On May 6, 10:13 am, bud-- wrote:
westom wrote:
On May 5, 1:19 pm, bud-- wrote:
I agree that service panel suppressors are a real good idea.
Particularly in high lightning areas, like yours, they should be used.
And I agree that you can have small transients with a service panel
suppressor and short connections of phone and cable entry protectors to
the ground at the power service.
I see nothing in either the IEEE or NIST guides that says plug-in
suppressors are not effective when used alone ...

A
surge is earthed 8000 volts destructively through the adjacent TV

The lie repeated. The suppressor that protects TV1 does no damage to TV2.


This is a perfect example of how Tom takes anything and everything out
of context and turns it into an outright lie. Here is what the text
associated with figure 8 actually says. Pay special attention to the
last sentence:

"Figure 8: Ground potential differences within a building under
lightning strike
conditions: how down-line TV sets get damaged. With a 3,000A surge
rising in 3 ìs,
and a 30 foot ground bond (A-C), ~10,000 V develops between A and C.
Even with a
multi-port protector (D) for TV1, the ground voltage at D is conveyed
to TV2 by the
coaxial cable, resulting in an 8,000 V potential across TV2, which
will probably destroy
it. A second multi-port protector as shown in Fig. 7 is required to
protect TV2"



Clearly the IEEE did not say that the damage at TV2 is CAUSED in any
way by the surge surpressor on TV1. And they clearly say that using
a plug-in surge protector on TV2 would protect it, which is 180 deg
opposite of everything that Tom says.