The steepness of the front, or the rate of rise,
(S) is the average rate of change of the voltage or current. It can be determined by the ratio between
the peak value xp and the front time T1:
xp
S= (1)
T1

2 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

3.9 surge: Temporary excessive voltage or current, or both, coupled on a telecommunication
line, from an external electrical source.
NOTE 1 Typical electrical sources are lightning and AC/DC power systems.
NOTE 2 Electrical source coupling can be one or more of the following: electric field (capacitive),
magnetic field (inductive), conductive (resistive), electromagnetic field.
3.10 surge due to lightning: A surge which is caused by lightning through any type of
electromagnetic (conductive, inductive and capacitive) coupling.
NOTE It is characterized by the following five parameters: peak value, front time (T1), time to half value,
T2, (or time parameters T1/T2), steepness, and specific energy.
3.11 surge protective device (SPD): Device that restricts the voltage of a designated port or
ports, caused by a surge, when it exceeds a predetermined level.
NOTE 1 An SPD is a combination of a protection circuit and a holder.
NOTE 2 Secondary functions may be incorporated, such as current limiting to restrict a terminal current.
NOTE 3 Typically, the protection circuit has at least one non-linear voltage-limiting surge protective
component.

4 Abbreviations
This Recommendation uses the following abbreviations:
BN Bonding Network
CBN Common Bonding Network
E Exchange
LPL Lightning Protection Level
MDF Main Distribution Frame
MET Main Earthing Terminal
NT Network Termination
S Subscriber
SPD Surge Protective Device
SPL Surge Protection Level

5 Reference configuration
Figure 1 shows the reference configurations for the telecommunication lines with metallic
symmetric conductors, where the reference nodes and the cable sections between them can be seen.
The Transition Points of Figure 1 have the following descriptions [2]:
Transition point L: Transition between equipment interface inside the exchange building
and the external cabling;
Transition point E: Entrance of the exchange building, e.g., the main distribution frame
(MDF);
Transition point P: Transition between paper-insulated and plastic-insulated buried
cables;
Transition point C: Transition between buried and aerial cables;
Transition point D: Transition between shielded and unshielded aerial cables;
Transition point S: Entrance of the customer's building;

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 3

 Transition point A: Transition between equipment interface inside the customer's building
and the external cabling;
Transition point M: Transition between equipment interface inside the exchange's
building and the internal cabling;
Transition point I: Transition between equipment interface inside the customer's building
and the internal cabling.

Figure 1/K.67 Reference configuration

6 Protective measures

6.1 Inherent protection

The use of equipment with suitable dielectric strength, current carrying capacity and impedance so
that it can withstand the conditions applied to it (i.e., the inherent resistibility characteristics of
equipment), is necessary in order to achieve equipment protection and limit its risk of damage.
The resistibility requirements of telecommunication equipment used at different points of
telecommunication networks have been defined in ITU-T Recs K.20, K.45 and K.21 for equipment
installed in the exchange building, in the access network and in the customer's building
respectively.
From the lightning protection point of view, this resistibility allows the equipment to withstand the
majority of the induced surges caused by lightning near the line (see 7.4). Because these surges are
the most frequent, the use of additional protective measures (primary protection) is limited to the
"exposed" installations, evaluated by the risk assessment [2, 3, 6].

4 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

6.2 Primary protection
The use of primary protection prevents excessive energy from reaching vulnerable parts of the
telecommunication and signalling installations (e.g., equipment and conductor insulations). To this
end, adequate primary protection shall be installed and its characteristics shall be suitably selected.
The effectiveness of the primary protection depends on its capability of conducting the surge
currents (for voltage-limiting devices, GDTs) or withstanding the surge voltages (for current
limiting-devices, fuses). The lightning parameters that determine the maximum values of surge
voltages and currents are given in Table 1, as a function of the lightning protection level (LPL).
These maximum values of surge voltages and currents are associated to the following surge
protection level (SPL): SPL I = 0.01, SPL II = 0.02 and SPL III = 0.05 which gives the probability
value of the dangerous surge voltage or current to be greater than, or equal to, the associated peak
value.

Table 1/K.67 Maximum values of lightning parameters according to LPL

LPL
Current parameters Symbol Unit I II III IV
(99%) (98%) (95%)
Peak current Ip kA 200 150 100
First short Short stroke charge Qshort C 100 75 50
stroke Specific energy W/R kJ/ 10 000 5 625 2 500
Time parameters T1/T2 s/s 10/350
Peak current Ip kA 50 37.5 25
Subsequent
Average steepness di/dt kA/s 200 150 100
short stroke
Time parameters T1/T2 s/s 0.25/100
Long stroke charge Qlong C 200 150 100
Long stroke
Time parameter Tlong s 0.5
Flash Flash charge Qflash C 300 225 150

6.3 Bonding, earthing and shielding

The use of installation techniques that provide bonding, earthing and shielding reduce the coupling
between the lightning and the communication line. In case of direct lightning strikes or near strikes
to the line, the CBN of the structure and equipment BNs disperse the lightning current providing
shielding for the internal lines. A fully encircling shield or conduit can be effective in reducing the
voltage and current coupled onto the communication conductors. The critical parameter for the
shielding effectiveness of the cable is its transfer impedance, which for solid shields at lightning
frequencies is approximately equal to the shield d.c. resistance.
The primary protection in combination with the bonding and earthing measures form an
electromagnetic barrier of the facilities that reduces the penetration of electromagnetic disturbances
into the facility from the outside.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 5

7 Expected surges due to lightning

7.1 Direct lightning flashes to a structure (source of damage S1): Lightning current
flowing through telecommunication or signalling lines entering the structure
(exchange or customer's building or remote site)
The lightning current of a direct stroke to a structure flows into the earthing system of the structure
as well as into the services that enter the structure. Therefore, a part of the lightning current enters
the cable sheath or the cable conductors of the telecommunication or signalling line directly or via
surge protective devices (SPDs) connected to them, as the cable is one of the services entering the
structure.
The lightning current parameters are those given in Table 1 for the first short stroke as a function of
the selected LPL. Therefore, the lightning current entering the telecommunication or signalling line
is described by 10/350 s waveshape and by the peak value If.
As a first approximation, it can be assumed that 50% of the lightning current (I), flows in the earth
termination system and the remaining 50% of the current is shared between the n services entering
the structure.
If the entering telecommunication or signalling line is unscreened or is not routed in metal conduit,
each of the m conductors of the line carries an equal part (If), of the peak lightning current which
may be evaluated by:
0.5 I p
If = for an unshielded line (2)
n m
For shielded entering lines (or for those routed in metal conduit) bonded at the entrance of the
structure, the peak values (If), of current entering each of the m conductors, is given by:
0.5 I p Rs
If = for a shielded line (3)
n (m Rs + Rc )
where:
Rs = ohmic resistance for unit length of the shield or the metal conduit;
Rc = ohmic resistance for unit length of the conductor.
The open circuit voltage between a conductor and the main earthing terminal (MET) is
approximately proportional to the product of the earthing resistance and the portion of the lightning
current that flows to the earthing network if the cable is unshielded. If the cable is shielded, the
open circuit voltage between the conductor and the MET that is bonded to the cable shield is
approximately proportional to the product of the shield resistance and the portion of the lightning
current that flows through the shield, limited by the breakdown voltage of the core conductors to the
shield (e.g., 5 kV). Where the shield is periodically earthed, the shield current attenuates as it
propagates away from the strike point. Propagation of the surge along the cable leads to dispersion
and increase of the decay time.
Even considering possible ionization of the earth near the electrodes, the magnitude of the resulting
voltage is likely to be sufficiently high to operate primary protection or to cause breakdown of the
conductor insulation, if there is no protection. Therefore, detailed procedures for calculating the
peak voltage are not considered. This applies to unshielded and shielded telecommunication lines.

6 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

7.2 Lightning flashes near, or to, a structure (source of damage S1 or S2): Induced surges
in telecommunication or signalling lines inside the structure (exchange or customer's
building or remote site)
A lightning flash near, or to, a structure induces common mode surge voltages into the
telecommunication or signalling line inside the structure (exchange or customer's building or
remote site) due to the time derivative of the lightning current (di/dt). The peak value Vio of the
induced open circuit voltage is given by the following equation:
di Ip
Vio = LM = LM (4)
dt T1
where:
LM = the mutual inductance between the induced loop and the lightning current;
Ip = peak value of the lightning current;
T1 = front time of the lightning current.
The lightning current parameter is the average steepness (di/dt), given by the ratio between the peak
value (Ip), and the front time (T1) (see 3.8) of the subsequent strokes (worst case) given in Table 1
as a function of the selected LPL.
The waveshape of the induced open circuit voltages is expected to have a very short duration (in
order of few s, e.g., 2 s to 10 s) and a front time similar to that of the subsequent stroke
(i.e., 0.25 s), as shown by measurements of induced voltages into a loop carried out with triggered
lightning, reported in Appendix I.
The peak value of the short circuit current (Isc), if the ohmic resistance of the loop wires is neglected
(worst case), is estimated as follows:
Voi T1
I sc = (5)
LS
or
LM
I sc = I p (6)
LS
where:
LS = is the self-inductance of the induced loop.
For the short circuit current (Isc), the lightning current parameter is the peak value (Ip), of the first
strokes (worst case) given in Table 1 as a function of the selected LPL. Its waveshape is the
waveshape of the lightning current (see Appendix I), therefore in the worst case it is described by
the 10/350 s wave shape.
The peak values of the open circuit voltage (Voi), due to the subsequent strokes, and short circuit
current (Isi), due to the first strokes, are reported in Table 2, for different SPL values. These values
have been estimated, as shown in Annex A (A.2 and A.3), for an unshielded loop having a loop area
of 50 m2 (h = 5 m; e = 10 m) inside an unshielded structure or building.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 7

 Table 2/K.67 Expected open circuit voltages and short circuit currents per conductor at
different nodes of a telecommunication or signalling line due to lightning flashes direct to
the structure (S1) and to the telecommunication line (S3) and near to the structure (S2)
Direct flashes to the
Direct flashes to the structure Near the structure
telecommunication line
source of damage S1 source of damage S2
source of damage S3
Nodes L, A, M
Nodes L, A, M
Nodes and I (Note 1) Nodes Nodes C, D,
and I (Note 1)
E and S (1 down conductor L, E, P S, A
(see Table A.1)
only) (see Table A.2)
(part of (induced (induced (part of
SPL (induced (induced (part of direct
direct voltage by voltage by direct
current by current by lightning
lightning subsequent subsequent lightning
first stroke) first stroke) current)
current) strokes) strokes) current)
waveshape: waveshape: waveshape:
waveshape: waveshape: waveshape: waveshape:
10/350 s 10/350 s 10/350 s
10/350 s 0.25/2 s 0.25/2 s 10/350 s
[kA] [kA] [kA]
[kA] [kV] [kV] [kA]
Equation (2) Equation (12)
I 250 6 5 0.1 0.50 (Note 2)
or (3) or (14)
Equation (2) Equation (12)
II 190 4.5 3.5 0.07 0.50 (Note 2)
or (3) or (14)
Equation (2) Equation (12)
III 125 3 2.2 0.05 0.50 (Note 2)
or (3) or (14)
NOTE 1 Calculation conditions: unshielded structure; unshielded induced line; loop dimensions: 50 m2
(h = 5 m; e = 10 m); loop conductor radius: 0.5 mm.
NOTE 2 In particular cases, Equation (12) or (14) can be used. Line-to-earth breakdown voltage is
considered as equal to 100 kV and the line is short circuited to earth at the point of interest.

For an induced line with a different loop but area with the same loop length (e), the values of the
surge voltages given in Table 2 must be multiplied by the following factor (Kr):
Kr = A/50 (A is loop area in m2) (7)
Then Equation (5) allows the evaluation of the short circuit current (Isc), calculating the value of the
self-inductance (LS) of the new loop.
For shielded lines the values of surge voltages given in Table 2 can be reduced by factor Ks3 given
by the following equation:
K s 3 = K r K ss (8)
where:
Vcs
K ss = (9)
Vio
Vcs = the voltage between conductor and shield given by the following equation:
Vcs = R I sc (10)
Using Equations (4) and (5) for Vio and Isc respectively, Equation (8) becomes:
R T1
K ss = valid for (LS/R) >> T1 (11)
LS

8 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

where:
Kss = the value of the shielding factor related to the shield (R is the shield resistance
in ).
NOTE Equation (10) is valid for tubular sheaths. For braided sheaths, this is an approximation.
The values of the surge currents for a different loop area can be evaluated considering that both the
induced surge voltage and the loop inductance have different values (see A.2 and A.3).

7.3 Direct lightning to the telecommunication or signalling lines

There are two possible situations:
a) the striking point is far away from the structure;
b) the striking point is close to the structure.
In both situations, the lightning current entering the telecommunication or signalling line is
described by the 10/350 s waveshape and by the peak value If. Neglecting the propagation effects,
the same 10/350 s waveshape is assumed for the current expected in different sites of the network
(exchange or customer's building or remote sites).
In situation a, the total peak current in the line will be given, in the worst case, by twice the line to
earth breakdown voltage divided by the line surge impedance (e.g., 2 100 kV/400 = 500 A);
this worst case is independent from LPL I to IV. However, if the line is shielded and the shield is
earthed periodically, the analysis for situation b applies.
In situation b, partitioning of the lightning current in both directions of the telecommunication
network, and breakdown of insulation to earth, must be taken into account. As a first
approximation, it can be assumed that 50% of the lightning current (Ip), breaks down to earth and
half of the remaining 50% of the current is propagated in both directions, between the n services
close to each other.
If the telecommunication or signalling line is unscreened or is not routed in metal conduit, each of
the m conductors of the line carries an equal part (If) of the peak lightning current which may be
evaluated by:
0.25 I p
If = for an unshielded line (12)
n m
where n = 1 or 2; the latter case applies for example, where telecommunication and power lines are
close to each other, e.g., they share the same poles.
The value given by Equation (12) shall be equal to or lower than the following value:
I f 8 A [kA] (13)

where A is the cross-sectional area of the telecommunication or signalling conductor [mm2].

For shielded (or routed in metal conduit) entering lines bonded at the entrance of the structure, the
peak values (If), of current entering each m conductor, is given by:
0.25 I p Rs
If = for a shielded line (14)
n (m Rs + Rc )
where:
Rs = ohmic resistance for unit length of the shield or the metal conduit;
Rc = ohmic resistance for unit length of the conductor.
The open circuit voltage between conductor and shield is approximately proportional to the product
of the shield resistance and the portion of the lightning current that flows through the shield, limited

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 9

by the breakdown voltage of the core conductors to the shield (e.g., 5 kV). Where the shield is
periodically earthed, the shield current attenuates as it propagates away from the strike point.
Propagation of the surge along the cable leads to dispersion and an increase of the decay time.
For exchange buildings, in general the lightning strikes the aerial line (few pairs) far away from the
structure. For this situation, values reported in Table 2 can be used. For particular situations,
Equations (12), (13) and (14) above can be used.
For the customer's building, the worst case occurs, in general, when the striking point is close to the
structure. For this situation, values estimated with Equations (12), (13) and (14) above can be used.
NOTE Little information is available on surge currents due to direct lightning to telecommunication lines.
In Chapter 10 of the Lightning Handbook [1], the Canada survey reports that "the 300 A, 300 s half decay
event was the result of a direct lightning strike to a pole which was approximately 200 m from a carbon
monitor site. This site was also equipped with a level counter and digital waveform monitor. The cable and
pole were severely damaged". No information is available on the peak value of the lightning current striking
the line. If it is assumed that this 300 A surge current has been caused by a lightning current of about 30 kA,
corresponding to a 50% probability, then it is possible to estimate the values of 2 or 1 kA associated with
LPL I or III respectively. Similar results can be obtained using Equation (6) with n = 1 and m = 20 when the
lightning current is 200 kA (LPL I) or 100 kA (LPL III).

7.4 Lightning flashes near telecommunication lines

7.4.1 General
The peak values of the lightning surge voltages and currents expected in some transition points of
the telecommunication network have been investigated by several surveys carried out in different
countries. The results of these surveys have been reported in Chapter 10 of the Lightning
Handbook [1].
The inherent resistibility requirements of telecommunication equipment, as defined in ITU-T
Recs K.20, K.21 and K.45, are based on the survey results as shown in the Lightning Handbook [1].
The use of additional protective measures (primary protection) is limited to the "exposed"
installations and is evaluated by the risk assessment [2, 3, 6].
The worst induction case, assumed by this Recommendation, is shown in Figure 2 where the
lightning flash location is equidistant from the line terminations and at a distance "x" from the
telecommunication line, which is a 6 m high (h = 6) aerial line.
The expected dangerous surge voltages and currents are evaluated in the middle point and at the line
terminations.

