We've done it both ways, and I'm not going to tell you that it's 100%
one way or the other. But based on experience, where we've lost gear
from the steel bonding method, we went back and ran a bonding wire up
and tied all of our gear to it and losses went down quite a lot.
But I would also agree with Jaime. An air terminal at the top above
everything is the best option for direct strikes.
Utility power is the single worst problem at most of our sites. DC. DC.
DC. Surge suppressors. Surge suppressors. Surge suppressors. Oh, and the
single point bonding principle.
On 5/9/2017 4:53 PM, Jason McKemie wrote:
That's not really possible in this case. What do you think about
bonding equipment to the tower vs a separate ground wire? I certainly
don't want to make the equipment more of a target.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jaime Solorza
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I am a firm believer in putting lightning rod at highest point of
tower with direct cable run to buried ring or rod next to it. Has
worked well in our area.
On May 9, 2017 3:25 PM, "Jason McKemie"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Wanted to get some opinions on grounding equipment at a tower
site (on the tower). The tower and shelter are all properly
grounded, it's a solid-steel leg tower. Right now I'm
grounded via clamps to the tower. My question is would it be
better/worse/the same to run a copper ground cable up to the
equipment? It's going to end up being bonded to the same
ground at the base, so I was thinking it wouldn't make a huge
difference but wanted to see what others' experience was with
this.
TIA
-Jason
