On 10/23/2015 11:12 AM, westom wrote:
On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 9:26:20 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
"A few panel protectors have circuitry that allows them to combine a low
surge limiting voltage with the capability to withstand 240 VAC
phase-neutral voltage. However, they do not stop the excess voltage
from passing to the connected equipment downstream. Plug-in
(point-of-use, or supplementary protectors) are the main defense
against sustained AC overvoltage events. For complete protection,
plug-in protectors should be used in conjunction with the panel
protectors described here. These SPDs are normally located at the
protected equipment and are discussed in Section 5 of this Guide."

Again trader_4 demonstrates no basic electrical knowledge. His quote describes a completely different transient that typically does not damage appliances. Basic electrical knowledge about longitudinal and transverse mode currents is so obviously unknown. Destructive currents seek earth ground. Those surges do damage. Those currents need not hunt for earth destructively via appliances IF properly earthed before entering.

trader_4 describes protection from a completely different transient already made irrelevant by how appliances are designed. Plug-in (point of use) protectors are only supplementary protection. Only effective if used in conjunction with the 'whole house' solution. Used alone (as trader_4 recommends) is ineffective for so many reasons.

trader_4 claims plug-in protectors are complete protection. He knows because advertising and hearsay says so. Near zero joule devices can be overwhelmed (even create fire) if used without the 'whole house' protection. A problem seen in 1986, 2003, and today.

Somehow trader_4 is an expert because he quotes out of context. He is obviously technically naive which explains his mockery and many personal attacks. Also explains why his every claim never includes numbers. For example, at what point does he say how his 'magic box' solution absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules? He ignores glaring inconsistencies as he also ignores what Martzloff said repeatedly. A plug-in (point of connection) protector can even make equipment damage easier.

He cannot cite numbers. His knowledge comes from subjective speculation. He does not even understand what his own quotes say. He does not even know how a 'whole house' protector works. He does not know the different between longitudinal and transverse mode currents. Somehow that magic box that can only absorb hundreds of joules will magically absorb a surge that is hundreds of thousands of joules. He knows because he has no electrical knowledge and routinely ignores numbers.

Essential for protecting any appliances or HVAC equipment is a properly earthed 'whole house'. Even a plug-in (point of use) protector (some found inside HVAC equipment) needs that protection. Since one protector can even compromise protection inside any nearby appliance - Figure 8 page 33. Plug-in protectors can even earth a surge destructively via any nearby appliance. Best protection that costs tens or 100 times less money is properly earthed 'whole house' protection.

The IEEE does not just define effective 'whole house' protection in that brochure. IEEE Red Book says:
lightning protection is achieve by the process of
interception of lightning produced surges, diverting
them to ground, and by altering their associated
wave shapes.

What is that? Clearly not a plug-in protector. Obviously 'whole house' protection.

IEEE Emerald Book:
It is important to ensure that low-impedance
grounding and bonding connections exist among
the telephone and data equipment, the ac power
system's electrical safety-grounding system,
and the building grounding electrode system. ...
Failure to observe any part of this grounding
requirement may result in hazardous potential
being developed between the telephone (data
equipment and other grounded items

What is that solution? Clearly not a plug-in protector. Obviously 'whole house' protection.

From a Martzloff 1993 paper:
The problem of threatening voltage differences created
along the return path of a surge diverted at the end of
a branch circuit can also be reduced by other means.
High current surges on the power system ... are best
diverted at the service entrance of the premises.

Threatening voltage on a branch circuit is created by a plug-in protector as described by Martzloff in this and other papers. And by Figure 8 page 33. But as he says, that damage to adjacent appliances is best reduced by the 'whole house' solution.

Again numbers from IEEE standards. A 'whole house' protector does "99.5% to 99.9% protection". Then use plug-in protectors to provide maybe another 0.2% protection. The tens or 100 times less expensive 'whole house' solution is for surges that typically do damage - hundreds of thousand of joules. Plug-in protectors are for the residual currents that might exist - that are typically made irrelevant by protection already inside all equipment.

Summarized is why plug-in protectors cause fires. What happens when hundreds of joules try to absorb destructive surges - hundreds of thousands of joules. The Fire Marshal (that trader_4 ignores) describes what happens. Fire is another reason why informed consumers earth one 'whole house' protector. Despite trader_4's denials, even his own citation says a typically destructive surge can be 20,000 amps. So a mininal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Despite trader_4's denials, any protector that fails did not provide effective protection.

How many things did he get wrong? Too many to count. Informed homeowners do what has been proven protection for over 100 years - earth a 'whole house' protector.

What in that brochure does he forget? Brochure says the 'whole house' protector is needed to protect plug-in protectors.
... three requirements of the service entrance SPD:
2) To reduce the surge current to the downstream SPDs.

Because downstream (near zero joule) plug-in protector must be protected so as to even not cause house fires.


You sure know a lot about this subject. Are you an electrician?

--
Maggie