Won't strike twice.

[H. Seldon]

Let's see. We put a $20 protector on each household appliance for
thousands of dollars. Or we get a 'whole house' protector from Home
Depot or Lowes for less than $50. Of course protection is only be as
effective as its earth ground which means house earthing must be
upgraded to post 1990 NEC requirements. But then that earthing may
need be upgraded anyway for human safety issues and for a plug-in
protector to work.

So where is this major expense for 'whole house' protection? Plug-in
protectors cost tens of times more money per protected appliance. Why
does H Seldon misrepresent the numbers? The consumer is advised to
learn these numbers in Home Depot or Lowes.

There is no way around a basic fact. Shunt mode protector earth
surges. No low impedance connection to earth means no effective
protection. So plug-in protectors that cost tens of times more money
(per protected appliance) also don't have that low impedance earthing
connection? What kind of protection is that? Protection promoted by
half truths - that forget to mention why earthing is so important.

Defined is same protection that the plug-in manufacturer also claims
in his numerical specs. Where does he actually claim protection from
each type of surge. Plug-in manufacturer hopes consumer never looks at
those numbers. Why no protection in those specs? Maybe because he
would have to discuss earthing? Maybe the consumer would learn that no
earth ground means no effective protection. Better sales come from
less information. Plug-in protectors are promoted by myths.

H Seldon somehow claims 'whole house' protection is vastly more
expensive - promoting more myths. Nonsense. Only manufacturers of
ineffective protectors would make that bogus claim. Responsible
manufacturers such as Cutler-Hammer, Leviton, Siemens, Intermatic, and
GE make effective protectors that costs so little AND that have that so
essential and dedicated earthing wire. What does a plug-in protector
not provide - the dedicated earthing wire.

Apartment dwellers can learn from 'whole house' techniques. Buy the
plug-in protector of highest joules. Cut off the power cord as short
as possible (remember distance to earth must be as short as possible).
Plug it into a wall receptacle closest to breaker box and therefore
closest to earth ground. It becomes a kludge 'whole house' protector.
At least it will provide some protection - at least the protector has
some earthing.

They are called shunt mode protectors. They shunt. Either they shunt
a transient to earth (safely) or they shunt the transient into an
adjacent appliance (potentially destructive).

No, there is no utopia in lightning protection. So we earth and
install a 'whole house' protectors to make well over 90% of surges
irrelevant. Others will instead hype this into 'woe is me; nothing can
protect'. Bull. Commercial broadcasters, 911 response centers, and
telephone switching stations need 100% protection. So they do this
same concept,but so large as to spend $thousands. IOW they spend that
much more to get a few more digits of better protection. That is what
Orange County FL did to stop all lightning damage. Did they buy
plug-in protectors? Of course not. They fix the problem. They
earthed:
http://www.psihq.com/AllCopper.htm

For less money is effective protection for everything in the house -
smoke detectors, furnace, clock radio, dishwasher, computers -
everything gets effective protection. Or spend more money for numerous
ineffective plug-in protectors.

Get trivial protection from a power strip, get massive improvement by
spending less money per appliance for 'whole house' protection, or
spend $thousands to do same 'whole house protection in high reliability
facilities. What is not used in those high reliability facilities?
Plug-in protectors. The other and effective protection methods put
protectors adjacent to earth ground - not adjacent to appliances. More
effective protection even costs less money.

Your argument is that of a theoretician living in an academic
world or you're a shill who is perpetrating lightning protection
overkill on the general population. Don't you understand? Most folks don't
have a clue WTF you're talking about and have never been bothered by
lightning in their lives. They're not even gonna buy plug-in protection
much less wholehouse (maybe) protection.

Take it to the classroom. In the real world where we mortals live, you're
simply fulla shit.

 

[David Maynard]

Your argument is that of a theoretician living in an academic
world

That gives him too much credit.

 

[Bud--]

Bud-- wrote:

And of course, we demonstrated same. Plug-in protectors simply
shunted a lightning strike into a network of computers. Why? Plug-in
protector had no dedicated earth ground. Why did lightning find earth
ground via those powered off computers? Because that is what plug-in
protectors do? Shunt to earth.

As has been said many times, plug-in surge suppressors work by clamping
the power wires (and signal wires for a multi-port unit) to a common
ground reference at the surge suppressor.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
For most people this is not a difficult concept. It is clearly described
in the IEEE guide.

Bud's citations even demonstrate why plug--in protectors can
contribute to damage of adjacent appliances. But again, I am only
reposting for about the 12th time the same response to his same false
accusation.

The 5 EEs that wrote the IEEE guide can actually figrue this out. So can
Martzloff. They are not a dumb as you apparently think they are. They
all say plug-in surge suppressors are effective.

..

A shunt mode protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
Earthing is what effective protectors do. Earthing defines
effectiveness of a shunt mode protector.

Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.

It is clear to anyone that can read and think that the IEEE and NIST
guides recognize plug-in surge suppressors as effective.

You have still provided NO links to reputable sources that say that
"plug-in surge supperssors are not effective".

43,839,853 web pages and you can't find one link??
Where are your supporting links???

bud--

 

[John Doe]

As has been said many times, plug-in surge suppressors work by
clamping the power wires (and signal wires for a multi-port unit)
to a common ground reference at the surge suppressor.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to
earth. Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily
shunt to earth. Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not
primarily shunt to earth. Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They
do not primarily shunt to earth. For most people this is not a
difficult concept. It is clearly described in the IEEE guide.

By high-voltage short-circuiting the MOV, the circuit sees about the
same voltage at its output? Seems easy enough to understand.

 

[David Maynard]

As has been said many times, plug-in surge suppressors work by clamping
the power wires (and signal wires for a multi-port unit) to a common
ground reference at the surge suppressor.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
For most people this is not a difficult concept. It is clearly described
in the IEEE guide.



The 5 EEs that wrote the IEEE guide can actually figrue this out. So can
Martzloff. They are not a dumb as you apparently think they are. They
all say plug-in surge suppressors are effective.

.



Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.
Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.

It is clear to anyone that can read and think that the IEEE and NIST
guides recognize plug-in surge suppressors as effective.

You have still provided NO links to reputable sources that say that
"plug-in surge supperssors are not effective".

43,839,853 web pages and you can't find one link??
Where are your supporting links???

bud--

w_tom has been told that many, many, times but he is either unwilling, or
unable, to grasp that no damage will occur to a device if there is no
damaging potential across the device, regardless of what the device's
potential relative to earth is. With avionics being an example that is
routinely brought up but one which he routinely ignores.

 

[w_tom]

Plug-in protectors primarily clamp. They do not primarily shunt to earth.

Exactly. And since the destructive surge seeks earth ground, it is
now clamps to more potentially destructive paths to earth. And so your
own citation notes the problem with shunt mode protectors that are
clamping (shunting) a surge without an earth ground:

objectionable difference in reference voltages ... occur
even when or perhaps because, surge protective devices are
present at the point of connection of appliances.

When a shunt mode protector clamps together all wires and no wire is
a short connection to earth, then how does that protector do as even
IEEE Green Book defines:

Lightning cannot be prevented; it can only be intercepted or
diverted to a path which will, if well designed and constructed,
not result in damage.

But then we have another Bud citation that says:

High-current surges ... are best diverted at the
service entrance of the premises. While such a
protection is not mandated at present, trends
indicate growing interest in this type of surge
protection.

Effective 'whole house protectors (secondary protection) are
manufactured by Leviton, Cutler-Hammer, GE, Siemens, Polyphaser, and
Intermatic. Sources include Lowes, Home Depot, and electrical supply
house. These devices include a dedicated earthing wire. Like all
shunt mode protectors, they are made effective by earthing. Building's
earthing should meet and exceed post 1990 National Electrical Code
requirements.

Homeowner should also inspect his primary protection system:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Those with incomes dependant on plug-in devices will post anything to
promote those ineffective, so often grossly undersized, and overpriced
devices.

 

[John Doe]

Exactly. And since the destructive surge seeks earth ground,

It's seeking ground everywhere, but it's not going to arc
everywhere.

When a shunt mode protector clamps together all wires and no wire
is a short connection to earth,

There are lots of paths to ground all over the place.

then how does that protector do

It does because the vast majority of electrical storm activity is
not going to be a lightning bolt that shoots out the back of your
computer case and dives into the floor of your house.

 

[Bud--]

Those with incomes dependant on plug-in devices will post anything to
promote those ineffective, so often grossly undersized, and overpriced
devices.

You must be really disparate. I have no financial or business interests
in surge protection.

Ineffective?

IEEE guide - chapter 6 provides examples protection using surge suppressors.

"SPECIFIC PROTECTION EXAMPLES
"The previous sections have shown, in general, how to protect electronic
systems in houses:
"1) Proper grounding and bonding, especially at the service entrance.
"2) AC panel and primary signal surge protection at or near the service
entrance.
"3) Multi-port plug-in protectors near the equipment to be protected."
#3 explicitly recognizes plug-in surge suppressors as effective.

Why do both examples of surge protection in this chapter use multi-port
plug-in surge suppressors??
If you have trouble figuring out the text look at the nice pictures of
multi-port plug-in surge suppressors.

----------------------
NIST guide

page 12 discussing protection of 2-port equipment:
"A simple solution to the problems of voltage differences for two-link
appliances is to install a special surge protector that incorporates, in
the same package, a combination fo input/output connections for the two
systems. Each link, power and communications, is fed through the
protector which is then inserted between the wall receptacles and the
input of the appliance [electronic device] to be protected. This type of
surge protector is readily available in computer and electronics stores,
and the electrical section of home building stores."
If you have trouble figuring out the text look at the nice pictures of
multi-port plug-in surge suppressors.

page 16 - questions and answers:
"Q - Will a surge suppressor installed at the service entrance be
sufficient for the whole house?
"A - There are two answers to that question: Yes for one-link appliances
[electronic devices], No for two-link appliances. 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. ...."

Page 17 - surge suppressor installation hints:
"Plug-in (with cord or directly into receptacle)
The easiest of all for anyone to do. The only question is "Which to
choose?"



It takes willfull stupidity say plug-in protectors are effective.

-------------------------
Both the IEEE and NIST say plug-in surge suppressors are effective.

As always, you provide no links to reputable sources that say plug-in
suppressors are not effective.

Where are your links???

bud--

 

[David Maynard]

Exactly. And since the destructive surge seeks earth ground,

As close as we can expect w_tom to get.

it is
now clamps to more potentially destructive paths to earth.

Utter nonsense.

And so your
own citation notes the problem with shunt mode protectors that are
clamping (shunting) a surge without an earth ground:

In the first place, they do have an earth ground but, at any rate, the
device with all it's input/outputs safely clamped together couldn't care
less where else the surge find a ground path. But it won't be through the
device because all it's input/ouputs are safely clamped together.

When a shunt mode protector clamps together all wires and no wire is
a short connection to earth, then how does that protector do as even
IEEE Green Book defines:

Easy, the path is AROUND the device. To be specific, through the shunt
protectors, which is why they're called that.

<snip>

 

[Curmudgeon]

Exactly. And since the destructive surge seeks earth ground, it is
now clamps to more potentially destructive paths to earth. And so your
own citation notes the problem with shunt mode protectors that are
clamping (shunting) a surge without an earth ground:

When a shunt mode protector clamps together all wires and no wire is
a short connection to earth, then how does that protector do as even
IEEE Green Book defines:

But then we have another Bud citation that says:

Effective 'whole house protectors (secondary protection) are
manufactured by Leviton, Cutler-Hammer, GE, Siemens, Polyphaser, and
Intermatic. Sources include Lowes, Home Depot, and electrical supply
house. These devices include a dedicated earthing wire. Like all
shunt mode protectors, they are made effective by earthing. Building's
earthing should meet and exceed post 1990 National Electrical Code
requirements.

Homeowner should also inspect his primary protection system:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Those with incomes dependant on plug-in devices will post anything to
promote those ineffective, so often grossly undersized, and overpriced
devices.

I really don't know where you obtained your self-styled expertise in
these matters but I would suggest you back off a bit before you make a
*complete* ass of yourself.

Surge suppression *does* work and wholehouse protection is *very*
expensive to implement unless it is professionally done during the
construction phase of the building in question.

The following paper is promulgated by BC Hydro, one of the major
suppliers of hydro-electric power in Canada. This company supplies
electricity as far south as California in the US.

http://www.bchydro.com/rx_files/psbusiness/psbusiness23442.pdf

I suggest you read it. You *may* learn something. I know that's
difficult for a mind as closed as yours but try and give it a shot huh?

 

[w_tom]

Direct quotes are from that BC Hydro brochure. It says what I have
posted. For example, "point of use" or plug-in protectors - page 2:

If these devices are applied alone, they may not provide
complete protection from all surge disturbances.

Exactly. Those are effective? Other and effective solutions (that
also cost less money per protected appliance) demonstrate why a plug-in
protector is ineffective - as well as "not provide complete protection"
(another quote from that brochure).

What does that paper state is necessary for protecction? Page 1:

Commonly shared grounding medium

Meanwhile others claim effective protection is obtained from
ungrounded devices - plug-in protectors. The SRE concept assumes
protection from equpotential - no earthing. And yet BC Hydro states:

The ground lead from the suppressor should be
connected to a common ground. Do not connect
TVSS ground wires to an isolated ground.

This is further demonstrated in an IEEE paper on SRE protectors that
then defines better protection:

High-current surges ... are best diverted at the
service entrance of the premises.

After writing a paper on SRE (plug-in) protectors, what does the
author recommend? Effective service entrance protectors - also called
'whole house' protectors.

I did not say protectors are not effective. I said shunt mode
protectors missing essential earthing connection are not effective.
They are called shunt mode devices. They work by earthing - shunting -
a transient. The brochure says same on page 2:

Manufacturers use three basic components .... These
devices contain sophisticated electronic switches that
operate when the voltage exceeds a predetermined
level to divert potentially harmful energy to an
alternative path.

So where is that alternative path for a surge that seeks earth
ground? Without a connection to earth, then what do those
"electronic switches" divert into? That surge can be diverted into the
appliance? Yeph. Network of computers even damaged becase an adjacent
protector diverted surge into those computers - no dedicated earthing
wire to divert to. Meanwhile, effective 'whole house' protectors also
have that short earthing path. Therefore 'whole house' type protectors
are effective.

BC Hydro's brochure further demonstrates what an effective protector
must do - page 6:

protection modes - this reflects the configuration of the
device's active components.These are often referred to
as normal mode or common mode (i.e., line to ground
and/or neutral to ground). Preferred devices should
provide both modes of protection.

Review numerical specs for a plug-in protector. Where do plug-in
protectors claim protection from either mode? BC Hydro defined the two
modes. Where are numbers from that plug-in manufacturer? Go ahead.
Post them. Why do ineffective protector manufacturers remain so so
silent? No earth ground means no effective common mode protection.
*Preferred devices* - also called 'whole house protectors - accomplish
what plug-in protectors do not even claim. Don't take my word for it.
Where are numerical specs for each mode of protection from that plug-in
protector manufacturer? BC Hydro tells you what that plug-in protector
manufacture must claim to accomplish. Why no such claim?

Manufacturers with responsible brand names provide 'whole house'
protectors that acutally provide both normal mode and common mode
protection: as BC Hydro demands. Common mode surges seek earth
ground. Effective protectors have that earthing ground so that common
mode surges don't get near to and harm appliances.

What even makes Ben Frankllin's lightning rods effective? Same thing
- earthing. So why do plug-in protectors not even claim to provide
normal mode and common mode protection? Because plug-in protectors do
not accomplish what this BC Hydro brochure demands. Effective 'whole
house' type protectors from responsible manufacturers such as Square D,
Cutler-Hammer, Intermatic, GE, and Siemens - as so many others - do
provide both normal mode and common mode protection. How do you
know? A short connection to earth. 'Whole house' protectors meet BC
Hydro's definition of *preferred devices*.

