Lightning Storms, riding on a Segway

[SegwayUtah]

So, I was riding in a lightning storm (complete with rain) the other day and was wondering how much of a target a moving Segway rider is in such conditions (for lightning, that is).

We are riding on rubber tires, so we have a little insulation from the ground--and our bases are at least not in contact with the ground (although I have seen lightning/electricity jump before in regular dense air).

So what is the probability of getting struck by lightning on a Segway vs. driving a car or walking. Whenever I'm camping and a lightning storm starts, I usually try to get out of open fields slowly (not creating moving air behind me) so I am no longer the tallest (6'3") thing in the field. But in a city with buildings that are taller than us, and riding at ~10mph or less (running speed), is there really anything to worry about?

BTW, it was fun riding in the rain, but I think I'm going to have to start taking some sunglasses and clear protective glasses with me in the future so that I don't get debris in my eyes from the wind/rain combo.

Chris

[mzokc]

You are covered by metal in the car. Being hit on the Segway is not the same. If the Segway is wet and your hands are on the grips, it sounds like a standup "electric chair" to me!

Mark

(PS: Drove home safely after two noteworthy glides. One stormy glide at 10,200 feet and the other at over 12,000 feet on public roads. Details and photos soon.)

[pam]

Lightening storms are the one time I won't glide. You guys are braver men than I, (gunga din - to finish the quote).
Pam

[JohnM]

quote:Originally posted by pam

Lightening storms are the one time I won't glide. You guys are braver men than I, (gunga din - to finish the quote).
Pam


84% of all lightning victims in the US are male. So much for bravery.

And don't get suckered in by the idea that rubber tires offer any protection. Thats a common myth among bicycle and motorcycle riders.

[BruceWright]

The reason a car is one of the safest places to be in a lightning storm is not because of rubber tires. The reason is that it's a Faraday Cage.

http://scipp.ucsc.edu/outreach/teslacoil/previous/schools/aptos/pics2001/paullightsm.jpg

I'd say that on a Segway, your odds are much worse than just standing outside. Rubber shoes and rubber tires are no protection from lightning. That's like donning a catcher's mitt to catch a scud missile!

Hey! You're also touching a big hunk of metal! Hmmm... not sure THAT'S a good idea!

And you're also standing higher than you would be, and creating moving air behind you (also a myth).

Getting in out of the lightning storm as fast as you can is the best solution. Run. Creating moving air behind you? That's a myth. The lightning isn't searching out people to destroy. You overestimate your own power to stir air, and you way underestimate the magnitude of a lightning strike, and the power of lightning to strike wherever it can. Your best bet is to get out of danger as quickly as possible. Get inside a building, or if you can't, get in a car with a metal roof.


-Bruce Wright

Segway: Vehicle of Dream

[lipinsky]

quote:Originally posted by SegwayUtah

...

We are riding on rubber tires, so we have a little insulation from the ground--and our bases are at least not in contact with the ground (although I have seen lightning/electricity jump before in regular dense air).

...


Why do people keep thinking this?! If a lightening bolt travels through 4 plus miles of air 1/4 inch of rubber is not going to do anything. What protects people in a car is a "faraday cage." The frame of the car makes a path for the electricity to flow keeping it away from the occupants. http://www.erh.noaa.gov/er/bgm/svrweek/lightning.html

You should not be outside during thunder storms -- Segway or not.

[opti6600]

Yeah, rainglides are fun and all, but bear in mind that you're just a big happy target for lightning. In a big city, no, you don't have much to worry about. As soon as you get into suburbia though, where you have low trees, houses, and plenty of power poles, you're at risk for both a direct strike and a secondary hit.

That said, it's really fun.

---------
Let's just take the safety labels off of everything and let America's problem sort itself out.

[Race3]

Bruce and lipinsky are correct. The rubber tires have nothing to do with the fact that a car can protect you in a lightening storm... it's the metal cage around you. That said, I would only ride a Segway in a lightening storm if I was on a p model and someone else was next to me on an i model... since they would be the higher target. :) kidding, of course.

I wouldn't ride in a lightening storm, particularly if you are in an open area.

[MagiMike]

The "danger" of lighting strike is very small. Less than 200 people a year die from lighting IN THE ENTIRE WORLD. When I'm out riding my seg I'm much more at risk from drivers who want to watch me , rather than the road.

