He was exposed as a repeated liar. So Bud must misrepresent what I
said so as to insult. Bud is a sales promoter of scam products. He
will not even admit to promoting his company products. He lies about
what I posted because I identified him as unethical.
So many including Saltydog and HeyBub are now repeating what I
accurately posted so many years ago. And was attacked by Bud because
that is what a sales promoter does. Only earthing electrode that is
insufficient is the cold water pipe. I said it then and was attacked
by Bud for accurately citing code. All other electrodes are
sufficient to meet code. I said it then and I repeat it again - into
Bud's lying face. The only electrode that must always be supplemented
by any other electrode is a cold water pipe.
Cold water pipe (with some rare exceptions) is insufficient as an
earth ground according to paragraph 250.53(D)(2). Bud denied what
that paragraph said in 2002 - and still denies it today.
Brian and Joseph McPartland in their book "National Electrical Code
Handbook" (at least 25 editions) are even blunter in contradicting the
electrically naive Bud:
Saltydog and so many other posters are correct. Up until 1978, a
water pipe was the best earthing electrode. Then code changed. Cold
water pipe electrode is now the least acceptable earth ground. Code
changed decades ago. It required nasty Bud to read paragraph 250.53(D)
(2) rather than attack others to promote his scam products..
Whereas a cold water pipe meets the definition of an earthing
electrode, it is the only electrode so insufficient as to require any
other earthing electrode. After 25 years, Bud still cannot learn that
a cold water pipe is insufficient earthing. That would requirement
him to learn facts rather than post insults.
In most cases, if the water pipe ground is the only earth ground,
then earthing is insufficient for surge protection. Critical to
protection is a short connection to earth - ie 'less than 10 feet'
with no sharp wire bends and other requirements. Even pipe solder
joints can compromise that earth ground. Pipe grounds are
insufficient when too far away. Just another reason why most pre-1990
buildings need earthing upgrades. Do not have sufficient earthing
also for surge protection. Ground alone does not avert more dead
canaries. But a short connection to single point ground is essential
one requirement - to appliance protection. Which again contradicts
nasty Bud's lies and says why his products will not avert the OP's
On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 20:24:56 -0500, " firstname.lastname@example.org"
"Should" is a term used by the lazy and incompetent. And ground loops
introduce noise, which is a problem for sensitive electronics whether
you like it or not.
No, they should not be creating codes and requirements that cause
operational problems, and even the possiblity of creating safety
problems where none exist. Differences in ground potential, since you
obviously don't know what they are, can be as dangerous as a bare live
I haven't changed the subject or moved the goal posts.
You haven't budged from not knowing what "ground potential" means,
either. If you did know what it meant, you wouldn't think I moved the
goal posts or changed the subject.
Go back to sleep.
On Sep 28, 6:24 am, email@example.com wrote:
Electronics and a switching power supply means those 120 volt
appliances must withstand 600 volts without damage. He has multiple
controller failures. If due to transients, then he has transients
exceeding 600 volts inside the house. That should never exist. The
controller is a 'canary in the coalmine'. A warning that something is
wrong. And that worse can be expected if he does not solve the
problem. An effective solution starts with proper earthing (that
meets and exceeds post 1990 code) and a 'whole house' protector.
No transient should be inside a house causing damage. A solution
to transients has been well proven for over 100 years now. That energy
must dissipate before it can enter the building. A solution that
means nothing inside the house is threatened. That 600 volt
transients would not exist if earthing and a 'whole house' protector
are properly installed..
Why "must" electronics withstand 600V.
There is no standard. People in repair newsgroups say some electronics
has protection and some does not. That is also what I have seen.
Protection that is often used is a MOV from line to neutral (and
sometimes MOVs to ground). But according to w that can not possibly
work - there is no less than 10 ft connection to an earthing electrode.
Wow - you used "if".
What we don't know:
Is OP in a high lightning area? Lightning around the time of failures?
Other major surge sources?
What protection was provided by the manufacturers?
What is the electrical system earthing?
Is there a neutral-ground bond at the service?
Loose neutral? Schlocky wiring?
I give up. What do you think happened in the 1990 NEC?
On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 23:29:20 -0500, " firstname.lastname@example.org"
Your only "argument" is to call me names. That's because you have
nothing else. You shot your mouth off on a subject that you know
little or nothing about, and then couldn't figure out an escape route.
You would have to explain that further.
If it is relevant - an "isolated ground" is always required to connect
back to the ground bar at the service, with variations on how it is
done. Some manufacturers have said, for their product, to connect an
isolated ground receptacle with the receptacle ground terminal
connecting ONLY to a ground rod, which is only connected to the
receptacle. This is a major code violation, stupid, and unsafe. It may
be the basis of your hazard. (I agree with gfretwell that isolated
grounds are mostly black magic.)
The IEEE Emerald book ("IEEE Recommended Practice for Powering and
Grounding Sensitive Electronic Equipment") says "In general, equipment
that cannot be made to operate in a satisfactory manner without
violating applicable electrical safety requirements is not suitable for
use in normal applications. This inability is considered to be a design
flaw of the subject equipment."
On Sep 26, 9:24 pm, " email@example.com"
firstname.lastname@example.org... makes an important point. NEC is about human
safety. Grounding defined by the NEC is only for human safety.
Surge protection means installing this same earth electrode to exceed
Dr Standler noted that effective protection could have been achieved
by "mandatory standards". But in 1988, he saw no hope of mandatory
protection standards (transistor protection) being adopted in the
United States. As krw accurately notes, mandatory protection does not
exist. Mandatory protection is not the purpose of or defined by the
National Electrical Code.
The OP suffered repeat control board failure. A surge not properly
earthed before entering a building will hunt for earth destructively
inside a building. Destructively via control boards. His solution
means upgrading earthing. And connecting every incoming wire short to
that single point ground. Either directly or via a 'whole house'
protector. No such protection explains why control boards are
NEC defines grounds for human protection. Transistor protection
means a same earth ground must also exceed NEC requirements.
A computer supply can cut corners because the manufacturer need not
meet standards. Meeting standards is the responsibility of a computer
assembler - not the power supply manufacturer. Most computer
assemblers do not know that they are responsible for missing functions
in a cheap supply.
A supply inside a major appliance must be sufficient because the
appliance manufacturer is using designers with electrical knowledge;
because the manufacturer must meet industry standards.
Cutting corners to lower a price is a problem when the computer
assembler / manufacturer does not know who is responsible for meeting
standards. Cutting corners would not explain those controller
failures. Transients that must not be inside any house may explain
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.