Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1888-10-28
LIGHTNING RODS.
Their EnicIepcy Discussed BY Scientists
Baltimore San.


Their EnicIepcy Discussed BY Scientists
Baltimore Sun.
! At the meeting of the British Associa
ton at Bath, in September, the question
of tie prote ction of buildings from light
ming was discussed, and the old contro
versy as to the utility of using lightning
reds at all was revived in new form
Soon after Franklin's invention of the rod
armed at the upper end with a point
and with the 70 wer end buried in moist
earth, mathemsticians took up the subject
and beclouded it with ingenious doubts.
If one point he effective in drawing light
mir O from the clouds, thousand points,
they argued, would bs better, and roup d
bslj. whose surface embrace, an infinite
number of points, would be better still.
Light ng-rods were accordingly erected
with balls instead Of points, and violent
stroke. Inst cad of gradual dit charges were
thus invited. The disturber OF the peace
of the British Assc citation at this time was
Prof. s,or Oliver T. Lodge, who, re asoning
as a mathematician from certain expert
ments in his laboratory, had reached the
conclusion that lightning-rods protect
yery small areas, and those areas very I'M
perfectly. He seemed to sanction, also,
a farther heresy, to the effect that iron
rods ara better conduI tors than COPPER.
1t is hardly necessary to say that
Professor LODI e's views were req udl2tsd by
his w.electricians. Professor PreeCe,
electrician to the postcfice and president OF
the mechanical section OF the association,
combattei them with great vigor. and sus-
tanned the get of rules for the contraction
@" conductors formulated by the conference
Of enein GERS in 1870. Professor Preece has
under his supervision, he stated, five hun
dred thousand lightning conductors whose
efficien,y were not open to reasonable crit
iclsm. The poles of telegraph lines we'e
frequently struck by lightning until they
were mounted with wire running
from tie top to the ground.
The initial tallacy of Professor
Lodges reasoning, he held, lay in his as
sum ption that lightIing-rof formed part
of the flash. 1, did not. The furc tion o
the rod was to prevent the fash-to pre-
vent the possibility of the building being
struck. Ifitwe:e struck, there was some
defect in tie construction of the conductor
Its diam ter was insufficient, its parts were
improperly joined together, or its lower
ext em tg was not buried deep enough IN
the ground. Lightning did not, he con-
tended, SO caIeeripg wildly about, bnt
passed o 'ong tie Path prepared for it, An
other fallacy On which MIR. Lodges er-
rcneous cocclusions rested was his
ssurp''on that fash of Lightning is in
There was no proof of thai.
I he effect OF lightning upon telegraph
wires is to produce currents OF sensible
duration. 1t was further asstrsed that
lighting was cillstory in its charat ter;
that it did not 60 direct from the clouds to
the earth once for all, but went flashing
back ward and for1a ard with considerable
fire uuency. This assertion, however, rest
ed on iuadtquate evidence. The fact
against the theory WIS that the electro
magnets of the telegraph office were az
fected for a considerable duration OF
time ~ lightning flashes. Lstters
of the alphabet w9re sometimes sent
over tie wire, by l;ghtning-for exam
ple, the letter r, which needs three
signs; q, which needs four, and there was
a case on record of. G, wi ich needs eight
signs. A discharge from q Leydeu jar
might be osc,llat' ~, but the question was
mt about jals, but discharges from clouds.
Prof Lodge made the inference from his
theories at most conductors did not pro-
tect any area, but it was known from evi
dence that they did The experience OF
the past was preferable, in Mr.. Presce's
view, to Prof. Lodges mathematical as
al N ptiors. Upon the whole, the result Of
the discussion was to uphold tie value of
lightning rods prope ly made and properly
erected. A letter from Mr.. G. Brown Go1d,
of the Smiths ooian Institute, to the Bal
tinore Cnuuty Union, in reference
+, the protective efficiency of rods, con7
firms strongly the orc'us!ons of Prof.
P, erte Mr. Good admitted that conduc-
tors bad fallen in.o disfavor Try reason of
''the numerous cases Of lightning rods
failir 10 protect houses from damaging
strokes" but the insufficiency of the rods
in these cases resulted, he held, ''eitter
from their rot being large enough TO carry
off the whole charge, or from not having
their lower ends buried deep enough in the
earth 10 reach damp ground. AS respects
the so-called glass inso!ators, or Sleeves"
used to prevent the lightning from ent:r'
ing the house by way of the
staples that support the reds.
Mr.. Good ia of opinion that
they are useless. When wet by rain they
are good conductors, and if they tO1ld
be kept dry they would be too short
to prevent a lateral discharge. Lightning
leaps gceat distances, and an inch or two
of glass would bs no obstacle to it, course
if there were anything 10 the building to
attract it. When the summit of the Wash
ineton monument, in Washington city,
WA. struck, the lightning pass:d through
q foot or two of marble to reach thu iron
rods and framing that inclose the elevator
Much m re readily, of course, would it
have lespsd the length Of the ordinary
glass ms lator had it been the only thing
in the way.