Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic Whole
House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms in the
past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our furnace ! The
Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80 or so.

Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or closed
?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a big hit,
such that the unit would have to be removed prior to re-initiating service ?

Thanks,
Bob

On Apr 17, 10:38*am, "Robert11" wrote:
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic Whole
House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. *Have had several large lightning storms in the
past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our furnace ! * The
Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80 or so.

Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? *Thoughts on ?

BTW: *If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or closed
?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a big hit,
such that the unit would have to be removed prior to re-initiating service ?

Thanks,
Bob

After a major strike costed our insurance co 10000 + we installed one
and a Lightning arrestor, there is better stuff out there but it costs
more. An electrician that hasnt used one? Maybe you need one who is up
to date on these issues and what you really need.

In article ,
"Robert11" wrote:

Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic Whole
House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms in the
past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our furnace ! The
Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80 or so.

Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or closed
?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a big hit,
such that the unit would have to be removed prior to re-initiating service ?

Thanks,
Bob

I'd guess that for $80, you're just buying a single premium lightening
strike insurance policy. If you want actual protection, look to the
professional stuff:

http://www.lightningprotectioncor.com/

Give my friend Chester a call out there and he can recommend something.

On Apr 17, 11:38 am, "Robert11" wrote:
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic Whole
House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms in the
past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our furnace ! The
Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80 or so.

Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or closed
?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a big hit,
such that the unit would have to be removed prior to re-initiating service ?

Thanks,
Bob

From what I see on the web, the unit would be fed through a standard
15A dual-pole breaker, so if it shorted, the breaker would trip, and
you'd be running normally, with no protection, until you replaced the
unit (and maybe the breaker).

The write up on the LPS unit, which another responder has linked to,
says it pretty clearly: "These SPD’s are not repairable. A defective
SPD fails short circuit, in which case the line/branch fuses or
breakers operate. A prolonged short circuit may open, and in the
process cause rupture of the SPD elements. " My guess is the sames
goes for the Intermatic.

Chip C
Toronto

Smitty Two wrote:

In article ,
"Robert11" wrote:

Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic Whole
House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms in the
past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our furnace ! The
Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80 or so.

Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or closed
?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a big hit,
such that the unit would have to be removed prior to re-initiating service ?

Thanks,
Bob

I'd guess that for $80, you're just buying a single premium lightening
strike insurance policy. If you want actual protection, look to the
professional stuff:

http://www.lightningprotectioncor.com/

Give my friend Chester a call out there and he can recommend something.

You should not think of lightning protection and surge protection as
being synonymous. There are plenty of surges on the power lines that
have nothing to do with lightning. I put the Square D "Surge Breaker" in
my QO panel, I don't recall the exact price but I think it was well
below $80. The normal surge suppressers work well for non lightning line
surges as well as induced surges from nearby lightning strikes. They
complement, not replace lightning protection devices such as air
terminals (lightning rods) and other technologies. In any event it is
not generally economical to lightning harden a residence to the point of
being able to survive a direct hit.

Robert11 wrote:
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic
Whole House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms
in the past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our
furnace ! The Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80
or so.
Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or
closed ?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a
big hit, such that the unit would have to be removed prior to
re-initiating service ?

Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic. The one
you are considering handles 1200 joules and 48,000 Amps. Usually this is
adequate to handle typical power-line surges (blown transformer, re-connect
time, etc.). It they take a hit, they keep on working (unless it's a direct
lightning strike!). They indicate when they no longer are working (I think
by yelling "help").

Use of this device does not remove the need for more modest surge protectors
on individual devices. The Intermatic protects against surges from outside
your home, but it's possible a device inside your home could generate a
surge affecting stuff on the house side of the Intermatic.

We have one on our office service (not this model, but the same idea). We've
never been bothered by a power surges. We've never been bothered by
stampeding elephants either, so that's not much of a testimonial.

"Pete C." wrote in message
t...

Smitty Two wrote:

In article ,
"Robert11" wrote:

Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic Whole
House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms in
the
past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our furnace !
The
Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80 or so.

Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or
closed
?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a big
hit,
such that the unit would have to be removed prior to re-initiating
service ?

Thanks,
Bob

I'd guess that for $80, you're just buying a single premium lightening
strike insurance policy. If you want actual protection, look to the
professional stuff:

http://www.lightningprotectioncor.com/

Give my friend Chester a call out there and he can recommend something.

You should not think of lightning protection and surge protection as
being synonymous. There are plenty of surges on the power lines that
have nothing to do with lightning. I put the Square D "Surge Breaker" in
my QO panel, I don't recall the exact price but I think it was well
below $80. The normal surge suppressers work well for non lightning line
surges as well as induced surges from nearby lightning strikes. They
complement, not replace lightning protection devices such as air
terminals (lightning rods) and other technologies. In any event it is
not generally economical to lightning harden a residence to the point of
being able to survive a direct hit.

I'll second that. We have a neighbor that took a lightening hit that did NOT
come through the power lines.

It took out a couple of TVs as well as a DSL modem and a video card. Maybe
some other stuff, but that's all I remember.

I unplug sensitive electronics when a thunder storm is close. And don't
forget modems: Disconnect the signal path in either cable or phone line
based modems.
That's inexpensive protection.

Charlie in SW Florida

"Robert11" wrote in message
. ..
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic Whole
House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms in the
past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our furnace ! The
Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80 or so.

Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or
closed ?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a big
hit, such that the unit would have to be removed prior to re-initiating
service ?

Thanks,
Bob


Lightning wants the shortest path to earth. Make sure that the electrician
installs at least two ground rods and although the code allows them to be a
minimum of six feet apart I suggest at least sixteen feet between rods.

MOVs normally fail in thermal runaway and low resistance. All surge
suppressors (US) should be listed under UL1449. UL1449 requires
overheating MOVs be disconnected by a thermal disconnect.

That means that you regular old circuit breaker in you main panel will
"protect" the MOV from thermal runaway. Trouble is that once the CB trips
you lose protection until to notice the open breaker.

One would think that "someone" would make a MOV equiped device with a
self-resetting thermal breaker as part of the design. ALL of them seem to
have either fuxes or the MOV self-destructs in a way that doesn't set the
device on fire or create a short.


Carefully follow the manufacturer’s instructions. Keeping connecting wires
short is very important.

Well, it takes te impulse a little more than a nano-second to travel a foot.
If the response time of the MOV is measured in micro or even mili seconds,
the length of the wiring just doesn't make any difference.


Everything I saw at the Intermatic site indicated that their service panel
suppressors were MOV based.

I didn’t see anything at lightningprotectioncor.com on why their
suppressors would be superior.

Equipment most likely to be damaged has connection to both power and
signal (phone, cable).

Amen!

If a strong surge produces a 1000A current to earth, and the resistance to
earth is a very good 10 ohms, the voltage at the service ‘ground’ will
rise to 10,000V above ‘absolute ground’. The way to protect equipment is
to keep the ground reference for power and phone and cable at the same
potential.

Yep!

That requires a *short* ‘ground’ wire from phone and cable entry protectors
to the ‘ground’ at the power service.

That's why all utility wires are supposed to come into the house at the same
general location so that the grounds can be bonded together. The "cable
folks" often don't bother. Ditto for the "dish" folks.



With adequate ratings, using service panel suppressors, and plug-in
suppressors on “sensitive” electronics with power and signal connections,
you can protect against almost all lightning (not including a direct
strike to the house - very uncommon).

Well, you can get "local" break out boxes that will protect AC plugs and 1
or 2 coax and/or 1 or 2 phone lines. If the grounds are bonded well at
the electric service grounds I suspect that your local suppressor may have a
shorter than expected life.

If using a plug-in suppressor, all wiring (power, phone, cable, ...) going
to a set of protected equipment must go through the suppressor.

AMEN!
--
bud--


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Apr 18, 2:07 pm, "Robert11" wrote:
Thanks for help and info.
Appreciate it.

You are right; the 4870 model doesn't seem to be listed anymore.

Probably replaced by something newer.
Will give them a call Monday and ask.

Accurate replies define protection as earth ground. No protector is
protection. Protection is where that surge energy gets dissipated -
earth ground. Protectors are simply connecting devices to earth.

Therefore the Intermatic will only be as effective as the earth
ground - as others have noted. That means a breaker box ground wire
should not go up over the foundation and down to earth. Instead, that
ground wire should be through the foundation and down to earth. Every
wire foot shorter means better surge protection. No sharp bends. No
splices. And all grounds (telephone, cable) make a 'less than 10
foot' connection to this earthing electrode.

Most electricians don't have the 'radio frequency electricity'
knowledge to appreciate why sharp wire bends to earth means diminished
protection. That ground wire must be rerouted separated from other
non-earthing wires. Remember, that ground wire is carrying lightning
electricity into earth.

Telephone NID box also has a 'whole house' protector. That
protector also must be earthed to the same common point. Cable TV
needs no protector since it gets earthed only with a wire. But again,
connection should be 'less than 10 feet', no sharp bends, etc.

How to make that Intermatic even better? Expand a single point
earth ground with more rods or buried bare copper wire. If your
utilities do not enter at a common location, then the buried wire
interconnects all ground electrodes to create a single point ground
and to further enhance earthing. See a utility app note:
http://www.cinergy.com/surge/ttip08.htm

Most electricians don't understand why they must 'exceed' post 1990
National Electrical Code requirements since electricians only
understand 60 Hertz electricity - not RF electricity. What makes any
protector effective? Its connection to earth.

Same protector that makes lightning surges irrelevant also makes
irrelevant the 'inside the house' surge. If household appliances are
creating surges, then you are trooping daily to hardware stores for
new dimmer switches, clock radios, and bathroom GFCIs. Why are you
not replacing these devices daily? Protection inside all electronics
makes those 'inside the house' surges completely irrelevant.

Install a 'whole house' protector so that significant protection
already inside all appliances is not overwhelmed. IOW we install
protectors to earth direct lightning strikes and to remain functional.
Yes, MOV protectors are sufficient sized to earth direct lightning and
not fail. Then protection inside all appliances is not overwhelmed.
How good will that protection be? How good is your earthing
connection - both with better electrodes AND with shorter wire
connections? A protector is only as effective as its earth ground -
where surge energy must be dissipated.

John Gilmer wrote:
MOVs normally fail in thermal runaway and low resistance. All surge
suppressors (US) should be listed under UL1449. UL1449 requires
overheating MOVs be disconnected by a thermal disconnect.

That means that you regular old circuit breaker in you main panel will
"protect" the MOV from thermal runaway. Trouble is that once the CB trips
you lose protection until to notice the open breaker.

The UL required "thermal disconnect" must be close proximity to the MOV
and responds when the MOV gets hot at end of life (thermal runaway). It
is inside the suppressor.

It operates at end of life - the MOV conducts at "normal" voltages.


One would think that "someone" would make a MOV equiped device with a
self-resetting thermal breaker as part of the design. ALL of them seem to
have either fuxes or the MOV self-destructs in a way that doesn't set the
device on fire or create a short.

A well designed suppressor matches internal protection to the MOVs. They
disconnect the MOVs when they are at end of life. For overvoltage (much
longer duration than surge and will rapidly destroy MOVs) a few plug-in
suppressors will disconnect and save MOVs and protected equipment.


Carefully follow the manufacturer’s instructions. Keeping connecting wires
short is very important.

Well, it takes te impulse a little more than a nano-second to travel a foot.
If the response time of the MOV is measured in micro or even mili seconds,
the length of the wiring just doesn't make any difference.

The response time of MOVs is negligible. And surge rise times are over a
microsecond.

The problem is voltage drop. Surges are short duration events and thus
basically high frequency. The inductance of wire dominates over resistance.
The IEEE guide on surges and surge protection:
http://www.mikeholt.com/files/PDF/Li...ion_May051.pdf
has information on lead length and voltage drop (pdf page 32). At 3,000A
surge current, 6 inches of lead adds 70 volts to the clamp voltage.


Equipment most likely to be damaged has connection to both power and
signal (phone, cable).

Amen!

If a strong surge produces a 1000A current to earth, and the resistance to
earth is a very good 10 ohms, the voltage at the service ‘ground’ will
rise to 10,000V above ‘absolute ground’. The way to protect equipment is
to keep the ground reference for power and phone and cable at the same
potential.

Yep!

That requires a *short* ‘ground’ wire from phone and cable entry protectors
to the ‘ground’ at the power service.

That's why all utility wires are supposed to come into the house at the same
general location so that the grounds can be bonded together. The "cable
folks" often don't bother. Ditto for the "dish" folks.

It seems like a fairly common problem for signal services to be at
distant points. Cable installers are notorious for not correctly bonding
to power service grounds. Dish is probably worse.

The IEEE guide has an example of a cable service with too long a
‘ground’ wire causing a high voltage between cable and power wires
(starting pdf pabe 40). The guide says that if a short interconnect
cannot be made "the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to
use a multiport [plug-in] protector." (You could also run the cable to
near the power service, install a second ground block, and distribute
from there.)



With adequate ratings, using service panel suppressors, and plug-in
suppressors on “sensitive” electronics with power and signal connections,
you can protect against almost all lightning (not including a direct
strike to the house - very uncommon).

Well, you can get "local" break out boxes that will protect AC plugs and 1
or 2 coax and/or 1 or 2 phone lines. If the grounds are bonded well at
the electric service grounds I suspect that your local suppressor may have a
shorter than expected life.

"Local suppressor" is plug-in suppressor? Should have easier life if
interconnection at services is short - would have less use of voltage
limiting device from signal to plug-in suppressor ground.

If using a plug-in suppressor, all wiring (power, phone, cable, ...) going
to a set of protected equipment must go through the suppressor.

AMEN!

--
bud--

On Apr 17, 3:50*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Robert11 wrote:
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic
Whole House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. *Have had several large lightning storms
in the past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our
furnace ! * The Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80
or so.
Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? *Thoughts on ?

BTW: *If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or
closed ?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a
big hit, such that the unit would have to be removed prior to
re-initiating service ?

Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.

What is this claim based on? If they don't use MOV's what exactly
do they use? Also, this would seem to imply that MOV's are not
considered electronic components, but I believe by any reasonable
definition, they are electronic components.





The one
you are considering handles 1200 joules and 48,000 Amps. Usually this is
adequate to handle typical power-line surges (blown transformer, re-connect
time, etc.). It they take a hit, they keep on working (unless it's a direct
lightning strike!). They indicate when they no longer are working (I think
by yelling "help").

Use of this device does not remove the need for more modest surge protectors
on individual devices. The Intermatic protects against surges from outside
your home, but it's possible a device inside your home could generate a
surge affecting stuff on the house side of the Intermatic.

We have one on our office service (not this model, but the same idea). We've
never been bothered by a power surges. We've never been bothered by
stampeding elephants either, so that's not much of a testimonial.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

w_tom wrote:
On Apr 18, 2:07 pm, "Robert11" wrote:
Thanks for help and info.
Appreciate it.

You are right; the 4870 model doesn't seem to be listed anymore.

Probably replaced by something newer.
Will give them a call Monday and ask.

The best information on surges and surge protection I have seen is at:
http://www.mikeholt.com/files/PDF/Li...ion_May051.pdf
- "How to protect your house and its contents from lightning: IEEE guide
for surge protection of equipment connected to AC power and
communication circuits" published by the IEEE in 2005 (the IEEE is the
dominant organization of electrical and electronic engineers in the US).
And also:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/p.../surgesfnl.pdf
- "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to protect the
appliances in your home" published by the US National Institute of
Standards and Technology in 2001

The IEEE guide is aimed at those with some technical background. The
NIST guide is aimed at the unwashed masses.


Therefore the Intermatic will only be as effective as the earth
ground - as others have noted. That means a breaker box ground wire
should not go up over the foundation and down to earth. Instead, that
ground wire should be through the foundation and down to earth. Every
wire foot shorter means better surge protection. No sharp bends. No
splices. And all grounds (telephone, cable) make a 'less than 10
foot' connection to this earthing electrode.

Even with a very good resistance to earth of 10 ohms and a fairly strong
earth current of 1,000A the power system ground rises to 10,000V above
'absolute' earth potential. Protection has more to do with keeping
ground references together - short 'ground' wires from signal entrance
protectors to the 'ground' at the power service. The NIST surge guru,
and author of the NIST guide, has written "the impedance of the
grounding system to `true earth' is far less important than the
integrity of the bonding of the various parts of the grounding system."

The priority is not short connection to the same earthing electrode. The
priority is short connection from signal entry protectors to the
'ground' at the power service.

Cable TV
needs no protector since it gets earthed only with a wire.

"Needs no protector"? The IEEE guide says "there is no requirement to
limit the voltage developed between the core and the sheath. .... The
only voltage limit is the breakdown of the F connectors, typically ~2–4
kV." And "there is obviously the possibility of damage to TV tuners and
cable modems from the very high voltages that can be developed,
especially from nearby lightning." (A plug-in suppressor will limit the
voltage from core to shield.)

What makes any
protector effective? Its connection to earth.

For plug-in suppressors, the IEEE guide explains (starting pdf page 40)
they work primarily by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires (signal and
power) to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in suppressors do
not work primarily by earthing (or stopping or absorbing). The guide
explains earthing occurs elsewhere.


Same protector that makes lightning surges irrelevant also makes
irrelevant the 'inside the house' surge. If household appliances are
creating surges, then you are trooping daily to hardware stores for
new dimmer switches, clock radios, and bathroom GFCIs.

According to NIST guide, US insurance information indicates equipment
most frequently damaged by lightning is
computers with a modem connection
TVs, VCRs and similar equipment (presumably with cable TV
connections).
All can be damaged by high voltages between power and signal wires.


Install a 'whole house' protector so that significant protection
already inside all appliances is not overwhelmed.

Service panel suppressors are a real good idea.

What does the NIST guide say?
"Q - Will a surge protector installed at the service entrance be
sufficient for the whole house?
A - There are two answers to than question: Yes for one-link appliances
[electronic equipment], No for two-link appliances [equipment connected
to power AND phone or cable or....]. Since most homes today have some
kind of two-link appliances, the prudent answer to the question would be
NO - but that does not mean that a surge protector installed at the
service entrance is useless."

A service panel suppressor by itself does not guarantee there will not
be damaging voltage between power and signal wires.

--
bud--

bud-- wrote:

According to NIST guide, US insurance information indicates equipment
most frequently damaged by lightning is
computers with a modem connection
TVs, VCRs and similar equipment (presumably with cable TV
connections).
All can be damaged by high voltages between power and signal wires.


Install a 'whole house' protector so that significant protection
already inside all appliances is not overwhelmed.


Service panel suppressors are a real good idea.

What does the NIST guide say?
"Q - Will a surge protector installed at the service entrance be
sufficient for the whole house?
A - There are two answers to than question: Yes for one-link appliances
[electronic equipment], No for two-link appliances [equipment connected
to power AND phone or cable or....]. Since most homes today have some
kind of two-link appliances, the prudent answer to the question would be
NO - but that does not mean that a surge protector installed at the
service entrance is useless."

A service panel suppressor by itself does not guarantee there will not
be damaging voltage between power and signal wires.



A phone line is the most dangerous line in your house,
unless you have speakers in trees. We worked on a smart
house that had $40,000 in equipment damage when lightning
hit a tree next to the pool. It travelled the speaker lines
into the house, thru the distributed sound system, thru the
distributed tv antenna system, thru the phone and security
system and the centralized lighting control. Everything was
tied together. The grounding system did work, at least there
were no fires. Kitchen appliances were about the only thing
unaffected.

Everything was put pack in place, except speakers and lights
in the trees. Opto isolators with transorbs were added
where the systems were directly interconnected.

-- larry/dallas

wrote:
On Apr 17, 3:50 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Robert11 wrote:
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic
Whole House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms
in the past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our
furnace ! The Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80
or so.
Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or
closed ?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a
big hit, such that the unit would have to be removed prior to
re-initiating service ?

Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.

What is this claim based on? If they don't use MOV's what exactly
do they use? Also, this would seem to imply that MOV's are not
considered electronic components, but I believe by any reasonable
definition, they are electronic components.


You're right, of course. MOV are classified as "electronic" components. But
metallic-oxide-varistors work like reverse fuses: they short their terminals
together. And, like fuses, they (usually) only work once with no indication
(other than sometimes smoke) that they won't work again.

Sophisticated electronic circuitry can bleed off surges to ground and
continue to function indefinitely. It is the existence of this circuitry
that's the difference between a $3.00 "surge-suppression" outlet strip and a
$50.00 one.

Bob F wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message news:VM2dnfrrp-
Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.
The one you are considering handles 1200 joules and 48,000 Amps.
Usually this is adequate to handle typical power-line surges (blown
transformer, re-connect time, etc.). It they take a hit, they keep
on working (unless it's a direct lightning strike!). They indicate
when they no longer are working (I think by yelling "help").

Use of this device does not remove the need for more modest surge
protectors on individual devices. The Intermatic protects against
surges from outside your home, but it's possible a device inside
your home could generate a surge affecting stuff on the house side
of the Intermatic.

Why would the intermatic not absorb in-house surges?

The suggestion comes from the Intermatic web site.

I presume because everything on the same side of the device causing the
surge - including the Intermatic - is exposed to the surge. It's not the
path of least resistance; it's everything.

HeyBub wrote:

wrote:
On Apr 17, 3:50 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Robert11 wrote:
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic
Whole House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms
in the past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our
furnace ! The Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80
or so.
Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or
closed ?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a
big hit, such that the unit would have to be removed prior to
re-initiating service ?

Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.

What is this claim based on? If they don't use MOV's what exactly
do they use? Also, this would seem to imply that MOV's are not
considered electronic components, but I believe by any reasonable
definition, they are electronic components.


You're right, of course. MOV are classified as "electronic" components. But
metallic-oxide-varistors work like reverse fuses: they short their terminals
together. And, like fuses, they (usually) only work once with no indication
(other than sometimes smoke) that they won't work again.

MOVs will continue to work indefinitely if their rated clamping current
isn't exceeded, so they will readily clamp on the modest surges seen
every day. The mega surges from a really close lightning strike or a
tree branch dropping the primaries into the secondaries is what will
cause the MOV to self destruct and usually trip the circuit breaker in
the process thereby sacrificing itself to save the stuff downstream of
it.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Bob F wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message news:VM2dnfrrp-
Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.
The one you are considering handles 1200 joules and 48,000 Amps.
Usually this is adequate to handle typical power-line surges (blown
transformer, re-connect time, etc.). It they take a hit, they keep
on working (unless it's a direct lightning strike!). They indicate
when they no longer are working (I think by yelling "help").

Use of this device does not remove the need for more modest surge
protectors on individual devices. The Intermatic protects against
surges from outside your home, but it's possible a device inside
your home could generate a surge affecting stuff on the house side
of the Intermatic.

Why would the intermatic not absorb in-house surges?

The suggestion comes from the Intermatic web site.

I presume because everything on the same side of the device causing the
surge - including the Intermatic - is exposed to the surge. It's not the path
of least resistance; it's everything.

I would imagine that the suppressor would absorb the surge to keep it from
passing on to other circuits at the breaker panel.

On Apr 18, 9:35*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 17, 3:50 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Robert11 wrote:
Hello,

Having a new service box installed in a residence.

Electrician has never used these before, so thought I'd ask here.

Was thinking of purchasing, and having him install, an Intermatic
Whole House Surge Suppressor
Model 4870 in the new box. Have had several large lightning storms
in the past, and one nearby strike fried the control board on our
furnace ! The Intermatic unit isn't all that expensive, about $80
or so.
Any of you folks ever used this model ?

Worth doing ? Thoughts on ?

BTW: If they do ever take a big hit, do they (usually) fail open or
closed ?

e.g., would the MOV's be shorting the hot to neutral/ground after a
big hit, such that the unit would have to be removed prior to
re-initiating service ?

Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.

What is this claim based on? * *If they don't use MOV's what exactly
do they use? * Also, this would seem to imply that MOV's are not
considered electronic components, but I believe by any reasonable
definition, they are electronic components.

You're right, of course. MOV are classified as "electronic" components. But
metallic-oxide-varistors work like reverse fuses: they short their terminals
together. And, like fuses, they (usually) only work once with no indication
(other than sometimes smoke) that they won't work again.

Sophisticated electronic circuitry can bleed off surges to ground and
continue to function indefinitely. It is the existence of this circuitry
that's the difference between a $3.00 "surge-suppression" outlet strip and a
$50.00 one.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I think I've answered the question myself. Below is an excerpt from
Intermatics datasheets from both a residential and also a commercial/
industrial unit that clearly say both do in fact use MOV's and say
nothing about any alternate "sophisticated electronic circuitry." I
don;t know of any such alternate components that can handle the huge
currents that MOV's can which is why they are used in all the surge
protectors that I've seen.

If you have any alternate reference, we'd like to see it.


Residential:
Features and Applications:
The IG1240RC features six modes of protection and is recommended for
residential and light commercial applications.
It is intended for installation on 120/240 volt AC panels. The
IG1240RC incorporates the newest developments in MOV
technology and provides individual component thermal protection and
monitoring.

Commercial:
For installation in Category "C & B" locations
! Service Entrance, Distribution Panels and Sub-panels
! Parallel installation
! 125k Amps Peak Surge Capacity per mode
! All mode suppression for systems with a neutral
! Line-to-Line, Line-to-Neutral, Line-to-Ground, Neutral-to-Ground
! 6 mode suppression for systems with no neutral
! Line-to-Line, Line-to-Ground
! Integral Disconnect Switch with safety interlock
! Easily replaceable master surge module
! 40k Amp MOVs
! 200k AIC Surge Rated Fuses

wrote:

Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.

What is this claim based on? If they don't use MOV's what exactly
do they use? Also, this would seem to imply that MOV's are not
considered electronic components, but I believe by any reasonable
definition, they are electronic components.

You're right, of course. MOV are classified as "electronic"
components. But metallic-oxide-varistors work like reverse fuses:
they short their terminals together. And, like fuses, they (usually)
only work once with no indication (other than sometimes smoke) that
they won't work again.

Sophisticated electronic circuitry can bleed off surges to ground and
continue to function indefinitely. It is the existence of this
circuitry that's the difference between a $3.00 "surge-suppression"
outlet strip and a $50.00 one.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I think I've answered the question myself. Below is an excerpt from
Intermatics datasheets from both a residential and also a commercial/
industrial unit that clearly say both do in fact use MOV's and say
nothing about any alternate "sophisticated electronic circuitry." I
don;t know of any such alternate components that can handle the huge
currents that MOV's can which is why they are used in all the surge
protectors that I've seen.

If you have any alternate reference, we'd like to see it.


Residential:
Features and Applications:
The IG1240RC features six modes of protection and is recommended for
residential and light commercial applications.
It is intended for installation on 120/240 volt AC panels. The
IG1240RC incorporates the newest developments in MOV
technology and provides individual component thermal protection and
monitoring.

Commercial:
For installation in Category "C & B" locations
! Service Entrance, Distribution Panels and Sub-panels
! Parallel installation
! 125k Amps Peak Surge Capacity per mode
! All mode suppression for systems with a neutral
! Line-to-Line, Line-to-Neutral, Line-to-Ground, Neutral-to-Ground
! 6 mode suppression for systems with no neutral
! Line-to-Line, Line-to-Ground
! Integral Disconnect Switch with safety interlock
! Easily replaceable master surge module
! 40k Amp MOVs
! 200k AIC Surge Rated Fuses

Ah, okay. Thanks for the info. I thought a quality company like Intermatic
would rely on something other than MOVs, such as zener diodes or
gas-discharge tubes. Maybe even motor/alternators.

If they, in fact, are relying on piece-of-**** MOVs (probably made in
China), well, might as well stand naked in the rain.

Pete C. wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 17, 3:50 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.
What is this claim based on? If they don't use MOV's what exactly
do they use? Also, this would seem to imply that MOV's are not
considered electronic components, but I believe by any reasonable
definition, they are electronic components.

You're right, of course. MOV are classified as "electronic" components. But
metallic-oxide-varistors work like reverse fuses: they short their terminals
together. And, like fuses, they (usually) only work once with no indication
(other than sometimes smoke) that they won't work again.

MOVs will continue to work indefinitely if their rated clamping current
isn't exceeded, so they will readily clamp on the modest surges seen
every day. The mega surges from a really close lightning strike or a
tree branch dropping the primaries into the secondaries is what will
cause the MOV to self destruct and usually trip the circuit breaker in
the process thereby sacrificing itself to save the stuff downstream of
it.

While MOVs are good with very short duration surges, dropping a primary
wire onto secondaries will rapidly destroy a MOV as you describe. Then
protection is gone.

UL requires thermal disconnects for failing MOVs. The specs from trader4
include “200k AIC Surge Rated Fuses” which indicate that suppressor can
be used on in a panel with an available fault current (not surge
related) of 200,000A. The suppressor may also trip a circuit breaker,
but protection should be internal.

I believe the maximum likely surge current on one of the hot service
wires is 10,000A based on a very strong 100,000A surge hitting the high
voltage wire on the pole behind your house. The spec from trader4 is
40,000A per wire for that suppressor, which is well beyond what is likely.

MOVs also have an energy (Joule) rating, which is cumulative. The
40,000A rating goes with a very high Joule rating, which means the
suppressor can take many hits. If a MOV had a 1000J rating, it is for a
single surge. If the individual hits were much smaller, like 100J, the
cumulative rating is much higher than 1000J. When the energy rating is
exceeded, the MOV starts to conduct at lower voltages, eventually
conducting at ‘normal’ voltages and failing in thermal runaway.

Without a service panel suppressor, there will be arc over to panel
ground at about 6,000V. After it is established, the arc voltage will be
hundreds of volts. That dumps most of the surge energy to earth. For
plug-in suppressors, the impedance of the branch circuit wiring greatly
limits the current, and thus the energy, that can reach the suppressor.
Combined with arc over, the energy that can reach a plug-in suppressor
is surprisingly small (unless the branch circuit is very short).

--
bud--

HeyBub wrote:
wrote:
Intermatic surge protectors do not use MOVs - they are electronic.
What is this claim based on? If they don't use MOV's what exactly
do they use? Also, this would seem to imply that MOV's are not
considered electronic components, but I believe by any reasonable
definition, they are electronic components.
You're right, of course. MOV are classified as "electronic"
components. But metallic-oxide-varistors work like reverse fuses:
they short their terminals together. And, like fuses, they (usually)
only work once with no indication (other than sometimes smoke) that
they won't work again.

Sophisticated electronic circuitry can bleed off surges to ground and
continue to function indefinitely. It is the existence of this
circuitry that's the difference between a $3.00 "surge-suppression"
outlet strip and a $50.00 one.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think I've answered the question myself. Below is an excerpt from
Intermatics datasheets from both a residential and also a commercial/
industrial unit that clearly say both do in fact use MOV's and say
nothing about any alternate "sophisticated electronic circuitry." I
don;t know of any such alternate components that can handle the huge
currents that MOV's can which is why they are used in all the surge
protectors that I've seen.

If you have any alternate reference, we'd like to see it.


Residential:
Features and Applications:
The IG1240RC features six modes of protection and is recommended for
residential and light commercial applications.
It is intended for installation on 120/240 volt AC panels. The
IG1240RC incorporates the newest developments in MOV
technology and provides individual component thermal protection and
monitoring.

Commercial:
For installation in Category "C & B" locations
! Service Entrance, Distribution Panels and Sub-panels
! Parallel installation
! 125k Amps Peak Surge Capacity per mode
! All mode suppression for systems with a neutral
! Line-to-Line, Line-to-Neutral, Line-to-Ground, Neutral-to-Ground
! 6 mode suppression for systems with no neutral
! Line-to-Line, Line-to-Ground
! Integral Disconnect Switch with safety interlock
! Easily replaceable master surge module
! 40k Amp MOVs
! 200k AIC Surge Rated Fuses

Ah, okay. Thanks for the info. I thought a quality company like Intermatic
would rely on something other than MOVs, such as zener diodes or
gas-discharge tubes. Maybe even motor/alternators.

If they, in fact, are relying on piece-of-**** MOVs (probably made in
China), well, might as well stand naked in the rain.

According to the IEEE guide, "the vast majority (90%) of both
hard-wired and plug-in protectors use MOVs to perform the
voltage-limiting function. In most AC protectors, they are the only
significant voltage limiters."

Zener diodes and gas discharge tubes don't have the energy dissipation
capacity of MOVs in a small volume. MOVs dissipate the energy throughout
the volume of the device, where a zener diode dissipates the energy at a
'junction'. Other devices with high capacity are arc gaps and silicon
carbide devices (another form of MOV). I don't see a practical component
solution in your list.

You have not said why MOVs are a POS.

You could certainly use a motor/alternator. Depending on how much you
are protecting it might only cost a few thousand dollars. Or a full-time
conversion UPS for your house? (But what protects the UPS?) Or maybe a
ferroresonant transformer? You could use it to help heat the house.

Or maybe a full-time off-grid generator? And get rid of the troublesome
phone and cable lines?

--
bud--

On Apr 18, 3:00 pm, "John Gilmer" wrote:
That means that you regular old circuit breaker in you main panel will
"protect" the MOV from thermal runaway. Trouble is that once the CB trips
you lose protection until to notice the open breaker.

One would think that "someone" would make a MOV equiped device with a
self-resetting thermal breaker as part of the design. ALL of them seem to
have either fuxes or the MOV self-destructs in a way that doesn't set the
device on fire or create a short.

If the MOV got that 'hot' as to open a thermal fuse, it was grossly
undersized – operating in complete violation of its manufacturer.
Grossly undersizing is common with plug-in protectors since profit
margins are more important than effective protection. MOVs much shunt
(clamp, divert, connect) surges to earth AND remain *functional*.
Those promoting plug-in protectors forget to mention that a protector
must not fail by blowing the thermal fuse.

Any MOV that gets so hot as to trip a thermal fuse was violating MOV
manufacturer specs and providing no effective protection. The only
acceptable MOV failure means no excessive heat - no MOV vaporization.
But such failures get the naive to recommend more protectors -
increase sales. Again, which is more important – profits or
protection?

Scary pictures demonstrate problem with grossly undersized
protectors that still have UL 1449 approval. Not only do we instead
install one properly sized 'whole house' protector. We also do not
want protectors located on a rug or adjacent to a pile of desktop
papers. The scary pictures demonstrate a 'too common' problem with
plug-in protectors that Bud promotes for:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
http://www.westwhitelandfire.com/Art...Protectors.pdf
http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm
http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html
http://tinyurl.com/3x73ol http://www3.cw56.com/news/articles/local/BO63312/

w_tom wrote:

If the MOV got that 'hot' as to open a thermal fuse, it was grossly
undersized – operating in complete violation of its manufacturer.
Grossly undersizing is common with plug-in protectors since profit
margins are more important than effective protection.

In w_’s mind, plug-in suppressors have minuscule ratings and service
panel suppressors have mega ratings. But plug-in suppressors are readily
available with very high ratings for relatively low cost. And branch
circuit impedance greatly limits the current, and thus energy that gets
to a plug-in suppressor.


Scary pictures demonstrate problem with grossly undersized
protectors that still have UL 1449 approval.

None of w_’s links say any damaged suppressor even had a UL label.

The scary pictures demonstrate a 'too common' problem with
plug-in protectors that Bud promotes for:

Lacking technical arguments about plug-in suppressors, w_ tries to
discredit people who expose his drivel. All I promote is accurate
information.

http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554

Lacking valid technical arguments all w_ has is pathetic scare tactics.

His hanford link is about "some older model" power strips and says
overheating was fixed with a revision to UL1449 that required thermal
disconnects. That was 1998. The hanford failure was in 1999 - a one year
old suppressor? There is no reason to believe, from *any* of these
links, that there is a problem with suppressors produced under the UL
standard that has been in effect since 1998.

For accurate information on plug-in suppressors read the IEEE and NIST
guides. Both say plug-in suppressors are effective.

--
bud--

On Apr 20, 10:58 am, bud-- wrote:
In w_’s mind, plug-in suppressors have minuscule ratings and service
panel suppressors have mega ratings. But plug-in suppressors are readily
available with very high ratings for relatively low cost. And branch
circuit impedance greatly limits the current, and thus energy that gets
to a plug-in suppressor.

w_tom is not promoting for a plug-in manufacturer. Bud is. 'Scary
pictures' are a problem with plug-in protectors designed to maximize
profits and that do not even claim to provide protection. Protectors
located on flammable materials such as a rug or adjacent to a pile of
desktop papers:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
http://www.westwhitelandfire.com/Art...Protectors.pdf
http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm
http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html
http://tinyurl.com/3x73ol or
http://www3.cw56.com/news/articles/local/BO63312/

Bud is repeatedly asked for plug-in manufacturer specs that list
each type of surge and protection from that surge. Manufacturer’s
specs don't even list protection from any type of surge. So Bud
pretends the request does not exist.

Bud cannot provide numbers that plug-in manufacturers will not
provide. Bud must deny this problem with plug-in protectors. Bud
will even belittle others. And still Bud will not provide a single
manufacturer spec that claims protection. But will not even admit who
he is promoting for. Protectors that do not even claim to provide
protection - but are so profitable.

Take a $3 power strip. Add some ten cent parts. Sell it for $25 or
$150. That profit margin explains why plug-in protectors are
promoted. Even manufacturer specs do not claim to provide
protection. No wonder Bud will never provide those spec numbers.
Honesty might endanger profits.

w_tom wrote:
On Apr 20, 10:58 am, bud-- wrote:

In w_’s mind, plug-in suppressors have minuscule ratings and service
panel suppressors have mega ratings. But plug-in suppressors are readily
available with very high ratings for relatively low cost. And branch
circuit impedance greatly limits the current, and thus energy that gets
to a plug-in suppressor.

w_tom is not promoting for a plug-in manufacturer. Bud is.

To quote w_ "It is an old political trick. When facts cannot be
challenged technically, then attack the messenger." My only association
with surge protectors is I have some.

Lacking valid technical arguments w_ lies.

'Scary
pictures' are a problem with plug-in protectors designed to maximize
profits and that do not even claim to provide protection.

Lacking valid technical arguments w_ repeats the 'scary' lie. w_ has no
source that says UL listed plug–in suppressors produced after 1998 are a
fire hazard.


Bud is repeatedly asked for plug-in manufacturer specs that list
each type of surge and protection from that surge.

Lacking valid technical arguments w_ invents issues. "Each type of
surge" is nonsense. Plug-in suppressors have MOVs from H-G, N-G, H-N.
That is all possible combinations and all possible surge modes.

w_ favored SquareD service panel suppressors do not list "each type of
surge".

w_ has never explained how "common mode" surges get past the N–G bond
required in US services.

And still Bud will not provide a single
manufacturer spec that claims protection.

The last plug-in suppressor I bought (about $25) had 1 MOV that was
1475J, 75,000A and 2 that were 590J 30,000A. w_ will likely ignore this
and continue to ask for specs, as usual.

But will not even admit who
he is promoting for.

3rd repetition of the lie. Too bad w_ doesn't have technical arguments.


Take a $3 power strip. Add some ten cent parts.

Provide a source for a 1475J 75,000A MOV for ten cents.


Both the IEEE and NIST guides say plug-in suppressors are effective.
Read the sources.

There are 98,615,938 other web sites, including 13,843,032 by lunatics,
and w_ can't find another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are NOT
effective.

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"?


–-
bud--

On Apr 21, 12:29 pm, bud-- wrote:
The last plug-in suppressor I bought (about $25) had 1 MOV that was
1475J, 75,000A and 2 that were 590J 30,000A. w_ will likely ignore this
and continue to ask for specs, as usual.

A plug-in protector uses maybe 1/3rd and never more than 2/3rds of
it joules in protection. When a plug-in protector has other
connections (ie telephone, cable, ethernet), those numbers decrease.
Meanwhile, 'whole house' protectors from responsible companies (GE,
Siemens, Cutler-Hammer, Intermatic, Keison, etc) use ALL joules for
protection. Using all joules means the same sized 'whole house'
protector may last eight times longer and can divert even more surge
into earth. Did Bud forget to mention that? Profit would be at
risk.

Bud still provides not one plug-in manufacturer spec that actually
claims protection. Protection numbers cannot be quoted when no - not
one - plug-in protector manufacturers claims that protection. Oh.
$25 for one plug-in protector ... that does not even claim to provide
protection? One whole house' protector costs about $1 per protected
appliance. That 'whole house' protector also does not earth surges
destructively 8000 volts destructively through an adjacent appliance -
Page 42 Figure 8 from Bud's citation.

A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground which is
the point quoted in every Bud citation:
You cannot really suppress a surge altogether, nor
"arrest" it. What these protective devices do is
neither suppress nor arrest a surge, but simply
divert it to ground, where it can do no harm.

How does that protector without a 'less than 10 foot' connection to
earth "divert it to ground, where it can do no harm"? It cannot
*divert* to what it does not connect to. Same point demonstrated in
two front page articles in Electrical Engineering Times entitled
"Protecting Electrical Devices from Lightning Transients". Where do
they discuss plug-in protectors? They don't. The article is about
effective surge protection. It discusses earth ground and connections
to earth ground; what provides protection.

A homeowner upgrades building earthing to meet and exceed post 1990
NEC code, and installs a 'whole house' protector from responsible
companies. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground which
is why effective protectors have that short and dedicated wire to
earth ground.

How to identify the ineffective protector: 1) No dedicated earthing
wire. 2) Manufacturer avoids all discussion about earthing. No earth
ground means no effective protection which is why some will even
'forget' how few joules actually get used in protection.

w_tom wrote:
On Apr 21, 12:29 pm, bud-- wrote:
The last plug-in suppressor I bought (about $25) had 1 MOV that was
1475J, 75,000A and 2 that were 590J 30,000A. w_ will likely ignore this
and continue to ask for specs, as usual.

A plug-in protector uses maybe 1/3rd and never more than 2/3rds of
it joules in protection.

Poor w_ can invent the stupidest arguments. 75,000A, the MOV that takes
most of the hit, is far larger than needed in a service panel
suppressor. There is no possibility of getting that current on a branch
circuit. The high value just goes with the high energy ratings.

Investigation by the author of the NIST guide with surges up to 10,000A
on a branch circuit with a MOV at the end found in 13 of 15 cases the
amount of energy absorbed by the MOV was less than 1.2J. The maximum was
35J. Arc-over at the panel and impedance of the branch circuit simply
limit the current, and thus energy, that can reach a plug-in suppressor.
The ratings in my suppressor are far over what it will see making the
likelihood of ever failing essentially zero.


Bud still provides not one plug-in manufacturer spec that actually
claims protection.

What an idiot.

One whole house' protector costs about $1 per protected
appliance.

Counting light bulbs and switches as "appliances".

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground

And the required statement of religious belief in earthing. Poor w_’s
religious blinders prevent him from reading in the IEEE guide that
plug–in suppressors work primarily by clamping, not earthing.

Still missing - link another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are
NOT effective.

Still missing – answers to 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"?

Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
Never any sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Twists opposing sources to say the opposite of what they really say.
Attempts to discredit opponents.
w_ is a purveyor of junk science.


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

--
bud--

On Apr 22, 1:04*pm, bud-- wrote:
w_tom wrote:
On Apr 21, 12:29 pm, bud-- wrote:
The last plug-in suppressor I bought (about $25) had 1 MOV that was
1475J, 75,000A and 2 that were 590J 30,000A. *w_ will likely ignore this
and continue to ask for specs, as usual.

* A plug-in protector uses maybe 1/3rd and never more than 2/3rds of
it joules in protection.

Poor w_ can invent the stupidest arguments. *75,000A, the MOV that takes
most of the hit, is far larger than needed in a service panel
suppressor. There is no possibility of getting that current on a branch
circuit. The high value just goes with the high energy ratings.

Investigation by the author of the NIST guide with surges up to 10,000A
on a branch circuit with a MOV at the end found in 13 of 15 cases the
amount of energy absorbed by the MOV was less than 1.2J. The maximum was
35J. Arc-over at the panel and impedance of the branch circuit simply
limit the current, and thus energy, that can reach a plug-in suppressor.
The ratings in my suppressor are far over what it will see making the
likelihood of ever failing essentially zero.



