Design methods guide

The air-termination methods in IEC 62305-3

IEC 62305-3 gives three ways to position the air terminations that catch a lightning strike: the rolling sphere method, the mesh method and the protection angle method. This guide explains how each one works, when it is used, how they combine on one building, and how they tighten as the lightning protection level becomes more demanding.

A lightning bolt striking behind an industrial building, the exposure an IEC 62305 assessment quantifies

IEC 62305-3 gives three methods for positioning the air terminations that catch a lightning strike: the rolling sphere method, the mesh method and the protection angle method.

Each one decides where rods, wires or mesh conductors must go so that no part of a structure is left exposed. They are not competing choices; a designer uses them together on a single building, and all three tighten as the lightning protection level becomes more demanding.

The air termination is the part of a lightning protection system that a strike attaches to. Its job is to give lightning a preferred, controlled point to hit, so the current is caught by the system and led safely to ground rather than reaching an unprotected corner of the building. The three methods in this guide are the recognised ways to work out where those terminations go. This page explains how each method works, when each is used, how they combine on one structure, and how the geometry of all three follows directly from the lightning protection level the risk assessment arrived at.

The rolling sphere method A sphere of fixed radius rests on the ground and touches the tip of a mast. The mast tip is where an air termination is needed; the region the sphere cannot reach, between the mast and the ground, is protected. A smaller sphere protects a smaller area. protected radius Rolling sphere radius set by the protection level air termination protected
The sphere rests on the ground and touches the mast tip, where an air termination is needed. The shaded region it cannot reach is protected. A smaller sphere, meaning a higher protection level, protects a smaller area.
The three methods at a glance

Three ways to leave no surface exposed

Each method answers the same question from a different angle: given this structure and this protection level, where must the air terminations go so a strike cannot reach an unprotected surface? The three are summarised here, then taken one at a time below.

Rolling sphere

The general method

An imaginary sphere of a fixed radius is rolled over the structure. Anywhere it touches is a place a strike could land, so terminations are placed to keep it off every vulnerable surface. It works on any shape and is the fallback where the other two do not fit cleanly.

Mesh

For roofs

A grid of conductors laid across a roof, so any strike is caught by the nearest conductor and shared between the surrounding ones. It suits flat and gently pitched roofs, where a regular grid sits naturally over the protected area.

Protection angle

For rods and small items

A rod or mast protects a cone of space beneath it, bounded by an angle from the vertical. Anything inside the cone is shielded. It suits simple structures and individual rooftop items such as a vent, an antenna or a small plant unit.

Method one

How does the rolling sphere method work?

The rolling sphere method is the most general of the three, and the easiest to picture. Take a solid sphere of a fixed radius and roll it over the structure from every direction: across the roof, against the walls, around the corners, up and over any mast or parapet. Wherever the surface of the sphere touches the building, a lightning strike could attach at that point. Wherever the sphere cannot reach, because an air termination holds it off, the surface beneath is protected.

Designing with the method means placing rods, masts and conductors so that the rolling sphere rests only on the air terminations and never on a part of the structure you need to protect. On a tall building the sphere touches the top edges and corners first, which is why terminations cluster there; lower down, a wall can be shielded by the roof edge above it if the sphere cannot curve in to reach it. For a single mast on flat ground you can size the protected zone with our rolling sphere calculator. The method makes no assumption about the shape of the building, which is what makes it the universal one: it works on a cube, a tower, a curved roof or a cluttered industrial structure equally well.

Why the radius matters, and why it shrinks. The sphere radius represents the striking distance of a lightning flash, the distance over which a descending leader is finally captured by an object below it. A higher-current strike has a longer striking distance and is caught by a larger sphere; a weaker, lower-current strike comes closer before it attaches, which a smaller sphere models. A more demanding lightning protection level is designed to intercept that wider range of strikes, weaker ones included, so it uses a smaller radius. A smaller sphere settles into more places between terminations, which is the same as saying it forces more, or better placed, air terminations to keep it off the structure.

