Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
....
Jim, a lot of interesting stuff with which I generally agree. The approach that my reference took to rating the conductor for a lightning discharge includes a safety factor (as you might expect), and so will rate the conductor at lower I^2*t than finding the conditions to melt the wire. In real life, you would want the conductor to withstand a second strike or fault soon after, and you would want to allow some tolerance for other variables, hence the safety factor. The approach is to find the I^2*t that raises the conductor one third of the way from ambient (323K) to melting point. The calculator you used might assume resistivity is at 0°C , ambient is 0°C, and the material is raised to melting point with no heat loss, and that would give a fusing current close to double of the approach that I used. BTW, we have half inch copper water pipe over here (we still do but it has a nominal metric size) and it is half in od... whereas half inch galvanised steel pipe is half inch nominal bore... actually about 5/8" id. Don't you like consistency in the same field! Some years ago I did extensive modelling of a double exponential excitation of structures and facilities (not lightning, faster than lightning) and it was interesting how much the circuit configuration affected the transformation of the excitation waveform to structure current, including ringing. The same software could run a lightning scenario, but that wasn't the main goal of the analysis so my experience with the lightning scenario is more limited. So, as I said, the nature of the current waveform is the big uncertainty and so measures are usually quite conservative to cover that uncertainty. Owen |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Owen Duffy wrote:
... Jim, a lot of interesting stuff with which I generally agree. The approach that my reference took to rating the conductor for a lightning discharge includes a safety factor (as you might expect), and so will rate the conductor at lower I^2*t than finding the conditions to melt the wire. In real life, you would want the conductor to withstand a second strike or fault soon after, and you would want to allow some tolerance for other variables, hence the safety factor. The approach is to find the I^2*t that raises the conductor one third of the way from ambient (323K) to melting point. The calculator you used might assume resistivity is at 0°C , ambient is 0°C, and the material is raised to melting point with no heat loss, and that would give a fusing current close to double of the approach that I used. BTW, we have half inch copper water pipe over here (we still do but it has a nominal metric size) and it is half in od... whereas half inch galvanised steel pipe is half inch nominal bore... actually about 5/8" id. Don't you like consistency in the same field! But they're not the same field.. the stuff made of copper is actually "tubing" and the stuff made of steel is "pipe", and historically, they've been measured differently. Tubing is usually soldered/sweated/brazed into fittings with a receptacle, so the OD is important, because even with different wall thicknesses, the fittings are all the same. Pipe is based on something else (King John's toe diameter or something) Some years ago I did extensive modelling of a double exponential excitation of structures and facilities (not lightning, faster than lightning) and it was interesting how much the circuit configuration affected the transformation of the excitation waveform to structure current, including ringing. The same software could run a lightning scenario, but that wasn't the main goal of the analysis so my experience with the lightning scenario is more limited. So, as I said, the nature of the current waveform is the big uncertainty and so measures are usually quite conservative to cover that uncertainty. There's some fascinating papers out there that use NEC to model response to a nearby lightning stroke (a much more common occurance than a direct hit). It's actually quite involved, since they model the traveling impulse of the stroke. Owen |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() We had a near by lightning strike last night... All my radios and antennas survived... My son's Dish Network receiver did not... He's quite bummed out... denny |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Building a Solid Copper Ground Pipe {Tube} with an Solid Iron Core. - Also - Water Drilling a Solid Copper Pipe for a Ground Rod. | Shortwave | |||
Building a Solid Copper Ground Pipe {Tube} with an Solid IronC... | Shortwave | |||
Cold Water Pipe Ground? | Antenna | |||
Ground rod or water pipe? | Antenna | |||
Antenna Tuner/Coupler Ground ... Hot Water Pipe? | Antenna |