3-D FDTD Analysis of Lightning-Induced Voltages in Distribution Lines Due to Inclined Lightning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, lightning-induced overvoltages due to inclined lightning are investigated by a finite-difference timedomain (FDTD) method for distribution lines of a single conductor and a multiphase line (three-phase conductors with a shield wire, utility poles, groundings, and arresters). The FDTD model is validated in comparison with results of circuit-theory-based analytical and numerical calculation methods. In the single conductor line, the influences of inclined lightning on the induced voltage waveform, peak voltage, and voltage profile along the line are investigated with several combinations of lightning distances, earth resistivities, and lightning current waveforms. The induced voltage is significantly influenced by the lightning inclination toward the line (angle θ). The increased ratio of the peak voltage by the angle θ becomes larger with lower earth resistivity and shorter rise time of the lightning current. While the inclination along the line (angle φ) makes only minor differences on the peak voltage, the voltage profile along the line becomes asymmetric. In the multiphase line, the influence of the angle θ on the voltage becomes similar to that in the single conductor line. These results clearly indicate that the lightning inclination should be considered for an accurate evaluation of lightning-induced voltages.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it