Does as GFCI give you some surge protection?

[w_tom]

You have not grasped the various type of transients, do not understand why the IEEE defines what is necessary for protection, and a few other technical facts posted below. Destructive voltages are not between neutral and hot wire. That transient is made irrelevant by protection already inside appliances - and other reasons. Meanwhile, a 'whole house' protector also makes that type transient irrelevant.

What does the IEEE demand as necessary for surge protection? IEEE does not discuss differential voltage difference between two wires. That surge is trivial. Protection is about a surge that typically does electronics damage: IEEE Red Book:

IEEE Emerald Book (Powering and Grounding Sensitive Electronic Equipment)

Learn of many types of transients. To promote their product, plug- in protectors would have you believe all surge types are same. Nonsense. For example, you describe a surge that comes down a black (hot) wire and leaves on neutral (white) wire. This is not the typically destructive surge. Even utility power switching creates another and typically more destructive transient. What happens when a surge comes down any or all black, white, and green wires; and leaves via phone wire, wooden table, linoleum floor tile, or any other conductive material? Latter is the surge that does damage. When it leaves, where does it go? Earth ground.

Yes, for typically destructive surges, those otherwise non- conductive items become conductors. Also conductive are church steeple, concrete, or a tree. Items conductive to typically destructive surges are typically not conductive to trivial currents and voltages between two wires.

How great is voltage between wires? Wire insulation is only rated for 600 volts. Higher voltages simply cause breakdown - temporarily connect those wires together. But voltages that seek earth are typically 10+ times larger. What kind of surge puts 8000 volts on that TV? Not voltage between two wires. 8000 volts means a surge that seeks earth.

Bud's page 42 Figure 8 shows how a TV is damaged by 8000 volts. Why? Destructive surge seeks earth ground; is not between two wires. Because a plug-in protector was too close to TV, then the surge used that TV to obtain what? Earth ground. 8000 volts did not exist between two wires because of where the protector is located. 8000 volts would not exist between two wire if no protector existed. 8000 volts occurred because current is on any or all wires; finding earth destructively via a TV. A destructive type surge seeks earth - is not between two wires.

Does a telephone line protector in your NID or in the telco's CO sit between two wires? Of course not. Otherwise the protector could be located anywhere on those wires. But even 1950s protectors were not between wires:

protector connects each wire to an earthing ground lug. Each 'carbon' is beneath that hex head - from each phone wire to earthing. Why? Destructive surges with potentially higher voltages seek earth ground; do not seek the other wire. Surges between two wires are made irrelevant for numerous reasons including wire insulation breakdown voltage and by appliance design - an industry standard even 30+ years ago.

As demonstrated in a 1959 research project by Bodle and Gresh in the Bell System Technical Journal are hundreds of surges that would harm the CO because the surge seeks earth ground. Surges even on underground wires seek earth ground.

If a protector between two wires was sufficient, then that protector could be anywhere on wires. But an effective protector cannot be anywhere. Effective protector is located at the service entrance and connected short to earth ground; as even the Air Force demands. Effective protectors are best located distant from electronics. Telcos define that separation (between protector and electronics) as up to 50 meters. Why? A voltage difference between two wires may be shunted anywhere on those wires. But a surge that seeks earth ground

- separation between protector and electronics improves protection. Therefore design of building and location of incoming wires affect how a protection 'system' is installed.

From a Sun Microsystem planning guide for server rooms Section

5.4.7:

Protection between two wires is completely irrelevant to building design and utility location. But destructive surges to a Sun Server means earthing. Earthing is why building design and utility location is part of that Sun mandated design. To be earthed, building and utility design determines where and how that protector is located. Why? Sun server destructive surges seek earth ground. Sun describes protection for their servers - properly grounded protectors.

What does a 'whole house protector connect to? Each wire is not connected to the other wire via protector. Each wire is connected to earth ground. Same as in the 1950s telco protector and in a Sun servier site. Effective protectors connect each wire to earth.

