control boards in modern appliances

[bud--]

Perhaps you could post something relevant to what is being discussed, like is a metal water service pipe required to be an earthing electrode?

[bud--]

All I know is what I read.

[westom]

bud posts insults constantly, in part, because others will believe the insults rather than technical facts. If he insults, then others will forget that I said years ago "the water pipe is the least acceptable electrode and is the only one that may never be used by itself as the sold electrode.". bud is lying to misrepresent me. He must do that to divert attention from him. He hopes everyone will ignore that he cannot even comprehend paragraph 250.53(D)(2).

Years ago, bud insisted the word 'supplemental' meants another electrodes is not required. He could not understand the meaning of supplemental - which means the water pipe electrode is insufficient. As paragraph 250.53(D)(2) says and as I have posted for years, a water pipe electrode is the only earthing electrode that is insufficient. To confuse you, he now says things I never said. Posting insults and lying is bud's nature.

He also denies to promoting his company products in newsgroups. Another example of his ethics. Meanwhile paragraph 250.53(D)(2) was quoted to him years ago. He lies to deny that. And he again denies obvious reality in this thread. bud was always a nasty and unethical person. He never changed. Again denies water pipe is not sufficient for earth ground.

[bud--]

w is insulted by reality, which is what I provide.

As is obvious from threads on the device-I-dare-not-name, w thinks if he repeats his beliefs often enough others will believe. I provide reliable sources.

I want pe "connections to water pipes are only for removing electricity" "water pipe is no longer acceptable as an earth ground" "water pipes are not intended primarily for electrical earthing - therefore water pipes are no longer sufficient for earthing"

One of w's many hallucinations. Provide the quote.

w thinks that a ground rod - resistance to earth of maybe 25 ohms - is superior to a metal water supply system - resistance to earth of maybe 3 ohms.

A water pipe is the only electrode that is likely to be in a house that is *required* to be used as an earthing electrode.

More hallucinations from w. What you have said is readily available on google.

w is so pathetic.

Still not answered: If you have a metal water service pipe are you required to use it as an earthing electrode?

Can't answer simple questions about earthing electrodes either?

[westom]

So bud again post insults. Hoping you will ignore his ignorance. bud for years said a water pipe earth ground, by itself, is sufficient. And it is the best earthing electrode. That was true before 1978. And has not been true for decades.

Bud also claimed household pipes can be used as an equipment ground. That also changed long ago. No appliance should be safety grounded to water pipe - even if bud denies it.

bud simply refuses to learn. Even in his last post, he denies reality in paragraph 250.53(D)(2). So that you don't see him again posting lies, he also posts insults. No wonder his wife left him. His wife even got tired of his electrical ignorance.

And so nasty bud has simply become even nastier.

Despite everything bud claims, never use water pipes as a safety ground. Pipes are now bonded to the electrical box so that pipes do not become electrically hot - as others have noted.. Pipes are no longer acceptable as a safety ground no matter how many times bud denies it. The only earthing electrode that is insufficient is a water pipe earth ground. bud again denies that reality. Failed electrician even has a problem reading one paragraph - 250.53(D)(2).

Nasty bud is not trustworthy or educated. As indicated by personal insults in every post. He will reply with more insults because that is what bud always does. So many others have posted what I posted years ago. Water pipe earth ground is insufficient for earthing a structure - no matter how many times bud denies it.

[salty]

"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 wire.

[keith]

The industry quote is "the NEC is written in blood". That is, someone died for that provision to get where it is. "None exist", my A$$.

You've once again demonstrated how clueless you are.

[salty]

Okay, touch a wet finger to "ground" inside a switch-mode power supply with an isolated ground and have the coroner get back to us.

You apparently don't even understand the term "Ground Potential"

[keith]

Move the goal posts again, while you're at it.

You insist on changing the subject.

[salty]

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.

[bud--]

The same drivel. The same confused language.

Still not answered - a really simple question: If you have a metal water service pipe are you required to use it as an earthing electrode?

[bud--]

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."

[krw]

Of course you have, liar.

Liar. Look at the subject line, then take a remedial reading course.

Go back to fishing. You're talking through your ass.

[westom]

[e-mail]... 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 NEC requirements.

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 repeatedly damaged.

NEC defines grounds for human protection. Transistor protection means a same earth ground must also exceed NEC requirements.

[salty]

No, I have not. I really have not.

I wonder how many of those modern appliances have sensitive electronics... or switch-mode power supplies!

Go back to sleep.

[George]

Sure, and the other thing is that (some) people want cheap stuff. So manufacturers cut corners in things like power supplies to lower the price.

[westom]

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..

[westom]

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 the failures.

[Ron]

Hoo-Boy!

[The Daring Dufas]

When I'm building a computer for myself, I don't scrimp on the power supply. 8-)

TDD