Starlink (Satellite internet) Lightning protection

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gerry_G

Member
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Occupation
Electrical Engineer (retired)
Starlink Services (rural, VERY HIGH SPEED, satellite internet, in the US and 17+ other countries so far) only supplies a phased array antenna dish with a custom 100' shielded Ethernet cable permanently attached. The antennas are usually mounted high, on a high mast or tower. The antenna is very uniquely, not what most are accustomed to with satellite internet. The phased array needs a fairly wide view of the sky since the satellites are not stationary and the phased array switches what satellite it "talks to" very frequently. The custom cable also needs to supply ~100 W to the antenna. Standard Ethernet cable can't handle that power level @ 56 V.

They only support running that cable into a building with no lightning protection, not even grounding/bonding the shield at the building entrance. There are reports of lightning strikes destroying (literally blowing apart) the power supply inside the house and disintegrating the custom cable to the antenna. The only "ground" is inside the building at the power injector. The only ground is via the 3 prong 15 A power supply cord.

This appears to be very dangerous, folks are mounting the antennas high, thus prone to attracting lightning.

Their minimal FAQ https://www.starlink.com/faq contains:

"Starlink meets the U.S. National Electrical Code (NEC) grounding requirements and includes the necessary lightning protection. However, any user who lives in an area with lightning should have the appropriate lightning protection installed in accordance with your local electrical code prior to using Starlink." (bold my emphasis).

However, their support replies to never cut the or extend the supplied cable, thus one can't even ground the shield at the building entrance. Also, being non standard cable, one can't even use an available CAT 5e/6 protection unit at the building entrance.

I don't believe Starlink's configuration meets the NEC re lighting protection.

Am I correct, if so, any suggestions?
 
I think if a lighting strike puts enough current through the cable to the antenna that it disintegrates, then I doubt anything further down the cable would protect the cable itself. Perhaps it might protect the downstream equipment, but I think even that's very questionable with that big of a strike. And it would offer little if any protection to the phased array antenna itself which is a costly part of the system.
Normally having something like an antenna tower that 's nearby and higher than the antenna could offer some level of protection. However you wouldn't want it to block the view of the Starlink antenna significantly.
 
My concern was not protecting the outdoor equipment, rather house fire protection. The only supported configuration requires the antenna cable to enter the house with no protection.
 
Gerry_G said:
My concern was not protecting the outdoor equipment, rather house fire protection. The only supported configuration requires the antenna cable to enter the house with no protection.
Click to expand...
Which is clearly a violation of the requirements found in 810.20.
 
The General Electrical Forum might be a better place for this than the lighting (not lightning) forum, if you can move it.

>My concern was not protecting the outdoor equipment, rather house fire protection.
Your concern is valid.

I have three customers who have amateur (ham) radio licenses. All of them have antennas that are taller then other nearby objects (house and trees).
The shields of all of the coaxial cables are bonded and grounded where they enter the building. Surge suppressors are installed on the coaxial cable and the antenna rotator control cables. This ground system is bonded to the building electrical ground system, at the service entrance.

The shield for the Starlink cable should be grounded where it enters the building. Starlink needs to get their act together on this.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Which is clearly a violation of the requirements found in 810.20.
Click to expand...
810 is for Radio and TV antennas, I'm not sure that covers this. 810.20 is for receive antennas, the Starlink antenna receives and transmits.
830 and 840 are close, but don't really cover this.
 
I reported I put it in the wrong place, it has been moved. I missed an "n" in the topics. Lightning vs Lighting :-(
 
Last edited:
robertd said:
The General Electrical Forum might be a better place for this than the lighting (not lightning) forum, if you can move it.

>My concern was not protecting the outdoor equipment, rather house fire protection.
Your concern is valid.

I have three customers who have amateur (ham) radio licenses. All of them have antennas that are taller then other nearby objects (house and trees).
The shields of all of the coaxial cables are bonded and grounded where they enter the building. Surge suppressors are installed on the coaxial cable and the antenna rotator control cables. This ground system is bonded to the building electrical ground system, at the service entrance.

The shield for the Starlink cable should be grounded where it enters the building. Starlink needs to get their act together on this.
Click to expand...
I am an ham with a tall tower. It's topped with a DC grounded VHF antenna and is at least 35' higher than anything else nearby. All is properly grounded and bonded. As I understand it, all cables must have protection independent of relative height of the antenna.
 
robertd said:
810 is for Radio and TV antennas, I'm not sure that covers this. 810.20 is for receive antennas, the Starlink antenna receives and transmits.
830 and 840 are close, but don't really cover this.
Click to expand...
810 applies to all antenna systems and a satellite systems have an antenna system. A PI that was accepted at the First Draft meeting is changing the title of Article 810 to "Antenna System" to match up with the scope. That is unofficial at this time, but the First Revision Report will be published on July 7th with the official results of the action on PI 2780.

Even though it transmits, it still receives and it remains my opinion that 810.20 applies.
 
robertd said:
The General Electrical Forum might be a better place for this than the lighting (not lightning) forum, if you can move it.

>My concern was not protecting the outdoor equipment, rather house fire protection.
Your concern is valid.

