what is the differences between whole house surge protectors?

Electrical code wants a conductive ground. Things that make a better conductor include moisture, finer soils, and more surface area on the electrode, and a wider area of earth included in that electrode 'system'. For example, code requires rods to be separated by six feet so that the surface area of one rod does not 'connect' to the same earth used by the surface of another.

Earthing for surges involves both conductivity and equipotential. An example of equipotenial. Lightning strikes a tree. Therefore a nearby cow is electrocuted. Why? Cow is earthed by separated fore and hind legs. Therefore the connection from cloud to earthborn charges is through sky, through tree, into earth, up cow's hind legs, down fore legs, and then through earth to those earthborne charges.

How to protect the cow? Convert earth beneath that cow into a single point ground. Create equipotential. Surround the cow with a buried loop so that earth beneath the cow is equipotential. Charges that would have passed through the cow, instead, encircle the cow on that buried loop. Now all earth beneath the cow is equipotential - cow is unharmed.

Even though voltage beneath a cow might rise by thousands of volts, no incoming and outgoing path exists. Therefore no surge current exists. Therefore no harm.

People want to think of surge protection in terms of a magic box. The protector is not protection. The protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Therefore your telco (connected to overhead wires all over town) suffers typically 100 surges during every thunderstorm

- and no damage. Why? Telcos routinely use Ufer grounds or something equivalent to create even better equipotential.

We can never make the building sufficiently equipotential. So earthing must be more conductive. But we can never make those electrodes sufficiently conductive. So we also make better equipotenial.

Having said this, more conductive electrodes that exceed 1990 Code will be sufficient for most homes. However if we built homes standard with Ufer grounds, a buried loop outside the foundation, or even integrate basement floor concrete rebar into the earthing system, then significantly improved earthing makes a minor increase in protection. That minor increase is essential for any facility that can never ever suffer surge damage.

Again, protection is about electrodes that are more conductive and that provide equipotential.

Surge protection also is about a connection as short as possible because wire is just not sufficently conductive. Whereas fifty feet of wire from breaker box to an electrical receptacle is less than 0.2 ohms resistance; that same wire may be 120 ohms impedance to a surge. Impedance is little changed by increasing wire diameter and mostly decreased by making that wire shorter. Home earthing is typically less than 10 feet. Sharp bends, bundled with other wires, or ground wire inside a metallic conduit will also increase impedance - reduce conductivity.

Polyphaser, an industry benchmark (the niave never heard of Polyphaser and foolishly believe APC, Belkin, or Monster Cable are good), makes a protector that has no earthing connection. Instead, that protector mounts ON earth ground: zero foot earthing connection.

A ground wire up over the foundation and down to electrodes may be adjacent to other non-ground wires, have sharp bends, and too long. Better is to connect that ground wire through foundation and down to earth. Shorter distance. Few or no sharp bends. Separated from other wires. This also makes superior surge protection.

Some examples and suggestions to better understand the difference between earthing for human safety (the Code) and earthing for surge protection. That earthing electrode serves multiple purposes. Code is mostly concerned with human safety. But earthing is best also upgreaded for surge protection - transistor safety.

Reply to
westom
Loading thread data ...

It is the religious belief in earthing. Apparently, because it makes him look so stupid, w doesn't want to clearly say what he believes - that plug-in suppressors do not work.

With minimal reading and thinking ability, poor w could read in the IEEE guide how plug-in suppressors work. It is not primarily by earthing. It is by clamping the voltage on all wires to the ground at the suppressor.

Contrary to w's religious belief, both the IEEE and NIST guide say plug-in suppressors are effective.

Well isn't that clear.

Much of the surge protection is from power and phone and cable wires being at the same potential, even if it is elevated far above "absolute" ground potential by a surge. Martzloff has written that is more important than further lowering the resistance to earth. It requires a short wire from the phone and cable entry protectors to the "ground" at the service panel.

Parts of a house in contact with the earth have about zero probability of being "equipotential".

For both a service panel suppressor and plug-in suppressors the Joules that are "used" depends on the wires the surge hits on.

In the case of a plug-in suppressor, high energy ratings are readily (and cheaply) available which make it very unlikely the suppressor will ever fail. (Tests show the amount of energy from a surge that is actually absorbed in a plug-in suppressor is surprisingly small.) That is one reason why some manufacturers can provide protected equipment warrantees. The service panel suppressors the OP was looking at had a 3 year warrantee that did not include any consumer electronics (which is the most likely to be damaged).

Reply to
bud--

Bud again does what he does routinely. First, Bud follows me everywhere to promote plug-in protectors. Eventually he then posts insults. Bud is a salesman; a promoter for plug-in protectors. He does not have design experience; literally witnessing direct strikes without damage.

Bud repeatedly posts citations that contradict his claims. Quotes from his NIST citation:

What does Bud's plug-in protector do? Without earthing, it must stop or absorb surges. How does that tiny part inside a power strip absorb or stop what 3 miles of sky could not stop? Bud refuses to answer. Instead, Bud claims his protector clamps surges to nothing. His magic box will make a surge disappear? Clamping to nothing will dissipate surge energy? Of course not.

Why does every telco everywhere in the world not use Bud=92s protectors? They need protection that actually works and costs much less money. An effective protector makes a short connection to earth. Telcos use effective =91whole house=92 protectors. Even Bud's NIST citation bluntly says that on page 17:

Protectors promoted by Bud have no dedicated earth ground. Somehow it will magically dissipate surge energy? Worse, an adjacent protector may even earth a surge destructively through adjacent appliances. Just another reason why surges must be earthed before entering a building. Just another reason why telcos don=92t waste money on power strip protectors.

From Southwest Bell's FAQ on Surge protection:

Should the reader learn reality, then profits are at risk. So Bud

1) follows me everywhere, 2) to post insults.

If honest, Bud would post a manufacturer numeric specs that claims plug-in protector protection. Bud always refuses. No power strip protector manufacturer claims to protect from the typically destructive surge. No specs exist. An effective protector means protection already inside every appliance is not overwhelmed.

Earth one 'whole house' protector. Then energy from direct lightning strikes is harmlessly dissipated in earth =96 as Southwest Bell and NIST both state. A properly sized and properly earthed 'whole house' protector means nobody even knows a surge existed.

Effective protection means even the protector is not harmed. Many have seen damaged power strip protectors =96 no effective protection. Effective 'whole house' protectors are sized to earth even direct lightning strikes without damage. Numbers that say so posted previously.

Detailed above is how even the US Air Force, Sun Microsystems, munitions storage dumps, FCC, NASA, every telephone company, commercial radio and TV stations ... how surge protection is installed to not have damage. In every case, a protector makes a short connection to single point earth ground; for both conductivity and equipotential. An engineer knows this. A sales promoter will reply with mockery and insults. He will continue posting until he has the last word. He does this everywhere. Sales are at risk.

So where are those manufacturer spec numbers that Bud refuses to provide?

Reply to
westom

Reply to
Gary

I'm going to install my satellite dishes, and the instructions say to ground the dish, get I have never seen a grounded dish. Do I need to ground my dish?

Bud again does what he does routinely. First, Bud follows me everywhere to promote plug-in protectors. Eventually he then posts insults. Bud is a salesman; a promoter for plug-in protectors. He does not have design experience; literally witnessing direct strikes without damage.

Bud repeatedly posts citations that contradict his claims. Quotes from his NIST citation:

What does Bud's plug-in protector do? Without earthing, it must stop or absorb surges. How does that tiny part inside a power strip absorb or stop what 3 miles of sky could not stop? Bud refuses to answer. Instead, Bud claims his protector clamps surges to nothing. His magic box will make a surge disappear? Clamping to nothing will dissipate surge energy? Of course not.

Why does every telco everywhere in the world not use Bud?s protectors? They need protection that actually works and costs much less money. An effective protector makes a short connection to earth. Telcos use effective ?whole house? protectors. Even Bud's NIST citation bluntly says that on page 17:

Protectors promoted by Bud have no dedicated earth ground. Somehow it will magically dissipate surge energy? Worse, an adjacent protector may even earth a surge destructively through adjacent appliances. Just another reason why surges must be earthed before entering a building. Just another reason why telcos don?t waste money on power strip protectors.

From Southwest Bell's FAQ on Surge protection:

Should the reader learn reality, then profits are at risk. So Bud

1) follows me everywhere, 2) to post insults.

If honest, Bud would post a manufacturer numeric specs that claims plug-in protector protection. Bud always refuses. No power strip protector manufacturer claims to protect from the typically destructive surge. No specs exist. An effective protector means protection already inside every appliance is not overwhelmed.

Earth one 'whole house' protector. Then energy from direct lightning strikes is harmlessly dissipated in earth ? as Southwest Bell and NIST both state. A properly sized and properly earthed 'whole house' protector means nobody even knows a surge existed.

Effective protection means even the protector is not harmed. Many have seen damaged power strip protectors ? no effective protection. Effective 'whole house' protectors are sized to earth even direct lightning strikes without damage. Numbers that say so posted previously.

Detailed above is how even the US Air Force, Sun Microsystems, munitions storage dumps, FCC, NASA, every telephone company, commercial radio and TV stations ... how surge protection is installed to not have damage. In every case, a protector makes a short connection to single point earth ground; for both conductivity and equipotential. An engineer knows this. A sales promoter will reply with mockery and insults. He will continue posting until he has the last word. He does this everywhere. Sales are at risk.

So where are those manufacturer spec numbers that Bud refuses to provide?

Reply to
Gary

Nothing in the above contradicts anything that Bud has said.

Bud never said clamping dissipates surge energy.

Maybe because the central office doesn't consist of equipment that is plugged into AC outlets like you'd find in a home? And actually the telcos do use a tiered approach to protection and do not just rely on a single point of supression. In addition to protection on the phone wires and AC entering the builiding, there is also surge protection on the actual line cards contained in the switch, where the phone wires terminate.

Which brings us to another glaring contradiction in your claims that we've been through before with no answer. All appliances, electronic gear, etc have surge protection built-in. They use MOVs, the same components used in plug-in surge protectors, though smaller. Last time I checked, these appliances and electronic gear do not have a direct 10 ft connection to an earth ground. Yet, Tom has told us many times how that protection inside the appliance is effective. So, with no earth ground, how can that be?

One thing is for sure. I'd rather have the MOV inside a $20 plug-in surge protector see any surge, rather than the one inside my $2000 TV.

Since you want to use Southwestern Bell as a reference, let's look at the whole picture. First, SB clearly says that a whole house primary surge protector will provide a solid FIRST LINE of defense against surges. Clearly that does not contradict the NIST, IEEE, etc, who Bud has frequently cited. The NIST, IEEE, etc show whole house surge protectors used in COMBINATION with plug-in surge protectors.

What Southwestern Bell says, is very different from Tom's claim that plug-in surge protectors do not work and actually cause damage. In fact, Southwestern Bell sells plug-in surge protectors:

formatting link
Southwestern Bell S60860 Travel Telephone Surge Protector

That's right. They actually sell them. And also, the vast majority of companies that manufacture and sell whole house surge protectors also sell plug-in protectors too and discuss how to use them as part of an overall protection strategy. These are the very same companies that you regularly cite as authorities on surge protection, but clearly they don't agree with you.

Bud may follow you, but it seems you are the one that scours the internet to find anything to do with surges and then renews this same thread, without adding anything new. I take that back. This time you did add the Southwestern Bell citation which not only doesn't say what you claim it does, but SB actually sells plug-in surge protectors. And in all these threads, I don't think I've yet seen one person in any of them that agrees with you that plug-in surge protectors are useless and actually cause damage.

Reply to
trader4
:

Westcom,

You are oversimplifing. true Earth ground is a good idea in many cases but you don't NEED TO HAVE a true Earth ground to provide surge protection... there are other ways to do it...

