On Friday, October 4, 2013 7:05:50 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Friday, October 4, 2013 11:22:13 AM UTC-4, wrote:
And you have two EE's here, Bud and myself, telling you you're
friend is wrong. But more importantly, you have the IEEE
surge protection guide that was written by not just electrical
engineers, but a half dozen or so who are experts in surge
protection.
IEEE papers even say plug-in protectors alone (no properly earthed 'whole house' protector) can make damage to appliances easier. I even quoted Martzloff's paper that says that.
See, this is how it works. You've already taken the IEEE guide to
surge protection and completely misrepresented what it actually says.
You took two figures that show plug-in surge protectors being used
successfully for surge protection and tried to turn it 180 deg opposite
of what it really says. So, I've asked for the link, the reference so
that we can all see what Martzloff actually says, in context. Does he
say plug-in surge protectors cannot and should not be used as part
of a tiered surge protection strategy? That they are useless because
they have no earth ground? I've asked for the link, but so far all
we have are crickets.
Unlike you, I did this stuff even decades ago as an EE. Not just educated. Also have experience doing this. We learned even from mistakes.
I'm sure there were plenty of those.....
We traced surges earthed by power strip protectors destructively through hardware.
LOL. I'm sure that was a fair, impartial and unbiased evaluation.
When you start with all the faulty premises you've outlined here
and a religious war against surge protectors, I could tell you where
you'd end up before you even started.
Traced paths for that current. And then replaced each semiconductor in that path to make all computers functional.
Every damaged part was in a path from an ineffective plug-in protector to earth ground.
Of course it was, because it's that way by definition, according to you.
Computers never failed again when replaced as obsolete. Why? We earth a 'whole house' protector to make future surges irrelevant. So that all types of surges no longer caused damage.
Calling bud an EE is bogus. He did not even know many concepts taught in first semester EE courses. He did not even know about wire impedance. Did not know difference between normal mode and longitudinal mode currents. He did not even know all phone lines already had 'whole house' protectors. He did not know concepts that must be known to understand what protectors really do. He claimed that a protector somehow makes energy just disappear.
I've seen Bud post here for many years now on a wide array of
home repair topics, mostly EE related. The above is yet another lie.
I've never seen Bud say any of the nonsense you attribute to him.
His advice, knowledge has always been sound. And when needed, he
backs it up with links. Just like he's done here. Where are your
links that say plug-in surge protectors can't provide any protection?
You on the other hand, I've asked a simple question about Ohm's
Law generating a massive voltage difference right at your whole
house surge protector that takes the 20K amp hit, your own number.
Yet you refuse to answer the simple question of how that 20K+ volts
doesn't still present a serious surge to the wiring in the building.
A 'whole house' protector is protection from all types of destructive surges - from lightning down to surges that even do not harm appliances. Plug-in protectors can contribute only if the always required earthing and a 'whole house' protector exist.
Not true. The IEEE guide shows it on page 33.
He was an electrician who became a sales promoter of surge protectors.
Now you're really off into cuckoo land.
So he posts insults rather than quote facts and numbers from Martzloff and other industry professional. He does not even know that most of protection is always provided by earthing and 'whole house' protectors.
Never once does he or you post a single plug-in protector specification numbers that defines protection from typically destructive surges. For good reason. No manufacturer makes that numeric claim.
Sigh, there you go lying again. You've asked that over and over. The
last time was maybe a week ago. I gave you the specs and a link.
Here is another example from APC:
http://www.apc.com/products/resource...?base_sku=P8GT
Output
Number of Outlets
8
Receptacle Style
NEMA 5-15R
Input
Nominal Input Voltage
120V
Input Frequency
50/60 Hz
Input Connections
NEMA 5-15P NEMA 5-15P
Cord Length
1.83 meters
Maximum Input Current
15A
Surge Protection and Filtering
Surge energy rating
2160 Joules
EMI/RFI Noise rejection (100 kHz to 10 MHz)
58 dB
Peak Current Common Mode
144 kAmps
NM Surge Response Time (ns)
1 ns
Data Line Protection
RJ-11 Modem/Fax protection (two wire single line)
Let Through Voltage Rating
400
In every case, what do professionals define as essential for protection? Earth ground.
IEEE Guide repeatedly says why effective protector are earthed. Page 33 figure 8 show a plug-in protector earthing a surge 8000 volts destructively through nearby appliances ... because that surge was not earthed BEFORE entering the building. That protector earthed a surges on the best path - 8000 volts destructively through TV2. It was doing what the manufacturer said it would do.
That diagram shows TV1 with a plug-in protected from a surge.
It shows TV2, with no plug-in damaged by the same surge.
IEEE then states:
"A second multi-port protector as shown in Fig. 7 is required to protect TV2"
Only a village idiot would conclude that the the IEEE is saying
that the surge protector on TV1 "caused" the damage on TV2. Or that
the IEEE position is anything other than endorsing the use of plug-in
surge protectors as part of surge protection.
Paragraphs after paragraph from that Guide are quoted here defining earth ground as essential for protection. You ignore those paragraphs to continue promoting protectors that have no earth ground? You even thought bud was an EE? Please. He did not even know concepts taught to first semester engineers.
Again, no one here has said that a properly earthed whole house surge
protector is not effective, that it's not the best FIRST LINE of defense.
What you ignore that is right there in the IEEE guide is that plug-in
surge protectors can be used as part of a tiered strategy. They are
essential to protect appliances, eg TV, PC, that are connected to more
wiring than just AC.
Scary is that you actually think bud has electrical engineering training. He does not even understand basic EE concepts that electricians are never taught and need not know. He even thought impedance and resistance were same.
I'm an electrical engineer myself and you've accused me of some of
the same things you're accusing Bud of. You don't even believe the
half dozen authors of the IEEE surge protection guide. In fact, you
lie and distort what they actually say. Is that what they taught you
in science and engineering?