what is the differences between whole house surge protectors?

[Gary]

Gary

You really have chosen an installation location that is very difficult to protect. If you bond the dish to the Equipment Grounding Conductor (EGC) of your attic lighting circuit then the voltage on that circuit would rise to a very high value during a lightning strike to the dish itself or anything near by. That will jeopardize anything on that circuit that also has a connection to a wire carried utility other than the power lines. It will also jeopardize the circuit itself as a lightning strike will destroy the insulation on the two insulated conductors when the voltage on the circuits EGC rises to a point well above the effective insulation puncture withstand of the cable.

You need to run a conductor of at least the gauge specified in the installation instructions all the way down to the ground. You then install a ground rod and connect the dishes grounding conductor to that rod. Here is the part that you will just hate. You then run a bonding conductor from that ground rod to the electrical Grounding Electrode System located at or near the the electrical panel. The minimum size for that bonding conductor is number six American Wire Gauge under the US NEC but larger would be better.

If you want to improve your homes lightning and surge / spike protection you will run the required bonding conductor around the house buried in the earth. Then as long as you use a bare conductor you will be increasing the earth contact surface area of the Grounding Electrode System.

-- Tom Horne

Thx Tom. My drywall is not up yet I can run a wire to an electrode that I drove in the basement next to the sump pit. I have that tied to a ground under the footing about 10' away. That is then tied into my panel. So I should tie into the ground rod and not the ground under the footing first?

Another quesstion. If lightening strikes my dish on the side of my house and I have the wire grounded though a ground wire on my attic circuit, is the burned out circuit the worst of my problems?

[Gary]

I have to get the dish up high to get over my neighbors roofline for my line of sight.

[westom]

Appreciate EE principles that were posted earlier. Your concern is not resistance. Protection from AC electric (near DC) currents means that ground wire can be bundled with other wires, sharp bends, splicing, etc. But your ground must also carry high frequency surge currents. That means a connection to earth must be separated from other wires, no sharp bends, no splices, etc. That safety ground wire to an atttic light is low resistance; but high impedance. That is only a safety ground wire; not an earth ground. Connection to that safety ground wire would violate every (previously posted) earthing principle.

For example, the earthing connection must be separated from other wires. Safety ground wire inside Romex is bundled with other wires - a violation of the principles.

Tom Horne properly described how that dish can be earthed and bonded to meet code. Much work. A lesser ground is simply a ground wire directly to a dedicated electrode and best routed outside the building (for numerous reasons). Grounding the dish to a safety ground wire inside the attic would be a worst solution both for lightning protection and for human safety.

[westom]

This is Bud again posting without first learning basic electrical engineering facts. Many automatically post denials without first learning basic electrical concepts. To mask insufficient technical knowledge, they would also post insults.

Will a direct lightning strike harm a 10 AWG wire? An informed Bud would have never posted that sentence. But again, I quote professionals. From the Electrical Engineering Times article entitled "Protecting Electrical Devices from Lightning Transients":

An 18 AWG wire is sufficient (marginal) to earth a typical 20,000 amp direct lightning strike without damage. Then we more than quadruple that ground wire so that a direct lightning strike still does not cause damage.

A sales promoter would not know this. A 10 AWG wire is more than sufficient to earth direct lightning strikes on cable and telephone. We then make that ground wire even four times thicker for AC electric

- 6 AWG.

But again, the limiting factor is not wire gauge (thickness). Limiting factor is wire length and other critical parameters such as no sharp bends, not inside metallic conduit, and separation from other wires. Factors that provide lower impedance (not resistance) and better earthing will also make or break protector effectiveness. But again, a protector is only as effective as its earth ground. That means wire length. Even 10 AWG wire is sufficient to conduct direct lightnings strikes.

Effective protection means direct lightning strikes are earthed without entering a building and without damage. Not even damage to the protector. A 10 AWG ground wire from a phone 'whole house' protector (installed for free by telcos) or from coax cable (without any protector) will earth direct lightning strikes without damage. However wire to earth a dish is typically larger. A technically informed sales promoter would have known 10 AWG is more than sufficient.

And again, who not only knows the facts AND backs them up with numbers and professional citations? Not Bud who routinely resorts to posting insults.

Gary - important is know not from the numbers who agree. Important is to know from the minority who actually did this stuff. Whose designs suffered direct lightning strikes without damage.

[westom]

A majority who discuss this stuff know only from popular urban myths. Code is concerned with human safety. If any part of the dish gets accidently shorted to live AC power, then the dish must short out that current - trip the circuit breaker - so that humans are not harmed. Code is about human safety. If grounding was only for static electric discharge, then a 32 AWG wire would be more than sufficient.

Code requires the dish to be earthed for human safety reasons. Then we also earth the dish so that direct lightning strikes cause no damage. For the same reason that Ben Franklin earthed lightning rods on wooden church steeples.

Earthing solves many problems. It also eliminates trivial static electric charges. However those charges are made completely irrelevant by protection already inside the receiver. That grounding is also for human safety and for transistor safety (lightning protection). Many who never knew this instead heard someone say it is for static electric discharge. If true, they were grounding dishes and antennas with wire no thicker than human hair - embedding that wire inside the insulation of coax cable.