You do know that they have lightning surge protection on electronics in airplanes.

Mark

Reply to
makolber

Go to your local hardware store and buy an 8 ft copper-clad ground rod. Drive it into the ground. Attach a copper ground wire to the mounting frame of the dish.

Reply to
Davej

w again does what he does routinely - troll google groups for "surge" to post his religious dogma about suppressors.

I promote only accurate information to counter w's religious dogma. And I am a regular participant in this newsgroup

Poor w is insulted by reality.

To quote w_ "It is an old political trick. When facts cannot be challenged technically, then attack the messenger." My only association with surge protectors is I have some.

But if poor w had valid technical arguments he wouldn't have to try to discredit others..

What does the NIST guide really say about plug-in suppressors? They are "the easiest solution". And "one effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor

Because of his religious blinders the village idiot can't read in the IEEE guide how plug-in suppressors work - clamping the voltage on all wires to the common ground at the suppressor. They don't work by stopping or absorbing. Or magic.

In addition to trader's answer, thousands of telephone lines would have to connect through the plug-in suppressor.

I promote only accurate information. And it is only magic for the village idiot. Others can read the explanation in the IEEE guide.

Answered nicely by trader.

The lie repeated - specs have been posted often and ignored by the village idiot . For instance over a year ago in this newsgroup.

formatting link

Repeating: Service panel suppressors are certainly a good idea. But from the NIST guide: "Q - Will a surge protector installed at the service entrance be sufficient for the whole house? A - There are two answers to than question: Yes for one-link appliances [electronic equipment], No for two-link appliances [equipment connected to power AND phone or cable or....]. Since most homes today have some kind of two-link appliances, the prudent answer to the question would be NO - but that does not mean that a surge protector installed at the service entrance is useless."

Service panel suppressors do not prevent high voltages from developing between power and signal wires.

w will continue posting until he has the last word. His religious belief in earthing has been challenged and cracks are developing in his universe.

For real science read the IEEE and NIST guides. Both say plug-in suppressors are effective.

There are 98,615,938 other web sites, including 13,843,032 by lunatics, and w can't find another lunatic that agrees with him that plug-in suppressors are NOT effective. All you have is w's opinions based on his religious belief in earthing.

And w never answers simple questions:

- 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"?

Plus questions from previous threads here:

- 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 does the IEEE Emerald book include plug-in suppressors as an effective surge protection device?

- Why does ?responsible? manufacturer SquareD says "electronic equipment may need additional protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?

Reply to
bud--

Metal dishes and supports must be bonded to the same grounding system as the power system (if the US-NEC is enforced). The length of the ground wire is not as important as for cable and phone entry because you don't have high surge currents (unless you have a direct strike to the dish, which would require much better protection).

Reply to
bud--

Or the cow did what humans are also told to do. Stand with all legs in one spot. Unfortunately, cow just don't listen to good advise.

Reply to
westom

So show me where that surge energy gets dissipated? A surge protector does not magically stop or absorb surges. Show me where energy get dissipated if not in earth? There is no way around earthing for protection (as maybe ten professional citations state in another post). But since you know a 100 years of industry professionals are wrong, then tell us where that energy gets dissipated? Show us how your protector design does it better.

You made the claim. Now let's see the science on how it is done.

Reply to
westom

Code requires earthing an antenna (dish) and also earthing the antenna lead where it enters a building. For surge protection, a dish is earthed to withstand direct lightning strikes (without damage). Cable is earthed to the single point earth ground (also used by AC electric and phone) so that destructive surge currents need not enter that building.

Of course, code is written for human safety. But the same earthing performed for human safety is also more carefully installed to provide transistor safety.

Correct, many dish installers do not properly earth the dish. But code requires that earthing for human safety.

Reply to
westom

For instance you could build a metal shed in the back yard completely insulated from the earth (maybe on a 4 foot high pile of glass bottles). The power service panel has a surge suppressor. Phone and cable entry protectors have short wire to the power "ground". There would have to be a suppressor from cable center conductor to "ground", or plug-in suppressors. The shed "ground" is not earthed at all. Everything inside is protected with no earthing at the shed. (The service panel suppressor has lower surge currents than if it was earthed, thus lower energy absorption.)

