Whole house surge suppressor -- Tytewadd??

Page 2 of 2  

w_tom wrote:
The usual bullshit from w_ on plug-in surge suppressors.
The best information I have seen on surges and surge protection 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). (This link originally came from w_.)
A second god source is: 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.

are converted to transverse mode surges (H lifts away from N & G) by the N-G bond in US services.

junk to very high.
Both the IEEE guide and NIST guide recognize plug-in suppresors as effective.

guide clearly describes plug-in surge protectors as primarily CLAMPING the voltage on all conductors to the common ground at the surge suppressor. The clamped voltage is safe for connected equipment. Earthing is secondary.

older model” power strips and specifically references the revised UL standard, effective 1998, that requires a thermal disconnect as a fix for overheating MOVs.

technology using series mode protection, which w_ says doesn't work.

None of these links say the damaged suppressor had a UL label. None of them say plug-in suppressors are not effective or that they should not be used or that there is a problem under the current UL standard. Problem fixed in 1998.

effective.
the service. Plug-in suppressors have clamps from H-N, H-G, N-G and handle all modes anyway. And w_ has never provided specs for "each type of transient" for any of his favorite suppressors. Yet another stupid argument.

Bottom line - the IEEE and NIST recognize plug-in suppressors as effective.
-- bud--
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
w_tom wrote:

Why do they suggest not daisy-chaining suppressor power strips?
--
Asking Iran and Syria to help us succeed in Iraq is like your local fire
department asking a couple of arsonists to help put out the fire.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clifto wrote:

Will a power strip protector somehow stops or block what three miles of sky could not? That is not what a power strip protector does. And yet that is why some daisy chain power strip protectors on a myth that more will create a chain of protection - stop or block a surge.
Meanwhile, every power strip must have a 15 amp circuit breaker so that excessive load does not concentrate on one power strip. Fires have killed because power strips were daisy chained when, instead, the solution was sufficient number of wall receptacles. Fire code in some larger cities did not permit power strips - same reason. Safer than a $25 surge protector power strip is the $3 power strip with an essential 15 amp circuit breaker. That circuit breaker to eliminate danger of too many loads on one wall plug. But you must confirm that breaker exists.
That breaker is not your primary safety device. Primary protection is to not daisy chain power strips. That breaker is only a secondary layer of protection. If you must daisy chain power strips, then the room needs more wall receptacles.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
w_tom wrote:

Yes.
That is not what a power strip protector does. And

Not all myth, but your'e blatherskiting so no sense wasting words on you.

No. They do not have to be 15 amps. Ckt brkrs are not the only means either.
Fires

BS. You can not cite even a single instance of that claim. Do you even know what "daisy chained" means?
Fire code in some

No, definitely not the same reason.
Safer than a

Safer how? To what? Whom?
That circuit breaker to eliminate

I havent' heard anyone claim that it was.
Primary protection

Again, no one claimed that was the case.
That breaker is only a secondary

You're making this up as you go along, I think.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pop' wrote:

Gee. I'm sorry. That whole kennel of dead dogs when the owner daisy chained power strips ... well that fire did not really happen? Clearly insults are now sufficient as technical proof? Lurkers are cautioned: some will change their identity to post insults without basic technical grasp.
Meanwhile, reasons for not daisy chaining power strips are accurate and include the reasons why. Responsible poster don't change their identities to post personal attacks.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
w_tom wrote:

I ask again: Do you know what daisy chaining power strips means? And can you cite even a single instance of your claim? Because you say so doesn't make it so, anymore than it makes my e-mail address valid.

Oh, it probably happened, but not for the reasons you're citing and/or making up. All I want is a cite; if I'm wrong I'm not afraid to admit it. But logic tells me I am not wrong about your allegations. Your say so doesn't make it so.

No, I wouldn't consider your insults of any kind of proof whatsoever. Or anyone else's for that matter.
Well, where's the cite? Where is there any proof of your allegation? Where can I find information to support ANY of your claims about the shock hazard issue?

Yes, there sure are reasons: but they are NOT the reasons YOU allege. Your allegations are BS unless/until you can provide some supporting information. You appear to be relying on uneducated assumptions, inuendo, misinformation and egocntricity. Or, you're making it up for your own purposes. Just cite something supportive.
Provide some backup information. It's certainly not recommended to daisy chain, but for reasons other than you are claiming.

Hey, I can change my nick to whatever I wish to, and if you noticed, I'm still:
Regards,
Pop`
FWIW, I change my nick periodically; there's a definite purpose in it which is far from what you're suggesting, or I'd also change my name from "Pop`" to something else. A nick is a nick, and a liar is a liar.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
L Ectro wrote:

An old Rush Limbaugh trick is to attack and accuse so that the others will not notice the accuser has insufficient technical grasp. Pop' who also pretends to be L Ectro denies obvious dangers from daisy chaining power strips. Dangers that anyone with technical knowledge has long since understood.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3737/is_200111/ai_n8959523

Danger from daisy chaining is common knowledge. Daisy chaining power strip protectors (which was the original question) is even worse because a plug-in protector does nothing useful while promoted as if it will stop or absorb surges.
Another has suggested, using word phrasing, that Pop' may also have posted here under a third name. Purpose? To deceive others. This time Pop', whose ethics now have no problem posting as if different people in a same discussion, Pop' got caught.
Meanwhile point-of-use surge suppressors are dangerous when daisy chained, are undesireable as demonstrated in scary pictures: http://www.westwhitelandfire.com/Articles/Surge%20Protectors.pdf http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?pageU6&parentU4 http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html http://www.nmsu.edu/~safety/programs/gen_saf/surgeprotectorfire.htm and are not earthed with or without three wire (safety grounded) wall receptacles.
Power strip without 'protector' components and with an essential 15 amp circuit breaker only should be used. Effective surge protection (with two wire or three wire receptacles) is accomplished by a properly earthed 'whole house' protector. Earthing defines that protection.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
w_tom wrote:

Okay. I always count total wattage/current before plugging stuff in, even on a standard wall outlet. Main reason I like to daisy-chain surge protectors is that the one closest to the outlet takes most of the small hits and wears out the fastest, protecting the others so they can (1) stay in use when I replace the closest one and (2) help a little on a somewhat- more-than-small hit.
--
Asking Iran and Syria to help us succeed in Iraq is like your local fire
department asking a couple of arsonists to help put out the fire.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clifto wrote:

What the hell does daisy chaining power strips have to do with whether or not plug in type surge protectors do help protect sensitive equipment? W_Tom talks about going on the attack to divert attention from technical issues, yet he's here spewing how daisy chaining power strips and plugging in endless loads can cause a fire. Good grief!
It seems most of the world is in agreement. Whole house surge protectors with a proper ground are an excellent idea, as they can protect the whole house and stop a surge just as it enters the house. And for those that can't install one, like those living in a rental property or an apartment, plug in surge protectors are a good idea. And they are a good idea even if you have a whole house protector. To argue against it is like saying having a locked bank vault doesn't do any good, cause the front door is already secure.
And old W Tom rants on about how appliances already have surge protection built in. Well, which would you rather deal with? A $2000 Plasma TV that took the hit and blew out the surge protection, or a $25 surge protector that you can throw away?
Like most here, I've seen plug ins work and believe they are effective, though not as preferable as a whole house unit. Another factor, many of the plug ins also offer additonal protection for cable and phone lines. W Tom, Before you go on a rant about how all that is unecessary, read the part about the bank.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Did Trader4 bother to first read the question before spouting insults? Funny that Trader4 would do what he falsely accuses others of doing. But to make it easy for him, the question that he forgot to read before attacking is reposted:

Trader4 - the question is "Why do they suggest not daisy-chaining suppressor power strips?" Do you think, just once, you could demonstrate some enough concentration to stay on topic? Surprise us instead of spewing. Why not chain suppressor power strips? Again, just so you don't forget the question:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
w_tom wrote:

No attack, just cogent comments, instead of rambling rants.

I didn't accuse you or anyone else of spouting insults,.

The obvious point, apparent in the above, is how you keep focusing on "suppressor" power strips. As if endlessly daisy chaining non-suppressor power strips and plugging in more extension cords doesn't present safety issues. Or, for that matter, just using those little cube taps to plug 20 extension cords into one outlet.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Despite a confused post from trader4, daisy chaining of power strips and extension cords has again been at the heart of a deadly fire:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
w_tom wrote:

The only one that appears confused here is you Tom. Thanks for making my point, which was that endlessly plugging in loads, whether using surge protector power strips or other means, as happened above, is just as dangerous.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You seem to be the one confused or trying to mislead. The power strip seems no more central than the row house itself or the christmas decorations. The extension cord was "at the heart" of the fire, which is why the article starts with "An extension cord overloaded..."
A powerstrip has a circuit breaker and its cord is protected by that breaker. Obviously if you plug a powestrip (safe) into an extension cord that is too small (not safe) you can have a problem, but so far I've not seen anything inherant in power strips that would be a problem "daisy-chained," and apparently neither have you.
sdb
--
Wanted: Omnibook 800 & accessories, cheap, working or not
sdbuse1 on mailhost bigfoot.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
sylvan butler wrote:

Verb correction. A power strip should have a circuit breaker.... There is no rule and no requirement that a breaker exists. Without a breaker, it cannot get UL approval. But UL approval is not required. In many fires, such as the local dog kennel that killed all dogs, at least some power strips did not have the circuit breaker. You have assumed all power strips have circuit breakers. I was just looking at one today (from Archer - a Radio Shack product) that did not.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Any equipment might be faulty in design or miss-built or broken. How does that incriminate power strips?
sdb
--
Wanted: Omnibook 800 & accessories, cheap, working or not
sdbuse1 on mailhost bigfoot.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

So what type of existing wiring do you have K&T? BX? Romex no ground?
may be possible to easily add ground thruout your home if say its BX?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm not sure of the terminology but the wiring appears to be two-wire, and not metal-clad.
I had the original 50-year-old service panel upgraded and a new ground rod installed. The cable and phone service is (now) properly grounded at the same point.
I think my current plan is to order a panel mounted protector like the Intermatic one, then try to have one outlet per room grounded, for point-of-use suppressors. Does that seem reasonable?
-- Dave
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    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.