Panel Grounding vs. Lightning Rod Grounding

On Sep 24, 10:02=EF=BF=BDpm, "Russell Brill" wro= te:

=BDThose who learned

OH NO!!!!!!!!!!!

PAUL/TOM? IS THAT Y O U ????

Hey! you been on vacation or what?

Nope... I've been sooooo busy lately... When I'm home, I'm asleep or doing paperwork......... I hate paperwork......

Would this be the device that you are referring to, Robert?

Thanks Tom. Good stuff, in this as well as your other postings in this thread. I've also looked at your links.

Single point earth ground for power, telco, TV, CATV, etc., makes sense to me. However, I am still not clear re whether the lightning arrestor grounding rods, (RLBass's copper rods), are, or are not, supposed to be bonded together with the above single point house ground. What is your take?

BTW, to those who have indicated that this is not a prudent DIY project -- I agree fully. I'm just trying to learn enough to feel somewhat confident that the installation will be done correctly. Remember my pretty unusual location....

hey that's a good thing! ridiculously slow around there here parts :-(

RHC: Yes, that looks like the one....

I've used that one a few times. I was very impressed with the ease of installation. a well thought out niche product. One place I used one had been hit a couple of times that took out boards. Haven't heard back since, been yeeaars.

David,

I'm pretty sure the lightning arrestor ground is separate from the bonded ground for services entering the home. Remember that the lightning arrestor system is intended to divert a direct hit from the sky. The bonded ground system is intended to prevent flow of current from mearby earth strikes going esentially in one ground and out the other.

You're paying too much. I sell those retail for $22.00

Lightning arrestor is assumed to be a lightning rod or air terminal. Typically, Franklin rods are connected as short as practicable to dedicated earth ground rods and separated from the building earthing electrode. However, if connected to the building earthing electrode, that connection must be made right at the electrode.

Better is to interconnect that separate ground rod to the building's earthing electrode with a buried bare copper wire (that meets NEC requirements for size and depth).. Then any potential difference is minimized between that 'struck' lightning rod connection and things inside the walls. One problem with current on that lightning rod is that it may find a better path to earth via the building earthing electrode. Then lightning might arc into that other ground. However, if the ligthning rod electrode and building electrode share a buried common connection, then both electrodes are electrically more equal meaning lightning need not arc.

Also lightning rod wires should be routed, where possible, at least two feet away from any other conductor - wire, pipe, etc. This to also avoid arcing. Arcing is not just potentially destructive to building appliances. Arcing can also create fires.

So ..... what you're saying is ......... that even if you do all the things right, .............. regardless of the cost and the time that it takes ....... and assuming that your customer is going to pay you for all of these precautions, ...... and ....... even if you have the right conditions to be able to do all of this ...... and ..... that the electrician or other contractor doesn't come in behind you and change something ...... and .... you do it for every customer regardless if you can charge them for all this work or not and ............ you do all this whether they've ever had a lightning problem or not .......

it still doesn't make any difference if you ground an alarm panel or not because it could still get damaged by lightning.

Right?

In everyones life there are risks that are taken for the greater or lessor good. Consequences are paid accordingly. Being a safety zealot is idealy nice to look at. However, the consequences of thinking that everyone else should waste time and money for the relatively remote chance that their equipment is going to be hit by lightning, is not something people want to pay for. They'd rather take the risk. Especially since most reasonable defenses will only reduce the risk to some unknown level but not provide 100% protection.

What you don't want to hear: " I paid you $200.00 for lightning protection and the panel was destroyed anyway."

Therefore, it doesn't make any difference if a panel is grounded or not. People generally (both installer and end user) would rather take the R E M O T E risk.

Thank you so much everyone for your thoughts!! (I'm the OP). Your back-and-forth exchanges have given me a much better understanding of the essence of this matter!! Best regards, David

e OP). =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDYour

And that should be ....... that ...... it doesn't matter whether you ground a panel or not since you have no idea to what extent your home may be affected by a lightning strike. If you put $100.00 into lightning protection you will always know that you may get hit by the $120.00 lightning strike ....... and so on.

How much are you willing to spend, so that you can "think" that you will be protected ..... but never actually knowing if it's going to protect your equipment ..... or not?

Every panel I've seen lightning damaged had been "grounded". It really is a stupid argument anyway.

Grounded how? A panel grounded by a 'cross the basement' wire to a water pipe is ground for human safety but not ground for electronics safety. Reasons why have been explained previously. Once that concept is grasped, then can you tell us every panel has been grounded? No.

That also explains why some *assumed* the panel was grounded and yet still had damage.

For example, to protect a panel, which is critical? Wider (thicker or larger gauge) wire? Or shorter wire? Those who have learned this answer also know why so many homes do not have a sufficient earth ground. Shorter ground connection is the most critical parameter. Many grounds sufficient for human protection do not provide the necessary electronics protection.

Of course the difference between grounding for human protection verses grounding also for lightning protection is obvious? Grounds that meet code may be woefully insufficient for lightning protection.

For example, which is important for lightning protection? Thicker (heavier gauge) wire or shorter wire?

You still haven't answered the question

How many alarm panels have you had damaged by lightning.

I just want to see you say ....... none.

None. However that says little. Relevant question is whether a surge causes damage to anything. For example, in one location, a 33Kv wire dropped onto local distribution. Hundreds of electric meters were blown literally 30 feet distant from their pans. Who did not have any electronics damage? The homeowner who had proper earthing and one 'whole house' protector. Neighbors had damage to plug-in protectors and appliances connected to those protectors. GFCIs were often damaged where electric consumers did not have a proper earthing. Proper earthing even for the panel means nothing is damaged.

Does that say earthing is 100% effective? Obviously not. We don't know how good that earthing is when, for example, ground rods in sand are not sufficiently conductive (see that previous example). There is no complete testing for earthing. At best, do what typically is known effective, wait for lightning to find those human mistakes, then learn and correct what caused damage. Damage to electronics is directly traceable to human failure.

For example, if the earthing wire has sharp bends, is 40 feet long, or connects to different earth grounds, then earthing (sufficient for an electrician) may only make panel damage possible.

Others have said the panel was grounded and still damaged. Well, was the panel grounded to only meet an electrician's standard? Or was it grounded to also make surges irrelevant?

What is the test of better grounding? Surges cause damage in neighborhood homes but do not damage a protected home's clock radio, furnace, smoke detector, and dishwasher. Even an undamaged panel is not sufficient. Sufficient earthing means nothing inside a home is damaged. When damage occurs, the study begins by learning how a surge obtained earth ground, destructively, through damaged electronics.

Any ground that only meets pre-1990 code means grounding is insufficient. Ground must meet 'and exceed' post 1990 code. No way around fundamental knowledge that was even understood 100 years ago.