Figure 2/K.67 Reference configuration for surge evaluation induced by

a lightning near the line (worst case)

10 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

By the definition of SPL:

N T (U SPL )
SPL = (15)
N T (U R )
where:
USPL = the voltage corresponding to the selected SPL;
UR = a reference voltage (lower than USPL) that defines the minimum resistibility
voltage level of the equipment connected to the line or of the line conductor
insulation;
NT (U) = the total number of strikes that will induce a voltage equal to or greater than U.
The calculation of NT and USPL is reported in Annex B for an aerial line, both unshielded and
shielded, above perfectly conducting soil.
Annex B also suggests how to evaluate the short circuit currents associated with the dangerous
surge voltages.
7.4.2 Calculated values (perfectly conducting soil)
The peak values of the dangerous surge open circuit voltages and short circuit currents expected in
the transition points P, C and D (close to the middle point) of the unshielded aerial line are reported
in Table 5, for the different SPL. The waveshape of the surge voltage and current varies widely with
the characteristics of the lightning current (waveshape, peak value and velocity), with the distance
between the stroke and the line and with the line characteristics (earthing connections, shielding,
etc.). Considering a fixed lightning current and an unshielded line, the increase in the distance
between the stroke and the line leads to lower induced voltage and current and longer waveshapes.
Moreover, shielding a line also leads to lower induced voltage and current and longer waveshapes.
For the lightning currents considered in Table 1, the velocity of the return stroke is equal to
130 m/s and the induced voltages corresponding to the selected range of SPL (i.e., 0.01 to 0.05),
the waveshape of the induced voltages and currents on an unshielded line can be represented by a
8/20 s double exponential wave. For a shielded line, the peak value is lower and the waveshape is
longer, so that a 10/700 s double exponential wave is more representative.
NOTE The 8/20 s waveshape for an unshielded aerial line has been calculated using reference [5],
assuming velocity of the return stroke is equal to 130 m/s. For the shielded line, the waveshape has been
assumed in agreement with measurements.
7.4.3 Measured values (imperfectly conducting soil)
The surge voltages and currents which can appear in the access network have been measured in
several countries and the measurement data are reported in Chapter 10 of the Lightning
Handbook [1]. These data are summarized in Table 3.
These data have been collected in the field on lines composed of a mixture of buried and aerial
shielded sections and often a short unshielded section near the customer (the drop wire). The
majority of the data was measured at the exchange and at the subscriber ends. In Table 3, the
voltage Ue is the voltage between the pair and the shield measured at the exchange end and isce is the
associated short circuit current, whereas Us is the open circuit voltage between the pair (or one
conductor of the pair) and the earth at the customer end and iscs is the associated short circuit
current.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 11

 Table 3/K.67 Measured open circuit surge voltages and short circuit
surge currents at the exchange and customer ends
Exchange end Customer end
Probability
Ue [V] isce [A] Us [V] iscs [A]
0.01 860 17 2300 23
0.02 680 13 1640 16
0.05 480 8 1020 10

Assuming the shield resistance Rs = 5 , the earth resistance of the shield connection to earth near
the customer Rt = 40 and the surge impedance Z = 100 for buried section and Z = 400 for
aerial section, the following values of ss = 0.05 and se = 0.1 can be estimated.
Considering these shielding factor values, from measurement data it is possible to estimate the
truncated distribution (UR = 50 V) at the exchange end and (UR = 150 V) at the customer end.
Dangerous peak values of the surge voltages and currents are reported in Table 4 as a function of
the SPL.

Table 4/K.67 Measured open circuit dangerous surge voltages and short
circuit surge currents at the exchange and customer ends
Exchange end Customer end
SPL
Ue [V] isce [A] Us [V] Iscs [A]
I 1000 20 3500 35
II 750 15 2500 25
III 500 10 1500 15

These values are also reported in Table 5.

Table 5/K.67 Expected open circuit voltages and short circuit currents per conductor at
different nodes of a telecommunication or signalling line due to lightning
flashes near to the telecommunication line (S4)
Lightning flashes near the telecommunication or signalling line (worst case)
source of damage S4
Nodes
Nodes D,
L, E, P Nodes L, E,
Nodes L, E, Nodes D, S S and A Nodes D, S and A
and C P and C
P and C and A (calculated (measured)
(calculated (measured)
e = 0.1)
SPL s = 0.05)
Line composed by: buried shielded (E-C nodes), aerial shielded
Unshielded line (Note)
(C-D nodes), and aerial unshielded (C-S nodes) sections
Induced Induced Induced Induced Induced Induced Induced Induced Induced Induced
voltage: current: voltage: current: voltage: voltage: current: voltage: voltage: current:
8/20 s 8/20 s 8/20 s 8/20 s 10/700 s 10/700 s 10/350 s 10/700 s 10/700 s 10/350 s
[kV] [A] [kV] [A] [kV] [kV] [A] [kV] [kV] [A]
I 44 110 64 160 1 1 20 6.4 3.5 35
II 23 60 34 85 0.75 0.8 15 3.4 2.5 25
III 10 25 14 35 0.5 0.6 10 1.4 1.5 15
NOTE Calculation conditions: Aerial line and perfectly conducting soil.

12 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

 Annex A

Induced surges inside the structure due to lightning near, or to, the structure
A.1 General
Lightning induced surges into loops formed by the wiring in an installation is an important issue for
many ITU-T K-series Recommendations. Lightning surges are characterized by their waveshape
and peak value.
Appendix I shows the waveshapes of these induced surge voltages based on the results of
measurements carried out in an experimental installation.
The peak value of the open circuit voltage (Vio) and short circuit current (Iio) induced in the loop are
estimated in A.2 and A.3 for lightning flashes near, or to, the structure respectively.

A.2 Lightning near the structure

The peak value of the open circuit voltage (Vio) induced in the loop inside the structure by lightning
near the structure can be calculated with Equation (4) where the mutual inductance (LM) is given by
the following approximated equation (assuming the incident magnetic field to be a plane wave)
[3, 6]:
f +d +e
LM = 0.2 K s h ln [H] (A.1)
f +d
where (see Figure A.1):
h = width or height of the loop [m];
e = length of the loop [m];
f = distance from the lightning channel to the wall of the structure [m];
d = distance of the loop from the wall of the structure;
= 0.12 w = shielding factor of the structure shield (shield of LPZ 1), where w 5 m is the
mesh width of the grid-like spatial shield [5, 6];
Ks = shielding factor, taking into account the effect of the cable shield;
and:
Ips = peak value of the subsequent strokes (Table 1) [kA];
T1 = 0.25 = front time of the subsequent strokes (Table 1) [s].

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 13

 Figure A.1/K.67 Lightning strokes near the structure

The short circuit current (Isc), if the ohmic resistance of the wires is neglected (worst case), is
estimated with Equation (5) or (6), where the self-inductance (LS), in H, of the loop is calculated
with the following equation:

2 h 2 e
r r
LS = 0.8 e + h 0.8 (e + h) + 0.4 e ln
2 2
+ 0.4 h ln (A.2)
2 2
h e
e + e + e e + e + h

where:
r = the radius of the loop wire [m].
The expected dangerous surge voltages induced into the internal loop are evaluated by Equation (4).
By the definition of SPL:
N T (U SPL )
SPL = (A.3)
N T (U R )
where:
USPL = the voltage corresponding to the selected SPL;
UR = a reference voltage (lower than USPL) that defines the minimum resistibility
voltage level of the equipment connected to the line or of the line conductor
insulation;
NT (U) = the total number of strikes that will induce a voltage equal to or greater than U.
The total number of strikes NT (U) is given by (see Figure A.2):

2
N T = 4. N g p(i ).di.cos .d.x.dx (A.4)
R o I

14 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

where:
Ng = the ground flash density (strikes/km2 . year);
R = the minimum distance from the loop at which the lightning will not directly
strike the structure (R 3H + L/2) (see Figure A.1);
p(i) = the probability function of the strike current.
NOTE 1 As shown in ITU-T Rec. K.47, p(i) = 102 e (abi) for i 0, where "i" is
lightning peak current [kA], a = 4.605 and b = 0.0117 for i 20 kA and a = 5.063 and
b = 0.0346 for i > 20 kA.
= the angle between the loop and a straight line linking the strike and the loop;
x = the distance between the strike and the centre of the loop;
Ip = the peak strike current that will induce the voltage U at the loop given by
Equation (4).

Figure A.2/K.67 Reference configuration for evaluation of the surge

induced into a loop by lightning near a structure

Considering that most of the strikes will be at some distance from the structure so that f+d >> e and,
therefore, ln [(f+d+e)/(f+d)] e / (f+d), Equation (A.1) can be written as:
e W
LM = 0.2 K s h (A.5)
(f +d) x
Where x f+d and W is a constant given by:

W = 0.2 K s h e (A.6)
Solving the integrals of Equation (A.4), inserting the results into Equation (A.3) and making some
algebraic manipulations lead to the following equations:

[(C1 .U SPL + 1) exp(a1 C1 .U SPL ) D]

2
U
SPL = R for UR and USPL ULIM (A.7)
U SPL [(C1 .U R + 1) exp(a1 C1 .U R ) D]
[(C 2 .U SPL + 1) exp(a 2 C 2 .U SPL )]
2
b .U
SPL = 1 R for UR ULIM and USPL > ULIM (A.8)
b2 .U SPL [(C1 .U R + 1) exp(a1 C1 .U R ) D]

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 15

 [(C 2 .U SPL + 1) exp(a 2 C 2 .U SPL )]
2
U
SPL = R for UR and USPL > ULIM (A.9)
U SPL [(C 2 .U R + 1) exp(a 2 C 2 .U R )]
NOTE 2 These three Equations (A.7), (A.8) and (A.9), instead of only one, are due to the break in the
function p(i) at i = 20 kA (see NOTE 1);
where:
20.W
U LIM = (A.10)
R.T1
b1 .R.T1
C1 = (A.11)
W
b2 .R.T1
C2 = (A.12)
W
b2 b2
D = 1 + 20b1 20 1 12 exp(a1 20b1 ) = 82.33 (A.13)
b2 b2
a1 = 4.605; b1 = 0.0117; a2 = 5.063; and b2 = 0.0346 are the parameters of p(i).
In the equations from (A.7) to (A.9), USPL and UR are in kV.
A limit condition for the SPL is achieved for R 0. In this case, Equations (A.7) to (A.9) are
reduced to the simple form shown in Equation (A.14), where USPL is independent of the loop
dimensions and of the p(i) parameters.
2
U
SPL = R (A.14)
U SPL
Tables A.1 and A.2 show the values of USPL for different values of SPL, UR, loop and structure
dimensions, based on Equations (A.7) to (A.9).
The same rationale can be applied in order to induce the short circuit currents in the loop. The
resulting equations are similar to Equations (A.7) to (A.9) where the voltages UR, USPL and ULIM
shall be replaced by the currents IR, ISPL and ILIM. Equations (A.10) to (A.12) shall be modified as
follows:
20 W
I LIM = (A.15)
R LS
b1 R LS
C1 = (A.16)
W
b2 R LS
C2 = (A.17)
W
In the calculation of the values for Tables A.1 and A.2 it has been considered that the function p(i)
applies to the first stroke. As stated in Table 1, the subsequent stroke has the same distribution as
the first stroke, but with the currents divided by a factor 4 (i.e., 200 kA for the first stroke
corresponds to 50 kA for the subsequent stroke, and so on). Therefore, as the function p(i) has been
used for the calculation of Equations (A.7) to (A.9), the front time of the subsequent stroke used in
the calculation of USPL has been multiplied by a factor 4, i.e., T1 = 1 s, in order to compensate for
the difference in the magnitude of the currents. The values of USPL and ISPL were calculated for the
subsequent and first strokes, respectively.

16 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

 Table A.1/K.67 Peak values of induced surge voltages and surge currents, in a 25 m2 loop
inside a structure, due to lightning near the structure
Structure dimensions (m)

SPL L = 25 H = 50 L = 15 H = 5 L=0H=0
(large building) (small building) (no building)
USPL (V) ISPL (A) USPL (V) ISPL (A) USPL (V) ISPL (A)
I 2520 61 4630 112 5000 121
II 2100 51 3390 82 3540 86
III/IV 1610 39 2200 53 2240 54
NOTE Calculation conditions: h = 2.5 m; e = 10 m; r = 0.5 mm (Ls = 41.2 H); = 1; Ks = 1.

Table A.2/K.67 Peak values of induced surge voltages and surge currents, in a 50 m2 loop
inside a structure due to lightning near the structure
Structure dimensions (m)

SPL L = 25 H = 50 L = 15 H = 5 L=0H=0
(large building) (small building) (no building)
USPL (V) ISPL (A) USPL (V) ISPL (A) USPL (V) ISPL (A)
I 3370 64 4890 93 5000 95
II 2690 51 3500 67 3540 68
III/IV 1920 37 2230 43 2240 43
NOTE Calculation conditions: h = 5 m; e = 10 m; r = 0.5 mm (Ls = 52.4 H); = 1; Ks = 1.
The values of the inductance LS for different loop dimensions can be calculated with
Equation (A.2). Table A.3 shows some results of Equation (A.2) for different loop dimensions.

Table A.3/K.67 Inductance values (Ls) in H for different loop dimensions

e = 20 m e = 10 m
h (m)
r = 0.5 mm r = 5 mm r = 0.5 mm r = 5 mm
2.5 75.3 54.6 41.2 29.7
0.5 56.4 37.5 28.7 19.1
0.05 36.9 18.4 18.5 9.2
0.025 31.3 12.9 15.7 6.4

A.3 Lightning to the structure

In case of lightning to the structure, the following three cases can be considered:
1) structure protected by an LPS built of one separate rod (e.g., antenna tower which protects
the nearby Radio Base Station (RBS));
2) structure protected by a meshed LPS with down-conductors spaced along the perimeter;
3) structure protected by a grid-like spatial shield (LPS) with mesh width w 5 m.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 17

In the first two cases, the open circuit voltage (Vio) induced in the loop inside the structure can
be evaluated with Equation (4), where the mutual inductance LM is given by the following
equation [4, 6]:
d +e
LM = 0.2 K c K s h ln [H] (A.18)
d
where (see Figure A.3):
h = high of the loop [m];
e = length of the loop [m];
d = distance between the down conductors and the circuit loop [m];
Kc = factor taking into account the current-sharing among the down conductors;
Ks = shielding factor taking into account the shielding effect of the cable shield;
and:
Ips = peak value of the subsequent strokes (Table 1) [kA];
T1 = 0.25 = front time of the subsequent strokes (Table 1) [s].

Figure A.3/K.67 Lightning strokes to the structure:

LPS with one or more down conductors

In the case of an LPS with one down conductor, Kc = 1 is assumed; in the case of LPS with multiple
down conductors [6]:
1
Kc = + 0.3 (A.19)
2 n
where:
n = the number of down conductors equally spaced around the perimeter.
In the third case of a structure protected by a grid-like spatial shield LPS, the peak value of the open
circuit induced voltage in the loop may be calculated with Equation (4) where the mutual
inductance LM is given by the following Equation [6]:
d +e w
LM = 0.4 K s h ln w K h [H] (A.20)
dw dr
where (see Figure A.4):
dw = distance of the loop from the wall [m];
dr = distance of the loop from the roof [m];
Kh = configuration factor equal to 0.01[1/m0.5];
Ks = shielding factor taking into account the shielding effect of the cable shield;

18 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

and:
Ips = peak value of the subsequent strokes (Table 1) [kA];
T1 = 0.25 = front time of the subsequent strokes (Table 1) [s].

Figure A.4/K.67 Lightning strokes to the structure: Grid-like spatial shield LPS

The short circuit current (Isc), if the ohmic resistance of the wires is neglected (worst case), is
estimated with Equation (5) or (6), where the self-inductance (LS), in Henry, of the loop is
calculated with Equation (A.2).
The values of Voi and Isc, due to the first and the subsequent strokes, are reported in Table A.4, as a
function of the LPL, assuming that the structure is protected by an LPS built of one separate rod
(Kc =1, worst case) and the internal cabling is unshielded and the induced loop dimension is 50 m2
(h = 5 m; e = 10 m).

Table A.4/K.67 Peak values of induced surges, in a 50 m2 loop inside

a structure, due to direct lightning to the structure
First strokes Subsequent strokes
LPL Voi Isc Voi Isc
[kV] [kA] [kV] [kA]
I 25 6 250 1.5
II 19 4.5 190 1.2
III/IV 12.5 3 125 0.8
2
Calculation conditions: LS = 42 H; LM = 0.792 H; Loop dimensions 50 m (h = 5 m;
e = 10 m); Kc = 1; Ks =1; d = 4 m; r = 0.5 m.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 19

 Annex B

Induced surges on telecommunication lines due to lightning near the line:

Perfectly conducting soil

The number of lightning strokes in the elementary section "Lr dx", inducing on the
telecommunication line a voltage equal to or above U, is given by:

N = 2 Lr N g dx p(i ) di (B.1)
I

where Ng is the ground flash density, Lr is the line length, p(i) is the probability function of the
strike current as given by ITU-T Recs K.25, K.47 and IEC 61663-1, and I is the peak strike current
that will induce the voltage U at a given point on the line.

Figure B.1/K.67 Reference configuration for surge evaluation

induced by lightning near the line

The total number of strikes that will induce a voltage equal to or greater than U is given by:

N T = 2 Lr N g p(i ).di.dx (B.2)
d I

Where d is the minimum distance from the line that will not lead to a direct strike to it. The
approximated relation d = 3 h is assumed (Figure B.1).
The peak value of the voltage U1, in the middle point of the line, and U0 or U2, at the line
terminations, can be estimated by the following equations when a perfectly conducting soil is
assumed:
30 I p h
U1 = 1 + (B.3)
d
2 2
30 I p h
U 0 =U 2 = (B.4)
d
where:
Ip = the peak value (in kA) of lightning current;
= the ratio between the return-stroke velocity (v = 1.3 108 m/s is assumed) and
the velocity of the light (c = 3 108 m/s):

= 0.43 and 1 + = 1.3 .

2 2

20 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

Inserting Ip from Equation (B.4) into Equation (B.2), solving the integrals, inserting the results into
Equation (15) and making some algebraic manipulations lead to the following equations:
U R [exp(a1 A1U 0 ) B ]
SPL = where UR and U0 ULIM (B.5)
U SPL [exp(a1 A1U R ) B ]
b1U R [exp(a 2 A2U 0 )]
SPL = where U0 > ULIM and UR ULIM (B.6)
b2U SPL [exp(a1 A1U R ) B ]
U R [exp(a 2 A2U 0 )]
SPL = where U0 > ULIM and UR > ULIM (B.7)
U SPL [exp(a 2 A2U R )]
NOTE 1 These three Equations (B.5), (B.6) and (B.7), instead of only one, are due to the break in the
function p(i) at i = 20 kA.
where:
= is the shielding factor of the line ( = 1 when the line is unshielded)
ULIM = 600 h / d (B.8)
b1 0.00117
A1 = = (B.9)
10
b2 0.00346
A2 = = (B.10)
10

b
B = 1 1 exp(a1 20b1 ) = 52.37 (B.11)
b2
a1 = 4.605; b1 = 0.0117; a2 = 5.063; and b2 = 0.0346 are the parameters of p(i).
In the equations from (B.5) to (B.7), USPL and UR are in kV.
A limit condition for the SPL is achieved for d 0. In this case, Equations (B.5) to (B.7) are
reduced to the simple form shown in Equation (B.12), where USPL is independent of the line
characteristics and of the p(i) parameters.
U
SPL = R (B.12)
U SPL
Table B.1 shows the values of USPL for different values of SPL and UR based on Equation (B.5) for
an aerial unshielded line ( = 1).
Table B.1/K.67 Open circuit values of the dangerous surge voltage (USPL)
at the ends of an aerial unshielded line as a function of the SPL for
different values of reference voltage UR
Dangerous surge voltage, USPL [kV]
UR (kV) SPL
0.01 0.02 0.05
1.5 111 64 28
1.0 81 44 19
0.75 64 34 14
0.5 44 23 10
0.25 23 12 5

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 21

In Table B.1, twice the referenced voltage value (2 UR) is the lower limit of the open circuit for
the "dangerous" voltages, in order to take into account the reflection in the line termination. For
example, considering UR = 0.75 kV and SPL = 0.01 means that 1% of the induced open circuit
voltages above 1.5 kV will be equal to or greater than 64 kV.
The peak value of the short circuit current (Isc) is estimated as follows:
U SPL
I sc = (B.13)
Z
where:
Z = 400 is the surge impedance of the aerial line.
For a shielded aerial line, the USPL values can be calculated following the same procedure reported
above when the shielding factor value related to shield has been evaluated and used into
Equations (B.9) and (B.10). However, the resulting USPL will have an absolute probability of
occurrence (number of surges per year) much lower than the corresponding USPL for the unshielded
line. Therefore, it is more representative to multiply the USPL of the unshielded line by the shielding
factor in order to get the USPL of the shielded line.
NOTE 2 Considering SPL II, for example, means that among all the voltages above 0.75 kV observed on
an unshielded line during a certain period of time, 2% are equal to or greater than 34 kV and that this 2%
corresponds to NT surges. Therefore, for a shielded line (e = 0.1) and the same SPL II, in the same period of
time NT surges will be equal to or greater than 3.4 kV. However, it shall be noted that among all the voltages
above 0.75 kV observed on this shielded line during this period of time, more than 2% are equal to or greater
than 3.4 kV.
The resulting values for specific shielding factors, were inserted into Table 5, in particular, the
shielding factor related to the shield (s = 0.05) for Nodes L, E, P and C and the shielding factor
related to the earth (e = 0.1) for Nodes D, S and I.
NOTE 3 The shielding factor related to shield has been evaluated assuming the shield resistance (Rs) is
equal to 5 , then s = Rs/Z = 5/100 = 0.05. The shielding factor related to earth has been evaluated
assuming the earth resistance of the shield Re equal to about 40 , then e = (Rs + Re)/(Z + Re) =
45/440 = 0.1.
Table B.2 shows the values of USPL for different values of SPL and UR for an aerial shielded line (
= 0.1) and the rationale described before.

Table B.2/K.67 Open circuit values of the dangerous surge voltage (USPL)
at the ends of an aerial shielded line as a function of the SPL for
different values of reference voltage UR
Dangerous surge voltage, USPL [kV]
UR (kV) SPL
0.01 0.02 0.05
1.5 11 6.4 2.8
1.0 8.1 4.4 1.9
0.75 6.4 3.4 1.4
0.5 4.4 2.3 1.0
0.25 2.3 1.2 0.5

The peak value of the short circuit current (Isc) could be estimated by Equation (B.13) where Z
equal to 50 or to 100 is the surge impedance of the conductor-shield circuit or of the
conductor-earth circuit respectively, both empirically taken from the measurements.

22 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

 Appendix I

Induced surges inside the structure due to lightning near, or to, the structure:
Experimental setup and results
I.1 Introduction
The aim of this appendix is to support the assumption that the waveform of lightning induced
voltage into an open loop has a very short front time and duration and that the waveform of
lightning induced current into a closed loop is identical to the waveform of the lightning current
itself. This is done with the aid of experimental data from a triggered lightning test site of Cachoeira
Paulista Brazil.

I.2 Theoretical model

The following assumptions are considered:
The loop is relatively close to the lightning channel, so that the current can be considered as
uniform along the lightning channel (this assumption neglects the propagation effects of the
lightning current along the lightning channel).
The earth is considered as a perfect conductor, so that image theory can be applied to the
lightning channel below the surface of the earth.
The effect of metallic conductors (for instance, power lines) that may carry part of the
lightning current is neglected. This means to assume a symmetric current distribution on the
surface of the earth, which allows the use of image theory.
The loop is considered as having low resistance in comparison with its inductive reactance
at the frequencies associated with lightning currents (this applies to most practical cases).
Any shield effect around the loop is neglected.
Any bending of the lightning channel from the vertical is neglected.
The loop and the lightning channel are in the same plane (this is a conservative assumption
for the current magnitude, but does not affect the wave shape).
Therefore, the inducing lightning current (Ia) flows uniformly along a vertical straight line
(see Figure I.1). The magnetic induction field (B) produced by this current is:
0 I a
B= (I.1)
2 x
where:
x is the distance from the lightning channel.
The magnetic flux into the loop is easily found by integrating the magnetic field across the loop.
f +e
I a h0 dx
B =
2 x
(I.2)
f

which leads to:

f +e
I a h 0 ln
f
B = (I.3)
2

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 23

The driving voltage induced (V) into the loop is given by the time derivative of the magnetic flux:
dI a f +e
h 0 ln
dt f
V= (I.4)
2
Equation (I.4) can be written as:

V = LM
dI a
(I.5)
dt
where:
LM is the mutual inductance between the lightning channel and the loop, i.e.,:
f +e
h 0 ln
f f +e
LM = = 0.2 h ln in H (I.6)
2 f
The induced current Iloop is given by:

I loop = 1 Vdt = M I
L (I.7)
L L a
S S

where:
LS is the loop's self-inductance.

Figure I.1/K.67 Induction into a loop

24 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

I.3 Experimental test site and test set-up
I.3.1 Experimental test site
The RBS of the test site is shown in Figure I.2a, where, at the tower's top there is a rocket pad used
to trigger lightning discharges. Figure I.2b shows a closer view of the tower top. The pad is
supported by insulators and connected to the structure by one single conductor which passes
through a Pearson current monitor (type 1330) that feeds an oscilloscope housed in the metallic box
nearby. The oscilloscope is remotely controlled by RS232 interface over fibre-optics. This provides
a direct measurement of the lightning current.

a) RBS of the test site b) tower top

Figure I.2/K.67 RBS of the test site

I.3.2 Test set-up for induced voltage into an open loop

The experimental setup is shown in Figure I.3, where lightning is triggered and recorded at the top
of a telecommunication tower and the induced voltage is measured in a loop placed at a distance f
from the tower. The set-up data are:
Loop dimensions: e = 1.5 m and h = 2.0 m (loop area = 3 m2);
Distance between the loop and the lightning, f = 100 m.

Figure I.3/K.67 Test set-up for induced voltage into an open loop

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 25

The measured lightning current is shown in Figure I.4, and its main parameters are summarized
below:
current: front time (T) = 0.375 ms;
peak value (Is) = 9.8 kA.

Figure I.4/K.67 Triggered lightning current

The measured induced voltage into the loop is shown in Figure I.5, where it can be seen that the
front time of the induced open circuit voltage is similar to that of the inducing current (i.e., 0.35 s)
and that its waveshape has a very short duration, in the order of a few s.

(time-scale is not synchronized with Figure I.4)

Figure I.5/K.67 Measured induced voltage into a loop

Inserting the numerical values into Equation (I.4) and considering the current waveform as
trapezoid we get a rectangular wave with 0.375 s of duration and 157 V peak. This value shall be
compared with Figure I.5, where it can be seen that it is somewhat higher than the measured value
(110 V).

