This article was posted 03/29/2012 and is most likely outdated.

Mike Holt - Lightning Interception - Non Conventional Lightning Protection Systems
header
Lightning Interception - Non Conventional Lightning Protection Systems

Lightning Interception
Non Conventional Lightning Protection Systems

Report by: Vernon Cooray on behalf of Cigre Working Group C4.405 M. Bernardi (IT), C. Bouquegneau (BE), V. Cooray (SE), G. Diendorfer (AT), M. Fernando (SE), M. Ishii (JP), T. Kawamura (JP), C. Mazetti (IT), C. A. Nucci (IT), A. Piantini (BR), F. Rachidi (CH), V. Rakov (US), T. Shindo (JP), H. Torres (CO), S. Visacro (BR), S. Yokoyama (JP)

Image

The external lightning protection systems used by engineers in different countries can be divided into two categories, namely, conventional and non-conventional lightning protection systems. The conventional systems use Franklin rods. Many decades of experience shows that by combining Franklin rods located at critical points on a structure with a proper down conductor and grounding system the damage due to lightning could be reduced significantly [1]. The Early Streamer Emission rods and Dissipation Arrays (sometimes called Charge Transfer Systems) belong to the category of non conventional lightning protection systems. The latter systems have been introduced into several lightning protection standards without testing them over the same long period of time in the field as done for conventional ones to assess and validate their performances. In this note we will summarize the results of studies pertinent to these systems as reported in the scientific literature.

Click here to read the full report.

footer
This newsletter was sent to 20524 Subscribers
Comments

  • Mike, check your first paragraph. Stephen

    Stephen  March 30 2012, 2:16 pm EDT
    Reply to this comment

  • I've developed a working model for current flow that is somewhat simplistic but I believe effective. I consider only two parameters: path and potential difference. Once the path has current flow potential difference becomes secondary. Notice I've elimnated the circuit concept. I believe the circuit is just a special case of maintaining path and potential difference and not necessary in all circumstances of current flow. Secondly, current flow does not mean exclusively electron flow. Under certain conditions their opposite, positvely charged entities can substitute-as in electrolytes. As far as lightning is concerned it appears to me that an active system requiring power could produce ionized paths to replace the rods. Of course this system requires grounding. But a system of powerful lasers should be able to supply the ionized paths for varying levels of atmospheric potential differences. This system would perform better than the conventional but would require the expense of power for the lasers.

    bob  March 30 2012, 12:36 pm EDT
    Reply to this comment

  • This article points out a lot of interesting variances with lightning protection. The main issue to come to light may be that any protection is better than no protection, but no device is perfect. When lightning strikes the best protection is to be someplace else.

    Wingrider  March 30 2012, 7:23 am EDT
    Reply to this comment

Add Your Comments to this Newsletter
* Your Name:
   Your name will appear under your comments.

* Your Email:
   Your email address is not displayed.
* Comments:

This newsletter is closed to new comments.

Email Notification Options:
Notify me when a reply is posted to this comment
Notify me whenever a comment is posted to this newsletter