DIY surge protection...
Existential Angst
On the main breaker box, for the whole house.
First Q: Is surge protection strictly lightning-related?
Holmes on Homes was emphasizing this, saying $500 wasn't much for the
protection it affords.
$500?????????????? Holy shit.....
Isn't surge protection just some capacitors?? Connected to where? Each hot
to ground? Between hots? Values?
I have a ton of run/start caps, 20 to 100 uF, 370 V.
If you have surge protection on the mains, do you then need those itty-bitty
surge protectors fer yer pyooters?
Also, sometimes equipment will have an iron-like ring around a wire -- I
think in power supplies, mebbe surge protectors.
What is that ring doing? And which wires go thru it? Hot? Hot+return?
--
EA
co_f...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Surge protectors are not capacitors. They are made from material that
will conduct electricity when the voltage exceeds some particular
design value. That excess electric power is converted to heat in the
surge protector. If the "surge" or spike is too long lasting or occurs
so often that the surge protector does not have time to cool, it will
eventually produce smoke and stop working. At that time any and all
surges and spikes will continue on to the rest of your house.
Usually the surge protector will die without you knowing about the
death. There is no way to test them without a spike generator and an
oscilloscope.
The power spikes can come from anywhere. I personally experienced
equipment destroying spikes that came from the telephone wires. A
construction company was excavating very deeply for a sewer pumping
station near my office. Somehow they connected 220 volts to the buried
telephone cable. The power went through the local phone company
junction box and into our phone system and fax machine. The surge
protectors immediately absorbed all the power they could and produced
smoke. Then the power continued on to burn out circuit boards in the
equipment.
We only discovered the source of the problem when a few days later I
discovered a telephone guy installing a new junction box near our
office. He told me about the construction company problem and how they
were paying for the damage. They also paid us.
So, bottom line is the protectors are probably a one-time only
protection. There is no easy way to test. The surge may come from an
unprotected source. This applies to all protectors, including all-
house protectors. All lines coming to a house must be protected, Not
just the "hot" lines.
The "iron rings" you refer to are ferrite RF supressors. They reduce
the electronic noise generated by switching power supplies.
Paul
hr(bob) hofmann@att.net
wrote:
They are not capacitors. They are electronic-semiconductor devices
that are open circuit until some voltage threshold is exceeded, then
they act like a very low resistance to try to limit the voltage. The
limiting factor is the amount of power the devices can withstand
before exploding due to the heat they generate when acting as s short
circuit. I don't know a lot more than that, except that they are
usually rated in Joules of energy they can dissipate before blowing
up. They certainly cannot handle a direct strike to the power line,
but induced voltage spikes due to nearby lightning can be handled if
the joule rating is high enough.
Joseph Gwinn
"Existential Angst" <UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> wrote:
> Awl --
>
> On the main breaker box, for the whole house.
>
> First Q: Is surge protection strictly lightning-related?
>
> Holmes on Homes was emphasizing this, saying $500 wasn't much for the
> protection it affords.
> $500?????????????? Holy shit.....
I have a few whole-house (well, whole branch circuit) UL-rated surge arrestors.
They are big (4" long by 2.25" diameter) plastic cans that attach to the main
breaker box, and are wired into the branch circuits that they protect. The cans
cost something like $50 each from the local electrical supply house, and are
made by an outfit in Texas. I have a pair of their Model 302 arrestors.
<http://www.deltala.com/prod02.htm>
The website doesn't work right for Safari or Firefox in MacOS, so it's probably
MSIE only. But you can make it work anyway, with fiddling and indirection.
> Isn't surge protection just some capacitors?? Connected to where? Each hot
> to ground? Between hots? Values?
> I have a ton of run/start caps, 20 to 100 uF, 370 V.
They are not just capacitors, they are industrial-size metal-oxide varistors
plus capacitors.
> If you have surge protection on the mains, do you then need those itty-bitty
> surge protectors fer yer pyooters?
No.
> Also, sometimes equipment will have an iron-like ring around a wire -- I
> think in power supplies, mebbe surge protectors.
> What is that ring doing? And which wires go thru it? Hot? Hot+return?
Probably ferrite EMI-supression "beads", which have no effect on
computer-smoking surges. Yes, it's hot+return.
Joe Gwinn
Existential Angst
news:d4b0157f-6cdb-4cc2...@o30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
====================================================
So the surge protector is a kind of crude voltage regulator?
Well, how about this:
Why not put a 100 A relay in the service, with the coil connected to a
fast-acting voltage-sensing amplifier.
If the voltage goes up by more than, say, 10%, the relay is activated (or
deactivated, if NO), all power to the house is broken, with the relay
latching out, requiring a manual re-start. Proly a NO relay.
A little more dramatic/intrusive in its action than surge protector, in
that power is removed, but it should do the job, protection-wise.
AND this would have the advantage of being re-usable essentially forever,
and also testable.
If you wanted to get fancy, you could have this coordinated with a UPS and
generator, so that no perceptible power interruption occurs. Much more $$,
of course.
--
EA
cavelamb
>
> So the surge protector is a kind of crude voltage regulator?
>
> Well, how about this:
>
> Why not put a 100 A relay in the service, with the coil connected to a
> fast-acting voltage-sensing amplifier.
> If the voltage goes up by more than, say, 10%, the relay is activated (or
> deactivated, if NO), all power to the house is broken, with the relay
> latching out, requiring a manual re-start. Proly a NO relay.
>
> A little more dramatic/intrusive in its action than surge protector, in
> that power is removed, but it should do the job, protection-wise.
> AND this would have the advantage of being re-usable essentially forever,
> and also testable.
>
> If you wanted to get fancy, you could have this coordinated with a UPS and
> generator, so that no perceptible power interruption occurs. Much more $$,
> of course.
Relays are mechanical devices and, as such, operate in slo-mo compared to
electricity.
--
Richard Lamb
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/
Existential Angst
news:crqdnXdLqtofmDjW...@earthlink.com...
What do fast-acting UPS's use? Use the same thing? Mebbe solid state
relays?
They're proly cheaper than mechanicals, by now, and I would assume pretty
fast.
There's an A/C supply outfit that sells, iirc, a 2 pole 50 A jobby for under
$20. The neat thing is, the "coil" is good for, like, 100-300 V!!!
--
EA
Tony Hwang
So you think coil driven mechanical relay is as fast as spikes or surge?
Forget it. But there is such a thing call S.S. relay. and it is not a
voltage regulator it is a limiter.
Robert Swinney
""The power spikes can come from anywhere. I personally experienced
equipment destroying spikes that came from the telephone wires. ASo, bottom line is the protectors
are probably a one-time only
protection. There is no easy way to test. The surge may come from an
unprotected source. This applies to all protectors, including all-
house protectors. All lines coming to a house must be protected, Not
just the "hot" lines.""
Yep! Call them, "Fail dead and burned open" with usu. no visible way of determining when failure
occurrs. Yeah, I know some have a pilot light but it is easy to ignore.
Bob Swinney
cavelamb
> "cavelamb" <cave...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:crqdnXdLqtofmDjW...@earthlink.com...
>> Existential Angst wrote:
>>> So the surge protector is a kind of crude voltage regulator?
>>>
>>> Well, how about this:
>>>
>>> Why not put a 100 A relay in the service, with the coil connected to a
>>> fast-acting voltage-sensing amplifier.
>>> If the voltage goes up by more than, say, 10%, the relay is activated (or
>>> deactivated, if NO), all power to the house is broken, with the relay
>>> latching out, requiring a manual re-start. Proly a NO relay.
>>>
>>> A little more dramatic/intrusive in its action than surge protector, in
>>> that power is removed, but it should do the job, protection-wise.
>>> AND this would have the advantage of being re-usable essentially forever,
>>> and also testable.
>>>
>>> If you wanted to get fancy, you could have this coordinated with a UPS
>>> and generator, so that no perceptible power interruption occurs. Much
>>> more $$, of course.
>>
>> Relays are mechanical devices and, as such, operate in slo-mo compared to
>> electricity.
>
> What do fast-acting UPS's use? Use the same thing? Mebbe solid state
> relays?
MOVs = Metal Oxide Varisters
> They're proly cheaper than mechanicals, by now, and I would assume pretty
> fast.
> There's an A/C supply outfit that sells, iirc, a 2 pole 50 A jobby for under
> $20. The neat thing is, the "coil" is good for, like, 100-300 V!!!
Spikes can go WAY bigger than a paltry 300 v
And the unsuppressed arc across a relay contact - 30KV?
co_f...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> "cavelamb" <cavel...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
You were probably still a baby when the whole thing about power
protection got started. There was a HUGE argument between marketing
people and engineers relating to "UPS". Marketing called them
uninterruptable power sources (UPS) and engineers demanded they be
called Stand-By power sources(SPS). All the things you buy today are
really stand-by power sources. They have a real mechanical relay that
switches from the power line to battery source. A real UPS will cost
many hundreds to many thousands of dollars. They continually supply
power from batteries and the AC just keeps the batteries charged. An
electronic circuit keeps the internally generated AC synchronized to
the external power frequency. The marketing people finally won the
battle. Guess it was the money, not the truth.
All computers and associated equipment, today, used switching power
supplies which can continue to operate during the 2-4 cycles it takes
the mechanical relay to switch and the time to start the electronics
to begin supplying AC power.
Paul
Jim Wilkins
> Existential Angst wrote:
>
> > So the surge protector is a kind of crude voltage regulator?
>
> > Well, how about this:
>
> > Why not put a 100 A relay in the service, with the coil connected to a
> > fast-acting voltage-sensing amplifier.
> > If the voltage goes up by more than, say, 10%, the relay is activated (or
> > deactivated, if NO), all power to the house is broken, with the relay
> > latching out, requiring a manual re-start. Proly a NO relay.
> > If you wanted to get fancy, you could have this coordinated with a UPS and
> > generator, so that no perceptible power interruption occurs. Much more $$,
> > of course.
>
> Relays are mechanical devices and, as such, operate in slo-mo compared to
> electricity.
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varistor
Note the microseconds. Relays take thousands of microseconds to
operate.
Here's a traditional answer:
http://www.solahd.com/products/powerconditioning/cvs.htm
TV repairmen used them to make hot-chassis sets safer to work on. I
have one but use a UPS instead.
jsw
Nate Nagel
I agree with you, but you can get a "true online" UPS for less than
several thousand dollars (but more than the typical thing you'll find at
your local computer store)
The keywords that differentiate the two are "line-interactive" (as you
describe) and "true online" (which powers the UPS receptacles from the
batteries through an inverter 100% of the time.)
Now when you talk about true online UPS units, you also have to consider
the quality of the power that comes out of them... need to find one
with a GOOD inverter that produces a nice sine wave...
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
cavelamb
Tony Hwang
Whoa! At last EA is showing his true intelligence exposing his level of
ignorance. 'nuff said.
Robert Swinney
"There was a HUGE argument between marketing
people and engineers relating to "UPS". Marketing called them
uninterruptable power sources (UPS) and engineers demanded they be
called Stand-By power sources(SPS). All the things you buy today are
really stand-by power sources. They have a real mechanical relay that
switches from the power line to battery source. A real UPS will cost
many hundreds to many thousands of dollars. They continually supply
power from batteries and the AC just keeps the batteries charged. An
electronic circuit keeps the internally generated AC synchronized to
the external power frequency. The marketing people finally won the
battle. Guess it was the money, not the truth."
One very knowledgeable cohort of mine used to speak of them as real UPS's and "chicken UPS's"
During that time, I was project manager on a couple of large UPS installations, both on PBX plants.
One was a 4000 line PBX and the other was 2000 line. They were Lorraine Electric units,
uninterruptible in every sense of the word, with huge lead-acid batterys. As I recall the batts in
the 4000 line unit were sized for nominally 24 hours.
Bob Swinney
Tony Hwang
In my working days in radio telcomm. UPS was composed of battery bank,
motor-generator set and control(switching) unit. I don't recall we ever
suffered radio link outage. This is true UPS.
Howard Eisenhauer
Here's a very good document on home protection written for the
non-electrically inclined-
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf
Pay particular attention to the section on GPR, there's a lot of
people in the industry who, while they may know about it
"intellectually", don't really think about it enough. :(
Suppressors don't just protect against lightening but also against
transient spikes on the power lines induced by heavy equipment etc.
How much protection you get depends on how much money you spend. The
cheaper MOV "little black box" units that Mr. Holme's electrician is
so in love with (he does do neat wiring, though :)) are good for the
occasional spike, if you live in an area prone to lightening & you own
a lot of $$$ electronics you might want fork out for an industrial
strength unit-
http://www.transtector.com/ProductData?class=acph
but figure on ~$1000 for a top of the line one with SASD devices that
will stand up to the abuse.
H..
Robert Swinney
output is being generated constantly whether commercial power is present or not. A motor-gen UPS
would not be fit the true GPS definition unless the generator ran constantly from its source of
power, battery or commercial. In the "true" GPS, switching is implemented only in the event of
primary power failure; and then only to interrupt or restore primary power to the batteries charging
component.
Bob Swinney
"Tony Hwang" <drag...@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:Dnapn.12224$y13....@newsfe12.iad...
westom
wrote:
> They are not capacitors. They are electronic-semiconductor devices
> that are open circuit until some voltage threshold is exceeded, then
> they act like a very low resistance to try to limit the voltage. The
> limiting factor is the amount of power the devices can withstand
> before exploding due to the heat they generate when acting as s short
> circuit. I don't know a lot more than that, except that they are
> usually rated in Joules of energy they can dissipate before blowing
> up.
energy. Or you buy protectors based upon how it was done even 100
years ago. Protection is always about where energy dissipated.
Either that energy remains outside the building. Or that energy is
inside hunting for earth ground destructively via appliances.
Adjacent protectors simply give surges even more potentially
destructive paths through adjacent appliances.
An effective surge protector means even the protector remains
functional. A minimal 'whole house' protector starts at 50,000 amps.
Direct lightning strikes are typically 20,000 amps. Yes, the
protector must be sized to even earth direct lightning strikes and
remain functional. And that means the connection to earth must be
additional requirements - short ('less than 10 feet) to earth, no
sharp wire bends, no splices. all protectors meet at (again 'less than
10 feet to') the single point earth ground, ground wires separated
from other non-ground wires, not inside metallic conduit, etc.
Protection is always about where energy dissipates. If those
hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate in earth, then no damage.
This is how it was done even 100 years ago.
