Avionics lightning protection design GUI

Clay McCreary - January 06, 2014

Introduction
Reference [1] describes a process for the design of lightning protection that transforms the transient
experienced by the components during the lightning test transient into the reference transients used
on component datasheets. This allows components to be selected that are suitable for the application
eliminating the trial and error phase of the design process.

In addition, a technique to determine the minimum trace width required to tolerate the transient is
presented in [1]. This paper introduces a free Graphical User Interface (GUI) that performs all the
calculations from [1] and outputs the results. These results can then be compared to datasheets for
the selection of components. This allows for rapid design of robust lightning protection.

In order to build aircraft that are lighter and thus, use less fuel, aircraft manufacturers have begun
using carbon composite material to fabricate the airframes instead of aluminum. An undesired effect
of this change is the increase in severity of the indirect effects of lightning strikes to the airframe on
the electrical equipment used on the aircraft (avionics). The more severe lightning transients require
the interfaces of avionics to have more robust transient protection. More robust protection typically
requires larger components. However, aircraft manufacturers and avionics vendors desire to keep
the same form factor for existing avionics. As a result, additional lightning protection must be
carefully designed so that the components with the minimum physical size are used.

Datasheets for the components used in lightning protection circuits provide ratings based on
reference transients. These transients are different from the lightning transients to which the
circuits will be exposed in an aircraft environment. Therefore, a typical design technique was to use
experience to decide on the component. Another technique was to use the largest component that
the printed circuit board (PCB) could physically accommodate. The trace widths used for the circuits
was determined by generic IPC (formerly the Institute for Printed Circuit Boards, now just IPC)
guidelines.

However, these guidelines were developed for continuous current resulting in much wider trace
widths than what is required to tolerate transient currents. After the initial design, a prototype was
built and tested. The test results were analyzed and it was determined if the parts and the trace
widths used for the circuit were suitable. This "trial and error" technique caused delays in schedule
and increased use of resources. The use of the GUI presented in the paper will prevent these delays.

Section 22 of [2] contains the lightning test transients used for indirect lightning testing required by
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Waveform 4 (WF4), shown in Figure 1, is the test
transient for metallic aircraft.
Figure 1: WF4 from Section 22 of [2].

Waveform 5A (WF5A), shown in Figure 2, is used for composite aircraft. The levels associated with
the waveforms are designated by the voltage open circuit (VOC) and current short circuit (ISC). These
values are used to calibrate the source impedance of the transient generator used for testing.

Figure 2: WF5A from Section 22 of [2].

In order to determine the test levels for avionics, lightning transients must be either applied to the
airframe or simulated. [3] describes the transients to be applied to the airframe or simulated at
different locations (zones) determined by [4]. This testing or simulation produces voltage levels
associated with each zone. For avionics that are connected to each other, the sum of the voltages for
the zones through which the connecting cables pass is calculated and doubled to produce the test
level for each signal line.

The lightning current transient that is applied to the airframe by the process in [3] to determine
avionic test levels has the same rise time and pulse width as WF4. Composite airframes distort this
transient significantly while the distortion provided by metallic airframes is negligible. Thus, WF5A
is longer in duration than WF4. In addition, the composite airframes impart more of the energy from
the lightning transient to the avionics. In order to simulate this during the test, WF5A also has a
source impedance of 1 while WF4s source impedance is 5 .

The distortion generated by the airframe is caused by diffusion and structural IR (current x
resistance) coupling of composite airframes. Figure 3 provides a simplified visual representation for
the description of these couplings.

Figure 3: Diagram of the indirect effects of lightning to avionics. In this

example, the lightning attaches to the tail and detaches at the nose. The test
level determination process in [3] varies the attachment and detachment points
throughout the airframe. The components in blue are a simplified model for
diffusion and structural IR coupling. This model is a adapation from those found
in [5].

Structural IR and diffusion coupling can be described by considering the airframe as a resistor
through which the lightning current flows. Avionics equipment connected to one another by signal
lines are connected in parallel with this resistor. The cables connecting the avionics can be
represented by an inductor and capacitors. The current through the resistor represents the
structural IR coupling and the reactive components represent the diffusion coupling. The
combination of the two couplings lengthens the waveform. Because of the longer duration and less
source impedance of WF5A, more energy is imparted to the avionics for the same level.

User Instructions for the GUI

User Instructions for the GUI

Installation and Startup
The GUI may be found at http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/39650. This GUI
requires that MATLAB version R2009b or later be installed on the end user's computer. Two files are
contained in a .zip file download: Lightning_Protection.m and Lightning_Protection.fig. Extract and
save these files in the working directory being used in MATLAB as shown in Figure 4. (For non-
MATLAB users, find the standalone executable and instructions here.)

Figure 4: Screenshot of MATLAB showing the working directory containing the two files for
the GUI.

After the files are placed in the working directory, run the GUI either by right clicking on
Lightning_Protection.m and selecting "Run File" or by typing "Lightning_Protection" on the
command line. The GUI shown in Figure 5 will appear on the screen.
Figure 5: Screenshot of the GUI.

Operation
The "Series Resistance" input is the series resistor to be used for the suppression circuit. This
component may be selected for various reasons such as:

Controlled impedance this value is selected for the designer with very little tolerance
(ARINC429).
Minimum impedance common on power lines, series resistance results in wasted power under
normal operating conditions.
Current limiter common on discrete inputs in which the drive circuit is designed by someone else
and the current under operating conditions is specified.

There are many more scenarios, but these are some common examples.

The clamping voltage of the suppression device is typically chosen after analysis of the downstream
circuits being protected. Several considerations must be made when selecting a clamping voltage:

Low enough to protect the downstream, circuits

Low enough so that it is not precluded from activating by the downstream circuit
High enough to not be activated during normal operation
Must tolerate the lightning transient

The GUI gives 1-, 1.5-, and 2-oz. options for copper weight. The copper weight is the thickness of
copper poured over a 1 x 1-ft area. 1 oz. equates to 1.4 mils of trace thickness. The designer may
have constraints for trace width due to the interface board being densely populated with signal lines.
The copper weight (trace thickness) may be adjusted to optimize the trace width.

The designer must determine the appropriate series resistance, clamping voltage of the suppression
device, and copper weight. All the other inputs are given test conditions. Compromises may be made
between these characteristics.

After the inputs are entered, the designer just needs to press the "Calculate" push button. The
outputs will then appear in the output text boxes. They may then be used to select components using
the guidance of [1]. If the designer wishes to adjust one of the input parameters, adjust the input
parameter and press the "Calculate" push button; the outputs will be updated. This feature allows
the designer to quickly compromise between various series resistances, clamping voltages, and
copper weights.

The GUI does contain one parameter that [1] does not consider - Return Line Impedance. During the
calibration of the lightning generator, a typical technique to compensate for the return line
impedance is to increase the Voc until Isc is achieved. Voc is maintained within the 10% tolerance
allowed by [2], but it will be on the high side. This results in slight overtesting of the avionics.
Robust lightning protection with margin should have no issue with this. However, the overtesting
could result failure of a marginal design. Previous calibration results for the test setup to be used
should be consulted during design of lightning protection.

Example Design

Example Design
The following is an example of a multiple stage lightning protection scheme for a power supply
input. The power supply is required to tolerate level 4 composite aircraft lightning, category B4 [2].
For the downstream components to be protected, the WF5A 750/750 transient [2] must be clamped
to less than 200 V.

In addition, due to overvoltage testing requirements; the suppression devices must not turn on when
the input voltage is 80 V. During normal operation, there is a requirement for the voltage drop
across the lightning protection that limits the series resistance to less than 2.5 . In summary, the
suppression devices must reliably clamp the lightning transient between 80 and 200 V using series
resistance of less than 2.5 .

First Stage
A review of some MOV data sheets revealed an MOV that may be able to tolerate the WF5A 750/750
transient and provide some clamping action with no series resistance. This part is the V130LA10.
Using the PSPICE model for the V130LA5 (identical clamping characteristics as the V130LA10, but
lower maximum current rating) shown in Figure 6, the transient in Figure 7 is produced. The
clamping voltage for the MOV during the WF5A 750/750 [2] transient is 220 V. This information is
then input into the GUI shown in Figure 8.
Figure 6: Screenshot of the PSPICE simulation for the first stage.

Figure 7: Screenshot of the PSPICE data for the first stage.

Figure 8: Screenshot of the GUI for the first stage.

V130LA10 has an 8 x 20-s current rating of 4500 A. Figure 6 shows that the equivalent 8 x 20-s
current applied to the MOV during this transient is 2566 A. Thus, the part will tolerate the transient.

The PCB trace that connects the interface contact to the MOV should be 19-mils wide using 1-oz.
copper in order to tolerate the transient when the MOV operates normally. However if the MOV
were to fail short, the trace should be 27-mils wide to tolerate the short circuit current of the WF5A
750/750 [2] transient.

