Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
0
PROBLEMS AND SOLUTION OF UTILIZING
THE PROTECTION ANGLE METHOD
Prof. Tibor Horvath
1018 - 1
air-termination system became dominant, which did not
need the protection angle method. Other countries used
several types of air-termination rods, which involve the
application of the protection angle. This caused no
problem at the edge of roof; however, special solution has
to be found in the area among several rods. While different
angle can be used in zones inside and outside of earth
wires, these zones cannot be defined at 3D structures. The
rolling sphere method gave finally a method to solve this
difficulty.
3.1. Principle of balancing areas Figure. 2. The protection angle plotted against the height,
The development turned to a false way concerning the according to IEC 62305-3 standard.
protection angle method at the end of the 20th century.
3.2. Problems with the standardized values of
This was caused by an idea, which tried to define a
protection angle
protection angle equivalent to a rolling sphere of given
radius. The first origin of this idea could not be found, but The application of the diagram in Fig. 2 also produces
many publications, papers and books referred to it [6]. interesting contradictions, apart from the fact that it totally
devoid any rational basis [7], [8].
According to the diagram, the protection angle moves
from 23° to 70°–79° in function of the height above an
undefined reference plane. In contrast, the experience
supports only acceptable protection angles under 45°
decreasing with the height (see Table 2). Nothing has
proved the efficiency of protection angles greater than 70°,
which also may be applied according to the diagram.
1018 - 2
procedure always results in the smallest protected area on 3.3. Horizontal extension of protected area in function
the ground produced by the highest air-termination mast, of the height above the ground
as demonstrated by Table 3. Such values could not be
The IEC 62305-3 standard contains only the diagram
accepted as rational results!
reproduced in Fig. 2 here. This doesn’t give any overview
Table 3. Calculated results of the protection angle method about the horizontal extension of the protected area. Fig 4
according to the international standard shows the construction method around a mast of 60 m that
defines this extension at some reference planes.
Height Class of LPS
Figure 4 shows the construction relating to a 60 m high
of mast I II III IV
air-termination mast. This value determines the position of
m Protection angle
the tip of the air-termination above the ground. When the
60 – – – 23,23°
45 – – 23,23° 33,78°
reference plane is in 50 m above the ground, the physical
30 – 23,23° 37,45° 45,21° height of the air-termination is 10 m above the roof. Using
20 23,23° 37,45° 47,98° 53,97° the diagram of standard IEC 62305-3 below Table 2 (here
m Radius of protected area on the ground (m) in Fig.2), the previous conditions determine 64,87° as
60 – – – 25,75 protection angle. Assuming the reference plane in 30 m
45 – – 19,31 30,11 above the ground, the height of the air-termination is also
30 – 12,88 22,98 30,22 30 m above the roof. The protection angle is 45,21°
20 8,58 15,32 22,20 27,49 according to the diagram. Relating to the ground level, the
protection angle decreases to 23,23°.
Here and later in this paper, the protection angles are Figure 5 shows the shapes of the protected areas in a
always calculated on the base of the principle shown by vertical plane that turns around the air-termination rods or
Fig. 1. This is necessary because precise values cannot be masts. Their heights are 20 m, 30 m 45 m and 60 m above
read from the diagram printed in IEC 62305-3 standard the ground. Figure 4 and Figure 5 mark with red arrows
and reproduced in Fig. 2. At the end of this paper, the the points, which belong together. Both Figures are related
Annex gives a better diagram for this purpose. the Class IV of Lightning Protection System. Figure 5
It is astonishing that these contradictions have never exactly corresponds to IEC 62305-3 standard; although, it
been recognized though the diagram of Fig. 2 has been is an unusual interpretation of changing the standardized
known for twenty years at least. It has been probably protection angles.
referred many times, without using it in the practice before
that it was standardized.
1018 - 3
Figure 7. The shapes of the protected areas in a vertical plane
that turns around the air-termination rods or masts of Class II.
1018 - 4
4. HOW TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS? constant angle of 15°, but its width is limited to one tenth
of the sphere radius on the lower part. This is illustrated on
There is a question: Should be generally omitted the
Fig. 10 to right with enlarged scale. The green marked part
application of protection angle method for 3D structures or
represents an additional protected volume due to the
what is its proper application? The protection angle
protection angle method, which would not taken protected
method causes much difficulty in many cases, when the
according to the rolling sphere. It is important for the
rolling sphere method offers a proper solution. Therefore,
practice, because the air-termination components should
introducing another method would be inexpedient beside
be installed exactly above the edge of roof without this
the rolling sphere method. However, the application of
additional part of the protected volume. Referring to the
rolling sphere method also could cause problems, when
experience with EHV lines, an air-termination presumably
the height of a structure is similar to the radius of the
produces a sufficient protection for the edge under the
rolling sphere.
angle of 15°. This protection extends over the small
4.1. When no side flashes have to be expected protrusions on lateral sides too. In contrast, the limited
width aims to prevent an unreasonable extension of the
In this case the air-termination elements should be protection volume against the rolling sphere method.
posed exactly above the edge of roof, which corresponds Thought, the protection angle is independent of the Class
to protection angle of zero grad. However, a small of LPS, the limited width depends on that.