* *Bud still provides not one plug-in manufacturer spec that actually
claims protection.

What an idiot.

One whole house' protector costs about $1 per protected
appliance.

Counting light bulbs and switches as "appliances".

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground

And the required statement of religious belief in earthing. Poor w_’s
religious blinders prevent him from reading in the IEEE guide that
plug–in suppressors work primarily by clamping, not earthing.

Still missing - link another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are
NOT effective.

Still missing – answers to 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"?

Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
Never any sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Twists opposing sources to say the opposite of what they really say.
Attempts to discredit opponents.
w_ is a purveyor of junk science.

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

--
bud--

I think both have their uses and as per the IEEE, can complement each
other. For example, an issue Tom never addresses is that lots of
people are living in an apartment or rented home and they can't
install a whole house protector at the panel. And even for those
that do have a whole house protector, having secondary protection at
the point of use only adds to the protection. Curiously, one of his
arguments is that manufacturers of electonic eqpt all include surge
protection in the electronic eqpt, so it's already built-in and
apparently Tom is OK with that. Yet, the protection used inside
electronics like a TV set has no earth ground nearby, without which,
according to Tom, surge protection is impossible. In fact, at the
appliance, it's even an addional cord length of 6 ft away from earth
ground as compared to where a plug-in suppresor would be. So, then
how could protection inside the electronics possibly work?

I know one thing. If a surge does make it to the outlet, I'd rather
have it next encounter the MOVs inside the $20 surge protector,
instead of the ones in the $2000 TV.

On Apr 22, 3:14 pm, wrote:
I know one thing. If a surge does make it to the outlet, I'd rather
have it next encounter the MOVs inside the $20 surge protector,
instead of the ones in the $2000 TV.- Hide quoted text -

Review Page 42 Figure 8. A surge arrives on black (hot) wire. Plug-
in protector shunts that surge onto white (neutral) and green (safety
ground) wires. Now that surge has three paths to find earth ground,
8000 volts destructively, through that TV. Bud's citation that shows
what a plug-in protector might do ALSO shows how that same ineffective
protector can contribute to appliance damage.

w_tom has addressed this apartment problem repeatedly. A kludge.
Cut the protector power cord as short as possible. Plug it into a
receptacle attached to the breaker box. This locates the protector as
far as possible from appliances and close to earth ground. No, this
is not very good protection. But it is an improvement over the worst
installation; a protector adjacent to the appliance.

Meanwhile, apartments in steel and concrete buildings already have
best earthing. Breaker box is bonded to steel. Only needed is a
'whole house' protector - effective earthing already exists.

w_tom learned this stuff decades ago in this example. A house
without a 'whole house' protector had networked computers; two
computers on plug-in protectors. All computers powered off. Plug-in
protectors created the damage as demonstrated three paragraphs up.
Black wire surge was shunted (connected) to the green wire. Plug-in
protector bypassed protection in both computers - put surges into each
computer's motherboard and network card. Surge found earth ground via
the network, a third computer and its modem. Without plug-in
protectors, the surge would not have been shunted (diverted, clamped,
bonded) into motherboard - would not have bypassed protection already
inside those computers. Better protection would have been no plug-in
protector. Or connecting protector to a receptacle at the breaker box
- as far as possible from computers to be closer to earth ground.

Using a plug-in protector without a properly earthed 'whole hosue'
protector can result in adjacent appliance damage - as demonstrated by
Bud in his citation Page 42 Figure 8. Plug-in protector can only
supplement - cannot replace missing earth ground protection. Without
the 'whole house' protector, in so many examples, the plug-in
protector then created electronics damage.

Only wild speculation says a plug-in protector is better than
nothing. A plug-in protector does not even claim to protect from
typically destructive surges. Do not assume, as Bud hopes, that all
surges are same. Had the plug-in protectors not exists, then all
networked computers may not have been damaged.

We earth surge protectors for a type of surge that typically causes
damage AND must be earthed. No way around what must provide
protection even in apartments.

trader, unlike a sales promoter Bud, I have actually done this. We
designed some of this stuff (in custom installations), and learned
from mistakes. One mistake - I foolishly thought a plug-in protector
was better than nothing. Then lightning taught us some lessons. No
way around what provides protection from the typically destructive
surge: earth ground. Even the manufacturer will not claim what Bud
is posting. Above: plug-in protectors too close to the appliance even
made damage possible. What kind of protection is that? Ineffective
protection. In multiple examples, plug-in protector was worse than
nothing. But good news: it will protect from a surge that typically
does not create damage. That means complete protection.

On Apr 22, 5:49*pm, w_tom wrote:
On Apr 22, 3:14 pm, wrote:

I know one thing. *If a surge does make it to the outlet, I'd rather
have it next encounter the MOVs inside the $20 surge protector,
instead of the ones in the $2000 TV.- Hide quoted text -

* Review Page 42 Figure 8. *A surge arrives on black (hot) wire. *Plug-
in protector shunts that surge onto white (neutral) and green (safety
ground) wires. *Now that surge has three paths to find earth ground,
8000 volts destructively, through that TV. *Bud's citation that shows
what a plug-in protector might do ALSO shows how that same ineffective
protector can contribute to appliance damage.

* w_tom has addressed this apartment problem repeatedly. A kludge.
Cut the protector power cord as short as possible. *Plug it into a
receptacle attached to the breaker box. *This locates the protector as
far as possible from appliances and close to earth ground. *No, this
is not very good protection. *But it is an improvement over the worst
installation; a protector adjacent to the appliance.


Are you for real? Cut the cord short and plug it into a receptacle
attached to the breaker box? What receptacle attached to what
breaker box? Geez, I've lived in many apartments and the only
outlets attached to the breaker box were the ones in the wall, which
is where everyone, including the IEEE would place the protector. And
like cutting the cord from 3 ft to what 1 ft is going to make a
significant difference? LOL




* Meanwhile, apartments in steel and concrete buildings already have
best earthing. *Breaker box is bonded to steel. *Only needed is a
'whole house' protector - effective earthing already exists.

* w_tom learned this stuff decades ago in this example. *A house
without a 'whole house' protector had networked computers; two
computers on plug-in protectors. *

Hmmm, couldn't be too many decades ago that a typical house had
networked computers...



All computers powered off. Plug-in
protectors created the damage as demonstrated three paragraphs up.
Black wire surge was shunted (connected) to the green wire. *Plug-in
protector bypassed protection in both computers - put surges into each
computer's motherboard and network card. *Surge found earth ground via
the network, a third computer and its modem. *Without plug-in
protectors, the surge would not have been shunted (diverted, clamped,
bonded) into motherboard - would not have bypassed protection already
inside those computers. *

How does an external surge protector "bypass" the internal
protection? And how exactly is it that the same components inside a
computer are going to deal with the surge any differently?
Internally, the MOV's have the exact same deployment choices ie hot to
neutral, hot to ground, etc that they do in an external surge
protector. Unless you're gonna tell us that the TV comes with an
earth ground inside it.



Better protection would have been no plug-in
protector. *Or connecting protector to a receptacle at the breaker box
- as far as possible from computers to be closer to earth ground.

* Using a plug-in protector without a properly earthed 'whole hosue'
protector can result in adjacent appliance damage - as demonstrated by
Bud in his citation Page 42 Figure 8. *Plug-in protector can only
supplement - cannot replace missing earth ground protection. *Without
the 'whole house' protector, in so many examples, the plug-in
protector then created electronics damage.

Do you have any credible reference, or even any reference at all,
other than your own claims of surge protectors causing damage of this
type rather than helping prevent it? Funny the IEEE doesn't warn
about it.


* Only wild speculation says a plug-in protector is better than
nothing. *

No, only wild speculation says it's worse. Reference please.



A plug-in protector does not even claim to protect from
typically destructive surges. *

Read the label and marking on the box it comes in.


Do not assume, as Bud hopes, that all
surges are same. * Had the plug-in protectors not exists, then all
networked computers may not have been damaged.

Of course in your jaundiced view, anything that's bad that happens is
due to either plug-in surge protectors or human failure. If the cat
died, it would be due to the surge protector too. I've had exactly
the opposite experience, where electronics connected to plug-in surge
protectors came through a lightning storm OK, while one device NOT
using one was destroyed.


* *We earth surge protectors for a type of surge that typically causes
damage AND must be earthed. *No way around what must provide
protection even in apartments.

* trader, unlike a sales promoter Bud, I have actually done this. *We
designed some of this stuff (in custom installations), and learned
from mistakes. *One mistake - I foolishly thought a plug-in protector
was better than nothing. *Then lightning taught us some lessons. *No
way around what provides protection from the typically destructive
surge: earth ground. * *Even the manufacturer will not claim what Bud
is posting. *Above: plug-in protectors too close to the appliance even
made damage possible. *What kind of protection is that? *Ineffective
protection. *In multiple examples, *plug-in protector was worse than
nothing. *But good news: *it will protect from a surge that typically
does not create damage. *That means complete protection.


