Lightning Protection: Compilation of Comments On Committee Draft

81/222/CC
COMPILATION OF COMMENTS ON COMMITTEE DRAFT
Project number: Reference number of the CD

IEC 62305-2, Ed.1 81/213/CD
IEC/TC or SC Date of circulation
TC 81 2003-07-25
Title of the TC or SC:
Lightning protection
Title of the committee draft:

IEC 62305-2, Ed.1: Protection against lightning - Part 2: Risk management
The above-mentioned document was distributed to National Committees with a request that comments be submitted
Comments received – see annex 1)

DECISION OF THE CHAIRMAN (in cooperation with the secretariat)
a A revised committee draft will be distributed as a committee draft for vote (CDV) by (date) ..........
b A revised committee draft will be distributed for comment by (date) ..........
c The committee draft and comments will be discussed at the next meeting (date) 2003-09-29
NOTE In the case of a proposal a or b made by the chairman, P-members objecting to such a proposal shall inform the Central Office
with copy to the secretary in writing within 2 months of the circulation of this compilation (see ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1, 2.5.3).
Name or signature of the Secretary Name or signature of the Chairman
G.B. Lo Piparo C. Bouquegneau
1)
to be collated on Form Comments and annexed.
FORM CC (IEC)
2002-08-09
–2– 81/222/CC
Annex
Date Document
2003-07-25 81/213/CD
National Clause/ Paragraph Figure/ Type of COMMENTS Proposed change OBSERVATIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT
Committee Subclause Table comment on each comment submitted
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 1 Entire G Line and service are used both for the Use the term “service” through the entire Agreed.
Document same document.
DE 2 General T To check parameters and result of risk Adapt parameters if needed. Noted.
analysis for covering also worst cases as
e.g. Kuala Lumpur towers:
height=453m, more than 200
thunderstorm days per year
corresponding to Ng=30 (old formula)
DE 3 General E Example: Parameter values should be given as far Agreed.
Table B.6 should have a column for as possible in the tables, not in NOTES
"no shield" with values 1 (similar as in or in the text.
table B.7), instead of text "For
unshielded line PLD =1 shall be taken."
DK1 General General E The terms “lightning flash” and “flash are Exchange “lightning flash” with “lightning Terms are consistent with 81/216 /CDV.
not consistent with the 81/212/CD (part 4 strike” throughout, and also exchange 81/212/CD will be modified accordingly.
of this standard) “flash” with “lighting strike” throughout.
DK2 General General E The draft would benefit from being Noted.
worked over by a native English
speaking person. Also much greater
care should be taken with regards to
defining symbols and explaining the
formulae and calculations.
Particularly it should be realised that
although the examples in the appendices
are correct and relevant, they will be of
little use if not great care is taken to give
detailed explanations and conclusions,
so that each example may be read and
understood by itself. If this is not taken
seriously most likely no readers but the
ones deeply involved in developing the
standard will be able to follow,
understand and benefit from the
examples.
–3– 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
ES 1 General Many factors are considered here for the The altitude should be studied as a Noted.
risk assessment, but not an important parameter for risk assessment, giving a
one: the altitude. Statistics show that factor for choosing lightning parameters,
there are differences in lightning dimensions and positioning not only
parameters. At high mountains, lightning considering the number of events but
protection components should be also their characteristics.
dimensioned for withstanding high
energy lightning strikes. However, at sea
level the LPS design should take into
account that lightning strikes have lower
energy but they are more difficult to
intercept, hence air termination system
positioning should be more strict. The
protection measures could be more
efficient if this fact is taken into account.
ES 2 General "The standard should not be circulated Software is an Annex to IEC 62305-2.
without the acompanying sofware, since It is hopeful that IEC 62305-2 will
it is very complicated to apply." circulate, since the first round, as a
complete document with all its Annexes,
but , if the Annex relevant to the sofware
will not be prepared on time, the main
document will circulate and the Annex
will be attached to it once ready.
Use the editorial proposal below to
simplify reading.
Improved examples to give a chance to

the reader to understand the document Noted. See also ES 2.
by checking by himself how it works The annex dealing with software will
The document has been largely
show the simplified method on which
improved in terms of simplification. But
Add as soon as possible and in any the software is based. Such method will
it is necessary to go further in the
case before the CDV the software, supply information for a simplified risk
FR1 General simplification. For example, to send
which has been agreed to include. analysis both for lightning contractors
back in annexes the complex part is not
and for electrical contractors (TC 64,
sufficient. The Annexes should also be
Work out some examples accordingly SC 37A).
simplified.
to the software on order to show a) the Advise will be given in the introduction
capability of the software and b) its of IEC 62305-2 for such annex.
limits – it is, as a matter of fact, limited
to simple case and is devoted to
contractor
–4– 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
Especially work out a simplified version
for electrical contractors who have no
access or influence to other parameters
than the electrical lines and equipments
FR2 Editorial Symbols used throughout the document Either use symbol with a number of An annex should be prepared relevant to
are not intuitive and then difficult to use letters set to minimum and which symbols and formulas.
for someone not familiar with the have a meaning
document Or use symbol which two letters only in
their order of appearance
FR3 Editorial There is no list of symbol A list of symbol should be created at the See Fr 2
beginning of the standard with their
meaning and where they are define
FR4 Editorial Equations should have a number in Give a number to each equation Agreed.
order to identify them especially in
examples
GB 1 General A large amount of editorial work is Noted.
required for this document to be
consistent with the ISO/IEC Directives,
Part 2.
Particular attention needs to be given to

ensuring that the language used is
consistent with the status (i.e. normative
or informative) of the text. For example,
informative annexes should not use
'shall'.
JP 1 G As both terms “service” and “incoming See DE 1.

service” are used throughout the
standard (for example, S3 and S4 in the
Table 7), difference of the both terms
should be clarified.
NL 1 General For practical purposes this standard is Add a software calculation method See Es 2 and Fr 2.
only acceptable with a good software before document reaches the CDV
package included in the standard. status.
–5– 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
PL 1 General The standard under consideration is very 1) Revise terms and definitions. Noted.
important and - as such – should be 2) Define exactly the services, which
precisely formulated. Adequate editorial should be considered for risk
and technical changes are proposed. calculation separately or together
with the structure to be protected
(consider the external services
separately from the structure to be
protected in the case of risk
assessment for these services only).
3) Eliminate all repetitions from the text
and tables within the considered
part of the standard.
4) Equip equations with a system of
successive numbering.
5) Explain symbols used in equations
not on their lines but just below
them.
6) Explain all kinds of the risk and its
all components in the same place.
7) Insert all figures in their proper
places in the text (not after it).
United Entire General The structure of the document makes it Consider a simplification of the layout of See Fr 1 and FR 2.
States 1 Document very difficult to use and understand. For the document. The goal should be to
example, Chapter 4 is titled “Risk make the document easier to use with a
Assessment Method” yet one must go layout conducive to being able to find the
through 9 pages of definitions of information necessary. Consider moving
acronyms before you get to even the all of the pages of descriptions of
simplest description of the method. By acronyms to an annex (which is clearly
this time the intended audience is labelled so one will know where to look).
confused and lost. By the time one gets
to the point that he needs to use the Consider the use of a Table or List of
acronym he must go back through the 9 Acronyms with short descriptions to be
pages to find it again. It is also used as a reference list when conducting
necessary to go to some annexes to find the assessment. The USNC found it
items referenced in the body of the impossible to use the risk assessment
document without indication in the body without putting together such a list.
where the information can be found.
–6– 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
United Entire Technical Equations should be numbered to allow Number each equation used in the See FR 4.
States 2 Document referencing. This will aid in the ability to document.
find where they are located and also
allow the examples to reference the
specific equation used to arrive at the
values given.
Introductio Agreed.
CN 1 Par7 E in user’s installations in users’ installations
n
nd
DK3 Introductio 2 par. from the E ‘Probability..... and the lightning ‘The probability....and the lightning Agreed.
n bottom discharge characteristics...on the extent current characteristics......on the
of....’ probability of damages, the extent of...’
United Introductio General / There is no place in the entire 62305 Provide a paragraph in the introduction Noted.
States 3 n Technical series of documents where the clearly identifying the relationship
relationship between the assessment of between the parameters associated with
risk for structures and assessment of risk the structure and the parameters
for services is clearly defined. associated with the service. Specifically,
Throughout the document parameters this text should identify to the first time
are given for structures and others are user concerned with the assessment of
given for services without any obvious risk to a structure, the significance of the
indication of their relationship. parameters associated with the services
and to the user concerned with the
protection of a service, the significance
of the parameters associated with a
structure.
United Introductio First paragraph Editorial The sentences in this paragraph are too “Cloud-to-ground discharges may be Agreed.
States 4 n long and are awkward to read. hazardous to structures, persons,
Recommend revision of the first 2 services, installations, and other
sentences as proposed to eliminate equipment in, on or associated with a
excessive number of “and”s and make structure. The hazard can result in
them easier to read. damages to the entire structure, its parts
and contents, and associated services;
as well as in failures of equipment and
electrical and electronic systems. “
United Introductio Second Editorial Change “which extend” to “what extent” “Whether they are needed and to what Agreed.
States 5 n paragraph and insert “a” before “risk assessment” in extent should be determined by a risk
the second sentence. assessment.”
th
United Introductio 4th paragraph Editorial Revise the second item in the 4 “- flashes striking near the structure, Agreed.
States 6 n paragraph to eliminate redundancy and incoming lines and services (power,
make it easier to read. telecommunication lines, etc.) and/or
other services.”
–7– 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
United Introductio 5th paragraph Editorial Provide commas to set off the “Flashes striking near the structure or Agreed.
States 6a n independent clause in the second service, as well as flashes to the
sentence. structure or service, may cause failures
of electrical and electronic systems due
to …”
United Introductio 7th paragraph Technical Switching overvoltages are covered in “Note 2 – Information on assessment of Agreed
States 7 n Annex F vice Annex G. risk due to switching overvoltages are
reported in Annex F.”
o
GB 2 1 Technical The scope statement leaves it unclear as The scope should be rewritten to indicate 2 sentence will be modified as follows:
to whether the intention of this document the intended status of the document. “The scope of this part of the standard is
is to impose normative requirements for to provide a procedure for….”.
making risk assessments, or whether it Due to the globally wide divergence of Document is not prescriptive for the
simply offers guidance for doing so. ceraunic activity, the UK NC would find a values; it is a standard for procedure to
prescriptive document unacceptable. be adopted for risk evaluation.
IT 1 2 Editorial Delete IEC 61643-1998 Agreed.

DE 4 3 E Classifications (defined in text only): Define in clause 3 classifications: Agreed.
S 1 ,S 2 ,S 3 ,S 4 Source of damage S1,S2,S3,S4 Source of damage
D1,D2,D3 Type of damage D1,D2,D3 Type of damage
L1,L2,L3,L4 Type of loss L1,L2,L3,L4 Type of loss
should be written not like numeric written differently from numeric values:
values: La,Lu,Lf,Lo,LA…LZ values of loss
La,Lu,Lf,Lo,LA…LZ values of loss Rx,R1…R4,RA…RZ,RT values of risk
Rx,R1…R4,RA…RZ,RT values of risk to avoid confusion between e.g.
L1,L2,… and La,Lu,Lf,Lo …
NOTE – Proposed change is yet used
e.g. in Figure 2 and in Annex H !
PL 2 3.3 Line 2 Technical The statement „A service entering a “A service being outside a structure and “entering a structure” and the note will
structure …” is not correct. having connection with its equipment …” be deleted.
PL 3 3.4 Line 2-6 Technical There are no zones: type 0, type 1 and There are: zone 0, zone 1 and zone 2. Definition will changed as follows:
type 2 (see IEC 60079-10); moreover the Take in account not only zone 0 but also -“hazardous zones…” will be put before
probability of explosion in zone 1 may be zone 1. “solid explosive materials”;
significant! -“type 0” will be deleted.
Note becomes:
“For the scope of this part of the
standard only structures with hazardous
zone type0 or containing solid explosive
materials are considered”.
–8– 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
2
DK4 DK1 3.7-9 T Fire load in kg/m is not used in Denmark Explain in more detail how to estimate Fire load is a widely used in fire
and it is not explained in detail in the the fire load of typical building materials protection domain. Information may be
text how to calculate it. and. supplied by Fire Fighter Department in
Also explain how to evaluate the building each country.
surface area to be considered. Definitions from 3.7 to 3.10 will be
Also explain how the user determines modified and moved to Annex C,Table
whether a material is combustible. C.4.
2
DK5 DK1 3.7-9 E ‘..kg/m2..’ ‘..kg/m ..’ See DK 4
DK6 General General E The terms ‘line’, ‘service’ and ‘service Chose one for consistency See DE1.
line’ are used with what seems to be the
same meaning
PL 4 3.10 Line 2-3 Technical An amount can not be compared with a Ratio of the total volume of combustible See DK 4.
surface. material in a structure and the overall its
volume.
United 3.16 Editorial The definition as written indicates that it “Lightning flash striking close enough to Agreed.
States 8 is the object to be protected that is able an object to be protected that it may
to cause the overvoltage when in fact it cause dangerous overvoltages.”
is the lightning. Revise as shown.
PL 5 3.19 Line 2 Technical What means „near a structure (service)”? Add: “within a distance enabling Agreed.
3.20 The definition should be completed. influence its equipment.
United 3.26 Technical Would not the permanent damage due to Delete definition. Definition will be changed.:” …due to
States 8a direct effects also be considered a failure LEMP”
of the system? Is the intent of the term
“electromagnetic effects” to refer only to
indirect effects? This definition could be
confusing to a “casual user” of the
document. Why is it necessary to define
this term?
PL 6 3.27 Line 2 Technical Failure current may cause damages not “Telecommunication” will be deleted.
only in telecommunication lines;
moreover, the current greater than
minimum one causes also damages.
United 3.27 Editorial Insert “will” between “that” and “cause.”“Minimum peak value of lightning current Agreed.
States 9 that will cause damage in a
telecommunication line.”
PL 7 3.30 Line 2 Technical The risk cannot be defined as a probable Risk is a relative measure of probable Agreed.
loss. loss.
–9– 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
PL 8 3.33 Technical These terms and definitions should be Terms used in clauses 5 and 6.
3.34 deleted because they are not clear and
not needed. The terms “homogenous
characteristics” and “one set of
parameters” are not defined and too
general.
PL 9 3.35 Line 2 Technical The definition should be corrected and LPL is a number representing a set of Definition of LPL will be changed as
the NOTE deleted. values of lightning parameters, which follows:
allow to define lightning as a source of “number related to a set of values of
damage and to apply protection lightning parameters, which allow to
measures enabling reduction of the risk define lightning as a source of damage
of damage to tolerable level and to apply protection measures
enabling reduction of the risk of damage
to tolerable level”
United 3.36 Editorial Delete the “in” before “a service” . “Measures to be adopted in a structure Agreed.
States 10 or a service to reduce the risk due to
lightning.”
PL 10 3.38 Line 2 Technical The definition should be the same as in LEMP is an effect of lightning current.
other parts of the standard. Moreover,
LEMP is not the effect but source of
effects on internal systems.
DE 5 3.39 E Lightning Protection Zone Add abbreviation LPZ used in the It is used in the TLC.
CD:
Lightning Protection Zone (LPZ)
JP 2 3.39 E “Lightning Protection Zone” should be Not agreed.
“Lightning protection zone (LPZ)”.
DE 6 3.40 E Shielding wire(SW) SW never used. Delete definition. It is used in the TLC.
Wording in Table 2 will be modified.
PL 11 3.40 Line 2 Technical Reduction of physical damages is a Physical damages are the primary
secondary task of SW, first one is to consequence of a direct lightning flash.
prevent direct strikes to the service.
DE 7 3.41 E Magnetic shield(MS) MS never used. Delete definition. It is used in Annex B.
PL 12 3.43 Line 2 Technical Correct the definition as follows: set of SPDs properly selected, Agreed.
coordinated and …
United 3.43 Editorial Change “erected” to “installed.” SPDs A co-ordinated set of SPD properly Agreed.
States 11 are installed, not erected. selected and installed to reduce failures
of electrical and electronic systems.
– 10 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
United 4.1 Heading Editorial / The heading indicates that this section Develop a complete revision of this Noted.
States 12 General provides the general approach to the risk chapter to make the document easier to
assessment method. However, this use.
section only provides a general
introduction to some of the acronyms
used in the document. The heading title
should reflect the content of the section.
JP 3 4.1.1 & G There are several different definitions Agreed.Editorial.
4.1.2 regarding S1,S2,S3,S4 and D1,D2,D3.
(For example, 4,1,1 and Fig.1 for S
series, and 4,1,2 and Fig.1 for D series).
An definition should have coherence
throughout the standard.
PL 13 4.1.1 Line 2-3 Technical The source of damage should The lightning flash is the source of Agreed.
correspond with distinguished situations: damage. The following sources are
S1 ÷ S4, which are not currents but distinguished depending on the position
flashes. of the point struck by flash (see
Figure 1).
United 4.1.1 Introductory Technical Current is the primary source of damage “Lightning current is the primary source Not agreed.
States 13 paragraph associated with lightning activity, but it is
of damage addressed in this
not the only cause. assessment.”
PL 14 4.1.2 Editorial From editorial point of view this Noted.
subclause should be substantially
changed. Starting with its last section,
types of damages should be first listed
and then explained. Moreover, the
characteristics of object should be clearly
precised. Distinction between object,
structure and service should be quite
clear.
United 4.1.2 First sentence Editorial Break the first sentence into 2 “A lightning strike may cause damages Agreed.
States 14 sentences. depending on the characteristics of the
object to be protected. Among the most
important are:”
– 11 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
nd
United 4.1.2 2 paragraph Editorial Eliminate excess wording and break into “The damage to a structure due to Agreed.
States 15 smaller sentences as shown. lightning may be limited to a part of the
structure or may extend to the whole
structure. It may also involve
surrounding structures or the
environment (e.g. chemical or
radioactive emissions).”
th
United 4.1.2 4 paragraph Editorial Insert “a” between “of” and “lightning” in Agreed.
States 16 the first sentence.
PL 15 4.1.3 all Editorial This subclause is devoted to precise the Delete the last part of the subclause or Agreed.
loss (not the risk). shift it to next subclause.
PL 16 4.1.3 Line 4 Technical The loss depends on the structure itself „… characteristics of the structure itself Agreed.
and on its content. and its content”
United 4.1.3 First sentence Editorial Insert “a” between “produce” and Agreed.
States 17 “different” in the first sentence.
United 4.1.3 L4 Editorial Values and value have different Replace “values” with “value” Agreed.
States 18 meanings. The correct term here is
value.
United 4.1.3 R4 Editorial Values and value have different Replace “values” with “value” Agreed.
States 19 meanings. The correct term here is
value.
PL 17 4.2. Line 1 Editorial The title should be changed. Type of risk and its components Change in :”Risk and its components”
PL 18 4.2. Line 2 Editorial This line should be preceded by a list of The following types of risk and its
all types of risk and its components with components are distinguished: risk with
reference to the equations and tables reference to type of loss, risk with
(see subclause 4.3. in 81/212/CD). reference to source of damage, risk with
reference to type of damage, risk See PL 18.
components of loss, risk components for
a structure, risk components to a
structure with reference to flashes to the
structure, etc.
PL 19 4.2. Line 4-24 Editorial It is here not the place for such Delete it. Agreed.
information.
United 4.2 Editorial Enclose the acronyms for the risk “- the number of dangerous events (N) Agreed.
States 20 components in brackets and change - the probability of damage (Px) and
“consequent” to “resulting” . - the resulting loss (Lx)
– 12 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
United 4.2 Last sentence Editorial / What is the intent of the statement that Delete this statement. It adds to Not agreed. Risk is divided in
States 21 Technical each risk component depends on the confusion and doe nothing to enhance components according to the element
point of strike? The point of strike is the assessment method. struck.
random (to some degree). What is the
relevance? Haven’t the risk components
taken this into consideration?
CN 2 4.2.1 Par1 E depend of depend on Agreed.
DE 8 4.2.1 c) 1st paragraph T Loss of type L4 is also possible for the Add L4 to the types of loss for RU. Agreed.
risk component RU.
JP 4 4.2.1 c) T First indent, regarding component RU, Agreed.
“Loss of type L1 may arise” should be
“Losses of type L1 and L4 may arise”.
JP 5 4.2.1 E “depend of” should be “depend on” Agreed.
Risk component RU should be in the Agreed.

JP 6 Table 1 E column of source of damage S3 not in S2.
PL 20 4.2.1 Line 4, 16, 21, 36 Editorial The titles of a), b), c), d) should be − risk components with reference to Agreed.
changed, because they are in flashes to a structure;
contradiction with the text, where risk − b), c) and d) in similar way;
components (not flashes) are presented. − delete the word „component” before
symbols Rx.
PL 21 4.2.1 Titles of c) and d) Technical Difference between line and service Apply consequently the term “line” or See DE 1.
should be cleared up. “service”.
PL 22 4.2.1 a), b) Editorial Equations should be numbered and their Agreed.
equations symbols should be explained below.
United 4.2.1 First sentence Editorial / Delete the last clause. It adds nothing “For a structure, the following risk See USA 21.
States 22 Technical but confusion. Modify sentence as components shall be considered:”
proposed.
United 4.2.1 a) Technical The statement that the risk related to Delete all text suggesting that this risk is Sentence refers only to injuries caused
States 23 injuries inside a structure is negligible is negligible. by step and touch voltages inside a
untrue. The USNC is aware of many structure in the case of flashes to the
instances where injuries and death have structure. Injuries of living beings inside
occurred to living beings inside a a structure have been experienced only
structure. While we can agree that the for overvoltages/overcurrents transmitted
risk is greatly reduced, we cannot concur by incoming services (component RU).In
with any suggestion that this risk is all case such risk is very low and not
negligible. considered in this standard.
– 13 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
United 4.2.1 a) Technical There is no mention of the risk of fire due Develop an additional risk component to It could be considered included in
States 24 to resistive heating. This risk should also address fire due to resistive heating or component RB. The relevant sentence
be addressed. incorporate the risk into one of the will be modified accordingly throughout
existing components. the standard.
United 4.2.1 b) Technical / Change “induced” to “injected” in the “… caused by overvoltages injected onto Change in:“… caused by overvoltages
States 25 Editorial discussion of Rw. A direct strike would incoming lines and …” generated onto incoming lines and …”
inject current into the line. The current is
induced onto the lines by flashes near
the line as discussed in component Rz.
United 4.2.1 Note Technical It is the understanding of the USNC that Delete this note and address the case of Not agreed. In general for protection
States 26 the applicability of the risk assessment is piping entering the structure. against electric shockit is required that all
to determine whether protection is metallic extraneous parts (including
necessary and, if so, to determine the pipes entering the structure) are to be
applicable protection level. If no bonded to equipotential bonding bar of
lightning protection is provided, how can electrical installation of the structure.
it be assumed that an equipotential The note will be modified as
bonding bar will be provided for the follows:“…source of damage is not
structure and that pipes entering the considered in this standard.”
structure will be bonded to this bar? As
a result, the note is not likely valid.
rd
United 4.2.1 3 paragraph Editorial Delete redundant “of”. “The risks in a structure corresponding t Agreed.
States 27 each type of damage and loss are given
in Figure 2.”
(2)
DE 9 4.2.2 Table 2 T For the risk component RM the protection Add “X “ in row LPS and column RM. Agreed. Grid-like LPS have no influence
measure LPS (only for grid-like LPS) has in reducing RM. Only grids with mesh
to be taken into account. size w<= 5 m have influence in the
attenuation of lightning electromagnetic
field.
(3)
DE 10 4.2.2 Table 2 T For the risk component RU the protection Add “X “ in row LPS and column RU and Agreed.
measure LPS (due to equipotential delete “X” in the row SPD system and
bonding) has to be taken into account, column RU.
not an entire SPD system.
DE 11 4.2.2 Table 2 T Do NOT subdivide into "Characteristics Subdivision is not needed. Delete it. Not agreed. All measures tend to limit
of structure" and "Protection measures": the value of risk. For better
Fire precautions is a protection measure, understanding it is useful to identify the
high floor resistivity can it be. characteristics of the structure and the
specific protection measures against
lightning, which have an influence on the
probability of damage.
– 14 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 12 4.2.2 Table 2 T Note 1 – See note 3 of table B.1 Give the required condition here. Note 2 shall be referred.
Referenced Note does not exist ! Do not reference to another Note !
DE 13 4.2.2 Table 2 T Note 2 - Only for grid-like LPS Note 2 - Only for grid-like external LPS Agreed.
The complete system LPS cannot be
"grid-like"
United 4.2.2 Table 2 General There is no Note 3 in Table B.1. The “Note 1 - In the case of “natural” or Reference is to note 2 of Table B.1.
States28 Note 1 correct reference is Note 2. That note standardized LPS with down-conductors
deals with probability Pa vice Ra. The spaced less than 10 meters, the value of
note in this table should not require that risk RA is negligible.”
the user go to the Annex to retrieve a
note which is not specific to this table.
DK7 4.2.3 Line 16 E The referenced Figure 2b does not exist ? Noted.
PL 23 4.2.3 Line 2 Technical Without distinguishing of internal and Divide the services clearly into external Not agreed.Object are different.
external services the same risk and internal one.
component may be taken into account
twice. For instance, there is no difference
between Rw and R’z.
PL 24 4.2.3c) Line 1 Technical The structure to be protected and the Use consequently the terms “structure to Not agreed. Not changed.
neighboring structure may be connected be protected” and “neighboring
to the external service. To avoid structure”.
misunderstanding they should be
properly named.
JP 7 Table 2 E “Characteristics of structure” should be Noted.
“Characteristics of structure”.
JP 8 Table2 E Note 1 says “See note 3 of Table B.1”, Noted.

Note 1 but note 3 is not given in Table B.1.
JP 9 4.2.3 E “( see Figure 2b )” should be Agreed.

“( see Table 9 )”.
United 4.2.3 RD Editorial Delete “direct” from RD. It is redundant. RD = R`V + R`W risk due to flashes Agreed.
States 29 striking the service (source S3);
United 4.2.3 RI Editorial move “directly” to the end of the clause “RI = R`B + R`C +R`Z risk due to Noted.
States 30 flashes not striking the service directly”
– 15 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
PL 25 4.3, 4.3.1, all Editorial This text, if needed, should be placed at Delete subclauses 4.3, 4.3.1 and 4.3.2. Rearrange as follows:
4.3.2 the beginning of this part or even in the 4.0 Explanation of terms
first part of the standard. It is not 4.1 Source and type of damage
adequate place here. (Now 4.1)
4.2 Risk and its components
(Now 4.2)
5.0 Risk Management
(Now 4.3)
United 4.3 Last line Editorial There is a reference to Annex J, which Delete reference to Annex J. Noted.
States 31 does not exist.
DE 14 4.3.1 E It must be clear, that the structure to be Add a sentence after the last paragraph: Transfer in A.2 the first 2 paragraphs and
considered for risk assessment may be “The structure to be considered for risk figure 3 ( redrafted). Add as a note the
subdivided into several zones (acc. to assessment may be subdivided into proposed sentence:
clause 5.1). several zones (see clause 5.1).” “The structure to be considered for risk
assessment may be subdivided into
several zones (see clause Now 5.1).”
DE 15 4.3.1 also in Figure 3 T IEC standard cannot be referenced to an Make reference to an international See DE 14.
national (Italian?) standard as REI 120 standard
DE 16 4.3.1 T Add a last sentence: Agreed.
Protection does not include incoming
services outside of the structure.
PL 26 4.3.1 Line 2 Editorial Symbol S is reserved for source of The following presentation would be See DE 14.
damage and should not be used as a proper: every structure B can be
symbol of structure. Moreover, a clear considered for risk assessment as
definition of building and structure is integrated one, when the vertical
necessary here. Figure 3 and its partitioning REI ≥ 120 inside the
description is presented in artificially structure doesn’t exist, or as divided into
complicated way. two independent parts B1 and B2, when
the vertical partitioning REI ≥ 120
between these parts exists.
United 4.3.1 First sentence Editorial “Shall” must be changed to “may” or the “The structure S may be a stand-alone See DE 14.
States 32 option must be deleted. Spell out Figure building B, or may consist of only a part
for consistency. of such building provided that the
following conditions are fulfilled (see
Figure 3):”
United 4.3.1 First paragraph Editorial Revise the second item for clarity. “the contents of building B provide no See DE 14.
States 33 risk of explosion”
– 16 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 17 4.3.2 T Last sentence: Change last sentence: Agreed.
It does not include the user’s equipment. Protection does not include the user’s
equipment or any structures connected
at the ends of the service.
st
DK8 4.3.2 1 line E ‘comprised between’ ‘comprising’ Agreed.
IT 2 4.3.2 Technical Add the following two dashes - Two switch telecommunication Agreed.
buildings, for TLC lines;
- Two user’s buildings, for TLC
and signal lines.
PL 27 4.3.2 Technical This subclause should be exactly Noted.
precised. Does the user’s building
belong to the service or to the structure
to be protected?
AT 1 4.3.3 Table 5 T Change RT for Loss of human life to See GB 3.
-6
value 5.10
DE 18 4.3.3 Table 5 T The background of the values for the Add notes with some background to Reference can be made to standard BS
tolerable risks RT is not clear. The DE those values or give references to this 6651- 1985 and to other publications on
NC needs more information to agree with subject. Fatal accident rate.
those values.
GB 3 4.3.3 Technical This subclause indicates that there is a The UK NC proposes that the scope of Values are representative, not
considerable variation in the tolerable this standard states that national mandatory. See also 81/216/CDV,
risk associated within the various committees may make local decisions as clause 6.1.
aspects of lightning protection. to the values of the tolerable risk, and
other such factors used in any risk
assessment performed in accordance
with this standard.
“Tolerable risk RT” should be “Tolerable Not agreed.

JP 10 4.3.3 Table 5 E risk of damage RT” as defined in Terms
and definitions.
United 4.3.3 First paragraph General / Add the proposed test at the beginning “It is the responsibility of the authority Agreed.
States 34 Technical of the section to clarify the responsibility having jurisdiction to identify the value of
for assigning risk values and that the tolerable risk.”
values provided are examples of typical
values.
– 17 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
JP 11 4.3.4 E Since the tolerable risk is defined as Agreed. “Maximum” will be deleted.
“maximum value of risk which can be …”
in the Terms and definitions,
“identification of the maximum tolerable
risk RT;” should be “identification of the
tolerable risk RT;”.
DE 19 4.3.5 Entire Para. T The procedure to evaluate the economic Delete the whole paragraph 4.3.5 and Not agreed.
convenience of protection is a economic take risk R4 into account using the same 1. Evaluation of economic convenience
item. A technical standard is the wrong procedure shown in paragraph 4.3.4 for is not mandatory. However guidance
place to discuss and to assess this item. R1 … R3. is useful for the users who intend to
In addition to that the values needed to As the typical value of tolerable risk for perform it.
-3
follow the procedure are hard to find economic loss L4 add RT = 10 in table 5 2. The economic convenience is a
(e.g. costs of protection measures during (paragraph 4.3.3). balance of cost-benefits. It is wrong
the planning stage of a structure). The individual characteristics of a to fix a value of tolerable risk in this
structure according to a possible case.
economic loss are considered with the
loss factors Lt, Lf and Lo given in Annex
C.
rd
Dk9 4.3.7 3 last line E ‘Figure 6a’ and ‘Figure 6b’ ‘Figure 6’ and ‘Figure 7’ Noted
DK10 4.37 3rd par lien 2-3 E ‘...from the latter, with...’ does not make Rewrite Noted
sense
JP 12 4 3.7 E “of Figure 6a for structures and of Figure Noted
6b for services” should be “of Figure 6
for structures and of Figure 7 for services
“.
PL 28 5.1 Lines 1, 2, 4, 12, Technical Do not introduce new artificial zones. Delete zones Zs. Not agreed. To subdivide the structure in
16 Additional artificial partitioning of the zones allows to select tailored protection
structure causes confusion. measures minimizing cost.
Practical examples of subdividing a
structure in zones is reported in H.0.3.
PL 29 5.3 Lines 4 Editorial Do not repeat the equations Replace the equation by its number. Agreed.
5.4
United 5.3.1 Editorial Does the IEC Manual of Style allow a Agreed.
States 35 5.3.1 without a corresponding 5.3.2?
DK11 5.5 Table 7 E All constants ra ; r ; Lt ; Lf ; h, hf should be ra ; r ; Lt ; Lf ; h, hf should be carefully See Fr3.
carefully defined – preferably in table 6 defined – preferably in table 6
– 18 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
PL 30 6 all Technical It is impossible to consider the risk for Postpone the preparation of clause 6. IEC 62305-5 belongs to rules for design
services before the preparation of the and installation of protection measures
relevant standard (IEC 62305-5). (yet known) for a service. Performance
of such protection measures is given in
IEC 62305-2.
IT 3 6.1 Technical Replace the last two sentences by the The risk components R’v, R’w of the Agreed.
following new text. service shall be evaluated as the sum of
the relevant risk components of each
section of the service
The risk components R’z, of the service

id the maximum value of relevant
components of each section of the
service
The risk components R’B, R’C of the

service shall be evaluated for each
structure connected to the service
The total risk R of the service is the sum

of risk components R’B, R’C, R’v, R’w and
R’z
PL 31 6.1 Lines 1, 2, and 4 Technical It is impossible to speak about sections Make the reference to the figure and Noted.
without reference to the figure. formulate this subclause more precisely. Practical examples of subdividing a
The statements of subclause 6.1 are too service in sections is reported in H.0.2.
general and worthless.
PL 32 6.2 Table 8 Technical Description of separate positions must Correct the descriptions. Noted.
be different.
IT 4 6.3 Technical Replace the existing formulas by the new - R’ V = NL P’V L’V components related Agreed.
formulas: to physical damages
- R’ w = NL P’w L’w components related

to the failure of connected equpment
IT 5 6.4 Technical Replace the existing formula by the new R’Z = (NI – NL) P’Z L’Z Agreed.
formula:
DE 20 6.5 Text T R'B = [NDa + NDb] P'B L'B A service can have branches. In this Essentially agreed. The item will be
and components related to physical damages case more than 2 structures can be redrafted.
Table 9 R'C = [NDa + NDb] P'C L'C connected to it. Therefore it would be
component related to the failure of more general, to replace [NDa + NDb] by
connected equipments [ΣNDi]
– 19 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DK12 6.5 Formulae E Subscripts ‘Da’ and ‘Db’ refer to damage Explain that subscripts Da’ and ‘Db’ refer See DE 20.
at ‘a’ and ‘b’ end of line (see fig 8). But to damage at ‘a’ and ‘b’ end of line,
this is not explained. (Also for NDa in A2 maybe with reference to fig 8.
on the middle of page 36)
IT 6 6.5 Technical Replace the existing text by the new text: For evaluation of risk components Agreed.
related to lightning flashes to structures
to which the service is connected, the
following relations apply for each section
of service directly connected to a
structure:
- R’ B = ND P’B L’B components related
to physical damages
- R’ C = ND P’C L’C components related

to the failure of connected equpment
PL 33 6.5 Line 1 Technical The structure should be properly named. Add “neighboring” before “structures”. Agreed., but not neighboring, better
“connected”. See DE 20.
DE 21 6.6 Table 9 T RI = R`Z + R`W + R`C RO= R`W + R`Z + R`C Agreed.
Compare table 7:
Must be RO instead of RI . Correct order.
IT 7 6.6 Technical Change existing Table 9 by Table 9 of Agreed after incorporation of DE 21.
Annex 1 of this document
DE 22 Figures Figure 1 T Loss of type L4 is also possible for the Add L4 after L1 in this row. Agreed.
source of damage S3 and the type of
damage D1 (risk component RU).
JP 13 Fig. 1 T “ L4** ” should be added in the column Agreed.
of structure – type of loss (vertical) and
of S3 – D1(horizontal).
JP 14 Fig. 1 E “( shocks of leaving beings )” should be Agreed.

“( shocks of living beings )”.
JP 15 Fig. 1 E “Failure of electrical and electronic Not agreed.

system due to overvoltages” should be
“Failure of internal system due to
overvoltages”.
DE 23 Figures Figure 2 T Line D1: RA Replace RA by RS Agreed.

Correct is RS (being = RA + RU)
– 20 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
JP 16 Fig. 2 E “L1,L2,L3,L4” and “D1,D2,D3” should be Not agreed.
“L1,L2,L3,L4” and “D1,D2,D3” respectively.
JP 17 Fig. 2 E Since the internal system is defined as Not agreed.

note 2 “electrical and electronic systems within
a structure” in the Terms and definitions,
“internal electrical and electronic system”
should be “internal system”.
JP 18 Fig.3 T Symbol of internal system used in Fig. 3 Figure has been deleted.
should be located in the structure to be
considered for risk assessment,
and location of entering point of services
should be shown in Fig. 3.
JP 19 Fig. 4 E “Structure or service to be protected for “Structure or service is protected for

this type of loss” should be “Structure or this type of loss”.
service protected for this type of loss”.
JP 20 Fig. 5 E Position of “YES” should be corrected. Agreed.
JP 21 Fig. 5 E “protectionmeasures” should be Agreed.

“protection measures”.
JP 22 Fig. 5 E “( see Annex J )” should be Agreed.

“( see Annex G )”.
AT 2 Fig.6 T RC is also effected by measures of Change RB > RT to RD > RT Not agreed.

external LPS
JP 23 Fig.6 G Term “LPM” should be defined in the Agreed.
Terms and definitions.
DE 24 Figures Figure 8 T Dashed line for 3Ha is wrong. Dashed line shall cross ground level Agreed.
instead of overhead line
– 21 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 25 Annex A A.2 T NDa needs to be explained, when used Write “NDa as the number of flashes to a Yet defined in 5.4.2 .
the first time in annex A structure connected at the end of the
service may be evaluated as the
product:”
DE 26 Annex A A.3 T Borderline distance was reduced to See DE comment to collection areas Partially Accepted (see IT9)
A.4 Dm=250m (former 500m). This now is given below. Consistent would be:
inconsistent with table A.2 giving 1000m Dm=250m for structures
(=2x500m) for aerial and 50√ρ 2x250m for aerial lines
(=2*25√ρ=2x559m maximum for 2x10√ρ (max. 2x224m) for buried lines
ρ=500Ωm) for buried lines
DK13 A.1 Note T Ng ≈ 0,1 Td will overestimate the actual No change. Formula should be used only
lightning to ground density at northern if a map of Ng is not available.
latitudes such as in Denmark and
Sweden
United A.1 First paragraph Editorial “N” should be moved to the end of its “The annual number of lightning flashes Agreed.
States 36 description and “its” should be specified influencing an object to be protected (N)
as to what it is referring. Revise depends on the thunderstorm activity in
paragraph as proposed. the region where the object is located
and on the object’s physical
characteristics. It is generally accepted
to evaluate the number N by multiplying
the lightning ground flash density (Ng) by
an equivalent collection area (A) of the
object.”
nd
United A.1 2 paragraph Editorial / Revise for clarification and modify the “The lightning ground flash density, Ng, is Agreed.
2
States 37 Technical last clause to identify source of the number of lightning flashes per km
measurements. per year. This value is available from
ground strike location networks in most
areas of the world.”
DK14 A.2 Table A.1 row 1 T ‘Object surrounded by other objects or Explain how close and tall surrounding Not agreed.
Relative location trees’: How close and how tall? What if objects/trees should or should not be. Scope of such a wording is to give the
the rolling sphere shows that the objects Perhaps with reference to rolling sphere idea of type of surroundings, not to allow
are protected? method. precise calculation.
DK15 A.4 Table A.2 E Define Ai (see figure A.2) It’s clearly defined.
DK16 A.5 Note E ‘..defined by the length Li and by the Figure A.2 instead of A.1 and show Li on Agreed.
lateral distance Di (see figure A.1)’. the figure (it is called Lc now).
DK17 A.5 Note T ‘...near the line causes induced over ‘..near the line may cause over voltages Noted.
voltages not lower that ...’ higher...’
– 22 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
FR5 Annex A Table A1 Technical Object surrounded by other objects Add a new line with value 0,25 Agreed. Add:
should be split in two values 0,5 and Object surrounded by smaller objects or
0,25 to be more accurate trees of the same heights: 0,5
Object surrounded by higher objects or
trees: 0,25
IT 8 Annex A, Technical In order to simplify the formula it is See new table A.2 (see Annex 2 to this Agreed.
A.4 posssible avoid reference to specific soil document)
resistivity by adopting the value of 500
Ωm.
th
IT 9 Annex A, Technical For SPD compliance with IEC 62305-4 Change the 4 row after the table as Agreed.
Table A2 should be assured. follows: “…first point where
SPD,complying with IEC 62305-5, are
installed on the line,….”
IT 10 Annex A, Editorial Delete the last sentence Not clear.
A.2
pag.36
PL 34 Figure A.2 Editorial Main structure is the structure to be Replace “b” by “a”. Not agreed.
protected and should be marked by “a”.
DE 27 Annex B Entire annex T It must be clear, that protection Add a sentence: “Values for K and P The structure may be divided in zones.
measures or characteristics of the less than 1 may only be taken, if the Change as follows: … entire structure or
structure to be protected or its content, measure or characteristic is valid for the zone of structure (Zs).
reducing the effects of lightning, must be entire structure to be protected or for all
valid for the entire structure or for all relevant equipment.”
relevant equipment, not only for some
parts.
DK18 B.1 Title E From 4.2.1 a) lines 2-3 one can work out In the title mention that is for living See 4.2.1.
that B.1 is for people outside a structure, beings outside a structure. In the text put
not inside. It would be helpful with a note in a note that the touch and step risk
to this effect. inside is negligible.
DE 28 Annex B Table B.3 T It must be clear, that only an entire SPD- Add a note 1: “If only an LPS with Add a note: Only an SPD set is suitable
system reduces the probability PC. equipotential bonding SPDs according to as the protection measure to reduce Pc.
SPD(s) according to IEC 62305-3 are not IEC 62305-3 exists, then PSPD = 1.”
sufficient here.
DE 29 Annex B Table B.3 T If a LPS acc. to IEC 62305-3 is Add a note 2: “If a LPS acc. to IEC Second column header is changed in:
necessary (PB < 1), the level of a SPD- 62305-3 exists and a SPD-system is LPL (as in table B3).
system must be coordinated to that of chosen as an overvoltage protection
PB. The LPL on which PC is based must measure, the LPL on which Pc is based
be identical or higher than the LPL on must be identical or higher than the LPL
which PB is based. on which PB is based.”
– 23 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 30 Annex B Table B.4 T The remark given below the table is not Delete the note (*), because it misleads. (*) will be transferred in column of
correct, because we handle indirect Probabilities.
strikes with their induction effects, where Note will be amended as follows:
a limitation to the maximum value of 200 “Values affected by low accurancy”.
kA or 200 kA/ s is not necessary. If the
overvoltages are getting higher than LPL I means a set of lightning current
those expected by LPL I, additional parameters. Values of probability of
measures (including SPDs) can further current higher than those relevant to LPL
reduce those overvoltages; there is no I are not known
limit !
DE 31 Annex B Tables E The background of the values in the Add notes with some background to Noted.
B.4/B.6/B.7 tables B.4/B.6/B.7 is not clear. The DE those values or give references to this
NC needs more information to agree with subject.
those values.
DE 32 Annex B Para. B.4 T The equation “KS1 = KS2 = 0,12 w” must Control the accordance between this Noted.
be in line with IEC 62305-4. equation and the results/equations of
IEC 62305-4.
DE 33 Annex B Para. B.4 T For values w > 8 m it follows: KS1 > 1. Add a note 2: “The maximum value of Agreed.
This is technically wrong. KS1 must be KS1 is limited to 1.”
limited to a maximum of 1.
DE 34 Annex B Para. B.4 E The sentence “For distances ranging Add the sentence to the note and delete Agreed to modify the note as suggested
from 0,1 w to 0,2 w the values of KS1 it in the main text. and move the note nto the text.
and KS2 have to be doubled.” belongs to Mandatory requirements shall not insert
the note below. in the note.
IT 11 Annex B General More precise evaluation of probabilities Agreed.
PU, PV, PW, PZ should be carried out A note will be added: “ Formula valid for
taking into account the line sections and w < 8 “.
their position in the line
FR6 Annex B B4 Technical In table H.4.2 KS1 is set to 1 as there is Change formula in Annex B or correct See IT 11.
no LPS but with the formula given below example H.4.2 For distance greater than 0,2 w formula
Table B4 Ks1 = 0,12 w, Ks1 may be of KS1 apply.
greater than 1. Clarify this discrepancy
FR7 Annex B B4 Technical The last line between Ks1 is not Clarify the sentence above the note and Change note1 and last line at page 42 as
understood. What happens when the the note itself follows “where induced loop is running
distance is set between 0,2 w and w close to the LPZ boundary screen
conductor at distance to the shield
shorter than the safety distance, the
values KS1 and KS2 are higher. For
istance, for distances to the shield
ranging from 0,1w to 0,2w the values of
KS1 and KS2 have to be doubled.”
– 24 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
PL 35 B.4 Line 19 Technical In a distance greater than “w” the value Noted
of KS1 is much less than 0,12 w;
moreover it should be taken in account
that KS1 < KS2.
DE 35 Annex B Para. B.5 T It must be clear, that SPD(s) according Add a note: “An entire SPD-system Agreed.
to IEC 62305-3 are sufficient to reduce according to IEC 62305-4 is not
the probability PU. necessary here to reduce PU. SPD(s)
according to IEC 62305-3 are sufficient.”
DK19 B.4 Table B.5 E Ks3 in row 2 is shown as 0.02 Show it as 0,02 Noted.
DK20 B5 and B7 Tables B.6 and E In the table headlines ‘..section..’ should Use: ‘...cross section...’ Agreed.
B.7 be ‘..cross section..’
IT 12 Annex B, Editorial Lines 4,5,6: add Ώ / km Agreed.
Table B.5
IT 13 Annex B, Technical Add the following text: Agreed.
B.5 “at the entrance of the structure (see
Table B.6).
PL 36 Table B.5 Lines 4 ÷ 6 Technical In the case of lightning surges the wall Instead of symbol (1) in the table, there Agreed.
thickness of the screen is more important should be written: “with screen
than its resistance, which can be resistance R > 5 Ω/km”.
different at the same wall thickness. The
way of R assessment should be given.
DE 36 Annex B Table B.6 T The remark given below the table is not Delete the note (*), because it misleads. See DE 30.
necessary here. On services the
maximum current levels are usually
clearly below some 10 kA, as agreed
during our WG9 meetings and based on
experiences of the relecommunication
experts. Therefore, there is no need to
limit this parameter.
DE 37 Annex B Table B.6 T … depending on section S of the line … depending on resistance of the cable Agreed.
shield … shield R …
see table content !
DE 38 Annex B Para. B.6 T It must be clear, that SPD(s) according Add a note: “An entire SPD-system Agreed. See DE 35.
to IEC 62305-3 are sufficient to reduce according to IEC 62305-4 is not
the probability PV. necessary here to reduce PV. SPD(s)
according to IEC 62305-3 are sufficient.”
– 25 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 39 Annex B Para. B.8 T In case of induced overvoltages on the Write: Leave as it is.
service (flashes near the line), a PZ = PSPD PLi
limitation to PSPD or PLI is not correct. being The protection measure which assure
Both measures can act in parallel, - PSPD the probability that the lowest protection level determine the
reducing the overvoltages. Therefore, overvoltages will cause failures value of Pz.
the two parameters have to be when a SPD-system (according to SPD and shielding of line (and then the
multiplied. IEC 62305-4) is provided (Table section of the line shield) are in
B.3); alternative.
- PLi the probability that overvoltages
on the line lead to failures of
electrical or electronic systems
depending on the section S of the
line shield and the impulse
withstand voltage of the equipment
(Table B.7).
DE 40 Annex B Table B.7 T The remark given below the table is not Delete the note (*), because it misleads. See DE 30.
necessary here. On services the
maximum current levels are usually
clearly below some 10 kA, as agreed
during our WG9 meetings and based on
experiences of the relecommunication
experts. Therefore, there is no need to
limit this parameter.
DE 41 Annex B Table B.7 T … depending on section S of the line … depending on resistance of the cable Agreed.
shield … shield R …
see table content !
JP 24 ANNEX B E Note 1 says “For more information see Noted.
B.1 5.3.7 and 5.3.8 of IEC 62305-3”, but
Note 1 these two clauses are not given in
IEC 62305-3.
DE 42 Annex C Head E It must be clear, right at the beginning of Add a sentence: “The values given in Agreed.
this annex, that the values for L are to be this Annex are values proposed by the
fixed by the responsibilities conducting IEC. Other values may be chosen if
the risk evaluation. So if one has a based on calculations and documented
different approach to come to values of assumptions.”
L, it must be possible.
– 26 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 43 Annex C Entire annex T It should be the usual case, that the Add a note: “It is recommended to apply Agreed.
users of the standard use the equations the given approximate relation.”
for estimating Lt, Lf and Lo instead of the
typical values. This should be stated in
the text.
DE 44 Annex C Table C.1 T The values are changed significantly Change the values of table C.1 like given Leave as it is.
compared with the previous versions of in the appendix to this comment. Value of annex C should be checked by
the document, but the equation is still the a lot of example to achieve realistic
same. Because there is no reason for results.
this change, use the old and agreed
values again.
DK21 C.1. Line 1 E ‘..a peculiar t type..’ ‘..a particular type..’ Noted
DK22 C.2. Table C.1 T The table shows the values for Lt , Lf, Specify how the values in table C.1 See DE 44.
and Lo to be independent of n/nt, which depend on number of persons. Values in table C.1 are very rough. Such
seems unrealistic. relative values are dependent of type of
structure.
-2 -5
DK23 C.2 Table C.1 T Lt = 10 inside and 10 outside. It seems Make loss inside smaller than outside. If Agreed.
-5
unlikely that the loss from touch and step it turns out it is 10 inside then consider
inside is greater than outside, especially if that is consistent with the inside touch
considered the text in 4.2.1 a) lines 2-3 and step risk being negligible as 4.2.1.a)
which says that the risk from touch and says it is.
step inside is negligible.
DK24 C.2 Text below table E Define ra ; r ; Lt ; Lf ; h, hf in the text or Define ra ; r ; Lt ; Lf ; h, hf in the text or Noted.
C.1 refer to table 6 (see DK10) refer to table 6
DK25 C.2. Table C.2 E In column 1 change ‘Agricoltural’ to Noted.
‘Agricultural’ in row 1 and ’Gres’ to
’Grass’ row 2.
DK26 C.2. Table C.2 E Change division sign to ‘-‘ in column 2 Agreed.
rows 2 and 3.
United Table C.2 Type of soil or Editorial It is assumed that “Agricoltural” should Make corresponding editorial revisions. Delete gres.
States 38 floor be “Agricultural” and “Gres” should be
“Grass”
United Table C.2 Contact Editorial Replace the division sign with a dash or <1 See DK 25.
States 39 resistance “to.” 1 to 10
10 to 100
> 100
DE 45 Annex C Table C.3 T The step from 0.5 to 0.1 for different fire Change the value in the third row from Agreed.
provision measures seems to be to 0.1 to 0.2.
large.
– 27 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 46 Annex C Table C.3 T The value 0.1 or 0.2 seems to be to good Connect “fire proof compartments” and Agreed.
for “fire proof compartments” and “protected escape routes” with the value
“protected escape routes”. 0.5.
DE 47 Annex C Table C.3 T If more than one provision against the Change the sentence after table C.3 into: Agreed.
consequences of fire is taken, very low “If more than one provision has been
values of rf (unrealistic low !) may b taken, the value of r is the lowest
achieved. The values may be even lower between the individual values.”
than in case of a LPS type I.
DE 48 Annex C Table C.4 T For structures with risk of explosion or Delete the row “Explosion” and add a Leave value and add a note:
structures containing explosive mixtures note: “In case of structures with risk of “In case of structure with risk of
more detailed investigations are explosion and structures containing explosion and structure containing
necessary (detailed zone definition explosive mixtures a more detailled explosive mixtures a more detailed
taking into account also other sources of evaluation of rf may be necessary. Then evaluation of rf may be necessary”.
danger, clear separation of those zones the values given in Table C.4 are not
from other parts of the structure, use of applicable.”
intrinsically safe protection measures).
This is outside the usual scope of this
standard, so the relevant row should be
deleted here.
-2 -2
DE 49 Annex C Table C.6 T The value 10 for Lf and TV, TLC, Power Change this in table C.6 into 5*10 . Value to be checked.
supply seems to be to low compared to
the other values an compared to the
previous versions of the document IEC
62305-2.
PL 37 Table C.6 Line 3 Editorial Acronym TLC should be explained. 1) TLC - telecommunication Noted.
DE 50 Annex C Para. C.5 T The given assumed values for Lf, Lo and Add a table C.7 with assumed values for See DE 44.
Lt are to rough and do not take into Lf, Lo and Lt, like given in the appendix to
account any difference in the use of the this comment. The values correspond to
structures to be protected. Additional values given in previous versions of this
guidance should be given to the user. document IEC 62305-2.
DE 51 Annex C Para. C.5 T Not only in case of hazard or Delete the sentence: “Only values of h Agreed.
contamination of surroundings the relevant to hazard or contamination of
parameter h has to be used. Also in surroundings shall be considered.”
case of injuries of people the economic
damage for the owner of the structure
must be taken into account (costs for
illness, hospitals, smart-money)
– 28 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
IT 14 Annex C, Editorial Change “hf “ into “rf “ Noted.
C.4, Pag.
49
The last
but one
row
C.5
Page 50
th
5 paragr
C.5
Page 50
The last
but three
row
DE 52 Annex D Table D.3 T The given values for the impulse Add typical given values for the impulse Clause is relevant to TLC only.
withstand voltage Ui dependent on the withstand voltage Ui for other insulation
cable insulation are valid only for TLC materials or other cable types.
cables. Other insulation materials or
other cable types (e.g. low voltage cable
of the power supply) are missing.
FR 8 Annex D Table D5 Technical This table seems over accurate. In Simplify the table It is the distribution curve of lightning
practice a smaller table would be current amplitude; a better precision
sufficient seems not dangerous.
IT 17 Annex D, Technical Add the following sentence (Fibre optic TLC lines should be Noted.
D.1 considered too)
IT 18 Annex D, Technical Add the following line Lightning cable 0,02 Agreed, but it is necessary to define the
Table d.2 lightning cable.
Change the table D2 first column
row3,4,5 as follow:
“Shielding wire - one conductor
Shielding wire - two conductor
Shielding wire – steel tube”
IT 19 Annex D More precise evaluation of probabilities Future work
P’B, P’C, P’V, P’W, P’Z should be carried
out taking into account the line sections
and their position in the line
PL 38 Table D.3 Line 2 Editorial “Plastic” is too general term. Replace “Plastic” by: PCV, PE, etc. Noted
– 29 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
PL 39 Table D.4 Title Technical The term “surge immunity” should rather Note 1 - For electronic devices, also
be used in the case of electronic surge immunity according to
devices. Adequate note to the title IEC 61000-4–5 and IEC 62305-4 (p. 50 –
seems to be advisable. figure A.1) should be taken in account.
DK27 D.1.1 Table D.5 T Essentially no lightning currents above Delete rows for 300 kA – 600 kA Noted. Leave as it is. See DE30.
200 kA peak have ever been recorded, Probability of occurrence of lightning
hence including values 300 kA, 400 kA currents greater than 200 kA is not 0!
and 600 kA are completely without Lightning currents over 200 kA may
foundation occur even if not yet recorded.
DE 53 Annex F T … overvoltages are expected to be lower Change text and formula: Agreed.
than 4 kV and only 2 per 1000 have a
magnitude exceeding 2.5 kV.
… in excess of 2,5 kV or 4 kV by the … in excess of 2,5 kV (but lower than
following equation: 4 kV) by the following equation:
N = 0,002 n / 2000 N = 0,002 n
DE 54 Annex F T Why the limit value is 2,5 kV while it is Change limit value to 1,5 kV Switching overvoltages are related to
1,5 kV elsewhere in the CD (see Annex power lines and relevant equipment.
A.3, Table A.4 and examples Annex H) ?
DK28 Annex F Line above E ‘..in excess of 2.5 kV or 4 kV...’ ‘...in the range 2,5 kV to 4 kV...’ See DE 53.
equation
DK29 Annex F Equation T For consistency with the text ‘ .. only 2 N = 0,002 · n See DE 53.
per 1000...’ the equation should be:
N = 0,002 · n
DE 55 Annex G Whole Annex T Procedure is not more needed (see Delete Annex G See DE 19.
comment to para. 4.3.5)
DE 56 Annex H Whole Annex T Has to be revised taking account the Agreed.
changes in the main part and in the
annexes A – C. In addition to that, some
headlines have the wrong numbers.
FR9 Annex H H0 General Part H0 is well documented but need to Improvement of part H0 is needed See DE 56.
be revisited to make it crystal clear.
For example, there is a line in the table
which says, “line aerial “ and the answer
is for example “no”; which means this is
an underground cable. A more
understandable question would be:”type
of line: overhead or underground”
IT 20 Annex H Technical Examples should be updated according See DE 56.
the amendments of main text
– 30 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
PL 40 H General Annex H is presented in artificially The following procedure is proposed: See DE 56.
complicated way. Considerations should - define the examples to be
be limited to representative examples of considered;
risk calculation for typical structures. - establish the data for structures and
Separate calculations of selected services of every example;
quantities (basic examples) should be - precise the assumptions;
eliminated. - select adequate equations;
It is impossible to introduce symbols - insert relevant data to equations,
additional to those used in the main part - create the table of calculation
of the document. Definition 3.33 and results;
some general statements in 5.1 cannot - compare the calculated risk values
be a base to apply additional zones. with that of tolerable one;
Gardens and outside entrance areas are - select adequate protection
not structures to be protected. measures;
− control the new value of the risk.
United Annex H Risk Assessment General The USNC would like to confirm its solid See DE 56.
States 40 Software support for the continued development of
software supporting this risk
assessment. The confusing method by
which the information is currently
presented does not lend itself to
widespread use by the public. Simplified
software is going to imperative if this risk
management document is going to gain
great acceptance.
United Annex H General This latest draft of examples is a great Provide a complete revision of the annex See DE 56.
States 41 improvement over the previous drafts, to provide a simple example of how the
but it still has a long way to go to meet requirements of the document are to be
the objectives of such an annex. implemented. Keep the focus on making
Equations used in the examples are not it clear to the first time user how the
referenced and it is not obvious how document is to be used.
some of the conclusions and values are
obtained. References to some tables
and figures do not appear to be correct.
The examples appear to be more
fragmented than is necessary. It is
recommended that WG8 review this
Annex in detail during their July 2003
meeting with a goal of providing a new
revision that can be easily followed and
does not contain unnecessary clutter.
– 31 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DE 57 Ânnex H Subclause T The equation (RV = (NL(1) · PV(1) + NL(2) · Delete PV in this erquation and give See DE 56.
H.0.2.1 PV(2)) PV h r rf Lf) is wrong. It contains a additional informations about the
second PV. parameters PV(1) and PV(2).
DK30 H.0.1 Line 4 E Change ‘Figure 6’ to ‘Figure A.2’ See DE 56.
DK31 H.0.1 Line 5 E Change ‘Figure I.0.2’ to ‘Figure H.0.2 See DE 56.
Ditto in the text to Fig H.0.2 on page 62.
DK32 H.0.1 Last line E Change ‘Table I.0.1’ to ‘Table H.0.1’ See DE 56.
DK33 H.0.1 Fig. H.0.2 E ‘...of Fig. I.0.1’ ‘..of Fig. H.0.1’ See DE 56.
DK34 H.0.2 Line 2 E Change ‘according 5.5 and 5.6’ to See DE 56.
‘according to 5.4.2 and 5.4.3’
2
DK35 H.0.2.1 Table H.0.5 E In the title to column 2 change (m ) to ( See DE 56.
1/ year )
In column 3 change ‘A5’ to ‘A4’ in both
rows.
DK36 H.0.2.1 First line after Fig. E ‘..in Table I.0.6...’ ‘..in Table H.0.6...’ See DE 56.
H.0.3
DK37 H.0.2.1 7 lines below E Should ‘Pv’ after the right hand bracket ‘)’ Possibly remove ‘Pv’ from the formula. See DE 56.
table H.0.5 and before ‘h’ be there? The values
inside the brackets contain Pv.
-2
DK38 H.0.2.1 8 lines below E Lf = 1 does not agree with table C.6 on Change Lf from 1 to 10 See DE 56.
table H.0.5 page 49 where Lf for power supply is
-2
10
rd
DK39 H.0.4 A2) 3 last line E Change ‘peculiar’ to ‘particular’ See DE 56.
And in B) on page
71 line 10
DK40 H.0.4 C) line just above E Change ‘Table H.1.1’ to ‘Table H.0.7’ See DE 56.
table H.0.7
– 32 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DK41 Rest of General See DE E The following comments are about See DE 56.
standard 56. information in the tables that is hard to
understand, and possibly incorrect.
Due to time constraints it has not been

possible to check all the information in all
the tables, so no comment does not
necessarily mean ‘ok’.
The Danish National Committee

acknowledge that a great effort has been
made in this draft to tackle an extremely
difficult and complex subject. To inspire
people to use the many complicated
rules it would help if there were more
explanatory comments to the examples.
The application examples are very

helpful as they are the only way people
will be able to understand how the
standard should be used. Hopefully the
following comments will indicate were
additional information is needed.
Without a clear and thorough explanation

of the application examples this very
complex standard will not be used in
practice. On the other hand, there is a
great need for guidelines and rules for
risk assessment and with an
understanding of the examples the
standard is likely to be used.
DK42 H.0.4 C) table H.07 E In the last row of the table total Presence Show symbol for Presence. See DE 56.
is 10. In column 2 no symbol is shown.
Should it be nt as used in the formula for
Lx in C.2. on page 46
-3
DK43 H.0.4 Table H.0.8 E In row 1 ra is 0,01. In table C.2 it is 10 Change ra from 0,01 to 0,001 See DE 56.
for grass.
DK44 H.0.4 Table H.0.8 E In row 2 change the symbol from ‘r’ to ‘rf’ See DE 56.
as shown in table C.4 on page 48
– 33 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DK45 H.0.4 Table H.0.8 E In row 4 change the symbol from ‘rf’ to ‘r’ See DE 56.
as shown in table C.3 on page 47
DK46 H.0.4. Table H.0.9 E In row 9 the value of Lt is 0,01 and in row Explain where the values for Lt and Lf See DE 56.
10 the value of Lf is 0,01. This is come from.
consistent with table C.1 on page 47
-2
where Lt inside buildings is 10 and Lf is
-2
10 for Hospitals, Hotels and Civil
buildings. But is the structure in this
example in that group of structures?
Generally, it is not easy to work out
where the values for Lt and Lf in this and
other examples come from.
DK47 H.0.4 Table H.0.9 E No symbol is shown for Presence. Is ‘n’ Show symbol for Presence See DE 56.
or ‘nt’?
DK48 H.0.4 Table H.0.12 E In row 3 column 3 a ‘)’ is missing Correct See DE 56.
In row 1 and 2 column 4

µ has been replaced by □
DK49 H.0.4. Table H.016 E In row 9 the value of Lt is 0,001 and in Explain where the values for Lt and Lf See DE 56.
row 10 the value of Lf is 0,001. Where do come from. And explain at table C.1 on
these values come from? Could it be that page 47 that the values in the table
the values in table C.1 should be should be multiplied by n / nt
multiplied with 0,1 because Presence is
1 (se row 12) and Presence for the
structure is 10 (shown in H.0.7 ).? If that
is so the symbol for Presence in table
H.07 should be ‘nt’ and in table H.016 it
should be ‘n’ and furthermore the values
in table C.1 on page 47 should then be
multiplied by n/nt (which in this case is
0,1).
DK50 H.0.4 Table H.0.16 E No symbol is shown for Presence. Is it Show symbol for Presence See DE 56.
‘n’?
Dk51 H.0.4 Table H.0.17 E Same type of comment as DK49 Same as for DK49 See DE 56.
Dk52 H.0.4 Table H.0.17 E Same comment as DK50 Same as for DK50 See DE 56.
DK53 H.0.4 Line just above E ‘No people is attending in outside the ? See DE 56.
Table H.0.8 building’
- what does this mean?

