This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
A Wide-Range Model for Metal-Oxide
Surge Arrester
Valdemir S. Brito, George R. S. Lira, Member, IEEE Edson G. Costa, Member, IEEE, and Marcelo J. A. Maia
AbstractThis paper presents an electric model of metal-oxide
surge arrester (MOSA). The proposed electric model accurately
represents the MOSA in a wide range of frequencies and
amplitudes. The model was developed and validated based on
MOSA electrical behavior in each one of the three operating
regions of the zinc-oxide (ZnO) surge arresters, and in a
database composed of voltage and current waveforms measured
from tests performed in twelve ZnO varistors having different
physical dimensions and electrical characteristic - from five
different manufacturers. These varistors were subjected to
different voltage levels in the low current region, and multilevel
amplitude of switching current impulses (30/60 s), lightning
current impulses (8/20 s), high current impulses (4/10 s) and
fast-front current impulses (1.5/26 s and 3/6 s), encompassing
the three regions of operation and a wide-range of frequencies
and amplitudes. The results provided by the MOSA wide-range
(MWR) model were compared with that obtained in laboratory.
The MWR model has shown good agreement in terms of
waveform, peak value, and absorbed energy for the evaluated
cases.
Index TermsArresters, modeling, power system protection,
testing, varistors.
I. I NTRODUCTION
T HE metal-oxide surge arresters (MOSA) are equipment
applied to electrical power system for protection against
overvoltage caused by switching and lightning surges. Its
function is to limit the overvoltage level which reaches the
electrical system and important equipment, such as power
transformers, preventing insulation failure.
The main characteristic of the MOSA is its high
nonlinearity between the voltage and current (V -I curve). This
characteristic allows that currents in the milliampere range
flows through the MOSA, when it is subjected to the normal
operating condition. However, tens of kiloamperes can flows
through the MOSA in the presence of lightning surges. In
this wide range operation, the MOSA has different electrical
characteristics [1][3].
In the absence of overvoltage, i.e., when the MOSA is
subjected to electric system operating voltage, its capacitive
behavior is predominant [4][6]. In the intermediate region of
high nonlinearity, when the MOSA is subjected to temporary
overvoltages or switching surges, the resistive behavior is
dominant [3], [7]. At last, in the high current region, when it
Valdemir S. Brito is with the Federal Institute of Paraba, Princesa Isabel,
PB, 58.755-000, Brazil (e-mail: valdemir.brito@ifpb.edu.br).
George R. S. Lira and Edson G. Costa are with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, Federal University of Campina Grande, Campina Grande, PB,
58.429-140, Brazil (e-mail: george@dee.ufcg.edu.br; edson@dee.ufcg.edu.br).
Marcelo J. A. Maia is with the Hydroelectric Company of San Francisco,
Recife, PE, 50.761-901, Brazil (e-mail: mjamaia@chesf.gov.br).
0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
is subjected to lightning surges or vary-fast transients (VFT),
the literature reports a predominantly inductive or dynamic
behavior [8][15]. In this situation, the MOSA residual voltage
increases with the current impulse front time decrease. The
wide range of operation associated with the diversity of
the MOSA electrical behaviors is included in the MOSA
representation by an electric model for general purpose, which
is a complex task.
Several arrester models have been proposed in the literature
[8][12], [16][18] aiming to represent its behavior properly.
These models were proposed with the purpose of providing
tools for studies of insulation coordination, optimal location,
energy absorption capacity, correct selection/specification of
MOSA, among others [19][23]. Unfortunately, the current
models were developed to work properly in specific situations.
Some models are appropriate for power frequency studies,
others are useful on switching studies, and finally some are
applied only in lightning or VFT studies. Thus, as the power
system studies normally involve several kinds of operational
situations (power frequency, transients, etc.), the existent
MOSA models can fail in representing and simulating all such
situations.
With the goal to represent the surge arresters in its three
operating regions, for a wide range of frequencies and
amplitudes, a MOSA wide-range (MWR) model is proposed.
The proposed model is based on measurement data of
twelve ZnO varistors having different physical dimensions and
electrical characteristic - from five different manufacturers.
The lab tests were conducted in the MOSA three regions of
operation. The MWR model results were compared with the
measured results. The MWR model presented good results in
the three regions of operation.
II. V -I C HARACTERISTICS OF MOSA
The typical behavior of MOSA V -I characteristics are
represented in Fig. 1 [24]. The V -I curves are of a surge
arrester with line discharge class 2 and nominal discharge
current In = 10 kA.
In the region I, prebreakdown or leakage current region,
the MOSA operates at steady state. In this region, wherein
the current density is lower than 104 A/cm2 [3], the V -I
characteristic is approximately linear [3], [7] and exhibits
dependence on temperature [25], [26], as well as capacitive
behavior [3], [4].
In the region II, breakdown or intermediate nonlinear
region, the MOSA operates due to temporary overvoltages
and switching surges. The nonlinear region of the intermediate
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY

Region I Region II Region III Rp

PC
1.5 HV Probe
HV Probe Resistor
4/10 s Oscilloscope
Source
AC Test Elevator ZnO Varistor
Transformer
Switching Object r
To CVR
Lightning
1/9 s
Peak value of voltage (p.u.)

