On Nov 12, 9:44 am, wrote:
The typical surge arriving at an electronic appliance in your house is
not a direct full lightening strike, so this has zero applicability.
...
I'll compare my engineering and technology qualifications against
you're any day, smart guy.
What happens when lightning strikes wires highest on utility poles?
A direct strike to household appliances similar in nature to a direct
lightning strike on a commercial broadcast station, emergency response
center, or telephone CO. Why is an appliance damaged? A direct
strike finds earth ground, destructively, through that appliance. To
lightning, those utility wires connect to your appliances just like an
antenna to a radio station. What do those facilities install -
religiously - for no surge damage? Better earth grounds and no plug-
in protectors. What is the homeowner's solution? Same - but for so
little money.
What happens when using a properly earthed 'whole house' protector?
A homeowner need not install $2000 or $3000 of plug-in protectors.
Now the homeowner can save money and eliminate risk of these scary
pictures:
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/
Let's see. The well proven solution costs tens of times less
money. It eliminates those scary pictures. It makes those grossly
overpriced plug-in protectors unnecessary. It does not earth a surge,
8000 volts destructively, through adjacent appliances; another
engineering fact on Page 42 Figure 8 that trader4 ignores or just does
not comprehend. Page 42 Figure 8 where a plug-in protector (no earth
ground connection) earths the surge destructively through a TV.
Trader4 still refuses to quote numeric specs that cite each type of
surge AND protection from that surge. Based upon technical facts
posted by trader4, he has no idea what different transients are. No
wonder he also associated MOVs with fuses. Manufacture specs are no
help. The manufacturer avoids admitting to surges it does not protect
from. So what are these various surges? Trader4 posts no
manufacturer specs because his knowledge is ... well, the manufacturer
will not even make those claims.
The 15 foot elephant is missing technical facts posted by trader4.
Somehow his denials of engineering and a belief in Bud half truths -
that is knowledge? Trader4 rationalizes "the pamphlet discussed a
plug-in protector; therefore it must protect from the typically
destructive surge". Trader4 - learn the technology. It also says that
earth ground is required to have protection. Why do you conveniently
ignore that part? Ignore that fact and you can claim the plug-in
protector does protect. It is called lying by ignoring the most
important fact. A plug-in protector can do something effective ... if
it has the earth ground that is does not have.
A plug-in protector will protect from one type of surge. A surge
made irrelevant by protection already inside appliances. But trader4
also denies that internal protection exists. He even denies standards
such as IEC1000. He denies because he does not possess necessary
technical knowledge. Trader4 - it is a standard for the technically
informed. I don't expect you to understand it. All you need
understand is that protection inside appliances even makes indirect
surges irrelevant. Protection that may be overwhelmed by the
destructive surge - ie a direct lightning strike to utility wires. No
plug-in protector claims to provide that protection.
Trader4 ignores what responsible engineers do routine for real world
protection. As in every telco switching center, the protector is
close to earth ground, AND up to 50 meters distant from electronics.
Separation between electronics and protector is part of the
protection. Apparently trader4 still does not even grasp the
significance of wire impedance as stated in "Protecting Electrical
Devices from Lightning Transients" at:
http://www.planetanalog.com/showArti...leID=201807127
Trader4, is simple math for wire impedance too complex? Did you
understand why EE Times discusses low wire impedance? Effective
protection means the surge must be earthed by low impedance
connections. That mean the 'less than 10 foot' earthing connection
provide by 'whole house' protectors AND a connection not available on
plug-in protectors. Could they be blunter? Effective protection is
about making a low impedance connection to earth. Effective
protection is not some protector absorbing surges as trader4 claims;
as he learned from retail salesman.
.. Notice engineers (ie the engineer at WXIA) don't post insults to
prove effective protection. Where do they discuss plug-in
protectors? They don't. They are discussing protection that
works ... and that means earthing.
Trader4 - remember earthing - the 15 foot elephant you routinely
ignore because, well, you even deny damage comes from direct lightning
strikes. Meanwhile effective protection from direct lightning strikes
even makes irrelevant trader4's indirect strikes (that are also made
irrelevant by protection inside appliances).
Why does trader4 invent damage from indirect strikes? The plug-in
protector is typically too grossly undersized (and no earthing) to
address direct strike damage. So he invents this straw man - the
indirect strike.
The informed homeowner ignores trader4 since his only prove come
from remarks of disparagement. Do what every responsible
professional recommends. ARRL, US Air Force, every telephone company,
Telcordia, Polyphaser - an industry benchmark, IEEE green, emerald,
and red book (Bud conveniently forgets all those IEEE standards demand
earthing for protection), British Standard 6651, every commercial
broadcasting engineer, all electric companies, rocket launch
facilities, FAA communication towers, ... anyone who cannot have
damage from surges requires earthing for protection. Every high
reliability facility does not use plug-in protectors. They ignore
these trader4 myths. Even Ben Franklin demonstrated the concept in
1752. What provided protection for a church steeple? The connection
to and quality of earthing.
Trader4's denies it. Every responsible source cites earthing as
essential. Earthing is the one system component that must always
exist for protection. Some protector systems don't even use
protectors. But still have that earth ground. From IEEE Standards
that trader4 repeatedly ignores and Bud intentionally misrepresents
(but then profits are at risk):
In actual practice, lightning protection is achieve by the
process of interception of lightning produced surges,
diverting them to ground, and by altering their
associated wave shapes.
From Bud's NIST citation:
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.
From an industry professional:
Well I assert, from personal and broadcast experience spanning
30 years, that you can design a system that will handle *direct
lightning strikes* on a routine basis. It takes some planning and
careful layout, but it's not hard, nor is it overly expensive. At
WXIA-TV, my other job, we take direct lightning strikes nearly
every time there's a thunderstorm. Our downtime from such strikes
is almost non-existant. The last time we went down from a strike,
it was due to a strike on the power company's lines knocking
*them* out, ...
Since my disasterous strike, I've been campaigning vigorously to
educate amateurs that you *can* avoid damage from direct
strikes. The belief that there's no protection from direct strike
damage is *myth*. ...
The keys to effective lightning protection are surprisingly simple,
and surprisingly less than obvious. Of course you *must* have a
single point ground system that eliminates all ground loops. And
you must present a low *impedance* path for the energy to go.
That's most generally a low *inductance* path rather than just a
low ohm DC path.
From the front page article in EE Times:
Providing a flow path for the lightning current is central to
effective lightning protection.
From another industry professional:
Conceptually, lightning protection devices are switches to
ground. Once a threatening surge is detected, a lightning
protection device grounds the incoming signal connection
point of the equipment being protected. Thus, redirecting
the threatening surge on a path-of-least resistance
(impedance) to ground where it is absorbed.
Any lightning protection device must be composed of two
"subsystems," a switch which is essentially some type of
switching circuitry and a good ground connection-to allow
dissipation of the surge energy.
From IEEE Emerald Book which Bud routinely misrepresents:
It is important to ensure that low-impedance grounding and
bonding connections exist among the telephone and data
equipment, the ac power system's electrical safety-grounding
system, and the building grounding electrode system. ...
Failure to observe any part of this grounding requirement
may result in hazardous potential being developed between
the telephone (data) equipment and other grounded items
that personnel may be near or might simultaneously contact.
IEEE Green Book (Standard 142):
Lightning cannot be prevented; it can only be intercepted or
diverted to a path which will, if well designed and constructed,
not result in damage. Even this means is not positive,
providing only 99.5-99.9% protection. ...
Still, a 99.5% protection level will reduce the incidence of direct
strokes from one stroke per 30 years ... to one stroke per
6000 years ...
In an April 1997 discussion among ham radio operators about
protecting everything (including station) from surge damage:
The basic scenario is to install a Single Point Ground System
that is installed at the building entry. It shunts everything to
ground before it goes in the building. If you can keep it
outside, then you don't really have to do much inside. IMO
disconnecting the cables is more psychological than preventive.
From Matthew T. Glennon, P.E.
A surge protection device ... is designed to divert high-
current surges to ground and bypass your equipment,
thereby limiting the voltage that is impressed on the
equipment. For this reason, it is critical that your facility
have a good, low-resistance grounding system, with a
single ground reference point to which the grounds of all
building systems are connected. Without a proper
grounding system, there is no way to protect against
surges.
From the Motorola famous R-56 document:
Any ground length over five feet from equipment to ground rod
is almost useless for protection from a close lightning strike. It
is fine for a electrical safety ground, but too much voltage will
be imposed on the equipment for the equipment to survive from
a close strike.
From Sun Microsystems:
Lightning surges cannot be stopped, but they can be diverted.
The plans for the data center should be thoroughly reviewed
to identify any paths for surge entry into the data center. Surge
arrestors can be designed into the system to help mitigate the
potential for lightning damage within the data center. These
should divert the power of the surge by providing a path to
ground for the surge energy.
From the legendary Polyphaser application notes:
The ideal plan is a single point ground with no sneak paths.
Sneak paths are loops that allow lightning current to flow
into the equipment room.
and
An adequate ground system, designed for lightning fast
rise time current pulses, is essential for long term
equipment survival.
From "Overvoltage Protection of Low Voltage Systems"
... the connection of all metal supply lines entering a building,
including power and communication cables, to the lightning
protection and earthing system by direct junctions across
disconnection spark gaps, or arrestors in the case of live
conductors."
Still trader4 denies that direct strikes cause damage. Trader4
even ignores the engineering reality of these scary pictures:
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/
A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. One properly
earthed 'whole house' protector means no damage. Why waste $2000 or
$3000 for plug-in protectors that don't even claim to provide that
protection? Because plug-in protectors manufactures need those
profits?
The responsible homeowner upgrades earthing to meet and exceed post
1990 NEC requirements and installs a 'whole house' protectors from
responsible companies such as Siemens, Square D, Leviton, GE, Cutler-
Hammer, Intermatic or others. The responsible homeowner need not
waste big bucks on protectors that - well where does it even claim to
provide protection? Where is the connection to "divert it to
ground"? Telcos spend massively less money on 'whole house'
protectors connected to earthing - and do not waste money on plug-in
protectors. That is why telcos can suffer 100 surges during earth
thunderstorm and no damage. These are the facts that trader4 ignores
to believe Bud's myths.
The lurker need not waste money on myths. A 'whole house' protector
is so effective that the telco even installs one on all (your)
subscriber lines, for free. Again, what makes it effective? Follow
a wire from their protector inside the NID to what? Earth ground.
What is always required for effetive protection?
TV coax cable does not even need a protector. A properly installed
cable is earthed directly - no protector - where it enters the
building. And if they see a plug-in protector on your cable, the
cable guy will suggest you remove it. It does nothing useful; only
degrades the cable signal. Why does the cable guy not recommend what
trader4 and Bud promote? Ask who is promoting protection and who is
promoting retail sales propaganda? $150 for a Monster Cable box?
With those profit margins, than honest becomes difficult.