26 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

A more elaborated method can be used, based on Rusck's work [I.1]. This model takes into account
the current propagation along the lightning channel. Considering Rusck's equations for the magnetic
induction field (B) at some distance from the lightning and computing its time derivatives we get:
dB
= 0 for t r0 v0 (I.8)
dt
1
dB 60 I 0 v v v t 2
2 2

= 1 + 0 1 t for r0 v0 t r0 v0 + T (I.9)
dt r0 2Tv 0 v0 r0


1

1
dB 60 I 0 v
2

v v0t
2
2 2

v v0 (t T )
2
2

= 2 1 + 1 t 1 + 1 (t T ) (I.10)
dt r0 Tv0 v0 r0 v0 r0


for t r0 v0 + T
In Equations (I.9) and (I.10) 0 is the velocity of light in free space (3 108 m/s) and is the
lightning current propagation velocity, assumed as equal to 1.3 108 m/s. Inserting the numerical
values into these equations gives the waveform shown in Figure A.6. This wave shape has
112 V peak and agrees excellently with the measured voltage.

Figure I.6/K.67 Voltage wave calculated with from Rusck's model

From Equations (I.9) and (I.10) it can be concluded that, for loops relatively close to the striking
point (f < T v0), the induced voltage peak value can be reasonably approximated by considering the
lightning current as being uniform along the channel, as given by Equation (I.4). However, as the
loop is moved away from the striking point, the induced voltage is progressively lower than the
value calculated by Equation (I.4), because the current velocity of propagation becomes a relevant
parameter. In this case, Equations (I.8) to (I.10) should be used.

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 27

I.3.3 Test set-up for induced current into a closed loop
Figure I.7a shows a closer view of the RBS, where can be seen a loop at the top of the housing. This
loop is made of a short circuited copper tube and its current is measured by means of a Pearson
current monitor (type 110) which feeds an oscilloscope inside the RBS housing. Figure I.7b shows a
triggered lightning to the tower top, as seen from the control shelter.

Loop

a) RBS housing with loop b) Triggered lightning

Figure I.7/K.67 Test set-up for induced current into a closed loop

Waves, recorded simultaneously at the tower top (Figure I.8) and at the loop (Figure I.9), are
described by the peak value, the time to half value (Th) and the front time (Tf) defined as
1.25 (T90% T10%).

Figure I.8/K.67 Lightning current

28 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

 Figure I.9/K.67 Induced current in the closed loop

The comparison between the waves recorded at the tower top and at the loop shows a very good
agreement regarding the wave shape.
The test site data are:
Distance from the tower axis and the loop: f = 10.7 m;
Loop height: h = 0.80 m;
Loop width: e = 1.00 m;
Loop conductor radius = 0.0075 m.
The mutual inductance between the tower and the loop is given by Equation (I.6) as:
LM = 0.0143 H
The loop self inductance is given by Equation (A.2) as:
LS = 2.89 H
The expected loop current, as given by Equation (I.7), for a lightning current Ia = 7.04 kA is:
Iloop = 34.8 A
The measured loop current (26.4 A) is somewhat lower (24%) than the expected value because the
actual conditions of the test site does not completely fulfil the theoretical assumptions listed in I.2.
Among these assumptions, the one that most contributes to this difference is the presence of the
electric power line which conducts part of the lightning current away from the station in such a
direction that it does not couple with the loop. In order to duplicate the measurement of the
lightning current, these factors have been compensated for in the system gain informed to the
measuring software.
In conclusion, as experimentally shown, the waveform of lightning induced current into a closed
loop is identical to the waveform of the lightning current itself and the relation between their peak
values can be assessed by the ratio between the mutual and the self inductances, as given by
Equation (I.7).

ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006) 29

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

[I.1] RUSCK (S.): Transactions of the Royal Institute of Technology, No. 120, Induced lightning
overvoltages on power transmission lines with special reference to the overvoltage
protection of low voltage networks, Stockholm, 1958.

30 ITU-T Rec. K.67 (02/2006)

 SERIES OF ITU-T RECOMMENDATIONS

Series A Organization of the work of ITU-T

Series D General tariff principles

Series E Overall network operation, telephone service, service operation and human factors

Series F Non-telephone telecommunication services

Series G Transmission systems and media, digital systems and networks

Series H Audiovisual and multimedia systems

Series I Integrated services digital network

Series J Cable networks and transmission of television, sound programme and other multimedia signals

Series K Protection against interference

Series L Construction, installation and protection of cables and other elements of outside plant

Series M Telecommunication management, including TMN and network maintenance

Series N Maintenance: international sound programme and television transmission circuits

Series O Specifications of measuring equipment

Series P Telephone transmission quality, telephone installations, local line networks

Series Q Switching and signalling

Series R Telegraph transmission

Series S Telegraph services terminal equipment

Series T Terminals for telematic services

Series U Telegraph switching

Series V Data communication over the telephone network

Series X Data networks, open system communications and security

Series Y Global information infrastructure, Internet protocol aspects and next-generation networks

Series Z Languages and general software aspects for telecommunication systems

Printed in Switzerland
Geneva, 2006
APPENDIX

1. Ground Measurement Techniques

2. REDUCING COPPER THEFT IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS

INDUSTRY by Rohit Narayan, Jeff Regan, ERICO

.
 GROUND MEASURING TECHNIQUES:
ELECTRODE RESISTANCE TO REMOTE EARTH & SOIL RESISTIVITY

Elvis R. Sverko

ERICO, Inc. Facility Electrical Protection, U.S.A.

Revision Date: February 11, 1999

Abstract: This paper presents different concepts and

procedures for ground measuring techniques. A few of This general formula is a simplified version of some
the techniques that are discussed are the measuring of complex formulas (derived by Professor H. B. Dwight of
resistance to remote earth for a single earth electrode or Massachusetts Institute of Technology) used to
for an entire earth electrode system, and also the calculate the resistance to remote earth for a grounding
resistivity of the local soil using an earth system tester. system. The assumption in the general formula is that
the resistivity of the soil is constant throughout the
considered area, or averaged for the local soil.
1. Introduction
In the practical (real) world, soil resistivity is not
A good grounding system (also known as an earth constant, properties of electrodes and their connections
electrode system) is important for the protection of an vary (except with CADWELDTM), and complex
overall system facility. There are many factors that equations just dont cut it. Therefore, an actual
determine how well a grounding system performs. Two measuring technique is necessary. This technique is
major parameters are its resistance to remote earth and done with an earth resistance tester, often called a
the resistivity of the local soil. Each of these values can megger. One example of the earth tester is the ERICO
be measured to help determine and design the best EST301Universal Earth System Tester, seen in figure 1,
solution for the grounding system. (please refer to the ERICO EST301 Operating
Instructions manual for detailed instructions on its use.)
The resistance to remote earth of the grounding system This type of instrument can be used at various stages
needs to be at a minimum in order to sustain its in the life of a grounding system, once during
effectiveness. A few of the components that make up installation to see if it meets all specifications, and
this resistance are the physical properties of the anytime thereafter to observe any possible changes.
material used to make the electrode and conductor, all
connections made, contact resistance between the
electrode and the soil, and the soil resistivity. A
complete grounding system might include only one
earth electrode, an entire group of electrodes with a
grounding grid, or anything in between and beyond.
The earth electrodes from any of these types of
systems can have their resistance to remote earth
determined.

Figure 1: ERICO EST301 Universal Earth System Tester

2. Theory vs. Practice

Theoretically, the resistance to remote earth of an earth 3. Earth Electrode Measurement (Single Electrode)
electrode can be calculated. This calculation is based
on the general resistance formula: There exists different measuring techniques for
resistance to remote earth of a grounding system. One
R = ( x L) / A such technique is the 3-pole earth electrode
measurement for a single electrode. This technique
where: uses the electrode under test (EUT), a reference probe,
and an auxiliary probe, set in a straight line. Figure 2
R = resistance to remote earth () shows the single electrode measuring method, and
= soil resistivity (-cm) figure 3 shows the single electrode measuring setup for
L = length of conducting path (cm) the ERICO EST301 earth tester.
A = cross-ectional area of path (cm)
 4. Earth Electrode Measurement (Multiple Probe
System)

A second earthing resistance measuring technique is

the process of measuring the resistance to remote earth
of a single earth electrode in a multiple electrode
grounding system. This technique is used when the
earth electrode cannot be disconnected from the rest of
the grounding system such as a communication tower
installation. When the earth electrode can be
disconnected, the previous 3-pole single electrode
technique may be used. Caution should always be
Figure 2: Single Electrode Measuring Method
taken when disconnecting any earth electrode.

The same principles apply to this technique as they did

for the single probe technique, the only difference is
that for the multiple electrode grounding system, the
current is measured with a current transformer around
the EUT, (see figures 5 and 6.) After the proper voltage
and current values are measured, a simple Ohms Law
equation determines the electrodes resistance to
remote earth.