8/20 s
1.0 CVR

30/60 s
AC
DC
Fig. 2. Experimental set-up.
0.5
HV Probe
Resistor

HV Probe

Elevator ZnO Varistor

Transformer
r ZnO Varistor
To CVR
In
0
10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 101 10
2
103 104 105
Peak value of current (A)
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Voltage-current characteristics of a ZnO surge arrester with In =
10 kA, line discharge class 2. The voltage is normalized to the residual voltage Fig. 3. Photos of the experimental set-ups. (a) AC set-up. (b) Switching and
of the ZnO surge arrester at In . Typical values are presented [24]. lightning set-up.
TABLE I
current is the MOSAs main region, wherein the device leads P HYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND LINE DISCHARGE CLASS OF THE Z N O
HV Probe VARISTORS .
an increasingly large amount of current for a small increase in
voltage. The degree of nonlinearity is determined by nonlinear ZnO Varistor
N Manu- Height Diameter Line discharge
region flatness; the flatter the V -I curve in this region, the Varistor
samples facturer (mm) (mm) class
better the device [3]. The MOSA electrical behavior is almost
A 2 I 28.35 41.00 1
purely resistive [3]. B 2 II 27.85 41.00 1
In the region III, high current or upturn region, the MOSA C 2 III 30.15 75.85 4
operates on lightning surges. The current density is larger D 2 IV 30.25 49.10 2
than 103 A/cm2 [3]. In this region, a dynamic characteristic E 2 V 22.50 48.30 2
is observed, wherein the residual voltage is greater for faster F 2 I 31.55 62.40 3
current wavefronts [8], [11], [12].
frequency (60 Hz). The waveforms of the applied voltages
and their respective leakage currents were recorded.
III. L ABORATORY T ESTS
To characterize the varistors on high nonlinearity and high
In order to perform the laboratory tests, twelve ZnO current regions, it is important to evaluate the inductive
varistors of five different manufacturers were used. Four of coupling between the object test and measurement system. In
them were from the same manufacturer. They were grouped the technical standards [27], [28], a procedure is presented to
according to their physical and electrical characteristics. The perform the compensation of the residual voltage due to the
varistors were labeled as A, B, C, D, E and F. In Table I, inductive effect of the test set-up. This procedure is, normally,
some relevant (to this work) characteristics or parameters are applied on the steep current impulse residual voltage test,
shown. but, in this work, the necessity of applying the compensation
The evaluated varistors were submitted to electrical procedure to switching and lightning impulses was evaluated.
tests in the three operating regions, aiming their entire The compensation procedure consists, basically, of putting a
characterization. The waveforms of voltage and current non-ferrous metal block (e.g., aluminum) with the same ZnO
obtained in the lab tests were recorded and used in the varistor physical dimensions in series with the ZnO varistor.
construction and validation of the proposed electric model. Thus, the residual voltage is measured in the ZnO varistor
In Fig. 2, the general diagram of the performed lab tests are and metal block, when both are conducting a current impulse
shown. The set-up is composed of an electrical source (AC, similar in waveform and amplitude. In accordance with [27],
switching current or lightning current), a protection resistance if the peak voltage on the metal block is greater than 2% of
against short-circuit (Rp) in series with the test object (one of the peak voltage of the ZnO varistor, then the compensation
the evaluated varistors), a high voltage (HV) probe (that allows is necessary, and the impulse shape of the metal block must
voltage measurements), a current viewing resistor (CVR), to be subtracted from the impulse shape of the ZnO varistor. The
measure the current through the varistor, and data acquisition resultant waveform is the correct one.
system consisting of a digital oscilloscope and computer. In Therefore, before starting the characterization tests, the
Fig. 3, photos of the set-up are presented. inductive effect on the residual voltage due to the set-up was
To characterize the varistors on the low current region, they evaluated. For this, the switching current impulse generator
were subjected to different voltage levels in the industrial was adjusted to produce current impulses with waveform

