"bud--" wrote in message
.. .
w_tom wrote:
On Jul 18, 2:53 am, bud-- wrote:
The best information on surges and surge protection I have seen is form
the
IEEE:http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guide...ion_May051.pdf
And also the
NIST:http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/p.../surgesfnl.pdf
Finally the industry promoter has arrived to 'cut and paste' half
truths. From those citations are reality that Bud refuses to
acknowledge. He cannot. Profits are just too high.
To quote the all-knowing w_ “It is an old political trick. When facts
cannot be challenged technically, then attack the messenger."
My “half truths” come from the IEEE and NIST. w_’s opinions come from his
religious belief in earthing - with no sources.
Page 42 Figure 8 of his first citation shows a protector too far
from earth ground. Protector too close to electronics. And a defective
earthing system. Therefore 8000 volts finds earth ground
destructively through adjacent TVs. Bud claims that earthing is not
necessary. it is necessary to sell protectors at gross profit. But
Page 42 figure 8 shows, a protector without proper earthing can even
destroy the TV. A protector too close to TV earths a surge 8000 volts
destructively through that TV. It was not a 'whole house' protector.
Therefore it was too far from earth ground.
The illustration in the IEEE guide has a surge coming in on a CATV drop.
There are 2 TVs, one is on a plug-in suppressor. The plug-in suppressor
protects TV1 connected to it.
Without the plug-in suppressor the surge voltage at TV2 is 10,000V. With
the suppressor at TV1 the voltage at TV2 is 8,000V. It is simply a *lie*
that the plug-in suppressor at TV1 in any way contributes to the damage at
TV2.
The point of the illustration for the IEEE, and anyone who can think, is
"to protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required."
w_ says suppressors must only be at the service panel. In this example a
service panel protector would provide absolutely *NO* protection. The
problem is the wire connecting the CATV entry block to the power service
is too long (not a “single point ground”). As I said in my previous post,
the IEEE guide says in that case "the only effective way of protecting the
equipment is to use a multiport protector.”
Because plug-in suppressors violate w_’s religious belief in earthing he
has to distort what the IEEE guide says about them.
Bud repeately insists that earthing is not required for protection.
Poor w_ can’t figure out that my last post covered earthing, as do both
guides .
And because plug–in suppressors violate w_’s religious belief in earthing
he can’t understand how they work. Repeating from my last post: “The IEEE
guide explains plug-in suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all
wires (signal and power) to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in
suppressors do not work primarily by earthing. The guide explains
earthing occurs elsewhere. (Read the guide starting pdf page 40).”
But his second citation says otherwise. From page 6 (Adobe page 8 of
24) of
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/p.../surgesfnl.pdf
The question is not about earthing. The only question is whether plug-in
suppressors work.
What does the NIST guide really say about plug-in suppressors?
They are "the easiest solution".
and:
"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,
No for two-link appliances [equipment connected to power AND phone or CATV
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."
Because plug-in suppressors violate w_’s religious belief in earthing he
has to distort what the NIST guide says about them.
One 'whole house' protector does so
much more because, well, notice it has the essential earthing wire.
These products are available in Lowes, Home Depot, and electrical
supply houses. Some are avialable for less than $50.
w_ has never provided a link to the mythical $50 ‘whole house protector’.
Or specs for one.
Yet another claim w_ can't back up with a source.
Meanwhile, Bud will do anything to avoid discussing single point
earth ground.
If w_ could only read and think he would have seen single point ground was
a major point in my last post.
Even
his own citations define earthing as necessary. He ignores that
reality. Bud ignores earthing since products he promotes have no
earthing. Earth ground - not a protector - is the protection. A
protector simply connects a surge to protection.
And the religious belief in earthing again.
The question is not earthing – everyone is for it. The only question is
whether plug-in suppressors work. Both the IEEE and NIST guides say
plug-in suppressors are effective. Read the sources.
There are 98,615,938 other web sites, including 13,843,032 by lunatics,
and w_ can't find another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are NOT
effective. All you have is w_'s opinions based on his religious belief in
earthing.
Never explained by w_:
- 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".
Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
Never any sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Twists opposing sources to say the opposite of what they really say.
Invents opinions and attributes them to opponents.
Attempts to discredit opponents.
w_ is a purveyor of junk science.
--
bud--
Your comments are supported by my field experience. We see lightning damaged
tuners and inputs all the time. The are never connected through surge
suppressors on the cable or sat line. We have hundreds of installs WITH
surge suppressors that never see any damage. w_tom IS correct about them
importance of grounding, up to a point. He consistently ignores the fact
that clamping does not assume that ground is always the lowest potential,
nor that clamping does not necessarily require earthing to be effective.
MOVs just dump current when their clamping voltage is exceeded. They
require a voltage difference, not an earth ground. Earthing is important,
but it is not the whole story. He simply does not tell the whole story and
ignores a great deal of context. He is a perfect example of how a lot of
knowledge can be made useless, or even harmful, when it is misapplied.
Leonard