Mike in Houston

[Peter iNova]

Just don't glide under trees in a lightning storm. If you get caught out in the open, lay the HT down flat and lie down on the ground a hundred feet from the nearest trees. Wet, but safe.

-iNova

http://www.glidewalk.com

[BruceWright]

Well, Mike, lightning may kill only 100 Americans a year, but it strikes 400-800 Americans a year. Most suffer lifetime injuries.

And every single one of them is someone doing something dumb like not going inside.

If everyone stood outside in the lightning storms (ie, doing what you are saying not to worry about) a lot more than 400 people a year would get hit.

Lightning kills more people per year than tornadoes or hurricanes. And it's nearly 100 percent avoidable.

The low death-rate for lightning strikes has a lot to do with the rarity of thunderstorms in most parts of the country. If you're IN a thunderstorm, all those bets are off. If you're swimming in the middle of a Shark feeding frenzy, don't fool yourself by remembering how rare shark-bites are among Americans!

Lightning can carry up to 100 million volts of electricity, between 35,000 and 40,000 amps. A lightning bolt can be 50,000 degrees celsius. Ouch!

-Bruce Wright

Segway: Vehicle of Dream

[SegwayUtah]

Wow, there's a lot of wisdom in people here on the boards.

So, I am all about statistical probabilities. If there are only a few hundred people struck by lightning every year in the USA, how likely is a Segway rider to be struck, technically? Are there 400,000 people in the USA (about 1 out of 1,000) that run around in lightning storms each year? If so, that would mean that in 100 years, I would have a 1% chance of getting struck by lightning in such a storm--that's not a good odd, but it's pretty low nonetheless :)

I am of course not suggesting that we should ignore the lightning, but for those of us, say, in tropical climates with lots of lightning (or in the lightning capital of the USA down in Florida near Cape Canaveral), not riding in the lightning is a big detriment.

I don't think that people in this country are really educated about lightning for some reason. I spoke with a friend of mine about this just last night who is getting his PhD in a similar field, and he thought the rubber tires might protect me :) I didn't think they would so much.

Chris

[bicycledriver]

quote:Originally posted by Race3

Bruce and lipinsky are correct. The rubber tires have nothing to do with the fact that a car can protect you in a lightening storm... it's the metal cage around you.


Yup, after traveling through half a mile of "nonconducting" air, 1/4" of rubber won't slow it down.

Occasionally one reads about a bicyclist getting killed by a lightning strike. Rare but possible.

Note that if your car is a fiberglass body Corvette, or a rag-top, you aren't protected either.

-Steve Goodridge

[BenBethel]

I hate those myths as well... the others:

* That people are scared to be on my balcony in a lightning storm - I live in the penthouse of a building in phoenix - but it's so hard to convince them that tall buildings just don't get struck by lightning. I've lived here 14 years and have watched many of our monsoon storms and have seen mountains and houses and streets and power stations struck, but never have I seen a tall building hit.

* However, I feel safer on the balcony wearing rubber shoes and not touching the balcony railing!

* Off topic - I hate the myth that people shouldn't shoot guns straight up in the air. Because of this, they shoot at an angle - like 45 degrees - and the bullet never reaches a terminal velocity and starts to tumble and simply fall and hit wind resistance - and this is when people get killed - it's always over a mile away that this happens. We've had several incidents of this in Phoenix which led to a new law. Of course, you shouldn't fire guns in the air, period. When they train officers to fire warning shots if they must, they tell them to fire straight up into the air because of this. This is somewhat related to the myth that a penny dropped from a tall building will kill someone - the penny reaches its max speed after just a short distance due to wind resistance.

Ben

www.benbethel.com

[BruceWright]

Chris,

Taking a statistical view isn't going to necessarily predict your safety. Because it doesn't tell you your odds of surviving the storm that you're standing in, only the dangers of living in a lightning-prone world.

For example, you cite Florida, which alone accounts for half the lightning-injuries of the country.


There's a few reasons for that.

One is the weather in Florida, lots of thunderstorms. Another is the fact that a lot of Florida is dedicated to outdoor recreation activities. A lot of folks on golf-courses, and on boats. Another is the fact that Florida is very flat, and a person standing up is a target.