Method two

How does the mesh method work?

The mesh method protects a roof by covering it with a grid of conductors, the mesh, bonded into a closed pattern across the area to be protected and tied into the down conductors at the edges. The idea is that a strike to anywhere on the roof attaches to the nearest mesh conductor, and the current then divides between the conductors around it rather than concentrating in one. A roof covered by a sound mesh has no large gap where a strike could reach the surface between conductors.

This is the natural method for flat and gently pitched roofs, where a regular grid sits cleanly over the area and follows the edges and any rooftop features. It is less suited to steeply pitched or complex roofs, where a grid is awkward to lay and the rolling sphere or protection angle does the job better. In practice the mesh conductors are routed along ridges, edges and around plant, and any metal part on the roof that is large enough to take a strike is bonded into the mesh so it becomes part of the protected system rather than an unprotected target.

Finer grid for a higher class. The mesh size, the spacing of the grid, is set by the lightning protection level. A more demanding level uses a finer mesh, with less roof area between conductors, so a strike has a shorter distance to travel before it meets a conductor. A coarser grid is permitted at a less demanding level, where the risk assessment shows it is enough. The exact mesh dimension for each level is given in the standard; the principle is simply that the grid gets tighter as the protection level rises.

Method three

How does the protection angle method work?

The protection angle method places a vertical air termination, a rod or a mast, and treats the cone of space beneath its tip as protected. The cone is bounded by an angle measured from the vertical axis of the rod: anything that falls inside the cone is considered shielded from a direct strike, and anything outside it is not. A taller rod casts a wider cone in absolute terms, so a single mast can protect a surprisingly large area at its base, while a short rod protects only a small zone close around it.

This method suits simple shapes and individual items: a small building with a clean outline, or a single object on a larger roof such as a vent, an antenna, a chimney or a compact plant unit. For those isolated items the protection angle is often the most direct method, a rod beside the object sized so the object sits inside its cone. It becomes unwieldy on large or irregular structures, where the rolling sphere or mesh is cleaner, which is why it tends to be used for parts of a building rather than the whole of a complex one.

The angle narrows with height and class. The protection angle is not a single fixed value. It depends on the height of the air termination above the surface it protects and on the lightning protection level, and it narrows as either increases. That is why a tall mast protects a smaller footprint than its height alone would suggest, and why a more demanding level tightens the cone. Above a certain height the method stops being valid altogether and the rolling sphere is used instead. The exact angle for each height and level is set out in a chart in the standard.
When to use which

Choosing a method, and combining all three

The three methods are not a menu to pick one from. A real building usually uses all three at once, each applied to the part of the structure it suits best, all worked to the same protection level.

Rolling sphere for the whole and the awkward

Use it on any shape, and reach for it wherever the building is tall, complex or irregular and the other two do not fit cleanly. It is the method that checks exposed corners, edges and tall features the grid does not cover.

Mesh for the flat roof

Use it across the main roof area, where a regular grid follows the edges and ties cleanly into the down conductors. It is the efficient way to protect a large, gently pitched expanse that would take many rods to cover otherwise.

Protection angle for the small and simple

Use it to size masts protecting individual rooftop items, and on small, clean-outlined structures. It is the most direct method for a single object that needs its own rod.

A typical design on a flat-roofed building meshes the main roof, uses the protection angle to size the masts that shield rooftop plant and antennas, and then applies the rolling sphere to confirm that the exposed corners, parapet edges and any tall features are all covered. The methods overlap deliberately. What matters is the result they share: every surface a strike could reach is protected by at least one method, and all of them are worked to the same lightning protection level so the building meets one consistent class rather than a patchwork of stronger and weaker zones.

The common thread

How the methods follow the lightning protection level

The single most useful thing to carry away is that all three methods are driven by one input, the lightning protection level, and all three tighten together as it becomes more demanding.

A lightning protection system is built to one of four classes, I to IV, and the class is decided by the lightning protection level (LPL I to IV) that the Part 3 design inherits from the Part 2 risk assessment. LPL I is the most demanding and LPL IV the least. The level is not chosen on taste; it is the output of the risk work, and it then sets the geometry of every air-termination method at once.