0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
BRITO et al.: A WIDE-RANGE MODEL FOR METAL-OXIDE SURGE ARRESTER
16
14
12
10
Varistor A1
Voltage (kV)
8 8
Measured voltage
6 Compensated voltage
Voltage across aluminum block
4 Measured current
2 2
0 0
2 2
0 5 10 15
Time (s)
Fig. 4. Voltage and current measurements in varistor A1 and aluminum block.
30/60 s and amplitudes of 250, 500, 1000 and 2000 A.
The impulses were applied to ZnO varistor of control. The
peak voltages on the metal block were greater than 3% of
the measured residual peak voltage on ZnO varistor. Thus,
the compensation was performed in all varistors subjected to
switching current impulse test. A total of 192 (two impulses of
same amplitude for each one of the twelve evaluated varistors,
considering the four current levels, and the measurements on
metal block and on the ZnO varistor) impulses were applied,
recorded, and processed to characterize the ZnO varistors on
high nonlinearity region.
To characterize the MOSA on the high current region, the
varistors were subjected to impulse currents with the following
waveshapes and amplitudes: 1.5/26 s, 3/6 s, 4/10 s and
8/20 s; and amplitudes of 4, 8, 10 and 15 kA. Again, before
starting the tests on the evaluated varistors, an extra (test)
varistor was subject to the impulses and amplitudes chosen
to the complete test. It was verified that the peak voltages
on the metal block reached up to 13 percent of the measured
residual peak voltage on test varistor. Thus, it was necessary
perform the compensation of the inductive coupling present in
the residual voltage measurements. In Fig. 4, the current and
voltage measurements in varistor A1 for 8/20 s - 15 kA,
the voltage across aluminum block, and the compensated
voltage are presented. Considering all the types of impulses,
the chosen amplitudes, the number of evaluated varistors, and
the fact that each varistor has been subjected two impulses,
and that the residual voltage measurements were performed
on the varistor and on metal block, a total of 768 impulses
were obtained.
The technical standards [27], [28], consider the voltage
drop due to the inductance, even after compensation (although
particularize for the steep current impulse residual voltage).
Thus, it was used the similar approach in this paper, i.e., after
the residual voltage has been compensated, it was included an
inductance on the model to represent the voltage drop due to
the surge arrester length, as shown in Fig. 5.
IV. P ROPOSED M ODEL
Analyzing the data obtained in lab tests and results reported
on the literature, the model shown in Fig. 5, called the MOSA
wide-range (MWR) model, was proposed. The inductance L
represents the magnetic fields associated with the current that
0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Transactions on Power Delivery
3
16 RL
14
12
10
Current (kA)
L C
6
R(i)
4 Rc
20
Fig. 5. Proposed electric model.
flows through the MOSA. It depends on the MOSA height
and number of columns in parallel with the ZnO varistors
inside it. The calculate of the inductance L was based in
others works [9], [10], where the inductance is related with the
height, calculated as 1 H/m. The capacitance C represents
the electric permittivity of the ZnO varistor, important for
modeling of the low current region. It depends on the MOSA
height, line discharge class and number of parallel internal
columns of ZnO varistors. The nonlinear resistance R(i)
represents the MOSA electrical conductivity. It depends on the
line discharge class and current impulse front-time that flows
through the MOSA. The resistances RL and RC are used to
avoid possible numerical oscillations due to some simulation
software that use the trapezoidal integration rule as a numerical
solution method (e.g., Alternative Transient Program - ATP).
The resistance values depend on the time step value used
in the simulation [29]. The resistances RL and RC may be
disregarded if the trapezoidal integration rule is not used.
The procedure to determine the MWR model parameters is
described as follows.
1) The parameters L and RL are obtained from:
L h/n (H) (1)
8L
RL = () (2)
4t
where h is the height of the MOSA in meters, n is the
number of columns in parallel to ZnO varistors inside
the MOSA and 4t is the time step value used in the
simulation.
2) The parameter C is obtained according to the number
n of columns in parallel of ZnO varistors, height h in
meters, line discharge class of the MOSA, and using
the data presented in Table II, which were obtained
from the data measured in the lab tests. The capacitance
C was estimated from [6], and the value related with
the height and line discharge class.
3) The parameter RC is obtained from (3) [29].
0.15 4t
RC = () (3)
2C
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY

TABLE II TABLE IV
C APACITANCE OF THE MOSA AS A FUNCTION OF THE NUMBER n V -Ir CHARACTERISTIC NORMALIZED OF THE MWR MODEL NONLINEAR
COLUMNS IN PARALLEL OF Z N O VARISTORS INSIDE THE MOSA, HEIGHT RESISTANCE .
h IN METERS , AND LINE DISCHARGE CLASS .
Current (A) Voltage (p.u.)
Line discharge class Capacitance (pF) 0.00015 0.30
Class 1 7.50 n/h 0.00060 0.48
Class 2 12.31 n/h 0.00200 0.56
Class 3 19.59 n/h 0.00500 0.61
Class 4 36.75 n/h 0.01000 0.63
Class 5 78.96 n/h 0.01600 0.65
250 0.72 - 0.81*
500 0.74 - 0.83*
TABLE III
V -Ir CHARACTERISTICS NORMALIZED OF THE MWR MODEL NONLINEAR
1000 0.77 - 0.86*
RESISTANCE , IN THE HIGH NONLINEARITY REGION , IN ACCORDANCE 2000 0.82 - 0.89*
WITH THE LINE DISCHARGE CLASS . 4000 0.91
8000 0.97
Line discharge class - Voltage (p.u.) 10000 1.00
Current (A)
1 2 3 4 5 15000 1.06
250 0.72 0.76 0.78 0.80 0.81 20000 1.10
500 0.74 0.79 0.80 0.81 0.83 40000 1.20
1000 0.77 0.82 0.83 0.84 0.86 *In the high nonlinearity region, the values in p.u. depend of the line discharge class,
2000 0.82 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89 according with Table III.

on the lab tests were denominated Pm . The percentage error

between these quantities was defined as Pe , and it is given by:
4) The parameter R(i) is obtained from the data points  
shown in Table IV. These points are normalized with  (Ps Pm ) 
Pe =   100% (4)
relation to the residual voltage peak for standardized Pm 
lightning current impulse (8/20 s) with amplitude of
For comparison of the energy values, the energy values in
10 kA. If the model is to be used in studies involving
the test (Em ) and simulation (Es ) were calculated using (5).
lightning current impulse (8/20 s), switching current
Then, the percentage error was calculated (Ee ) in accordance
impulses or the low current region, the data points
with (6).
must be multiplied by the residual voltage peak for
the standard lightning impulse current. These kind of Z t
studies are the most commonly carried out. On the E= v(t).i(t) dt (5)
0
other hand, if the MWR model is to be used in studies
involving very fast transients (VFT), like impulses with where v(t) and i(t) are the instantaneous values of the residual
1/2 s waveshape, the last six points of V -Ir curve voltage and impulse current, respectively.
must be multiplied by VFT residual voltage peak at  
 (Es Em ) 
10 kA. Finally, the data points marked with * must be Ee =    100% (6)
adjusted according to the MOSA line discharge class, Em 
as established in Table III. Finally, the complete waveforms yielded by the MWR
model and the ones obtained from the lab tests were compared.
An example of how to determine the MWR model For this, the R2 statistical calculation was used. If R2 is close
parameters is shown in Appendix A. to 1, it means that the model can represent the measured data
accurately, i.e., the model can explain the observations. The
V. P ERFORMANCE A NALYSIS OF THE MWR MODEL
R2 statistics is given by:
The simulations with the MWR model were performed in
the ATP software. The signals of voltage and current measured SSE
R2 = 1 (7)
were filtered to reduce the noise during acquisition. For this, SST
the filter moving average was used [30]. where
For comparison of the simulated and measured signals, the Pm Pm
SSE = j=1 [vmj vsj ]2 and SST = j=1 [vmj vmj ]2
following parameters were used:
2
Low current region - leakage current peak and R where vm and vs are the measured values and provided by the
statistics in relation to measured current; MWR model, respectively; m is the number of samples; vm
Regions of high nonlinearity and high current - is the mean value of the measured signal; SSE is the sum of
residual voltage peak, R2 statistics in relation to measured squared error; and SST is the sum of squared total.
residual voltage waveform, and absorbed energy value. In Fig. 6, the waveforms of the measured signals and of
The peak values obtained from the simulations were called the current waveform provided by the MWR model in the
Ps , while the peak values obtained from the measurements low current region are shown. This is a typical result obtained

0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
BRITO et al.: A WIDE-RANGE MODEL FOR METAL-OXIDE SURGE ARRESTER 5

1 4 8 2
Measured current
MWR model current
Measured voltage

0.5 2 6 1.5
Varistor D1
Current (mA)

Voltage (kV)

Current (kA)
Voltage (kV)
250 A 1.9 kA Measured voltage
0 0 4 250 A 1.9 kA MWR model voltage 1
250 A 1.9 kA Measured current

0.5 2 2 0.5

1 4 0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Time (ms) Time (ms)

Fig. 6. Voltage and current measurements and provided by the MWR model Fig. 7. Results of voltage and current measurements and provided by the
in varistor F1 in the low current region. MWR model in varistor D1, in the high nonlinearity region (30/60 s).

TABLE VI
TABLE V
AVERAGE ERROR IN THE VOLTAGE PEAK VALUE , ENERGY ABSORBED AND
AVERAGE ERROR IN THE CURRENT PEAK VALUE AND R2 STATISTIC IN
R2 STATISTIC IN THE HIGH NONLINEARITY REGION .
THE LOW CURRENT REGION .