Above is a secondary protection 'system' where voltages between wires is irrelevant.. Also inspect the primary protection 'system'. Inspect what in a primary protection 'system'? Well what do typically destructive surges (with maybe ten times higher voltages) seek?

How big is that surge between black and white wires? For destructive surges that seek earth ground, a most minimal earthing path is for 50,000 amps. Why 50,000 amps? Protection 'system' is for surges - ie tens of thousands of amps - that may overwhelm protection already inside appliances. Show me a 50,000 amp surge exists between black (hot) and white (neutral) wire? It does not exist. Large current surges seek earth ground. Such surge made trivial by the 'whole house' protector and made irrelevant by protection already inside appliances.

Qwest defines what is necessary in their Publication 77355:

Why low impedance? High current surges that seek earth ground are radio frequency currents. Typically occur in microseconds. What is the most common source of such surges? Microsecond type surges include lightning. And what does lightning seek? Not a voltage difference between two wires. Typically destructive surges - ie lightning - seek one thing: earth ground. For surges between wires - low 'resistance' is sufficient. For surges that do serious damage - ie lightning - low 'impedance' earthing is required. Just another reason why a protector's location (ie 'less than 10 feet' from earth ground) is so essential for surge protection.

How many industry professionals need I quote - or do you still listen to a plug-in protector promoter Bud? IEEE is quite blunt what is required for effective protection: earthing. What is the most destructive surge? Lightning. What does it create? Massive currents on any or all wires that seek earth ground. Voltages between wires are so trivial as to be made irrelevant even by appliance design - and other reasons above.

There is no major voltage difference between wires. Now I understand why you were so easily decieved by the myths. Your 'threat' is made irrelevant even by protecti> No, it is not THE protection it is one protection, but not the one in > question.

[Joseph Meehan]

If you car to post a single valid link to a non-commercial authoritative site that supports and explains your views, I will be happy to view it and comment on it.

[Bud--]

Seems you are a dummy Joseph.

Neither the IEEE or NIST guides consider hot-to-neutral transients irrelevant. If they are irrelevant, ?whole house? protectors are irrelevant.

A major hallucination. Please get medical help.

The Emerald Book has plug-in suppressors among the devices that provide protection. Why are plug-in suppressors in the Emerald Book w_?

Both the IEEE and NIST guides say plug-in surge suppressors should be multi-port. ALL signal and power wires to protected equipment need to run thorough the suppressor. Repeating yet again, the voltage on ALL wires is clamped to the common ground at the surge suppressor. There is no damaging voltage between power and phone wires downstream from the suppressor. The primary protection, as explained in the IEEE guide, is clamping, not earthing. Both the IEEE and NIST guides say that protects the equipment connected to the suppressor.

But I guess both the NIST and IEEE forgot about the wood table and linoleum floor.

It is not my page. It is the IEEE?s page.

Trying to extract some meaning from rather illiterate writing - all surges in the illustrations are between 2 wires (or sets of wires).

Not according to the text. The IEEE says ?the vast majority of the incoming lightning surge current flows through? the earthing wire from the CATV ground block to the power service. The earthing current through the TV or plug?in suppressor is minor according to the IEEE. The surge is earthed, but the earthing is not through the TV or plug-in suppressor.

Assuming this means at the 2nd TV, that is true. If there was no plug-in suppressor at the 1st TV, there would not be 8,000V at the 2nd TV, it would be 10,000V.

The whole point of this (fig.8) discussion in the IEEE guide is ?to protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required?.

And the point of all of this in the IEEE guide is do explain how plug-in suppressors work. To protect his religious belief in earthing, w_ has to twist the IEEE explanation to say the opposite.

Other points the IEEE makes here: ?If the CATV, satellite, or phone cables do not enter the building near the service entrance, the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport protector.? It is common to have entry points for phone, CATV or satellite to be distant from the power service. That prevents establishing a ?single point ground?.

Since CATV entry ground blocks do not limit the voltage from core conductor to shield that voltage, according to the IEEE guide, is only limited to the breakdown voltage of F connectors, typically 2000?4000V. ?There is obviously the possibility of damage to TV tuners and cable modems from the very high voltages that can be developed, especially from nearby lightning.? CATV wires going through a plug-in suppressor will have that voltage limited.

There follow lots of quotes. Few are relevant. None say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.

But the IEEE and NIST guides both say plug-in suppressors are effective.

And, as always, no links from w_ that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective. Only his religious beliefs and distortions of sources. Where are your links?

-- bud--

[trader4]

My favorite part to Tom's usual rant above is this:

"What happens when a surge comes down any or all black, white, and green wires; and leaves via phone wire, wooden table, linoleum floor tile, or any other conductive material? Latter is the surge that does damage. When it leaves, where does it go? Earth ground. "

In the above, he acknowledges that a surge can come in via the power line and then exit via everything from a phone wire to a wood table. Yet he refuses to acknowledge that it could also leave via a point of use surge protector shunting the surge to ground. And it would seem that would be a much lower impedance path than a wood table.

Where Tom goes astray is he starts with good advice, which is that surge protection on the AC panel with a good ground is the most effective and good practice. But then he quickly decends into nonsense, when he claims that point of use protectors offer no protection at all and are actually destructive. Another of his rants that I like is that all appliances have surge protection already built into them. Hmmm, let me think.... What would I rather have get blown due to a surge? The MOV in a $20 plug in protector or the MOV in a $2000 HDTV?

Here's some of what UL has to say about surge protectors. They specifically talk about the point of use type, say they rate them and don't say they are ineffective.

at your home computer when suddenly the lights flicker. Your computer screen fades to black; then copy is restored. Sound familiar? You've just experienced a power surge. Power surges -- also known as transient voltage surges-- are brief spikes of power that can travel through power lines. Power surges can permanently damage computers, televisions, fax machines and other home appliances that contain microprocessors and sensitive electronic components.

Many people assume that surge suppressors can protect their home from lightning damage. Surge suppressors are not lightning protection devices - they cannot protect your home or your home's internal electrical wiring from a direct strike. Surge suppressors can, however, protect your equipment from voltage surges caused by unexpected occurrences such as a utility pole downed by a storm.

Surges can also generate from inside the home. For instance, appliances such as furnaces, air conditioners and vacuum cleaners can cause power surges in your home's electrical system when turned on or off. And in some cases, remote lightning strikes cans cause surges. However, UL Listed transient voltage surge suppressors (TVSS) can reduce the risk of such damage.

The unpredictable nature of surges makes it difficult to suppress them; you never know when, how long or how powerful they will be. In some cases, a surge may have a higher energy level than the device can handle. When this happens, the surge suppressor may be damaged and lose its ability to provide protection against future surges.

Some surge suppressors look very similar to multiple-outlet power strips but obviously have additional features to suppress surges. Other surge suppressors resemble common plug-in adapters. Not all power strips and adapters offer surge suppression, so make sure the product and product packaging clearly states "UL Listed Transient Voltage Surge Suppressor."

UL evaluates surge suppressors for fire, electric shock and personal injury hazards, and also measures and categorizes the devices for how much voltage they can "clamp," thus preventing excess voltage from passing through to electronic equipment. UL refers to this as a "suppressed voltage rating," with ranges from 330V (volts) to 4000V. Believe it or not, the lower the rating, the better the protection.

Whatever surge suppression protection you're looking for, make

[w_tom]

Does all of a surge only go down one wire or only down another wire? Of course not. And yet going down only one wire must happen for effective surge protection. Trader, it does not matter if some of a surge takes that path to ground. Most all of it must. That ground wire is only low resistance - not low impedance. Therefore too much surge finds other destructive paths. You are still denying that high impedance even after page 42 Figure 8 shows high impedance - 2000 volts.

Surge comes down a black wire seeking what? Earth ground. Surge is shunted from black wire to green wire by protector ... still seeking earth ground. Some surge current uses green 'safety ground' wire to mains breaker box. Some current goes into computer motherboard, through modem, and to earth via phone line. Not all current goes destructively through computer as trader claims. Large current also passed through and destroys modem. Why? All current did not get conducted by a high impedance safety ground wire that is at 2000 volts. Decades ago an adjacent protector earthed a surge destructively through powered off computers - damage proven by following and replacing all damaged ICs. Another unbiased source - Martzloff in an IEEE paper - also warns of same damage "even when or perhaps because, surge protective devices are present at the point of connection of appliances. "

Joseph Meehan - repeatedly posted were links to non-commercial authoritative sites such as Martzloff and IEEE. Later you ask for non- commercial citations. Why do you keep asking that question after information is provided? Why the standard denials?

trader also does it again. He assumes safety ground wire is a perfect conductor because he does not understand impedance. As an electrician, he confuses resistance with impedance. The non- commercial page 42 Figure 8 shows 2000 volts 'end to end' on that wire. Why? Excessive wire impedance. Because it is not a 'less than

10 foot' earthing connection, too much wire impedance and 2000 destructive volts. trader remains in denial mode?

trader cannot grasp this concept: wire impedance. trader - why is the protector in Figure 8 at 2000 and 8000 volts? Why ignore excessive wire impedance even in this 'mike holt' provided figure? But again I say to you - learn about wire impedance. Look at figure

8: why a TV is at 8000 volts. Wire to earth ground is too long, too many sharp bends, splices, etc. Too much impedance means ineffective earthing. So where does that 8000 volts find earth ground? Destructively via an adjacent TV. The non-commercial page 42 Figure 8 again demonstrates Martzloff's problem with plug-in protectors - that can even contribute to appliance damage.

Same myth was written by an English major in HowStuffWorks. The vacuum cleaner is so destructive that everyone troops to hardware stores weekly to replace clock radios and digital clocks? Oh. Internal protection makes vacuum cleaner 'surges' irrelevant? Exactly. Trader repeatedly posts that claim and I repeatedly reply with this example. Notice how electronics inside a microwave oven are routinely damaged by the furnace? What protected appliances not on a surge protector? Internal protection that was industry standard even

30+ years ago. Why does trader not know of this internal protection even inside HDTVs?

But trader says we are all replacing dimmer switches weekly due to damage created by refrigerators. Appliances must contain internal protection. Anything that plug-in protector might accomplish is already inside the appliance. Internal appliance protection demands one properly earth a 'whole house' protector so that internal protection is not overwhelmed.

Why does trader deny that internal protection? Trader assumes that protectors fail or vaporize to provide protection. He was provided MOV datasheets that say protectors must not fail. And yet he remains fixated on this 'vaporize' concept. Effective protectors earth lightning strikes and must remain functional. Just another reason why 'whole house' protectors are properly sized.

Meanwhile a surge arrives at an HDTV and surge protector. The protector is so grossly undersized as to disconnect as fast as possible - to smoke. HDTV is then left to fend for itself. No problem. HDTV has sufficient internal protection. But the na=EFve proclaim "a surge protector sacrificed itself to protect my TV". Wrong. A surge too small to harm an HDTV struck both TV and surge protector simultaneously. Only the surge protector was grossly undersized - vaporized - so that the na=EFve will promote more sales.

Surge protectors contain MOVs. MOVS are rated for 8/20 and 10/1000 microsecond waveforms. Why these waveforms? Because MOVs are designed for a surge that creates those waveforms: Lightning. Surge protection is installed so that lightning does not do damage. Protection that also makes other transients irrelevant.

But again, trader denies protection already inside appliances - as he denies wire impedance and that 2000 volts - as he denies protectors are for lightning protection - as he denies how an adjacent protector can even contribute to appliance damage.

Protectors without that short ('less than 10 foot') connection to a single point earth ground cannot provide protection. A protector is only a connecting device to earth ground. That 'magic box' does not stop what 3 miles of sky could not.

Wire impedance is why all telcos install Central Office protectors ON an earth ground AND up to 50 meters distant from electronics. Wire impedance is why Orange County solved surge damage by enhancing the earthing system; did not install plug-in protectors:

Wire impedance is why the Air Force requires protector located "as soon as practical where the conductor enters the interior of the facility." Surge protection is about low impedance and a single point earth ground. Effective protectors make that dedicated 'less than 10 foot' connection to earth. Plug-in protectors do not make that connection AND do not claim to protect from the type of surges that typically cause damage. What do the typically destructive surges do? Come down any or all wires seeking earth ground, destructively, through appliances. Surge overwhelms protection already inside all appliances. Surge must be earthed before it can enter a building. Effective protectors make the typically destructive surge (which not created by vacuum cleaners) irrelevant. That means a short connection to earth. No earth ground means no effective protection.

[bud--]

Martzloff said in the same paper "Mitigation of the threat can take many forms. One solution. illustrated in this paper, is the insertion of a properly designed surge reference equalizer [mulitport suppressor]." Martzloff consistently says plug-in surge suppressors are effective, as he did in the NIST guide.

Because you have NEVER posted a link to a site that says plug-in suppressors are NOT effective. Nor have your quotes from sources ever said plug-in suppressors are not effective. Many of your quotes are from sources that, in fact, said plug-in suppressors are effective, like the IEEE guide, and Martzloff above.

A readers guide to w_'s rant: w_ refers to the IEEE guide, not 'mike holt'. The figure shows a surge on a CATV source with 2 TVs connected. TV1 is protected by a plug-in surge suppressor. 2000V does not appear at the TVs. The plug-in suppressor at TV1 did NOT contribute to damage, but reduced the voltage at TV2 from 10,000V to 8,000V. But the point of the figure is "to protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required". The IEEE says the earthing path for the surge is not through the TVs or branch circuit. "The vast majority of the incoming lightning surge current flows through" the earthing wire from the CATV ground block to the power service. This figure part of the IEEE guide explanation of how plug-in suppressors work. But the explanation violates w_'s religious beliefs in earthing.

Other points the IEEE makes here: "If the CATV, satellite, or phone cables do not enter the building near the service entrance, the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport protector." It is common to have entry points for phone, CATV or satellite to be distant from the power service. That prevents establishing a "single point ground".

Since CATV entry ground blocks do not limit the voltage from core conductor to shield, that voltage, according to the IEEE guide, is only limited to the breakdown voltage of F connectors, typically

2000-4000V. "There is obviously the possibility of damage to TV tuners and cable modems from the very high voltages that can be developed, especially from nearby lightning." CATV wires going through a plug-in suppressor will have that voltage limited.

Only the naive would buy a surge suppressor that is grossly undersized. Suppressors with very high ratings are readily available.

Only the naive would post an argument requiring a grossly undersized suppressor.

Only the naive would think a HDTV could handle any surge that hits it.

The religious belief in earthing. As explained by the IEEE guide, plug in suppressors work primarily by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires to the common ground at the surge suppressor, not earthing or stopping.

So may words, so little that is minimal relevant to plug-in suppressors.

The IEEE and NIST guides both say plug-in suppressors are effective.

And w_ still can't find a link that says plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.

-- bud--

[w_tom]

More standard 'cut and paste' replies from Bud as he follows me everywhere - as a troll - to promote grossly overpriced and unearthed protectors.

What does a protector do? Connects surges to earth ground. Earth provides protection when a surge does not and need not enter the building. Bud's page 42 Figure 8 shows exactly what a protector does. No classic and necessary 'less than 10 foot' connection to earth. So it earthed a surge - 8000 volts - destructively through a TV. But then the protector did as designed. Protectors only connect surges to earth. Protector simply connected that surge to earth, destructively, via a TV.

Same problem exists when a kid connects an Xbox to a TV. Bud's reply: you must teach the kid how to connect his Xbox. So it is the kid's fault if damage occured - because Bud's ineffective protector was used? Yes, according to Bud.

Responsible manufacturers provide effective solutions. Products from GE, Siemens, Square D, Intermatic, Cutler-Hammer, Leviton and other responsible manufacturers are found in Lowes, Home Depot, and electrical supply houses. Bud will lie incessantly in fear. He will deny that some of these sufficiently sized products can be found in Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50. He fears you might discover how much less expensive that effective solution is.

