On Apr 23, 5:59 pm, wrote:
OK, now we have Tom's list of the "responsible" companies who know all
about surge protection. Funny thing though, most of these responsible
companies on the list actually sell plug in surge protectors as part
of their product lines.

Names of responsible manufacturers were provided for years. Did
trader only read enough to criticize? Why did trader not see this
list (and others) posted repeatedly for years? Reading selectively?
He did not even read the EE Times article entitled "Protecting
Electrical Devices from Lightning Transients".

If the consumer is so wealthy and so poorly informed as to spend
tens of times more money on plug-in protectors, then I also would sell
one to him. Profits are just too obscenely massive to ignore. But I
would also recommend and provide effective protectors as responsible
manufacturers also do. Which companies sell protectors that actually
provide protection? Not APC. Not the $150 Monster Cable. Not
Tripplite, Not Belkin. And not the grocery store where a same
protector is sold for much less money.

Surge protection means surge energy must be dissipated in earth.
Plug-in promoters hype myths: protector absorbs all that energy,
'clamps to nothing', or make surge energy disappear. No science
supports those myths. But that is what a plug-in protector must do to
protect from surges that typically create damage.

No earth ground means no effective protection. Worse, plug-in
protectors (when the building does not have a properly earthed 'whole
house' protector) can even contribute to appliance damage - ie Page 42
Figure 8 and that network of powered off computers.

Facilities that must suffer direct lightning strikes to incoming
wires without damage always uses 'whole house' type protection.
Always. Often used is the same solution that protects munitions from
direct lightning strikes - Ufer grounds. In every case, earth ground
and 'whole house' protectors are carefully installed. In FL where
damage is not acceptable and where earth has poor conductivity, this
provides protection:
http://members.aol.com/gfretwell/ufer.jpg

Others do same so that direct lightning strikes need not cause
damage:
http://scott-inc.com/html/ufer.htm
http://www.psihq.com/iread/ufergrnd.htm
http://www.copper.org/applications/e.../nebraska.html
http://home1.gte.net/res0958z/

QST (the ARRL official magazine) has numerous articles on surge
protection. Every one discusses what? Not plug-in protectors.
Earthing is what every article discussed for no surge damage. Whose
household electronics are at greatest risk? Ham radio operators:
http://www.eham.net/articles/6848?eh...61e080ac23c416
Electrical Code vs. Good RF Grounding by K9KJM on November 22,
2003
Those who say "nothing will withstand a direct lightning strike" are
very misinformed. My towers take direct lightning hits most every
big storm. So do most all tall commercial towers. With NO damage!
Those old wives tales of damage are for the most part over 50 year
old tales of woe from improperly grounded/ protected stations.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) in alt.tv.tech.hdtv on 9 May
2006 in "Is HDTV really user friendly? Options":
That tower takes a direct lightning strike about three times a summer. ...
Simply grounding the TV antenna by itself may or may not make things
worse rather than better. What's required is called a single point ground
where all of the grounds tie together

Bud routinely responds that homeowners do not have ham radio
antennas. Correct. Instead, homeowner appliances are connected to an
'antenna equivalent' wire. To lightning, AC electric wires are
'antennas' connected directly to every household appliance. Same
protection learned in early 1900 radio stations is now implemented in
all homes for about $1 per protected appliance. A less expensive
solution is also the superior one - a properly earthed 'whole house'
protector. Same solution used routinely in radio stations where
surges must not create damage.

Your cable company will recommend removing a plug-in protector from
their cable. Cable already has effective protection without any
protector. Responsible cable companies make that 'less than 10 foot'
connection to earthing using only a wire and ground block. Bud will
claim that is not sufficient. A properly earthed cable (short
connection to single point earth ground) provides complete cable
protection:
Richard Harrison in rec.radio.amateur.antenna on 26 Jan 2004 in
"Damaged by a lightning?":
...we did use a separate ground rod en each tower leg. This was
lightning protection. We also used closed circuit antennas
grounded at the tops of the towers. Coax rejects
common-mode lightning energy. We used zero protection
across coax and never had a burnt transistor receiver front-end.

What makes the Intermatic 'whole house' protector so effective? A
short connection to single point earth ground. How do we make that
one protector even better? Money wasted on plug-in protectors,
instead, is put into better earthing. A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. How many more professionals are quoted
here?

From QST July 2002 "Lightning Protection ..."
The purpose of the ground connection is to take the energy
arriving on the antenna feed line cables and control lines
(and to a lesser extent on the power and telephone lines)
and give it a path back to the earth, our energy sink. The
impedance of the ground connection should be low so the
energy prefers this path and is dispersed harmlessly. To
achieve a low impedance the ground connection needs to be
short (distance), straight, and wide.

How curious. This is also what makes the Intermatic surge protector
so effective. And this is what plug-in promoters must deny or ignore
to promote their obscenely profitable products. The Intermatic is
only as effective as its earth ground. A plug-in protector has no
earthing. Or we cut its power cord as short as possible, connect to
as close as possible the breaker box, and hope that provides at least
some earthing.