But somehow a magic box next to the appliance will absorb all those
joules? Always view the tech specs. Plug-in protectors rates at
hundreds of joules will somehow make hundreds of thousands just
disappear? That is what they claim. In analysis, we even traced
surges earthed destructive through a network of powered off computers
because the surge was permitted inside the building. And because a
surge on the black (hot) wire was connected directly to the
motherboard by the protector. The protector bypassed protection
inside the computer's power supply.
Telcos do not waste money on protectors adjacent to electronics.
That switching center must never suffer damage. A switching center,
connected to overhead wires all over town, may suffer 100 surges with
each thunderstorm - and no damage. Why? Each protector connects
short to the single point earth ground. And the protector is up to 50
meters separated from electronics. That separation increases
protection.
No protector is protection. None. The only effective protectors
make that short connection to single point earth ground. Ineffective
protectors (a $3 power strip with some ten cent protector parts
selling for $25 or $150) are profit centers. The NIST (US government
research agency) discusses those ineffective protectors by describing
what every protector must do:
> A very important point to keep in mind is that your surge protector will work by diverting the
> surges to ground. The best surge protection in the world can be useless if grounding is
> not done properly.
The NIST describes plug-in protectors as "useless". Obviously. It
does not even claim protection in its numeric specs. Find those spec
numbers that list each type of surge and protection from that surge?
No plug-in protector makes protection claims. They are a profit
center.
Protection is always about where energy dissipates. IOW why
facilities with effective protection both meet and exceed post 1990
National Electrical code. Where does energy dissipate? A protector
is only as effective as its earth ground - which no plug-in protector
has and therefore will not discuss. Effective 'whole house' protectors
come from General Electric, Keison, Intermatic, Siemens, Square D, and
Leviton. An effective Cutler-Hammer solution sells in Lowes and Home
Depot for less than $50.
Cliff
<UNfi...@UNoptonline.net> wrote:
>
>First Q: Is surge protection strictly lightning-related?
A surge protecter/surge suppressor is one thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surge_protector
http://www.elect-spec.com/faqspike.htm
Spikes might be another.
Beware induced spikes on phone & data lines.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>One very knowledgeable cohort of mine used to speak of them as real UPS's and "chicken UPS's"
>During that time, I was project manager on a couple of large UPS installations, both on PBX plants.
>One was a 4000 line PBX and the other was 2000 line. They were Lorraine Electric units,
>uninterruptible in every sense of the word, with huge lead-acid batterys. As I recall the batts in
>the 4000 line unit were sized for nominally 24 hours.
The land-line phones usually work.
40 VDC IIRC.
--
Cliff
cncmillgil
How bout a surge from downed power lines? Ours got knocked down from
ice on trees falling on the main lines into the house 4am Christmas
eve. Started a fire (12" flames) on the Belkin UL approved spike/
surge protector right next to the christmas tree & plasma TV! Could
never get an answer as to why this happened. Knocked out a couple
other surge strips including a plug in CO2 detector.
Thank god thats all that happened.
http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned1.JPG
http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned2.JPG
http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned3.JPG
http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned4.JPG
http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned5.JPG
Must be something to do with the end of the power- where it
dissipates ?
--
BB;s #9
The older you get
The more you suspect
Ideas long set
Are just all wet
©¿©
~gil~
tra...@optonline.net
> On Mar 20, 8:47 am, "Existential Angst" <UNfit...@UNoptonline.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Awl --
>
> > On the main breaker box, for the whole house.
>
> > First Q: Is surge protection strictly lightning-related?
>
> > Holmes on Homes was emphasizing this, saying $500 wasn't much for the
> > protection it affords.
> > $500?????????????? Holy shit.....
>
> > Isn't surge protection just some capacitors?? Connected to where? Each hot
> > to ground? Between hots? Values?
> > I have a ton of run/start caps, 20 to 100 uF, 370 V.
>
> > If you have surge protection on the mains, do you then need those itty-bitty
> > surge protectors fer yer pyooters?
>
> > Also, sometimes equipment will have an iron-like ring around a wire -- I
> > think in power supplies, mebbe surge protectors.
> > What is that ring doing? And which wires go thru it? Hot? Hot+return?
> > --
> > EA
>
> Surge protectors are not capacitors. They are made from material that
> will conduct electricity when the voltage exceeds some particular
> design value. That excess electric power is converted to heat in the
> surge protector.
That isn't correct. The main function of a surge protector is to
shunt the current to ground. In doing so, SOME of the power is
converted to heat as it passes through because the MOVs are not
perfect conductors and do have some small resistance.
> If the "surge" or spike is too long lasting or occurs
> so often that the surge protector does not have time to cool, it will
> eventually produce smoke and stop working. At that time any and all
> surges and spikes will continue on to the rest of your house.
>
> Usually the surge protector will die without you knowing about the
> death. There is no way to test them without a spike generator and an
> oscilloscope.
All of the good whole house surge protectors that I have seen have
indicator lights that show if they are still functioning or not.
Some also have audible alarms to signal that they have failed, or
relay contacts that can be sent to a remote alarm system, etc.
>
> The power spikes can come from anywhere. I personally experienced
> equipment destroying spikes that came from the telephone wires. A
> construction company was excavating very deeply for a sewer pumping
> station near my office. Somehow they connected 220 volts to the buried
> telephone cable. The power went through the local phone company
> junction box and into our phone system and fax machine. The surge
> protectors immediately absorbed all the power they could and produced
> smoke. Then the power continued on to burn out circuit boards in the
> equipment.
>
> We only discovered the source of the problem when a few days later I
> discovered a telephone guy installing a new junction box near our
> office. He told me about the construction company problem and how they
> were paying for the damage. They also paid us.
>
> So, bottom line is the protectors are probably a one-time only
> protection. There is no easy way to test. The surge may come from an
> unprotected source. This applies to all protectors, including all-
> house protectors. All lines coming to a house must be protected, Not
> just the "hot" lines.
>
> The "iron rings" you refer to are ferrite RF supressors. They reduce
> the electronic noise generated by switching power supplies.
>
> Paul- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
tra...@optonline.net
> On Mar 20, 12:26 pm, "hr(bob) hofm...@att.net" <hrhofm...@att.net>
> wrote:> They are not capacitors. They are electronic-semiconductor devices
> > that are open circuit until some voltage threshold is exceeded, then
> > they act like a very low resistance to try to limit the voltage. The
> > limiting factor is the amount of power the devices can withstand
> > before exploding due to the heat they generate when acting as s short
> > circuit. I don't know a lot more than that, except that they are
> > usually rated in Joules of energy they can dissipate before blowing
> > up.
>
Well, we all knew this was coming. Mention surge protector, and like
a bolt of lightning from the sky, here comes WTom.
> Either you buy a protector that will somehow absorb all that
> energy. Or you buy protectors based upon how it was done even 100
> years ago. Protection is always about where energy dissipated.
> Either that energy remains outside the building. Or that energy is
> inside hunting for earth ground destructively via appliances.
> Adjacent protectors simply give surges even more potentially
> destructive paths through adjacent appliances.
>
> An effective surge protector means even the protector remains
> functional. A minimal 'whole house' protector starts at 50,000 amps.
> Direct lightning strikes are typically 20,000 amps. Yes, the
> protector must be sized to even earth direct lightning strikes and
> remain functional. And that means the connection to earth must be
> additional requirements - short ('less than 10 feet) to earth, no
> sharp wire bends, no splices. all protectors meet at (again 'less than
> 10 feet to') the single point earth ground, ground wires separated
> from other non-ground wires, not inside metallic conduit, etc.
>
> Protection is always about where energy dissipates. If those
> hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate in earth, then no damage.
> This is how it was done even 100 years ago.
So far, I would mostly agree. Except the part about a direct
lightning strike. A direct lightning strike is mostly a red herring,
because even if the lightning bolt hit the service cable near the
building, it's highly unlikely that the path of all or even most of
the lightning is going to be through the service wire and into the
surge protector. Far more likely, it will arc with most of the
energy finding ground outside the building before it ever gets to the
surge protector at the panel or meter.
>
> But somehow a magic box next to the appliance will absorb all those
> joules?
Here;s where Tom likes to start arguing against strawmans and the rant
about plug-in surge protectors begins. The actual question was
about a whole house surge protector.
> Always view the tech specs. Plug-in protectors rates at
> hundreds of joules will somehow make hundreds of thousands just
> disappear? That is what they claim. In analysis, we even traced
> surges earthed destructive through a network of powered off computers
> because the surge was permitted inside the building. And because a
> surge on the black (hot) wire was connected directly to the
> motherboard by the protector. The protector bypassed protection
> inside the computer's power supply.
>
> Telcos do not waste money on protectors adjacent to electronics.
Total nonsense. Every line card on a telco switch has surge
protection right on the card where it connects to the incoming line.
Much like if you take apart an analog modem, you will almost always
find MOVs or similar components there.
> That switching center must never suffer damage. A switching center,
> connected to overhead wires all over town, may suffer 100 surges with
> each thunderstorm - and no damage. Why? Each protector connects
> short to the single point earth ground. And the protector is up to 50
> meters separated from electronics. That separation increases
> protection.
In fact, just like the IEEE recommends, the telco uses a tiered
approach. Yes, they have surge protection where the line enters the
building. But they also have it on the line cards. Months ago I
even found you semiconductors designed and marketed for telcos that go
on the linecards, complete with the application notes. Yet, here we
go again.
>
> No protector is protection. None. The only effective protectors
> make that short connection to single point earth ground. Ineffective
> protectors (a $3 power strip with some ten cent protector parts
> selling for $25 or $150) are profit centers. The NIST (US government
> research agency) discusses those ineffective protectors by describing
> what every protector must do:
Please provide us a link to NIST or any other credible source that
says plug-in protectors are ineffective as part of a protection plan.
You've been asked that here for years and we have yet to see the
link.
>
> > A very important point to keep in mind is that your surge protector will work by diverting the
> > surges to ground. The best surge protection in the world can be useless if grounding is
> > not done properly.
>
> The NIST describes plug-in protectors as "useless". Obviously. It
> does not even claim protection in its numeric specs. Find those spec
> numbers that list each type of surge and protection from that surge?
> No plug-in protector makes protection claims. They are a profit
> center.
>
> Protection is always about where energy dissipates. IOW why
> facilities with effective protection both meet and exceed post 1990
> National Electrical code. Where does energy dissipate? A protector
> is only as effective as its earth ground - which no plug-in protector
> has and therefore will not discuss. Effective 'whole house' protectors
> come from General Electric, Keison, Intermatic, Siemens, Square D, and
> Leviton. An effective Cutler-Hammer solution sells in Lowes and Home
> Depot for less than $50.
And here comes the list again. What Tom won't tell you is that of
those companies on his list of real effective and responsible
manufacturers, most of them also sell plug-in surge protectors. They
recommend using them as part of a tiered strategy.
As for the HD solution for less than $50, that doesn't square with
your criteria of needing a minimum of 50,000 amps, because they have
no such product available at HD.
The best advice was already provided. That was the link to the IEEE
guide on surge protection.
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf
Everyone can read what respected peer-reviewed engineers
recommend. And I can tell you this. They don't say plug-ins are
ineffective. Read chapters 5 and 6. Instead, they show them being
used as part of a tiered strategy. You put whole house protection at
the meter or panel. Then you use plug-ins that route all power and
signal through them, to further protect key equipment, eg, TVs, PCs,
etc.
Larry Jaques
<mil...@cin.net> scrawled the following:
>How bout a surge from downed power lines? Ours got knocked down from
>ice on trees falling on the main lines into the house 4am Christmas
It's highly likely that you had 17KV coming in where 120V should have
been when the main power lines shorted across a transformer somewhere.
>eve. Started a fire (12" flames) on the Belkin UL approved spike/
>surge protector right next to the christmas tree & plasma TV! Could
>never get an answer as to why this happened. Knocked out a couple
>other surge strips including a plug in CO2 detector.
>Thank god thats all that happened.
>
>http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned1.JPG
>http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned2.JPG
>http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned3.JPG
>http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned4.JPG
>http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned5.JPG
>
>Must be something to do with the end of the power- where it
>dissipates ?
Yeah, the MOVs are at the switched end. That's precisely where they'd
absorb the energy, get hot, and FLAME AWAY.
--
If we attend continually and promptly to the little that we can do, we
shall ere long be surprised to find how little remains that we cannot do.
-- Samuel Butler
sta...@prolynx.com
wrote:
> Awl --
>
> On the main breaker box, for the whole house.
>
> First Q: Is surge protection strictly lightning-related?
>
> Holmes on Homes was emphasizing this, saying $500 wasn't much for the
> protection it affords.
> $500?????????????? Holy shit.....
>
> Isn't surge protection just some capacitors?? Connected to where? Each hot
> to ground? Between hots? Values?
> I have a ton of run/start caps, 20 to 100 uF, 370 V.
>
> If you have surge protection on the mains, do you then need those itty-bitty
> surge protectors fer yer pyooters?
>
> Also, sometimes equipment will have an iron-like ring around a wire -- I
> think in power supplies, mebbe surge protectors.
> What is that ring doing? And which wires go thru it? Hot? Hot+return?
> --
> EA
Ferrite rings are for EMI, so the buzz in the box stays there and not
in your radio or stereo. Switching power supplies can generate a
whole lot of hash and that's the type that's gradually replacing the
old-syle wall warts. The ring is acting as a choke for RF, also
generated by the computer itself. Different deal than surge
protection, but also needed these days.
Look up "surgistor" or MOV, that's what's in those surge protectors.
They're rated in joules, the amount of energy they can pass. The
higher, the better, and more costly they get. The better surge
protector strips will say how much energy they can handle on the
package. I assume the panel versions do the same. What none of the
ad copy says is that MOVs have a distinct lifespan. They WILL wear
out after snubbing "x" number of spikes and become useless. Some of
the power strip units tie the neon switch light to the MOVs. If no
light when switched on, the MOVs have expired and it's time for a new
strip. But nobody tells the consumer about it. So there's a whole
lot of dead protectors out there that are just power strips now.
Usually there's MOVs between ground and each supply wire and between
the supply wires. Not rocket science.
As far as lightning protection, they'll do part of that, up to the
energy rating. Which is why you need the tiered approach. Arrestors
on the line in, surge protectors on the panel and on each high-value
electronic item. My sister is always getting hits, they blow the
phones off the walls, but since she's gotten decent surge protectors,
those get fried instead of the computer or video equipment. They have
to be replaced, but she gets the sort with insurance attached, so not
that costly.
There are other approaches to surge and spike protection, an MG set is
pretty much immune to any such up to direct lightning strikes. A
ferro-resonant transformer used to be a big part of the innards of one
line of power conditioners, pretty much immune to spikes, but the
transformer itself was noisier than a whole switch yard. Had one in a
corner of the shop for a mini-computer, had to go outside to talk to
anyone. None of those will snub spikes on LAN, phone or video cables,
for that you have to go to power strips with built-in protection or
stand-alones.
Stan
Bob F
> How bout a surge from downed power lines? Ours got knocked down from
> ice on trees falling on the main lines into the house 4am Christmas
> eve. Started a fire (12" flames) on the Belkin UL approved spike/
> surge protector right next to the christmas tree & plasma TV! Could
> never get an answer as to why this happened. Knocked out a couple
> other surge strips including a plug in CO2 detector.
> Thank god thats all that happened.
>
> http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned1.JPG
> http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned2.JPG
> http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned3.JPG
> http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned4.JPG
> http://users.cin.net/~milgil/Belkin_burned5.JPG
>
> Must be something to do with the end of the power- where it
> dissipates ?
Looks like a pretty good case for metal enclosed surge protectors.
Michael A. Terrell
tra...@optonline.net wrote:
>
> In fact, just like the IEEE recommends, the telco uses a tiered
> approach. Yes, they have surge protection where the line enters the
> building. But they also have it on the line cards. Months ago I
> even found you semiconductors designed and marketed for telcos that go
> on the linecards, complete with the application notes. Yet, here we
> go again.
I posted links to photos of telco cards with rows of MOVs, yet he
claims they don't exist. He is just a brain dead troll like Cliff, and
The_Mangled_Toad.
--
Lead free solder is Belgium's version of 'Hold my beer and watch this!'
The Daring Dufas
48 volts DC standard at the central office. I've seen all sorts
of variations on POTS lines but the standard is 48 VDC.
TDD
Cliff
>Could
>never get an answer as to why this happened. Knocked out a couple
>other surge strips including a plug in CO2 detector.
While I was staying in a motel in Southington, CT an
empty room burned.
Smoke detector started the fire. Melted & dripped flaming plastic
on the bed ....
(Had central wiring back to the office & was poorly
installed.)
--
Cliff
Cliff
>That isn't correct. The main function of a surge protector is to
>shunt the current to ground.
Ground schmound.
The ground could be the hot wire.
Or not at all involved in the surge.
--
Cliff
bud--
>
> An effective surge protector means even the protector remains
> functional. A minimal 'whole house' protector starts at 50,000 amps.
> Direct lightning strikes are typically 20,000 amps. Yes, the
> protector must be sized to even earth direct lightning strikes and
> remain functional.
Lightning strikes can be far larger than 50,000A (but low percentage).
But a strike to a power line has multiple paths to earth. Investigations
have shown the largest lightning-caused surge with any reasonable
probability of occurring is 10,000A on an incoming power wire. The
50,000A suppressor rating can handle that. High ratings give long life.
The best information on surges and surge protection is in a guide from
the IEEE at:
<http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf>
(also posted by Howard and trader)
and a simpler guide from the NIST at:
<http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf>
Neither service panel or plug-in suppressors can reliably handle crossed
power lines. MOVs which can handle 10,000A for maybe 100 microseconds
are rapidly burned out by longer duration events. (These events are
probably the major cause of catastrophic MOV failures.)
I would not make my own suppressor attached to power lines (other than
fuse protected MOVs in equipment).
> But somehow a magic box next to the appliance will absorb all those
> joules? Always view the tech specs. Plug-in protectors rates at
> hundreds of joules will somehow make hundreds of thousands just
> disappear?
Poor w has to warp a thread about service panel suppressors to his
favorite topic - plug-in suppressors.
Trying to not repeat traders nice reply....
François Martzloff was the surge guru at the NIST and wrote the NIST
guide. He also wrote numerous published technical papers. One paper
looked at the energy absorbed in a MOV on a branch circuit. It was
surprisingly small - 35 Joules max. In 13 of 15 cases it was 1 Joule or
less. That was with up to 10,000A coming in on the service wire. There
are a couple of reasons for that - I could elaborate if anyone is
interested.
Plug-in suppressors are only a "magic box" to w because he refuses to
understand how they work - clearly explained in the IEEE guide starting
pdf page 40. They work by CLAMPING (limiting) the voltage on all wires
(signal and power) to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in
suppressors do not work primarily by earthing (or absorbing). The guide
explains earthing occurs elsewhere.
According to NIST guide, US insurance information indicates equipment
most frequently damaged by lightning is
computers with a modem connection
TVs, VCRs and similar equipment (presumably with cable TV
connections).
It is likely that much of equipment damage is from high voltages
between power and signal wires. This is illustrated in the IEEE guide
example starting pdf page 40.
A service panel suppressor can not limit the voltage between power and
signal wires. To do that, there has to be a *short* ground wire from the
telephone entrance protector to the earthing system near the power
service. Also for the cable entrance ground block (and dish....) With a
large surge current to earth, the "ground" at the building can rise
thousands of volts above "absolute ground". Much of the protection is
that power and phone and cable wires rise together. If short ground
wires can not be used (as in the IEEE guide example) the guide says "the
only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector."
For similar reasons, all protected equipment that is interconnected
needs to be connected to the same plug-in suppressor. External
connections, like phone, also need to go through the suppressor.
Connecting all wiring through the suppressor prevents damaging voltages
between power and signal wires.
> The NIST describes plug-in protectors as "useless".
What does the NIST guide really say about plug-in suppressors?
They are "the easiest solution".
And "one effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport
plug-in suppressor.
> A protector
> is only as effective as its earth ground
The required statement of religious belief in earthing.
Why aren't airplanes crashing daily when they get hit by lightning (or
do they drag an earthing chain)?
Often asked and never answered - simple questions:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the
consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only
effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector"?
- Why do your favorite manufacturers make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does favorite manufacturer SquareD say (for their service panel
suppressor) "electronic equipment may need additional protection by
installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
And why can't you find a source that agrees with you that plug-in
suppressors are not effective?
For real science read the IEEE and NIST guides . Both say plug-in
suppressors are effective.
--
bud--
clarkm...@gmail.com
I have designed lightning protection for aircraft.
I have designed surge protection for aircraft.
I have not designed surge protection for households.
But once in a start up, I was testing the upper limit of the input
Voltage range for the switching powers supply I had designed for an
ultrasound cart.
I used a surge protector power strip as an extension chord.
I dialed up up the 60Hz AC to a couple hundred VAC.
If the surge protector worked for a while, I don't know.
But the stink of the smoke that came out of that surge protector had
to be smelled to be believed.
co_f...@yahoo.com
You needed a protector with larger smoke packets. Yours ran out too
soon!
Paul
Jon Elson
> The power spikes can come from anywhere. I personally experienced
> equipment destroying spikes that came from the telephone wires. A
> construction company was excavating very deeply for a sewer pumping
> station near my office. Somehow they connected 220 volts to the buried
> telephone cable. The power went through the local phone company
> junction box and into our phone system and fax machine. The surge
> protectors immediately absorbed all the power they could and produced
> smoke. Then the power continued on to burn out circuit boards in the
> equipment.
I have a fairly expensive business phone system in my house, central
control box and stations here and there. So, I made my own protector.
I used a 10 Ohm 1 Watt film resistor in series with each incoming phone
wire, and then connected to a 3-terminal gas tube arrestor. The idea is
the film resistors blow like ultra-fast fuses during a severe surge,
allowing the gas tube to handle what got through before. This has
worked well, I've never had any damage to the phone system, but the DSL
modems I used to use got blitzed a couple times. The resistors did get
popped a couple times, too. I don't think you can get this kind of
phone wire arrestor anywhere as a complete unit, except maybe from a
telephone physical plant supplier. The gas tubes can be bought from
Digi-Key and similar electronics distributors.
I have had some other gear damaged, but due to the nature of the
equipment, I am pretty sure it was NOT from anything coming in the power
lines. Wires running from one end of your house to the other can
develop thousands of Volts when there is a nearby lightning strike, due
to magnetic induction. I've had some stuff in my home burglar alarm
damaged, as well as an ethernet port on a computer. (Most of this
damage all happened in one incident, nearby lightning strike.)
So, I'm not so sure that power line protectors will actually prevent a
whole lot of damage.
Jon
Jon Elson
> So the surge protector is a kind of crude voltage regulator?
>
> Well, how about this:
>
> Why not put a 100 A relay in the service, with the coil connected to a
> fast-acting voltage-sensing amplifier.
> If the voltage goes up by more than, say, 10%, the relay is activated (or
> deactivated, if NO), all power to the house is broken, with the relay
> latching out, requiring a manual re-start. Proly a NO relay.
>
The standard protectors are tested against is the so-called 8/20 surge,
the 8 means an 8 MICROSECOND rise time. So, the current rises to it's
peak value in 8 us, then decays in 20 us after that. Relays take many
milliseconds to react, and a lightning surge will just jump right over
the open contacts, anyway. So, totally FORGET anything using relays.
Jon
Jon Elson
> What do fast-acting UPS's use? Use the same thing? Mebbe solid state
> relays?
SSR's generally use SCR's, which have the property that they don't turn
off until the current is interrupted. Normal 60 Hz power turns off 120
times a second. But, when you tell the thing to turn off during a
surge, it will totally ignore the command because the current is still
flowing.
Really high-end UPS's do use fancy devices like back-to-back giant
IGBT's, but most probably just use an electro-mechanical relay, and are
designed to supplement dropped line power, not protect the load. There
are "on line" UPS's that only use electromechanical relays to bypass a
failed inverter, and otherwise all connection from input to output is
through the DC battery bank. These are usually pretty expensive
(thousands of $ for a small one) noisy and waste a lot of power, too.
Jon
Pete Keillor
wrote:
I remember at work in the early '80's (before PC) getting a whole
bunch of modems and a PDP/11-23+ comm board smoked due to a near miss.
The modems all turned into maracas. IT said it was induced surge on
the phone lines. I saw a lot of lightning arrestor stuff going up on
our feeders after that. We were about 5 miles of wire away from our
nearest plant power house.
After that, didn't have a problem. Coastal Texas gets a LOT of
lightning.
Doug White
pretty good). They go around fixing messes previous contractors have
made of house construction/renovation jobs. They regularly install whole
house surge arrestors on the breaker panels when they re-wire a place.
We've been thinking of getting one installed, so I did a little research.
Leviton seems to be the biggest vendor in the US. They have an
interesting dodge, which is a surge arrestor that goes in series with
electric meter, inside the metter housing. In my case, this is outside
of the house, which means if it turns into a fireball, it probably won't
do a lot of damage. I also like the idea of stopping the surge as early
in the wiring as possible.
http://www.levitonproducts.com/catalog/model_50240-MSA.htm
I've got a query in to see if it will fit in just any old meter housing,
and how it compares with some of their breaker panel add-ons. Other than
having to deal with the electric company to replace the seal on the meter
housing, this thing looks like a snap (literally) to install. The cost of
the suppressor is about the same for either approach, but the electrician
should be able to install the meter version in considerably less than
half the time.
Doug White
westom
> How bout a surge from downed power lines? Ours got knocked down from
> ice on trees falling on the main lines into the house 4am Christmas
> eve. Started a fire (12" flames) on the Belkin UL approved spike/
> surge protector right next to the christmas tree & plasma TV! Could
> never get an answer as to why this happened. Knocked out a couple
> other surge strips including a plug in CO2 detector.
> Thank god thats all that happened.
A friend suffered a 33,000 volt fault to the local distribution. As
a result, hundreds of electric meters were blown from their pans. At
least 100 clear plastic meter covers in pieces 10 meters from the pan.
Many neighbors suffered damaged electronics and protectors similar
to yours. Fortunately, no fires. At least one neighbor had a
destroyed 20 amp circuit breaker.
But my friend knows someone who knows this stuff. He only had a
'whole house' protector installed. Therefore he had no damage other
than an exploded meter. Even the 'whole house' protector remained
functional.
Just another reason why informed consumers earth one 'whole house'
protector and do not made money on plug-in protectors. That Belkin
does not even claim protection in its numeric specs.
BTW, electric company was not responsible for any damage (as
expected). Many electric customers had their meter pans completely
replaced due to the explosive power in that 33,000 volt fault.
westom
wrote:
> I posted links to photos of telco cards with rows of MOVs, yet he
> claims they don't exist. He is just a brain dead troll like Cliff, and
> The_Mangled_Toad.
That is not what I said. I said those are not MOVs. MOVs have
excessive capacitance. Telcos use a different device that does not
have that excessive capacitance. Please read what was posted. You
got caught lying elsewhere. So everything from you is only an attack.
Any protection that might work adjacent to electronics is already
inside electronics.
Informed consumers dissipate energy so that surges are not even
inside the building.
westom
> We've been thinking of getting one installed, so I did a little research.
> Leviton seems to be the biggest vendor in the US. They have an
> interesting dodge, which is a surge arrestor that goes in series with
> electric meter, inside the metter housing. In my case, this is outside
> of the house, which means if it turns into a fireball, it probably won't
> do a lot of damage.
That Belkin did what plug-in protectors do too often. Threaten
human life. Any protector that fails during a surge was ineffective -
grossly undersized for that surge. The Leviton and 'whole house'
protectors from so many other companies much earth a direct lightning
strike - and remain functional.
A direct lightning strike is typically 20,000 amps. Therefore the
minimally sized 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. 50,000 amps
without failure.
The most rare of surges is 100,000 amps. An IEEE paper demonstrates
what happens when that 100,000 lightning strike hits the utility power
wire. Maybe 40,000 amps attempts to enter the home. (the IEEE
picture assumes the 'primary' surge protection system is also properly
installed).
Only more responsible companies sell 'whole house' protectors. Not
in the list are APC, Tripplite, Belkin, and Monster. Companies that
sell protectors for real world protection include Leviton, Square D,
General Electric, Intermatic, Keison, and Siemens. An effective
Cutler-Hammer solution sells in Lowes and Home Depot for less than
$50.
And again, no protector is protection - despite what others have
posted. Protection is always about where energy dissipates. Always.
Either the protector makes an always required short (ie 'less than 10
foot') connection to earth ground. Or that surge will hunt for earth
ground destructively via appliances.
