Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jack Painter" wrote in message news:zbbnd.1127$wa1.571@lakeread04... snip The coax shields grounded at the tower (min. at the bottom, best top and bottom), and again at the basement entrance single point ground. Shields must be grounded before connection to an arrestor. Jack - regarding your comment on grounding the shields BEFORE connection to an arrestor: My arrestors are mounted on the common ground panel and the coax is grounded via the coax connector to those arrestors. What is the reason for a separate ground prior to that one. Maybe I misunderstood something, but it seems redundant to have a separate ground a few inches from that one. In response to another's comments regarding protection of the SteppIR, rotor, and other control lines: I use MOVs and .01 bypass caps on all those lines in a box at the base of the tower and have another set of the same at the entry panel box. Those components are mounted via European-style screw terminal strips (12 positions per strip) obtained from Jameco via the Web. Much cheaper than the same from Radio Shack or other sources. MOVs came from Mouser. A lightning strike last year entered my shack via relay control lines which were unprotected at that time. Hopefully, the new arrangement will help. 73, Floyd - K8AC |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
This was answered off-line but for the group:
"Floyd Sense" wrote "Jack Painter" wrote in message snip The coax shields grounded at the tower (min. at the bottom, best top and bottom), and again at the basement entrance single point ground. Shields must be grounded before connection to an arrestor. Jack - regarding your comment on grounding the shields BEFORE connection to an arrestor: My arrestors are mounted on the common ground panel and the coax is grounded via the coax connector to those arrestors. What is the reason for a separate ground prior to that one. Maybe I misunderstood something, but it seems redundant to have a separate ground a few inches from that one. Coax shield grounding must be accomplished at the tower top, tower base (on ground level, not even 6" above!) and before the arrestor to comply with protector manufacturer requirements and to be in keeping with best engineering practices that are used nationwide in communication tower designs. The grounding just before the arrestor is for two purposes: 1. preventing unnecessary energy (whether capacitively or inductively coupled) from challenging the gas tube, MOV, coil (or all three) mechanisms of a protector, and 2: to help limit the differing potential available to reverse-path voltage from a nearby strike in ground potential rise conditions. A nearby strike can saturate the ground system, and a station ground can reference hundreds of thousands of volts 'up' from the ground, and 'out' via arrestors, phone, power cables to lower potential felt at some distant point. Grounding cable shield at the station single point ground thus helps maintain equipotential for both directions. Even if the station coax arrestors are mounted on the master ground the additional grounding is still helpful for voltage-division during saturated ground conditions. But in all cases that ground bus mount must never be the only place the coax shelding is grounded! In response to another's comments regarding protection of the SteppIR, rotor, and other control lines: I use MOVs and .01 bypass caps on all those lines in a box at the base of the tower and have another set of the same at the entry panel box. Those components are mounted via European-style screw terminal strips (12 positions per strip) obtained from Jameco via the Web. Much cheaper than the same from Radio Shack or other sources. MOVs came from Mouser. A lightning strike last year entered my shack via relay control lines which were unprotected at that time. Hopefully, the new arrangement will help. 73, Floyd - K8AC Several amateurs have reported successful use of private design MOV on control lines. While this could exceed commercially available equipment specs in some cases, for those less familiar with such designs, they are readily available in package-form to protect control lines. Jack |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:44:50 -0500, "Floyd Sense"
wrote: "Jack Painter" wrote in message news:zbbnd.1127$wa1.571@lakeread04... snip The coax shields grounded at the tower (min. at the bottom, best top and bottom), and again at the basement entrance single point ground. Shields must be grounded before connection to an arrestor. Jack - regarding your comment on grounding the shields BEFORE connection to an arrestor: My arrestors are mounted on the common ground panel and the coax is grounded via the coax connector to those arrestors. What is the reason for a separate ground prior to that one. Maybe I misunderstood something, but it seems redundant to have a separate ground a few inches from that one. In response to another's comments regarding protection of the SteppIR, rotor, and other control lines: I use MOVs and .01 bypass caps on all those lines in a box at the base of the tower and have another set of the same at the entry panel box. Those components are mounted via European-style screw terminal strips (12 positions per strip) obtained from Jameco via the Web. Much cheaper than the same from Radio Shack or other sources. MOVs came from Mouser. A lightning strike last year entered my shack via relay control lines which were unprotected at that time. Hopefully, the new arrangement will help. 73, Floyd - K8AC Floyd, The real reason for grounding the coax shield at the entrance panel in addition to having the protection device grounded is the voltage drop between the connector and the coax line. The cable to connector connection is usually not a good low resistance - high current joint as far as lightning is considered. During a lightning strike you may have considerable voltage drop across that junction. Sometimes connectors are found to have been welded to the cable or their threads welded due to lightning strikes because of the poor connection at the connector. Other times the junction may get burned open. It can also melt the solder quickly in a soldered on connector which would provide for an immediately poor connection. However, lots of people do not do the extra grounding of the cable at that point. Most are lucky if they get some sort of protection device installed and a ground connected. As Jack mentioned grounding the cable "at the bottom of the tower like is used nation wide in tower designs" is ideal. But unfortunately that is not how it usually gets done. Often the lines come off the tower at 6 to 10 feet above the ground to go to the building in a cable tray. But it would indeed be best if they were taken all the way to ground level before exiting the tower. The reason being that during a strike the tower and associated lines on it develop considerable voltage drop due to the high current being conducted. Coming off the tower above ground is like taping a resistor part way up from the ground end. Allowing more voltage to exit on the lines rather than the potential at the base of the tower where it is closer to ground. The tower usually has considerable inductance for voltage to develop across. Ideally lines should be grounded to the tower not only at the top and bottom but at distances along the tower length as well. This is to avoid flashovers that may puncture the line. Lightning protection schemes are all about voltage drop. Most due to inductance of the tower or other conductors carrying the current. All conductors will have inductance and resistance and therefore voltage drop if they are asked to carry lightning current. Keeping things out of the middle of that path is the trick. 73 Gary K4FMX |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gary Schafer wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:44:50 -0500, "Floyd Sense" As Jack mentioned grounding the cable "at the bottom of the tower like is used nation wide in tower designs" is ideal. But unfortunately that is not how it usually gets done. Often the lines come off the tower at 6 to 10 feet above the ground to go to the building in a cable tray. But it would indeed be best if they were taken all the way to ground level before exiting the tower. The reason being that during a strike the tower and associated lines on it develop considerable voltage drop due to the high current being conducted. Coming off the tower above ground is like taping a resistor part way up from the ground end. Allowing more voltage to exit on the lines rather than the potential at the base of the tower where it is closer to ground. The tower usually has considerable inductance for voltage to develop across. I'm one of those who pulls the coax off the tower at around eight feet and hangs it on a carrier wire from the tower to the outside wall near the shack. In the past I've had end insulators at both ends of the carrier wire. Your point about grounding the coax at the base of the tower is well taken but is obviously not possible in these situations. It occurs to me that the same effect can be accomplished by connecting a #6 or #8 solid wire between the the coax shields where they bend away from the tower and the base of the tower. Yes? Taking it a bit further it also occurs to me that the carrier wire could be connected to the base of the tower at the point where the tower connects to the ground rods there, then up the tower and connected to both the coax shields at the eight foot level and the tower again. Then horizontally to the house wall with the coax, then down to the ground rods just outside the shack to which the equipment is also grounded. I'd also connect the coax shields to the carrier wire again at the point where they turn away from the wire and go through the wall. One hefty continuous, unbroken length of copper wire. There would still be voltage differentials involved because there is no escape from the inductances BUT . . . is my thinking in the right direction here? 73 Gary K4FMX w3rv |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gary Schafer wrote in message . ..
On 20 Nov 2004 17:59:12 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote: .. . . I'm one of those who pulls the coax off the tower at around eight feet and hangs it on a carrier wire from the tower to the outside wall near the shack. Theref are many installations like yours in existance. It was the "common way" to do it some years ago. Not the best though. In the past I've had end insulators at both ends of the carrier wire. Your point about grounding the coax at the base of the tower is well taken but is obviously not possible in these situations. It occurs to me that the same effect can be accomplished by connecting a #6 or #8 solid wire between the the coax shields where they bend away from the tower and the base of the tower. Yes? No that won't do much good. If you ground the coax shield to the tower where it bends away from the tower you will have a much better (lower inductance) to ground with the tower than what the wire would provide. The wire would do almost no good at all when compared to the much larger tower in parallel. Got it. Taking it a bit further it also occurs to me that the carrier wire could be connected to the base of the tower at the point where the tower connects to the ground rods there, then up the tower and connected to both the coax shields at the eight foot level and the tower again. Same as above. Grounding the carrier to the tower will do much more than a wire to the ground rods at the tower. The carrier wire should not be insulated from the tower. It and the coax should both be grounded to the tower at the exit point. Otherwise you can have flashover's to the carrier. OK, cancel useless wire from base of tower. Then horizontally to the house wall with the coax, then down to the ground rods just outside the shack to which the equipment is also grounded. I'd also connect the coax shields to the carrier wire again at the point where they turn away from the wire and go through the wall. One hefty continuous, unbroken length of copper wire. There would still be voltage differentials involved because there is no escape from the inductances BUT . . . is my thinking in the right direction here? Connecting the carrier wire to the coax again at the house is a good idea for the same reason you should connect it at the tower. to prevent flashovers to the cables. The same situation exist on the tower itself with lines running down. That is why they should be grounded to the tower at several points. Especially on a tall tower. OK again. The tower has inductance just like any piece of wire has. Although the tower inductance is less than just a length of wire it still has inductance. When lightning strikes the top, the tower and lines all share the current to ground. The farther up from ground you are the higher the voltage will be with respect to ground. I got that from your prior post. It can be significant. Especially on a smaller tower. It took a few seconds to get your point but yes, it's a matter of how far up the tower the coax departs the tower as a percentage of the tower height. Since I'm planning a short (35-40 foot tubular crankup) tower I'll have both a "high inductance tower" and a high pulloff level in terms of percentage. Not good no matter how one looks at it. Leaving the tower only a few feet above ground with your coax line is putting that line at some point above ground that can have high voltage. The best way is to run the lines all the way to the bottom of the tower, ground them there, and then run underground to the house to your ground rods. Don't forget to also run a ground lead from your house ground to your tower ground system too. That's a given. Bury it along with the cables. That will give you more contact with the earth as well as tying the grounds together. The wire will be there but I doubt that I'll be able to bury it. The whole (small) property is part of a forest of huge old hardwoods several of which are crowded close to the house particularly along the wall thru which I need to feed the coax. You'd have to see it to believe it and it's only six miles from City Hall Philadelphia. Digging a trench is not possible thru the tangle of roots on any approach from the tower to the wall. I'm not looking forward to driving ground rods thru this maze of underground lumber but I'll do it even if it takes some serious power drilling to accomplish. What I could do is run all the cables to the bottom of the tower with shield bonds at the top of the moving section, another one at the top of the fixed section, another bond halfway down fixed section and the last one at the bottom of the tower. Which will also be surrounded by trees. There's a hole below the canopy big enough to accomodate a Hexbeam or some similar very compact HF antenna if I spot the tower correctly. Some contractor is going to have a really bad time digging the hole for tower base. From the base of the tower I'll run the cables and the carrier wire horizontally on the surface for a few feet then back up to the eight foot level to a tree trunk. Six feet would also work and the rest of the run would be per previous. The good news is that the soil is eternally damp highly conductive dark loam . . Gary K4FMX Thanks Gary. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Brian Kelly" wrote Gary Schafer wrote No that won't do much good. If you ground the coax shield to the tower where it bends away from the tower you will have a much better (lower inductance) to ground with the tower than what the wire would provide. The wire would do almost no good at all when compared to the much larger tower in parallel. This is correct, and why I mentioned even 6" was "too much". It can be significant. Especially on a smaller tower. It took a few seconds to get your point but yes, it's a matter of how far up the tower the coax departs the tower as a percentage of the tower height. The last was not a correct assumption. The distance across a conductor (and in this case it is also the distance to ground) is what allows inductance to create deadly voltage potentials. Any conductor in series with a lightning strike will exhibit the same characteristics. 6" above ground near the base of a tower can translate to as much as 9800v above ground, with just modest assumptions of a very average return stroke current of 25Ka with a rise time of 40Ka/usec. It has no bearing whatsoever how tall or short the tower is. It's not long (or high above ground) before you could see over 100,000v potential develop where coax leaves any tower too soon. Bury it along with the cables. That will give you more contact with the earth as well as tying the grounds together. The wire will be there but I doubt that I'll be able to bury it. Burying a grounding electrode conductor is normally a code requirement. But that is not what you have in connecting the tower ground system to the station ground, AC mains ground, etc. Those are bonding conductors, and they are in many cases required to be insulated. Not in this case, but I want you to understand the difference between grounding, voltage division from many grounds, and a bonding conductor between your station and the tower. The latter is to maintain equipotential, and will not carry more than just equalizing currents. It will be well within the capability of a #6 insulated wire, should you choose to use that. Personally I would go a little larger but #6 is as largest that NEC or NFPA recommend for a bond in *most* cases. So burying the bonding conductor is not a requirement, although to protect it that is exactly what most facilities do. Neither will burying coax feedlines help in lightning protection, unless you are counting on them by design to be grounding electrode conductors! Pretty foolish but heh, if someone tosses feedlines out a window, they may as well short them to a ground rod and "bring it on". In that case any more than about 5,000v will breakdown the dialectric both inside and outside the coax, and anything nearby may be the next target before it ever reaches the ground rod. The good news is that the soil is eternally damp highly conductive dark loam . . Gary K4FMX That is very good news, and it makes your job easier. But good soil or poor soil, understanding what bonding provides is equally if not more important than having a ground rod at all. To rest on the laurels of highly conductive soil and ignore bonding, would be inviting disaster. Yes commercial tower design does require many shield "bonds" along the height of towers, but as I said, I applied a reasonable approach which the average short tower or mast-only owner could and would be likely to comply with - bonding at the top, bottom and station entrance. I suspect few go even that far. You may or may not be interested in all the surge protection diatribe in my website, but it's there because so many unfortunate souls were mislead in this area. I do think you might benefit from it's coverage of what bonding does to protect both you and your station, and it is a lot harder for most to get a hold of then simple mast or tower grounding. It doesn't have to be. http://members.cox.net/pc-usa/station/ground0.htm 73, Jack Painter Virginia Beach, VA |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:06:45 -0500, "Jack Painter"
wrote: "Brian Kelly" wrote Gary Schafer wrote No that won't do much good. If you ground the coax shield to the tower where it bends away from the tower you will have a much better (lower inductance) to ground with the tower than what the wire would provide. The wire would do almost no good at all when compared to the much larger tower in parallel. This is correct, and why I mentioned even 6" was "too much". It can be significant. Especially on a smaller tower. It took a few seconds to get your point but yes, it's a matter of how far up the tower the coax departs the tower as a percentage of the tower height. The last was not a correct assumption. The distance across a conductor (and in this case it is also the distance to ground) is what allows inductance to create deadly voltage potentials. Any conductor in series with a lightning strike will exhibit the same characteristics. 