Just a few reasons why we know so many who fear static charges are totally misinformed =96 yet automatically promote that widely believed myth anyway.

[westom]

We are discussing the simplest of surge protection - for buildings. So simple that these 'best protection' principles were well understood and routinely installed even 100 years ago. So why do you not understand what even

1920 Ham radio operators knew?

Surge protection for aerospace equipment is more complex. Same principles apply. But the number of possible surges and numerous directions for those surge currents make aerospace protection more complex. See that URL for a 747 earthing a surge in Osaka.

So tell me. How much design work do you have with aerospace equipment? Zero? Much of what I did and learn comes from aerospace design. Those more complex problems are not relevant to routine surge protection of terrestrial facilities. For that matter, why not also confuse people with surge protection from nuclear EMP? Why not just through in more grenades to confuse others and to justify your personal vendetta?

To keep this simple, discussion is terrestrial protection. Disagree? Then were is your professional citation or numbers to support your claim? You never demonstrate that professional knowledge. Basic electronics knowledge means you knew household surge protection and airplane surge protection are significantly different and not relevant to the OP's questions.

[trader4]

Hide quoted text -

And you asked the very same thing and I answered it 9 posts back with the correct answer, that everyone here agrees with:

Q "Thank you, 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? "

A "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. "

And if you think my saying that you should read the dish install directions, go to the manufacturer's website where you can find instructions, diagrams, etc, is unhelpful, then I'm beginning to think there is no hope for you. Time to call an electrician.

[trader4]

You propose to route a lightning strike from a roof mounted dish on your house inside to an ordinary attic electrical box, using the very end of the ground system, using probably 14 gauge wire, with who knows how many splices, 90deg bends, long length, etc., and you want to know if a burned out circuit is the worst of your problems?

How about when that kludged approach can't handle 25,000 amps, so after the lightning gets started down that path, it takes another one. You're sitting there watching TV and a fireball comes out of an outlet and zaps you in the ass? Or it sets the house on fire. Clearly you have no grasp of the concepts involved here. Call an electrician before you harm yourself.

[trader4]

Now there's a frightening thought.

No personal vendetta here, just the facts. And that is that airplanes are obviously protected from lightning strikes and surges, yet have no direct 10ft connection to ground, which you continue to say without which you cannot protect from surges. They use some of the same design techniques that are used for protection on the ground, eg clamping.

That's not the only obvious contradiction you can't deal with. The other one I like is your claim appliances and electronics come with built-in surge protection and that it is effective. Now, how can that be? Those appliances don't have a direct 10ft connection to ground either. In fact, they sit even further away from earth ground than a plug-in protector. Yet, somehow they achieve protection, typically using some of the very same components found in plug-in surge protectors. So, with no direct 10ft earth ground, how can that be?

Of course the IEEE and NIST have been given to you countless times, where they discuss using plug-in surge protectors as part of a surge protection plan. We've also given you major manufacturer's of whole house surge protectors. Companies who YOU have frequently called knowledgeable on surge protection. These same companies also make, sell and talk about using plug-ins as part of surge protection.

Since you're now on the lightning kick, here's one more to add to the list. The National Lightning Safety Institute. Take a look at the diagram they show of one protection scenario. Right in the picture are both a PC and a TV, both connected to plug-in surge protectors.

BTW, we're still waiting for any reference from you that just comes out and says plug-in surge protectors don't work.

[salty]

I'm beginning to think maybe Gary is a W_Tom sockpuppet. He's a little too "deliberately thick" to pass the sniff test easily.

[salty]

Hey, if it melts, then it's a fuse, right? LOL

[bud--]

As a mater of fact I read the article before I posted. The #18 wire 61kA rating is for the wire melting. That is not acceptable to most people. Using #10, the wire might not melt, it might only start a fire along its length. There are additional problems at the ends - as the article makes clear. Curves in the article for #10 wire have currents from about

50 to 80kA at more reasonable temperatures. Lightning can range well above that.

A real system for lightning protection, which uses lightning rods, has down wires far larger than #10 and there is normally more than one. If you want an idea what is needed for lightning protection look at a lightning rod system.

Lightning strikes to outside cable and telephone wires, as I said in a previous post, have multiple paths to earth. The phone/cable wire to your house does not take the full lightning strike. And the current is limited by the cable and phone wires themselves. The principle, in general, is that the "ground" wire has at least the cross sectional area of the phone/cable wires.

You certainly can protect a dish from a direct lightning strike. TomH's scheme would probably protect the house. But much as I respect his knowledge in the field, I don't think it would protect equipment. If you want to protect an antenna and equipment from a direct strike you had best do what a competent ham would do, which includes much more extensive protection.

And if you want to protect a house from lightning you need ground rods.

The scheme suggested by TomH would certainly provide good protection for practical hazards. As I wrote, I am just leery of a distant ground rod connected to signal wires. But the dish coax could also go through a ground block near the power service with a connection to the power earthing system.

And again, who not only knows the facts AND backs them up with numbers and professional citations? Not w who routinely resorts to trying to discredit others as a "sales promoter".