Figure 3: Single Electrode Measurement Setup

After applying a voltage at the designated location in

the circuit, the current between the EUT and auxiliary
probe is measured, and the voltage between the EUT
and the reference probe is measured. Using Ohms
Law, the resistance can now be calculated. This routine
is completed by the earth tester. It has been determined
that the distance D be approximately 100 feet, and the
distance between the EUT and reference probe be 0.62 Figure 5: Multiple Electrode Measuring Method
times the value of D. These values have been tested
using the fall of potential method to give optimal results
(see figure 4.) But due to the large amounts of
uncertainty in all properties of probes and soil, the
value of D should be varied for each individual test
until reasonably consistent values appear; however, it
is recommended that the value of D stay greater than 80
feet. It is also necessary to take a second set of
readings at 90o to the original in case of interference
from overhead power lines or any underground
electrical equipment or metal objects.

Fall of Potential
60 Figure 6: Multiple Electrode Measurement Setup
Resistance (Ohms)

50

40

30 Once the resistance to remote earth for each electrode

20 in the entire grounding system is determined, one can
10 calculate the resistance to remote earth for the entire
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
grounding system in one of two ways. The first
approach is in understanding that the electrodes are in
Distance between earth electrode and ref. probe (ft.)
parallel with each other (through the grounding grid
and ground itself.) Because they are in parallel, the rule
Figure 4: Fall of Potential for parallel resistances can be used.
 Many different factors have a direct effect on the
Rs = 1 / [ (1/R1) + (1/R2) + (1/R3) + (1/Rn) ] resistivity of the local soil. A large factor is the type of
soil. The resistivity range can go from 1 cm to the
where
upwards of over 1,000,000 cm (see figure 8.)
Rs = resistance to remote earth for entire Moisture content can be a large factor in determining
grounding system () the resistivity of the local soil. The drier the soil, the
R1,2,3n = resistance to remote earth higher the resistivity. The soil resistivity remains
for each individual electrode () relatively low (and constant) if the moisture content of
the soil is greater than 15% (by weight,) and skyrockets
However, this rule is not completely accurate in this for lower values of moisture content. Another large
application because of the extra resistance to remote factor in the determination of soil resistivity is the
earth through the grounding grid. content of minerals, such as salts or other chemicals.
For values of 1% (by weight) salt content, the soil
The second approach used to calculate the resistance resistivity remains low (and constant,) and skyrockets
to remote earth for the entire grounding system for lower values of salt content. Finally, compactness
assumes that the resistances to remote earth for each and temperature can set the resistivity of the local soil.
electrode are equal. Then, for the entire grounding With temperature, the colder the soil is, the higher the
system, the resistance to remote earth is 40% lower for resistivity. Due to seasonal changes where the
a system with only two electrodes, 60% lower for a temperature can change drastically for a particular area,
system with three electrodes, and 66% lower for a the resistivity of the local soil can also change
system with four electrodes (compared to the resistance drastically (see figure 9.) Many of these factors
to remote earth for one of the equal electrodes.) These (moisture content, mineral content, compactness, and
values are slightly larger than the values given by the temperature,) of the local soil can change during the life
parallel resistance rule. of the grounding system, and therefore change the
resistance to remote earth of that grounding system.

5. Soil Resistivity Soil Resistivity ( -cm)

lower upper
The second major factor in determining how well a Surface Soils 100 5,000
grounding system performs, is the resistivity of the Clay 200 10,000
Sandy Clay 10,000 15,000
local soil. Soil resistivity is the resistance measured
Moist Gravel 5,000 70,000
between two opposing surfaces of a 1m3 cube of
Dry Gravel 70,000 120,000
homogeneous soil material (see figure 7,) usually
Limestone 500 1,000,000
measured in m, or cm. Soil resistivity has a Sandstone 2,000 200,000
direct effect on the resistance of the grounding system. Granites 90,000 110,000
The evaluation of the resistivity of the local soil can Concrete 30,000 50,000
determine the best location, depth, and size of the
electrodes in a grounding system, and can also be used Figure 8: Resistivity range for different types of soil
for many other applications. A geological survey uses
the soil resistivity to locate ore, clay, gravel, etc.
beneath the earths surface. Depth and thickness of
Typical year
bedrock can also be determined. The degree of 35
Earth Resistance

30
corrosion of the local soil also can be obtained from its 25
resistivity value. Due to these many reasons, it is
(Ohm)

20
necessary to measure the resistivity of the local soil. 15
10
5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Month

Figure 9: Typical electrode resistance to remote earth in a year

Like the resistance to remote earth of an electrode,

Figure 7: Soil Resistivity Definition Cube measuring the resistivity of the local soil can be done
with a specific metering device. The process is
sometimes referred to as the four pole (or four-terminal) of readings be taken at different values of a, as well as
method (see figures 10 and 11.) in a 90o turned axis, so that the measuring results are
not distorted by any underground pieces of metal
(pipes, ground cables, etc.) These final values should
be plotted, so that a consistant value be determined.

6. Improving the Grounding System

If it is determined that a grounding systems resistance

to remote earth is not low enough, there are several
ways that it can be lowered. The first approach would
be to lengthen the electrodes, which puts them deeper
into the ground. If it is difficult to drive ground rods
Figure 10: Soil Resistivity Four Pole Method
keep into the ground, a horizontal crows foot
approach using copper tape, may be used. Another
approach would be to use multiple ground rods. The
National Electrical Code (NEC 1996) states that if one
electrode is being used and its resistance to remote
earth is greater than 25 , then only one additional
electrode needs to be installed. A final way to help
lower the resistance to remote earth for a grounding
system, is to treat the soil with some type of ground
enhancing material (i.e. GEMTM, salt, chemical rod, etc.)
The thickness of the electrode used plays only a small
part (and it is not very economical) in helping to reduce
the total resistance to remote earth of the grounding
Figure 11: Soil Resistivity Four Pole Setup
system.

Four small electrodes (auxiliary probes) are placed in a 7. Conclusion

straight line at intervals of a, to a depth of b. A current
is passed through the outer two probes, and the It is important for a facility to have a good grounding
potential voltage is then measured between the two system. The safety of all personnel and equipment is at
inner probes. A simple Ohms Law equation determines stake. In order to be sure that a good grounding
the resistance. From this information, it is now possible system is in place, it is necessary to maintain a low
to calculate the resistivity of the local soil by using the resistance to remote earth of all the electrodes, and a
Equally Spaced (or Wenner Arrangement) method. low resistivity of the local soil. There are different
methods for obtaining these measurements. Due to
= [ 4 x x a x R ] / [ 1 + ( ( 2 x a ) / SQRT ( a2 + variations in electrodes and soil, a number of
4 x b2 )) ( a / SQRT ( a2 + b2 ) ) ] measurements should be taken and evaluated for a
consistancy.
where
It is the intent that this paper be used as a guide for
= resistivity of the local soil (-cm) descriptions and definitions of different ground
a = distance between probes (cm) measuring techniques for electrode resistance to remote
b = depth of probes into the ground (cm) earth and soil resistivity. Detailed instructions on the
R = resistance determined by the testing use of any earth testing device should be fully read and
device () understood before they are used. There always exists
the possibility of ground faults in a system, and step
For most practical circumstances, a is twenty times and touch potentials. It is important to note that before
larger than b, where we can then make the assumption attempting to test any grounding system, all safety
that b=0, and the formula becomes simply: precautions be taken.

= 2 x x a x R

These values give an average resistivity of the soil to a

depth of the value of a. It is recommended that a series
References Author

Earley, Mark W., Editor in Chief, National Electrical Elvis R. Sverko

Code Handbook, Seventh Edition, 1996 Applications Engineer
ERICO, Inc. Facility Electrical Protection
Elmes, UNILAP GEO X Earth Tester Operating 34600 Solon Road
Instructions, LEM Solon, Ohio 44139
U.S.A.
Getting Down to Earth, Manual on Earth-Resistance Phone: (440) 248-0100
Testing for the Practical Man, Fourth Edition, Fax: (440) 519-1675
Biddle Instruments, 1982 email: [email protected]

IEEE Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity, Ground

Impedance, and Earth Surface Potentials of a
Ground System, ANSI/IEEE Std 81-1983

Simmons, J. Philip, Soares Book on Grounding,

International Association of Electrical
Inspectors, Fifth Edition, Editor1996

Superior Grounding,
http://www.superiorgrounding.com/soils.html

Switzer, W. Keith, Practical Guide to Electrical

Grounding, ERICO

Understanding Ground Resistance Testing, AEMC

Instruments, Workbook Edition 6.0
 REDUCING COPPER THEFT IN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY

by

Rohit Narayan
ERICO
 REDUCING COPPER THEFT IN
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
Rohit Narayan, Jeff Regan
ERICO

Introduction

With the increase in copper prices, copper theft, which was once a nuisance
factor, has now become a major problem for the telecommunications industry.
Copper theft in the US alone has a cost impact in excess of US1 billion dollars
per annum. Copper theft in the telecommunications sector includes the theft of
ground bars, cables and grounding conductors.

The Problem

The copper theft happens either during construction stages or later on when the
sites are operational. If the theft occurs during construction then there is
economic loss and an annoyance. However theft of copper in operational
facilities is a larger concern because it brings about a serious safety problem not
only for the copper thieves but the general public. There is serious impact on
noise level at a telecommunications site when the ground grid is removed and
this has operational ramifications.

