2000
DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6826(00)00008-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Propagation of lightning generated transient electromagnetic fields over finitely conducting ground

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
2
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is because the real ground has a limited conductivity. According to Cooray et al [26] , the ground conductivity is 10 −2 -10 −3 S·m −1 .…”
Section: The Signatures Of Electric Field Change At Different Distancesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This is because the real ground has a limited conductivity. According to Cooray et al [26] , the ground conductivity is 10 −2 -10 −3 S·m −1 .…”
Section: The Signatures Of Electric Field Change At Different Distancesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It is known that electromagnetic fields propagating over lossy ground suffer attenuation and distortion [e.g., Uman et al, 1976;Cooray et al, 2000]. A number of approximate expressions in both frequency and time domains have been used [e.g., Cooray and Lundquist, 1983;Cooray, 1992Cooray, , 2002Rubinstein, 1996;Shoory et al, 2005;Barbosa and Paulino, 2007] to account for the field propagation effects.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is attributed to the fact that in the LF range the amplitude of even the largest IC pulses is significantly lower compared to that of the CG return strokes (Weidman et al, 1981). The amplitude difference between CG strokes and IC pulses increases even further with increasing propagation distance between the source and the lightning sensor (Cooray et al, 2000). Hence, more sensors will detect the radiation from a single CG discharge compared to an IC pulse.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%