Artificial, Lightening Conductor

[YT2095]

Here`s an Idea I`ve been tinkering with in my head ever since I saw a twin Tesla Coil arrangement.

 

Forgive me if I get the polarities wrong, but so long as they`re different, it`s easily corrected.

 

the Earth has a possitive charge and the sky and clouds have a negative charge, occasionaly it will build up and we`ll get lightening.

Electricity always takes the shortest path, and so ligtening will strike the tallest and or most conductive path to Earth.

now on a golf course it may happen to be a tree or a man about to take a swing with his club.

 

currently (excuse the bad pun) we use strips of metal on a high point to conduct this lightening safely to earth.

 

My idea: what if a small electronic + ion generator were to be stuck on a small pole (6 foot high) right next to a tree that was 30 foot high. the possitive ions streaming out would effectively make it seem a shorter path for the lightening. a bit like artificial height. would the lightening hit the small but strongly possitive pole, or the 30 foot tree that was at just earth potential?

 

the tree is passive, the device would be an active attractor.

 

any thoughts as wether it work or be marketable?

 

Cheerz all

[blike]

I dunno, sounds like a good idea. I can imagine the lightning hitting the tree and then arcing and hitting the generator.

 

Thats what seems to happen here in florida. Often times lightning will travel down a tree only to hit a small spot on the ground a couple of meters or so away from the tree.

[atinymonkey]

YT2095 said in post #1 :

Here`s an Idea I`ve been tinkering with in my head ever since I saw a twin Tesla Coil arrangement.

 

Forgive me if I ....................................

 

My idea: what if a small electronic + ion generator were to be stuck on a small pole (6 foot high) right next to a tree that was 30 foot high. the possitive ions streaming out would effectively make it seem a shorter path for the lightening. a bit like artificial height. would the lightening hit the small but strongly possitive pole, or the 30 foot tree that was at just earth potential?

 

any thoughts as wether it work or be marketable?

 

Cheerz all

 

I seem to remember a fella from Cambridge explaining to me that the lightning strike has traveled such a distance that having a small 3 foot metal pole is not enough to convince it to change direction at the last second. The lightning isn't 'aware' of the tree, golf club or ground until it connects (then it sometimes arches back to the lowest resistance within a certain radius of the strike, like Blike said).

 

As for collecting the energy, I'd have to quote Doc Brown

 

Unfortunately, Marty, nobody knows when or where lightning will strike

[YT2095]

Ah well.. It seemed like a good idea at the time

I suppose creating something that was artificial high up (more atractive to lightening) is a no go then

I only envisaged something like a simple air ioniser like the sort you get in cars but emmiting possitive instead of negative ions to give it more "Presence" would act as a good "bait".

but as you`ve stated it would be insignificant really.

Not to worry though, the Rockets with a trailing wire still works for study purposes (and is way awsome to watch!)

 

thnx for the input guys

[blike]

Have you ever seen those scientists that cause lightning to strike by launching model rockets at specified times? Why can't we gather energy from that somehow?

[YT2095]

Blike, I have and it is SOoooooo COOL!

even the sand in the buckets create glass type formations worth mega bucks too!

 

I guess the only real prob would be the storage medium, it needs an extremely fast duty cycle rate, the insulation materials need not cause a problem nor the leakage over time. we could certainly HOLD such power without a problem, BUT it would have to be charged over a slow period of time, a lot slower than a lightening strike sadly

I`m sure "whistlers" or "feelers" could be tapped though, and give that slow charge over time that would be needed, only problem being is when a feeler turns into a strike.... you lose the whole lot then

[blike]

What are duty cycles and feelers? (sorry, i have no electrical background!)

 

I'm not sure how much electricity is in a lightning bolt, but here in florida we get thousands of strikes per day!

 

A quick search of google revealed that it is likely between 10 and 120 million volts. I don't know much about volts, watts, amps, etc....but that seems like an awful lot!

[YT2095]

a "Whistler" and a "feeler" are what lightening does before it stikes, it`s almost like it sends out little tiny strikes or charges untill it finds the best place to hit, a Whistler is similar, that`s the sound it makes as it charges before a strike, a simple audio amp to an antenna and ground (idealy with a many windings coil between them) will actualy pick them up

"Duty Cycle" is charge/discharges per sec and how fast it can do it, on Amplifiers it`s called "Slew Rate"

 

the above power(s) you mentioned are quite storable with current tech, but not in the Mirco second or so it`s delivered in

[atinymonkey]

So, Doc Brown mislead me, I've attatched the stone of shame.

