Amateur radio and CB'ers and radio and Tv stations and federal government and the milatary have been using separate ground rod and rods since the beginning of electromagnetic communications many years ago.

I get both your points.

I'm pretty sure a separate ground rod would effectively reduce the chance of a lightning strike. I also found in the NEC where supplemental ground rods not bonded are allowed in some instances.

On that note, I thought about it and the shield of the coax goes to my 3 televisions. That shield is grounded to my household electrical ground. I am guessing that creates a secondary path to ground that may or may not become the path of least resistance for some of the circuits in the house. That might prevent the plug in surge protectors from working properly.

I'm conflicted and plan to do a little more research before going a particular route.

That doesn't mean their system is safe in the event some source of fault current comes in contact with the system that is supposedly grounded. An isolated radio/antenna ground system, separate from the power ground sets up the operator to be hurt or killed if the antenna ground system is forced to a high voltage relative to the power ground during a fault condition. I'm grateful the majority of the people that installed isolated grounds suffered no harm... that doesn't change the fact that they could have had a safer installation, in some cases, cheaper as well.

The purpose of grounding is not to reduce the chance of a lighting strike. It's to reduce the possibility that dangerous voltages could appear on the chassis of equipment if a lightning strike or other fault current source comes in contact with your electrical system.

Can you cite the chapter and section? I'm always willing to learn more on the subject.
In the unlikely event that some electrical fault occurs, do you want that current flowing through your TV set(s)? I prefer to connect the mast and coax grounding conductors to the electrical service ground so that the path of least resistance is known, and known to be capable of handling a large amount of current with little voltage drop.

Hi GroundUrMast,

I do believe the purpose of grounding includes reducing the chances of a lightning strike, limiting the voltage during a lightning strike or other fault, getting rid of static buildup, and stabilizing voltage. Lightning strikes may not be the primary reason the service is grounded, but I'm pretty sure it is the primary reason an antenna mast is grounded.

That last paragraph I wrote was agreeing with you. I want the path of least resistance to continue to be the primary electrode, not passing through my house and devices.

I do believe I misinterpreted the NEC code and you got it right. I was looking at 250.54. Where they state "shall not be required to comply with the electrode bonding requirements", I now think it means that not all bonded electrodes have to meet the requirements of an effective ground.

No worries. Perhaps I was needlessly forceful while re-enforcing the point. If so, my bad.

If you want to follow the NEC, focus on article 810. It will point back to the relevant sections of article 250 and others.

+=>
-------
The issue of grounding and lightning is/are issues that are filled and running over with fear and suspicion and tales and misinformation and lies.

I have witnessed the Legal Certified Experts go to blows over it.

It Quickly becomes an issue that no one is capable of thinking clearly about.

Rather that making a broad statement, implying that everyone but you is engaged in "...misinformation and lies.", I think it would be far more informative for you to state your position... I don't have any idea what that is... Unless it's simply, 'no one should talk about this subject.'

When someone asks 'how to ground their antenna system', are you proposing that we should:

A - Keep silent.
B - Tell them, 'Don't bother'.
C - Advise, "Refuse to ground your antenna system as a protest against 'the man'"
D - Say or imply that 'One method or practice is no better than another.'

My position is pretty clear, I hope;

A - It's best to answer when asked.
B - The benefit is worth some effort and expense.
C - Take reasonable steps to protect life and property.
D - There are ways to 'ground' an antenna system that give an illusion of safety but can be dangerous under specific conditions. It's better (and often less expensive) to do the job right the first time. Following NEC article 810 is a good guide for improving the safety of an antenna system.

So, we've heard your complaints about other people discussing grounding... What's your position regarding grounding an OTA TV RX-only antenna system?

I appreciate the advice I received from both of you (Teleview and GroundUrMast).

I have changed my plan to something more feasible. I decided not to mount the antenna to the chimney. I went to Lowes and Home Depot today. The grounding wire alone would cost me $240 to make the run. I will instead mount the antenna on the south side of the house gable.

I noticed that the grounding rod that the cable company installed is only connected to their coax and not to the mains that is only a foot away from their plastic box.

Thank you guys for helping me choose an antenna. Sorry that the ground war (get it hehe) seems to be taking over the thread.

With that said, I ran into radio shack today. They had a HBU22 but no 11 in the store. I almost got it just because it would have been convenient but decided to hold off for an opinion. Otherwise, I will be ordering the 11 Monday.

Certainly not an insignificant factor.

My apologies. It's challenge to strike a balance between respecting you and your thread, allowing for differing opinions and taking on a obvious safety issue responsibly.

Sadly, some of the people who should know better either don't, or don't care.