On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 12:12:32 PM UTC-4, 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.
Well, if that's true, then take it up with IEEE or NIST, it's
their words not mine.
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.
Really ? Still waiting for the explanation of how the small MOVs inside
an appliance can make surges "irrelevant", with no earth ground, but
a plug-in is not only not effective, but actually causes damage.
Only effective if used in conjunction with the 'whole house' solution. Used alone (as trader_4 recommends) is ineffective for so many reasons.
That isn't what Martzloff who you cite as an authority says.
In his own words, in context, with a link so anyone can verify it:
http://pml.nist.gov/spd-anthology/fi...es_happen!.pdf
"Plug-in Surge Protectors
This is the easiest solution and there are a wide variety of brands
in the stores. These come in two forms: a box that plugs directly
into a wall receptacle or a strip with a power cord and multiple outlets."
trader_4 claims plug-in protectors are complete protection.
I never said any such thing.
Somehow trader_4 is an expert because he quotes out of context.
Actually, I've provided many links so that anyone interested can
look at and read what is really there. It fully supports everything
I've said. YOU are the one taking things 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.
What Martzloff actually says, in his own words, in context, with a link
so anyone can verify it:
http://pml.nist.gov/spd-anthology/fi...es_happen!.pdf
"Plug-in Surge Protectors
This is the easiest solution and there are a wide variety of brands
in the stores. These come in two forms: a box that plugs directly
into a wall receptacle or a strip with a power cord and multiple outlets."
He cannot cite numbers.
Wrong, I've cited the IEEE and NIST.
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.
That's a new one. HVAC equipment now has plug-in surge protectors
inside? Good grief!
Since one protector can even compromise protection inside any nearby appliance - Figure 8 page 33.
Fig 8 page 33 clearly ends with that to protect the second damaged TV,
another multiport plug-in surge protector is required.
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.
Says who? You?
Read what NIST, IEEE say.