They had a few hundred to replace in the eastern suburbs in the first week of
Jan the cable there is almost all underground. If anyone has one and can post a
detailed photo of the PCB we can get to the bottom of it but suspect the HV
protection is non existent.
I have heard mention from customers that there is some sort of clicking sound
on a dead NTD not sure what that would be why there would be a relay in there.
Might be just false info
Matt
--
/* Matt Perkins
Direct 1300 137 379 Spectrum Networks Ptd. Ltd.
Office 1300 133 299 m...@spectrum.com.au
Fax 1300 133 255 Level 6, 350 George Street Sydney 2000
SIP 1300137...@sip.spectrum.com.au
Google Talk mattaperk...@gmail.com
PGP/GNUPG Public Key can be found at http://pgp.mit.edu
*/
> On 24 Jan 2021, at 7:00 pm, Jrandombob <jrandom...@darkglade.com> wrote:
>
> Mea Culpa.
>
> That makes perfect sense. I was considering it from an RF perspective
> wherein the mass of earth would theoretically shield the buried
> copper. I'd failed to consider that in the case of a ground strike the
> buried copper presents a low-resistance path through the lumped
> resistance of earth, so it will be the preferential path for the
> current to take.
>
> In which case the best I can offer is that perhaps the apparent higher
> NTD mortality rate in high lightning areas with aerial lead-ins is
> maybe due to them being more susceptible to higher-frequency
> components which are induced RF-wise into the aerial cable?
>
> Though without solid data it's hard to say if there's actually a real
> correlation between the aerial lead-ins and failures. Since most
> aerial cables end up being underground somewhere along the line it
> could well be a remote ground strike that is to blame and it's just
> the human propensity for pattern matching telling us there is a
> correlation.
>
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 12:51 PM Ross Wheeler <aus...@rossw.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021, John Edwards wrote:
>>>
>>> Underground copper is probably more vulnerable than aerial to lightning.
>>> Lightning strikes the ground, not the copper, but a voltage gets induced
>>> in the copper due to the nearby electromagnetic charge - something that
>>> doesn't happen in air because it's a fairly good insulator.
>>
>> My experience has shown a different path to lightning damage.
>>
>> When lightning strikes the ground, or a grounded object, that current
>> dissipates through the soil, which has a typical resistance of around 500
>> ohms per metre. If you have tens of thousands of amps flowing, then ohms
>> law tells us we have potentially huge potential differences over even
>> fairly short distances.
>>
>> The copper cable has a very low resistance (by comparison).
>> If that cable happens to be radial (or oblique) to the current path from
>> the point of entry, the potential difference from one end of the cable to
>> the other will be hundreds to many thousands of volts.
>>
>> Even the insulation of the cable may not be enough to save it, and any
>> components connected to it which happen to be physically close to the
>> ground will certainly break down.
>>
>> This can happen at distances far further away than magnetic induction
>> alone would explain. It also explains (to me anyway) why I've seen burried
>> cables damaged part way along their length (where the greatest potential
>> difference has been).
>>
>> Just my take on it.
>> R.
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