Bud has kindly provided the IEEE citation that shows same. See:
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf
On page 42 Figure 8 - the surge energy was permitted inside a
building. Since he was only using plug-in protectors, then the surge
found earth ground 8,000 volts destructively via the adjacent TV.
That is what protectors do. Earth a surge harmlessly outside the
building or destructively inside. Page 42 Figure 8 is only what that
Belkin can do.
All appliances already contain any protection that will work adjacent
to the appliance. Your concern is the rare surge that will overwhelm
internal appliance protection (ie my friend's 33,000 volt wire
dropping on local distribution). Any potentially destructive surge
earthed without entering a building will not go hunting 8000 volts
destructively via appliances - page 42 figure 8.
The only thing that makes a protector effective is its earth
ground. Therefore any money wasted on plug-in protectors is better
spent upgrading earth ground. Protection is always about where energy
dissipates - which is why earthing must meet and exceed post 1990
National Electrical code. Which is why informed homeowners upgrade
what dissipates energy harmlessly outside the building.
This is true of every protector. Why a 'whole house' protector is so
effective and why that Belkin does not even claim effective protection
in its specs. This: No earth ground means no effective protection.
A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Protection is
always about where that energy dissipates – earth ground.
Michael A. Terrell
westom wrote:
>
> On Mar 21, 4:34 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
> > I posted links to photos of telco cards with rows of MOVs, yet he
> > claims they don't exist. He is just a brain dead troll like Cliff, and
> > The_Mangled_Toad.
>
> That is not what I said. I said those are not MOVs. MOVs have
> excessive capacitance. Telcos use a different device that does not
> have that excessive capacitance. Please read what was posted. You
> got caught lying elsewhere. So everything from you is only an attack.
I posted links to datasheets that said they were MOVs designed for
telecom service, and had some of the boards in my hands to read the part
numbers. Since that doesn't agree with your ignorant jihad, you ignored
them.
> Any protection that might work adjacent to electronics is already
> inside electronics.
>
> Informed consumers dissipate energy so that surges are not even
> inside the building.
westom
> As far as lightning protection, they'll do part of that, up to the
> energy rating. Which is why you need the tiered approach.
In professional papers, tiering is not about protectors. Tiering is
about the only system component that dissipates the energy. Every
protection layer is defined by that component ALWAYS required in each
protection layer - the single point earth ground. The only item that
dissipates that energy. Every protection ‘tier’ is defined only by
the earth ground. Any protector without earthing does not ‘tiering’.
A residential 'whole house' protector is discussed. But that entire
protection “layer” is defined by what the protector connects to -
earth ground. Homeowners should also inspect their 'primary' surge
protection system. That is the other protection “layer”:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html
Protectors that do not even claim protection in their numeric specs
(ie that Belkin) will not discuss earthing. They hope you ‘assume’ a
protector magically makes energy disappear. The NIST (US government
research agency) citation provided by Bud is quite blunt about what an
effective protector must do:
> You cannot really suppress a surge altogether, nor "arrest" it. What these
> protective devices do is neither suppress nor arrest a surge, but simply
> divert it to ground, where it can do no harm.
What happens if the protector does not make that short (ie 'less than
10 foot') connection to earth? That energy must dissipate
somewhere? Bud’s IEEE citation – page 42 Figure 8 – shows where that
energy dissipates: 8000 volts destructively via nearby appliances.
Either that energy is earthed. Or that energy will hunt for earth
ground inside the building destructively via appliances. Both IEEE
and NIST make that point.
I am being kind. I have only called them ineffective. NIST is
blunter about what a protector without earthing does:
> A very important point to keep in mind is that your surge protector will work
> by diverting the surges to ground. The best surge protection in the world
> can be useless if grounding is not done properly.
See those pictures of the Belkin posted elsewhere? It even
threatened human life. And the NIST also describes plug-in protectors
are >useless<:
> ... can be useless if grounding is not done properly.
Only more responsible companies sell effective protectors. With an
always required, dedicated wire to make a short connection to earth.
Responsible companies including General Electric, Leviton, Intermatic,
Siemens, Square D, and even the Cutler-Hammer solution that sells in
Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50. In every case, an effective
protector has a wire to dissipate energy harmlessly into earth. Plug-
in protectors do not – are not part of a ‘tiered’ solution. Without
earthing (ie plug-in protectors), "The best surge protection in the
world can be useless if grounding is not done properly." Could they
be any blunter? Protection is always about where energy dissipates.
Each protection layer is defined by what provides protection – the
single point earth ground.
Secondary protection is earthing at the service entrance. Primary
protection is earthing by the utility. Each protection layer is about
where energy dissipates – not by some high profit box that somehow
makes energy magically disappear.
bud--
> On Mar 22, 7:31 pm, Doug White <gwh...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> We've been thinking of getting one installed, so I did a little research.
>> Leviton seems to be the biggest vendor in the US. They have an
>> interesting dodge, which is a surge arrestor that goes in series with
>> electric meter, inside the metter housing. In my case, this is outside
>> of the house, which means if it turns into a fireball, it probably won't
>> do a lot of damage.
>
> That Belkin did what plug-in protectors do too often. Threaten
> human life. Any protector that fails during a surge was ineffective -
> grossly undersized for that surge.
The only Belkin that failed in this thread was from crossed power lines.
It was not a surge, and neither service panel or plug-in suppressors are
designed to protect from the much longer duration events caused by
crossed power lines.
> The Leviton and 'whole house'
> protectors from so many other companies much earth a direct lightning
> strike - and remain functional.
Service panel suppressors are a real good idea.
But from the NIST guide:
"Q - Will a surge protector installed at the service entrance be
sufficient for the whole house?
A - There are two answers to than question: Yes for one-link appliances
[electronic equipment], No for two-link appliances [equipment connected
to power AND phone or cable or....]. Since most homes today have some
kind of two-link appliances, the prudent answer to the question would be
NO - but that does not mean that a surge protector installed at the
service entrance is useless."
Service panel suppressors do not prevent high voltages from developing
between power and signal wires. To limit the voltage you need a *short*
wire connecting the cable/phone entrance protectors to the ground at the
power service.
(And as someone pointed out, a near lightning strike can then induce
voltages with interior house wiring acting as an antenna.)
Much of the equipment damaged has power plus phone/cable connections,
and is likely damaged by high voltage between power and signal wires.
> The most rare of surges is 100,000 amps. An IEEE paper demonstrates
> what happens when that 100,000 lightning strike hits the utility power
> wire. Maybe 40,000 amps attempts to enter the home. (the IEEE
> picture assumes the 'primary' surge protection system is also properly
> installed).
Martzloff (NIST surge expert) has a paper (probably what w refers to)
that has a 100,000A lightning strike to a utility pole behind a house
with typical urban overhead distribution. The calculated average
probability of a worse event is once in 8,000 years. There are multiple
paths to earth so 'only' 40,000A is directed to the house on the service
neutral. Service neutrals in the US are connected to ground at the
service panel and connected to the earthing electrode(s) dissipating
that energy. Some of the energy is transferred to the hot wires and the
max probable surge current per wire is 10,000A (also in the IEEE guide
pdf page 27).
Incidentally, at about 6,000V from hot bus to enclosure (ground) there
is arc-over. After the arc is established the voltage is hundreds of
volts. If there is no service panel suppressor this is what dissipates
most of the energy on the hot wires. It is one of the reasons so little
energy is dissipated in MOVs in plug-in suppressors.
> Companies that
> sell protectors for real world protection include Leviton, Square D,
> General Electric, Intermatic, Keison, and Siemens. An effective
> Cutler-Hammer solution sells in Lowes and Home Depot for less than
> $50.
Repeating traders response to w's repeated drivel - the "real world
protection" all these manufacturers (except SquareD) sell includes
plug-in suppressors. And the $50 devices do not meet w's minimum specs.
For its best service panel suppressor SquareD says "electronic equipment
may need additional protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at
the point of use", and the connected equipment warranty is double when
"used in conjunction with ... a point of use surge protective device."
> Bud has kindly provided the IEEE citation that shows same. See:
> http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf
> On page 42 Figure 8 - the surge energy was permitted inside a
> building. Since he was only using plug-in protectors, then the surge
> found earth ground 8,000 volts destructively via the adjacent TV.
> That is what protectors do.
If poor w could only read and think he could discover what the IEEE
guide says in this example:
- A plug-in suppressor protects the TV connected to it.
- "To protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required."
- In the example a surge comes in on a cable service with the ground
wire from cable entry ground block to the ground at the power service
that is far too long (as in my last post). In that case the IEEE guide
says "the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a
multiport [plug-in] protector."
- w's favored power service suppressor would provide absolutely NO
protection.
It is simply a lie that the plug-in suppressor in the IEEE example
damages the second TV.
Lacking any source that supports his drivel w tries to twist an example
in the IEEE guide that shows how plug-in suppressors provide protection.
> Your concern is the rare surge that will overwhelm
> internal appliance protection (ie my friend's 33,000 volt wire
> dropping on local distribution).
Neither plug-in or service panel suppressors will reliably protect from
crossed power lines. This is idiocy.
Provide a spec from any manufacturer that claims such protection.
> Therefore any money wasted on plug-in protectors is better
> spent upgrading earth ground.
Martzloff has written "the impedance of the grounding system to `true
earth' is far less important than the integrity of the bonding of the
various parts of the grounding system." That is - short ground wires
from the telephone and cable entry protectors (and dish...) to the
ground at the power service.
> Belkin does not even claim effective protection
> in its specs.
Complete nonsense.
> No earth ground means no effective protection.
> A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
w's religious mantras protects him from disturbing thoughts (aka reality).
Still not explained - why aren't airplanes crashing daily when they get
hit by lightning (or do they drag an earthing chain)?
Everyone is in favor of earthing. The IEEE guide explains, for anyone
who can think, that plug-in suppressors do not work primarily by
earthing and that earthing occurs elsewhere.
For real science read the IEEE and NIST guides - links provided . Both
say plug-in suppressors are effective.
There are 98,615,938 other web sites, including 13,843,032 by lunatics,
and w can't find another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are
NOT effective. All you have are w's opinions based on his religious
belief in earthing.
Still never answered - simple questions:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the
consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only
effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector"?
- Why do your favorite manufacturers make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does favorite manufacturer SquareD say (for their service panel
suppressor) "electronic equipment may need additional protection by
installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
--
bud--
bud--
> On Mar 21, 7:05 am, cncmillgil <mil...@cin.net> wrote:
>> How bout a surge from downed power lines? Ours got knocked down from
>> ice on trees falling on the main lines into the house 4am Christmas
>> eve. Started a fire (12" flames) on the Belkin UL approved spike/
>> surge protector right next to the christmas tree & plasma TV! Could
>> never get an answer as to why this happened. Knocked out a couple
>> other surge strips including a plug in CO2 detector.
>> Thank god thats all that happened.
>
> 'whole house' protector installed. Therefore he had no damage other
> than an exploded meter. Even the 'whole house' protector remained
> functional.
I have not noticed that w is a reliable source of what happens. Perhaps
you could provide a newspaper article?
MOVs are the basic protection components for virtually all power circuit
surge suppressors. A MOV that can easily handle a 33,000V surge for 100
microseconds is rapidly burned out by a crossed power line ("temporary
overvoltage", not a "surge"). Suggesting that a service panel suppressor
will provide protection is idiocy.
Provide a spec from any manufacturer that their suppressor protects from
crossed power lines.
--
bud--
bud--
>
> We've been thinking of getting one installed, so I did a little research.
> Leviton seems to be the biggest vendor in the US. They have an
> interesting dodge, which is a surge arrestor that goes in series with
> electric meter, inside the metter housing. In my case, this is outside
> of the house, which means if it turns into a fireball, it probably won't
> do a lot of damage. I also like the idea of stopping the surge as early
> in the wiring as possible.
>
> http://www.levitonproducts.com/catalog/model_50240-MSA.htm
You would, in all probability, have to have permission from the utility
to use it.
The clamp voltage is 800V. According to Martzloff (was the NIST surge
expert) equipment can withstand about 600-800V surges. The 800V rating
sounds way too high to me. (On the other hand, the 330V rating on most
suppressors may be lower than needed.) It is a "nominal" clamp voltage.
With a strong surge the voltage is forced upward from 800V.
If there is a strong surge, the path to earth is through the neutral
from meter can to service panel, through the required neutral-ground
bond (almost always in the service panel), and to the earthing
electrode. The voltage drop on the neutral will add to the clamp
voltage. A surge is a very short duration event, so the current
components are relatively high frequency, so the inductance of the wire
is more important than the resistance. See the discussion on lead length
in the IEEE guide starting pdf page 22. In effect you are adding the
neutral wire to the lead length.
I would rather have a suppressor where I have total control over it
(service panel).
Probability of catastrophic failure is very low. Martzloff has written
"in fact, the major cause of [suppressor] failures is a temporary
overvoltage, rather than an unusually large surge." A cause of
"Temporary overvoltage" would be crossed power wires, as elsewhere in
this thread.
--
bud--
tra...@optonline.net
wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:20:14 -0700 (PDT), trad...@optonline.net wrote:
> >That isn't correct. The main function of a surge protector is to
> >shunt the current to ground.
>
> Ground schmound.
> The ground could be the hot wire.
> Or not at all involved in the surge.
> --
> Cliff
Idiot
tra...@optonline.net
You don't have to be so sure. The IEEE and NIST are though.
tra...@optonline.net
Another factor, many of the surge protectors intended for panel use
have indicator lights that show the status. Some even have audible
alarms to indicate that the protection has taken a hit and is no
longer functioning. If it's buried in the meter housing, you have no
way of knowing if it is still functioning.
bud--
> On Mar 21, 12:41 pm, sta...@prolynx.com wrote:
>> As far as lightning protection, they'll do part of that, up to the
>> energy rating. Which is why you need the tiered approach.
>
> In professional papers, tiering is not about protectors.
From surge expert Martzloff:
"Whole house protection consists of a protective device at the service
entrance complemented by [plug-in surge suppressors] for sensitive
appliances [electronic equipment] within the house."
Kinda sounds like tiering to me.
> Protectors that do not even claim protection in their numeric specs
> (ie that Belkin)
Complete nonsense.
> will not discuss earthing.
Because anyone with minimal intelligence can read in the IEEE guide that
plug-in suppressors do not work primarily by earthing.
> They hope you ‘assume’ a
> protector magically makes energy disappear.
Only magic if your religious blinders prevent you from understanding how
suppressors work.
The NIST (US government
> research agency) citation provided by Bud is quite blunt about what an
> effective protector must do:
Ho-hum. w just repeats the same distortions. Repeating:
What does the NIST guide really say about plug-in suppressors?
They are "the easiest solution".
And "one effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport
plug-in suppressor.
> Bud’s IEEE citation – page 42 Figure 8 – shows where that
> energy dissipates:
The lie repeated.
> Responsible companies including General Electric, Leviton, Intermatic,
> Siemens, Square D, and even the Cutler-Hammer solution that sells in
> Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50.
Ho hum - 3rd repetition. Repeating:
Being responsible companies, all these manufacturers (except SquareD)
sell includes plug-in suppressors. And the $50 devices do not meet w's
minimum specs.
> Plug-
> in protectors do not – are not part of a ‘tiered’ solution.
Martzloff says they are:
"Whole house protection consists of a protective device at the service
entrance complemented by [plug-in surge suppressors] for sensitive
[electronic equipment] within the house."
> Each protection layer is defined by what provides protection – the
> single point earth ground.
And the required religious mantra.
Still not explained - why aren't airplanes crashing daily when they get
hit by lightning (or do they drag an earthing chain)?
Still no link to another lunatic that agrees that plug-in suppressors
are NOT effective.
Still never answered - simple questions:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the
consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only
effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector"?
- Why do your favorite manufacturers make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does favorite manufacturer SquareD say (for their service panel
suppressor) "electronic equipment may need additional protection by
installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
For real science read the IEEE and NIST guides. Both say plug-in
suppressors are effective.
--
bud--
bud--
>
> Ferrite rings are for EMI, so the buzz in the box stays there and not
> in your radio or stereo. Switching power supplies can generate a
> whole lot of hash and that's the type that's gradually replacing the
> old-syle wall warts. The ring is acting as a choke for RF, also
> generated by the computer itself. Different deal than surge
> protection, but also needed these days.
>
> Look up "surgistor" or MOV, that's what's in those surge protectors.
> They're rated in joules, the amount of energy they can pass. The
> higher, the better, and more costly they get. The better surge
> protector strips will say how much energy they can handle on the
> package. I assume the panel versions do the same.
There is (in the US) apparently no definition for how joules are
measured. As a result, some manufacturers measure jules in a deceptive
manner, which puts honest manufacturers at a disadvantage. As a result,
some good manufacturers are not providing joule ratings anymore. Instead
they give surge current ratings (which are comparable).
The IEEE guide warns against comparing devices based on joule ratings
unless the test method is the same. Too bad - I like joule ratings.
> What none of the
> ad copy says is that MOVs have a distinct lifespan. They WILL wear
> out after snubbing "x" number of spikes and become useless.
Certainly can happen.
In my first post I quoted an investigation by Martzloff that found only
about 35J max at a plug-in suppressor with even the strongest surge that
can be reasonably expected on power wires. One reason is arc-over at the
service panel. The other is the impedance of branch circuit wiring. Both
are mentioned in other posts. If the branch circuit is very short -
outlet under the panel, the energy can be higher.
I recently bought a major brand plug-in suppressor (about $30) with
ratings of 590J and 30,000A per MOV, 1770J and 90,000A total. I don't
expect the suppressor will ever fail. The manufacturer apparently
doesn't either - there is a connected equipment warranty.
The current ratings, 30,000A, are in some ways odd - there is no way you
could get that current to the suppressor. It is higher than what will
come in on the service. But the high current ratings go along with the
high joule ratings.
The joule rating for a MOV is the single event energy hit the MOV can
take and be at the defined end of life (but still functional). If you
look at MOV ratings curves, you find that if the individual energy hits
are a small fraction of the rated energy, the cumulative energy rating
is far higher than the single event rating. If my 590J MOVs only see 35J
or far less events, the cumulative energy rating will be far over 590J -
another reason for connected equipment warranties.
High ratings are useful in the same way for service panel suppressors.
> Some of
> the power strip units tie the neon switch light to the MOVs. If no
> light when switched on, the MOVs have expired and it's time for a new
> strip. But nobody tells the consumer about it. So there's a whole
> lot of dead protectors out there that are just power strips now.
> Usually there's MOVs between ground and each supply wire and between
> the supply wires. Not rocket science.
The normal failure mode for MOVs is to start to conduct at lower
voltages until they conduct at normal voltages and have thermal runaway.
Any suppressor you buy in the US should be listed under the appropriate
UL listing - 1449. UL1449 has required, since 1998, a thermal disconnect
for overheating MOVs.
For plug-in suppressors, the IEEE guide goes on at length about how the
protected load can be connected across the MOVs, and be disconnected
when they fail, or can be connected across the incoming line. In the
former case, the load is 'protected' even if the MOV fails. Another
reason why manufacturers can have protected equipment warranties.
> As far as lightning protection, they'll do part of that, up to the
> energy rating. Which is why you need the tiered approach. Arrestors
> on the line in, surge protectors on the panel and on each high-value
> electronic item.
A good idea, particularly in high risk areas. It is suggested by
Martzloff in another post.
Plug-in suppressors are particularly useful if the protected equipment
has both power and phone/cable connections - equipment that is
particularly at risk.
Note that all interconnected equipment has to be connected to the same
plug-in suppressor and external wires (including phone and cable) have
to go through the suppressor. I think this is not as well understood as
it should be.
The max probable current on hot service wires is 10,000A. Service panel
suppressors with much higher ratings are readily available.
> My sister is always getting hits, they blow the
> phones off the walls, but since she's gotten decent surge protectors,
> those get fried instead of the computer or video equipment. They have
> to be replaced, but she gets the sort with insurance attached, so not
> that costly.
Phones off the wall sounds odd. I would look at the phone entrance
protector and length of ground wires from phone and cable entrance
protectors to the ground at the power service. The entrance protector
and earthing should protect the phone (using US installation practice).
And look at earthing system?
> There are other approaches to surge and spike protection, an MG set is
> pretty much immune to any such up to direct lightning strikes. A
> ferro-resonant transformer used to be a big part of the innards of one
> line of power conditioners, pretty much immune to spikes, but the
> transformer itself was noisier than a whole switch yard. Had one in a
> corner of the shop for a mini-computer, had to go outside to talk to
> anyone. None of those will snub spikes on LAN, phone or video cables,
> for that you have to go to power strips with built-in protection or
> stand-alones.
All good information.
Never been around a ferro-resonant transformer - interesting.
--
bud--
sparky
> On Mar 20, 9:09 pm, westom <west...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 20, 12:26 pm, "hr(bob) hofm...@att.net" <hrhofm...@att.net>
> > wrote:> They are not capacitors. They are electronic-semiconductor devices
> > > that are open circuit until some voltage threshold is exceeded, then
> > > they act like a very low resistance to try to limit the voltage. The
> > > limiting factor is the amount of power the devices can withstand
> > > before exploding due to the heat they generate when acting as s short
> > > circuit. I don't know a lot more than that, except that they are
> > > usually rated in Joules of energy they can dissipate before blowing
> > > up.
>
> Well, we all knew this was coming. Mention surge protector, and like
> a bolt of lightning from the sky, here comes WTom.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Either you buy a protector that will somehow absorb all that
> > energy. Or you buy protectors based upon how it was done even 100
> > years ago. Protection is always about where energy dissipated.
> > Either that energy remains outside the building. Or that energy is
> > inside hunting for earth ground destructively via appliances.
> > Adjacent protectors simply give surges even more potentially
> > destructive paths through adjacent appliances.
>
> > An effective surge protector means even the protector remains
> > functional. A minimal 'whole house' protector starts at 50,000 amps.
> > Direct lightning strikes are typically 20,000 amps. Yes, the
> > protector must be sized to even earth direct lightning strikes and
> > additional requirements - short ('less than 10 feet) to earth, no
> > sharp wire bends, no splices. all protectors meet at (again 'less than
> > 10 feet to') the single point earth ground, ground wires separated
> > from other non-ground wires, not inside metallic conduit, etc.
>
> > Protection is always about where energy dissipates. If those
> > hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate in earth, then no damage.
> > This is how it was done even 100 years ago.
>
> So far, I would mostly agree. Except the part about a direct
> lightning strike. A direct lightning strike is mostly a red herring,
> because even if the lightning bolt hit the service cable near the
> building, it's highly unlikely that the path of all or even most of
> the lightning is going to be through the service wire and into the
> surge protector. Far more likely, it will arc with most of the
> energy finding ground outside the building before it ever gets to the
> surge protector at the panel or meter.
>
>
>
> > But somehow a magic box next to the appliance will absorb all those
> > joules?
>
> about plug-in surge protectors begins. The actual question was
> about a whole house surge protector.
Tom does not know anything about surge protection so he is trying to
bluff his way through. he thinks he is appearing intelligent but most
readers can see through his misinformation. It is too bad that he
feels the need to rant about things he knows absolutely nothing
about. Perhaps he could make a more informed opinion on the type of
beer he is drinking.
Doug White
news:480688a3-3779-4e44...@15g2000yqi.googlegroups.com:
The unit has two LEDs to indicate the condition of the device. I am
goign to call Leviton support tomorrow to try to get more info. They
don't have teh mnaul/instructions on-line.
Doug White
Cliff
You know nothing about it, eh?
--
Cliff
westom
> The unit has two LEDs to indicate the condition of the device. I am
> goign to call Leviton support tomorrow to try to get more info. They
> don't have teh mnaul/instructions on-line.
Those lights only report a failure that must not happen if the
protector is properly sized. Normal failure mode for any protector
means it only degrades. Those lights do not report that normal
failure mode.
For most any location, a 50,000 amp protector will last at least ten
years - in most cases many decades longer. If your neighborhood has a
high number of failures, then a 100,000 amp protector will
exponentially increase that protector life expectancy. And will
significantly decrease its clamping voltages.
Of course, a most critical part is the only part that actually
provides protection. That is the earth ground. Every protection
layer is defined by the only 'system' component that provides
protection. Earth ground. How to make that 'whole house' protector
more effective? Upgrade the earthing. Every protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. Single point earthing with a
connection as short as possible, no sharp wire bends, ground wire
separated from other non-grounding wires, wire not inside metallic
conduit, etc. All essential to permit a protector to earth direct
lightning strikes without damage – even to the protector.
tra...@optonline.net
> On Mar 23, 6:05 pm, Doug White <gwh...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > The unit has two LEDs to indicate the condition of the device. I am
> > goign to call Leviton support tomorrow to try to get more info. They
> > don't have teh mnaul/instructions on-line.
>
> Those lights only report a failure that must not happen if the
> protector is properly sized. Normal failure mode for any protector
> means it only degrades. Those lights do not report that normal
> failure mode.
More convoluded logic. If the indicator lights are useless, then why
are they included on many of the surge protectors provided by the
company Wtom recommends?
>
> For most any location, a 50,000 amp protector will last at least ten
> years - in most cases many decades longer.
We're still waiting for a link to where you can buy one of those 50KA
ones at HD for $50 like you claimed.
If your neighborhood has a
> high number of failures, then a 100,000 amp protector will
> exponentially increase that protector life expectancy. And will
> significantly decrease its clamping voltages.
>
> Of course, a most critical part is the only part that actually
> provides protection. That is the earth ground. Every protection
> layer is defined by the only 'system' component that provides
> protection. Earth ground. How to make that 'whole house' protector
> more effective? Upgrade the earthing. Every protector is only as
> effective as its earth ground.
Then explain this. You have claimed many times that all appliances
and electronics have built-in surge protection. How can that be,
since they have no direct short connection to earth ground, which you
claim renders protection impossible? Do they come with a mythical
earth ground inside? And how can the same type of device that is
used in common electronics for surge protection, ie MOV, work inside
the home electronics, but according to you, be totally ineffective if
used outside the electronics in the form of plug-in surge protector?
Not only do they also use MOVs, but those in $20 plug-in surge
protectors have significantly LARGER capacity MOVs than the ones
inside the $500 home entertainment electronics. How are airplanes
protected from surges without an earth ground?
The contradictions here are enough to make your head explode.
Twayne
news:0d99b258-a457-4540...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com,
westom <wes...@gmail.com> typed:
Wow; that's quite a mess of unverifiable and misleading
misinformation! Earth ground is NOT the most critical
protection object. It isn't even necessary for protection from
longitudinal surges, in fact. This is a mess of guesses with
an attempt to hopefully sound like you know what you're
talking about, but you don't.
Beware that poster's advice.
HTH,
Twayne`
Michael A. Terrell
He's been trolling with the same crap for years. :(
westom
> Earth ground is NOT the most critical protection object. It
> isn't even necessary for protection from longitudinal surges,
> in fact. This is a mess of guesses with an attempt to
> hopefully sound like you know what you're
> talking about, but you don't.
So why do all telcos require their protectors connected from each
wire to earth? Why does every telco bring every wire into underground
vaults where a protector connects within feet to earth - for
longitudinal mode transients? And why has this been the routine
solution for over 100 years?
Why does the NIST say grounding is required for protection?
> You cannot really suppress a surge altogether, nor "arrest" it.
> What these protective devices do is neither suppress nor
> arrest a surge, but simply divert it to ground, where it can
> do no harm.
So the NIST also has it wrong?
IEEE Standard 141 (Red Book) says:
> In actual practice, lightning protection is achieve by the process
> of interception of lightning produced surges, diverting them to
> ground, and by altering their associated wave shapes.
What is lightning? A longitudinal mode surge. So the NIST is
wrong. The IEEE is wrong. The US Air Force is also wrong when
protector are required to located as close to where wires enter the
building and earth ground?
Instead of posted anything technical, you also post insults? Of
course. That is what the less technically informed do. Where is this
IEEE paper that shows longitudinal mode protection is without earth
ground? Every paper I read is always about earth ground. Even this
professional's application note says every wire must connect to earth
before entering the building. But since you know better, then the
professional is lying? We should believe you only because you can
insult?
From Compliance Engineering entitled "Resettable Circuit Protection
for Telecom Network Equipment" is:
> In longitudinal mode, the overstress is present between tip-and-
ring
> and ground. Longitudinal overstresses are the most common and
> occur during power induction or power crosses in which both
> conductors have the same exposure to the hazard. Lightning-induced
> overstresses are typically longitudinal
IOW longitudinal surges seek earth ground destructively via
electronics. How do you stop it? Do you magically stop what even
three miles of sky could not? Of course not. Do you magically make
that energy just disappear? Of course not. The routine solution for
over 100 years is to do even what Ben Franklin lightning rods do.
Connect the longitudinal mode surge to earth. The energy is not
inside the building hunting for earth ground destructively via
appliances.
The NIST says how critical earth ground is:
> A very important point to keep in mind is that your surge protector will work
> by diverting the surges to ground. The best surge protection in the world
> can be useless if grounding is not done properly.
So, if earth ground is not important, then Franklin was wrong to
earth his lightning rods? That is what you have posted. Franklin's
lightning rods work because lightning - a longitudinal mode surge - is
connected to earth. - where energy is harmlessly dissipated. Where is
that energy absorbed if not in earth? Please, show me this magic
device that can stop what three miles of sky cannot. That will
magically absorb hundreds of thousands of joules? When surge
protection is always about earth ground, how do you know they are
wrong? Because you can post venom?
Why do the same technically naive naysayers routinely post so nasty?
westom
> isn't even necessary for protection from longitudinal surges,
> in fact. This is a mess of guesses with an attempt to
> hopefully sound like you know what you're
> talking about, but you don't.
So why do all telcos require their protectors connected from each
wrong? Because you can post venom? Why is earthing for surge routine
in every facility that can never suffer damage? And why has that
always been the solution for over 100 years? Clearly they must be
wrong because you can insult.
westom
> misinformation! Earth ground is NOT the most critical
> protection object. It isn't even necessary for protection from
> longitudinal surges, in fact.
From Dr Ronald B Standler in his book "Protection of Electronic
Circuits from Overvoltages":
> It should be noted that if the grounding wire is disconnected, an SPD
> will provide no protection against common-mode overvoltages. The
> grounding conductor is more than a safety feature; it is absolutely
> essential for the protection against common-mode overvoltages.
Longitudinal is also called common-mode. Maybe Dr Standler should
consult you? Myths must be better information. Grounding is not
necessary for effective protection? Plug-in protectors without ground
are effective because retail salesmen and hearsay says so.
Michael A. Terrell
westom wrote:
>
> On Mar 25, 1:43 pm, "Twayne" <nob...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> > Earth ground is NOT the most critical protection object. It
> > isn't even necessary for protection from longitudinal surges,
> > in fact. This is a mess of guesses with an attempt to
> > hopefully sound like you know what you're
> > talking about, but you don't.
>
> So why do all telcos require their protectors connected from each
> wire to earth? Why does every telco bring every wire into underground
> vaults where a protector connects within feet to earth - for
> longitudinal mode transients? And why has this been the routine
> solution for over 100 years?
Why is so much of the Teleco plant fiber optic, that requires no
electrical protection?
bud--
>
> Why does the NIST say grounding is required for protection?
Everyone is in favor of earthing.
The NEC requires the service neutral to be bonded to the ground and both
be connected to earthing electrode(s). (That directly earths any surge
on the neutral.)
The NEC requires an entrance protector for telephone wires, with the
voltage on the wires clamped to a terminal connected to the earthing system.
The NEC requires a ground block on cable and antenna coax where the
cable enters the building with the ground block connected to the
earthing system. (That does not limit the voltage on the center conductor.)
That is the required wiring under the NEC.
With a strong surge current to earth, the building "ground" system can
rise thousands of volts above "absolute" earth potential. Much of the
protection is actually that the power, cable, phone, ... wires rise
together. (If phone and cable entry protectors are not near the power
service and connected with short ground wires that can not be assured.)
According to Martzloff, improving the interconnections between systems
is more important than reducing the resistance to earth.
> Where is this
> IEEE paper that shows longitudinal mode protection is without earth
> ground?
Still not explained - why aren't airplanes crashing daily when they get
hit by lightning (or do they drag an earthing chain)?
> Every paper I read is always about earth ground.
Your religious blinders do not allow you to read anything in the papers
that contradicts your religious belief in earthing.
Like a Martzloff paper that says "Mitigation of the threat can take many
forms. One solution. illustrated in this paper, is the insertion of a
properly designed [multiport plug-in surge suppressor]." You have often
try to make the paper say the opposite of what Martzaloff was saying.
> Even this
> professional's application note says every wire must connect to earth
> before entering the building.
That certainly solves almost all of the surge problem.
But it is hard to get power, telephone and cable through the earthed wires.
> Do you magically stop what even
> three miles of sky could not? Of course not.
w thinks plug-in suppressors are "magic" because his religious blinders
prevent him from reading the clear explanation in the IEEE guide of how
they work.
> Do you magically make
> that energy just disappear? Of course not.
Where the energy goes has often been explained (including this thread)
but w's religious blinders prevent the words from penetrating.
> The NIST says how critical earth ground is:
With respect to plug-in suppressors what does the NIST guide really say?
They are "the easiest solution".
And "one effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport
plug-in suppressor.
> When surge
> protection is always about earth ground
And the required statement of religious belief in earthing.
westom
wrote:
> Why is so much of the Teleco plant fiber optic, that requires no
> electrical protection?
So again you cannot answer the question. So as a hate monger, you
must change the subject. Every CO has copper wires. Every CO has
typically 100 surges with each thunderstorm. And damage must never
happen. Why? They don't waste money on plug-in protectors. They
spend massively less money for the protectors that actually do
protection. Every incoming wire in every cable connects short to
earth ground via a 'whole house' protector. Because that is the
protection that even makes direct lightning strikes irrelevant. That
is how it was done 100 years ago. That is based even in the
principles demonstrated by Franklin in 1752.
Rather than admit reality, you would throw out fiber optics as a
solution? What is the best solution per dollar? What makes even
direct lightning strikes to utility wires irrelevant? A 'whole house'
protector connected to the only thing always necessary for surge
protection - earth ground.
What defines every protection layer? Each layer always has one
thing - single point earth ground. What must magic box protectors
avoid discussing to protect obscene profit margins? Earth ground.
Spin and accusation does not change reality. COs suffer hundreds of
surges without damage - because the technology was even understood 100
years ago.. Protection is always about where energy dissipates. A
westom
>> Do you magically make that energy just disappear? Of course not.
>
> Where the energy goes has often been explained (including this thread)
> but w's religious blinders prevent the words from penetrating.
According to Bud, that energy magically disappears. Clamping
somehow make energy disappear? He says that often. Meanwhile the
NIST (his own citation) says what happens when the protector cannot
connect that energy to earth:
> The best surge protection in the world can be useless if
> grounding is not done properly.
Or Dr Martzloff who discusses the same problems in his 1994 paper.
A plug-in (point of connection) protector can even cause damage to
nearby appliances. It is the first conclusion in that IEEE paper:
> Conclusion:
> 1) Quantitative measurements in the Upside-Down house clearly show objectionable
> difference in reference voltages. These occur even when or perhaps because, surge
> protective devices are present at the point of connection of appliances.
Each layer of protection is defined by the only item that makes
surge energy harmless. Protection is always about where energy
dissipated. And why more responsible companies sell the 'whole house'
protector. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. An
effective protector also costs tens or 100 times less money per
protected appliance.
tra...@optonline.net
> On Mar 26, 12:32 am, bud-- <remove.budn...@isp.com> wrote:
>
> >> Do you magically make that energy just disappear? Of course not.
>
> > Where the energy goes has often been explained (including this thread)
> > but w's religious blinders prevent the words from penetrating.
>
> According to Bud, that energy magically disappears. Clamping
> somehow make energy disappear? He says that often. Meanwhile the
> NIST (his own citation) says what happens when the protector cannot
> connect that energy to earth:
>
> > The best surge protection in the world can be useless if
> > grounding is not done properly.
>
> Or Dr Martzloff who discusses the same problems in his 1994 paper.
> A plug-in (point of connection) protector can even cause damage to
> nearby appliances. It is the first conclusion in that IEEE paper:
>
> > Conclusion:
> > 1) Quantitative measurements in the Upside-Down house clearly show objectionable
> > difference in reference voltages. These occur even when or perhaps because, surge
> > protective devices are present at the point of connection of appliances.
>
> Each layer of protection is defined by the only item that makes
> surge energy harmless. Protection is always about where energy
> dissipated. And why more responsible companies sell the 'whole house'
> protector.
Most of those same responsible companies also sell plug-in surge
protectors too. Some recommend using them in conjunction with their
whole house surge protectors. So there goes that arguement. One
would think W would have learned to stop bringing this bogus argument
up since it's so easy to demolish, but here we go again.
> A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. An
> effective protector also costs tens or 100 times less money per
> protected appliance.
Still waiting for an explanation of the obvious contradiction here.
W claims that all electronics and appliances have built-in surge
protection and that it works. Now, if surge protection is only
possible with a short direct connection to earth ground, how is that
protection possible? And how is it that the same components, ie MOVs
inside a TV can be effective, yet even larger ones in a plug-in surge
protector next to the TV are ineffective?
How is it that electrical systems on airplanes are protected from
surges? Where is their earth ground?
And if W knows so much about surge protection, where is the link to
that 50KA rated whole house surge protector for less than $50 that he
claimed is available at HD?
Michael A. Terrell
>
> On Mar 26, 4:55 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
> > Why is so much of the Teleco plant fiber optic, that requires no
> > electrical protection?
>
> So again you cannot answer the question.
What question? Why you keep trolling with your outdated and wrong
ideas?
> So as a hate monger, you
> must change the subject. Every CO has copper wires.
No. Not even at power line is copper these days. The local
switching center is all fiber optic, and the power lines are aluminum.
> Every CO has
> typically 100 surges with each thunderstorm.
Try to prove that. You can't, because it's another factoid you
created with a box of Ex-lax.
> And damage must never happen.
Yet it used to, before they started the conversion to fiber optics.
It happened quite often. That's why they were constantly reparing their
physical plant. The old leaded cable had to be pressurized with dry
nitrogen to keep water out when lighting pinholed the lead. They used
to monitor the tanks, and if too much was leaking, they used an
ultrasonic sniffer to find the pinholes.
> Why? They don't waste money on plug-in protectors. They
> spend massively less money for the protectors that actually do
> protection.
Sigh. They did use plug in protectors on the phone lines. EDCO made
them, but the market is a lot smaller these days. Now they are sold for
PBX systems.
> Every incoming wire in every cable connects short to
> earth ground via a 'whole house' protector.
So, they have surge suppressors on optical cable?
> Because that is the
> protection that even makes direct lightning strikes irrelevant.
Bullshit. A direct strike can blow a hole through a building, take
out the switching system for the plant's 48 VC power system, and leave
it a smoking wreck.
> That is how it was done 100 years ago.
Sure it was.
> That is based even in the
> principles demonstrated by Franklin in 1752.
Yawn. Franklin was an early, "Hold my beer" type. He was an ignorant
bumbler who was lucky he didn't die from his belief that lightning could
be harnessed to provide electricity.
Florida was switching to fiber optic trunklines and smaller switch
centers 20+ years ago. My copper phone line runs less than one mile
before it is converted to fiber, combined with a lot of other lines,
then routed to a switching center about the size of a single car
garage. You're at least 30 years behind the times, and ignorant as
ever.
Keep posting your nonsense. Everyone can see you for what you are.
Hate mongers? Yes, I despise liars and idiots with nothing but
flimsy straw men.
> Rather than admit reality, you would throw out fiber optics as a
> solution? What is the best solution per dollar? What makes even
> direct lightning strikes to utility wires irrelevant? A 'whole house'
> protector connected to the only thing always necessary for surge
> protection - earth ground.
You wouldn't know reality if it hit you in the face.
> What defines every protection layer? Each layer always has one
> thing - single point earth ground. What must magic box protectors
> avoid discussing to protect obscene profit margins? Earth ground.
Yawn. Keep spouting your narrow minded message. BTW, have you ever
heard of EDCO? Friends of mine just bought their factory building to
move their manufacturing business.
> Spin and accusation does not change reality.
The stop spinning and accusing.
> COs suffer hundreds of
> surges without damage - because the technology was even understood 100
> years ago.. Protection is always about where energy dissipates. A
> protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
Sigh. The classic CO is a dinosaur. Technology has passed it by.
Learn what is really going on so you don't keep embarrassing yourself.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
bud--
> On Mar 26, 12:32 am, bud-- <remove.budn...@isp.com> wrote:
>>> Do you magically make that energy just disappear? Of course not.
>> Where the energy goes has often been explained (including this thread)
>> but w's religious blinders prevent the words from penetrating.
>
> According to Bud, that energy magically disappears. Clamping
> somehow make energy disappear? He says that often.
I don't ever say that, but the village idiot just can't understand. To
poor w it is "magic".
As clearly explained in the IEEE guide, plug-in suppressors work
primarily by limiting the voltage on all wires to the ground at the
suppressor. The voltage between wires going to the protected equipment
is safe for the protected equipment. The guide says earthing occurs
elsewhere. Because that violates w's religious belief in earthing his
religious blinders filter out the words.
For power service wires, any surge energy on the neutral is directly
earthed by the required N-G-earthing electrode bond in all US services.
If there is a large surge on hot wires, at about 6,000V there is
arc-over from service panel buses to the enclosure, which is connected
to the earthing electrode. After the arc is established the voltage is
hundreds of volts. That dumps most of the surge energy to earth. This
has been explained numerous times but is filtered off by poor w's
religious blinders.
Martzloff (who was the NIST surge guru) has a technical paper that looks
at the energy that reaches the MOV in a plug-in suppressor. Even with
the maximum probable surge on power wires the energy is 35J or less. In
most cases it was 1J or less. The reason is arc-over, above. Also that a
surge is, by definition, a very short event. That means the current
components are relatively high frequency. So the inductance of the
branch circuit wires is more important than the resistance. The
impedance of the wire is to high to allow much energy reach the plug-in
suppressor. This has also often been explained, but the village idiot
just ignores it.
Just as I wrote in my last post - "where the energy goes has often been
explained (including previously in this thread) but w's religious
blinders prevent the words from penetrating." Poor w just keeps
repeating his lies.
> Meanwhile the
> NIST (his own citation) says what happens when the protector cannot
> connect that energy to earth:
And poor w still can't read what the NIST guide says about plug-in
suppressors:
They are "the easiest solution".
And "one effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport
plug-in suppressor.
> Or Dr Martzloff who discusses the same problems in his 1994 paper.