Bud's own citations define what is required of a protector:

As demonstrated on Page 42 Figure 8 in

earth ground means no effective protection Effective 'whole house' protectors properly earthed 'less than 10 feet' mean all protection inside all TVs (and all other household appliances - even smoke detectors and bathroom GFCIs) are not overwhelmed. But if you learn this, then Bud's income may be harmed.

[Bud--]

Just a repetition of the same bullcrap.

For reliable information the IEEE guide on surges and suppression at:

the NIST guide at: recommended.

Both guides say plug-in suppressors are effective.

Where are your links links that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective w_? There should be thousands of them. Why should anyone believe you if you can't find links that support your views?

-- bud--

[w_tom]

Bud's own citations demonstrate why real world protector manufacturers sell 'whole house' protectors. How to identify a real world protector? 1) Product has the dedicated earthing wire for that 'less than 10 foot' connection. 2) Manufacturer discusses earthing. Bud who promotes for a 'mythical protector' manufacturer will not even deny his own citations. Bud has posted in hundreds of posts how earthing is not required - how his 'magic box' protector will somehow stop or absorb what three miles of sky could not.

And so we go to his own citations where a plug-in protector puts

8000 volts through the adjacent TV. He cannot even dispute that a kid with an Xbox may completely compromise 'plug-in' protection.

Bud says we must educated kids so damage is not created when they connect that Xbox. Bud says we must install $2000 or $3000 of plug- in protectors - one on every appliance - so that the damage on page 42 Figure 8 does not happen. What do real world protector manufacturers do for less money? They install and earth one 'whole house' protector. A solution even sold in Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50. A solution not provided by manufacturers such as Monster Cable. Responsible manufacturers that sell 'whole house' protectors are Cutler-Hammer, Square D, Leviton, GE, Intermatic, Siemens and others. Where in that list are plug-in protector manufacturers such as Monster Cable? Well responsible manufacturers don't sell 'magical' speaker wire for $60 either. But Bud recommend thousands of dollars of plug-in protectors just so one protector does not 8000 volts destroy the adjacent TV - as on page 42 Figure 8.

[Bud--]

Links still not shown. Where are your links?

Ho-hum - the religious belief in earthing. The IEEE guide explains plug-in suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires to the common ground at the suppressors. They do not work primarily by earthing.

Ho-hum again. Repeating: ?And I can only quite w_ - ?It is an old political trick. When facts cannot be challenged technically, then attack the messenger.? ?.

Bullcrap. I recommend reading the IEEE guide which includes earthing as one of the major protection methods. I *repeat* the explanation in the IEEE guide ? plug-in suppressors work primarily by clamping, not earthing.

How stupid. Both the IEEE and NIST guides say plug-in suppressors are effective.

Ho-hum #3 - already covered. The plug-in suppressor *reduced* the surge voltage at another TV, but the IEEE says "to protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required". Apparently too technical for w_.

In a thread a few days ago 2 people looked at online sites and found: Lowes had NO ?whole house? suppressors. Home Depot had no ?whole house? suppressors near $50. The 2 suppressors available had no specs available from Home Depot or the manufacturer.

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

And still missing - links that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective. Could it be nobody agrees with you w_? Where are your links? And include a link for the $50 ?whole house? suppressor.

-- bud--

[w_tom]

Bud knows because he saw it on the web. 'Whole house' protectors from responsible manufacturers have sold in Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50 for years now. Bud knows that cannot be true because he did not see it on the web. If he actually did this stuff, then he might discover 'whole house' protectors - some selling for less than $50. But that would harm sales of ineffective plug-in protectors. Easier is to lie and deny.

How ineffective? Bud's various IEEE and NIST citations state a protector must connect to ground. Protectors work by grounding surges:

Bud admits his protectors have no ground. So he denies earthing is necessary. What do IEEE Standards (IEEE Red Book, Emerald Book, etc) repeatedly define necessary? Earthing. What happens when earth ground is too far away? Page 42 Figure 8 shows a protector earthing a surge - 8000 volts destructively - via an adjacent TV. Bud says this damage will not happen with $2000 or $3000 more protectors for virtually every household appliance. $50 for one properly sized 'whole house' protector or $3000 that may also create those scary pictures.

Spend many thousands of dollars and still suffer surge damage because a kid connects his Xbox to a TV? Yes, that is what Bud called effective protection.

Bud ignores Page 42 Figure 8 from his own citation. His own citations shows damage to household appliance created by the plug-in protector

Another of his citations say:

Informed consumers install what is also standard where direct lightning strikes routinely do no damage. They earth. One 'whole house' protector earths for ALL household appliances. Protector not located on flammable rugs or desktops that would do this - the scary pictures:

No earth ground means no effective protection. But if a plug-in protector cost more money, then it must work better - to enrich plug- in manufacturers. And so the troll Bud who follows me everywhere will post more denials. Cites are quotes from his own citations. Even his own citations say earthing is necessary. To promote profitable plug- in protectors, Bud must even deny 'whole house' protectors in Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50.

[Bud--]

The religious belief in earth ground - because plug-in suppressors do not work by earthing, for w_ they cannot possibly work. But the IEEE guide explains they primarily work by clamping.

Nothing new - the same drivel. Attempts again to take 2 sources that say plug?in suppressors are effective and make them say the opposite. w_ still can?t find the mythical $50 ?whole house suppressor? - if they exist provide a link - why should anyone think they exist.

And no links to sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective. That is because no one in the known universe thinks plug-in suppressors are NOT effective - except w_. w_ is a purveyor of junk science.

But the IEEE and NIST guides both say plug-in suppressors are effective. Anyone can read the sources.

-- bud--

[w_tom]

Even quotes from Bud's citations show on page 42 Figure 8 how a plug- in protector can create damage to the adjacent TV. Another citation defines what is necessary for protection - earth ground:

Bud says plug-in protectors don't require earthing. Somehow they will instead protect by 'clamping'. Well that is not what his own citations say.

Meanwhile all appliances, including GFCIs, contain protection. Protection that can be overwhelmed if a surge is not earthed where it enters a building. Properly earth a surge at the breaker box and internal protection inside all household appliances is not overwhelmed. So what is required to make the 'whole house' protector so effective? Earthing that both meets and exceeds post 1990 National Electrical Code requirements. Bud's own citations define earthing as essential to protection. IEEE Standards define earthing for protection.

Bud now replies by 'attacking the messenger'. He cannot deny Page

42 Figure 8 - his own citation that shows a plug-in protector creating 8000 volts damage to an adjacet TV.

[trader4]

Like Bud, instead of religous rants, I'm still waiting for any credible reference that says plug-in surge protectors are totally ineffective. Or even better, that they cause, rather than prevent damage.

Tom's whole argument is so full of holes and contradictions, it's quite silly. Here's another glaring one. Tom claims a plug in surge protector at best can't work, or even worse, will cause damage. Then he proceeds to point to the fact that common and cheap appliances all have built in surge protection which doesn work. Well, isn't it strange that putting an MOV inside a plug in protector is a disaster, but it suddenly becomes a good and effective protector when put into a $50 VCR? Hmmm, would seem the VCR has the same long path to any earth ground that the plug in protector has. No, wait! It actually has a path a few feet longer! Yet, inside the VCR, no problems with high impedance path to ground or being able to deal with what "miles of air could not."

And again, let me think. Which MOV would I rather have take most of a 2000V surge? The one in a $25 plug in suppressor or the one in a $2000 HDTV?

Now, for the religous minded, a disclaimer:

I did not say that a whole house protector, with proper grounding is not the best first line of defense. And I did not say that all services don't need to be properly grounded where they enter the house. All I said was that plug-in protectors do provide some protection and that they can be good choices for a tiered protection strategy, or for situations where you can't install main panel protection, ie apartment renters, etc.