westom wrote:
On Mar 26, 12:32 am, bud-- wrote:
Do you magically make that energy just disappear? Of course not.
Where the energy goes has often been explained (including this thread)
but w's religious blinders prevent the words from penetrating.

According to Bud, that energy magically disappears. Clamping
somehow make energy disappear? He says that often.

I don't ever say that, but the village idiot just can't understand. To
poor w it is "magic".

As clearly explained in the IEEE guide, plug-in suppressors work
primarily by limiting the voltage on all wires to the ground at the
suppressor. The voltage between wires going to the protected equipment
is safe for the protected equipment. The guide says earthing occurs
elsewhere. Because that violates w's religious belief in earthing his
religious blinders filter out the words.

For power service wires, any surge energy on the neutral is directly
earthed by the required N-G-earthing electrode bond in all US services.
If there is a large surge on hot wires, at about 6,000V there is
arc-over from service panel buses to the enclosure, which is connected
to the earthing electrode. After the arc is established the voltage is
hundreds of volts. That dumps most of the surge energy to earth. This
has been explained numerous times but is filtered off by poor w's
religious blinders.

Martzloff (who was the NIST surge guru) has a technical paper that looks
at the energy that reaches the MOV in a plug-in suppressor. Even with
the maximum probable surge on power wires the energy is 35J or less. In
most cases it was 1J or less. The reason is arc-over, above. Also that a
surge is, by definition, a very short event. That means the current
components are relatively high frequency. So the inductance of the
branch circuit wires is more important than the resistance. The
impedance of the wire is to high to allow much energy reach the plug-in
suppressor. This has also often been explained, but the village idiot
just ignores it.

Just as I wrote in my last post - "where the energy goes has often been
explained (including previously in this thread) but w's religious
blinders prevent the words from penetrating." Poor w just keeps
repeating his lies.


Meanwhile the
NIST (his own citation) says what happens when the protector cannot
connect that energy to earth:

And poor w still can't read what the NIST guide says about plug-in
suppressors:
They are "the easiest solution".
And "one effective solution is to have the consumer install" a multiport
plug-in suppressor.

Or Dr Martzloff who discusses the same problems in his 1994 paper.
A plug-in (point of connection) protector can even cause damage to
nearby appliances. It is the first conclusion in that IEEE paper:
Conclusion:

This is exactly the paper I cited in my previous post - w's religious
blinders prevent him from reading anything that conflicts with his
religious belief in earthing.

At the time of the 1994 paper "multiport" surge suppressors were just a
concept or very new. The *whole point* of the paper was that multiport
suppressors are effective.

w always ignores that Martzloff said in the paper:
"Mitigation of the threat can take many forms. One solution. illustrated
in this paper, is the insertion of a properly designed [multiport
plug-in surge suppressor]."

On alt.engineering.electrical, w similarly misconstrued the views of
Arshad Mansoor, a Martzloff coauthor, and provoked a response from an
electrical engineer:
"I found it particularly funny that he mentioned a paper by Dr. Mansoor.
I can assure you that he supports the use of [multiport] plug-in
protectors. Heck, he just sits down the hall from me. LOL."

And in 2001 Martzloff wrote the NIST guide which says plug-in
suppressors are effective.

Each layer of protection is defined by the only item that makes
surge energy harmless.

"Layers of protection" are described by Martzloff:
"Whole house protection consists of a protective device at the service
entrance complemented by [plug-in surge suppressors] for sensitive
appliances [electronic equipment] within the house."

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.

w's religious mantra protects him from evil thoughts (aka. reality).

Still no link to another lunatic that agrees that plug-in suppressors
are NOT effective.
Why doesn't anyone in the known universe agree with you w???

Still never answered - 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"?
- Why does the NIST guide say "One effective solution is to have the
consumer install" a multiport plug-in suppressor?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the
IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE guide say for distant service points "the only
effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport
[plug-in] protector"?
- Why do your favorite manufacturers make plug-in suppressors?
- Why does favorite manufacturer SquareD say (for their service panel
suppressor) "electronic equipment may need additional protection by
installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use"?
Why can't you answer simple questions w???

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

--
bud--