Actually, even whole house surge protectors deal with the surge after it has entered the building. They are typically installed in the main panel, which in most cases is inside the building.
And if the only possible way of dealing with surges is an earth ground, how is it that aircraft have surge protection which deals with static discharge and lightning strikes?
The best information on surges and surge protection I have seen is at:
- "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 major organization of electrical and electronic engineers in the US). And also:
- "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to protect the appliances in your home" published by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology in 2001
The IEEE guide is aimed at those with some technical background. The NIST guide is aimed at the unwashed masses
If w had minimal ability to read and think he could read in the IEEE guide how plug-in suppressors work - clamping (limiting) the voltage on all wires (signal and power) to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in suppressors do not work primarily by earthing (or stopping or absorbing). The guide explains earthing occurs elsewhere. (Read the guide starting pdf page 40).
EZ Peaces appears to describe a direct lightning strike to a house. The only reliable protection is lightning rods.
w has a religious belief (immune from challenge) that surge protection must directly use earthing. Thus in his view plug-in suppressors (which are not well earthed) can not possibly work. Unfortunately for w, the IEEE guide clearly explains how plug-in suppressors work - primarily by clamping, not earthing. Because that violates w's religious belief he apparently can't read it - just like he can?t read any other source that says plug-in suppressors are effective.
Because w is evangelical in his religious belief in earthing he trolls google-groups for "surge" to save the world from the evils of plug-in suppressors. He is currently is spreading his drivel in another current thread in this newsgroup and this is at least his 4th missionary stint to this newsgroup this year.
If poor w had valid technical arguments he wouldn't have to lie about others.
Never seen - anyone that agrees with w that plug-in suppressors are effective.
Never answered - any questions. Current questions from the other thread:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest solution"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport [plug-in] protector"?
- Why did Martzloff say in his paper "One solution. illustrated in this paper, is the insertion of a properly designed [multiport plug-in surge suppressor]"?
- Why do your "responsible manufacturers" make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does "responsible" manufacturer SquareD says "electronic equipment may need additional protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
- Where is a source that says protection is "inside every appliance"?
- How do you protect airplanes from direct lightning strikes? Do they drag an earthing chain?
And (with some overlap):
1 - Do appliances and electronics typically have some built-in surge protection, eg MOVs? Yes or no. 2 - If the answer to 1 is yes, which we all know to be the case, then how can that surge protection work without a direct earth ground? 3 - How can aircraft be protected from surges, caused by lightning or static in the air, since they have no direct earth ground?For real science read the IEEE and NIST guides. Both say plug-in suppressors are effective.
Direct strikes without damage are routine. If damage does happen, a human has made a mistake. Never, but we humans have no way to test our designs. First test is when a direct strike occurs. If surge damage occurs, we humans have made a mistake. Then go looking for where we made that mistake. But as long as the simple surge protection system is properly installed, then direct lightning strikes do not cause damage even to the protector.
An example. In one location, lightning struck incoming power, ignored the building single point earth ground, and traveled across the house. Why? Apparently a vein of graphite existed on far side. Better earth ground was through the house into that graphite vein. Damage occurred which means we made a mistake. Solution was to expand single point earth ground a buried loop outside the building. Incoming surges could obtained earth on a buried loop; need not find earth ground destructively inside the house.
Human failure corrected. Direct strikes without damage. Geology is a critical part for protecting household appliances. The protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
Aircraft use same protection techniques. In fact, runways must be specially constructed with earthing so that surge protection and static discharge problems are automatically eliminated. Connecting an airplane to a better earthig is an essential part of aircraft safety procedures. Protection is never about stopping or absorbing surges or static. Protection even in aircraft is about diverting a surge so that energy is harmlessly dissipated elsewhere.
Of course trader has read this previously - should know it by now if trying to learn rather than just make wild accusations. His agenda is to create confusion. Obviously, the OP is not asking about power strip protectors in series on an airplane. Why is trader?
I started at page 40 but couldn't find a diagram of what you're talking about. I will agree that there can be pitfalls when a system is connected to more than one ground.
Lets say the first one trips, if the voltage reaches 200 volts. The second one trips if the voltage reaches 200 volts. How would that add up? I say, not at all.
"Stormin Mormon" wrote in news:gts2nr$li3$ snipped-for-privacy@news.motzarella.org:
OTOH,if there's enough energy to blow past the first protector,the 2nd will absorb/shunt it. The 1st protector also acts as a delay,slows down the rise of the pulse.
I stumbled across the instructions for one the 2 plug-in suppressors I use. It says: "All Belkin Surge Protectors must be plugged directly into a properly wired AC power line ... and must not be 'daisy-chained' together in serial fashion with other power strips, UPSes, other surge protectors, ... or extension cords."
Perhaps ransley could find where Tripp Lite says in writing plug-in suppressors can be daisy chained. I didn't think phone techs were held in high regard.
The example in the IEEE guide, pdf page 40, document page 31, "4.1 Ground Potential Rise within a Building".
Uh huh. Now we're getting somewhere. They do use some of the same protection techniques. And that includes surge protection that uses clamping to keep various parts of aircraft systems at the same potential. But they sure don't have a direct, short connection to earth ground, which you have claimed many, many times is the only way to have any protection.
Funny how you now want to move the discussion to aircraft on the ground. What about when they are at 40,000 ft, with no earth ground?
Oh bother. Buds agenda is to sell surge protectors. Now my agenda is to create confusion, because I point out obvious big holes and contradictions in your assertions. What's your agenda?
No surge protector trips. Where is this device inside that power strip that disconnects appliance from AC mains? This 'tripping' myth is the claim that a protector will stop and absorb what even three miles of sky could not stop.
What is that 'tripping' device? You made the claim. What does this tripping?
Why is 'let-through' voltage at 330 volts? Where does 200 volts come from? What is this device inside a protector that measures and trips on voltage? Surges are measures in amperes. What measures and trips on 200 volts?
The more important question is, what are YOU tripping on?
I believe one could get into trouble daisy chaining. I wish I could see diagrams to understand what could go wrong.
Years ago, I was impressed with the argument at the website of an English manufacturer (Zero Surge?) that if your phone ground electrode wasn't bonded to your power ground electrode, it was safer not to plug your phone line into your point-of-use protector. That's the kind of thing where a diagram would refresh my memory.
In the 80s, my BIL kept having to send his modems in to have the lightning-protection fuses replaced. He was using a Radio Shack gas-tube protector for his phone line. Finally, the modem manufacturer told him to get a better protector. He got a Tripp Lite and had no more trouble. The threshold of the gas tubes was too high to protect the modem fuses.
Ahh! I was starting at document page 40.
That example uses a TV plugged into a different outlet from the cable protector. Wouldn't it be better to plug the TV into an extension cord daisy chained with the cable protector?
If the phone grounding electrode isn't bonded to the power system ground you better not connect anything to both the power and phone lines (like a computer). A plug-in suppressor would give you a chance.
For good protection, not only must the phone entry protector connect to the "ground" at the power system, the connection must be with a short wire to prevent high voltage between power and phone lines. That is the moral of the IEEE illustration (starting pdf page 40) for cable. In the case of a wire that is too long the IEEE guide says "the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport [plug-in] protector." (Ignored, of course, by w.)
Not bonding is a code violation in the US, and I believe all phone companies are indoctrinated into making the connection. They don't necessarily understand the importance of a short connection. And if the phone entry location is distant from the power service you can't have a short connection.
Yea - I used to have that problem a lot.
It would be better than what is shown. A lot better idea to not use an extension cord from the TV to the suppressor and use a second suppressor. They aren't real expensive (unless you only buy Monster products like w).
I was mistaken. Zero Surge is American. Now they recommend against multiport protectors.
My SEs are 20 feet apart. I bonded them after I found 0.25VAC between the electrodes. I was online when lightning hit a tree 30 feet from my power SE. I had no damage, but the phone man had to replace the "fuses" on the telephone pole. (They call them something else.)
I told him I thought bonding had saved me. He beat around the bush for
20 minutes, then said the code requires it but it's phone-company policy not to comply. He said surges usually come in on the power company's neutral. If the electrodes are bonded, the clamping of the phone company's SE protector can send the surge into the phone line. That's why he had to replace his fuses.The lack of bonding appears common around here. It may save the phone company a few fuses, but it puts the lives and equipment of residents at risk.
Across the street, my neighbor refused to bond his electrodes. The bolt that struck my house didn't damage any of my phone/computer equipment, but it got his modem, computer, cordless phones, and satellite receiver. He called the phone company, and there technician said there was nothing wrong with the grounding. So my neighbor told me I was wrong.
His BIL is a power-company executive. He said I was right. So my neighbor had the phone guy return. This time the phone guy admitted that the code required bonding and it was the phone company's responsibility. He said he would expedite it if my neighbor would give him free music lessons. My neighbor agreed, but the phone man never returned and the electrodes are still not bonded.
Are you talking about something other than daisy chaining?