There are always multiple paths to earth, many provided by the utilities. Poor w doesn't seem to be able to figure out multiple earth paths.

The shed is not practical. But just like in the shed, much of the protection in a house is from having all wires - power and phone and cable - at the same potential. If a house has a higher resistance to earth it means the interior wires may float to a higher voltage above "absolute" earth potential. Even with a relatively good earth connection, the interior wires can be thousands of volts above the earth potential in parts of a concrete basement.

w forgot to include part of Mark?s post: "You do know that they have lightning surge protection on electronics in airplanes." w has never explained how you can protect an airplane when there is no earth ground - "no earth ground means no effective protection".

Reply to
bud--

Let me take the liberty of responding to your question about Mark's excellent point. In a single word: Clamping

Reply to
trader4

Now that's pretty funny. The solution to not getting killed by lightning is to stand with both legs in one spot? How far apart are your feet when you're standing to begin with? Geeez

Reply to
trader4

Code requires earthing an antenna (dish) and also earthing the antenna lead where it enters a building. For surge protection, a dish is earthed to withstand direct lightning strikes (without damage). Cable is earthed to the single point earth ground (also used by AC electric and phone) so that destructive surge currents need not enter that building.

Of course, code is written for human safety. But the same earthing performed for human safety is also more carefully installed to provide transistor safety.

Correct, many dish installers do not properly earth the dish. But code requires that earthing for human safety.

Thankyou, I will do that. I am mounting them in the "A" on the side of my house opposite my attic. My attic has lights in it. Can I just run a wire to bond to one of the metal electrical boxes? Is it code to run a ground wire directly into the electrical box to tie the sats and coax bonding to?

Reply to
Gary

No. The DISH and the cable grounding block should be directly tied to the central building ground. If the antenna is located close to the electric service entrance, that should be easy to do.

There should be installation instructions that came with the dish that discuss correct installation. Or you can find the direction from the manufacturer online.

Reply to
trader4

Another problem that a sales promoter hopes you avoid - scary pictures:

formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
Most every fire department has seen this danger. An ineffective protector attempting to stop and absorb a serious surge. Damage also gets the naive to promote more ineffective power strips. A fire marshal even states why that hazard exists. Read it.

Bud is paid to promote power strip protectors. Bud must turn this discussion long and nasty so that you ignore well proven and less expensive solutions - earthing one 'whole house' protector. Even discuss airplanes which he knows is completely different and irrelevant. Anything to avoid reality such as those scary pictures of protectors he is paid to promote.

A GE white paper also explains how power strip protectors create fires as demonstrated by the above 2007 Boston apartment fire:

See those scary pictures to appreciate why Bud posts incessant attacks. Should you learn why high reliability facilities do not use plug-in protectors, then profits are at risk.

Bud says a power strip will stop and absorb what even three miles of sky could not. Scary pictures demonstrate what otherwise happens. Why does Bud never post a power strip numeric spec? He cannot post what does not exist. So Bud wants to discuss something completely different - airplanes. Power strip protectors are not permitted on airplanes. Appreciate one reason why. See those scary pictures.

Norma on 27 Dec 2008 in alt.fiftyplus entitled "The Power Outage" also describes the danger:

According to Bud, Norma was lying. Otherwise profits are at risk. So Bud would rather attack the messenger.

Effective protection means surge energy is dissipated (and diverted, shunted, clamped, connected, bonded, conducted) harmlessly in earth; does not enter the building. A solution that costs tens or 100 times less money is also so reliable as to be used anywhere that damage cannot occur. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.

Reply to
westom

Warning to Gary:

Westom, aka W_tom, is a well known usenet kook and has been at this for years. He has been known to post advice, which if followed could easily kill you or a loved one. Get your advice elsewhere. Really.

Reply to
salty

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.