Imax Analysis Varistor Global

Varistor A B C D E F Average
(kA) Parameters A B C D E F Average
P ei (%) 4.49 4.67 2.57 2.94 2.63 4.63 3.66
P ev (%) 1.91 1.40 2.10 0.82 1.58 2.91 1.79
R2 0.95 0.88 0.99 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.95
0.25 Ee (%) 3.74 3.36 3.88 2.66 0.24 4.57 3.08
R2 0.78 0.51 0.91 0.67 0.72 0.67 0.71
P ev (%) 0.44 1.29 0.72 0.74 0.83 1.40 0.90
from the varistor F1, when subjected to the varistor operation 0.50 Ee (%) 2.02 0.69 2.48 2.01 0.21 3.07 1.75
voltage. Each evaluated varistor was subjected to four voltage R2 0.71 0.60 0.87 0.66 0.73 0.64 0.70
P ev (%) 0.81 1.79 0.55 1.08 0.84 0.76 0.97
levels (between 10% and 120% of the operation voltage),
1.00 Ee (%) 2.13 0.67 1.45 2.62 0.12 2.14 1.52
totaling 48 tests. In Table V are presented the absolute R2 0.66 0.57 0.81 0.58 0.71 0.69 0.67
average errors for the leakage current peaks and R2 statistic. P ev (%) 0.50 1.13 1.01 0.70 0.14 0.95 0.74
Note that the values of R2 statistic was greater than 0.88. 2.00 Ee (%) 0.96 0.70 2.16 1.97 0.73 2.02 1.42
R2 0.73 0.58 0.75 0.61 0.62 0.71 0.67
Concerning the leakage current peak (P ei ), the average error
was 3.66%. Therefore, the MWR model represented leakage
current waveform with good accuracy. 3% in most cases. However, for the current impulse 1.5/26 s,
In Fig. 7, the waveforms of the switching current impulse errors ranged between 4.9% and 10.7%. This occurred because
(30/60 s) and its respective residual voltages for current the MWR model does not faithfully follow the dampening of
amplitudes of 250 and 2000 A are presented. These the voltage wave, as shown in Fig. 8(a). The values of the
data were measured from the varistor D1. The MWR model R2 statistic were between 0.61 and 0.90. Therefore, the MWR
response is given too. The same behaviors were verified with model satisfactorily represented the ZnO varistors in the high
the others varistors. current region.
In Table VI, the average errors were calculated in the high It was verified that the compensation procedure presented
nonlinearity region for the six varistors types. The global in the technical standards are not sufficient to eliminate
average errors of the residual voltage peak are very low, less interferences of the experimental arrangement on the residual
than 1.8% for the evaluated varistors types. The global average voltage waveform. Thus, for achieving a better adjustment
errors in the absorbed energy are low, too, less than 3.1%. between the proposed model and the experimental data, it
The values of the R2 statistic were between 0.51 and 0.91. will be necessary increase, artificially, the model inductance
Therefore, the MWR model represented satisfactorily the ZnO value. We do not recommend this, because the obtained
varistors in the high nonlinearity region. inductance value will not be proportional to the surge
In Fig. 8, the waveforms of the lightning current impulses arrester height (1 H/m), as it is consensus on the literature,
(8/20 s), high current impulses (4/10 s) and fast-front physically reasonable, and considered before on the paper.
current impulses (1.5/26 s e 3/6 s), and its respective Some works approach the residual voltage measurement with
residual voltage for current amplitudes of 4 and 15 kA, the electromagnetic coupling effects minimized [31], [32].
measured in the varistors A1, B1, C1 e E1, and provided by the Additionally, it is important to understand that MWR
MWR model are presented. The same behavior were verified model could represent the MOSA behavior, especially, its
in the other evaluated varistors. performance/design parameters (voltage and current peaks,
In Table VII, the same parameters used in Table VI are and absorbed energy) with good accuracy (the majority of
presented for high current region. The global average errors errors were less than 5%) for several kinds of operational
of the residual voltage peaks are very low, less than 2.2%. situations: power frequency, switching and lightning.
The average errors in the absorbed energy are low, too, for
the 8/20 s, 4/10 s and 3/6 s current impulses, less than

0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY

10 15 10
3.9 kA 14.7 kA Measured voltage 15
3.9 kA 14.7 kA MWR model voltage
3.9 kA 14.7 kA Measured current
8 8

10 10
Varistor E1

Current (kA)

Current (kA)
Voltage (kV)

Voltage (kV)
6 6
Varistor C1
4 kA 15.1 kA Measured voltage
4 kA 15.1 kA MWR model voltage
4 4 4 kA 15.1 kA Measured current
5 5

2 2

0 0 0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (ms) Time (ms)

(a) (b)
15 16 15 16

12 12
10 10

Current (kA)

Current (kA)
Voltage (kV)

Voltage (kV)
Varistor B1 Varistor A1

4 kA 15.6 kA Measured voltage 8 4 kA 15.5 kA Measured voltage 8

4 kA 15.6 kA MWR model voltage 4 kA 15.5 kA MWR model voltage
4 kA 15.6 kA Measured current 4 kA 15.5 kA Measured current
5 5
4 4

0 0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 5 10 15 20
Time (ms) Time (ms)

(c) (d)

Fig. 8. Results of voltage and current measurements and provided by the MWR model in ZnO varistors, in the high current region. (a) Varistor C1 - 1.5/26 s.
(b) Varistor E1 - 3/6 s. (c) Varistor B1 - 4/10 s. (d) Varistor A1 - 8/20 s.

TABLE VII
AVERAGE ERROR IN THE VOLTAGE PEAK VALUE , ENERGY ABSORBED AND R2 STATISTIC IN THE HIGH CURRENT REGION (1.5/26 S , 3/6 S , 4/10 S
AND 8/20 S ).

Varistor 1.5/26 s 3/6 s 4/10 s 8/20 s

Imax (kA)
Type P ev (%) Ee (%) R2 P ev (%) Ee (%) R2 P ev (%) Ee (%) R2 P ev (%) Ee (%) R2
4.00 4.84 6.66 0.73 2.14 2.22 0.83 3.99 4.08 0.87 3.46 3.34 0.71
8.00 4.54 8.64 0.78 1.11 2.43 0.83 1.54 3.46 0.89 1.90 3.17 0.74
A
10.00 6.73 7.93 0.79 0.85 2.08 0.82 0.76 2.41 0.89 1.12 2.11 0.76
15.00 1.92 5.72 0.81 1.08 1.15 0.82 0.34 1.94 0.90 1.32 1.13 0.80
4.00 2.47 5.10 0.80 2.25 1.99 0.78 1.11 1.42 0.83 2.06 2.13 0.67
8.00 2.27 9.57 0.80 1.86 2.75 0.79 1.00 1.63 0.86 1.49 2.63 0.70
B
10.00 1.69 8.50 0.81 2.17 2.63 0.79 1.40 1.77 0.86 0.65 1.70 0.72
15.00 2.51 9.96 0.79 1.63 2.45 0.79 1.29 1.28 0.87 1.27 2.00 0.75
4.00 2.12 4.98 0.79 1.54 0.22 0.80 1.37 0.67 0.83 1.44 0.44 0.69
8.00 0.47 7.23 0.81 1.04 0.57 0.78 1.01 1.09 0.85 0.34 1.40 0.69
C
10.00 0.39 8.03 0.81 0.31 1.56 0.76 0.88 1.41 0.86 0.50 1.33 0.69
15.00 1.86 8.81 0.83 1.05 2.02 0.78 1.68 2.29 0.88 2.08 2.75 0.70
4.00 1.41 6.83 0.78 1.68 3.03 0.80 1.60 3.17 0.86 0.11 1.82 0.69
8.00 1.26 10.62 0.70 0.97 3.05 0.78 0.35 2.33 0.84 0.61 1.77 0.70
D
10.00 0.48 7.62 0.80 0.97 2.81 0.80 1.12 2.16 0.85 0.90 1.99 0.71
15.00 2.37 6.07 0.84 1.53 2.59 0.78 0.99 1.59 0.87 1.32 1.59 0.74
4.00 2.69 5.13 0.68 0.59 0.49 0.81 0.90 0.74 0.88 0.55 0.75 0.69
8.00 3.48 5.95 0.76 0.12 1.41 0.75 1.03 1.33 0.87 1.28 2.09 0.70
E
10.00 1.84 5.49 0.77 0.76 1.87 0.74 1.03 1.12 0.88 1.21 2.11 0.71
15.00 1.10 5.64 0.82 0.93 1.64 0.76 1.10 1.75 0.89 1.29 2.09 0.72
4.00 1.12 5.64 0.78 0.96 1.80 0.81 0.24 1.72 0.84 1.19 1.83 0.69
8.00 1.15 6.79 0.83 0.71 2.05 0.65 0.51 1.60 0.85 1.11 1.61 0.69
F
10.00 1.34 6.42 0.85 1.50 2.10 0.67 0.67 1.61 0.86 1.22 1.49 0.71
15.00 1.98 8.00 0.82 2.32 1.92 0.61 0.78 1.55 0.84 1.42 1.87 0.65
Global Average 2.17 7.14 0.79 1.25 1.95 0.77 1.11 1.84 0.86 1.24 1.88 0.71

0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
BRITO et al.: A WIDE-RANGE MODEL FOR METAL-OXIDE SURGE ARRESTER 7

VI. C ONCLUSIONS TABLE VIII

E XAMPLE OF V -Ir C HARACTERISTIC OF THE MWR MODEL NONLINEAR
In this paper, MOSA wide-range model (MWR model) was RESISTANCE .
presented. This model is based on MOSA electric behavior
in its three operating regions. The model was validated from Voltage (kV)
Current (A)
measurement of voltage and current in MOSA regions of 8/20 s 1/20 s
operation. The model is simple, and all its parameters are 0.00015 57.60 57.60
easily found in the manufacturers datasheet. 0.00060 92.16 92.16
The different studies with MOSA can be performed using 0.00200 107.52 107.52
only the MWR model. This avoids error of representation 0.00500 117.12 117.12
0.01000 120.96 120.96
when the studies involves more of one region, as in the
0.01600 124.80 124.80
case of the load-shedding due to a short-circuit. Furthermore, 250 145.92 145.92
the MWR model is easy to use and allows the permanent 500 151.68 151.68
representation of the MOSA in the simulated electrical system. 1000 157.44 157.44
From the measurement results, significant differences in the 2000 165.12 165.12
behavior of the V -I curve, in the high nonlinearity region, in 4000 174.72 187.46
accordance with the line discharge class of the MOSA were 8000 186.24 199.82
verified. 10000 192.00 206.00
15000 203.52 218.36
The waveforms of the voltages or currents supplied by
20000 211.20 226.60
the MWR model were similar to the lab tests results. The
40000 230.40 247.20
differences observed in the high nonlinearity and high current
regions can be attributed, at this moment, to the necessity
of improving the inductive coupling compensation method.
Table IV, by the residual voltage for 8/20 s-10 kA, which is
The method provided in the standards for very fast transients,
V10 = 192 kV, in this case. The results are shown in Table VIII.
apparently, is not sufficient.
To better represent the MOSA resistive behavior, a curve fitting
From the measurement results, it has been verified that
on V -Ir characteristic points using (8) is suggested,
the inductive coupling present in the MOSA residual voltage
measurement is significant, too, to transients such as switching  q
v
current impulses (30/60 s), contrary to recent technical i=p (8)
Vref
standards that claim to be needing some kind of compensation
for very fast transients (front times equal or less than 1 s). where the parameters i and v are current and voltage
in the MOSA, respectively, q is the nonlinear coefficient,
A PPENDIX A p a multiplier factor and V ref is an arbitrary reference
E XAMPLE OF PARAMETER S ELECTION FOR MWR MODEL voltage, which normalizes the equation and prevents numerical
OF MOSA
representation problems (overflow) during the potentiation.