Aircraft have two wire AC circuits with daisy chained power strip protectors? How many times do you post irrelevant to the OP's questions? Even airplanes need earthing which is why runways have extensive earthing systems to ground airplanes. And still completely irrelevant to the OP's question - which trader does not answer.
Why did plug-in protectors damage a network of powered off computers? Protectors without earthing do not absorb surges as trader claims. Do not absorb surges as a daisy chain of power strips must do. Those protectors - even if in a daisy chain - simply gave a surge more paths to find earth ground destructively through the entire network. Diverts the surge to earth - which can be through the adjacent computer or TV if too close to appliances and too far from earth ground. Protector simply gave a surge on more wires - and put many thousands of volts onto those appliances.
How curious. Page 42 Figure 8. Using a power strip protector, the surge was earthed 8000 volts destructively through an adjacent TV. Nothing stops or absorbs surges. Same problem that we engineers saw and corrected by earthing a 'whole hosue' protector - and no power strip protectors..
Surge protection is about keeping surges outside the building. Current that does not flow inside a building and does not flow through appliances causes no damage. Current that is diverted harmlessly into earth creates no destructive voltage. Simple solution that also costs less money. Better earthing and only one 'whole house' protector is even necessary to protect power strip protectors as well as protect everything else. An effective protector that costs the OP maybe $1 per appliance.
What does trader recommend? He wants to argue about airplanes. Those with so much animosity also have trouble even remembering the OP's question. Little hint: the newsgroup is called alt.home.repair. Not alt.airplane.repair.
It's irrelevant what circuits they actually have. The key point is that those circuits are obviously protected against static and lightning surges while flying at 40,000 ft where there is no earth ground. According to Tom, no protection is possible without a direct, short connection to earth ground. So, how can that be?
How many times does Tom hyjack a thread and turn it into a rant on the alleged evil of plug-in surge protectors? Classic example is the other thread, where the OP asked how to add a ground to a 2 wire circuit over a slab. Next thing you know, there;s Tom ranting about plug-ins.
Gee, what happens in the air? Is there earthing there too?
=A0>And still completely
Bud and a couple others did an excellent job of answering the question, perhaps you missed it.
Where exactly did this occur? Forgive me if I question your credibility, but I have to when you misquote an IEEE guide that actually recommends plug-in protectors and run around telling everyone that the IEEE says in that guide that it was a plug-in protector that destroyed a TV. So, link please.
Never claimed any such thing.
With a plug-in surge protector clamping all the wires going into an appliance, it's very unlikely that path is going to destroy the appliance. But without it, it is likely that it could be destroyed.
=A0> Diverts the surge to earth - which can be through the
This is a perfect example of how Tom takes anything and everything out of context and turns it into an outright lie. Tom doesn't provide any link so others can easily take a look for themselves and figure out that it actually says the opposite of what Tom says it does. Here's the link:
"Figure 8: Ground potential differences within a building under lightning strike conditions: how down-line TV sets get damaged. With a 3,000A surge rising in 3 =ECs, and a 30 foot ground bond (A-C), ~10,000 V develops between A and C. Even with a multi-port protector (D) for TV1, the ground voltage at D is conveyed to TV2 by the coaxial cable, resulting in an 8,000 V potential across TV2, which will probably destroy it. A second multi-port protector as shown in Fig. 7 is required to protect TV2"
Clearly the IEEE did not say that the damage at TV2 is CAUSED in any way by the surge surpressor on TV1. And they clearly say that using a plug-in surge protector on TV2 would protect it, which is 180 deg opposite of everything that Tom says.
You've already forgotten what I just taught you a few posts ago. Even with a whole house surge protector, in most cases surges are not kept outside the building. The surge protector is typically located in the main panel, which in most cases is inside the building.
Zero Surge does not use MOVs in their suppressors. Their pitch is to discredit MOV based suppressors. Their propaganda, last I looked, was kinda ridiculous.
If there is high voltage between power and signal wires you can't protect without a multiport suppressor. The NIST guide suggests equipment is most likely to be damaged by high voltage between power and signal wires.
With thousands of amps from a lightning strike spreading out from the point of earthing the potential of the earth rises. It is easy to get thousands of volts between separated ground rods near the strike. The thousands of volts will appear at equipment connected to power and phone wires.
The IEEE guide says you can have the same problem at equipment like a pad mounted A/C compressor/condenser. With a very near strike the pad and equipment can be a very different potential from the power system ground and power wires.
It should be illegal to be that stupid.
If a strong surge on power wires is earthed through its ground rod the potential at the distant phone ground rod can be thousands of volts different.
