Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Cushcraft Lightning Arrestor

To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Cushcraft Lightning Arrestor
From: aa0cy@nwrain.com (Bob Wanderer)
Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 08:22:49 -0700
You are correct regarding there being energy into the 
gigahertz range existing due to quick rise times (usually 2 us).
ENERGY at dc is the MAJOR component, however.
Perhaps DAMAGING ENERGY would be more appropriate a description.

73,
Bob AA0CY

----------
From:  David Robbins[SMTP:k1ttt@berkshire.net]
Sent:  Friday, May 08, 1998 4:54 PM
To:  Bob Wanderer
Cc:  'Tom Rauch'; 'Tower Reflector'
Subject:  Re: [TowerTalk] Cushcraft Lightning Arrestor

Bob Wanderer wrote:
> 
> Yes.
> Most of the energy in a lightning strike is at dc and that's what causes the
> bulk of the damage. By dc blocking (which was a patent held by the PolyPhaser

WRONG!  unless you consider a rise time from zero to maybe tens of
thousand of 
amps in a couple microseconds DC.

DC blocking would only help in blocking a slow build up of static such
as 
occurs before a lightning stroke or under a cloud that is charged but
not
enough to initiate a stroke.  these voltages can reach high enough to
damage
equipment and would be removed by a DC block, but not a lightning
stroke.


-- 
David Robbins K1TTT (ex KY1H)
k1ttt@berkshire.net   or   robbins@berkshire.net
http://www.berkshire.net/~robbins/k1ttt.html



--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Submissions:              towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-towertalk@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>