Now imagine a person standing up on an 86-pound hunk of metal. Here's an idea, go hang on to a chain-link fence while you're at it!

If you're outside in a thunderstorm, though, don't go "oh, I'm not in Florida, therefore I'm 50% safer!". Statistics don't work that way. If you are out in a thunderstorm, you are in danger.

Statistics show 99% of accidents happen to people who are being reckless fools! That's the real statistic to consider.

Folks, half of lightning deaths occur before the rain arrives or after the storm has passed. Use the 30-30 rule and be safe out there.



-Bruce Wright

Segway: Vehicle of Dream

[BruceWright]

quote:Originally posted by BenBethel
[ but it's so hard to convince them that tall buildings just don't get struck by lightning.


http://store4.yimg.com/I/photonewyork_1744_8195707


The Empire State Building is struck over 100 times a year.

-Bruce Wright

Segway: Vehicle of Dream

[PoloAk]

Oh stop whining over a little glide in a lightning storm. . .at least you'd get a charge, right?

Kelsey

"A closed mouth gathers no foot."

[BenBethel]

The reasaon the Empire State is struck ~100 times per year is that it was *designed* to attract lightning and ensure that other buildings don't get struck. Otherwise, tall buildings don't get struck... perhaps they did this with the Empire State since the area is so totally dense with buildings and they didn't want the smaller ones with gas boilers to be blowing up all the time? All the information is here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/wonder/structure/empire_state.html

www.benbethel.com

[BruceWright]

quote:Originally posted by BenBethel

The reasaon the Empire State is struck ~100 times per year is that it was *designed* to attract lightning and ensure that other buildings don't get struck.


Why was it designed that way, if, like you say, the other tall buildings wouldn't get struck anyway?




Yes, true, the Empire State Building is a lightning rod, designed to protect other buildings. Do you have a taller building near your apartment that serves as a lightning rod?

It may not really protect the surrounding area anyway, at least that claim hasn't been scientifically proven. (Lightning-rod salesmen to the contrary). But at least it's a part of the building that's built to withstand and ground the lightning strike.

Tall buildings get struck by lightning. In fact, they are the thing most likely thing on the ground to be struck by lightning. It's not always the tops of tall buildings that are hit. The sides of buildings get hit, as well as smaller buildings near taller buildings.

Just because you've seen smaller buildings get hit, doesn't mean that taller buildings are safer. In fact, they are less safe.


Hears a great link from the NSSL (National Severe Storms Laboratory) about how the risk of lightning strikes increases with the height of the building. It has some great theories about how the missing World Trade Center in New York has changed the lightning strike pattern in the city.

http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/headlines/lightning_towers.html



Here's a quote:

"Tall buildings have a predictable chance of being struck, one that increases with height."




I think I know why it's been hard to convince your friends that tall buildings don't get struck by lightning, Ben!


-Bruce Wright

Segway: Vehicle of Dream

[BenBethel]

Bruce - also, that link you provided states that they looked at the data for Manhattan for the 4 years prior to 9/11/2001 and showed zero strikes on the Empire State and just a few on the WTC. I live in Phoenix, what I think is #2 in the US for lightning strikes, in the penthouse of a high-rise, and I've been here for 14 years - I stare at downtown phoenix, uptown phoenix, and the biltmore area - all areas with tall buildings. I make a point of having people over for storms, like the one last night, and we just watch hundreds of bolts of lightning in just about two hours. This is the time of the year for it, and I honestly swear that I've never seen any of the tall buildings get hit in 14 years. I've seen thousands of transformers explode, streets get hit, mountains, etc., but no tall buildings. I've even taken hours long movies... again, no direct hits to buildings.

I don't know why this is - but I thought I heard that most lightning rods are developed to carry charges so that there are thousands of small, nearly undetectable spikes of energy rather than one big bolt, the one at the empire state is designed to take the big bolts and dissipate the energy in beams at each level before reaching the bedrock of manhattan.

