On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 16:05:10 -0500, w_tom wrote:

If Ufer grounds were so destructive, then why does "your"
tower talk even recommend them? You could not even cite
appropriate posts in 'tower talk'. Funny. I provided
citations from 'tower talk' that says you posted technical
inaccurate information.

First you deny that earthing is essential for protection.
Then you openly admit lightning caused "lost 2 TV sets, 1
computer, my router and wireless access point". Classic
damage when all incoming lines are not properly earthed. You
have a serious earthing problem in your own home. Instead you
cite your own improperly earthed home as proof that earthing
is not essential to lightning protection; that no protection
is possible. That TV and computer damage is classic when
incoming wires - antenna and utility - are not properly
earthed.

I asked you how I could have prevented my Cat5 from picking up induced
voltage, but you somehow avoided that question again. My antenna and
utillities are properly earthed. How do you earth a Cat5 cable? Do
you know what one is?


Yes there is more to protection that just earthing.

Exactly what we have been telling you. But some how you want to
ignore what others have posted.

Some
incoming utilities require more than just earthing. However
without earthing, then no protection exists. Earthing is
required at the OPs antenna mast AND on wire as it enters
building - the ground block. Earthing is THE first item - the
most essential - installed for lightning protection.
'System' installed using concepts in "The Need for
Coordinated Protection":
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf

No earth ground means no effective lightning (or static)
protection. Earthing also required by the National Electrical
Code - for human safety reasons. The answer to zeeeeeeee3's
original questions: earthing is required at both that antenna
mast AND at the common service entrance so that all incoming
wires first connect to the single point earth ground. Driving
the mast into earth is not a sufficient earth ground.

Are you repeating this for your benefit? If you want to argue with
yourself, feel free.


Lancer demonstrates what happens when a poorly earthed home
suffers a lightning strike - unnecessary damage to computer
and TV. He even denies the effectiveness or need for
earthing. That's fine. What is not fine is when Lancer
outrightly lies to others about benefits of single point earth
ground.

You put words in Franks mouth, now you are attempting do that with me.
I never denied the effectiveness of earthing, I stated and will state
it again, sometimes that isn't enough.


For the OP's original question: system demonstrated here
applies:

http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf

Additional products that can utilize advantage of the
essential earthing system are offered at Erico, from
Polyphaser, and even in Home Depot. 'Whole house' protector
is also required on other incoming wires. But the bottom line
remains - lightning (and static) protection is only as
effective as its earth ground.

Thought you said Static is irrelevant. A few hundred volts of static
will not damage any properly built radio. You could even static
shock your car radio antenna or a portable radio antenna
without damage. That would be as much as 18,000 volts - and
still no damage.




Earthing is not a total solution. However it is the answer
to OP's original question. No earthing means no protection
exists and a violation of NEC. Earthing is that essential.

No one has said any different. Glad that you admit earthing is not
the total solution, something I have maintained all along.


In the meantime, even 'tower talk' demonstrates why single
point earth ground (service entrance earth ground) and why
Ufer grounds are so effective. A preferred earthing solution
where people first learn facts before posting denials - and
more information for the OP's original question.


Great, why don't you do that, and get over the idea that earthing is
not the total and complete solution.