Copper is used in grounding applications widely in bare and insulated forms.

Conductors used in this application are often perceived to be not live and are a
prime target for copper thieves.

The frequency of the copper thefts seems to follow the price of copper in the
scrap metal trade, which naturally follows the market price of copper. The current
economic cycle is again seeing a rise in the market pricing of copper after the low
pricing during the Global Financial Crisis. Hence it is envisaged that this problem
will be on the rise in months and years to come, if this trend continues.
ERICOs Solutions to Reduce Copper Theft

ERICO offers two types of solutions aimed at minimizing or eliminating theft of

copper from grounding systems in telecommunications.

1) Alternative Conductors to Copper

2) Alternative Ground Bars to Copper

All of the solutions should be complimented with clear signage at the site stating
that the conductors are not copper.

Alternative Conductors to Copper

Copper is not substituted easily with other materials because of its unique
properties in terms
of its conductivity and corrosion. However there are a number of conductor
solutions available that can retain the use of the copper properties but yet
change the composition so that it is of little or no scrap value. The conductors
discussed here are well suitable for grounding applications. These newer
conductors are also suited for other non-grounding applications.

Theft Deterrent Composite Cable. TDCC

This is a bare concentric stranded conductor that consists of peripheral

galvanized magnetic steel stranding, which protects and conceals the internal
tinned copper stands. This conductor is ideal for exposed locations where copper
theft may occur. The conductor is difficult to cut with hand tools, and the outer
steel stranding is ferrous, which further deters thieves looking for copper. Copper
stranding inside of conductor increases conductivity and conductor flexibility.
Copper stranding is tinned for superior corrosion protection
Copper Bonded Steel Conductor CBCS

This is solid high carbon steel (1018 grade) core and molecularly bonded with a
minimum of 250m copper. These conductors cannot be removed from the
grounding system using normal copper cutting hand tools and has a significantly
lower scrap value than the equivalent solid copper conductor. This type of cable
is usually a fraction of the cost of copper cables.
It performs exceptionally well in terms of corrosion, both above and below ground
levels. This conductor is suitable for above and below ground applications. It can
be used as a ground lead between the ground bar and a traditional copper based
ground electrode system or it can be used as the horizontal conductor in a
ground electrode system

Traditional connection methods like CADWELD are ideal for this conductor. It
looks like copper from the outside and may still be prone to theft is some
applications. However, they are difficult to cut and remove.

CBSC Conductor and Bending Tool

Galvanised Steel Strap Conductors

The historical reason that galvanised steel has been used, is that buried grounds
were close to telephone exchanges where there were lots of lead sheathed
cables. Lead and copper buried together was perceived as a corrosion risk.

The snag with galvanised steel is its rapid corrosion in comparison with copper.
Traditionally telecommunications carriers had procedures for annual ground
resistance testing which would identify extensive corrosion. Some carriers still do
regular ground testing but with the high number of sites in a cellular network it
can be difficult to instil the discipline to carry these tests out.

Experience from site examinations and long-term studies have demonstrated that
the rapid corrosion of galvanised steel is almost always a problem. The expected
life of Galvanised Steel would be 10-15 years in comparison with 25-30 years for
copper coated steel systems in the similar soil conditions.

The issue of copper theft is a worldwide problem and not many carriers and in
that case utilities have opted for galvanised steel but rather looked at more
modern solutions. The image below shows the corrosion on galvanised steel
strap which was in the ground for 12 years.

For further reading on corrosion on copper bonded vs galvanised steel grounding

systems please refer to technical paper A Technical Report on The Service Life
of Ground Rod Electrodes Chris Rempe ERICO 2004 and Experimental
Evaluation of the Corrosion Performance of Copper-Bonded and Galvanized
Grounding Electrodes by Dr F. DAlessandro (B.App.Sc., B.Ed. PhD, SMIEEE)
and Dr. B. Baumgartner
Alternative to Ground Bars

The Theft Deterrent Ground Assembly (TDSGA) is a unique and cost-effective

alternative to using conventional bus bars in a grounding system. The system is
designed to equalize the surge energy to the tower at the top, middle and bottom
locations, while offering the electrical conductivity required during the surge
event.

This can be used with Telecordia and TIA standard lugs that are currently used
with traditional copper ground bar.

The theft deterrent ground assembly can be installed in 3 methods.

Method 1. The TDSGA can be installed on to a 3 galvanised pipe which site

beneath the feeder entry into the building. The pipe acts and a conductor
between the TDSG and the ground electrode system. A connection is made
between the 3 pipe and the ground electrode system via a 2/0 wire which is
CADWELDED on to the pipe with a VS type connection.

Method 2: The TDSG can be installed on to a wall much like a traditional ground
bar with the aid of suitable angle brackets.
Method 3: The TDSGA can be installed on the telecommunications mast directly
using suitable clamps. Two examples are shown below for mounting to a circular
mast and a traditional angle member of a larger mast.

In two of the mounting arrangements, no down lead is necessary to the earth

ground ring, helping to eliminate the risk of copper theft. In the third method a
ground lead is required. The CC5A05 is a suitable size Theft Deterrent
Composite Cable for this application. This conductor is connected to the copper
earth electrode system using CADWELDED connection. The copper bonded
steel conductor is also a suitable conductor to act as the ground lead.

There are TDSGA can be attached to the tower by either a UL approved fl at

clamp or pipe
clamp. When using the post-mount method, two TDSGA post adaptors are
necessary.

Alternative Earth Bars

ERICO undertook the study of the following alternative materials available for use
as ground bars.

The investigation included corrosion resistance, electrical performance and costs

for the alternate materials for telecom earth bars.
 Galvanised Steel and Tinned
Aluminium Earth Bars

The change of impedance and visual inspection was carried out after subjecting the earth bars to
alkaline and acidic conditions to simulate long-term corrosion in soil. The simulation included salt
mist treatment to Standard IEC 60068-2-52 and humid sulfurous atmosphere treatment to
standard ISO 6988:1985.

This investigation demonstrated that the earth bars that showed closest performance to
solid copper earth bar are copper clad aluminum and tin plated aluminum. Tin Plated
Aluminum is considered the best alternative to copper earth bars. In addition to the
outcomes of the test it is known from the galvanic potentials table that tin permits
compatibility with the various lugs and connectors including copper.

Copper plated steel and galvanized steel showed similar characteristic to each other but
had higher DC and AC resistance than copper and tin-plated aluminum even before the
corrosion tests. Some of these bars can be considered as alternatives to copper
earth bar under certain conditions.

Zinc-Nickel Alloy Plated Steel and Stainless Steel either showed high DC or AC
resistance or high corrosion and were deemed not suitable for use as earth bars. These
are not good materials to use as alternative to copper earth bars.

The aluminum bar under investigation showed that its DC and AC resistance is higher
than tinned and it showed a higher inclination to corrode than tinned aluminum and tinned
copper. Aluminum oxides naturally in air and maintains a hard coating of aluminum oxide
through its life. This is not be a big issue if the lugs are terminated to plain aluminium,
but the oxides would have to be removed prior to any additional terminations made at a
later date. Bare Aluminum is not compatible with copper. It cannot be used for any
underground earthing. In the case of Tinned Aluminum, its surface is cleaned before the
tinning process. In general bare aluminum not deemed an alternative to copper earth
bars but can be used if precautions are taken about cleaning prior to future
connections and it is not in direct contact with copper.
 Electronic Cable Theft Sensor Systems
ERICO has developed an electronic cable theft sensor system for critical railway, utility or
telecommunications sites.

The system:

Can sense loss of cable

Triggers an alarm if theft occurs
Can be used with existing installations. Uses sleeves with sensors embedded within
It does not alter existing cables
Detects if sensor conductors in sleeve have been altered or cut
Continuously monitors at a high sample rate for fast alarm
Monitors 12-16 Cables
Operates off 8, 24, or 48 DC volts
NO/NC Alarm outputs, 240 Volts, 0.1A rating

Conclusion

ERICO has been involved in the earthing business for more than 100 years and has
produced innovative solutions to meet the changing needs of the market. Many of these
changes have been due to improvement in technology. Its theft deterrent solutions have
been developed in response to massive increase in copper thefts in last few years,
which is a worldwide problem.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. A Technical Report on The Service Life of Ground Rod Electrodes by Chris Rempe
ERICO 2004

2. Experimental Evaluation of the Corrosion Performance of Copper-Bonded and

Galvanized Grounding Electrodes by Dr F. DAlessandro (B.App.Sc., B.Ed. PhD,
SMIEEE) and Dr. B. Baumgartner

3. NEW APPROACHES TO REDUCING COPPER THEFT IN THE UTILITY INDUSTRY by

Brenton Williams Presented at E21C Utility Conference, 2009

4. Theft Deterrent Composite Cable - Product brochure ERICO