[BC] Lightning and grounding ... fun for all!

[Alan Alsobrook]

Hi Bruce,

hehe Despite all the different answers you are still pushing to a single 
thought. I'm thinking you can easily have it both ways put in your 
conventional protection and then add the Dissipaters.

But again, there is no easy way to prove that the dissipaters do work.
Although their seems to be strong evidence that they do. Even though you 
don't want to accept testimonial evidence of their performance, how 
could you prove that they did or didn't prevent a lightning strike?

Bruce Doerle wrote:
>>>>lowen at pari.edu 05/18/05 12:59 PM >>>
> Is making our towers into 'very-reluctant strike receptors' not the goal of 
> Lightning Prevention?  
> I think NOT.
> If you want prevention, I think you need to make arrangements with Mother Nature.
> 
> If you want protection, there are steps you can take to try to direct lightning away from equipment, but there is never a guarantee with lightning.  It is the bull in the china shop syndrome.
> 
> What I believe that you don't want to do is to have faith in a product that cannot deliver.  CTS type devices make claims to prevention, but demonstration that supported these was made, it was under tighly controlled condition that do not replicate what Mother Nature does or can do.  The intensity of a lightning strike greatly exceeds those laboratory conditions.  If there is a level of 'prevention' at the top of the tower, it won't prevent lightning from striking elsewhere on the tower which may include sensitive electrical/electronic apparatus.  You you not prefer it strike at a location where it can be dissipated safely?
> 
> Bruce   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/
> 

-- 
Alan Alsobrook CSRE AMD CBNT
St. Augustine Fl. 32086 904-829-8885
aalso at Bellsouth.net