×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Cone Method Vs. Rolling Sphere Method

Cone Method Vs. Rolling Sphere Method

Cone Method Vs. Rolling Sphere Method

(OP)

Hello,

This question pertains to lightning protection in substation design. When running overhead static wires for lightning protection, when is the Rolling Sphere Method preferred or required instead of the easier Cone Method to determine lightning protection coverage?


Thanks

 

RE: Cone Method Vs. Rolling Sphere Method

The cone method is inadequate for high masts or shield wires because it does not take side strokes into consideration.  Applying the rolling sphere method to horizontal shield wires is not difficult.  See IEEE Std 998, IEEE Guide for Direct Lightning Stroke Shielding of Substations, which discusses both methods.
 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources