Counterpoise vs triode
- Thread starter bwyllie
- Start date
- Status
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
It was in a peer review of some design documents, the engineer stated he would prefer to use the counterpoise grounding method in lieu of the triode because it would be an easier connection to the lightning system as well as easier to install.
It was in a peer review of some design documents, the engineer stated he would prefer to use the counterpoise grounding method in lieu of the triode because it would be an easier connection to the lightning system as well as easier to install.
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
I used the triode configuration for my Ham radio station, years ago.
The triode is buried tuned radials arranged in a star. This is for a wider bandwidth.
A counterpoise is a half wave length buried radial.
I don't know how this ground concept is used in lightning systems.
I used the triode configuration for my Ham radio station, years ago.
The triode is buried tuned radials arranged in a star. This is for a wider bandwidth.
A counterpoise is a half wave length buried radial.
I don't know how this ground concept is used in lightning systems.
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
These electrodes are designed to deal with the capacitance coupling between the electrode and the dirt. This coupling changes with a change in frequency.
60 Hertz systems are not as sensitive to capacity changes.
The building ground should be the common method, as indicated in the NEC.
These electrodes are designed to deal with the capacitance coupling between the electrode and the dirt. This coupling changes with a change in frequency.
60 Hertz systems are not as sensitive to capacity changes.
The building ground should be the common method, as indicated in the NEC.
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
I found some of my old papers. A triode for building ground is three rods over ten feet apart, bonded together, and installed at each building corner.
A counterpoise ground is a ground ring, with multiple rods.
The applied math indicates the triode is of lower impedance, but that is dependant on soil conditions.
I found some of my old papers. A triode for building ground is three rods over ten feet apart, bonded together, and installed at each building corner.
A counterpoise ground is a ground ring, with multiple rods.
The applied math indicates the triode is of lower impedance, but that is dependant on soil conditions.
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
thanks for the info, it is our company standars to use the triode method, not sure why, but I am trying to figure that out. Someone had mentioned that the current can't make it around a 90 degree turn in the ground ring, or something like that.
thanks for the info, it is our company standars to use the triode method, not sure why, but I am trying to figure that out. Someone had mentioned that the current can't make it around a 90 degree turn in the ground ring, or something like that.
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
When only 60 Hertz is involved, I would think the rebar would make a good earth connection.
When other frequencies are involved then an engineered grounding system is in order.
A grounding system for lightning dissipation should be designed to compensate for how much the capacitance coupling increases the impedance.
When only 60 Hertz is involved, I would think the rebar would make a good earth connection.
When other frequencies are involved then an engineered grounding system is in order.
A grounding system for lightning dissipation should be designed to compensate for how much the capacitance coupling increases the impedance.
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
Counterpoise is one of those definitions that should be avoided because it has no single definition. Typically it is a radio term: "Counterpoise, a conductor or system of conductors used as a substitute for earth or ground in antenna systems".
Triode doesn't make much since either. Triode is a electron tube with a anode, cathode, and controlling grid.
"Ground Rings" and "Grids" are the simplest and most effective ground electrodes to connect lightning down conductors too.
In a high rise building, the usual method of lightning protection is just simply the structural steel framework or rebar that the building is made of. It forms a faraday cage surrounding and protecting the contents inside, and discharges lightning into the foundation much like a Ufer ground.
Are you possible referring to a "Triad" or "Tri-Pod"? That is a system of three rods layed in a triangle pattern.
[ March 06, 2004, 08:01 PM: Message edited by: dereckbc ]
Counterpoise is one of those definitions that should be avoided because it has no single definition. Typically it is a radio term: "Counterpoise, a conductor or system of conductors used as a substitute for earth or ground in antenna systems".
Triode doesn't make much since either. Triode is a electron tube with a anode, cathode, and controlling grid.
"Ground Rings" and "Grids" are the simplest and most effective ground electrodes to connect lightning down conductors too.
In a high rise building, the usual method of lightning protection is just simply the structural steel framework or rebar that the building is made of. It forms a faraday cage surrounding and protecting the contents inside, and discharges lightning into the foundation much like a Ufer ground.
Are you possible referring to a "Triad" or "Tri-Pod"? That is a system of three rods layed in a triangle pattern.
[ March 06, 2004, 08:01 PM: Message edited by: dereckbc ]
hurk27
Senior Member
- Location
- Portage, Indiana NEC: 2008
Re: Counterpoise vs triode
Here is a good site on the subject:
National Lightning Safety Institute
Just do a search on there site. There is much infomation and a lot of it is good to know.
This is what I could find on there site about a counterpoise:
Here is a good site on the subject:
National Lightning Safety Institute
Just do a search on there site. There is much infomation and a lot of it is good to know.
This is what I could find on there site about a counterpoise:
- Status