Author Archives: admin

ESE effectiveness worldwide


V.Pomar, S.Polo (Aplicaciones Tecnológicas, S.A.) S. Fauveaux (Indelec)

Scientific basis of any kind of external lightning protection system (protection against direct lightning strikes to buildings) is empirical. Statistics on existing external lightning protection installations are needed to perform effective empirical studies. For this reason it is unexpected the lack of statistical publications on existing lightning protection installations in relation to the number of installed systems, their location and effectiveness.

This has led the authors to make the present study where the empirical experience of ESE lightning protection systems is analyzed.

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness of ESE lightning protection systems for buildings and open areas. This study analyzes the data of the ESE LPS manufactured in Europe and installed worldwide, and demonstrates that, according to the expected strike frequency, the external lightning protection using ESE air terminals has been effective.

The FOLPS seeks clarification on wording of ESE specifications

The FOLPS has written to IEC, BSI and to AFNOR seeking clarification on how we word our specifications. Some members quote NF C 17-102 as the only standard for ESE systems whilst others are quoting a hybrid system using IEC 62305 and NF C 17-102. There are manufacturers of ESE systems that quote both. The rules of CENELEC seem to state that there cannot be conflicting installation standards, and so, the NF C 17-102 underwent transformation in 2011 into a product standard that is now acceptable to CENELEC. At the same time, it is illogical to solely quote NF C 17-102 if it missing vital installation guidance. For guidance on installation, there is only one place to look – the IEC 62305 suite of standards. One thing that all members agree on – ESE systems are not part of BSEN 62305. So, what is the best way for us to be quoting and specifying ESE installations?