Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST)

Abstract Codes and standards for lightning often rely on simulations due to the difficult nature of lightning testing, as in the case of corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST). A small set of simulations by CSST manufacturers were previously used to justify the suggestion that grounding CSST woul...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Haslam, Bryan, Eagar, Thomas W
Other Authors: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Springer US 2021
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131870
_version_ 1811087402868932608
author Haslam, Bryan
Eagar, Thomas W
author2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Materials Science and Engineering
author_facet Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Haslam, Bryan
Eagar, Thomas W
author_sort Haslam, Bryan
collection MIT
description Abstract Codes and standards for lightning often rely on simulations due to the difficult nature of lightning testing, as in the case of corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST). A small set of simulations by CSST manufacturers were previously used to justify the suggestion that grounding CSST would make it safe from perforation in the presence of lightning. Such a small set of simulations does not account for the uncertainty of lightning and the situations where it may interact with CSST. We account for these uncertainties in this work by performing thousands of simulations that use different combinations of simulation parameters. For example, for one scenario we run 2560 simulations with a variety of different waveforms and different impedance values. The waveforms follow IEC 62305 with rise times ranging from 0.25 $$\upmu$$μs to 10 $$\upmu$$μs and fall times ranging from 100 $$\upmu$$μs to 1000 $$\upmu$$μs and the impedance values were varied by ± $$25\%$$25%. Our results show that there are cases where grounding may prevent perforation, cases where grounding may reduce the damage but not prevent perforation and cases where grounding increases the chances of perforation. Our results further show that for lightning strikes with peak current greater than the median, there was never a case where grounding could have prevented perforation. Our methods provide a way to perform more comprehensive simulations to replicate what may happen in nature and better inform decisions made about codes and standards. In particular we show grounding of CSST will not prevent fires when assaulted by lightning with any reasonable degree of certainty.
first_indexed 2024-09-23T13:45:32Z
format Article
id mit-1721.1/131870
institution Massachusetts Institute of Technology
language English
last_indexed 2024-09-23T13:45:32Z
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format dspace
spelling mit-1721.1/1318702023-02-23T20:24:29Z Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST) Haslam, Bryan Eagar, Thomas W Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Materials Science and Engineering Abstract Codes and standards for lightning often rely on simulations due to the difficult nature of lightning testing, as in the case of corrugated stainless steel tubing (CSST). A small set of simulations by CSST manufacturers were previously used to justify the suggestion that grounding CSST would make it safe from perforation in the presence of lightning. Such a small set of simulations does not account for the uncertainty of lightning and the situations where it may interact with CSST. We account for these uncertainties in this work by performing thousands of simulations that use different combinations of simulation parameters. For example, for one scenario we run 2560 simulations with a variety of different waveforms and different impedance values. The waveforms follow IEC 62305 with rise times ranging from 0.25 $$\upmu$$μs to 10 $$\upmu$$μs and fall times ranging from 100 $$\upmu$$μs to 1000 $$\upmu$$μs and the impedance values were varied by ± $$25\%$$25%. Our results show that there are cases where grounding may prevent perforation, cases where grounding may reduce the damage but not prevent perforation and cases where grounding increases the chances of perforation. Our results further show that for lightning strikes with peak current greater than the median, there was never a case where grounding could have prevented perforation. Our methods provide a way to perform more comprehensive simulations to replicate what may happen in nature and better inform decisions made about codes and standards. In particular we show grounding of CSST will not prevent fires when assaulted by lightning with any reasonable degree of certainty. 2021-09-20T17:30:44Z 2021-09-20T17:30:44Z 2019-07-02 2020-09-24T21:36:02Z Article http://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131870 en https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-019-00885-x Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature application/pdf Springer US Springer US
spellingShingle Haslam, Bryan
Eagar, Thomas W
Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST)
title Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST)
title_full Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST)
title_fullStr Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST)
title_full_unstemmed Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST)
title_short Variation in Lightning Simulations to Assess Grounding Safety of Corrugated Stainless Steel Tubing (CSST)
title_sort variation in lightning simulations to assess grounding safety of corrugated stainless steel tubing csst
url https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131870
work_keys_str_mv AT haslambryan variationinlightningsimulationstoassessgroundingsafetyofcorrugatedstainlesssteeltubingcsst
AT eagarthomasw variationinlightningsimulationstoassessgroundingsafetyofcorrugatedstainlesssteeltubingcsst