This section details the determination of the MWR model

parameters for a MOSA with one column of ZnO varistors,
line discharge class 2, with an overall length of 1.036 meters.
The residual voltage for 8/20 s-10 kA, V10 , it is 192 kV and
the residual voltage for steep current with specific waveform
1/20 s-10 kA, Vsp , it is 206 kV. The time step used in the
simulation is 0.01 s.
A. Modeling of MOSA for regions of low current, high
nonlinearity and high current with standard lightning
waveform (8/20 s)
Using the equations presented previously in this paper, the
values for L, RL , C and RC are determined as follows:
L = h/n H = 1.036/1 = 1.036 H
RL = 8L/4t = 81.036106 /1108 = 828.80
C = 12.31 pF(n/h) = 12.31 pF(1/1.036) = 11.88 pF
RC = 0.15 4t/2C = 0.15108 /211.881012 = 63.13
The V -Ir characteristic points of the nonlinear resistance
R(i) are obtained multiplying the points in p.u., shown in the
B. Modeling of MOSA for regions of low current, high
nonlinearity and high current with specific lightning waveform
For simulations with specific lightning waveform current
impulses, the procedure for calculating the parameters L, RL ,
C and RC are same as in previous case. Only the last six points
of the V -Ir characteristic are modified. Those points in p.u. are
multiplied by residual voltage for specific lightning waveform
with amplitude of 10 kA. Here, the waveform 1/20 s with
Vsp = 206 kV is used. The results are shown in Table VIII.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank CAPES (Coordination
for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel),
PPgEE-COPELE (Post-Graduate Program in Electrical
Engineering at UFCG) and CHESF (Hydroelectric
Company of San Francisco) through the R&D project
CTNI-92.2011.3500.00 for their financial support.
R EFERENCES
[1] L. M. Levinson and H. Philipp, The physics of metal oxide varistors,
J. Appl. Phys., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 13321341, Mar. 1975.