I have three customers who have amateur (ham) radio licenses. All of them have antennas that are taller then other nearby objects (house and trees).
The shields of all of the coaxial cables are bonded and grounded where they enter the building. Surge suppressors are installed on the coaxial cable and the antenna rotator control cables. This ground system is bonded to the building electrical ground system, at the service entrance.

The shield for the Starlink cable should be grounded where it enters the building. Starlink needs to get their act together on this.
Click to expand...
I'm a ham and do exactly what you described.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
810 applies to all antenna systems and a satellite systems have an antenna system. A PI that was accepted at the First Draft meeting is changing the title of Article 810 to "Antenna System" to match up with the scope. That is unofficial at this time, but the First Revision Report will be published on July 7th with the official results of the action on PI 2780.

Even though it transmits, it still receives and it remains my opinion that 810.20 applies.
Click to expand...
I agree that it makes sense to change the title of Article 810 as you say. Although 810.1 says the article covers antenna systems, it has dated wording that I believe unnecessarily limits its scope. For example, it's not clear that it covers systems that have a complete transceiver like the Starlink unit (and not just a downconverter) at the antenna location. As the OP mentioned, the cable carries Ethernet data over differential pairs and not RF transmit or receive signals. And so I think distinguishing the antenna as transmitting or receiving is not very relevant to the issue of providing protection and/or grounding on what is really a data cable. In that sense I don't see this application as any different from a wi-fi access point that's outdoors. But an outdoor location such as on a roof makes it more vulnerable to surges or induced voltages from lightning, and so 810.20 should still apply.
 
Last edited:
synchro said:
I agree that it makes sense to change the title of Article 810 as you say. Although 810.1 says the article covers antenna systems, it has dated wording that I believe unnecessarily limits its scope. For example, it's not clear that it covers systems that have a complete transceiver like the Starlink unit (and not just a downconverter) at the antenna location. As the OP mentioned, the cable carries Ethernet data over differential pairs and not RF transmit or receive signals. And so I think distinguishing the antenna as transmitting or receiving is not very relevant to the issue of providing protection and/or grounding on what is really a data cable. In that sense I don't see this application as any different from a wi-fi access point that's outdoors. But an outdoor location such as on a roof makes it more vulnerable to surges or induced voltages from lightning, and so 810.20 should still apply.
Click to expand...
Then apply 725.141.
 
Gerry_G said:
Starlink Services (rural, VERY HIGH SPEED, satellite internet, in the US and 17+ other countries so far) only supplies a phased array antenna dish with a custom 100' shielded Ethernet cable permanently attached. The antennas are usually mounted high, on a high mast or tower. The antenna is very uniquely, not what most are accustomed to with satellite internet. The phased array needs a fairly wide view of the sky since the satellites are not stationary and the phased array switches what satellite it "talks to" very frequently. The custom cable also needs to supply ~100 W to the antenna. Standard Ethernet cable can't handle that power level @ 56 V.

They only support running that cable into a building with no lightning protection, not even grounding/bonding the shield at the building entrance. There are reports of lightning strikes destroying (literally blowing apart) the power supply inside the house and disintegrating the custom cable to the antenna. The only "ground" is inside the building at the power injector. The only ground is via the 3 prong 15 A power supply cord.

This appears to be very dangerous, folks are mounting the antennas high, thus prone to attracting lightning.

Their minimal FAQ https://www.starlink.com/faq contains:

"Starlink meets the U.S. National Electrical Code (NEC) grounding requirements and includes the necessary lightning protection. However, any user who lives in an area with lightning should have the appropriate lightning protection installed in accordance with your local electrical code prior to using Starlink." (bold my emphasis).

However, their support replies to never cut the or extend the supplied cable, thus one can't even ground the shield at the building entrance. Also, being non standard cable, one can't even use an available CAT 5e/6 protection unit at the building entrance.

I don't believe Starlink's configuration meets the NEC re lighting protection.

Am I correct, if so, any suggestions?
Click to expand...
Completely off topic but hey, it happens.
Mass. Is about as far south as it works?
I don’t think it’s available around 35th parallel yet.

Do you experience dropout and long periods of no internet?
 
synchro said:
I agree that it makes sense to change the title of Article 810 as you say. Although 810.1 says the article covers antenna systems, it has dated wording that I believe unnecessarily limits its scope. For example, it's not clear that it covers systems that have a complete transceiver like the Starlink unit (and not just a downconverter) at the antenna location. As the OP mentioned, the cable carries Ethernet data over differential pairs and not RF transmit or receive signals. And so I think distinguishing the antenna as transmitting or receiving is not very relevant to the issue of providing protection and/or grounding on what is really a data cable. In that sense I don't see this application as any different from a wi-fi access point that's outdoors. But an outdoor location such as on a roof makes it more vulnerable to surges or induced voltages from lightning, and so 810.20 should still apply.
Click to expand...
Indeed, the phased array has a separate transmitter and receiver, using different frequencies and only data and power is transmitted over the shielded cable. The wording of 810.1 & 810.20 doesn't really describe such a system. None the less, the array (two antennas on one metallic base) is bonded to the cable shield. One could consider it just a data and power supply (56 V PoE) cable for building protection purposes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top