naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Lightning

Subject: Lightning
From: tony baylis <>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 01:03:38 -0700 (PDT)
I have always assumed lightning came down but reading
here suggests that it might be the other way.  Anyone
care to be definitive?

--- Marty Michener <> wrote:
> At 04:39 PM 7/10/02 -0400, Walt wrote:
> >My theory is that the power surge that came in was
> riding on only one
> >leg of the power. And the SCSI card got caught in
> the middle and that
> >was how it all got into my computer. Also caught in
> the middle was the
> >ethernet lan. My computer lost the transmit side of
> it's ethernet, the
> >others lost the receive. It's not clear if the
> phone line surge was
> >internal to the house from this difference, or a
> separate surge that
> >came in from outside via the phone line. It's only
> damage was fried 
> >suppressers.
> 
> Walt - what a terrible time you have been having -
> my hopes for speedy 
> resolution go out to you and the troubled lan.  It
> makes you wonder when 
> you read about Electro-Magnetic Pulse terrorism, if
> it ain't already here. ;=D
> 
> I want to make a point about the weird combination
> of factors involved in 
> lightening.  I made quite a study of it many years
> ago, since the effects 
> sometimes seem quite bizarre and hard to understand.
>  I was constructing a 
> fifty foot pipe tower for anchoring one end of my 40
> meter ham antenna ca. 
> 1955, and was required to understand a lot about
> lightening by my father as 
> a pre-requisite.  I would NOT say I am an expert,
> only that I am more and 
> more amazed as I continue to learn.  I guess we all
> need Faraday shields 
> for homes these days.
> 
> There are effects that can be labelled mainly
> capacitative - voltage peaks 
> across insulators, effectively, and those that can
> be considered inductive 
> - magnetic fields inducing currents in parallel
> inductor systems, caused by 
> the very rapid change in current (di/dt).  These
> induced effects are the 
> most poorly appreciated by most of us, since they
> occur in seemingly 
> disconnected systems.  The rate of change in
> current, di/dt is one of the 
> most spectacular facts of ordinary lightening - the
> process happens so fast 
> that two turns of a wire loop can become a huge
> inductive mass, and the 
> voltage across such a coil become so high as to make
> the current jump as a 
> spark through the air, rather than "take the time"
> to pass through the 
> small two turn coil.  Many arrestors work by
> allowing a short gap shunt to 
> direct ground.
> 
> Of course they tell you lightening travels from the
> ground up into the sky, 
> not the reverse the way is popularly assumed.  I'm
> not sure there even IS a 
> difference, here, but ok. ;^)
> 
> But that is the easy stuff.  Induced amps in
> parallel conductors is the 
> hard one.  I have seen, here in Hollis, a plumbing
> system, dredged 
> postmortem from a well, where the iron pipe was so
> twisted it was almost 
> tied in knots by the force of a nearby bolt.  As
> nearly as we could tell, 
> the lightening current started concentrating in the
> deep bedrock aquifer, 
> travelled up the well casing thence to the pipe
> toward the house, jumped 
> somewhere in the yard to an oak root, travelled up
> the chestnut oak, 
> bursting it from the heat and steam (covering one
> side of the house with 
> its bark and wood fibres as if it had been
> spray-painted onto the siding) 
> and emerged from the leafy top to appear as a bolt
> in the sky.  Needless to 
> say, the well-submersible pump was fried, and it all
> required re-wiring 
> from the basement to the well.  The house, except
> for the pulp-blasted 
> exterior, was spared in this case. No computers
> around to test, but lots of 
> blown circuit breakers.
> 
> So I have come to look, in cases of near bolts, for
> indications of ground 
> potential itself having been shifted radically.  And
> this is the way I 
> would surmise your two-leg problem.  The problem
> with saying the bolt came 
> in primarily on one leg is that lightening energy is
> so rapid it will 
> hardly go around any corners, like ordinary house
> wiring, because of the 
> high inductive impedance at that high a frequency of
> a simple "U" in the 
> wire.  I think we need those ferrite anti-rf blocks
> around all wire and 
> cable leads entering our domains.  You can assume
> the "ground" itself moved 
> toward one leg and away from the other leg, or that
> the two ground 
> locations became momentarily separated by many, many
> volts.  I also suggest 
> that the surge that killed the lan was induced,
> rather than conducted, but 
> this would be hard to do physically if it is either
> twisted pair or coax.
> 
> I am afraid I have more questions than suggestions,
> but, really, Walt, as 
> in all things,  I do marvel at your patience.
> 
> my very best,
> 
> Marty Michener
> MIST Software Associates
> PO Box 269, Hollis, NH 03049
> 
> 
> coming soon : EnjoyBirds, bird identification
> software for all AOU area.
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

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

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU