Client Testimonials

Based upon our evaluation of NFPA 780, we could see no advantage to installing a conventional lightning rod system. Because of the nature and construction of our plant, most structures would have been considered to be self-protecting. There would be no benefit secured by installing conventional lightning rods, as the structures themselves already performed the functions of strike termination devices and main and down conductors. We already had a good plant grounding system, and, as you are aware, it is almost impossible to secure a permit to penetrate grade anywhere in the plant. Your system offered the advantage of simply installing your streamer-delaying air terminals on the existing structures, and using the existing structural steel and grounding system. We did not have to add conductors or change our grounding system. This saved a considerable amount of money, while still securing the benefits of streamer-delaying technology. Additionally, we had experienced direct lightning strikes within the “zone of protection” described in NFPA 780, a problem we have not experienced with the Lightning Master air terminals.

We did not judge as valid the science behind the charge transfer or dissipation array system. And, of course, we did not want to employ ESE technology, as if it worked as advertised, it would have attracted lightning, not a good idea in a microprocessor controlled plant.

After completion of phases one and two of your lightning protection program, the plant lightning outage rate dropped from approximately 1 – 1.5% to 3.5 – 4%. That is a significant reduction, both in equipment damage and downtime costs. Further reducing outages will be a process of filling in inadequately protected areas, replacing components in high corrosion areas, and installing surge suppression on problem circuits.

After the installation was completed, several company personnel were skeptical of the performance of the “fuzzy ball” lightning rods. Perhaps the strongest indication of the effectiveness of your system was when it did not work. In one particular area of our plant, we had a particularly corrosive environment. That caused the stainless steel dissipation electrodes at the tip of the air terminals to corrode away, turning the air terminals into the equivalent of blunt lightning rods. We immediately started experiencing damage to microprocessor equipment in that block of the plant. You worked with us to change the air terminal material to titanium, going so far as to change NFPA 780 to allow its use. When we changed out the air terminals to titanium, the problems stopped.

Thank you again for your honesty in accurately comparing the benefits of each type of lightning protection system, and in helping us to secure what we feel is the best performing and most cost-effective system for us.

– Steven J. Phillips, Project Manager