I need to learn more, because I'm uncertain myself.... but I know what my eyes see. One of my best friends was struck and killed on Mount Lemmon in Tucson in 1995, his other half was seriously injured but recovered, the third person with them was hurt, but crawled to get help. They were under trees as thunder clouds entered the mountains, about 9,000 feet up, but about 1/2 mile from a huge bank of transmission towers... why didn't the lightning hit those? I still wonder about that, and it also makes me wonder why there are three separate mountains I can see with transmission towers that I never see get hit, but the areas all around do all the time. I've had another friend who was struck twice in the open - in two different locations a year apart - and lived. But again, he wasn't the tallest object around and he wasn't carrying metal, so I don't know how the rules apply here where there's mountains, some that range 2,600 feet to 6,000 feet, right here in the county that phoenix is located in. Maybe that has something to do with it?

Another interesting thing is the Biosphere II in Oracle Arizona, it's covered with hundreds of rods, and when I asked about them, they said that the rods were repellants brought a charge to the air and ensured that lightning did not hit them, since the entire project is made of glass and steel, but now I learn this isn't the case? So many sides to the story.

I'm going to check out "all about lightning" from the library to learn more! I definitely don't claim to be a scholar on the subject but I would call myself an expert witness. :)



www.benbethel.com

[q]

quote:Originally posted by BenBethel

Bruce - also, that link you provided states that they looked at the data for Manhattan for the 4 years prior to 9/11/2001 and showed zero strikes on the Empire State and just a few on the WTC. I live in Phoenix, what I think is #2 in the US for lightning strikes,

<snip>



//

cf:
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/pub/ltg/crh_ltg_state_rank_FlashPerYear97_01.html


//


quote:

<snip>

They were under trees as thunder clouds entered the mountains, about 9,000 feet up, but about 1/2 mile from a huge bank of transmission towers... why didn't the lightning hit those? I still wonder about that, and it also makes me wonder why there are three separate mountains I can see with transmission towers that I never see get hit, but the areas all around do all the time.

<snip>



//

...that's the "thing" about
lightning...it has no rhyme
or reason. it's best not
to be around it at all,
seg or no seg. (...little
to no "room" for error.)

kthxbye.

q.

//

quote:

<snip>


I'm going to check out "all about lightning" from the library to learn more! I definitely don't claim to be a scholar on the subject but I would call myself an expert witness. :)



www.benbethel.com

[BruceWright]

quote:Originally posted by BenBethel

Bruce - also, that link you provided states that they looked at the data for Manhattan for the 4 years prior to 9/11/2001 and showed zero strikes on the Empire State and just a few on the WTC.


That's saying that the sattelite system that Vaisala-GAI uses didn't detect them. That photo above was taken in 1997, so there's proof of at least one strike that didn't get detected.

I'll trust the Empire State Building's management company's statistic of dozens of strikes a year, versus the satellite reading. Even the folks at Vaisala admitted that it seemed unlikely that the Empire State Building wasn't getting strikes. Perhaps their system can't read high altitudes very well.


Your observation seems to not make sense for what we're taught about how lightning works, and also runs counter to what the National Weather Service and NOAA NSSL say. It also may have something to do with the construction and materials of the buildings near you.

If you have data that contradicts the general accepted scientific thought in the matter, you should contact the National Weather Service. I have no doubt that you saw what you said you saw. But I'd counter that that is a minority of the hundreds of thousands of lightning strikes that happen every year, and while nobody can predict where lightning will strike, similarly you can't predict where it WON'T strike.

You and your friends are much safer inside than on the balcony.

-Bruce Wright

Segway: Vehicle of Dream

[citivolus]

I'd like to caution everyone that most tires are conductive and this includes Segway tires. Please don't think that tires are an insulator because they are not. The reason is that a floating ground is not desired and would be detrimental to anyone touching any motorized object. You may have seen the warnings to fill gas cans while on the ground and not in a vehicle. The reason is the grounding situation of the tank is unknown and may be inhibited by a bedliner, carpet, mat or some other such thing.

Imagine a car, bike, Segway, whatever traveling down the road with insulating tires. The whole thing looks like one big Van DeGraff generator and static charge builds up on the chassis, the faster you go the faster the buildup. The charge comes from the air rubbing on the machine just like rubbing a balloon on your shirt. Electric devices compound this problem even more. A Segway battery starts with a potential difference of about 72 volts and when discharged is about 48 volts. Not all of those electrons make the complete circuit and some are left behind in the metal. This built up charge will go somewhere as soon as it can and with insulating tires that is when you are stepping off and act as a ground strap. The result of this is that the vast majority of tires are conducting, including those on a Segway.

--
swiftly flying