 

Apparently the tempting of storms in the UK is a quite poor idea, before you get crazy ideas..............................

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1516880.stm

[Sayonara]

She recalls: "Mum identified her by this huge wart on her back because she hadn't got no head, or arms, or legs when they found her".

[YT2095]

HuH?

[atinymonkey]

I could never find anything of any consequence, except the fact that papers were clearly missing..........

 

[YT2095]

ok then... DOUBLE , HUH???

[aman]

Sounds like some people can still wear tinfoil hats in a crowd during a thunderstorm and still be near the same odds as everyone else of being lightning struck. I wonder if WWII soldiers in helmets got blasted very often in Europe?

I remember sitting in the Llanos of East Colombia with miles of flat ground and I had a 19,000 lb reconditioned steel military truck sticking 9 ft up during intense lightning strikes every 3 seconds for about an hour. We sat in a small hollow 100 ft away with fire extinguishers and a case of beer in case of a strike.

I guess it was a good reason to drink a lot of beer but we never got hit, though we got soaked. Lightning is damn unperdictable.

Just aman

[daisy]

hey .....pssst ...YT...it's "lightning"...not "lightening".......sorry....mumsie type thing.

[daisy]

By the way....purely coincidentally....I had an Aunt who was killed by lightning on the golf course many years ago.

[YT2095]

Thnx daisy, It`s frightning how many times I keep misspelling it

[atinymonkey]

aman said in post #14 :

Sounds like some people can still wear tinfoil hats in a crowd during a thunderstorm and still be near the same odds as everyone else of being lightning struck. I wonder if WWII soldiers in helmets got blasted very often in Europe?

I remember sitting in the Llanos of East Colombia with miles of flat ground and I had a 19,000 lb reconditioned steel military truck sticking 9 ft up during intense lightning strikes every 3 seconds for about an hour. We sat in a small hollow 100 ft away with fire extinguishers and a case of beer in case of a strike.

I guess it was a good reason to drink a lot of beer but we never got hit, though we got soaked. Lightning is damn unperdictable.

Just aman

 

 

I don't know how true it is, but I remember reading more Knights were killed by Lightning, during the same year, than were killed in the battle of Poitiers.

 

Although I keep wanting to say Agincourt, I think it's supposed to be Poitiers. Random unprovable fact! Yay!

[YT2095]

Hmmm... another idea just popped into my head, not sure how effective it would be though.

 

When a laser fires it leave an ionised pathway, I`m not sure how much would be needed to make it at least partly conductive though? perhaps a laser being fired up towards potential storm clouds (obviously rigged to flight path computers and satellite trackers to avoid hitting any) through a series of grounded collars (a bit like the setup in the old vacume tubes), making a pathway via the ion trail safely to the collars and Earth?

 

does that sound workable at all?

[atinymonkey]

Bit of a waste of a laser, isn't it? If ot all goes wrong, I mean.

 

 

But pretty, for the people standing in the storm.

[YT2095]

well I figure that as soon as the lightning hits the collar, that will be the shortest path to Earth, following the beam would be not an option, one laser per golf course and servo contoled mirrors to direct the beam, using underground conduits. as for looks, I haven`t got a clue? unless it was in the visible spectrum, but I can sure imagine the sound

and picture the steam trail IF it was raining too

[VendingMenace]

I think that this thread is baised on a common misconception? This misconceptoin is that the lightning rod is MEANT to be stuck.

 

If memory servers, the lightning rod has the exact opposite intention. It is put places you do not want to be struck.

 

The way this works is as follows. You put the lightning rod up real high somewhere where you don't want lightning to strike. Then you ground it. Then, durring a thunder storm, all the positive charge goes up to the highest point (the rod) in order to get closer to the negatively charged clouds. Since i lightning rod is sharp, it is able to dissipate charge into the surrounding air. Thus the lightning rod, in effect, is meant to take charge from the ground and dissipate it in to the air. Since there is less positive charge in the ground, lightning is less likely to strike in arreas around the lightning rod.

 

At least, i think this correct. I think i remember being told this in my E & M class. Cool

[YT2095]

I think the guy with the key and kite would disagree as would the fellas that measure lightening by firing rockets up into storms with a wire trail.

the lightening conductors there to atract lightning, so that if it IS likely to strike a tall building, it would prefer the conductor than say maybe the elevator shaft

I live on the top floor of a 12 story appartment block, on my balcony there`s a lightning conductor about 3 feet away from me on the roof, its been hit twice in the 13 years I`ve lived here. they do work

I figure that a laser could do the work of a 100 with wire, actualy baiting it rather than passively distract it and chanel it away with current tech.