6" above ground near the base of a tower can translate to as much as 9800v above ground, with just modest assumptions of a very average return stroke current of 25Ka with a rise time of 40Ka/usec. It has no bearing whatsoever how tall or short the tower is. It's not long (or high above ground) before you could see over 100,000v potential develop where coax leaves any tower too soon. A little clarification here. When I said "smaller tower" I was not necessarily referring to a shorter tower but one that has less surface area. (smaller face) The main consideration is the distance up from ground that the cables leave the tower. A lightning strike is a constant current source. If it is a 20ka strike the voltage across whatever it hits is going to raise high enough to conduct 20ka. If you have a low impedance conductor (tower) the voltage developed across it will be less than it would be on a high impedance tower (smaller face tower). That is why large communication towers have less problems with lines coming off at higher points on the tower. More of the strike current makes it to ground via the tower with the larger surface it has. Leaving the tower at some height above ground with the cables is still a division of the voltage like a voltage divider. The higher up you are the higher the voltage you will see with respect to ground. But what determines what that actual voltage goes to is the amount of strike current and the amount of inductance between the cable exit point and ground. Of course the cables leaving the tower will also carry part of the current too. Bury it along with the cables. That will give you more contact with the earth as well as tying the grounds together. The wire will be there but I doubt that I'll be able to bury it. Burying a grounding electrode conductor is normally a code requirement. But that is not what you have in connecting the tower ground system to the station ground, AC mains ground, etc. Those are bonding conductors, and they are in many cases required to be insulated. Not in this case, but I want you to understand the difference between grounding, voltage division from many grounds, and a bonding conductor between your station and the tower. The latter is to maintain equipotential, and will not carry more than just equalizing currents. It will be well within the capability of a #6 insulated wire, should you choose to use that. Personally I would go a little larger but #6 is as largest that NEC or NFPA recommend for a bond in *most* cases. So burying the bonding conductor is not a requirement, although to protect it that is exactly what most facilities do. Neither will burying coax feedlines help in lightning protection, unless you are counting on them by design to be grounding electrode conductors! Pretty foolish but heh, if someone tosses feedlines out a window, they may as well short them to a ground rod and "bring it on". In that case any more than about 5,000v will breakdown the dialectric both inside and outside the coax, and anything nearby may be the next target before it ever reaches the ground rod. It doesn't matter what you want to call a ground conductor. The point here is if it can carry any lightning current you are much better off with it buried in the ground. A bare ground conductor making contact with the soil acts like additional ground rods. Why would you not want that? Burying coax feed lines will help with lightning protection. It greatly increases the inductance of the lines to lightning. It also helps to dissipate the energy to ground by the coupling provided. (ie you get less at the other end) You can't help but view them as "grounding electrode conductors" as you may want to call them. After all they are connected to the tower. They are going to carry lightning current if you want them to or not. Might as well let them dissipate part of the energy to earth. A large part of the lightning is RF. You have to treat it as such. A good lightning ground also makes a very good antenna ground system. ( buried radial system) Think in those terms. 73 Gary K4FMX The good news is that the soil is eternally damp highly conductive dark loam . . Gary K4FMX That is very good news, and it makes your job easier. But good soil or poor soil, understanding what bonding provides is equally if not more important than having a ground rod at all. To rest on the laurels of highly conductive soil and ignore bonding, would be inviting disaster. Yes commercial tower design does require many shield "bonds" along the height of towers, but as I said, I applied a reasonable approach which the average short tower or mast-only owner could and would be likely to comply with - bonding at the top, bottom and station entrance. I suspect few go even that far. You may or may not be interested in all the surge protection diatribe in my website, but it's there because so many unfortunate souls were mislead in this area. I do think you might benefit from it's coverage of what bonding does to protect both you and your station, and it is a lot harder for most to get a hold of then simple mast or tower grounding. It doesn't have to be. http://members.cox.net/pc-usa/station/ground0.htm 73, Jack Painter Virginia Beach, VA |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
Grounding Question | Antenna | |||
QST Article: An Easy to Build, Dual-Band Collinear Antenna | Antenna |