Professional citations? Still missing - any source that agrees with w that plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.

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

Also still missing - answers simple questions:

- What "industry standards" require "all appliances" to "contain surge protection"?

- 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 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"?

- Why aren?t airplanes crashing regularly - "no earth ground means no effective protection".

Why *never* any answers w??? Why should anyone believe anything you say if you can't answer simple questions???

[bud--]

So the dish "ground" is to trip a circuit breaker? Another bizarre idea (maybe it is an urban myth).

From the NIST guide: "Surges of a slightly different kind can also happen in parts of other electrical systems that do not directly involve a power line. Examples of these are: the antenna for a remote garage door opener, the sensor wiring for an intrusion alarm system, the video signal part of a satellite dish receiver. Surges in these systems are caused by nearby lightning strikes."

In case that was not clear - surges on satellite coax come from nearby lightning strikes.

A competent ham would never protect their antenna and equipment from lightning with any scheme that has been in this thread.

And the protection envisioned in the NEC is clearly not for lightning protection.

Lightning strikes to a house, for almost all of us, is an extremely rare event. A lightning strike to a dish is similarly rare.

[Apologies if this winds up as a duplicate post]

[The Daring Dufas]

When I was a kid, living in the home my father built on top of a mountain (us kids helped), The house had a metal HVAC duct that ran the length of the house in the basement. Whenever lightning struck within a mile or two, a loud pop complete with a spark would come from the ductwork that was some 80 feet long. It would arc to the metal support poles that were attached to the concrete floor. If I was in the basement, it was quite startling to hear the loud pop and a short time later hear a thunder clap. From time to time we would have lightning damage to various things.

TDD

[Gary]

I was wondering how often satellite dishes get hit by lightning. Are there stats?

[Gary]

And you asked the very same thing and I answered it 9 posts back with the correct answer, that everyone here agrees with:

Q "Thank you, 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? "

A "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. "

And if you think my saying that you should read the dish install directions, go to the manufacturer's website where you can find instructions, diagrams, etc, is unhelpful, then I'm beginning to think there is no hope for you. Time to call an electrician.

You have too much time on your hands.....let it go. LOL

[Gary]

This is Bud again posting without first learning basic electrical engineering facts. Many automatically post denials without first learning basic electrical concepts. To mask insufficient technical knowledge, they would also post insults.

Will a direct lightning strike harm a 10 AWG wire? An informed Bud would have never posted that sentence. But again, I quote professionals. From the Electrical Engineering Times article entitled "Protecting Electrical Devices from Lightning Transients":

An 18 AWG wire is sufficient (marginal) to earth a typical 20,000 amp direct lightning strike without damage. Then we more than quadruple that ground wire so that a direct lightning strike still does not cause damage.

A sales promoter would not know this. A 10 AWG wire is more than sufficient to earth direct lightning strikes on cable and telephone. We then make that ground wire even four times thicker for AC electric

- 6 AWG.

But again, the limiting factor is not wire gauge (thickness). Limiting factor is wire length and other critical parameters such as no sharp bends, not inside metallic conduit, and separation from other wires. Factors that provide lower impedance (not resistance) and better earthing will also make or break protector effectiveness. But again, a protector is only as effective as its earth ground. That means wire length. Even 10 AWG wire is sufficient to conduct direct lightnings strikes.

Effective protection means direct lightning strikes are earthed without entering a building and without damage. Not even damage to the protector. A 10 AWG ground wire from a phone 'whole house' protector (installed for free by telcos) or from coax cable (without any protector) will earth direct lightning strikes without damage. However wire to earth a dish is typically larger. A technically informed sales promoter would have known 10 AWG is more than sufficient.

And again, who not only knows the facts AND backs them up with numbers and professional citations? Not Bud who routinely resorts to posting insults.

Gary - important is know not from the numbers who agree. Important is to know from the minority who actually did this stuff. Whose designs suffered direct lightning strikes without damage.

I'm learning lots

[Gary]

So what you are saying is that this is not a good idea. I THINK I GOT IT! :-)

[westom]

Dish strike is a function of what lightning seeks. For example, lightning avoided a 60 foot high tree to strike earth some 40 feet from that tree. Why? Bedrock came closer to the surface where lightning struck. Lightning choose the better (more conductive) path.

In another case, homeowners installed lightning rods. Lightning returned to strike the same bathroom wall. Lightning rods were only earthed by eight foot electrodes in sand. Bathroom wall plumbing connected to deeper and more conductive limestone. Just another example of how prediction is based more on local details.

Asking about the frequency of strikes to dishes is not informative. Best one can do is determine frequency of strikes to homes. More informative are a number of strikes in the neighborhood in the past decade, which items makes a better electrical connection to earth, and variations in geology.

How often does lightning strike? More than 95% of lightning strikes typically leave no apparent indication. Just another fact that makes prediction hard. One observed that white pines also protect like lightning rods. This NY Times article might provide a better grasp:

However, an answer of the risk to dishes is relevant only with numerous details unique to your neighborhood. Risk to a dish is better understood with lightning history of the past decade unique to your locale.