protection angle could be accepted above the previously When the height of structure exceeds the radius of
mentioned height up to the height, above which side rolling sphere, Fig. 11 illustrates how the protection angle
flashes have to be expected (e.g. 60 m). Depending from a method supplements the protected volume with the green
decision in the future, this angle could be either constant marked components. The protection angle method is
or decreasing as a function of height. This should be based suitable until the structure reaches the height (marked 1),
on the experience obtained with long time operation of above that side flashes should be expected. According to
transmission lines [5]. the standard this begins at the height of 60 m. The
The following proposal assumed 15° as constant value influence of several Classes of LPS is also demonstrated.
of the protection angle. Number 2 marks the additional part of protected volume,
Fig. 10 illustrates the principle of this method, if the which allows shifting the air-termination from the edge
height of air-termination is equal to the radius of rolling towards inside of roof. Number 3 marks that part, which
sphere, with consideration of Class IV of LPS. The upper can be used for protection of small protrusions on the side
part of the protected volume is determined with the of structure.
Figure 10. Construction of protected volume with the protection angle method,
when the height is equal to the radius of sphere
1018 - 5
Figure 11. Application of protection angle method, when the height of air-termination is 60 m.
1. Tip of air-termination; 2. Protection volume due to the protection angle; 3. Protection volume with limited width.
4.2. When side flashes have to be expected The air- termination system should be constructed for
the roof and the exposed lateral surface only with the
The protection angle method cannot be used on lateral
rolling sphere or the mesh method.
surface exposed to side flashes. According to IEC 62305-3
standard this is above the 80% height of structure. 5. CONCLUSIONS
However, all lateral surfaces are always exposed above the
height of 120 m. Utilizing the protection angle method according to the
IEC 62305-3 standard causes difficult problems in the
practice during the construction of air termination systems
in the case of 3D structures. This is the consequence of the
false idea of balancing areas, which has no physical basis
and leads to contradictions and irrational results. The
application of this idea came to an impasse; therefore, the
standardized form of the protection angle method should
be omitted.
In contrast, the protection angle has been successfully
used in operation of high voltage transmission lines since a
century. This long time experience gives a base for
estimating the suitable values of the protection angle, if it
is necessary. However, the protection angle is principally
connected to the transmission lines.
In the case of 3D structures, the air-termination system
can be constructed without any problem with the rolling
sphere method, while the height of the structure is smaller
than the radius of sphere. Therefore, it would be redundant
Figure 12. Protection angle at tall structure considering
to create a complicated method for using the protection
the exposition to side flash
angle beside the rolling sphere for the same purpose. Two
Red line marks such a surface in Fig. 12. If at bottom of different methods could conclude to contrary results that
this section (at 80 m above the ground) a protruding would be unfeasible.
horizontal conductor is installed on the wall, this produces Nevertheless, the rolling sphere method involves
the green marked protected volume according to the problems, when the height of air-termination is equal or
proposed protection angle method. Installing a similar higher than the radius of sphere. In this case, the
conductor at 60 m, the protection extends onto low protection angle method would be a useful supplementary
structures in the neighborhoods according to the rolling means for designing air termination of structures.
sphere method.
1018 - 6
6. REFERENCES
[6] P. Hasse, J. Wieseinger, “Handbuch für Blitzschutz und
[1] A. Schwaiger, “Der Schutzbereich von Blitzableitern.” Erdung.” 3 th edition. Pflaum Verlag, München; VDE-
Oldenbourg Verlag, München, 1938. Verlag, Berlin. 1989.
[2] D. Müller Hillebrand, “Probleme der Gewiterforschung [7] P. Hasse, “Overvoltage protection of low voltage
und des Blitzschutzes.” Elektrotechnische Zeitschrift – systems”. The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London.
ETZ-B, Vol. 16, Pp. 9-10,1964. 2000.
[3] F. S. Young, J. M. Clayton, A. R. Hileman, “Shielding of [8] T. Horváth, “Standardization of lightning protection based
transmission lines” Trans. of IIIE, Power Apparatus and on the physics or on the tradition?” Journal of
Systems, Vol. 82, Pp. 132-154.,1963. Electrostatics. Vol.60, Pp. 265-275, 2004.
[4] G. W. Brown, E. R. Whitehead, “Field and analytical [9] T. Horváth, “Problems with application of the protection
studies of transmission lines shielding.” Trans. AIEE, Vol. angle method at three-dimensional structures.”
88, Pp. 614-626, 1969. 29th International Conference on Lightning Protection,
[5] R. H. Golde, “Lightning protection.” Edward Arnold Paper 4-5, Uppsala, Sweden, June 2008.
Press, London, 1973.
ANNEX
The value of the protection angle can be calculated as function of the height of air-termination above the surface to be
protected, on the base of principle of balancing areas (see 3.1 section). Using a computer, a more precise diagram can be
produced than that is in IEC 62305-3 standard at Table 2 (reproduced here as Figure 2). This diagram is shown below that
makes possible to read such values of the protection angles, which are similar to the calculated ones citied in the paper.
1018 - 7