Phone line surge protection?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Serge
  • Start date Start date
S

Serge

Is there any point to connecting your phone/broadband line and Ethernet
cable to the surge protector? Or, is this just a gimmick concocted by the
surge protection industry?
 
Serge said:
Is there any point to connecting your phone/broadband line and Ethernet
cable to the surge protector? Or, is this just a gimmick concocted by the
surge protection industry?
Click to expand...
And this has what to do exactly with storage?
 
Serge said:
Is there any point to connecting your phone/broadband line and Ethernet
cable to the surge protector? Or, is this just a gimmick concocted by the
surge protection industry?
Click to expand...

For the phone line, yes. A few years ago we had a very-near lightning hit.
The surge came in through my phone line, wiped out the 14.4 modem and a
couple of chips on the MB; the rest of the PC and the peripherals were OK.
The power line went through a line conditioner before my PC, so I'm sure
the surge source was the phone line (as if the blackened EISA modem board
wasn't enough of a clue).

The Ethernet cable should be safe, unless you've run that cable outdoors
and didn't run it through a pipe or ROMEX.

If your broadband line is Fios DSL, I'd guess that was safe, since fibre
doesn't conduct electrons. If your broadband is copper DSL, check with your
DSL vendor; I don't know how or where the DSL mux is grounded.
 
Is there any point to connecting your phone/broadband line and Ethernet
cable to the surge protector?
Click to expand...
A friend of mine is an installer/ system programmer for the main UK
telecoms company, and he is putting in expensive bits of this sort of kit
all day every day. He keeps a box of specialised telephone line surge
protectors in his van and puts them into every line that he's working on,
or os he tells me. He doesn't see many failures, or many cases where the
surge protector has gone and protected the equipment from damage, but he
does see some, and his employers (who lease a *lot* of very expensive
equipment to a lot of clients) obviously think that the 5 minutes it takes
per line (and a non-trivial amount of wiring cabinet space and other
materials) is worth the effort.
I have never taken apart a "surge protector" system to find if they
use similar devices internally. I'd just go and ask Kenny for a handful if
I thought it was ever going to be a significant problem. To be honest, I'd
think that a proper UPS system was considerably higher on my list of
priorities. I suspect that domestic "surge protector" power strips etc are
FUD for selling useless kit to the fearful. Industrial equipment that
covers some of the same areas of concern costs a LOT more, and it's
capabilities are much more carefully described in the data sheets. That
makes me think that the problem generally needs a lot more analysis than a
£15 outlay suggests. I doubt they're likely to hurt though (except for the
£15).
 
Is there any point to connecting your phone/broadband line and Ethernet
cable to the surge protector? Or, is this just a gimmick concocted by the
surge protection industry?
Click to expand...

Depends on the protector. More specifically where it connects and what
it connects to. View another post that claims surge came in on phone
line to damage a modem. Well, he assumed. Why would a surge enter on
phone line when phone lines routinely have a surge protector,
installed free, by the telco? Did he know about that existing surge
protector - or just immediately assume?

To better answer your question, look at how a modem is typically
damaged. A direct strike to AC mains (highest wires, maybe down the
street and therefore assumed an indirect strike) carries a surge
directly into household appliances. What does a surge seek? Earth
ground. What causes damage? Surge finds a destructive path to
earth. IOW only some appliances are damaged; those making a better
path to earth. Damaged appliance must have both an incoming and
outgoing surge path.

Surge enters on AC mains, was not earthed at mains box, and then
arrives at a modem. AC electric is the incoming path. Outgoing to
earth ground is on phone line via that telco installed 'whole house'
protector.

After a surge is traveling through everything is a path (everything
simultaneously because it is electricity), only later is something in
that path damaged. This sentence is defined by how electriicty works
- and what so many forget when assuming.

Most common failure point in modems is the DAA section. Once
damaged, the modem will not make a connection. Most common damage is
to a PNP transistor that drives off-hook relay. Either the modem
remains connected to phone lines constantly, or modem never makes a
connection. Error message for both is "No Dialtone Detected".

Notice so many details because this damage was repeatedly analyzed -
some modems then repaired. How many posters know by working and
learning at this level of detail?

The naive assume surges enter like waves, crash on a beach (or
modem), and then stop. Not for one minute But again, read that
sentence 3 paragraphs up.. As noted above, it is electricity. First
electricity flows in a complete path from cloud to earth ground. Only
later does something with both an incoming and outgoing path get
damaged.

The most common source of damage to answering machines, modems,
faxes, and portable phone base stations: AC electric.

Having confronted popular myths (how surges damage), we move on to
another point. No surge is stopped, blocked, or absorbed. Surges
must be shunted (diverted, clamped, bonded, connected) to what surges
seek - earth ground. A protector is not protection. 1) It cannot stop
or absorb surges. 2) Earth provides the protection. 3) Protector is
effective when it shunts that surge to earth. A protector is only a
connecting device to protection - earth ground.

Notice how a telco 'installed for free' protector is connected.
Each wire connects to earth via a protector inside the NID - point
where their wires connect to yours. NID also must have an essential
earthing wire. Wire must be short ('less than 10 feet'), separated
from non-earthing wires, no splices or sharp bends, and connect to the
single point earth ground. 'Single point'? Yes, Not only must an
electrode be best earthing for a building. It must the only earthing
point - single point. All utilities that enter must first connect to
the surge protection - that common earthing electrode.

An industry professional demonstrates the concept in this
application note:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/fep/technotes/tncr002.pdf

Even underground wires must connect to that single point ground.
Every wire in every cable connects to earthing either via a protector
(AC electric and phone) or by a direct, hardwire connection (cable TV,
satellite dish). Notice surge protection for cable TV and satellite
dish needs no surge protector. Why? Surge protectors are not
protection. Earthing is the protection. Protector is simply a
connecting device to protection - earth ground.

So what do you do. First, building earthing must meet and exceed
post 1990 National Electrical Code requirements. Each utility wire
must make a 'less than 10 foot' connection to that essential
earthing. The most common source of surges comes from wires highest
on poles (most exposed) - AC electric. Therefore one AC electric
'whole house' protector is THE most important device to connect to
earthing. Notice why that modem was damaged - no properly earthed
'whole house' protector on AC electric.

'Whole house' protectors are sold by more responsible companies with
names long recognized for quality: GE, Leviton, Square D, Cutler-
Hammer, Intermatic, and Siemens are just some. A 'whole house'
protector is even available in Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50.

How to identify completely ineffective (and grossly overpriced)
protectors: 1) no dedicated wire for that 'less than 10 foot'
connection, and 2) manufacturer avoids all discussion about earthing.

Soon a troll will arrive to promote those ineffective protectors.
He will say earthing is not necessary because his income comes from
promoting those myths. When he arrives, the tone of this discussion
will become personal attacks - because he lies and because if you
learn why earthing is so essential, then his income is at risk.

Meanwhile, responsible professional have been discussing effective
protection for almost 100 years. A long list of professional
citations is listed in multiple posts is in
alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus on 30 Mar 2005 entitled "UPS unit
needed for the P4C800E-Deluxe"
http://makeashorterlink.com/?X61C23DCA

What is the only one common factor in every effective surge
protection 'system'? Earth ground. No way around that requirement.
No earth ground means no effective protection.

Again, look at how that above modem was damaged. Look at how
another concluded without first learning facts electrical. Notice how
the technology completely changes his conclusion AND demonstrates by
all high reliability faculties use 'whole house' protectors connected
short to enhanced earthing. Single point earth ground is THE
protection - not some 'magic box' protector that will somehow stop
what three miles of sky could not.

Yes, reading this multiple times will be necessary. Concepts
essential for protecting telephone systems even 70 years ago is
routinely denied by those who somehow know a 'magic box' is
protection.

Answers for ethernet and other information has not yet been
discussed. Grasp this before more infomation can be provided.
 
Previously chrisv said:
w_tom wrote:
Click to expand...
Do you google daily for new usenet "surge" threads? I swear, wherever
and whenever the issue pops-up you are there.
Click to expand...

Hehe. Possibly he thinks that most people do not understand how
surge-protection works and so his semi-knolwdge will not be too
obvious....

Armo
 
Hehe. Possibly he thinks that most people do not understand how
surge-protection works and so his semi-knolwdge will not be too
obvious....
Click to expand...

Most who recommend power strip protectors don't even know how
electricity works. The OP asked. Provided is common knowledge where
effective surge protection is installed.
 
Previously chrisv said:
w_tom wrote:
Click to expand...
Do you google daily for new usenet "surge" threads? I swear, wherever
and whenever the issue pops-up you are there.
Click to expand...

On a second note, this guy is still a complete incompetent. Some
very silly things in there, that only somebody that does not
understand what he is talking about could say. I think he tries
to throw a lot of technical data ''fragments'' at people to create
the illusion of competence.

Personal highlight: The PNP relais driver transistor. No relation to the
issue at hand at all.

Arno
 
The best information on surges and surge protection I have seen is at:
http://www.mikeholt.com/files/PDF/LightningGuide_FINALpublishedversion_May051.pdf
- the title is "How to protect your house and its contents from
lightning: IEEE guide for surge protection of equipment connected to
AC power and communication circuits" published by the IEEE in 2005
(the IEEE is the dominant organization of electrical and electronic
engineers in the US).

And also:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
- this is the "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to
protect the appliances in your home" published by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (the US government agency
formerly called the National Bureau of Standards) in 2001

Both guides were intended for wide distribution to the general public
to explain surges and how to protect against them. The IEEE guide was
targeted at people who have some (not much) technical background.

Both guides discuss multiport suppressors. They are not a gimmick.
All interconnected equipment needs to be connected to the same plug-
in suppressor, or interconnecting wires should go through the
suppressor. External connections, like phone, cable TV, should also go
through the protector. Connecting all wiring through the suppressor
prevents damaging voltages such as between power and phone wires.
Having confronted popular myths (how surges damage), we move on to
another point. No surge is stopped, blocked, or absorbed. Surges
must be shunted (diverted, clamped, bonded, connected) to what surges
seek - earth ground. A protector is not protection. 1) It cannot stop
or absorb surges. 2) Earth provides the protection. 3) Protector is
effective when it shunts that surge to earth. A protector is only a
connecting device to protection - earth ground.
Click to expand...
The IEEE guide explains plug-in suppressors work primarily by CLAMPING
the voltage on all wires (power and signal) to the common ground at
the surge suppressor, not earthing, stopping, blocking, absorbing,
diverting. w_ has a religious belief (immune from challenge) in
earthing. Since plug-in suppressors do not work by earthing he
believes they cannot possibly work. But both the IEEE and NIST guides
say plug-in surge suppressors are effective.
Notice surge protection for cable TV and satellite
dish needs no surge protector.
Click to expand...
Meaning no surge protection from core to shield is provided at the
service entry ground block. The IEEE guide says that the core to
shield voltage is then limited only by breakdown voltage of F
connectors, typically 2000-4000V (US). And "there is obviously the
possibility of damage to TV tuners and cable modems from the very high
voltages that can be developed, especially from nearby lightning."
CATV wires going through a plug-in suppressor will clamp that voltage.
A 'whole house'
protector is even available in Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50.
Click to expand...
In a thread a few days ago 2 people looked at internet sites and
found:
Lowes had NO 'whole house' suppressors.
Home Depot had no 'whole house' suppressors near $50. The 2
suppressors available had no specs available from Home Depot or the
manufacturer.
How to identify completely ineffective (and grossly overpriced)
protectors: 1) no dedicated wire for that 'less than 10 foot'
connection, and 2) manufacturer avoids all discussion about earthing.
Click to expand...
Statement of religious belief in earthing #3.
Soon a troll will arrive to promote those ineffective protectors.
He will say earthing is not necessary because his income comes from
promoting those myths. When he arrives, the tone of this discussion
will become personal attacks - because he lies and because if you
learn why earthing is so essential, then his income is at risk.
Click to expand...
The troll has already arrived. w_, being evangelical in his belief in
earthing, searches google groups for "surge" to paste in his religious
tract to convert the heathens.(Yes chrisv...) And sure enough the
personal attacks started - contrary views are lies from people paid by
manufacturers.
What is the only one common factor in every effective surge
protection 'system'? Earth ground. No way around that requirement.
No earth ground means no effective protection.
Click to expand...
Statement of religious belief in earthing #4


For reliable information read the IEEE and/or NIST guides. Both say
plug-in suppressors are effective.

Or read w_'s links on plug-in suppressors. There are none.


Looks like no pigeons in this newsgroup w_
 
chrisv said:
Do you google daily for new usenet "surge" threads?
Click to expand...

Of course he does. And power supply threads too.

w_tom has never declared his professional or commercial interest in
surge protection despite being invited to on several occasions, and he's
most certainly not above blatantly lying and twisting other people's
posts to try and make his point. He even ignores the differences
between the electrical systems in the USA and Europe in an attempt at
cheap point-scoring.

A search for w_tom or w_tom1 in Google Groups is enlightening. He comes
off worst in any thread where he gets involved in an argument. His
posts consist mostly of FUD with a few technical-sounding bits culled
from Google tossed in in an attempt to make him sound knowledgeable.

I personally think that w_tom is an idiot savant when it comes to surge
protection, except he lost the savant bit somewhere along the line.
 
More FUD from the surge protection idiot savant w_tithead desperately
trying to boost his income:
Why would a surge enter on
phone line when phone lines routinely have a surge protector,
installed free, by the telco?
Click to expand...

You didn't even know that British Telecom (not British Telephone as you
called them in a recent post) fits a surge protector on every phone line
it installs until I told you, did you? And now you're pretending you
knew that all along.

[rest of w_tom's dishonest and ignorant crap snipped]
 
Personal highlight: The PNP relais driver transistor. No relation to the
issue at hand at all.
Click to expand...

PNP transistor is often a path used by surges from computer, through
modem, to earth ground via phone line. How would one learn this?
Fix electronics to trace surge paths; also learn how surges damage.
That PNP transistor accurately defines how surge damage occurs.