– 34 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DK54 H.0 – H.4 Tables E (La·Wa·Ha) should be (La ·W a·Ha) (La ·W a·Ha) See DE 56.
H.0.10
H.0.11
H.2.7
H.2.8
H.3.6
H.3.7
H.3.8
H.4.3
H.4.4
DK55 H.0-H.4 Tables E Symbol: ra Should be: ra See DE 56.

H.0.16
H.0.17
H.2.2
H.2.3
H.2.4
H.2.5
H.2.6
H.3.2
H.3.3
H.3.4
H.3.5
H.4.2
DK56 H.1.2 a) Line 5 E Pu is shown as 0,03 which according to Change Pu from 0,03 to 0,01. See DE 56.
table B.3 page 41 is for LPL III-IV, but
here in this example an SPD LPL I is
used so Pu = 0,01 according to table B.3
DK57 H.1.2 4 lines above Change ‘Table H.0.8’ to ‘Table H.0.9’ See DE 56.
table H1.1.2
DK58 H.2.2.2 Tables H.2.2 and E See DE 56.
H.2.3 In row 2 change symbol ‘r’ to ‘rf’. In row 4
change symbol ‘rf’ to ‘r’.
– 35 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DK59 H.2.2.2 Tables H.2.2, E If Presence is nt and Attendance is n = Explain where Lt , Lf and Lo come from. See DE 56.
H.2.3 170 (table H.2.1) then you get the values
for Lt in tables H.2.2 and H.2.3 by
multiplying the values for Lt in table C.1
by nt / n. But why are Lf and Lo not shown
in tables H.2.2 and H.2.3?
DK60 H.2.2.2 Table H.2.4 E Again, as in earlier comments the values Explain where Lt and Lf come from. See DE 56.
Lt = 0,0009 and Lf = 0,00045 can be
derived from table C.1 on page 47 if it is
assumed that the values in the table
should be multiplied by nt / n. But the
explanation to the table does not say so.
DE 58 Annex H Subclause H.1.2 T The relevant risk components RV of the Change “SPD system” into “LPS due to See DE 56.
two lines are reduced by an SPD for equipotential bonding”.
equipotential bonding. A SPD system is
not necessary here.
DE 59 Annex H Subclause H.2.7 T The whole subclause is not to be Revise the subclause H.2.7. See DE 56.
understood. It needs additional
information.
DE 60 Annex H Table H.2.19 T The price for an LPS type IV (50.000 $) Change the price to a more realistic one See DE 56.
is not realistic, compared to the price for (e.g. 5.000 $ or so).
a SPD system (5.000 $).
DK61 H.2.6.1 Line 1 on page 85 E Change ‘I.2.1 to I.2.8’ to ‘H.2.1 to H.2.8’. See DE 56.
DK62 H.2.6.1 Line 3 on page 85 E Change ‘I.2.14’ ‘H.2.14’. See DE 56.
DK63 H.3.2.2 Table H.3.4 E Where does R1 Lf = 0,008 in row 10 See DE 56.
come from? And why in row 11 is there
no Lo value for R1?
DK64 H.3.2.2 Table H.3.5 E Where do R1 Lf = 0,01 in row 10 and R1 See DE 56.
Lo = 0,001 in row 11 come from?
DK65 H.3.3 Table H.3.6 E In the last row why is there no value for See DE 56.
Cda?
DE 61 Annex H Subclause H.3.7 T The solution “Type IV LPS” for a hospital Change the calculation to a more See DE 56.
(without the intensive care unit) in a realistic case.
surrounding with Ng = 4 flashes per km2
and year is unrealistic and will lead to
questions about the possibility of
application of this standard from the
lightning protection community.
– 36 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
DK66 H.3.7 Line 1 E Replace division sign with ‘-‘. See DE 56.
DK67 I.1.2.1 Table I.1.2 E Why in row 8 is PLI = 0,45? This value is See DE 56.
not In table B.7 on p. 45 for R < 1 (nor
for any other value of R). And Ui for the
equipment is not shown in table I.1.2.
FR10 Annex H H1 to H4 Editorial This part is not well documented. To More detailed example should be worked See DE 56.
allow calculations by the reader and out
compare the results each calculation
step should be included explaining what
are the choice made and what are the
equations used and what is the result for
each equation and parameters
FR11 Annex H Table H.4.3 Technical The sentence “transformer: none” is not Clarify this line of the table. Answer, It is a low voltage line without HV/LV
understood. There is a LV underground should be: transformer: yes transformer within 1000 m away from the
cable of 100 m without MV/LV structure (maximum considered length of
transformer at its end, so the supply is line).
coming from what?
FR12 Annex H Table H.4.5 Editorial This is not understood. We are studying Apply the annexes to one example only See DE 56.
one case, why some parameters such as and not to show the influence of
height of the building or risk of fire are some parameters
now a variable
JP 25 ANNEX H E “( see Figure 6 )” should be “( see Figure See DE 56.
H.0.1 H.0.2 )”.
JP 26 ANNEX H E “whit” should be “with” See DE 56.

H.0.3
JP 27 ANNEX H E “two store” should be “two stories” See DE 56.

H.0.3.1
JP 28 ANNEX H E “P1” and “P1 and S1” should be “P1” and See DE 56.
H.0.3.1 “P1 and S1” respectively.
JP 29 ANNEX H E “P1+S1” should be “P1+S1”. See DE 56.

H.0.3.2
– 37 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
JP 30 ANNEX H E ・Internal systems See DE 56.
H.0.3.3 “LV power line” in the first indent should
be deleted.
JP 31 ANNEX H E B) Risk R4 See DE 56.

H.0.4 “according to Annex J” should be
“according to Annex G”.
JP 32 ANNEX H E See DE 56.

C)Study case
H.0.4
“are reported in Table H.1.1” should be
“are reported in Table H.0.7”.
JP 33 ANNEX H Table H.0.10 and E “Soil resistivity” should be See DE 56.
H.0.11 “Soil resistivity (Ω
Ω･m)”.
2
JP 34 ANNEX H Table H.0.12 E Two formulas “Ada = ” and “Adb = “should Ada=[LaWa+6Ha(La+W a)+9π
π(3Ha) ] See DE 56.
2
be corrected. Adb=[LbWb+6Hb(Lb+W b)+9π
π(3Hb) ]
JP 35 ANNEX H Table E In the column of from, two “(A6)” should See DE 56.
H.0.13 be “(A5)”
-5
JP 36 ANNEX H E “tolerable value Ra = 10 ” should be See DE 56.
-5
H.1.2 and “tolerable value RT = 10 ”.
H.2.6.1
JP 37 ANNEX H Table H.1.2 E The TOTAL values of RV(line P1) and See DE 56.
RV(line S1) should be “0.0424”
JP 38 ANNEX H E “The building includes offices, archive See DE 56.

H.2.2.1 and computer centre” should be deleted
since this clause is mentioned already in
H.2.1 General.
JP 39 ANNEX H Table H.2.4 E The two Symbols of Parameters “Risk of See DE 56.
fire” and “Fire protection” should be “ r “
and “ rf “ respectively.
JP 40 ANNEX H E “LV power line” in the second indent See DE 56.

H.2.3 should be deleted.
– 38 – 81/222/CC
(General/
Technical/
Editorial)
JP 41 ANNEX H E “are reported Table I.2.14” should be See DE 56.
H.2.6.1 “are reported Table H.2.14”.
PL 41 Tables H.2 Line 1 Technical Marble, grass and linoleum are not a soil Soil type or surface layer
type.
IT 21 Annex I technical Examples should be updated according Agreed.
the amendments of main text
Attached to these comments is an appendix, consisting of the annexes A, B and C of 81/213/CD IEC 62305-2 CD with all the changes proposed above by DE worked into the document.
Attached to these comments is an appendix, consisting of the Table 9 and Table A.2 with all the changes proposed above by IT worked into the document.
Committee Comment on Annex H:
– 39 – 81/222/CC
DE-Comment to collection areas A and annual number of flashes N
Avoiding inconsistency between Dm and Di
If actually Dm = 250 m for structures, Di for lines shall be in the same order and therefore cannot be Di=500 m for
overhead or Di=25√ρ for underground lines with maximum = 559 m. Moreover a maximum width of 2Di = 1000 m
together with a maximum length of Lc = 1000 m seems not reasonable.
More reasonable for lines then would be Di = 250 m for overhead and Di = 10 √ρ for underground lines with maximum =
224 m. Now the maximum width of 2Di = 500 m and the maximum length of Lc = 1000 m are better in agreement.
Am
Dm
Ai Di
Dd Ad
Aa Da
Dl
Al Wa
W Ha
H
La
L
Lc
– 40 – 81/222/CC
ANNEX A
(Informative)
Assessment of annual number N of dangerous events
A.1. General
The annual number N of lightning flashes influencing an object to be protected depends on the thunderstorm activity of
the region where the object is located and on its physical characteristics. It is generally accepted to evaluate the number
N by multiplying the lightning ground flash density Ng by an equivalent collection area A of the object.
2
The lightning ground flash density Ng, in number of lightning flashes per km and per year, should be determined by
measurements.
NOTE - If the map of Ng is not available, it may be estimated by :

Ng ≈ 0,1 Td
where Td, the thunderstorm days per year, may be obtained from isokeraunic maps.
Events that may be considered as dangerous for a structure to be protected are:
- flashes to the structure;

- flashes near the structure;
- flashes to a service entering the structure;
- flashes near a service entering the structure;
- flashes to a structure to which a service is connected.
Events that may be considered as dangerous for a service to be protected are:
- flashes to the service;

- flashes near the service;
- flashes to the structure to which the service is connected.
A.2. Assessment of average annual number of flashes to a structure (ND , ND a)
ND may be evaluated as the product :

–6
ND = Ng Ad Cd 10
with
2
- Ng lightning ground flash density (flash/km /year)
2
- Ad collection area of the isolated structure (m )
- Cd factor taking into account the influence of the relative location of object to be protected (see Table A.1).
Table A.1 Location factor Cd
Relative location Cd
Object surrounded by other objects or 0,5
trees
Isolated object: no other objects in the 1
vicinity
Isolated object on a hilltop or a knoll 2
For isolated structures on a flat ground, the collection area Ad is the area defined by the
intersection between the ground surface and a straight line with 1/3 slope which passes
from the upper parts of the structure (touching it there) and rotating around it (see Figure
– 41 – 81/222/CC
A.1). For an isolated rectangular structure with length L, width W, and height H on a flat
ground, the collection area is then equal to:
For an isolated rectangular structure with length L, width W and height H on a flat ground,
the collection area is then equal to:
Ad = LW + 6 H (L + W) + 9 (H)2
being L,W and H expressed in meters.
NOTE - A more precise evaluation could be obtained considering the relative height of the structure with
respect to the surrounding objects or the soil within a distance of 3H from the structure.
NDa as the number of flashes to a structure connected at the end of the service may be
evaluated as the product :
NDa = ND Ct
with
- Ct correction factor for the presence of a transformer on the service to which the
structure is connected, located between the point of strike and the structure( see Table
A.3)
A.3. Assessment of average annual number of flashes near a structure (NM)
NM may be evaluated as the product :
NM = Ng Am 10 –6
with :
- Ng lightning ground flash density (flash/km 2/year)
- Am area of influence of the structure (m 2)
The area of influence of the structure Am is defined as the area surrounding the structure
where a lightning strike creates a magnetic field which may induce in a loop of 100 m2, an
overvoltage greater, or at least equal, to the impulse withstand voltage level of 1,5 kV of
internal systems.
It extends to a line located at a distance Dm = 250 m from the perimeter of the structure.
The area of influence Am is calculated as the difference between the area enclosed by this
line and the collection area Ad Cd of the structure.
NOTE – If Am < 0, it is assumed Am = 0
A.4. Assessment of average annual number of flashes to a service (NL)
For one section line, NL may be evaluated by :
NL = Ng Al Cd Ct10-6
– 42 – 81/222/CC
with:
- Ng lightning ground flash density (flash/km2.year)
- Al collection area of flashes striking the service (m2) ( see Table A.2 and Figure A.1)
- Cd location factor of service (see Table A.1)
- Ct correction factor for the presence of a HV/LV transformer located between the point
of strike and the structure( see Table A.3)
TABLE A. 2 – Collection areas Al and Ai depending on the service characteristics
Aerial Buried
Al (Lc –3(Ha+ Hb)) 6 Hc (Lc –3(Ha+ Hb)) 0,8

√ρ
Ai Lc 500 Lc 20√ρ
Hc = height (m) of the service conductors above ground ;

ρ = resistivity (Ωm) of the ground in which the cable is buried;
Lc = lenght (m) of the service from the structure to the first distribution node (e.g. HV/LV
station) or the first point where SPD are installed on the service, with a maximum value of
1000 m ;
Ha = height (m) of the structure connected at end “a” of service;
Hb = height (m) of the structure connected at end “b” of service.
For the purposes of this calculation:
− the maximum value of resistivity to be assumed is ρ = 500 Ωm;

− the maximum value of Lc to be assumed is Lc = 1000 m. Where the value of Lc is
unknown, Lc = 1000 m is to be assumed;
− for underground cables running entirely within a highly meshed earth termination, the
equivalent collection area Ai = Al = 0 may be assumed;
− structure to be protected shall be assumed to be the one connected at “b” end of
service.
Table A.3 Transformer factor Ct
Transformer Ct
Service with transformer 0,2
Service only 1
A.5. Assessment of average annual number of flashes near a service (NI)
For a one section (overhead, underground, screened, unscreened, etc.)line, the value of NI
may be evaluated by
– 43 – 81/222/CC
NI = Ng Ai Ce Ct 10 –6
with:
- Ng lightning ground flash density (flash/km2.year)
- Ai collection area of flashes to ground near the service (m2) (see Table A.2)
- Ce environmental factor (see Table A.4).
- Ct correction factor for the presence of a HV/LV transformer located between the point
of strike and the structure( see Table A.3)
Table A.4 Environmental factor Ce
Environment Ce
Urban 0
Suburban 0,5
Rural 1
NOTE -The collection area Ai of the service is defined by its length Li and by the lateral distance Di (see
Figure A.1) at which a lightning strike near the service causes induced overvoltages not lower than
1,5 kV.
– 44 – 81/222/CC
1:3
H
3H
Figure A.1 – Collection area of an isolated structure
Am
250 m
Ai
Di
Ad 3H
Dl
3Ha
Aa
L H Al Ha La
end “b” end “a” Wa
of line of line
W
LC
Figure A.2 – Collection areas relevant to the structure and the relevant incoming
services
– 45 – 81/222/CC
ANNEX B
(Informative)
Assessment of probability P of damage for a structure
The probabilities given in this Annex are valid if protection measures comply with:
- IEC 62305-3 for protection measures to reduce injuries to living beings and for
protection measures to reduce physical damages
- IEC 62305-4 for protection measures to reduce failures of internal systems
Other values may be chosen if justified.
Values for K and P less than 1 may only be taken, if the measure or characteristic is
valid for the entire structure to be protected or for all relevant equipment.
B.1 Probability PA that a lightning will cause injuries to living beings
The values of probability PA of shock to human beings due to touch and step voltage by
strike to the structure are reported in Table B.1 as a function of typical protection
measures:
Table B.1 – Values of probability PA that a lightning will cause a shock to living
beings due to dangerous touch and step voltages
Protection measure PA
No protection measures 1
Electrical insulation of exposed 10 -2
conductor (e.g. at least 3 mm cross-
linked polyethylene)
Effective soil equipotentialisation 10 -2
Warning notices 10 –1
If more than one provision has been taken, the value of PA is the product of the
corresponding PA values.
NOTE 1 - For more information see 5.3.7 and 5.3.8 of IEC 62305-3
NOTE 2 - Where the structure’s reinforcing members, or framework is used as down conductor system, or
where physical restriction are provided, the value of probability PA is negligible.
B.2 Probability PB that a flash to a structure will cause physical damages
The values of probability PB of physical damage by flash striking the structure is reported in
Table B.2, as function of LPS type.
– 46 – 81/222/CC
Table B.2 Values of PB depending on the protection measures to reduce physical

damages
Characteristics of Type of LPS PB

structure
Structure not protected by _ 1
an LPS
Structure protected by an IV 0,2
LPS or structure with III 0,1
continuous metal or II 0,05
reinforced concrete I 0,02
framework acting as
natural LPS, bonding and
earthing included
B.3 Probability PC that a flash to a structure will cause failure of internal systems
The probability PC that a flash to a structure will cause a failure of internal systems
depends on the adopted SPD system:
PC = PSPD
Values of PSPD depend on lightning protection level (LPL) for which SPD are designed, as
reported in Table B.3.
Table B.3 – Value of the probability PSPD

depending on LPL for which SPD
are designed
LPL PSPD
No SPD system 1
III-IV 0,03
II 0,02
I 0,01
NOTE 1 - If only an LPS with equipotential bonding SPDs according to IEC 62305-3 exists, then PSPD = 1.
NOTE 2 - If a LPS acc. to IEC 62305-3 exists and a SPD-system is chosen as an overvoltage protection measure, the
LPL on which Pc is based must be identical or higher than the LPL on which PB is based.”
B.4 Probability PM that a lightning flash near the structure will cause failure of
internal systems
The probability PM that a lightning flash near a structure will cause failure of internal
systems depends on the adopted LPM, according to factor KMS (see Table B.4).
When LPM are provided, value of PM is the lowest between PSPD and PMS.
The values of PMS as function of KMS are reported in Table B.4, where KMS is a factor taking
into account the performances of the adopted protection measures.
– 47 – 81/222/CC
Table B.4 – Value of the probability PM depending on factor KM
KMS PMS
≥ 0,4 1
0,15 0,9
0,07 0,5
0,035 0,1
0,021 0,01
0,016 (*) 0,005
0,015 (*) 0,003
0,014 (*) 0,001
≤ 0,013 (*) 0,0001
(*) Valid for lightning current greater than those relevant to LPL I
NOTE - (Background of the values given in the table.)
For internal systems with equipment not complying with the relevant EMC immunity
product standards PMS = 1 shall be assumed.
The values of factor KMS are obtained from the product :
KMS = KS1 KS2 KS3 KS4
where :
- KS1 takes into account the screening effectiveness of the structure, LPS or other
shields at boundary LPZ 0/1;
- KS2 takes into account the screening effectiveness of shields internal to the structure at
boundary LPZ X/Y (X>0,Y>1);
- KS3 takes into account the characteristics of internal wiring (Table B.5).
- KS4 takes into account the impulse withstand voltage of the system to be protected .
Inside an LPZ, at safety distance from the boundary screen at least equal to the
mesh width w, factors K S1 and K S2 for LPS or spatial grid-like shields may be
evaluated as
KS1 = KS2 = 0,12 w
being w [m] the mesh width of grid-like spatial shield or of mesh type LPS down
conductors or the spacing between the structure metal columns or between reinforced
concrete framework acting as natural LPS.
For shields of full continuous metal sheath KS1 = KS2 =10-4-10-5 shall be assumed, ranging
the thickness s of the shield from s=0,1mm to 0,5 mm.
For distances ranging from 0,1 w to 0,2 w the values of KS1 and KS2 have to be doubled.
– 48 – 81/222/CC
NOTE 1 - Where induced loop is running close to the LPZ boundary screen conductors at distance shorter
than the safety distance, the values of KS1 and KS2 are higher. For distances ranging from 0,1 w to 0,2 w
the values of KS1 and KS2 have to be doubled.
NOTE 2 - The maximum value of KS1 is limited to 1.
For a cascade of LPZ the resulting KS2 is the product of the relevant KS2 of each LPZ.
Table B.5 – Value of factor KS3 depending on internal wiring
Type of internal wiring KS3

Unshielded cable- No routing precaution
in order to avoid loops (*) 1
Unshielded cable- Routing precaution 0,2
in order to avoid large loops (**)
Unshielded cable- Routing precaution 0.02
in order to avoid loops (***)
Shielded cable (1) R ≥5 0,1
Shielded cable (1) 1 ≤ R < 5 0,02
Shielded cable (1) R <1 0,01
1) Cable with shield of resistance R (Ω / km) bonded to
equipotential bonding bar at both ends
(*) Loop conductors with different routing in large buildings.
(**) Loop conductors routing in the same conduit or loop
conductors with different routing in small buildings.
(***) Loop conductors routing in the same cable.
For wiring running in continuous metal conduit bonded to equipotential bonding bar at both
ends, Ks3 values shall be multiplied by 0,1.
Factor KS4 shall be evaluated as:
KS4 = 1,5 / Ui
where Ui is the rated impulse withstand voltage of system to be protected, in kV.
If in an internal system there are apparatus with different impulse withstand levels, the
factor KS4 relevant to the lowest impulse withstand level should be assumed.
B.5. Probability PU that a flash to a service will cause injuries of living beings
The values of probability PU of injuries to living beings due to touch voltage by a flash to a
service entering the structure depend on the characteristics of service shield, on the
impulse withstand voltage of internal systems connected to the service, on typical
protection measures (physical restrictions, warning notices, etc. – see Table B.1) and on
SPD provided (see Table B.6).
When an SPD(s) is provided for equipotential bonding according to IEC 62305-3, value of
PU is the lowest between PSPD (Table B.3) and PLD. Values of PLD are reported in Table
B.6.
– 49 – 81/222/CC
NOTE - An entire SPD-system according to IEC 62305-4 is not necessary here to reduce PU. SPD(s)
according to IEC 62305-3 are sufficient.
Table B.6 – Value of the probability PLD depending on resistance R of the

service shield and the impulse withstand voltage
Ui of the equipment.
Ui R ≥5 5 > R ≥1 R <1
(kV) (Ω / km) (Ω / km) (Ω / km)
1,5 1 0,9 0,8
2,5 0,4 0,1 0,04
4 0,2 0,05 0,006 (*)
6 0,05 0,02 0,003 (*)
R (Ω / km): resistance of the cable

shield
(*) Valid for lightning current greater
than those relevant to LPL I
For unshielded service PLD =1 shall be taken.