You`re perfectly correct about the possitive ions leaving the sharp point of the conductor, it makes it more "tasty" for the lightng in comparison to the other items around it that emit a weaker possitive charge, that was the basis for my original design (post #1(ish).

 

[VendingMenace]

I think the guy with the key and kite would disagree

 

Well, actually, i think Franklin agreed with my position...

 

"May not the knowledge of this power of points be of use to mankind, in preserving houses, churches, ships, etc., from the stroke of lightning, by directing us to fix, on the highest parts of those edifices, upright rods of iron made sharp as a needle...Would not these pointed rods probably draw the electrical fire silently out of a cloud before it came nigh enough to strike, and thereby secure us from that most sudden and terrible mischief!"

 

Here, "draw the electrical fire silently out of a cloud" i think clearly means avoiding lightening.

 

Of course, just because Franklin thought this does not mean it is correct. SO, i dug out some of my old physics texts. The following is from Phsysics the nature of things by Lea and Burke;

 

"The sharply pointed [lightning] rod is connected to the ground. As a thundercloud approaches, charge leaks from the ground into the air through the rod's point. The dischafe is rapid enough to reduce the risk of a lightning strike. If the connection to the ground is broken, the rod becomes a hazard. Instead of reducing the nearby concentration of electric charge, it becomes a relatively easy path for the lightening."

 

I think this is fairly clear that they view the lightening rod as reducing the chance for a lightning strike.

 

as would the fellas that measure lightening by firing rockets up into storms with a wire trail.

 

I think this is fundamentally different than a lightening rod. These rockets are fired up durring the hieght of a storm. They are not in place up in the air as the storm approaches. As such, the are not really given suffecient time to discharge the electrical charge. Thus, the become more like the lightening rod that is dosconected from the ground. They serve as a attaction for lightening.

 

the lightening conductors there to atract lightning, so that if it IS likely to strike a tall building, it would prefer the conductor than say maybe the elevator shaft

 

Actually, with most of todays modern buildings, lightning strikes are not that dangerous to the occupants (at least not directly). Most of the modern buildings have a steel inferstructure. This metal skeleton effectively yeilds the building a giant faraday cage, and offers ample protection from flowing electricity. Moreover, the elevator, as a metal box, is probably one of the safest places to be, should lightening strike a building (at least as far as the electrical currect from the strike goes). By the same measure, people in planes that are struck by lightening are also pretty darn safe.

 

The real problem seems to be that lightening strikes can really wreak havoc with a buildings electrical system. And malfunctioning electrical systems can cause bad things (failures, fires, ect). I think that is really the problem with lightning strikes, at least as far as tall buildings go.

 

I live on the top floor of a 12 story appartment block, on my balcony there`s a lightning conductor about 3 feet away from me on the roof, its been hit twice in the 13 years I`ve lived here. they do work

 

Well, i don't know if this is really good evidence, as sample size = 1. Also, what would be the frequency of lightening strikes without the rod?

 

Also, i did some reasearch. There are rods that DO attact lightning. They are usually dull where as the ones that do not attrat lightning are sharp. So perhaps we are just talking about two different stypes of lightning rods

 

I figure that a laser could do the work of a 100 with wire, actualy baiting it rather than passively distract it and chanel it away with current tech.

 

Yeah, i suppose it could work. However, you wouldn't really want the lightening to strike the laser would you? You would have to insulate it alot or something.

 

You`re perfectly correct about the possitive ions leaving the sharp point of the conductor, it makes it more "tasty" for the lightng in comparison to the other items around it that emit a weaker possitive charge, that was the basis for my original

design (post #1(ish).

 

I think that all depends on how much/fast the charge is put into the air. If it could dissipate it, then it wouldn't really attact the lightning more. At least i don't think. I guess i would have to sit down and see how fast the electrstatic attrachtion changes due to desity of charge field. Perhaps i will try to figure this out and post it up. Cool.

[YT2095]

I don`t know whether this will be of any help in your calculations, but when I monitor lightening during a storm. what you actualy hear sounds like a series of small clicks that rapidly escalate in frequency to a rising tone until it gets to about 5khz then the tone seems to break up and almost become a white noise with a "Howling sound" from there it either settles back down to a decreasing tone or a very loud click (a strike) and then starts all over again, something interesting that I did note was that as soon as it starts to rain, the sounds stop and you get are the loud clicks with a strike, no whistle sounds at all.