> A plug-in (point of connection) protector can even cause damage to
> nearby appliances. It is the first conclusion in that IEEE paper:
>> Conclusion:
This is exactly the paper I cited in my previous post - w's religious
blinders prevent him from reading anything that conflicts with his
religious belief in earthing.
At the time of the 1994 paper "multiport" surge suppressors were just a
concept or very new. The *whole point* of the paper was that multiport
suppressors are effective.
w always ignores that Martzloff said in the paper:
"Mitigation of the threat can take many forms. One solution. illustrated
in this paper, is the insertion of a properly designed [multiport
plug-in surge suppressor]."
On alt.engineering.electrical, w similarly misconstrued the views of
Arshad Mansoor, a Martzloff coauthor, and provoked a response from an
electrical engineer:
"I found it particularly funny that he mentioned a paper by Dr. Mansoor.
I can assure you that he supports the use of [multiport] plug-in
protectors. Heck, he just sits down the hall from me. LOL."
And in 2001 Martzloff wrote the NIST guide which says plug-in
suppressors are effective.
> Each layer of protection is defined by the only item that makes
> surge energy harmless.
"Layers of protection" are described by Martzloff:
"Whole house protection consists of a protective device at the service
entrance complemented by [plug-in surge suppressors] for sensitive
appliances [electronic equipment] within the house."
> A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
w's religious mantra protects him from evil thoughts (aka. reality).
Still no link to another lunatic that agrees that plug-in suppressors
are NOT effective.
Why doesn't anyone in the known universe agree with you w???
Still never answered - simple questions:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the
consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only
effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector"?
- Why do your favorite manufacturers make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does favorite manufacturer SquareD say (for their service panel
suppressor) "electronic equipment may need additional protection by
installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
Why can't you answer simple questions w???
k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
>westom wrote:
>> On Mar 26, 12:32 am, bud-- <remove.budn...@isp.com> wrote:
>>>> Do you magically make that energy just disappear? Of course not.
>>> Where the energy goes has often been explained (including this thread)
>>> but w's religious blinders prevent the words from penetrating.
>>
>> According to Bud, that energy magically disappears. Clamping
>> somehow make energy disappear? He says that often.
>
>I don't ever say that, but the village idiot just can't understand. To
>poor w it is "magic".
Idiot 'w' thinks his boat will sinks the first time a wave hits.
<snipped stuff 'w' will never understand>
Michael A. Terrell
We can only hope that he's right about that. :)
westom
> Most of those same responsible companies also sell plug-in surge
> protectors too. Some recommend using them in conjunction with their
> whole house surge protectors.
And so would I. If you are so misinformed as to spend up to $150
for an APC or Monster protector, well, GE sells the equivalent product
for $15.
Meanwhile the IEEE puts numbers to this stuff. A properly earthed
'whole house' protector is 99.5 to 99.9% protection. That 'whole
house' protector required to even protect those ineffective plug-in
protectors. Plug-in protectors that will magically absorb hundreds of
thousands of joules can create these scary pictures (and the fire
marshal who describes why the threat exists:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm
http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html
http://tinyurl.com/3x73ol
http://www3.cw56.com/news/articles/local/BO63312/
http://www.nmsu.edu/~safety/news/lesson-learned/surgeprotectorfire.htm
http://www.pennsburgfireco.com/fullstory.php?58339
To avoid that failure, the informed consumer earths one 'whole
house' protector for about $1 per protected appliance. Then those $40
and $150 per appliance protectors for the additional 0.2% protection
might do something useful.
But then the IEEE says what a properly earthed 'whole house'
protector does:
> Still, a 99.5% protection level will reduce the incidence of direct strokes
> from one stroke per 30 years ... to one stroke per 6000 years ...
Why spend $60 per appliance for a plug-in protector once the
effective solution is installed? The 'whole house' protector is
required to even protect plug-in protectors. But that would not reap
obscene profits for the less responsible companies that only sell the
ineffective protector. So myths are promoted. Discussion of earth
ground avoided. Insult posted by the usual nay sayers.
The informed homeowner installed a ‘whole house’ protector for about
$1 per protected appliance. Then may spend tens of times more money
for a plug-in protector to add the maybe 0.2% additional protection so
that the surge maybe once every 6000 years might be further
constrained. Plug-in protectors without a ‘whole house’ protector do
not even claim to provide the necessary protection. But companies
such as Monster must forget that. A $3 power strip with some ten cent
protector parts and expensive paint selling for $150. Profit is its
real purpose.
Doug White
news:Xns9D43C6A738E52...@69.16.186.50:
> My wife is a big fan of the "Holmes on Homes" show (which is actually
> pretty good). They go around fixing messes previous contractors have
> made of house construction/renovation jobs. They regularly install
> whole house surge arrestors on the breaker panels when they re-wire a
> place.
>
> We've been thinking of getting one installed, so I did a little
> research. Leviton seems to be the biggest vendor in the US. They
> have an interesting dodge, which is a surge arrestor that goes in
> series with electric meter, inside the metter housing. In my case,
> this is outside of the house, which means if it turns into a fireball,
> it probably won't do a lot of damage. I also like the idea of
> stopping the surge as early in the wiring as possible.
>
> http://www.levitonproducts.com/catalog/model_50240-MSA.htm
>
> I've got a query in to see if it will fit in just any old meter
> housing, and how it compares with some of their breaker panel add-ons.
> Other than having to deal with the electric company to replace the
> seal on the meter housing, this thing looks like a snap (literally) to
> install. The cost of the suppressor is about the same for either
> approach, but the electrician should be able to install the meter
> version in considerably less than half the time.
I finally got an installation manual from Leviton for the the meter
housing unit. It is only rated fror 200 amps IF it is installed in a
specific Murray housing. I went out and checked, and our housing isn't a
Murray. I also studied my meter, and it is one of the new electronic
remote read units. It fills up inside of the clear cover much more than
an old fashioned meter, and I doubt it would work with the Leviton even
if we had the right housing.
So, I'm back to finding a good unit to attach to the breaker panel. It's
too bad, because the earth ground has a more direct connection to the
meter box than to the breaker panel.
Doug White
westom
wrote:
> westom wrote:
>> Every CO has typically 100 surges with each thunderstorm.
>
> Try to prove that. You can't, because it's another factoid you created with
> a box of Ex-lax.
So many spiteful accusations. So little knowledge by first
learning. He constantly posts accusations without learning the
technology. So again, more facts without insult from one who learned
this stuff before posting.
In the late 1950s, Bodle and Gresh monitored surges throughout the
country. For example, over a six month period in Mt Freedom NJ, that
one cable produced 1120 longitudinal surges during 36 thunderstorms.
About 31 surges per thunderstorm per cable.
In the mid 1975, Carroll and Miller repeated this study. Over six
months in Washington CT, 1230 surges were recorded during 23
thunderstorms on that one cable. Average was 53 surges per storm per
cable. Some storms exceeded 100 surges per storm. One storm created
so many surges that the system ran out of film.
But Michael Terrell just knows this cannot be. He feels. Therefore
he knows. Which is what so many do to know plug-in protectors are
effective and to justify personal attacks. Clearly those papers in
the Bell System Journals were wasting time. They too should feel
rather than waste money on research. Clearly feeling justifies
malevolence.
Back to reality. COs suffer hundreds of surges without damage -
because that technology was understood even 100 years ago when a
carbon block protector was first patented about 1880. Protection is
Michael A. Terrell
Yawn. So many lies, so few neurons.
tra...@optonline.net
> On Mar 26, 6:35 pm, trade...@optonline.net wrote:
>
> > Most of those same responsible companies also sell plug-in surge
> > protectors too. Some recommend using them in conjunction with their
> > whole house surge protectors.
>
> And so would I. If you are so misinformed as to spend up to $150
> for an APC or Monster protector, well, GE sells the equivalent product
> for $15.
Square the above statement with calling those manufacturers
"responsible". How can they be responsible if they are selling
dangerous and ineffective products?
>
> Meanwhile the IEEE puts numbers to this stuff. A properly earthed
> 'whole house' protector is 99.5 to 99.9% protection. That 'whole
> house' protector required to even protect those ineffective plug-in
> protectors. Plug-in protectors that will magically absorb hundreds of
> thousands of joules can create these scary pictures (and the fire
> marshal who describes why the threat exists:
> http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
> http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm
> http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html
> http://tinyurl.com/3x73ol
> http://www3.cw56.com/news/articles/local/BO63312/
> http://www.nmsu.edu/~safety/news/lesson-learned/surgeprotectorfire.htm
> http://www.pennsburgfireco.com/fullstory.php?58339
>
> To avoid that failure, the informed consumer earths one 'whole
> house' protector for about $1 per protected appliance. Then those $40
> and $150 per appliance protectors for the additional 0.2% protection
> might do something useful.
WoW ! Stop the presses. This is something new. Previously W had
always argued that plug-in surge protectors were totally useless or
actually dangerous because protection without a short direct
connection to earth ground was impossible. Now for the first time,
it seems protection is not impossible, but instead has an
effectiveness of .2%. At least that's a step in the right direction.
Also, obvioulsy you are grossly misinformed about plug-in surge
protectors because good ones can be had for a lot less than $40 to
$150 each, let alone per appliance. I have a $25 one sitting
behind my TV that has 6 pieces of electronics plugged into it. That
works out to $4 an appliance, not $40.
Now lets deal with the frightnening pictures. My W you have been
busy searching haven't you? Here's the most serious problem. How
many photos could one find of TVs, toasters, stereos or other common
appliances that also had failures that caused fires? How many plug-
in surge protectors are there that are in use? Probably in the
hundreds of millions. So, to find 6 that caught fire isn't something
extraordinary. Note that at least some of those are identified as
older ones that do not have thermal protection that all new ones
must. The rest we don't know how old they were or if they had thermal
protection, which they probably did not.
And these units are being indicted for having MOVs. Guess what else
has MOVs that are even smaller? Your TV, radio, stereo, dishwasher,
oven, etc. So, again, how is it that according to W if you put an
MOV inside a plug-in surge protector it's a fire hazard. But put a
smaller one inside a plastic radio and it becomes effective
protection?
Also notice that NONE of the links said that plug-in surge protectors
are ineffective, dangerous and should be avoided. Some of them even
talked about how to use them.
>
> But then the IEEE says what a properly earthed 'whole house'
> protector does:
Yes and they also show plug-in surge protectors used too and recommend
them. You can't have it both ways.
>
> > Still, a 99.5% protection level will reduce the incidence of direct strokes
> > from one stroke per 30 years ... to one stroke per 6000 years ...
>
> Why spend $60 per appliance for a plug-in protector once the
> effective solution is installed? The 'whole house' protector is
> required to even protect plug-in protectors. But that would not reap
> obscene profits for the less responsible companies that only sell the
> ineffective protector. So myths are promoted.
Yes, like W's myth that these companies are "less responsible", while
we've shown him over and over again that the major electric gear
companies he calls "responsible" also sell them.
>Discussion of earth
> ground avoided. Insult posted by the usual nay sayers.
Yes, avoided indeed, because W can't explain the contradictions:
How is it that MOVs inside an appliance provide surge protection that
W says works, yet MOVs located in a plug-in are not effective?
How is it that MOVs inside a whole house surge protector are peachy
keen? They too are subject to the same failure modes after a surge
that is too large or after repeated smaller surges. Many of them are
also housed in plastic.
If a direct connection to earth ground is the only way to achieve
protection, how are electronics in airplanes protected?
>
> The informed homeowner installed a ‘whole house’ protector for about
> $1 per protected appliance. Then may spend tens of times more money
> for a plug-in protector to add the maybe 0.2% additional protection so
> that the surge maybe once every 6000 years might be further
> constrained.
Please provide a reference for those numbers, pulled out of thin
air. While you're at it, please provide a reference that agrees with
you that plug-in protectors are totally ineffective. Or is it now
that they are not totally ineffective, just .2% effective?
Also, perhaps you forgot, but I haven't. Still waiting for your link
to HD for their 50KA rated surge protector for less than $50.
bud--
> On Mar 26, 6:35 pm, trade...@optonline.net wrote:
>> Most of those same responsible companies also sell plug-in surge
>> protectors too. Some recommend using them in conjunction with their
>> whole house surge protectors.
>
> 'whole house' protector is 99.5 to 99.9% protection.
Not provided - quote or context.
As can be seen from other quotes from w, he completely twists what
sources says.
Service panel suppressors are a good idea.
But repeating from the NIST guide:
"Q - Will a surge protector installed at the service entrance be
sufficient for the whole house?
A - There are two answers to than question: Yes for one-link appliances
[electronic equipment], No for two-link appliances [equipment connected
to power AND phone or cable or....]. Since most homes today have some
kind of two-link appliances, the prudent answer to the question would be
NO - but that does not mean that a surge protector installed at the
service entrance is useless."
Service panel suppressors do not prevent high voltages from developing
between power and signal wires.
> That 'whole
> house' protector required to even protect those ineffective plug-in
> protectors.
More complete idiocy. Cite a source. (Hallucinations don't count.)
> Plug-in protectors that will magically absorb hundreds of
> thousands of joules
Continued idiocy.
> can create these scary pictures (and the fire
> marshal who describes why the threat exists:
> http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
w is unable to understand his own hanford link. It is about "some
older model" power strips and says overheating was fixed with a revision
to UL1449 that required thermal disconnects. That was 1998. There is no
reason to believe, from any of these links, that there is a problem with
suppressors produced under the UL standard that has been in effect since
1998. None of these links even say a damaged suppressor had a UL label.
But with no valid technical arguments all w_ has is pathetic scare tactics.
> The informed homeowner installed a ‘whole house’ protector for about
> $1 per protected appliance.
If you count light bulbs as appliances.
> Plug-in protectors without a ‘whole house’ protector do
> not even claim to provide the necessary protection.
Continued idiocy.
But SquareD, for their best service panel suppressor, says "electronic
equipment may need additional protection by installing plug-in
[suppressors] at the point of use".
> A $3 power strip with some ten cent
> protector parts
I recently bought a major brand plug-in suppressor with ratings of 590J
and 30,000A per MOV, 1770J and 90,000A total. Provide a source for a
30,000A/590J MOV for ten cents.
You forgot "a protector is only as effective as its earth ground." Are
you feeling OK?
Still no link to another lunatic that agrees that plug-in suppressors
are NOT effective.
Still never answered - simple questions:
Why aren't airplanes crashing daily when they get hit by lightning (or
do they drag an earthing chain)?
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the
consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only
effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector"?