0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2017.2704108, IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery
8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
[2] S. Tominaga, K. Azumi, T. Nagai, M. Imataki, and H. Kuwahara,
Reliability and application of metal oxide surge arresters for power
systems, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-98, no. 3, pp.
805816, May/June 1979.
[3] T. K. Gupta, Application of zinc oxide varistors, J. Am. Ceram. Soc.,
vol. 73, no. 7, pp. 18171840, July 1990.
[4] J. Lundquist, L. Stenstrom, A. Schei, and B. Hansen, New method
for measurement of the resistive leakage currents of metal-oxide surge
arresters in service, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 5, no. 4, pp.
18111822, Oct. 1990.
[5] Surge arresters - part 5: selection and application recommendations,
IEC Standard 60099-5, 2000.
[6] V. S. Brito, G. R. S. Lira, and E. G. Costa, Methodology for
decomposition of the leakage current in metal oxide surge arrester,
in Int. Symp. on High Voltage Engineering, Seoul, Korea, Aug. 2530,
2013.
[7] O. Nigol, Methods for analyzing the performance of gapless metal
oxide surge arresters, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 7, no. 3, pp.
12561264, July 1992.
[8] S. Tominaga, K. Azumi, Y. Shibuya, M. Imataki, Y. Fujiwara, and
S. Nishida, Protective performance of metal oxide surge arrester based
on the dynamic v-i characteristics, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol.
PAS-98, no. 6, pp. 18601871, Nov. 1979.
[9] W. Schmidt, J. Meppelink, B. Richter, K. Feser, L. Kehl, and D. Qui,
Behaviour of MO - surge arrester blocks to fast transients, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 292300, Jan. 1989.
[10] R. Hileman, J. Roguin, and K. Weck, Metal-oxide surge arresters in ac
systems-part v: protection performance of metal oxide surge arresters,
Electra, no. 133, pp. 132144, Dec. 1990.
[11] IEEE Working Group 3.4.11, Modeling of metal oxide surge arresters,
IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 302309, Jan. 1992.
[12] I. Kim, T. Funabashi, H. Sasaki, T. Hagiwara, and M. Kobayashi, Study
of ZnO arrester model for steep front wave, IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 834841, Apr. 1996.
[13] G. R. S. Lira, D. Fernandes Jr., E. G. Costa, and M. J. A. Maia,
Behavior of metal oxide surge arresters for fast surges, in CIGRE
A3 Tech. Colloq., Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Sept. 1213, 2007.
[14] G. R. S. Lira, L. A. M. M. Nobrega, L. V. Gomes, and E. G. Costa,
Performance evaluation of MOSA models against lightning discharges,
in Int. Symp. on Lightning Protection, Fortaleza, Brazil, Oct. 37, 2011.
[15] G. V. N. Bezerra, L. A. M. M. Nobrega, J. F. Silva Jnior, G. R. S.
Lira, V. S. Brito, E. G. Costa, and M. J. A. Maia, Evaluation of surge
arrester models for overvoltage studies, in Int. Conf. on High Voltage
Engineering and Application, Poznan, Poland, Sept. 811, 2014.
[16] P. Pinceti and M. Giannettoni, A simplified model for zinc oxide surge
arresters, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 393398, 1999.
[17] B. Zitnik, M. Babuder, M. Muhr, M. Zitnik, and R. Thottappillil,
Numerical modelling of metal oxide varistors, in Int. Symp. on High
Voltage Engineering, Beijing, China, Aug. 2529, 2005.
[18] P. B. Vilar, G. R. S. Lira, E. G. Costa, and M. J. A. Maia, Development
of a mathematical model to ZnO surge arrester, in Int. Symp. on High
Voltage Engineering, Seoul, Korea, Aug. 2530, 2013.
[19] L. Montanes, M. Garca-Garca, M. Sanz, and M. A. Garca, An
Improvement for the Selection of Surge Arresters Based on the
Evaluation of the Failure Probability, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 17,
no. 1, pp. 123128, Jan. 2002.
[20] A. L. Orille-Fernandez, S. B. Rodrguez, and M. A. G. Gotes,
Optimization of surge arresters location, IEEE Trans. Power Del.,
vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 145150, Jan. 2004.
[21] G. R. S. Lira, D. Fernandes Jr., and E. G. Costa, Computation of
energy absorption and residual voltage in metal oxide surge arrester
from digital models and lab tests: a comparative study, in Int. Conf. on
Power Systems Transients, Lyon, France, June 37, 2007.
[22] R. Shariatinasab, B. Vahidi, S. Hosseinian, and A. Ametani,
Probabilistic evaluation of optimal location of surge arresters on EHV
and UHV networks due to switching and lightning surges, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 19031911, Oct. 2009.
[23] S. Mohajeryami and M. Doostan, Including surge arresters in the
lightning performance analysis of 132 kV transmission line, in
IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conf. and Expo., Dallas, USA,
2016.
[24] ABB, Overvoltage protection metal oxide surge arresters in medium
voltage systems, Tech. Rep., 2011.
[25] H. R. Philipp and L. M. Levinson, Low-temperature electrical studies
on metal-oxide varistors - a clue to conduction mechanisms, J. Appl.
Phys., vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 16211627, Apr. 1977.
0885-8977 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
[26] C. L. Wooi, Z. Abdul-Malek, and S. V. Mashak, Effect of ambient
temperature on leakage current of gapless metal oxide surge arrester,
Jurnal Teknologi (Sci. & Eng.), vol. 64, no. 4, 2013.
[27] Surge arresters - Part 4: Metal-oxide Surge Arresters Without Gaps for
A.C. Systems, IEC Standard 60099-4, 2014.
[28] Metal-Oxide Surge Arresters for AC Power Circuits (>1 kV), IEEE
Standard C62.11, 2012.
[29] F. L. Alvarado, R. H. Lasseter, and J. J. Sanchez, Testing of trapezoidal
integration with damping for the solution of power transient problems,
IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., no. 12, pp. 37833790, Dec. 1983.
[30] R. M. Gray and L. D. Davisson, An introduction to statistical signal
processing. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
[31] I. A. Metwally, D-dot probe for fast-front high-voltage measurement,
IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 22112219, Aug. 2010.
[32] , Comparative measurement of surge arrester residual voltages by
d-dot probes and dividers, Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 81, no. 7, pp.
12741282, Mar. 2011.
Valdemir S. Brito received the B.Sc., M.Sc.,
and D.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering from
the Federal University of Campina Grande,
Campina Grande, Brazil, in 2012, 2013, and 2016,
respectively. Since 2013, he is with the Federal
Institute of Paraba. His research interests are high
voltage, surge arresters, electromagnetic transients,
optimization methods, techniques of measurement
in high voltage, and modeling of electric power
equipments.
George R. S. Lira received the B.Sc., M.Sc.,
and D.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering from
the Federal University of Campina Grande,
Campina Grande, Brazil, in 2005, 2008, and 2012,
respectively. Since 2010, he is with the Department
of Electrical Engineering, Federal University of
Campina Grande, Campina Grande, Brazil. His
research interests are high voltage, surge arresters,
electromagnetic transients, optimization methods,
computational intelligence, and pattern recognition.
Edson G. Costa received the B.Sc., M.Sc., and
D.Sc. degrees in electrical engineering from the
Federal University of Paraba, Campina Grande,
Brazil, in 1978, 1981, and 1999, respectively. Since
1978, he is with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, Federal University of Campina Grande,
Campina Grande, Brazil. His research interests
include high voltage, surge arresters, insulators,
partial discharge, and electric fields.
Marcelo J. A. Maia received the B.Sc. degree in
electrical engineering from the Federal University
of Paraba, Campina Grande, Brazil, in 1978. Since
1978, he is with the Hydroelectric Company of San
Francisco, Recife, PE, Brazil. His research interests
include power systems, surge arresters, transmission
and distribution of electric energy.