w_tom wrote:


Trader4 implies a protector will disconnect an appliance to stop a
surge. That surge could not be stopped by three miles of sky. How
does an MOV or fuse then stop or limit it?

Misquotes treader4 (a favorite w_ tactic).

My comments are in addition to trader4's response to w_’s dogma.


Bud's citations also say a protector too close to
appliances and too far from earth ground may earth a surge .... 8000
volts destructively ... through the adjacent electronics.

The lie repeated. See my other post.

Why no listing for
each type of surge AND no protection from that surge?

Why don’t w_’s favored SquareD service panel suppressors list “each
type of surge”? Because it is bullcrap.

How does a common mode surge (H and N lift from ground) get past the N-G
bond in all US services? Never explained.

That is the point of Page 42 Figure 8. No earth
ground connection. So it earths a surge 8000 volts through the TV.

The lie repeated #2.


Where does the IEEE make recommendations? Not in pamphlets. IEEE
makes recommendation in standards. What does the IEEE Standard 141
(Red Book) say?

The IEEE Emerald book ("IEEE Recommended Practice for Powering and
Grounding Sensitive Electronic Equipment"), an IEEE standard, recognizes
plug-in suppressors as an effective protection device. This is the most
appropriate IEEE standard for protecting electronics.

And the IEEE guide, which was published by the IEEE, says plug-in
suppressors are effective. This “pamphlet” was peer-reviewed by the IEEE
and “was written to make the information developed by the [IEEE] more
accessible to electricians, architects, technicians, and electrical
engineers who were not protection specialists.”


If a dedicated connection to earth ground does not
exist? Page 42 Figure 8. An 8000 volt surge gets earthed
destructively through the adjacent TV.

The lie repeated #3.

Therefore the surge now has more wires to find earth
ground, 8000 volts destructively, through the adjacent TV.

The lie repeated #4.

We have traced surges doing just that. In one
case study, plug-in protectors on some networked computers earthed a
surge into those adjacent computers.

Repeating:
“Note that all interconnected equipment needs to be connected to the
same plug-in suppressor, or interconnecting wires need to go through the
suppressor. External connections, like phone, also need to go through
the suppressor. Connecting all wiring through the suppressor prevents
damaging voltages between power and signal wires. These multiport
suppressors are described in both guides.”


That engineering knowledge is not displayed by
trader4. Trader4 has only posted what retail store salesmen claim.

Geez trader - you’re sure stupid.

But then plug-in protectors often have that problem
- too few MOVs (are so grossly undersized). A surge strikes protector
and computer simultaneously (see how the protector is wired).
Protection inside a computer is so robust that the computer is
unharmed. But the protector inside a power strip is so grossly
undersized as to fail - as trader4 says "blown out".

LOL.

The impedance of the branch circuit greatly limits the current, and thus
energy, that can reach a plug-in suppressor. With high ratings, that are
readily available, a plug-in suppressor will likely never fail. That is
why warrantees can be offered on protected equipment.

The IEEE guide describes at length how the protected load can be
connected across the MOVs, and be disconnected if the MOVs fail and are
disconnected. Or the protected load can be connected across the incoming
line. In the first case, the protected load is ‘protected’ if the MOVs
fail. (This can’t be done with a service panel suppressor.)


But that does not get the naive to promote more
sales of grossly overpriced plug-in protectors - including $150 models
from Monster Cable.

A problem for w_ because he only buys Monster products.


Grossly undersized plug-in protectors sometimes create these scary
pictures:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554

The other lie repeated.

Take a $3 power strip. Apply
some expensive paint. Install some $0.10 protector components.

Question not answered - repeating:
“One of the MOVs in a plug-in suppressor I recently bought has a rating
of 75,000A and 1475Joules. Provide a source for that MOV for $0.10.”


No earth ground means energy cannot be dissipated in earth. So
where is that energy dissipated?

Repeating:
“The guide explains earthing occurs elsewhere.” In the example in the
IEEE guide it is through the ‘ground’ wire from the cable entry block to
the power service (too long).


No earth ground
means no effective protection.

The required statement of religious belief in earthing.


If may shunt that energy 8000 volts
destructively through the adjacent TV (Page 42 Figure 8)

The lie repeated #5

Why does the datasheet cite 15,000 volt protection?

Provide a link. 15,000V will arc across about 0.75 inches.


Trader4 provides only one thing. Denial.

w_ provides only one thing. Denial.


No earth ground means no effective protection.

Statement of religious belief in earthing #2.

Bud who
promotes for plug-in protector manufacturers.

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.

With no technical arguments, w_ has to discredit those that oppose him.

By the way w_, what are your connections to surge protection equipment
manufacturers?
Specifically ZeroSurge?


w_tom took it up with the IEEE and learned what is required for
effective protection long ago. w_tom built surge protectors to learn
what does and does not work. w_tom traced direct lightning strikes
to learn why damage occurred.

w_tom can’t figure out what the IEEE or NIST guides say.


Who should we believe? Trader4 who has yet to cite a technical
fact.

Who should we believe? w_, who has NO sources that say plug-in
suppressors do not work. Or trader4 who cites the IEEE and NIST guides.
Gee - that’s a tough one.


No earth ground means no effective protection.

Statement of religious belief in earthing #3.

Page
42 Figure 8 - it may earth that surge 8000 volts destructively through
the nearby TV.

The lie repeated #6.

Both the IEEE and NIST guides say plug-in suppressors are effective.
Read the sources.

Still no link to another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are NOT
effective. Why no sources w_??? Doesn’t anyone agree with you??

Never any answers:
- 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"?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE Emerald book include plug-in suppressors as an
effective surge protection device.

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--