Attenuation of Lightning-Induced Effects on Overhead Distribution Systems in Urban Areas

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have investigated the effects lightning on power lines with buildings in proximity to the power lines.

While the results of these calculations are in general agreement with what one would have expected based on rough estimates of the effects, there are however some aspects that concern the detailed numerical results that have not been discussed in sufficient detail and would be good to address quantitatively in a revised version of the manuscript.

A simple geometry of the building is used, which is fine at this stage, however it is assumed that the building is a perfect conductor, which is certainly not correct for an average building. It should be discussed to what extent the results will change is a more realistic attenuation of the electromagnetic pulse by the building is included. This will likely affect the time-structure of the signal on the power line. A similar concern is for the assumed ground properties.

An additional concern is related to the omission of the shield wire from the problem. Most modern power lines have such shield wires and the effects of such a wire thus should be considered.

For low-voltage power lines such a shield wire is often absent, however there will be several wires, at different phases, close to each other. It should be addressed how this will affect the results of the calculations.

Author Response

The reviewer can find the response to his/her questions on the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1) It is necessary to provide all explanations for abbreviations

2) Keywords - It is advisable to enter the standard name instead of the abbreviation

3) The introduction part of the article is very poor. It is appropriate to supplement the current state with other applications of software solutions within the issue. Also, the current state is not described in comparison with the presented research.

4) Every figure that is not the output of your research needs to have the source indicated (Figures 1, 2)

5) Equations – please provide the parameter clarification in the separate lines

6) Are the steps of the EM field´s computational (lines 73-75) your suggestion? If not, please provide a reference, if yes, please provide detailed research activities or listed previous research.

7) Please provide a detailed specification of the parameter´s settings (lines 120-127)

8) Please provide a detailed analysis of Figures 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 in the new section “discussion”

9) Conclusion part - Please provide a contribution of your research to practice and science in a few sentences

Author Response

The reviewer can find the response to his/her questions on the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

It is good that the authors have checked the effects of different configurations on their result, however, these outcomes need to be provided in the manuscript. A communication to the referee is not sufficient.

Since, as the authors state, the geometry, building as well as ground conditions will be different for real applications, the value of the present investigation is really very minor.

Author Response

The reviewer can find the answers to his/her comments in the attached document

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

 Thank you very much for your revised work.

 Note for an explanation of comment No.5. For example, in equation No. 1 (lines 81-83 provide information about parameters in sequent (in lines), the better representation is a separately description -every parameter in a new line) the explanation should look like this:

, where:

v - the return stroke speed (assumed to be half of the light speed),

P(z′) - the attenuation function (assumed to be exponential, as dictated by the MTLE model [17],

U - the Heaviside function.

Please, provide this form of explanation notice identically for all equations.

In my opinion, after this minor modification, this article is suitable for publication.

Author Response

The reviewer can find the answers to his/her comments in the attached document

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf