w_tom wrote:
On Apr 21, 12:29 pm, bud-- wrote:
The last plug-in suppressor I bought (about $25) had 1 MOV that was
1475J, 75,000A and 2 that were 590J 30,000A. w_ will likely ignore this
and continue to ask for specs, as usual.

A plug-in protector uses maybe 1/3rd and never more than 2/3rds of
it joules in protection.

Poor w_ can invent the stupidest arguments. 75,000A, the MOV that takes
most of the hit, is far larger than needed in a service panel
suppressor. There is no possibility of getting that current on a branch
circuit. The high value just goes with the high energy ratings.

Investigation by the author of the NIST guide with surges up to 10,000A
on a branch circuit with a MOV at the end found in 13 of 15 cases the
amount of energy absorbed by the MOV was less than 1.2J. The maximum was
35J. Arc-over at the panel and impedance of the branch circuit simply
limit the current, and thus energy, that can reach a plug-in suppressor.
The ratings in my suppressor are far over what it will see making the
likelihood of ever failing essentially zero.


Bud still provides not one plug-in manufacturer spec that actually
claims protection.

What an idiot.

One whole house' protector costs about $1 per protected
appliance.

Counting light bulbs and switches as "appliances".

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground

And the required statement of religious belief in earthing. Poor w_’s
religious blinders prevent him from reading in the IEEE guide that
plug–in suppressors work primarily by clamping, not earthing.

Still missing - link another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are
NOT effective.

Still missing – answers to simple questions:
- 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.
Attempts to discredit opponents.
w_ is a purveyor of junk science.


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

--
bud--