When protection measures, such as physical restrictions, warning notices, etc. are
provided, probability P U shall be further reduced by multiplying it by the values of
probability P A reported in Table B.1.
B.6 Probability PV that a flash to a service will cause a physical damage
The values of probability PV of physical damages by a flash to a service entering the

structure depend on the characteristics of service shield, on the impulse withstand voltage
of internal systems connected to the service and on SPD provided ( see Table B.6).
When an SPD(s) is provided for equipotential bonding according to IEC 62305-3, value of
PV is the lowest between PSPD (Table B.3) and PLD. Values of PLD are reported in Table
B.6.
NOTE - An entire SPD-system according to IEC 62305-4 is not necessary here to reduce PV. SPD(s)
according to IEC 62305-3 are sufficient.
B.7 Probability PW that a flash to a service will cause failure of internal systems
The values of probability PW that a flash striking a service entering the structure will cause
a failure of internal systems depend on the characteristics of service shield on the impulse
withstand voltage of internal systems connected to the service and on SPD provided (see
Table B.6).
– 50 – 81/222/CC
When an SPD system is provided, value of PW is the lowest between PSPD (Table B.3) and
PLD. Values of PLD are reported in Table B.6.
B.8 Probability PZ that a lightning flash near an incoming service will cause
failure of internal systems
The values of probability PZ that a lightning flash striking near a service entering the
structure will cause a failure of internal systems depend on the characteristics of service
shield, on the impulse withstand voltage of the system connected to the service and on
protection measures provided:.
PZ = PSPD PLi
being
- PSPD the probability that overvoltages will cause failures when a SPD-system
(according to IEC 62305-4) is provided (Table B.3);
- PLi the probability that overvoltages on the line lead to failures of electrical or electronic
systems depending on the section S of the line shield and the impulse withstand
voltage of the equipment (Table B.7.
When an SPD system is provided, value of PZ is the lowest between PSPD (Table B.3) and
PLI. Values of PLI are reported in Table B.7.
Table B.7 – Value of the probability PLI depending on resistance R of the service
shield
and the impulse withstand voltage Ui of the equipment.
Ui No R≥5 5 > R ≥1 R<1

(kV) screen (Ω/km) (Ω/km) (Ω/km)
1,5 1 1 0,9 0,8
2,5 0,6 0,4 0,1 0,04
4 0,4 0,2 0,05 0,006(*)
6 0,25 0,05 0,02 0,003(*)
R: resistance of the cable shield (Ω / km)

(*) Valid for lightning current greater than those
relevant to LPL I

– 51 – 81/222/CC
ANNEX C
(Informative)
Assessment of amount of loss L for a structure
The values given in this Annex are values proposed by the IEC. Other values may be
chosen if based on calculations and documented assumptions.
C.1. Average relative amount of loss per year
The loss L refers to the mean relative amount of a peculiar type of damage, its extent and
the
consequential effects , which may occur as the result of a lightning strike. Its value
depends on:
- the number of persons and the time for which they remain in the hazardous place;
- the type and importance of the service provided to the public;
- the value of the goods affected by the damage.
The loss L varies with the type of loss (L1, L2, L3 and L4) considered and, for each type of
loss, with the type of damage (D1, D2 and D3) which has caused it. The following symbols
are used:
Lt loss due to injuries by touch and step voltages

Lf loss due to physical damages
Lo loss due to failure of internal systems.
C.2. Loss of human life
The value of Lt, Lf and Lo may be determined from the approximate relation:
Lx = n /nt∗ t / 8760 (relative number of victims)

where
n is the number of possible victims from a lightning strike;
nt is the expected total number of persons in the structure;
t is the time in hours per year for which the persons are present in a dangerous
place, outside of the structure (Lt only) or inside the structure (Lt , Lf and Lo).
Typical mean values of Lt, Lf and Lo, which may be assumed when the determination of n,
nt and t is uncertain or difficult, are reported in Table C.1. Other values may be chosen if
justified.
NOTE - It is recommended to apply the given approximate relation.

– 52 – 81/222/CC
Table C.1 – Typical mean values of Lt , Lf and Lo
Type of structure Lt
All – Inside buildings 10-4

All – Outside buildings 10-2
Type of structure Lf
Hospitals, Hotels, Civil buildings 0,1

Industrial, Commercial, School 0,05
Public entertainment, Churches, Museum 0,02
Others 0,01
Type of structure Lo
Risk of explosion 10-1

Hospitals 10-3
Others 10-5
Loss of human life are affected by structure characteristics which are taken into account by
increasing (h) and decreasing (rf, r, ra) factors as follows:
LA= ra Lt
LU = ra Lt
LB= LV = r h rf Lf
LC= LM = LW = LZ = Lo
Table C.2 – Values of reduction factor ra depending on the type of soil or floor
Type of soil or floor Contact resistance (k Ω)* ra

Agricoltural, Concrete ≤1 10-2
Marble, Ceramic, Gres 1 ÷10 10-3
Gravel, Moquette, Carpets 10 ÷100 10-4
Asphalt, linoleum, Wood ≥ 100 10-5
(*) Values measured between a 400 cm2 electrode compressed with force of 500
N and a point of infinity.
Table C.3 – Values of reduction factor r depending on provisions taken to reduce

the consequence of fire
Provisions r
No provisions 1
One of the following provisions: extinguishers, fixed manually operated 0,5
extinguishing installations, manual alarm installations, hydrants, fire proof
compartments, protected escape routes;
– 53 – 81/222/CC
One of the following provisions: fixed automatically operated extinguishing 0,2

installations, automatic alarm installations(*);
(*) only if protected against overvoltages or other damages and time of fire men
operation is t < 10 min;.
If more than one provision has been taken, the value of r is the product of the
corresponding values of each involved provision lowest between the individual values.
In structures with risk of explosion , r = 1 in all cases.
Table C.4 – Values of reduction factor rf depending on risk of fire of structure
Risk of fire rf
Explosion 1
High 10-1
Ordinary 10-2
Low 10-3
None 0
NOTE - In case of structures with risk of explosion and structures containing explosive mixtures a more
detailled evaluation of rf may be necessary. Then the values given in Table C.4 are not applicable.
Table C.5 – Values of factor h increasing the relative amount of damages in

presence of special hazard
Kind of special hazard h

No special hazard 1
Low level of panic (structure limited to two floors and the 2
number of persons not greater than 100)
Average level of panic (structures designed for cultural or 5
sport events with a number of participants between 100
and 1000 persons)
Difficulty of evacuation (structures with immobilised 5
persons)
High level of panic (structures designed for cultural or 10
sport events with a number of participants greater than
1000 persons)
Hazard for surroundings or environment 20
Contamination of surroundings or environment 50
C.3. Unacceptable loss of service to the public
The values of Lf and Lo can be determined from the approximate relation:
Lx = n/ nt * t/ 8760 (relative amount of possible losses)

where
n is the mean number of users not served;
nt is the total number of users served;
t is the annual period of loss of service, in hours.
– 54 – 81/222/CC
Typical mean values of Lf and Lo, which may be assumed when the determination of n, nt
and t is uncertain or difficult, are reported in Table C.6. Other values may be chosen if
justified.
Table C.6 – Typical mean values of Lf and Lo
Type of service Lf Lo
Gas, Water 10-1 10-2
TV, TLC, Power Supply 5*10-2 10-3
Loss of service to the public are affected by structure characteristics and by decreasing
factors (r) as follows:
LB= LV = r rf Lf
being the values of factors reported in:
− r in Table C.3
− rf in Table C.4
C.4. Loss of irreplaceable cultural heritage
The value of Lf can be determined from the approximate relation:
Lx = c / ct (relative amount of possible loss)
where
c is the insurable value of possible loss of goods, in currency;

ct is the total insured value of all goods present in the structure, in currency
Typical mean values of Lf, which may be assumed when the determination of n, nt and t is
uncertain or difficult is:
Lf = 10-1 for Museum or Gallery
Loss of irreplaceable cultural heritage are affected by structure characteristics by

decreasing factors (r) as follows:
LB= LV = r rf Lf

– 55 – 81/222/CC
− r in Table C.3
− hf in Table C.4
C.5. Economic loss
The value of Lt, Lf and Lo can be determined from the approximate relation:
Lx = c / ct (relative amount of possible loss)

where
− c is the mean value of possible loss of the structure, its content and of relevant
activities, in currency;
− ct is the total value of the structure, its content and of relevant activities, in
currency.
Typical mean values of Lt, Lf and Lo for all types of structures, which may be assumed
when the determination of n, nt and t is uncertain or difficult, are given in table C.7.
Table C.7 – Typical mean values of Lt , Lf and Lo
Type of structure Lt
All – Inside buildings 10-4
All – Outside buildings 0,01
Type of structure Lf
Hospital, Industrial, Museum, Agriculture 0,5
Hotel, School, Office, Church, Public 0,2
entertainment, Economic building
Others 0,1
Type of structure Lo
Risk of explosion 0,1
Hospital, Industrial, Office, Hotel, 0,01
Economic building
Museum, Agriculture, School, Church, 10-3
Public entertainment
Others 10-4

Loss of economical values are affected by structure characteristics by increasing (h, hf)
and decreasing (r, ra) factors as follows:
LA= ra Lt
LB= LV = r rf h Lf
− ra in Table C.2
− r in Table C.3
− hf in Table C.4
– 56 – 81/222/CC
− h in Table C.5
Only values of h relevant to hazard or contamination of surroundings shall be
considered.
ANNEX 1 IT - Comment to risk components for a service
Table 9 –Risk components for a service for different types of damage caused by different sources
Source of S3 S4 S1
Lightning flash Lightning Lightning flash Resulting risk
damage to a service flash near to a structure according to
a service the type of
damage
Type of Damage
D2 R'V = [Σ NLiP'Vi] R'B = Σ [NDi RF = R`V + R`B
Physical damage L'V P'Bi] L'B
D3
failure of electrical R'W = [Σ NLi P'Wi] R'Z = max(NIi – R'C = Σ [NDi RI = R`Z + R`W
and electronic L'W NLi ) P'Zi] L'Z P'Ci] L'C + R`C
systems
Resulting risk
according to the RD = R`V + R`W RI = R`Z + R`B + R`C
source of damage
ANNEX 2 IT - Comment to collection areas of services
TABLE A. 2 – Collection areas Al and Ai depending on the line characteristics
Aerial Buried
Al (Lc –3(Ha+ Hb)) 6 Hc 15 (Lc –3(Ha+ Hb))
Ai 1000 Lc 500 Lc
NOTE – A more precise evaluation of collection areas can be carried out in accordance with the
methodology given in the informative Annex L.
Delete: ρ resistivity (Ώ m) of the ground in which the cablòe is buried.
Delete the dash: the maximum value of resistivity to be assumed is ρ = 500 Ώ m

Lightning Protection: Compilation of Comments On Committee Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lightning Protection: Compilation of Comments On Committee Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

81/222/CC

COMPILATION OF COMMENTS ON COMMITTEE DRAFT

Project number: Reference number of the CD

Title of the committee draft:

Comments received – see annex 1)

b A revised committee draft will be distributed for comment by (date) ..........

Name or signature of the Secretary Name or signature of the Chairman

G.B. Lo Piparo C. Bouquegneau

Improved examples to give a chance to

Particular attention needs to be given to

JP 1 G As both terms “service” and “incoming See DE 1.

IT 1 2 Editorial Delete IEC 61643-1998 Agreed.

JP 5 4.2.1 E “depend of” should be “depend on” Agreed.

Risk component RU should be in the Agreed.

JP 8 Table2 E Note 1 says “See note 3 of Table B.1”, Noted.

JP 9 4.2.3 E “( see Figure 2b )” should be Agreed.

“Tolerable risk RT” should be “Tolerable Not agreed.

The risk components R’z, of the service

The risk components R’B, R’C of the

The total risk R of the service is the sum

- R’ w = NL P’w L’w components related

- R’ C = ND P’C L’C components related

JP 14 Fig. 1 E “( shocks of leaving beings )” should be Agreed.

JP 15 Fig. 1 E “Failure of electrical and electronic Not agreed.

DE 23 Figures Figure 2 T Line D1: RA Replace RA by RS Agreed.

JP 17 Fig. 2 E Since the internal system is defined as Not agreed.

JP 19 Fig. 4 E “Structure or service to be protected for “Structure or service is protected for

JP 20 Fig. 5 E Position of “YES” should be corrected. Agreed.

JP 21 Fig. 5 E “protectionmeasures” should be Agreed.

JP 22 Fig. 5 E “( see Annex J )” should be Agreed.

AT 2 Fig.6 T RC is also effected by measures of Change RB > RT to RD > RT Not agreed.

Due to time constraints it has not been

The Danish National Committee

The application examples are very

Without a clear and thorough explanation

In row 1 and 2 column 4

- what does this mean?

DK55 H.0-H.4 Tables E Symbol: ra Should be: ra See DE 56.

JP 26 ANNEX H E “whit” should be “with” See DE 56.

JP 27 ANNEX H E “two store” should be “two stories” See DE 56.

JP 29 ANNEX H E “P1+S1” should be “P1+S1”. See DE 56.

JP 31 ANNEX H E B) Risk R4 See DE 56.

JP 32 ANNEX H E See DE 56.

JP 38 ANNEX H E “The building includes offices, archive See DE 56.

JP 40 ANNEX H E “LV power line” in the second indent See DE 56.

DE-Comment to collection areas A and annual number of flashes N

Avoiding inconsistency between Dm and Di

Assessment of annual number N of dangerous events

NOTE - If the map of Ng is not available, it may be estimated by :

Events that may be considered as dangerous for a structure to be protected are:

- flashes to the structure;

Events that may be considered as dangerous for a service to be protected are:

- flashes to the service;

A.2. Assessment of average annual number of flashes to a structure (ND , ND a)

ND may be evaluated as the product :

Table A.1 Location factor Cd

being L,W and H expressed in meters.

A.3. Assessment of average annual number of flashes near a structure (NM)

NM may be evaluated as the product :

NOTE – If Am < 0, it is assumed Am = 0

A.4. Assessment of average annual number of flashes to a service (NL)

For one section line, NL may be evaluated by :