Smaller sphere

A more demanding level uses a smaller rolling sphere radius, which reaches into more places and forces more or better-placed air terminations across the structure.

Finer mesh

The same level uses a tighter grid, with less roof area between conductors, so a strike has a shorter path to the nearest mesh wire.

Narrower angle

The protection angle tightens, so each rod or mast shields a smaller cone and the structure needs more of them, or taller ones, to stay covered.

They all move the same way for the same reason: a more demanding level has to intercept a wider range of strikes, including the weaker, lower-current ones that a larger sphere, a coarser mesh or a wider angle would let through to the structure. The exact protection angle, mesh size and sphere radius for each level are set out in tables and a chart in the standard itself; the design has to be worked to those precise values once the level is known.

Common mistakes

Where air-termination design goes wrong

The methods are simple to state and easy to misapply. A few failures recur often enough to name, because each leaves a structure with a gap its paperwork does not show.

Forgetting the new rooftop item

A plant unit, antenna or solar array added after handover sits above the mesh and outside every protection angle, exposed. New rooftop equipment has to be brought back inside the protection, not left standing proud of it.

Stretching the protection angle too high

The angle method stops being valid above a certain height for a given level. Using it on a tall mast where only the rolling sphere applies leaves a zone that looks protected on paper but is not.

Mixing levels across one building

Working part of a structure to one level and part to another leaves a weakest link. Every method on a single building should be sized to the same lightning protection level so the whole meets one class.

Trusting the mesh on the wrong roof

A mesh is for flat and gently pitched roofs. On a steep or complex roof it leaves gaps a regular grid cannot follow, and the rolling sphere or protection angle should carry those areas instead.

Where this sits

Air termination in the wider standard

Positioning the air terminations is one step in a longer chain. The air termination catches the strike, the down conductors carry the current down the structure, and the earth termination dissipates it into the soil; the three together make up the external lightning protection system, described in IEC 62305-3. Getting the air termination right is what stops a strike reaching an unprotected surface in the first place, which is why the three methods on this page sit at the front of the design.

They also sit downstream of a decision made earlier. The lightning protection level that fixes the sphere radius, mesh size and protection angle is itself an output of the Part 2 risk assessment, which decides whether a structure needs protection at all and how strong it must be. And once the system is installed, the air terminations are checked at every periodic inspection, because a missing or displaced termination, or a new rooftop item left outside the protection, is one of the most common ways a sound design quietly stops being sound.

Establish the class the air termination must meet. Lumex runs the Part 2 risk assessment and reports the lightning protection level your design must be worked to, which is what fixes the sphere radius, mesh size and protection angle. The Part 3 layout is yours to draw and a competent person's to sign. When you are ready, run an assessment.
FAQ

Questions answered

What are the air-termination methods in IEC 62305?

IEC 62305-3 gives three methods for positioning the air terminations that intercept a lightning strike, so no part of a structure is left exposed: the rolling sphere method, where an imaginary sphere of a fixed radius is rolled over the structure and any point it touches needs protection; the mesh method, where a grid of conductors covers a roof; and the protection angle method, where a rod or mast shields a cone of space beneath it. The three are used together on one building, and each tightens as the lightning protection level becomes more demanding.

What is the rolling sphere method?

The rolling sphere method models a lightning strike as an imaginary sphere of a fixed radius rolled over and around a structure from every direction. Wherever the sphere touches a surface, a strike could attach there, so air terminations must be placed so the sphere rests only on them and never on a vulnerable part of the building. The radius is fixed by the lightning protection level: a more demanding level uses a smaller sphere, which reaches into more places and so demands more air terminations. It is the general method and works on a structure of any shape or height.

What is the mesh method?

The mesh method protects a roof with a grid, or mesh, of conductors laid across it and bonded into a closed pattern, so that any strike to the roof is caught by the nearest conductor and shared between the surrounding ones. It suits flat and gently pitched roofs where a regular grid sits naturally. The mesh size, the spacing of the conductors, is set by the lightning protection level: a more demanding level uses a finer mesh with less roof area between conductors.

What is the protection angle method?

The protection angle method places a rod or mast and treats the cone of space beneath it, bounded by a set angle measured from the vertical, as protected. Anything inside the cone is considered shielded from a direct strike. The angle depends on the height of the air termination and the lightning protection level, and it narrows as either increases, so a taller mast or a more demanding level protects a smaller footprint than the height alone suggests. It suits simple structures and individual rooftop items such as a vent, an antenna or a small plant unit.

When is each air-termination method used?

The rolling sphere method works on any structure and is the fallback for complex or tall shapes where the other two do not apply cleanly. The mesh method is the natural choice for flat and gently pitched roofs. The protection angle method suits simple shapes and small isolated objects on a roof. On most real buildings a designer uses all three together: a mesh across the main roof, the protection angle for masts and rooftop items, and the rolling sphere to check exposed edges, corners and tall features the grid does not cover.

Can the three air-termination methods be combined on one building?

Yes, and on most buildings they are. The methods are not mutually exclusive choices; they are tools applied to different parts of the same structure. A typical design meshes the flat roof, uses the protection angle to size masts protecting rooftop plant and antennas, and applies the rolling sphere to confirm that exposed corners, edges and tall features are covered. What matters is that every surface a strike could reach is protected by at least one method, all worked to the same lightning protection level.

How does the lightning protection level affect the air-termination methods?

The lightning protection level, LPL I to IV, sets the geometry of all three methods at once. A more demanding level, LPL I being the most demanding, means a smaller rolling sphere, a finer mesh and a narrower protection angle. All three move in the same direction because a more demanding level has to catch a wider range of strikes, including the weaker, lower-current strikes that a larger sphere, a coarser mesh or a wider angle would let through. The level itself comes from the Part 2 risk assessment.

Why does a higher lightning protection level use a smaller rolling sphere?

The radius of the rolling sphere represents the striking distance of a lightning flash, which is shorter for a lower-current strike. A smaller sphere therefore models the weaker strikes that come closer to a surface before attaching. A more demanding lightning protection level is designed to intercept that wider range of strikes, including the weaker ones, so it uses the smaller sphere. Because a smaller sphere settles into more places between air terminations, it forces more or better-placed terminations to keep it off the structure.

What is the striking distance in the rolling sphere method?

The striking distance is the distance over which a descending lightning leader is captured by an object on the ground, and it grows with the current of the strike. The rolling sphere method uses this distance as the sphere radius: the sphere represents the last step of the leader before it attaches. Because higher-current strikes have a longer striking distance, they are caught by a larger sphere, while the smaller spheres used at more demanding protection levels capture the weaker strikes that approach more closely.

Are the exact sphere radius, mesh size and protection angle values in IEC 62305?

Yes. IEC 62305-3:2024 (Ed.3) sets out the exact protection angle, mesh size and rolling sphere radius for every lightning protection level, in tables and a chart of its own. This guide explains how the methods work and the direction the values move in, but the per-class figures should be read from the standard, since the design has to be worked to the precise values it specifies for the chosen level.

What Lumex does, and what stays with you

Lumex computes the IEC 62305-2 method and shows the working. It does not certify a structure. You may not issue or submit a Lumex output until a competent person, qualified where the structure is located, has reviewed the inputs and the result and signed it.

The tolerable risk in IEC 62305-2 is not a fixed constant. Clause 7.3 NOTE 1 gives RT = 1×10-5 per year as a representative value of tolerable risk and adds that another value may be set once the case has been investigated in detail. Printed p.12 then lets national or local regulations fix RT, the tolerable frequency of damage FT, and the Annex A, B, C and E calculation rules and parameter values. Every Lumex assessment states the jurisdiction it was computed under and the values that applied.

Get started today

Design the air termination, and prove the class it meets

Contact our team