We do get a chuckle here listening to you rant about Bud and trying to
discredit him by claiming he sells plug-in surge protectors. How
long before you start accusing me too? Actually, I think you have,
in the past.

Are you insane? It is routine to have receptacles attached a
breaker box. With simple technical grasp of facts, then a receptacle
located only feet from the breaker box would be an alternative. Is
that so difficult? Well yes if one ignores impedance. It's this
difficult. Longer wire means high impedance which is why a six cord
power cord is cut as short as possible. Two EE Times front page
articles were provided so that trader could learn what is important -
low impedance. Trader never read it. Instead trader complains
because he cannot find an AC receptacle. Trader, please stop asking
for help to find an AC receptacle. Ask your mom.

Cutting feet off that protector wire is significant for a kludge
protection system. Even sharp wire bends diminish protection. Trader
would know that from reading front page EE Times articles entitled
"Protecting Electrical Devices from Lightning Transients". Then
trader’s next post could be questions based in technology and tempered
by numbers.

How does protection inside a computer get bypassed? Where does the
black wire connect? Where does the green wire connect? Protection
inside a computer is substantial where the black wire connects. A
green wire surge finds an easy and direct connection - near zero
protection - into motherboard electronics. Plug-in protector connects
a black wire surge directly into the motherboard - completely
bypassing computers best protection. Surge was shunted (connected) to
green wire by the plug-in protector.

Page 42 Figure 8 also shows what may happen when an adjacent
protector does not earth a surge. A surge was earthed 8000 volts
destructively through the TV. Same failure created by a protector
without earthing was traced through a network of powered off computer.

How curious. Where surge damage must never happen, plug-in
protectors are not used. Effective surge protection is routinely
earthed where wires enter the building and up to 50 meters distant
from the computer. Let's see. Damage to electronics because the
protector was too close to electronics and too far from earth ground.
No damage when protector is attached to earth ground and up to 50
meters distant from electronics. What were you saying about 100 years
of no damage when protectors are short to earth ground and separated
from electronics? Oh. Trader is still having difficulty finding a
wall receptacle near the breaker box. No time to learn the science
in an article entitled "Protecting Electrical Devices from Lightning
Transients"? Too much reality?

Wire impedance is so significant that manufacturers even consider
impedance on one inch MOV wires leads. .

Many apartments have such good earthing that only a ‘whole house’
protector is required. Provided is how to kludge a protector in an
apartment. It assumes one can find an AC receptacle closest to the
breaker box.

Responsible companies sell protectors with an earthing connection.
We make those protectors even better by upgrading earthing. Then plug-
in protectors need not earth surges destructively through appliances.

On Apr 22, 8:48 pm, wrote:
Are you for real? Cut the cord short and plug it into a receptacle
attached to the breaker box? What receptacle attached to what
breaker box? Geez, I've lived in many apartments and the only
outlets attached to the breaker box were the ones in the wall, which
is where everyone, including the IEEE would place the protector. And
like cutting the cord from 3 ft to what 1 ft is going to make a
significant difference? LOL
...

Hmmm, couldn't be too many decades ago that a typical house had
networked computers...

All computers powered off. Plug-in


How does an external surge protector "bypass" the internal
protection? And how exactly is it that the same components inside a
computer are going to deal with the surge any differently?
Internally, the MOV's have the exact same deployment choices ie hot to
neutral, hot to ground, etc that they do in an external surge
protector. Unless you're gonna tell us that the TV comes with an
earth ground inside it.
...

Do you have any credible reference, or even any reference at all,
other than your own claims of surge protectors causing damage of this
type rather than helping prevent it? Funny the IEEE doesn't warn
about it.


No, only wild speculation says it's worse. Reference please.

A plug-in protector does not even claim to protect from
...

Read the label and marking on the box it comes in.

Do not assume, as Bud hopes, that all
...

Of course in your jaundiced view, anything that's bad that happens is
due to either plug-in surge protectors or human failure. If the cat
died, it would be due to the surge protector too. I've had exactly
the opposite experience, where electronics connected to plug-in surge
protectors came through a lightning storm OK, while one device NOT
using one was destroyed.
...

On Apr 23, 3:08 pm, wrote:
No, but you certainly seem to be. A total nutjob if ever there was
one. Anyone who follows you should make sure all of their affairs are
in order and their life insurance is paid up so the kids, if they
aren't killed too, can still go to college someday.

Thank you for a technical reply. Those who were so dumb as to also
believe Saddam had WMDs would also prove their intelligence by posting
insults. Less responsible companies such as APC and Monster Cable
sell those scam plug-in protectors approved by salt@dog. Companies
who must make equipment so that a house does not burn down provide
'whole house' protectors. Responsible companies such as Intermatic,
Cutler-Hammer, Leviton, Keison, Square D, Siemens, and GE. But
salty@dog uses venom to know products from these companies will kill
kids. As usual, those who insult must know; could not bother to even
learn how electricity works.

Did you also read the warranty from those plug-in protectors? Chock
full of fine print exemption after exemption. For example, if you
have a protector from any other company, then the first company will
not honor its warranty. What kind of warranty is that? Companies
recommended by salty@dog even write warranties that can never be
honored. They are preaching to people such as salty@dog who is expert
because he can attack - and never posts even one technical number.

A majority believe plug-in myths for the same reason a majority also
believed Saddam had WMDs. They were told. Therefore it must be
true. If facts contradict their reality, then attack the messenger.
salty@dog (and 'experts' like him) do this. Venom was also sufficient
to prove Saddam had WMDs. Under the new rules of extremism, it must
be true only because salty@dog says so.

Accurately described is what makes an Intermatic protector so
effective. Without an earthed Intermatic, plug-in protectors can even
contribute to adjacent appliance damage - Page 42 Figure 8. With the
Intermatic and proper earthing, then surges that the plug-in protector
might protect from are made irrelevant. Any protector without that
short (low impedance) connection to earth ground is ineffective
protection - and promoted by salty@dog venom. A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground so that surge energy need not dissipate
(destroy appliances) inside a building.

On Apr 23, 3:53*pm, w_tom wrote:
On Apr 23, 3:08 pm, wrote:

No, but you certainly seem to be. A total nutjob if ever there was
one. Anyone who follows you should make sure all of their affairs are
in order and their life insurance is paid up so the kids, if they
aren't killed too, can still go to college someday.

* Thank you for a technical reply. *Those who were so dumb as to also
believe Saddam had WMDs would also prove their intelligence by posting
insults. *Less responsible companies such as APC and Monster Cable
sell those scam plug-in protectors approved by salt@dog. *Companies
who must make equipment so that a house does not burn down provide
'whole house' protectors. *Responsible companies such as Intermatic,
Cutler-Hammer, Leviton, Keison, Square D, Siemens, and GE. *But
salty@dog uses venom to know products from these companies will kill
kids. As usual, those who insult must know; could not bother to even
learn how electricity works.


OK, now we have Tom's list of the "responsible" companies who know all
about surge protection. Funny thing though, most of these responsible
companies on the list actually sell plug in surge protectors as part
of their product lines.

Intermatic sells plug-ins:
http://www.intermatic.com/Default.as...4&cid=46&did=6

http://www.intermatic.com/Default.as...6&cid=46&did=6

http://www.intermatic.com/Default.as...5&cid=46&did=6

Metal Surge Strips
Industrial Point of Use Protection IG11266BLK10
6 outlet metal plug strip surge protection with 10 foot cord and
lighted on/off switch. 15 amp resettable breaker. Black metal housing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Metal Surge Protection Devices IG11246
4 outlet metal plug strip surge protection with 6 foot cord and
lighted on/off switch. 15 amp resettable breaker.


So does Leviton:
http://www.leviton.com/OA_HTML/ibeCC...minisite=10028

Leviton Surge Protection Strips provide surge protection in a variety
of everyday applications. They are ideal for various residential needs
and at commercial workstations to protect computers and peripherals.
All models feature resettable circuit breakers. The 5300 series
features an LED, which indicates protection is active. It is also
available in a hospital grade model.


So does GE:
http://www.jascoproducts.com/product...?idCategory=33

GE Home Surge Protectors
Home Our Products GE Home Electric Products GE Home Surge
Protectors
Sort by: SKU Description High Price Low Price

GE 10-Outlet Surge Protector - 3090 Joules

Price $39.99

Protects the phone line and coaxial line.


Here's what Siemens has to say about plug-ins:

http://www2.sea.siemens.com/Products...anguagecode=en

"Point of use products provide a second line of defense. Homeowners
can reinforce the protection provided by a point-of-entry protection
device by installing surge protectors (strips) and low-voltage surge
suppressors.

Surge protectors plug into grounded wall receptacles where sensitive
electronic equipment is located. These devices defend electronic
components against surges from outside, and internally generated
transient events (surges) that travel through AC power lines. Low-
voltage surge suppressors defend electronic components against surges
from outside, and internally generated transient events (surges) that
travel through phone, data, and coaxial lines. These plug-in
protectors generally have much lower limiting voltages than entry
protectors, and provide better protection for electronic equipment.

