ESE vs conventional lightning arresters: what the standards actually say
How early streamer emission (ESE) air terminals differ from Franklin rods and mesh systems, which standards cover each, and how to decide what your project should specify.
Ashima Electrotech technical team · 3 min read
Short answer: A conventional system uses rods, mesh and catenary wires sized by the methods in IEC 62305 (IS/IEC 62305 in India). An ESE terminal claims a larger protected radius by launching an upward streamer earlier, and is designed to NF C 17-102 (France) or UNE 21186 (Spain). IEC 62305 does not recognise any enlarged protection zone from ESE devices. Specify what your consultant, client and authority accept. Either way, the system is only as good as its down conductors and earthing.
How a conventional system works
A conventional lightning protection system (LPS) intercepts a strike with air terminals: rods, horizontal conductors on the roof, or a mesh. It carries the current down through down conductors and disperses it through an earth termination system. IEC 62305-3 sets out three methods for placing the air terminals:
- the rolling sphere,
- the protective angle,
- the mesh method.
The sphere radius, angle and mesh size depend on the lightning protection level (LPL I–IV) chosen from a risk assessment under IEC 62305-2.
What an ESE terminal claims
An ESE air terminal is designed to emit an upward streamer earlier than a plain rod would under the same conditions. This head start is measured in the laboratory as ΔT in microseconds. Under NF C 17-102, a larger ΔT translates into a larger protection radius. That is why a single ESE mast is often proposed to cover an area that would otherwise need many rods or a roof mesh.
Where the standards disagree
- NF C 17-102 and UNE 21186 define how ESE devices are tested and how their protection radius is calculated.
- IEC 62305, the basis of IS/IEC 62305, does not include ESE methods. It defines protection zones only by the physical geometry of the air-termination system. It treats claims of an enlarged zone as unproven.
Field evidence for the ESE protection-radius model is debated in the technical literature. In practice:
- if a tender or consultant specifies IS/IEC 62305, design to it;
- if they specify NF C 17-102, ensure the ESE model has a test certificate to that standard from a recognised laboratory, and that the protection radius has been calculated for the actual mast height and protection level.
What matters whichever you choose
- Down conductors: the number, route and spacing set by the standard. Make them as straight as possible, with no sharp bends.
- Earth termination: a dedicated, low-impedance earth for the LPS, bonded to the building's other earths as the standard requires. See the solar earthing checklist for an example.
- Surge protection: an external LPS does not protect equipment inside from surges. Pair it with a Type 1 SPD at the main incomer. See SPD types explained.
- Strike counters on the down conductor show whether the system is actually being hit, which helps plan inspections.
- Inspection after installation and periodically, including earth resistance and continuity tests.
From Ashima
We supply:
- ESE air terminals from Cirprotec, Protector and Orkou,
- copper and copper-bonded conventional air terminals,
- lightning strike counters,
- the earthing for the LPS: ACME electrodes and backfill, which we manufacture.
Manufacturer test documents are available on request. See the lightning protection range.
Need a quotation?
Send the product, quantity, site details and delivery city. We will suggest the right item and quote.
Products mentioned
General technical guidance, not a design for a specific site. Follow your project specification, the current editions of the applicable standards and the requirements of the inspecting authority.