2.
Provisions types and selection earth electrodes and their arrangements are not accordance
with those 62305.
Annex page 34
The method used for risk evaluation and selection protection level LPS (LPL) conflict with
EN 62305-2.2.
Requirements the length earth electrodes don’t comply with requirements standard for
type earth arrangement (see EN62305-3, clause 5.4.4.4.4);
- Clause 3.3.1.4
dimensions the rod are contradiction with those Standard (see 62305-3, clause
5.2, page (see Annex B)
The specification for the necessary safety distance conflict with the requirements specified EN
62305 (see 62305-3, clause 6.4).3.2, page 33, and its Figures (see Annex contrast with because introduce a
distance that not considered 62305.
The requirement minimum total length the earth termination system conflicting with
requirements standard (see 62305-3, clause 5.2.
See also comment Annexe 17-102.1.3.2
The air termination system the 17-102 standard remains essential conflict with the air
termination systems the Standard, because:
- sub-clause 2.3, page (see Annex B)
positioning criteria air termination system conflict with the requirements standard (see
EN 62305-3, clause 5.2.2.1);
Clause 4.
- sub-clause 2.5
requirements for positioning air-termination system are essential conflict with those EN
Standard (see 62305-3, clause 5.1 points out the difference with the protected zone valutated 62305-3. See also comment Subclause 2.6.
See particular Clause “METHODE SELECTION NIVEAU PROTECTION”, page 39,
Tableau “Determination besoin protection niveau protection” block number 5
(see Annex B).2 and Annex A);
requirements for positioning air termination system tall structures are entirely disregarded (see
EN 62305-3, clause 5.1, page 10-11 (see Annex B)
the model used determine the protected area conflict with the correct use the electro-
geometrical model and used standard (see 62305-1,clause A.3);
The conflict evident the text the Subclause 2.
5
.2. The arrangement type which shall preferential for lightning protection,
has been entirely disregarded (see 62305-3, clause 5.2 and Table 6);
- sub-clause 2.1.2);
Annex page 31
The protection model used determine the protected area direct and serious conflict with the
correct use the electro geometrical model used standard (see 62305-1,clause A.2 and Annex 5.3, Table 10, page 63);
Clause 4.2.3.2);
Clause 4.2.3.
Clause 2.2.2.1;
The Clause 3.2) 17-102: detailed comments related principal conflicting clearer:
Avant-Propos (see Annex B).2.2.2.4);
- sub-clause 2.1 “Zone protégée”, page 11, where the
Figures 2.2.2. See
also the comments above under sub-clause 2
