Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 32 replies
  • Subscribers 33 subscribers
  • Views 4643 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Lightning electrodes

lyledunn

A relatively small parish church has 8 down conductors connected to rod electrodes. Each electrode measured separately ranged from 215 ohms to 12 ohms with the overall value being around 8 ohms. Now I am aware that the overall value should be less than 10 and that each individual electrode should be no more than 8x10. We have one at 215 and one at 135, the others meeting that requirement. It is easy for me to advise that the system does not meet code but I do not have the expertise to assess the implications of the situation. I would appreciate your opinion. 

Parents
  • 0

    The biggest implication is probably the insurance cover. Assuming that, as it is a parish church, it is Ecclesiastical Insurance, I believe that they require the lightning conductors to be tested every three years and a report issued to show it is being maintained in a satisfactory condition. If this is not the case (i.e. no report or not maintained satisfactorily) then the insurance may not cover damage caused by a strike. As the code (I assume you mean the published BS EN) is used to define ‘satisfactory’ then if it doesn't meet the code the insurance is questionable.

    I am guessing that the ‘small parish church’ refers not only to the size of the building but the size of their finances also and that you are trying to keep the cost to a minimum for them. While this is commendable, if there were to be a lightning strike and then problems with the insurance you wouldn't have done them any favours so replacing the dubious electrodes is probably the best option. Also remember that they only get worse, and so proving that they will probably still protect the church today doesn't mean that there will be the same level of protection one year down the line.

Reply
  • 0

    The biggest implication is probably the insurance cover. Assuming that, as it is a parish church, it is Ecclesiastical Insurance, I believe that they require the lightning conductors to be tested every three years and a report issued to show it is being maintained in a satisfactory condition. If this is not the case (i.e. no report or not maintained satisfactorily) then the insurance may not cover damage caused by a strike. As the code (I assume you mean the published BS EN) is used to define ‘satisfactory’ then if it doesn't meet the code the insurance is questionable.

    I am guessing that the ‘small parish church’ refers not only to the size of the building but the size of their finances also and that you are trying to keep the cost to a minimum for them. While this is commendable, if there were to be a lightning strike and then problems with the insurance you wouldn't have done them any favours so replacing the dubious electrodes is probably the best option. Also remember that they only get worse, and so proving that they will probably still protect the church today doesn't mean that there will be the same level of protection one year down the line.

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines