Should you use surge protector with DSL or Cable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mark Williams
  • Start date Start date
M

Mark Williams

I am checking on high-speed and looking into my options and trying to
understand how to set it up. One question is that I currently have a Belkin
Surgemaster Protector that includes cable and DSL protection. Is it a
good idea to use it? Does it impact performance in any way? Should it be
placed between the wall jack and the splitter?

Thanks for any help you can provide!
 
I am checking on high-speed and looking into my options and trying to
understand how to set it up. One question is that I currently have a Belkin
Surgemaster Protector that includes cable and DSL protection. Is it a
good idea to use it? Does it impact performance in any way? Should it be
placed between the wall jack and the splitter?

Thanks for any help you can provide!
Click to expand...

Go ahead and use it unless you note that an additional
(coax) cable degrades analog cable TV reception.
 
Mark Williams said:
I am checking on high-speed and looking into my options and trying to
understand how to set it up. One question is that I currently have a Belkin
Surgemaster Protector that includes cable and DSL protection. Is it a
good idea to use it? Does it impact performance in any way? Should it be
placed between the wall jack and the splitter?

Thanks for any help you can provide!
Click to expand...

I would never buy a surge protector only for cable or DSL protection. But if
you have one, there is no reason for not using it. The need for this
protector depends in fact of your connection to the net. If the cable is
aerial, you'd better have one. If it's underground, there is very little
chance for trouble. There is no impact on performance at all.
 
I have a Belkin Gold Series surge protector & all my PC hardware is
connected to it but NOT the DSL splitter as i tend to find that it takes
ages to connect to the internet.
Strange problem & i wonder why to this day.
 
Surgemaster claims protection from type of surges that don't
typically exist. Your telco has how many $millions of
equipment connected to overhead wires everywhere in town?
They don't shutdown for thunderstorms. They don't use the
ineffective in-line protectors promoted such as the Belkin.
Learn how effective protection from direct strikes has been
installed even before WWII - and costs less money. Discussed
previously in the newsgroup rec.video.satellite.dbs
entitled "Another Receiver dies" on 18 Jul 2004 at
http://tinyurl.com/6wr8x

Protector is only as good as the connected protection.
Start by installing effective protection - that will also meet
post 1990 National Electrical Code requirements. Protection
(earth ground) as demonstrated using a figure from the
National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST):
http://www.epri-peac.com/tutorials/sol01tut.html

Protector is only as effective as the earth ground. Same
concept that Franklin demonstrated in 1752.
 
Mark Williams said:
I am checking on high-speed and looking into my options and trying to
understand how to set it up. One question is that I currently have a
Belkin Surgemaster Protector that includes cable and DSL protection. Is
it a good idea to use it? Does it impact performance in any way? Should
it be placed between the wall jack and the splitter?

Thanks for any help you can provide!
Click to expand...

A pal of mine had a lightening strike on the local telephone pole. It came
down the line, through his modem and fried the motherboard. I now use a
surge protector between the microfilter and phone socket with no ill effects
whatsoever.
 
Where is the complete circuit? It come in on utility line
to damage modem and motherboard? Then where did it go? To
have damage, then first a complete circuit must be
established. Current must have travels from cloud, through
motherboard and modem, to earth. Where is that circuit?

Furthermore, how did the surge go completely past telephone
line 'whole house' protector? These damning questions suggest
your friend has no idea of how the transient caused damage AND
has no idea what this protector is doing - if anything.
Destructive surges occur typically once every eight years. So
yes, even a protector that contains no protection circuits
would appear effective and not adversely affect DSL.

Again, what was the incoming and outgoing path before
anything could be damaged? A damning question.
 
w_tom said:
Where is the complete circuit? It come in on utility line
to damage modem and motherboard? Then where did it go? To
have damage, then first a complete circuit must be
established. Current must have travels from cloud, through
motherboard and modem, to earth. Where is that circuit?

Furthermore, how did the surge go completely past telephone
line 'whole house' protector? These damning questions suggest
your friend has no idea of how the transient caused damage AND
has no idea what this protector is doing - if anything.
Destructive surges occur typically once every eight years. So
yes, even a protector that contains no protection circuits
would appear effective and not adversely affect DSL.

Again, what was the incoming and outgoing path before
anything could be damaged? A damning question.
Click to expand...

I can only relay what happened and the damage I saw although I should add
that it was a dial up modem, not ADSL, although I cannot see why that would
make any difference. Any failure on the part of the telephone equipment to
provide protection would have to be taken up with British Telecom, although
I have never heard mention of a "whole house protector", certainly in my
house there is a direct connection from the top of the communal telephone
pole to my telephones and PC via the normal socket outlets. The ADSL modem
has two lines, one into the outlet socket and the other into a USB port. As
to earth, the computer was plugged in which means that the casing etc. was
earthed. I can only assume that the current was sufficient to jump any
gaps. I believe it was BT who confirmed the cause of the trouble as a
lightening strike.
 
Ahh. Different circuit. But same concepts apply. BT
phones typically don't have 'whole house' protectors. Power
lines often are not above and protecting phone lines.

However, to define damage, both an incoming and outgoing
circuit must first exist. For example, it is possible for a
transient to enter on BT's wire, pass destructively through
modem and motherboard, and then seek earth ground via AC
electric wire. Motherboard would make a direct connection to
one AC electric wire. Again an incoming and outgoing path is
defined.

An adjacent protector does not block or interrupt this
circuit. If it did, then protector would interfere with POTS
phone service and would eliminate ADSL service. IOW protector
cannot work if protector sits between phone line and a
functioning modem.

A computer is not earthed, from the perspective of
destructive transients. Computer is safety grounded for 50 Hz
power. Earthing for transients means a dedicated, 'less than
3 meter' connection to earth. Obviously, a computer case does
not have that earthing connection. Computer chassis is only
safety grounded so that a human will not be electrically
shocked by low frequency 50 Hz electricity.

Have British standards have finally addressed transistor
safety problems? That means all electrical utilities must
make a short connection to the same earth ground before
entering a building. Cable makes a direct connection. Each
telephone wire must be earthed via protectors. Protectors
that do not routinely exist in the master socket (equivalent
in N America is an NID).

Correct is that a surge current may jump gaps. IOW a most
common part damaged in conventional modems is a PNP transistor
that drives an off-hook relay. The surge path would be from
phone line into relay wiper contacts. Then across a gap to
relay coil. Then through PNP transistor. We now define part
of a complete circuit. There is both incoming and outgoing
path through that PNP transistor. A resulting failure message
is often "No Dialtone Detected".

How to fix many lightning damaged modems? Only replace that
PNP transistor. It depends upon which paths were incoming and
outgoing. But a most common path only damages that PNP
transistor.
 
Back
Top