On Nov 11, 7:49 am, wrote:
..., but it doesn't mean that plug-in surge protectors don't work
or are useless. One of my favorites from w_tom is that all the
appliances already have surge protection inside. So, which
would MOV would you rather have take that big spike and
possible get blown out? A $15 surge protector or a $2000 TV?
Why let propaganda distort your thinking? If the MOV is blown out,
then it provided no protection. Nada. Effective protectors MUST
earth a surge and remain functional. Why does a plug-in protector
fail during a surge? Why is it so grossly undersized? That failure
promotes more sales. A surge way too small to overwhelm protection
inside that $2000 TV or dishwasher, instead, destroyed the grossly
undersized plug-in protector? What kind of protection is that?
Ineffective and so expensive. But the protector enriches the
manufacturer.
Plug-in protectors will even earth surges destructively through
adjacent appliances. Review Bud's citations. A protector must earth
a surge - not absorb it. How does a plug-in protector earth without
a 'less than 10 foot' dedicated earthing wire? It does not. But then
it does not even claim such protection in its own numeric specs. Its
purpose is profits; not protection.
Learn why plug-in protectors may even earth surges destructively
through appliances. The surge must be earthed somewhere. Page 42
Figure 8 in
http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guide...ion_May051.pdf
A plug-in protector too close to an appliance has earthed a surge
*8000 volts destructively* through an adjacent TV. Where is the
protection? That protector - earthing a surge through the TV - has
done what its manufacture claims. It does not claim to protect from
the type of surge that typically causes damage. By being grossly
undersized (ineffective), you have assumed a blown out protector
provided protection? A blown out protector even violates every MOV
manufacturer spec. Acceptable MOV failure means never vaporizing. But
vaporizing gets the naive to promote more profits - recommend those
grossly undersized protectors.
A 'blown out' MOV is even a safety hazard - completely unacceptable.
Do you really believe it will absorb the energy from three miles of
lightning? They need you to 'feel' that one inch part stops or
absorbs what three miles of sky could not stop. Show me a single MOV
designed to do that - and good luck. Bud needs you to 'feel' it
protects by absorbing the entire surge - sacrificing itself. If you
learn the science, then profits are at risk. No effective protector
does that stopping or absorbing. But when a plug-in protector is
undersized, scary pictures may result:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
http://www.westwhitelandfire.com/Art...Protectors.pdf
http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm
http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html :
http://tinyurl.com/3x73ol or
http://www.esdjournal.com/techpapr/P...OR%20FIRES.doc
http://www3.cw56.com/news/articles/local/BO63312/
MOVs are no longer inside appliances because MOVs adjacent to the
appliance (on power cord or inside) are not effective. All appliances
have long contained internal protection - and no MOVs. MOVs must be
AT earth ground. Bud's citation even defines the effective
protector. From page 6 (Adobe page 8 of 24) of
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/p.../surgesfnl.pdf
You cannot really suppress a surge altogether, nor "arrest"
it. What these protective devices do is neither suppress nor
arrest a surge, but simply divert it to ground, where it can do
no harm. So a name that makes sense would be "surge
diverter" but it was not picked. So, for the rest of this booklet,
we will stick to the most popular "surge protector".
Where does it say anything about absorbing energy to be 'blown
out'? It does not. It *diverts* - and it remains functional. Blown
out is how to promote more sales of protectors that don't even claim
to provide protection.
Divert it to where? Where is surge energy dissipated? Earth
ground. With a 6 foot power cord on a plug-in protector, how will it
make a 'less than 10 foot' connection? Wire length (not diameter)
mostly determines wire impedance. The effective surge protector must
have a low impedance connection to earth. That means 'less than 10
feet'. A plug-in protector too far from earth ground is for profits;
not protection. Does not even claim to provide protection. View it
yourself. Its numeric specs do not even list or claim to protection
from the typically destructive type of surge. Bud will never post
that number because the number does not exist. A $15 plug-in
protector (or same one sold in Circuit City or Radio Shack for $150)
does not even claim to provide that protection.
But its called a protector. Therefore it must be protection? Junk
science reasoning. Even its own specs do not claim to protect from the
typically destructive surge.
You would spend 15 times more money ($15) and still not protect that
$2000 TV?
A grossly undersized protector's MOV may vaporize so you will
believe myths. See those scary pictures that demonstrate plug-in
protectors. Bud hopes you ignore those scary pictures including a
latest fire in Boston or the NC Fire Marshall's report on why plug-in
protector create fires. Effective MOVs make a short ('less than 10
foot') connection to earth ground AND is best located far from
appliances. That effective solution is the 'whole house' protector -
costing tens of times less money. No earth ground means no effective
protection.
Why does your telephone CO not shutdown during every thunderstorm?
It connects to overhead wires everywhere in town. According to Bell
System Tech Journal papers, the CO may suffer about 100 surges during
every thunderstorm. Why does their telephone switching computer
suffer no damage? One 'whole house' protector is located where each
wire enters the building, where the protector connects directly to
earth ground, AND up to 50 meters separation from electronics.
*Separation* between electronics and protector is important for
protection. Oh. They don't waste money on plug-in protectors? They
don't want protectors that can even contribute to electronics damage
or create scary pictures. A protector is only as effective as its
earth ground. Effective protector is at earth ground AND is separated
from the $2000 TV.
You actually believe a 'blown out' MOV provides protection? A
'blown out' MOV even violates manufacturer specs. But a 'blown out'
MOV gets the naïve to promote more sales. Telcos don't waste tens of
times more money for ineffective protection. Why would you? Why
would you use a protector that may earth surges destructively through
your $2000 TV?