differences and performance verification data of lightning rods DAS (electrostatic dissipative type), dipole, ESE (wide area/active type), and general plunger (Franklin type)
|
division |
Principle and Structure |
Expected effects and features |
International Standards/Recognition Status |
|
A simple metal rod (Franklin type), which induces lightning strikes at a height and then discharges to the ground. |
Simple structure, proven method, protection radius is proportional to height |
Recognized by international standards such as IEC 62305 |
|
|
Built-in electronic circuit or discharge device, early discharge of streamer just before lightning strike |
Increased protection radius (by design), reduced installation quantity and cost, active lightning induction |
French NFC 17-102 only recognized, IEC not recognized |
|
|
Claims self-suppression of lightning occurrence by ion radiation from multiple needle electrodes and neutralization of atmospheric space charge |
Lightning strike suppression (driving concept), structure protection, theoretically reducing lightning strike occurrence |
Lack of international standard recognition, lack of scientific evidence |
|
|
A dipole configuration consisting of a lightning rod body (positive charge) and an insulated discharge cap (negative charge), inducing corona discharge. |
Interacts with the charge of thunderclouds to suppress lightning occurrence conditions (non-polar state), some actual application cases exist |
No official international standard, some field applications |
ESE (wide area, active)
Claim to expand the protection radius by releasing the streamer early (ΔT concept).
-
There is almost no difference between the critical flashover voltage and discharge time of ESE and general lightning rods (within 2 μs).
-
There was no statistically significant difference in the number of discharges (ESE 61 times, normal 55 times out of 120 times).
-
Only French NFC 17-102 is recognized, and international standards such as IEC 62305 do not officially recognize it (due to lack of theoretical basis, experimental reproducibility, and long-term reliability).
DAS(Distributed Static Energy Storage)
-
Some manufacturers and countries claim effectiveness, but there is a lack of reliable, long-term field data that is internationally valid.
-
The critical flashover voltage is slightly higher or similar to that of a general lightning rod (20 kV difference, practical protection distance of about 4 cm).
-
Some samples exhibited discharges at voltages lower than those of a typical lightning rod.
-
DAS also has no internationally recognized standard, and its effectiveness has not been scientifically proven.
-
DAS has no lightning reduction effect for buildings less than 300 m high.
Dipole
-
Suppresses lightning strike conditions through charge interaction with thunderclouds, such as dipole effects such as corona discharge.
-
Some resorts have reported cases of reduced lightning damage after installation alongside regular lightning rods.
-
National first aid kit
-
There is a lack of standard or recognized scientific performance verification data.
General acupuncture
-
Simple structure, decades of practical application and experimental reliability.
-
The only internationally recognized method, including IEC 62305.
All of them claim theoretical/experimental superiority over existing general lightning rods , but actual performance verification data does not clearly prove any significant difference or superiority .
The IEC does not officially recognize ESE, DAS, or dipole . Only some countries, such as France, have limited recognition of ESE.
When applying in practice, it is essential to check the technical specifications of the ordering party and the laws and standards of the relevant country, and to place importance on reliability and verified data .