Let's see - $20 or $100 for each and every household appliance.
Dishwasher, clock radio, smoke detector, furnace. How many $thousands
for all those electronic devices? Or go to Home Depot or Lowes. How
much for one effective 'whole house' protector? Less than $50. Where
is this 'so expensive"? Meanwhile the telephone line already has a
'whole house' protector provided free. Why? Because they are so
effective and so inexpensive. But again, numbers says plug-in
protectors cost so much more for all household appliances (as well as
not effective). 'Whole hosue' is so effective AND costs less. BC
Hydro brochure also demonstrates why 'whole house' protectors are so
superior.

I suggest you read details in the BC Hydro brochure. Suggets you
learn why plug-in protectors cost so much more than the single 'whole
house' protector.

 

[H. Seldon]

On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:05:09 -0700, w_tom wrote:

<balderdash>

Further discussion unwarranted.

 

[w_tom]

On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:05:09 -0700, w_tom wrote:
<balderdash>
Further discussion unwarranted.

Which means H Seldon cannot challenge technical facts. So he posts
what?

Even that BC Hydro brochure demonstrates the problem with plug-in
protectors. A problem that does not exist with superior, properly
earthed, and a less costly protector - 'whole house' protector.

What does a shunt mode protector do? Earths destructive transients.
What makes it effective? A short connection to earthing. What do
plug-in protectors not effectively connect to and therefore avoid
dicussing? Earthing. And so even from that BC Hydro brochure is a
description of plug-in protectors on page 2:

If these devices are applied alone, they may not provide
complete protection from all surge disturbances.

What does that brochure state as necessary for protecction? Page 1:

Commonly shared grounding medium

What does that brochure also say?

The ground lead from the suppressor should be
connected to a common ground. Do not connect
TVSS ground wires to an isolated ground.

What does an effective protector do? Makes a short connection (ie
'less than 10 foot') to earth. No earth ground means that shunt mode
protector has what to shunt into? The adjacent appliance? What kind
of protection is that? Inferior to effective 'whole house' protectors
from from responsible manufacturers such as Square D, Cutler-Hammer,
Intermatic, GE, Leviton, and Siemens - and from so many others.
Solutions sold in Home Depot, Lowes, and electrical supply houses.

Solutions that also have a dedicated wire for earthing. Solutions
not defined by BC Hydro's brochure as:

may not provide complete protection from all surge disturbances.

So <balderdash> proves this is all wrong? When you cannot challenge
facts, Rush Limbaugh proved that attacking the messenger is better?

 

[David Maynard]

Which means H Seldon cannot challenge technical facts. So he posts
what?

No, what it means is you've already been told the facts nigh onto a hundred
times yet you still burble nonsense so, as his statement says, "Further
discussion unwarranted," because you've demonstrated an inability to learn
a blessed thing including the simplest fact that if all the input/outputs
of a device are safely clamped together then it matters not where the heck
'earth' is.

<snip>

 

[H. Seldon]

No, what it means is you've already been told the facts nigh onto a hundred
times yet you still burble nonsense so, as his statement says, "Further
discussion unwarranted," because you've demonstrated an inability to learn
a blessed thing including the simplest fact that if all the input/outputs
of a device are safely clamped together then it matters not where the heck
'earth' is.

<snip>

Indeed it does matter where "earth" is. If it were in the wrong place, we
would have no place to stand.


--
________________________________________________________
H. Seldon

I wish there was an "Intelligence" control on the TV set.
There's a "Brightness" control, but it doesn't work.

VectorLinux SoHo 5.1

 

[w_tom]

Indeed it does matter where "earth" is. If it were in the wrong place, we
would have no place to stand.

Which suggests why they charge so much per acre.

Otherwise you would have no standing in the world? (Throw fruit
already sliced please).

 

[David Maynard]

Indeed it does matter where "earth" is. If it were in the wrong place, we
would have no place to stand.

There's just no denying you got a great point there