Hello All,
With all this talk about spider balls, can someone
please tell me how many male spiders I would have to
catch in order for me to make one of these things????
Thanks for any info and 73, Ted K2QMF
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:19:26 -0400 "W4ZW" <w4zw@comcast.net> writes:
>
> Jim Lux wrote:
>
> It seems that the manufacturers of the dissipators are legally very
> aggressive, having threatened lawsuits against IEEE and NFPA, among
> others.
> This prompted a more thorough than usual review of the IEEE paper
> (by
> Mousa... google for Mousa and Lightning... it will turn up).
> Interestingly,
> Mousa does say that the dissipators can have a beneficial effect on
> a
> certain class of discharges, but actually makes another kind worse,
> and,
> overall, that you're better off with a well designed conventional
> system.
> Also, for what it's worth, the special class of discharges
> apparently cannot
> occur when the thing being discharged is less than 300 meters tall.
>
>
> The mfr of the dissipator tried to get a NFPA standard for the
> dissipators
> (as opposed to the existing NPFA 780 lightning rod standards), and
> when a
> huge number (probably every lightning expert in the world) of very
> knowledgable people, backed up by extensive research, said that the
> proposed
> standard was, in short, "bunk".
>
> ----------------------
>
> And here's the rest of this story:
>
> The controversy over the dissipation theory of operation still
> rages.
>
> Jim chose this example, but it is a good demonstration of how
> difficult it
> is to realize a consensus
> of experts concerning lightning theory.
>
> In 1993 the NFPA (National Fire Protection Association-the authority
> in the
> US concerning
> wiring codes) declined to approve proposed NFPA 781, which would
> have
> set Early Streamer Emission standards for a controversial "improved"
>
> type of air terminal (spiderballs), and presumably given the ESE
> industry a shot in the arm. ESE makers sued, claiming NFPA 781 had
> just
> as much scientific backing as NFPA 780. In a settlement the NFPA
> agreed
> to have ESE technology reevaluated by an outside panel.
>
> The panel confirmed that there was no scientific basis for NFPA 781.
> But it
> also
> said there's no scientific basis for NFPA 780 (traditional lightning
> rods)
> either.
>
> Go figure.
>
>
> Jon Hamlet, W4ZW
>
> Casey Key Island, FL
> "A little piece of paradise in the Gulf of Mexico"
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers",
> "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free,
> 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
>
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|