Lightening & Lightening conductors

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Barclay
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conductors
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion clarifies the operation of lightning conductors, specifically addressing misconceptions from two sources. Source A accurately describes Franklin's Lightning Diversion Theory, stating that storm clouds induce a positive charge on the ground, leading to lightning strikes. Source B, while partially correct, inaccurately claims that lightning rods can discharge clouds over long distances, a theory debunked by modern research. The consensus is that lightning rods function primarily to divert strikes away from structures, effectively protecting them.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Franklin's Lightning Diversion Theory
  • Basic principles of static electricity and charge induction
  • Knowledge of lightning protection systems and their components
  • Familiarity with the physics of electric fields and ionization
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the differences between Franklin's Lightning Diversion Theory and modern lightning protection methods
  • Study the physics of charge induction and its implications for lightning behavior
  • Explore the design and effectiveness of various lightning protection systems
  • Investigate the limitations of lightning rods and their operational range
USEFUL FOR

Engineers, safety professionals, and anyone involved in designing or maintaining lightning protection systems will benefit from this discussion, as well as educators teaching the principles of electricity and atmospheric phenomena.

Barclay
Messages
207
Reaction score
1
I’ve been reading about static electricity and storms and lightning conductors. I’m confused about the way lightning conductors work. Having read two sources and my questions are shown below:

Source A (internet)
Storm clouds have a negative bottom and a positive top. The bottom of the cloud is nearer to the ground so it induces a positive charge on the ground. When the voltage becomes high enough a spark flies between the cloud and the earth; this is lightning.

Source B (text book)
Lightning conductors under thunderclouds create very strongly fields in the surrounding air. Air molecules near the tip of the conductor become ionised due to electrons being pulled off. These ions then discharge the thunder cloud so no flash is produced.How can electrons be pulled off if the bottom of the cloud is negative? Shouldn’t the electrons in the lightning conductor be repelled (by the negative bottom of the storm cloud) and left with a positive top that attracts the cloud (causing a flash?)?

How can the lightning conductor induce strong magnetic fields?

Please can someone explain the basics of what’s going on? Thank you

(This is not homework so I've posted here)
 
Last edited:
Science news on Phys.org
B is nonsense
 
Barclay said:
How can electrons be pulled off if the bottom of the cloud is negative? Shouldn’t the electrons in the lightning conductor be repelled (by the negative bottom of the storm cloud) and left with a positive top that attracts the cloud (causing a flash?)?

I believe that is what the textbook is saying. Electrons are pulled off of air molecules and transferred through the conductor to ground, leaving the air filled with positive ions.

Barclay said:
How can the lightning conductor induce strong magnetic fields?

I assume you mean electric fields? I'd expect that the conductor is charged by a high-voltage power source.

I'm no expert on lightning conductors, but I do have some experience with lightning protections systems. All the ones I've worked with are not charged, they are simply neutral conductors. I'll have to look up some information on these "charged" conductors, if they exist. May I ask what book are you reading?
 
As zoki85 said
B is total rubbish

The whole idea of the lightning rod is that the lightning bolt will strike the rod rather than the object below it which the rod is mounted to
... building, mast with radio antennas on it etc. for the most part ( 99% of the time) it works
some types of metal masts will form part of the lightning conductor others don't and have lightning rods protruding from the top of them
100503 Lightning New York City.jpg
this one below, you can see that the main strike occurred down from the top
one of those 1% of times that the lightning bold didn't go for the highest part of the structure
if you look closely, you will see a leader coming up from the top of the monument but it doesn't
connect to make the main discharge channel

National Monument Lightning Strike.JPG


I trust the first photo will show you that your source B is very wrongregards
Dave
 
Drakkith said:
May I ask what book are you reading?
The comments from source B are from a page photocopied from a book and the name of the book is not on the page.
 
Have been doing some research from the internet about lightning conductors and have learned the following ...

About Source B ...
"This is Franklin's Lightning Dissipation Theory that proposes that the lightning rod on a building prevents a lightning strike. It suggests that the lightning rod discharges the cloud over a longer length of time, thus preventing the excessive charge build-up that is characteristic of a lightning strike.
Modern research has shown that the Lightning Dissipation Theory is inaccurate. It is true that the tip of a lightning rod is capable of ionizing the surrounding air and making it more conductive and preventing a sudden static electricity surge (lightning). However, this effect only extends for a few meters above the tip of the lightning rod and this not capable of discharging a large cloud that stretches over several kilometres of distance".

So source B is correct to a small extent but source A is more correct.

Source A is Franklin's Lightning Diversion Theory
 
Last edited:
Charge-leader charge dissipators are effective, they also resemble "lightning rods" and are occasionally struck.

My most instructive manual on lightning was Mountaineering: Freedom of the Hills by The Mazamas.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K