As a homeowner, where do you install these devices? Simply put—
anywhere you’ve got expensive or sensitive electronic equipment like
computers, VCRs, fax machines, PCs with modems, satellite systems,
stereo systems, copiers and scanners. Start by physically inspecting
each room to determine which electronics need point-of-use surge
protection, what kind of lines and how many plugs you have, and what
type of signal lines are connected to each system. As a rule of thumb,
all types of equipment with signal lines, such as phones, cable TV,
and satellites, should be equipped with low-voltage surge suppressors,
which are specially designed to protect the signal lines."


That should take care of that specious argument as well as showing how
in touch with these companies product lines you really are.

BTW, I'm still waiting for an explanation of how a plug-in surge
protector is either useless or actually causes damage, while similar
or identical components located inside the electronics are very
effective according to you. How exactly can that be? Inside the
appliance the MOVs have exactly the same working limitations they
would in the protector strip in terms of connections. In other
words, there isn't an earth ground inside the appliance or
electronics, which is what you claim any protection must have to be of
any value. . So, how is it that the protection can work there, but
not in the plug-in?

I'm sure you know even less about WMDs.

On Apr 23, 5:59 pm, wrote:
OK, now we have Tom's list of the "responsible" companies who know all
about surge protection. Funny thing though, most of these responsible
companies on the list actually sell plug in surge protectors as part
of their product lines.

Names of responsible manufacturers were provided for years. Did
trader only read enough to criticize? Why did trader not see this
list (and others) posted repeatedly for years? Reading selectively?
He did not even read the EE Times article entitled "Protecting
Electrical Devices from Lightning Transients".

If the consumer is so wealthy and so poorly informed as to spend
tens of times more money on plug-in protectors, then I also would sell
one to him. Profits are just too obscenely massive to ignore. But I
would also recommend and provide effective protectors as responsible
manufacturers also do. Which companies sell protectors that actually
provide protection? Not APC. Not the $150 Monster Cable. Not
Tripplite, Not Belkin. And not the grocery store where a same
protector is sold for much less money.

Surge protection means surge energy must be dissipated in earth.
Plug-in promoters hype myths: protector absorbs all that energy,
'clamps to nothing', or make surge energy disappear. No science
supports those myths. But that is what a plug-in protector must do to
protect from surges that typically create damage.

No earth ground means no effective protection. Worse, plug-in
protectors (when the building does not have a properly earthed 'whole
house' protector) can even contribute to appliance damage - ie Page 42
Figure 8 and that network of powered off computers.

Facilities that must suffer direct lightning strikes to incoming
wires without damage always uses 'whole house' type protection.
Always. Often used is the same solution that protects munitions from
direct lightning strikes - Ufer grounds. In every case, earth ground
and 'whole house' protectors are carefully installed. In FL where
damage is not acceptable and where earth has poor conductivity, this
provides protection:
http://members.aol.com/gfretwell/ufer.jpg

Others do same so that direct lightning strikes need not cause
damage:
http://scott-inc.com/html/ufer.htm
http://www.psihq.com/iread/ufergrnd.htm
http://www.copper.org/applications/e.../nebraska.html
http://home1.gte.net/res0958z/

QST (the ARRL official magazine) has numerous articles on surge
protection. Every one discusses what? Not plug-in protectors.
Earthing is what every article discussed for no surge damage. Whose
household electronics are at greatest risk? Ham radio operators:
http://www.eham.net/articles/6848?eh...61e080ac23c416
Electrical Code vs. Good RF Grounding by K9KJM on November 22,
2003
Those who say "nothing will withstand a direct lightning strike" are
very misinformed. My towers take direct lightning hits most every
big storm. So do most all tall commercial towers. With NO damage!
Those old wives tales of damage are for the most part over 50 year
old tales of woe from improperly grounded/ protected stations.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) in alt.tv.tech.hdtv on 9 May
2006 in "Is HDTV really user friendly? Options":
That tower takes a direct lightning strike about three times a summer. ...
Simply grounding the TV antenna by itself may or may not make things
worse rather than better. What's required is called a single point ground
where all of the grounds tie together

Bud routinely responds that homeowners do not have ham radio
antennas. Correct. Instead, homeowner appliances are connected to an
'antenna equivalent' wire. To lightning, AC electric wires are
'antennas' connected directly to every household appliance. Same
protection learned in early 1900 radio stations is now implemented in
all homes for about $1 per protected appliance. A less expensive
solution is also the superior one - a properly earthed 'whole house'
protector. Same solution used routinely in radio stations where
surges must not create damage.

Your cable company will recommend removing a plug-in protector from
their cable. Cable already has effective protection without any
protector. Responsible cable companies make that 'less than 10 foot'
connection to earthing using only a wire and ground block. Bud will
claim that is not sufficient. A properly earthed cable (short
connection to single point earth ground) provides complete cable
protection:
Richard Harrison in rec.radio.amateur.antenna on 26 Jan 2004 in
"Damaged by a lightning?":
...we did use a separate ground rod en each tower leg. This was
lightning protection. We also used closed circuit antennas
grounded at the tops of the towers. Coax rejects
common-mode lightning energy. We used zero protection
across coax and never had a burnt transistor receiver front-end.

What makes the Intermatic 'whole house' protector so effective? A
short connection to single point earth ground. How do we make that
one protector even better? Money wasted on plug-in protectors,
instead, is put into better earthing. A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. How many more professionals are quoted
here?

From QST July 2002 "Lightning Protection ..."
The purpose of the ground connection is to take the energy
arriving on the antenna feed line cables and control lines
(and to a lesser extent on the power and telephone lines)
and give it a path back to the earth, our energy sink. The
impedance of the ground connection should be low so the
energy prefers this path and is dispersed harmlessly. To
achieve a low impedance the ground connection needs to be
short (distance), straight, and wide.

How curious. This is also what makes the Intermatic surge protector
so effective. And this is what plug-in promoters must deny or ignore
to promote their obscenely profitable products. The Intermatic is
only as effective as its earth ground. A plug-in protector has no
earthing. Or we cut its power cord as short as possible, connect to
as close as possible the breaker box, and hope that provides at least
some earthing.

wrote:
On Apr 23, 3:53 pm, w_tom wrote:
On Apr 23, 3:08 pm, wrote:

Those who were so dumb as to also
believe Saddam had WMDs would also prove their intelligence by posting
insults. Less responsible companies such as APC and Monster Cable
sell those scam plug-in protectors approved by salt@dog. Companies
who must make equipment so that a house does not burn down provide
'whole house' protectors. Responsible companies such as Intermatic,
Cutler-Hammer, Leviton, Keison, Square D, Siemens, and GE.


OK, now we have Tom's list of the "responsible" companies who know all
about surge protection. Funny thing though, most of these responsible
companies on the list actually sell plug in surge protectors as part
of their product lines.

Intermatic sells plug-ins:
http://www.intermatic.com/Default.as...4&cid=46&did=6

snip


So does Leviton:
http://www.leviton.com/OA_HTML/ibeCC...minisite=10028

snip


So does GE:
http://www.jascoproducts.com/product...?idCategory=33

snip


Here's what Siemens has to say about plug-ins:

http://www2.sea.siemens.com/Products...anguagecode=en

snip


That should take care of that specious argument as well as showing how
in touch with these companies product lines you really are.

Nice list.

You can add Cuttler Hammer - they make plug-in suppressors.

And looking at another favorite of w_ - SquareD *service panel*
suppressors:

For the 'best' suppressor - SDSB1175C
- The literature says "electronic equipment may need additional
protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use."
- The connected equipment warranty $ is double when the suppressors "is
used in conjunction with ... a point of use surge protective device."

For the next best suppressor - QO2175SB and HOM2175SB
- The connected equipment warranty $ does not include "electronic
devices such as: microwave ovens, audio and stereo components, video
equipment, televisions, and computers."


Alas - all but one of w_'s "responsible companies" are actually
irresponsible and "hype myths".

And what a surprise, w_ had no real response. I wonder why?



I'm sure you know even less about WMDs.

On the contrary, w_ was chief advisor to W on Wmds. Note the
corresponding lack of support for w_’s claim that plug-in suppressors do
NOT work.


Good news w_ - religious fanatics can be cured!!! Look in the yellow
pages for "deprogrammers".

--
bud--

Unlike salty@dog, I don't post about things I know nothing about.
Science reality is not provided by posting insults. Old dogs cannot
be taught new tricks. And properly earthed 'whole house' protectors
such as the Intermatic can provide more that sufficient surge
protection. The protector is only as effective as its earth ground.

On Apr 24, 6:19*am, wrote:
W_Tom only participates in threads about surge protectors. He scans all news
groups looking for just those threads. If you want to engage him in an argument,
just bear in mind that you are giving him a sexual thrill and he is masturbating
while typing his nutty replies.