It sure inspires confidence when you know what to do and the utility still does it wrong.
The phone company should be liable for any damage.
You could try a complaint to whatever agency regulates the phone company to get compliance at all installations. In MN some dish installers were required to go back and properly bond their installations.
I don?t like daisy chaining. I am talking about a separate suppressor at the 2nd TV plugged into the outlet at the 2nd TV with the cable wire going through it. (It is what the IEEE guide says to do.)
What did that protector do? To provide protection, surge energy must be dissipated somewhere. A connection to earth was 8000 volts through TV2. Or you must spend $5000 or $15,000 for plug-in protectors for everything ... dishwasher, microwave, bathroom GFCI, dimmer switches, timer switches, smoke detectors ... to have protection. IOW enrich bud.
Where damage can never happen, ie telco CO (switching center), they don't waste money on plug-in protectors. Responsible facilities earth a 'whole house' protector on every incoming wire. Now the surge need not find earth ground destructively through TV2, the furnace, washing machine, etc. Instead, the surge is earthed before entering the building. Effective protection for about $1 per appliance.
Or we can argue to create more confusion. If the surge enters a the breaker box and is then earthed five feet outside that box, is a surge in any bedroom, living room, hallway, kitchen, etc? Of course not. Because that surge does not enter the building - no matter how trader spins confusion.
Next trader will discuss airplanes to create even more confusion?
Page 42 Figure 8. A surge is permitted inside the building. Surge finds earth ground such as 8000 volts destructively through TV2. Surges earthed before entering a building will not overwhelm protection that is already inside every appliance. Anywhere that surge damage cannot happen: earthing and a 'whole house' protector. No earth ground means no effective protection. OR the surge finds earth ground 8000 volts destructively through adjacent appliances.
How curious. bud's NIST citation says the exact same thing:
Page 42 Figure 8. No earthed protector. So that protector simply
*diverted* that surge 8000 volts destructively through TV2. Page 42 Figure 8 - even the world's best power strip is useless BECAUSE grounding is not done properly.So do you discuss airplanes again? trader is not trying to confuse anyone?
Surge protection means that energy is harmlessly dissipated in earth; need not even enter the building to 8000 volts destroy the adjacent TV. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground ... which is necessary for any building that must never suffer damage. $1 per protected appliance or $5000 in power strip protectors.
They're $aving fu$e$. A corporation's duty is to maximize profits.
The distance between a cow's hooves is enough to wipe out a herd when lightning strikes a nearby tree.
It must be widely known. I suspect that Bellsouth owns NC regulators. My neighbor calls himself a handyman but won't take ten minutes and ten cents to remedy the problem.
In that case, if during a strike, the ground at one outlet is far different from the ground at the other, won't you get a surge through the shield of the cable? Won't that induce high voltage in the signal conductor? I believe a cable company uses special technology to deal with the problem between their facility and your service entrance, but it's your problem within your house.
According to the IEEE guide, the plug-in surge protector protected TV1 from damage. And they clearly state that had TV2, ie the damaged TV, had a plug-in, it too would have been protected. They state that the lightning strike raises the ground potential at one end of the house by thousands of volts and that is carried by the COAXIAL CABLE to damage TV2. In other words, everything, as usual is 180 deg opposite of what you claim it says.
The above claim that it costs $5K- $15K for plug-in surge protectors for a house gives a good view into your lack of grounding in reality. Pun intended.
As I pointed out to you in a previous thread, not only does the telco CO have surge protection at the point of entry, they also have surge protection on every line card where the phone line actually terminates at the CO switch. That protection typically includes MOVs, which operate on the line card, as they do inside appliances or plug-in surge protectors. Which is to say protection is provided without the benefit of a direct short connection to earth ground, which is 180 deg opposite to what you claim. I even provided you with a datasheet from National Semiconductor for their line card semiconductors, where they discuss the fact that protection must be provided on the line card. One more credible reference that refutes what you claim, but you just ignore.
Of course all the credible references say that just isn't so. Bud has explained this to you a dozen times. A lightning strike has such a high current, that even with a well grounded system, the current going through the whole house surge protector can result in thousands of volts still being present. Do the math. 10,000 amps times 1 ohm=3D?
Explained to you yesterday, why this is wrong X2. Not only is a surge still possible even with a whole house protector, but even the main surge going through the whole house protector, in most cases, is actually inside the house because the AC panel with the surge protector is typically located inside the house.
How is it that aircraft at 40,000 feet are protected then?
As Bud would say, the lie repeated.
=A0 =A0Page 42
HomeOwnersHub website 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.