Damage on modems, broadband, etc is typically from AC electric -
utilities wires most exposed and routinely struck. How to protect
modem, broadband, or even cable? Each wire is earthed short to a
common electrode. Some directly to ground. Some via a protector.
Bottom line - earthing defines the protection - anywhere in the world.
 
Usehttp://tinyurl.com/2qrszf
Click to expand...

View page 42 Figure 8. Protector is too far from earth ground and
too close to electronics. Therefore 8000 volts punches through and
destroys TV. Bud claims that earthing is not necessary. But as
figure 8 shows, a protector without proper earthing can even destroy
the TV.

Bud repeately insists that earthing is not required for protection.
But even his own citation says otherwise. From
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
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.
Click to expand...

Another author that Bud quotes frequently, Martzloff, even warns about
Bud's plug-in protectors.
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.
Click to expand...
Figure 8 on page 42 demonstrates how plug-in protectors contribute to
damage as Martzloff also warns about in his IEEE paper.
 
PNP transistor is often a path used by surges from computer, through
modem, to earth ground via phone line. How would one learn this?
Fix electronics to trace surge paths; also learn how surges damage.
That PNP transistor accurately defines how surge damage occurs.
Click to expand...

Complete nonsense. There is no relation between the type of
transistor and a surge path. The relais-driver transistor
is isolated from the phone-line input. And, if it is a PNP
driver, it is a high-side driver, meaning one side of the
relais-coil is grounded already. You are clueless.

Arno
 
Complete nonsense. There is no relation between the type of
transistor and a surge path. The relais-driver transistor
is isolated from the phone-line input. And, if it is a PNP
driver, it is a high-side driver, meaning one side of the
relais-coil is grounded already. You are clueless.
Click to expand...

No relationship was made between the type of transistor and that
surge path. Arno made assumptions and now takes offense at being
caught posting in error. That PNP transistor is a standard component
for a modem's off hook relay. PNP tells the informed where damage
occurs in a modem. A surge that enters on AC mains and finds earth
ground via phone line often damages that PNP transistor. If Arno knew
standard modem design, then he would not have posted that he did not
know.

Meanwhile, appliance is damaged when a surge takes a path through
that appliance to earth ground. Protection is to shunt a surge to
earth in a path that is not through and is distant from the
appliance. A technology that was standard even before WWII. Today,
some automatically know all about surge protection - and yet never
learned that the protection is earth ground. And so we now have 'magic
box' protection that will somehow stop what three miles of sky could
not.
 
w_tom said:
PNP transistor is often a path used by surges from computer, through
modem, to earth ground via phone line. How would one learn this?
Fix electronics to trace surge paths; also learn how surges damage.
That PNP transistor accurately defines how surge damage occurs.
Click to expand...

Clueless gibber.
 
View page 42 Figure 8. Protector is too far from earth ground and
too close to electronics. Therefore 8000 volts punches through and
destroys TV. Bud claims that earthing is not necessary. But as
figure 8 shows, a protector without proper earthing can even destroy
the TV.
Click to expand...
[The diagram shows a surge on the CATV cable and 2 TVs, TV1 has a plug-
in suppressor.]
For those with minimal reading and thinking ability, the text says "to
protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required".
And the protector "without proper earthing" did not destroy anyything.
It protected TV1 and lowered the surge voltage at TV2 from 10,000V ot
8,000V. This guide says plug-in suppressors are effective.
Bud repeately insists that earthing is not required for protection.
Click to expand...
Bullcrap. I recommend reading the IEEE guide which includes earthing
as one of the major protection methods. I *repeat* the explanation in
the IEEE guide - plug-in suppressors work primarily by clamping, not
earthing. But that violates w_'s religious belief in earthing, and he
thinks plug-in suppressors can't possibly work.
But even his own citation says otherwise. From
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
Click to expand...
The question is not earthing. The *only* question is whether plug-in
suppressors work. About that the NIST guide says "this is the easiest
solution".
Another author that Bud quotes frequently, Martzloff, even warns about
Bud's plug-in protectors.> Conclusion:

Figure 8 on page 42 demonstrates how plug-in protectors contribute to
damage as Martzloff also warns about in his IEEE paper.
Click to expand...
w_ forgets to mention that Martzloff said in the same document:
"Mitigation of the threat can take many forms. One solution.
illustrated in this paper, is the insertion of a properly designed
surge reference equalizer [multiport plug-in surge suppressor]."

And Martzloff wrote the NIST guide which says plug-in suppressors are
effective.


w_ has taken 3 sources that say plug-in suppressors are effective and
tried to make them say the opposite.

But the IEEE and NIST guides, as well as the Martzloff paper, say plug-
in suppressors are effective.

Still missing, as always, links to a source that says plug-in
suppressors are NOT effective..
 
bud- said:
w_ has taken 3 sources that say plug-in suppressors are effective and
tried to make them say the opposite.
Click to expand...

Which is his usual modus operandi.
 
Back
Top