- Why do your favorite manufacturers make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does favorite manufacturer SquareD say (for their service panel
suppressor) "electronic equipment may need additional protection by
installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
Why can't you answer simple questions w???
For real science read the IEEE and NIST guides. Both say plug-in
bud--
>
> So, I'm back to finding a good unit to attach to the breaker panel. It's
> too bad, because the earth ground has a more direct connection to the
> meter box than to the breaker panel.
Earthing electrodes are connected to the neutral in the meter enclosure?
Not the most common practice. (If that is the connection, it removes one
of my comments on the suppressor at the meter.)
The breaker panel, I assume, has the service disconnect. That means the
neutral and ground are bonded together at that point and it is the
'ground reference point' for the power system. The phone and cable entry
protectors should be connected to the earthing electrode wire that
connects to the meter. You want the length of the ground wire from
phone/cable entry protectors to the common connection with the power
system earthing to be short. You also want the distance from that common
connection point to the power ground reference point (in the service
panel) to be short. Yours is lengthened by the length of neutral from
the panel to the meter. If there is a large surge current from power
wires to earth, that raises the voltage between power and phone/cable
wires. If that is a concern, there are some service panel suppressors
that have ports for phone and cable wires to go through (SquareD makes one).
--
bud--
Ecnerwal
bud-- <remove....@isp.com> wrote:
> Doug White wrote:
> >
> > So, I'm back to finding a good unit to attach to the breaker panel. It's
> > too bad, because the earth ground has a more direct connection to the
> > meter box than to the breaker panel.
>
> Earthing electrodes are connected to the neutral in the meter enclosure?
> Not the most common practice. (If that is the connection, it removes one
> of my comments on the suppressor at the meter.)
It depends on the utility. Either is acceptable to the NEC, and the
distance between the meter and the service panel should be short.
Delta Lighting Arrestors are one common brand, trivial to install.
You can have both an arrestor and a capacitor if you like. Look for
LA302R and CA302R if searching the web. The surge capacitor helps the
surge arrestor, at some additional cost. They also make
larger/industrial units, though doubling up residential units seems to
get more bang for the buck than swapping a "residential" for an
"industrial", at least at the 120/240 single-phase service point.
Keeping the leads as short as possible when installing them on the panel
will help them work better.
Several of the panel makers (eg, Square D) have come up with in-panel
units that plug in like a dual pole breaker, but they cost more. In
theory, they might work better due to less lead inductance as they are
plugged right into the bus bars. In practice, they have lower ratings
than Delta arrestors available for half the price, probably because they
have to fit into the space alloted to two breakers.
--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by
westom
> Square the above statement with calling those manufacturers
> "responsible". How can they be responsible if they are selling
> dangerous and ineffective products?
Even I would sell you the Brooklyn Bridge if you want to buy it.
After all, why should I keep you from scamming yourself. Meanwhile,
only responsible companies also sell the well proven and effective
'whole house' protectors - no matter how he will spin it into a lie.
Again he reposts the same lie. He has done this often through the
years. I did not call protectors "totally useless". But then trader
reads what emotions tell him to read. I called them ineffective. The
NIST called them "useless":
> The best surge protector in the world can be useless if
> grounding is not done properly.
Ham radio operators who also learn this stuff from professionals,
science, and experience say same: "grounding system"
http://lists.contesting.com/_towertalk/2002-07/msg00760.html
1. Engineer your station to *keep the lightning out*.
2. High floor hamshack locations need to have their SPG lightning
protection at a ground level entry-point. From there, run your coax/
control cables inside. ...
4. Read the PolyPhaser book(s)
So those who use education and science learn from responsible
companies such as Polyphase (trader will not)r:
http://www.polyphaser.com/technical_notes.aspx
Keep lightning out is about where energy dissipates. Either energy
dissipates harmlessly in earth - outside the building. Or energy is
inside hunting for earth destructively via appliances. Ham radio
operators get to learn this quicker because Ham stations suffer even
more surges.
From K7...@aol.com in "grounding system":
http://lists.contesting.com/_towertalk/2002-07/msg00759.html
>> Trying to engineer for a direct hit is impossible with the light
>> gauge metals and structures that are quite flimsy when compared
>> to a bridge or a sky-scraper.
> Apples and oranges, dear boy. It's relatively easy to engineer for a direct hit -
> professionals do it everyday. And hundreds of sites take direct hits
> everyday with no damage. The techniques and materials are well
> documented.
But again what we know because we learned from science - not
propaganda from retail shelves.
Who to believe? People who do this stuff without damage? And who
learned basic electrical concepts? Or trader who routinely does his
usual attacks. He knows only because sales propaganda and his
emotions educated him. His ego will not permit him to admit he was
deceived..
None of which changes what the electrically trained knew even 100
years ago. Protection is always about where energy dissipates. A
protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
Attacks will continue. More professionals will be quoted to expose
that liar's attacks. As the same posters have done for years - attacks
will continue infinitely. Where is that manufacturer numeric spec
that claims protection? Been asking those questions for years. Not
once did any one provide those spec numbers. No plug-in protector
claims protection in the spec numbers.
Where are those spec numbers that list each type of surge and
protection from that surge? Never provided because it cannot exist.
As the NIST said,
> The best surge protector in the world can be useless if grounding
> is not done properly.
A protector is only as effective as its earth ground - which trader
must misrepresent to post more accusations. Where is that numeric
spec that provides protection? He never posts specifications - only
nasty attacks.
westom
wrote:
> Yawn. So many lies, so few neurons.
Translations. You said no numbers exist because you never learned
how electricity works. Those numbers are from the Bell System
Technical Journals. Only one of us learned this stuff.
He said those numbers do not exist. Stated was that telco COs
suffer about 100 surges with each thunderstorm. Actual numbers are
maybe 30 to 50 surges per cable times how many incoming cables? Well
over 100 surges with each thunderstorm. And no damage. Telcos use
'whole house' protectors. Waste no money on overpriced and
ineffective plug-in protectors. Therefore have no damage
Yawn is Michael Terrell avoiding his problem: insufficient
electrical knowledge. Yawn because he was again caught posting a
lie. His insufficient education has been exposed so often that
Michael will constantly post disparaging remarks - and no technical
knowledge..
Reality remains as it was 100 years ago. Protection is always about
where energy dissipates. A protector is only as effective as its
earth ground. Reality that makes Michael so enraged as to post
personal attacks rather than science numbers and professional
citations.
.
Michael A. Terrell
westom wrote:
>
> On Mar 28, 5:19 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
> > Yawn. So many lies, so few neurons.
>
> Translations. You said no numbers exist because you never learned
> how electricity works. Those numbers are from the Bell System
> Technical Journals. Only one of us learned this stuff.
What did you learn that is current technology? You keep quoting 100
year old data for designs that are no longer used.
> He said those numbers do not exist. Stated was that telco COs
> suffer about 100 surges with each thunderstorm. Actual numbers are
> maybe 30 to 50 surges per cable times how many incoming cables?
What cables? Fber Optic may be bundled, but aren't conductive.
> Well
> over 100 surges with each thunderstorm. And no damage. Telcos use
> 'whole house' protectors. Waste no money on overpriced and
> ineffective plug-in protectors. Therefore have no damage
>
> Yawn is Michael Terrell avoiding his problem: insufficient
> electrical knowledge. Yawn because he was again caught posting a
> lie. His insufficient education has been exposed so often that
> Michael will constantly post disparaging remarks - and no technical
> knowledge..
>
> Reality remains as it was 100 years ago. Protection is always about
> where energy dissipates. A protector is only as effective as its
> earth ground. Reality that makes Michael so enraged as to post
> personal attacks rather than science numbers and professional
> citations.
>
> .
Andrew VK3BFA
wrote:
> Awl --
>
> On the main breaker box, for the whole house.
>
> First Q: Is surge protection strictly lightning-related?
>
> Holmes on Homes was emphasizing this, saying $500 wasn't much for the
> protection it affords.
> $500?????????????? Holy shit.....
>
> EA
This has blown out to heaps of replies, so its probably got political.
And someone has maybe given you an answer thats of use. Dunno. Wont
add to that. Based solely on my experience as a working electronics
tech, I can say the following from experience. No theory involved.
Their called MOV's - Metal Oxide Varistors. Designed to short out when
overvoltaged by......you choose the tolerance...
Come in 2 sizes - big and little.
Big ones are on the side of your house near the switchboard. In
cartridges, so they are replaceable. These have a dirty big earth wire
connected to them - the theory is that so much current will flow that
the supply authority fuse at your cable entry blows and protects your
house stuff.
Little ones - in lotsa things, and should be more of em. You can buy
plug in ones for a few bucks - and remember, you gets what you pay
for. Getting popular combined into home entertainment power boards.
Also inside things.
Good example is the microwave oven - have them across the mains input
to the control panel. Fitted after the fuse, and the tracks running up
to it are thin, designed to fuse. Works well, usually protects things
on the same wiring circuit.
With a lightning strike, all bets are off. Anything can happen, but
mostly total destruction no matter what protection you have installed.
Hope that helps,
Andrew VK3BFA.
bud--
> On Mar 28, 9:18 am, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
>> Square the above statement with calling those manufacturers
>> "responsible". How can they be responsible if they are selling
>> dangerous and ineffective products?
>
> Even I would sell you the Brooklyn Bridge if you want to buy it.
So your "responsible" companies aren't responsible at all.
> Again he reposts the same lie. He has done this often through the
> years. I did not call protectors "totally useless".
Poor w doesn't even know what he writes:
"A protector is only as effective as its earth ground"
"No earth ground means no effective protection."
> NIST called them "useless":
The NIST called them effective:
They are "the easiest solution".
And "one effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport
plug-in suppressor.
> So those who use education and science learn from responsible
> companies such as Polyphase (trader will not)r:
Where does Polyphaser says anything about plug-in suppressors.
But those who use education and science learn from responsible companies
such as SquareD (for their best service panel suppressor): "electronic
equipment may need additional protection by installing plug-in
[suppressors] at the point of use"
SquareD is a truly "responsible" company because it does not make
plug-in suppressors.
> Who to believe?
Who to believe - w, who after years still can't find a source that
agrees with him that plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Or the IEEE, the NIST, SquareD, and everyone else that say plug-in
suppressors are effective.
> Or trader who routinely does his
> usual attacks.
Poor w is attacked by reality.
> attacks
> will continue infinitely.
w will continue infinitely. His religious belief in earthing has been
challenged and there are cracks developing in his universe.
> Where is that manufacturer numeric spec
> that claims protection? Been asking those questions for years. Not
> once did any one provide those spec numbers.
Posted for years and always ignored by w:
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=1770++joules+author
%3Abud--&btnG=Search&sitesearch=
[recombine to one line]
And posted by others and ignored.
Just like they will be ignored by w now.
Just like w ignores everything that does not fit his little world.
> No plug-in protector
> claims protection in the spec numbers.
Complete idiocy. A 10 year old could find them.
> Where are those spec numbers that list each type of surge and
> protection from that surge?
Where are those spec numbers that list "each type of surge" from
"responsible" company SquareD? Missing - because each type of surge is
just another piece of bullcrap from w. Plug-in suppressors have MOVs
from H-N, H-G, N-G. That covers all possible combinations and all
possible surges.
> A protector is only as effective as its earth ground
Still never explained - why aren't airplanes crashing daily when they
get hit by lightning (or do they drag an earthing chain)?
Why no explanation w??? Is there a massive coverup of all the crashes???
Still no link to another lunatic that agrees that plug-in suppressors
are NOT effective.
Still never answered - simple questions:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the
consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only
effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector"?
- Why do your favorite manufacturers make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does favorite manufacturer SquareD say (for their service panel
suppressor) "electronic equipment may need additional protection by
installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
Why can't you answer simple questions w???
For real science read the IEEE and NIST guides. Both say plug-in
bud--
> In article <a2f69$4baf9510$cde8d528$17...@DIALUPUSA.NET>,
> bud-- <remove....@isp.com> wrote:
>
>> Doug White wrote:
>>> So, I'm back to finding a good unit to attach to the breaker panel. It's
>>> too bad, because the earth ground has a more direct connection to the
>>> meter box than to the breaker panel.
>> Earthing electrodes are connected to the neutral in the meter enclosure?
>> Not the most common practice. (If that is the connection, it removes one
>> of my comments on the suppressor at the meter.)
>
> It depends on the utility. Either is acceptable to the NEC, and the
> distance between the meter and the service panel should be short.
Even though short, it adds to the length to the common connection point
and thus adds to the voltage between power and phone/cable wires. Wire
inductance (which you mention) makes the voltage higher that what it
would seem. The voltage could be damaging to equipment connected to both
power and phone/cable - like TVs. The NIST guide suggests that much of
the surge damage may be caused by high voltage between power and signal
wires. For the ground wire from a phone entry protector, 10 feet may be
too long.
> Delta Lighting Arrestors are one common brand, trivial to install.
>
> http://www.deltala.com/
As far as I could see none of the devices were UL listed. That would
disqualify their use for me.
I also didn't see any that said they met appropriate IEEE standards for
protection.
The voltage limiting in over 90% of power circuit suppressors uses MOVs.
Would be nice to see someone independent evaluate Delta's use of silicon
oxide varistors. Their comparisons are to arc-gap arresters, which are
common on circuits over 1000V. (Current use of "arrester" in the NEC is
for circuits over 1000V.)
>
> You can have both an arrestor and a capacitor if you like.
I have not seen any source that recommends using surge capacitors on
wiring below 1000V. And recommendations were for a surge cap with an
arc-gap arrester.
MOVs are fast enough to not need a capacitor. (Looks like Delta's
arresters are too.)
Ecnerwal
bud-- <remove....@isp.com> wrote:
> > Delta Lighting Arrestors are one common brand, trivial to install.
> >
> > http://www.deltala.com/
>
> As far as I could see none of the devices were UL listed. That would
> disqualify their use for me.
> I also didn't see any that said they met appropriate IEEE standards for
> protection.
The web site leaves something to be desired. I ordered mine, and in fact
the surge capacitors have the end-user UL mark, and the surge arrestors
have the UL component mark. Both are the dual Canada/US marking.
The surge capacitor has the additional function/labeling of a facility
EMI filter, which seems logical.
I suspect the component, rather than end-user, mark on the arrestors is
because they are supposed to be installed inside a box to prevent any
problems if they get more surge than they can arrest, and disintegrate.
They certainly pass inspections on a regular basis.