Good design practice would dictate that the designer should make the PCB trace at least 27 mils
wide if 1 oz. copper is used. If the designer is constrained such that they cannot accommodate 27-
mil-wide PCB traces, they should increase the copper weight if possible; or just be aware that the
trace will most likely fuse if the MOV fails short.

Second Stage
Experimenting with various component values and clamping voltages, the V85MLA1210 MOV is
found to have desirable clamping characteristics with 1 of series resistance as shown in Figure 9.
The clamping voltage is 226 V.
Figure 9: PSPICE model to determine the clamping voltage.

The addition of the V85MLA1210 / 1- resistor combination changes the clamping voltage of the
V130LA10 part. The resultant transient is shown in Figure 10. This transient is exported to a .txt file
to provide the input transient used for the GUI in Figure 11. The data in this file must be organized
into two columns: time and voltage. The columns must have one header row. This is the standard
format for PSPICE exports, but the data may be obtained from any source.
Figure 10: Resultant first-stage transient when the second stage is added.

Figure 11: Second-stage GUI.

This .txt file may be used as the input transient by selecting the ".txt_file" option from the "Lightning
Waveform being designed for" drop down box. When the "Calculate" push button is pressed, a dialog
box will appear allowing the .txt file to be selected. The "Open Circuit Voltage" and "Short Circuit
Current" inputs are not used by the GUI when ".txt_file" option is selected.

Using the 0.7 J/W thumb rule for wirewound resistors from [1], a 2-W wirewound 1- resistor may
be used. The VJ15M00600K MOV has the same clamping characteristics as the V85MLA1210 MOV
but with a higher current rating - 800 A. The equivalent 8 x 20 s resulting from the transient is 625
A.

Third Stage

Third Stage
For the third stage, the 80-V requirement is very important. Therefore, a TVS will be used because
the clamping voltage has very little variance over the dynamic current range of the part. The third
stage is designed in the same manner as the second stage. Parts are varied in PSPICE until a
resistor / TVS combination is found that provides desirable results. Then, the GUI is used to provide
the datasheet parameter so that parts may be selected.

SMDJ75CA with a 1.21- series resistor was found to be a combination that would provide desirable
clamping. Figure 12 shows the resultant circuit. As the second stage affected the transient on the
first stage, the addition of the third stage affects the second stage transient. Figure 13 shows the
resultant transient to be used for the third stage GUI.
Figure 12: Final circuit.

Figure 13: Third stage GUI.

A 1-W wirewound 1.21- resistor may be used. Figure 14 shows that the SMDJ75CA TVS will
tolerate the transient.
Figure 14: SMDJ75CA rating graph from the datasheet with the resultant point from the
GUI plotted.

Figure 15 shows the clamping voltages on all the stages.

Figure 15: Clamping voltages on all stages.

The process of using each transient as the input to the next stage was repeated to verify the correct
parts were selected. It was discovered that the V130LA5 MOV could be used on the first stage if
space on the PCB becomes an issue because this part is physically smaller than the V130LA10.
However, if the 1- series resistor were to open, the first stage MOV would clamp to 220 V as shown
in Figure 7. Thus, good design practice would dictate that the V130LA10 should be used if possible.

Conclusion
Lightning protection for avionics used to be a nearly trivial task in the time of metallic airframes.
With the move towards composite airframes, the design of lightning protection has become more
critical. [1] developed techniques to allow the designer to confidently design lightning protection
using the smallest components that will tolerate the given transients. Now, with the development of
the GUI presented in this paper, lightning protection design is becoming a nearly trivial task again
as shown by the example.

References
[1]. C. A. McCreary and B. A. Lail, "Lightning Transient Suppression Circuit Design for Avionics
Equipment", 2012 International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC), pp. 93-98,
2012.

[2]. "Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment", RTCA/DO-160E,
RTCA Inc. December 9, 2004.
[3]. SAE-ARP5412, "Aircraft Lightning Environment and Related Test Waveforms", SAE, 1999

[4]. SAE-ARP5414, "Aircraft Lightning Zoning", SAE, 1999

[5]. F. A. Fisher and J. A. Plumer, "Lightning Protection of Aircraft", NASA Reference Publication
1008, 1977

[6]. C. A. McCreary and B. A. Lail, "Design of Multiple Stage Avionics Lightning Protection for DC
Power Input Lines Using a Graphical User Interface (GUI)", in press

[7]. C. A. McCreary and B. A. Lail, "Hardening Lightning Protection for Avioincs on Composite
Aircraft", in press