.... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 3:07:49 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

We always used the Square D units. Never had a failure. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Surge Monster

Oren wrote:
... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

So, I have a SCM150. It's inside, but I'll check.

Greg

gregz wrote:
Oren wrote:
... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

So, I have a SCM150. It's inside, but I'll check.

Greg

I can't find other links to moisture, but I can find links to FIRE !!!!
I'm disconnecting. Actually, I had an older model, lesser amps. It blew one
day with a bang. The case did not shatter, but stuff came out the hole.

Thanks for posting. Some hazards on basic PROTECION....

http://www.rbs2.com/fire.htm

Greg

On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:46:28 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 3:07:49 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

We always used the Square D units. Never had a failure. ^_^

Mine hasn't failed for AC. I think it is inside the disconnect box (I
can check). Not much rain in the desert -- 4" per year.

I do plan to use a Square whole house SPD in the breaker panel
(round-to-it).

On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 07:15:08 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

gregz wrote:
Oren wrote:
... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

So, I have a SCM150. It's inside, but I'll check.

Greg

I can't find other links to moisture, but I can find links to FIRE !!!!
I'm disconnecting. Actually, I had an older model, lesser amps. It blew one
day with a bang. The case did not shatter, but stuff came out the hole.

Thanks for posting. Some hazards on basic PROTECION....

http://www.rbs2.com/fire.htm

Greg

Thanks, Saved the URL to read later.

On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 10:32:50 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:46:28 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 3:07:49 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

We always used the Square D units. Never had a failure. ^_^

Mine hasn't failed for AC. I think it is inside the disconnect box (I
can check). Not much rain in the desert -- 4" per year.

I do plan to use a Square whole house SPD in the breaker panel
(round-to-it).
Installed one in my brand new panel last week.

On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:46:15 -0400, wrote:

Mine hasn't failed for AC. I think it is inside the disconnect box (I
can check). Not much rain in the desert -- 4" per year.

I do plan to use a Square whole house SPD in the breaker panel
(round-to-it).

Installed one in my brand new panel last week.

Not an expert, but I guess lightning killed an electronic board for
my washer or it was a surge spike? TV was protected during the same
storm, no problem.

Oren wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:46:15 -0400, wrote:

Mine hasn't failed for AC. I think it is inside the disconnect box (I
can check). Not much rain in the desert -- 4" per year.

I do plan to use a Square whole house SPD in the breaker panel
(round-to-it).

Installed one in my brand new panel last week.

Not an expert, but I guess lightning killed an electronic board for
my washer or it was a surge spike? TV was protected during the same
storm, no problem.

Don't know. In my case of original supressor exploding, it could have been
my house that induced the surge. Storm day, lights were dimming and cutting
on and off. Air conditioner might have been running. Supressor attached to
air conditioner breaker. Breaker shut off during supressor explosion. No
other outlet oppressors affected, and I had at least 4 attached around the
house.

I.would like o have another 'whole house' supressor installed, and it sure
better be metal encased.

The supo type I've seened used in main breaker box on show Holmes on Homes.
I do not like the fact it uses stranded wire for breaker use.

Greg

Oren wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:46:28 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Monster
wrote:

On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 3:07:49 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
... water leaks and potential failure.

- Supco SCM 60 and 150 (Sycom)

- 5-2-1 SPD 60 and 150 (CPS products)

-SYC 120/240 T2 (Sycom)

"...There have been reports of surge protector failures in the field.
Our investigation concluded that moisture can penetrate the unit
causing an electrical issue and potential failure. There is currently
no government recall of the surge protectors, but as a precaution, we
are removing and replacing all the surge protectors in question. There
is no additional cost to our customers."

http://www.onehourheatandair.com/surgereplacement

Happy landing

We always used the Square D units. Never had a failure. ^_^

Mine hasn't failed for AC. I think it is inside the disconnect box (I
can check). Not much rain in the desert -- 4" per year.

I do plan to use a Square whole house SPD in the breaker panel
(round-to-it).

In my area, outside disconnect boxes are not the norm. Might be required
for new installations.

Greg

On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 8:09:12 PM UTC-5, Gz wrote:
Oren wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:46:15 -0400, wrote:

Mine hasn't failed for AC. I think it is inside the disconnect box (I
can check). Not much rain in the desert -- 4" per year.

I do plan to use a Square whole house SPD in the breaker panel
(round-to-it).

Installed one in my brand new panel last week.

Not an expert, but I guess lightning killed an electronic board for
my washer or it was a surge spike? TV was protected during the same
storm, no problem.

Don't know. In my case of original supressor exploding, it could have been
my house that induced the surge. Storm day, lights were dimming and cutting
on and off. Air conditioner might have been running. Supressor attached to
air conditioner breaker. Breaker shut off during supressor explosion. No
other outlet oppressors affected, and I had at least 4 attached around the
house.

I.would like o have another 'whole house' supressor installed, and it sure
better be metal encased.

The supo type I've seened used in main breaker box on show Holmes on Homes.
I do not like the fact it uses stranded wire for breaker use.

Greg

For a few bucks a month, you may be able to get your power company to install a meter base whole house surge arrester and I believe it may come with a guarantee against damage to your appliances due to lighting or power surges. ^_^

http://www.leviton.com/OA_HTML/Secti...?section=39659

[8~{} Uncle Surge Monster

Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 8:09:12 PM UTC-5, Gz wrote:
Oren wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:46:15 -0400, wrote:

Mine hasn't failed for AC. I think it is inside the disconnect box (I
can check). Not much rain in the desert -- 4" per year.

I do plan to use a Square whole house SPD in the breaker panel
(round-to-it).

Installed one in my brand new panel last week.

Not an expert, but I guess lightning killed an electronic board for
my washer or it was a surge spike? TV was protected during the same
storm, no problem.

Don't know. In my case of original supressor exploding, it could have been
my house that induced the surge. Storm day, lights were dimming and cutting
on and off. Air conditioner might have been running. Supressor attached to
air conditioner breaker. Breaker shut off during supressor explosion. No
other outlet oppressors affected, and I had at least 4 attached around the
house.

I.would like o have another 'whole house' supressor installed, and it sure
better be metal encased.

The supo type I've seened used in main breaker box on show Holmes on Homes.
I do not like the fact it uses stranded wire for breaker use.

Greg

For a few bucks a month, you may be able to get your power company to
install a meter base whole house surge arrester and I believe it may come
with a guarantee against damage to your appliances due to lighting or power surges. ^_^

http://www.leviton.com/OA_HTML/Secti...?section=39659

[8~{} Uncle Surge Monster

Seemed expensive at the time. When I moved in 10 years ago, they asked if I
wanted to keep the installed surge device. I said no. I never had notice of
them uninstalling anything, never noticed anything. The old homeowners were
cheap. I think it was scammy deal.

Greg

On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 9:09:12 PM UTC-4, Gz wrote:
The supo type I've seened used in main breaker box on show Holmes on Homes.
I do not like the fact it uses stranded wire for breaker use.

Lightning is typically 20,000 amps. So a minimal 'whole house' protector should be at least 50,000 amps. No protector should fail during a direct lightning strike or other surge. If its indicator light reports a failure, that protector was grossly undersized. Replacement may need be larger.

Each layer of protection is only defined by what a protector connects to - earth ground. A protector in the breaker box should be quite effective due to earth ground rods connected low impedance (ie less than 10 feet away) by a hardwire (a bare copper, quarter inch copper wire).

Each layer of protection is only defined by what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules - earth ground. Above only discusses 'secondary' protection. Also inspect your 'primary' surge protection layer. A picture demonstrates what to inspect:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Protection is only provided by what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules. No protector does that. An effective protector is only a connecting device wired low impedance (no sharp wire bends) to earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. That is protection during each surge. 50,000 amps defines protector life expectancy over many surges.

No protector should ever fail catastrophically like that. Either is was grossly undersized, not properly earthed, or a 'primary' protection layer was missing.

On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 7:44:58 AM UTC-5, westom wrote:
On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 9:09:12 PM UTC-4, Gz wrote:
The supo type I've seened used in main breaker box on show Holmes on Homes.
I do not like the fact it uses stranded wire for breaker use.

Lightning is typically 20,000 amps. So a minimal 'whole house' protector should be at least 50,000 amps. No protector should fail during a direct lightning strike or other surge. If its indicator light reports a failure, that protector was grossly undersized. Replacement may need be larger.

Each layer of protection is only defined by what a protector connects to - earth ground. A protector in the breaker box should be quite effective due to earth ground rods connected low impedance (ie less than 10 feet away) by a hardwire (a bare copper, quarter inch copper wire).

Each layer of protection is only defined by what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules - earth ground. Above only discusses 'secondary' protection. Also inspect your 'primary' surge protection layer. A picture demonstrates what to inspect:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Protection is only provided by what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules. No protector does that. An effective protector is only a connecting device wired low impedance (no sharp wire bends) to earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. That is protection during each surge. 50,000 amps defines protector life expectancy over many surges.

No protector should ever fail catastrophically like that. Either is was grossly undersized, not properly earthed, or a 'primary' protection layer was missing.

I read something about government studies concerning surge arresters protecting facilities from EMP and it involved layers of protection. Surge protection where power entered the building and at every breaker panel and device down the line. Here in town, an electronics company I dealt with sold a bunch of high end surge arresters to a cellphone company for their sites. Lightning strikes would often blow the hell out of the surge arrestors but none of the very expensive equipment was ever damaged. Hummm, let me see. a $100 dollar surge arrester or a $100,000 piece of electronic gear. I'll have to think about which one I'm concerned about losing. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Surge Monster

On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 9:07:06 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
Lightning strikes would often blow the hell out of the surge arrestors
but none of the very expensive equipment was ever damaged.

Obviously did not happen that way if one remembers how electricity works. If a current is incoming to an adjacent protector, then at the same time a current is outgoing into attached expensive equipment. Where is the protection?

A protector, blown to hell, has not provided protection. A surge is a current source. That means voltage increases as necessary to 'blow to hell' anything that tries to stop it. Voltage increased as necessary (causing catastrophic protector failure) so that current also flows into attached equipment. Both incoming and outgoing current paths must exist simultaneously. Where is the protection?

A surge current, too tiny to damage attached (more robust) equipment, also destroyed a grossly undersized protector. Where is protection?

Adjacent protectors are for tiny and completely different transients already made irrelevant by protection inside equipment. Adjacent protectors do not claim to protect from a typically destructive surge - that hunts for earth ground - that typically does damage.

Second, each layer of protection is not defined by a protector. Each protection layer is defined by what absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules - earth ground. As explained previously. Then protection inside equipment is not overwhelmed.

Facilities that had damage (even to protectors) start an analysis to discover a human created defect. Since energy must dissipate outside in earth - not inside. Unfortunately, many conclude only using observation. Not by first learning basic concepts. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate - harmlessly. A destroyed protector was grossly undersized - ineffective.

Intentionally undersizing a protector gets consumers (who only use observation) to recommended that ineffective protector and buy more. Undersizing increases profits.

Third, an IEEE brochure Figure 8 demonstrates same. A home had no properly earthed 'whole house' solution - no 'secondary' protection layer. So a plug-in protector earthed a surge current 8000 volts destructively via some nearby TV. It did what a protector does IF not properly earthed. To even make damage easier.

Fourth, if a protector was blown to hell, then it was a potential fire. Fire has always been a problem with undersized (plug-in) protectors - that are blown to hell. Protector part (MOV) manufacturers are blunt. That 'catastrophic' failure is unacceptable. APC recently announced some APC protectors are so dangerous as to be removed immediately.

A surge, too tiny to overwhelm protection inside equipment, destroyed a grossly undersized protector. Undersized protectors are a potential fire. An indicator light only reports one type of protector failure; that the protector failed due to undersizing. Fortunately it failed catastrophically without causing a fire.

Protection has always been about energy dissipating harmlessly outside; as Franklin demonstrated in 1752. Protectors that fail did not perform protection.

Informed consumers implement a 'secondary' protection layer. And inspect their 'primary' protection layer. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Protectors that are blown to hell were grossly undersized; did not do protection.

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 06:27:20 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 9:07:06 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
Lightning strikes would often blow the hell out of the surge arrestors
but none of the very expensive equipment was ever damaged.

Obviously did not happen that way if one remembers how electricity works. If a current is incoming to an adjacent protector, then at the same time a current is outgoing into attached expensive equipment. Where is the protection?

A protector, blown to hell, has not provided protection. A surge is a current source. That means voltage increases as necessary to 'blow to hell' anything that tries to stop it. Voltage increased as necessary (causing catastrophic protector failure) so that current also flows into attached equipment. Both incoming and outgoing current paths must exist simultaneously. Where is the protection?

A surge current, too tiny to damage attached (more robust) equipment, also destroyed a grossly undersized protector. Where is protection?

Adjacent protectors are for tiny and completely different transients already made irrelevant by protection inside equipment. Adjacent protectors do not claim to protect from a typically destructive surge - that hunts for earth ground - that typically does damage.

Second, each layer of protection is not defined by a protector. Each protection layer is defined by what absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules - earth ground. As explained previously. Then protection inside equipment is not overwhelmed.

Facilities that had damage (even to protectors) start an analysis to discover a human created defect. Since energy must dissipate outside in earth - not inside. Unfortunately, many conclude only using observation. Not by first learning basic concepts. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate - harmlessly. A destroyed protector was grossly undersized - ineffective.

Intentionally undersizing a protector gets consumers (who only use observation) to recommended that ineffective protector and buy more. Undersizing increases profits.

Third, an IEEE brochure Figure 8 demonstrates same. A home had no properly earthed 'whole house' solution - no 'secondary' protection layer. So a plug-in protector earthed a surge current 8000 volts destructively via some nearby TV. It did what a protector does IF not properly earthed. To even make damage easier.

Fourth, if a protector was blown to hell, then it was a potential fire. Fire has always been a problem with undersized (plug-in) protectors - that are blown to hell. Protector part (MOV) manufacturers are blunt. That 'catastrophic' failure is unacceptable. APC recently announced some APC protectors are so dangerous as to be removed immediately.

A surge, too tiny to overwhelm protection inside equipment, destroyed a grossly undersized protector. Undersized protectors are a potential fire. An indicator light only reports one type of protector failure; that the protector failed due to undersizing. Fortunately it failed catastrophically without causing a fire.

Protection has always been about energy dissipating harmlessly outside; as Franklin demonstrated in 1752. Protectors that fail did not perform protection.

Informed consumers implement a 'secondary' protection layer. And inspect their 'primary' protection layer. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Protectors that are blown to hell were grossly undersized; did not do protection.
You are not totally correct. When a "protector" conducts to ground
without failing, it is doing it's job 100%. If the surge is too big
for the protector, it starts dissipating the durge to ground,
lessening the amount of surge getting past it, and when it "blows"
there is a plasma arc which is very highly conductive, still
dissipating the excess power to ground. It is now not doing 100% of
it's job, but it is still providing protection FOR THAT SURGE. any
subsequent surge is unprotected - and any downstream surge protector
MAY be adequate to prevent damage from what is left of the surge.

When a surge protector on the fused side of the panel conducts it
SHOULD pop the breaker as well - and if the surge is strong enough to
destroy the wholehouse surge protector it MAY also destroy or
seriously compromise the main breaker as well

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 2:02:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
You are not totally correct. When a "protector" conducts to ground
without failing, it is doing it's job 100%. If the surge is too big
for the protector, it starts dissipating the durge to ground,
lessening the amount of surge getting past it, and when it "blows"
...
When a surge protector on the fused side of the panel conducts it
SHOULD pop the breaker as well - and if the surge is strong enough to
destroy the wholehouse surge protector

Problem is your term 'ground'. Which ground? Chassis ground? Analog ground? Floating ground? Receptacle ground? Ground bus in a breaker box? Digital ground? Some are even electrically interconnected and are still electrically different. A critically important expression cannot be ignored: low impedance (ie less than 10 feet). That term explains why interior protectors cannot do and to not claim to protect from the destructive type of surge.

No breaker or fuse pops to stop a surge. The number of reasons why are too many for this discussion. Some that you must know before every recommending protection: 1) a surge is done in microseconds. Fuses and breakers take milliseconds, seconds, or minutes to open. How many consecutive surges would pass through a fuse or breaker before it trips? 300? 10,000?

2) All fuses and circuit breakers have a voltage number. For example, many line fuses are 250 volts. That means the fuse continues conducting current if voltage exceeds 250 volts. A surge current increases voltage as necessary to blow through anything that might stop it (as explained earlier). That means a fuse blows and the surge would continue conducting through that fuse.

Claiming that a fuse or circuit breaker can avert a surge is a classic soundbyte myth. Posted in but a few sentences and without numbers. Reality takes paragraphs. And always includes numbers. Just another reason why those urban myths are quickly identified. Problem is a majority believe those myths; do not learn from the fewer who actually do this stuff.

So how does a surge protector fail? More facts that can only be explained in many paragraphs. A microsecond surge does damage. The actual damage takes milliseconds to occur - long after the surge is done. And then something even more powerful that a surge occurs - called a follow through current.. The now damage protector (that has no visual indication) is then further destroyed by a follow-through current - sometimes causing a fire.

BTW, you ignored the paragraph about fire. Fire is another problem when a protector is so grossly undersized as to fail during any one surge. Why ignore fires created by undersized protectors? That is not a rhetorical question. It is often ignored by many who have no idea what a protector really does and why it must never fail catastrophically.

Protectors that fail do not protect electronics. Also create other serious problems. So many reasons why that facilities (that cannot have damage), instead, spend tens or 100 times less money on a completely different and well proven solution - called 'whole house'. Because protection does not exist during if a protector failed during that surge.

You assumed those near zero and many times more expensive protectors somehow connect to earth ground. Explained before you even posted: low impedance (ie less than 10 feet, no sharp wire bends, etc). Protectors adjacent to appliances do not have an earth ground. Plug-in protectors can only block what three miles of sky cannot. Or its hundreds of joules must magically absorb a destructive surge (ie hundreds of thousands of joules). A post that defines reality and protection (exposes urban myths) say so with numbers. Because the author has done this stuff - direct strikes without even protector failure.

BTW, if a 'whole house' protector fails on any surge, then it was grossly undersized. Numbers posted even for that. A direct lightning strike is typically 20,000 amps. So a minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Because effective protectors must never fail catastrophically during any surge. If a 50,000 amp 'whole house' protector fails, then it is replaced by a 100,000 amp protector. Nothing new here. This stuff has been well understood long before PCs even existed (ie more than 100 years ago).

What is essential to even protect HVAC? A 'whole house' solution with an often upgraded single point earth ground. And a low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) connection to the only ground that does protection.

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:07:04 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 2:02:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
You are not totally correct. When a "protector" conducts to ground
without failing, it is doing it's job 100%. If the surge is too big
for the protector, it starts dissipating the durge to ground,
lessening the amount of surge getting past it, and when it "blows"
...
When a surge protector on the fused side of the panel conducts it
SHOULD pop the breaker as well - and if the surge is strong enough to
destroy the wholehouse surge protector

Problem is your term 'ground'. Which ground? Chassis ground? Analog ground? Floating ground? Receptacle ground? Ground bus in a breaker box? Digital ground? Some are even electrically interconnected and are still electrically different. A critically important expression cannot be ignored: low impedance (ie less than 10 feet). That term explains why interior protectors cannot do and to not claim to protect from the destructive type of surge.

In this case, ground is ground. Earth ground. Utility ground. It is
the ONLY ground a whole house surge protector sees - and also, if the
house is properly wired, the only ground downstream surge protectors
will see. The neutral is also bonded to the earth connection

No breaker or fuse pops to stop a surge. The number of reasons why are too many for this discussion. Some that you must know before every recommending protection: 1) a surge is done in microseconds. Fuses and breakers take milliseconds, seconds, or minutes to open. How many consecutive surges would pass through a fuse or breaker before it trips? 300? 10,000?

IF you have a good high rated whole house protector and you get a
surge high enough to blow the protector, you are looking at in the
tens of thousands of amps, which even inmicroseconds, will trip most
breakers. Most breakers have both thermal and magnetic protection -
and a 10,000 amp surge will trip the magnetic portion extremely
quickly.Remember, neutral and ground are bonded, so a short to ground
is the same as a short from line to neutral.
I have seen breakers destroyed by surges WITHOUT a surge protector

2) All fuses and circuit breakers have a voltage number. For example, many line fuses are 250 volts. That means the fuse continues conducting current if voltage exceeds 250 volts. A surge current increases voltage as necessary to blow through anything that might stop it (as explained earlier). That means a fuse blows and the surge would continue conducting through that fuse.


The plasma will be the same as in the blown surge protector
And the surge protector will be in parallell with the loads in the
house - to ground.. Most of the surge will go to "ground". What does
not go to ground through the protector will go to ground though
downstream protectors if they exist. They may be enough to protect the
"protected" equipment - or they may blow as well.

Claiming that a fuse or circuit breaker can avert a surge is a classic soundbyte myth. Posted in but a few sentences and without numbers. Reality takes paragraphs. And always includes numbers. Just another reason why those urban myths are quickly identified. Problem is a majority believe those myths; do not learn from the fewer who actually do this stuff.

I didn't say it could "avert" a surge. I said it could mitigate a
surge.

So how does a surge protector fail? More facts that can only be explained in many paragraphs. A microsecond surge does damage. The actual damage takes milliseconds to occur - long after the surge is done. And then something even more powerful that a surge occurs - called a follow through current. The now damage protector (that has no visual indication) is then further destroyed by a follow-through current - sometimes causing a fire.

BTW, you ignored the paragraph about fire. Fire is another problem when a protector is so grossly undersized as to fail during any one surge. Why ignore fires created by undersized protectors? That is not a rhetorical question. It is often ignored by many who have no idea what a protector really does and why it must never fail catastrophically.

What is an "undersized" protector? What size of surge do you design
for??? is 22500 amps adequate???
What do you do to mitigate fire damage? Is placing it inside a steel
service entrance panel adequate?

How do you ensure any protection will NEVER fail catastrophically???

You can design for a specified maximum surge intensity and ensure it
does not fail catastrophically under those design parameters, but is
it possible to envision the maximum possible 1 in 1000 year
occurrence?? If you can, I'd love to see your crystal ball.

Protectors that fail do not protect electronics. Also create other serious problems. So many reasons why that facilities (that cannot have damage), instead, spend tens or 100 times less money on a completely different and well proven solution - called 'whole house'. Because protection does not exist during if a protector failed during that surge.

ANd you, my friend, seem to have totally missed the fact that I am
talking about "whole house" protection.

You assumed those near zero and many times more expensive protectors somehow connect to earth ground. Explained before you even posted: low impedance (ie less than 10 feet, no sharp wire bends, etc). Protectors adjacent to appliances do not have an earth ground. Plug-in protectors can only block what three miles of sky cannot. Or its hundreds of joules must magically absorb a destructive surge (ie hundreds of thousands of joules). A post that defines reality and protection (exposes urban myths) say so with numbers. Because the author has done this stuff - direct strikes without even protector failure.

No, you assumed I assumed that. I made no such assumption. I have
never made any recommendation other than whole house. Using secondary
protection WITH a whole house protector is a case of belt and
suspenders - the secondary protectors MAY save a device that MIGHT
have been damaged even with a whole house protector.

BTW, if a 'whole house' protector fails on any surge, then it was grossly undersized. Numbers posted even for that. A direct lightning strike is typically 20,000 amps. So a minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Because effective protectors must never fail catastrophically during any surge. If a 50,000 amp 'whole house' protector fails, then it is replaced by a 100,000 amp protector. Nothing new here. This stuff has been well understood long before PCs even existed (ie more than 100 years ago).

What is essential to even protect HVAC? A 'whole house' solution with an often upgraded single point earth ground. And a low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) connection to the only ground that does protection.

And even that will NOT protect an HVAC unit that suffers a direct
lightning strike. HVAC units are good targets for lightning strikes -
particularly rooftop mounted units.

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 7:39:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
In this case, ground is ground. Earth ground. Utility ground. It
is the ONLY ground a whole house surge protector sees - and also,
if the house is properly wired, the only ground downstream surge
protectors will see. The neutral is also bonded to the earth
connection

Many 'experts' forget to first learn basic electrical concepts. Reality is not found in soundbytes. Unfortunately reality must be explained in long replies - and with numbers.

Wire is never a perfect conductor as you only assumed. Wire is always an electronic component. Telcos need 'whole house' protectors as much as 50 meters distant from $multi-million electronics. Wire impedance (increased wire length) increases protection. A homeowner needs a 'whole house' protector connected within feet of earth ground - because wire impedance must be low. Basic electrical knowledge also says why a hardwire to earth must have no sharp bends, no splices, and not inside metallic conduit.

Obviously a wall receptacle safety ground does not have low impedance. Obviously it is too long, has many sharp bends, multiple splices, and can be inside metallic conduit. Other educated by advertising would not know these basic and critical electrical concepts.

Your denials demonstrate no experience. You did not even know what impedance is. Low impedance is critical to have surge protection.

Numbers: a wall receptacle safety ground might have less than 0.2 ohms resistance. Also 120 ohms impedance. A tiny 100 amp surge would put that wall receptacle at something less than 12,000 volts (100 amps times 120 ohms). Where is protection? That 12,000 volts demonstrates why plug-in protectors have no earth ground - do not protect from destructive (or even a tiny 100 amp) surge.

Any tech can dicover this using a three light receptacle tester. Disconnect and reconnect a building's earth ground. Tester reports safety ground always good. Why? Because safety ground and earth ground are electrically different. Please learn this stuff before denying.

Unfortunately many are only educated by hearsay and advertising. It is called a surge protector. That means it does effective protection? Please stop using junk science reasoning. Above numbers demonstrate why a protector is only as effective as its connection to and quality of earth ground - not to wall receptacle safety ground. Protection is the only item that harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules - earth ground.


On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 7:39:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
IF you have a good high rated whole house protector and you get a
surge high enough to blow the protector, you are looking at in the
tens of thousands of amps, which even inmicroseconds, will trip most
breakers.

First, only scam protectors block surges. Clearly you have no idea how a 'whole house' protector works. An effective protector does not block as you only speculated; it connects a surge to what does protection. You clearly have no idea how and why 'whole house' protection works. And why it is so effective.

Second, routine is a microseconds surge through a breaker without tripping it. A 'whole house' protector is on its own circuit breaker. A protector effectively earths a 20,000 amp lightning strike ... and does not trip its circuit breaker. Breaker does not trip on transients that are too short.

Numbers: breakers require millisecond or longer transients to trip. Or learn manufacturer numbers from their trip curves. Square D charts show tripping on transients of 5 milliseconds or higher. Despite wild speculation, typically destructive surges do not trip circuit breakers.

Breakers and fuses do not 'avert' or 'mitigate' a surge current. Breakers do not protect hardware. Numbers make that obvious. Breakers trip long after damage ... to protect human life. Please learn manufacturer specifications and datasheets before just assuming.

Had you learned how 'whole house' protector works, then you knew that protector connects via a circuit breaker. A 20,000 amp surge does not damage the protector and does not trip its breaker. Despite only speculation, that breaker does not trip during a 20,000 amp direct lightning trike. Please learn how 'whole house' protector works before posting so many denials. Please learn why breakers do not and cannot trip during a surge. Please learn how these things work before posting.

A surge current must not be anywhere inside the structure. Otherwise that current is hunting for earth destructively via appliances - including furnace and AC compressor.

Rooftop units are struck when that is a best (destructive) connection to earth. Damage directly traceable to a human mistake - no properly earthed lightning rods. A human all but invited lightning inside a building possibly causing additional and unnecessary damage.

Protection is never provided by circuit breakers. Breakers trip AFTER damage has happened - to protect human life. Critical is what provides protection - a low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) connection to single point earth ground. Then hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate outside. Then a surge is not inside hunting for earth destructive via any appliance or HVAC equipment. Protection is always about earth ground (not a wall receptacle safety ground). Even lightning rods must be earthed to protect rooftop equipment.

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 9:27:38 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 9:07:06 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
Lightning strikes would often blow the hell out of the surge arrestors
but none of the very expensive equipment was ever damaged.

Obviously did not happen that way if one remembers how electricity works. If a current is incoming to an adjacent protector, then at the same time a current is outgoing into attached expensive equipment. Where is the protection?

A protector, blown to hell, has not provided protection. A surge is a current source. That means voltage increases as necessary to 'blow to hell' anything that tries to stop it. Voltage increased as necessary (causing catastrophic protector failure) so that current also flows into attached equipment. Both incoming and outgoing current paths must exist simultaneously. Where is the protection?

Poor Tom, confused again. In the described situation, the current has
at least two paths, through the equipment or through the surge protector
to ground. All the current clearly does not have to go through the
protected equipment. Even with a failed, blown, surge protector, a lot
of the current almost certainly went through the surge protector to
ground.



A surge current, too tiny to damage attached (more robust) equipment, also destroyed a grossly undersized protector. Where is protection?

Totally made up. Who says that the surge was too tiny to damage
the "more robust" eqpt? The surge protector almost certainly
directed most of the surge current to ground. And I've yet to see
an external surge protector that has components that are rated lower
than those in the typical home appliances, eqpt, etc. They use the
same type of components, but the ones in the external surge protector
almost always have much higher capacities.




Adjacent protectors are for tiny and completely different transients already made irrelevant by protection inside equipment. Adjacent protectors do not claim to protect from a typically destructive surge - that hunts for earth ground - that typically does damage.


Baloney. The IEEE guide to surge protection which has been provided
to you many times, says you're wrong. They show point-of-use protectors
used as part of a tiered protection strategy. Here is the link:

http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf




Third, an IEEE brochure Figure 8 demonstrates same. A home had no properly earthed 'whole house' solution - no 'secondary' protection layer. So a plug-in protector earthed a surge current 8000 volts destructively via some nearby TV. It did what a protector does IF not properly earthed. To even make damage easier.


That isn't what that guide shows at all. It clearly shows in that diagram
TV1 that has a plug-in protector being protected, while the other TV, TV2 with
no protector gets damaged. Only a true loon would try to turn
that into the surge protector at TV1 *causing* the damage at TV2.

http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf

Page 33. It ends with "to protect TV2 a second surge protector is required".

QED


Fourth, if a protector was blown to hell, then it was a potential fire. Fire has always been a problem with undersized (plug-in) protectors - that are blown to hell. Protector part (MOV) manufacturers are blunt. That 'catastrophic' failure is unacceptable. APC recently announced some APC protectors are so dangerous as to be removed immediately.


Show us that "recent" APC recall please. AFAIK it was over a decade
ago. GM recalled some cars, does that mean all cars are unsafe?

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 2:02:33 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 06:27:20 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 9:07:06 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
Lightning strikes would often blow the hell out of the surge arrestors
but none of the very expensive equipment was ever damaged.

Obviously did not happen that way if one remembers how electricity works.. If a current is incoming to an adjacent protector, then at the same time a current is outgoing into attached expensive equipment. Where is the protection?

A protector, blown to hell, has not provided protection. A surge is a current source. That means voltage increases as necessary to 'blow to hell' anything that tries to stop it. Voltage increased as necessary (causing catastrophic protector failure) so that current also flows into attached equipment. Both incoming and outgoing current paths must exist simultaneously. Where is the protection?

A surge current, too tiny to damage attached (more robust) equipment, also destroyed a grossly undersized protector. Where is protection?

Adjacent protectors are for tiny and completely different transients already made irrelevant by protection inside equipment. Adjacent protectors do not claim to protect from a typically destructive surge - that hunts for earth ground - that typically does damage.

Second, each layer of protection is not defined by a protector. Each protection layer is defined by what absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules - earth ground. As explained previously. Then protection inside equipment is not overwhelmed.

Facilities that had damage (even to protectors) start an analysis to discover a human created defect. Since energy must dissipate outside in earth - not inside. Unfortunately, many conclude only using observation. Not by first learning basic concepts. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate - harmlessly. A destroyed protector was grossly undersized - ineffective.

Intentionally undersizing a protector gets consumers (who only use observation) to recommended that ineffective protector and buy more. Undersizing increases profits.

Third, an IEEE brochure Figure 8 demonstrates same. A home had no properly earthed 'whole house' solution - no 'secondary' protection layer. So a plug-in protector earthed a surge current 8000 volts destructively via some nearby TV. It did what a protector does IF not properly earthed. To even make damage easier.

Fourth, if a protector was blown to hell, then it was a potential fire. Fire has always been a problem with undersized (plug-in) protectors - that are blown to hell. Protector part (MOV) manufacturers are blunt. That 'catastrophic' failure is unacceptable. APC recently announced some APC protectors are so dangerous as to be removed immediately.

A surge, too tiny to overwhelm protection inside equipment, destroyed a grossly undersized protector. Undersized protectors are a potential fire. An indicator light only reports one type of protector failure; that the protector failed due to undersizing. Fortunately it failed catastrophically without causing a fire.

Protection has always been about energy dissipating harmlessly outside; as Franklin demonstrated in 1752. Protectors that fail did not perform protection.

Informed consumers implement a 'secondary' protection layer. And inspect their 'primary' protection layer. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Protectors that are blown to hell were grossly undersized; did not do protection.
You are not totally correct. When a "protector" conducts to ground
without failing, it is doing it's job 100%. If the surge is too big
for the protector, it starts dissipating the durge to ground,
lessening the amount of surge getting past it, and when it "blows"
there is a plasma arc which is very highly conductive, still
dissipating the excess power to ground. It is now not doing 100% of
it's job, but it is still providing protection FOR THAT SURGE. any
subsequent surge is unprotected - and any downstream surge protector
MAY be adequate to prevent damage from what is left of the surge.

Of course you have it correct, but it's no use. Tom has his
agenda and beliefs.

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 5:07:18 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:


BTW, if a 'whole house' protector fails on any surge, then it was grossly undersized. Numbers posted even for that. A direct lightning strike is typically 20,000 amps.

Oh no, here we go again. It's been pointed out to you 100 times over
the years that while a lightning strike can be 20,000 amps, the chances
of that showing up at the panel are virtually nil. Typical lightning
strike doesn't hit the panel, it hits the utility pole, the service
cable, the mast head, etc. and flashover conducts most of that current
to ground. Only a small fraction reaches the panel.



So a minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Because effective protectors must never fail catastrophically during any surge. If a 50,000 amp 'whole house' protector fails, then it is replaced by a 100,000 amp protector. Nothing new here. This stuff has been well understood long before PCs even existed (ie more than 100 years ago).

If it never fails, then why would it ever need to be replaced?
Even you yourself explained how every surge degrades a surge protector.
Enough surges, it fails.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 10:10:17 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 7:39:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
In this case, ground is ground. Earth ground. Utility ground. It
is the ONLY ground a whole house surge protector sees - and also,
if the house is properly wired, the only ground downstream surge
protectors will see. The neutral is also bonded to the earth
connection

Many 'experts' forget to first learn basic electrical concepts. Reality is not found in soundbytes. Unfortunately reality must be explained in long replies - and with numbers.

Wire is never a perfect conductor as you only assumed. Wire is always an electronic component. Telcos need 'whole house' protectors as much as 50 meters distant from $multi-million electronics. Wire impedance (increased wire length) increases protection. A homeowner needs a 'whole house' protector connected within feet of earth ground - because wire impedance must be low. Basic electrical knowledge also says why a hardwire to earth must have no sharp bends, no splices, and not inside metallic conduit.

Obviously a wall receptacle safety ground does not have low impedance. Obviously it is too long, has many sharp bends, multiple splices, and can be inside metallic conduit. Other educated by advertising would not know these basic and critical electrical concepts.

Your denials demonstrate no experience. You did not even know what impedance is. Low impedance is critical to have surge protection.


I know what impedance is. Here's what I've asked you many times before
and you cannot explain. You claim that surge protection inside appliances,
TVs, etc is just wonderful and very effective at dealing with surges. You
claim that a plug-in surge protector at the TV is totally ineffective
because of your impedance rant above. So, how can one work so well, yet
the other, operating under the exact same limitation, not only can't work,
but is dangerous?

Of course the insanity here is that the MOVs inside a typical plug-in
surge protector are much larger than those in the TV and can handle
much larger surges without failing. And the plug-in
surge protector, it can be replaced for $15. How much does it cost to
replace the MOVs inside the TV?

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 10:35:08 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
Of course you have it correct, but it's no use. Tom has his
agenda and beliefs.

Trader_4 was caught and exposed multiple times lying. So he uses a Donald Trump technique of posting personal insults. He is technically ignorant. So he mocks and disparages. He will cite an IEEE brochure that he cannot understand. Brochure shows damage created by a protector that was not earthed. Figure 8 - protector earths a surge 8000 volts destructively though a TV. That protector is too close to appliances. And a 'whole house' protector is not properly earthed.

Trader_4 is not here to discuss reality. He is here due to bad blood. He is vindictive.

I expect him to post plenty of subjective denials. Hee routinely turns technical discussions into nasty personal attacks.

On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 10:31:49 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
I should have written that the surge arrester was sacrificed to protect the equipment since the cell towers received a lot of lightning strikes and transients on the power lines. A lighting strike can blow primary surge arresters right off the wall. The secondary arresters can also burn out at the same time but the equipment will remain undamaged.


Many manufacturer stopped putting MOVs inside electronics where effective protection cannot exist. For example, Apple stopped doing it after the Apple II. Superior protection is routinely inside all electronics - often using techniques not using protectors. For example, a computer's PSU will convert a surge into clean, stable, low voltage DC to power its semiconductors. Other techniques include filters and galvanic isolation.

Surges that can overwhelm this protection must be connected low impedance to earth - either via a hardwire or via a properly sized protector - that must not fail.

MOVs, not connected low impedance to earth, must 'magically' absorb surge energy. Numbers. How many joules do MOVs absorb? Hundreds? Destructive surges are hundreds of thousands of joules. What will that MOV do? Catastrophically fail in a manner that its manufacturer says must never happen. Catastrophically fail in a manner that causes fires. That damage is completely, absolutely, and unconditionally unacceptable. No way to say this any stronger. No protector must be catastrophically damaged by a surge.

BTW, telco protectors intentionally fail shorted. Not fail catastrophically. Remain shorted so as to continue acting as a surge protector while notifying humans of its acceptable failure.

Direct lightning strikes without damage - even to protectors - is routine. Why would anyone deny what even manufacturer spec numbers state? Lightning typically is 20,000 amps. So a 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Because protection means even the protector remains undamaged. Because protectors that fail catastrophically (sacrificial) create fires. Those catastrophic failures are why UL 1449 was created - because plug-in protectors create fires.

A major difference exists between degradation (normal failure mode) and sacrificial (catastrophic) failure. Sacrificial protectors are not providing effective protection - for the same reason fuses and circuit breakers do not provide protection.

One can install protectors to let a customer suffer damage. A protector does not do protection. Its earth ground does protection. Simply remove (or forget to install) that low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) ground wire. Most (even a technician here) would not know to look for that missing protection. Most assume a protector (not its earth ground) does protection. Missing earth ground means protection does not exist. Then a surge will hunt for earth ground destructively via interior phone systems.

If a protector is not properly earthed (ie using receptacle safety ground), then it cannot do effective protection. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Protectors must be properly sized and earthed so as to remain functional after each surge. So that robust protection already inside all equipment is not overwhelmed/

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 11:15:46 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 10:35:08 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
Of course you have it correct, but it's no use. Tom has his
agenda and beliefs.

Trader_4 was caught and exposed multiple times lying.

Since it's allegedly happened so many times, you should be able
to show us some examples. Where are they?



So he uses a Donald Trump technique of posting personal insults.

What I actually did was clearly explain why you are wrong.


He is technically ignorant. So he mocks and disparages. He will cite an IEEE brochure that he cannot understand. Brochure shows damage created by a protector that was not earthed.

Speaking of lying, show us where the IEEE guide says what you say it
does above. You
can't because they say no such thing. In fact they show and say just
the opposite. They show plug-in surge protectors being used to protect
against surges. And in that diagram that you claim I don't understand
they clearly end with "to protect TV2 a second surge protector is required".
Now if they are ineffective and actually destructive, why oh why would
the IEEE ever say that? Who should people believe, the IEEE or you?



I expect him to post plenty of subjective denials. Hee routinely turns technical discussions into nasty personal attacks.

No subjective denials. I posted the first link to that IEEE guide,
you didn't. Gee, I wonder why? Maybe because you're lying about
what it says?

http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf

Page 33, Fig 8.

Everyone can take a look and easily determine who's lying.

trader...let it go, he is not worth it...

my favorite question to him is...

if all surge protectors need earth ground, how do they protect the electronics on aircraft?

But don't bother, just let it go...

Mark

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 11:38:08 AM UTC-4, wrote:
trader...let it go, he is not worth it...

my favorite question to him is...

if all surge protectors need earth ground, how do they protect the electronics on aircraft?

But don't bother, just let it go...

Mark

LOL

I've posed that same exact question to him many times too.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 10:42:49 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
Oh no, here we go again. It's been pointed out to you 100 times over
the years that while a lightning strike can be 20,000 amps, the chances
of that showing up at the panel are virtually nil.

Here we go again. Trying to explain well proven concepts to someone who only wants to argue. For the benefits of others, Dr Martzloff's late 1970s IEEE paper contradicted this naysayer. He ignores Martzloff's numbers. This naysayer invents denials to be nasty.

Dr Martzloff describes a 100,000 amp lightning strike to AC utility wires. 40,000 amps gets earthed by the 'primary' surge protection layer (earth ground on the pole). 20,000 amps goes off to other homes. And 40,000 amps is incoming to this home's panel. 40,000 amps must be earthed by the 'secondary' protection layer - a properly earthed 'whole house' protector. No problem when properly sized - at least 50,000 amps.

Chances of a 40,000 amp surge are rare. A destructive surge typically occurs maybe once every seven years. And because most lightning strikes are less than 100,000 amps.

But a 20,000 amp surge is possible. Other surge sources (ie 33,000 volt wire falling on local distribution) are also why we earth that 'whole house' protector. A friend witnessed it. Others without properly earth protection had major appliance damage. At least one had multiple destroyed circuit breakers. Many electric meters literally exploded up to 30 feet from their pans.

My friend knew someone who knows about surge protection. His meter also exploded. But, unlike others, he had no appliance damage. Even his properly size 'whole house' protector remained functional.

A minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. So that lightning and other destructive surges do not damage anything - even the protector. IEEE papers and decades of experience both contradict a nasty naysayer.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 10:42:49 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
If it never fails, then why would it ever need to be replaced?
Even you yourself explained how every surge degrades a surge protector.

Explained multiple times. You intentionally ignore it to argue. A degraded protector remains functional. So yes, it might degrade so much as to need replacement in 100 years. But so will the roof. Do you also replace your roof after every rain? It also degrades.

Catastrophic failure is unacceptable in a protector. But that was explained how many times over how many years? Could you just once stop ignoring facts? Then you would not post reams of attacks. The request is that you learn. But that is not why you are here - is it.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 10:59:23 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
He makes the ridiculous claim that telephone eqpt is only protected
at the point of entry to the building. In fact, they use the same
strategy as the IEEE recommends, ie a tiered protection approach.
That includes MOVs on the line cards inside the building.

How many times must one explain 'tiered protection' to you? Protectoin is not Kleenex for water from your eyes. Stop being so emotional.

Each tier in a CO is another ground layer. Every protection 'tier' is defined by its ground - not by protectors. Homeowners have two layers. A 'primary' surge protection layer at the pole. A 'secondary' protection layer at the service entrance (main breaker box or meter).

Every protection layer is only defined by what absorbs energy - earth ground. Had you ever been in a CO, then you knew of special care so that every protection layer - the grounding - is not compromised. You deny only to argue - not because you have any experience.

It was explained multiple times. Each protection layer is defined by a ground that harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules. More protectors do not make more protection layers. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Some facilities have multiple ground 'layers'. You would know that by now if your purpose was to learn - not to attack.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 12:28:34 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 10:59:23 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
He makes the ridiculous claim that telephone eqpt is only protected
at the point of entry to the building. In fact, they use the same
strategy as the IEEE recommends, ie a tiered protection approach.
That includes MOVs on the line cards inside the building.

How many times must one explain 'tiered protection' to you? Protectoin is not Kleenex for water from your eyes. Stop being so emotional.

Each tier in a CO is another ground layer.

Really? There is an earth ground on the line cards? In days gone by
you denied there was any protection on the line cards period.


Every protection 'tier' is defined by its ground - not by protectors.

Really, then like Mark said, how is surge protection on an airplane even possible?



Homeowners have two layers. A 'primary' surge protection layer at the pole. A 'secondary' protection layer at the service entrance (main breaker box or meter).


Again, totally inconsistent with the IEEE guide.



Every protection layer is only defined by what absorbs energy - earth ground. Had you ever been in a CO, then you knew of special care so that every protection layer - the grounding - is not compromised. You deny only to argue - not because you have any experience.


Tell us all how surge protection is possible on an airplane. Where is
the earth ground? That's enough for now. So many contradictions your
head must be about to explode.

On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 13:54:46 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

Tell us all how surge protection is possible on an airplane. Where is
the earth ground? That's enough for now. So many contradictions your
head must be about to explode.

When I brought up the thread, I should have thought that Tom would
enter and speak his fallacies. He did it in my last thread about a
whole house panel SPD with a HVAC SPD in conjunction with each other.

You & TDD gave me the answers back then.

I can't read his comments -- it hurts.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 11:17:13 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 10:31:49 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
I should have written that the surge arrester was sacrificed to protect the equipment since the cell towers received a lot of lightning strikes and transients on the power lines. A lighting strike can blow primary surge arresters right off the wall. The secondary arresters can also burn out at the same time but the equipment will remain undamaged.


Many manufacturer stopped putting MOVs inside electronics where effective protection cannot exist. For example, Apple stopped doing it after the Apple II.

You can't make up your mind. Your mantra in the past was that surge protection
was built into every appliance and it was very effective. You just posted that
again he

"Adjacent protectors are for tiny and completely different transients already made irrelevant by protection inside equipment"

Now when challenged as to how that can work with no earth ground while
an external surge protector can't, you now claim there is no protection.
Interesting. I'm sure we'd all like to see a reference for that claim
about Apple PCs, but I'm betting there is none. Maybe you should show
this pic of an iMac power supply to Apple:

http://www.easytechnology.gr/images/...ac%20china.JPG

Power comes in on the right side. At the edge of the board is a blue
component that looks like a typical MOV. Printed on the board next to
it is "L2 MOV1". Behind it, partially covered is an identical second
one. Very typical, two MOVs. Bingo!


Superior protection is routinely inside all electronics - often using techniques not using protectors. For example, a computer's PSU will convert a surge into clean, stable, low voltage DC to power its semiconductors. Other techniques include filters and galvanic isolation.

Interesting. Now that big, old, mean surge that will destroy a plug-in
surge protector because no protection is possible without an "earth ground",
is magically converted to power by a power supply with no protection at all..
Go figure. Isn't science amazing?

Anything else we can help you out with today?

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 4:55:00 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
Really? There is an earth ground on the line cards? In days gone by
you denied there was any protection on the line cards period.

I did not say that. You are again inventing fiction to only be nasty. Trader_4 has never worked in any facility that cannot have damage. He had absolutely no reason to believe a line card has an earth ground. I never said that. He is here only to be nasty and demaning. As he usually is.

Facilities that cannot have damage always implement the 'whole house' solution. As in always. Even 'point of connection' protectors (ie in HVAC equipment) need that protection. IEEE defines how effective a properly earthed 'whole house' solution is with numbers, "99.5% to 99.9% protection".

Once a major and destructive surge is earthed, then that adjacent (point of connection) protector might pick up some residuals. It might add another 0.2% protection. But if a 'whole house' protector is not properly earthed, then Dr Martzloff defines the problem in a conclusion of his 1994 IEEE paper:
Conclusion:
1) Quantitative measurements in the Upside-Down house clearly
show objectionable difference in reference voltages. These occur
even when or perhaps because, surge protective devices are
present at the point of connection of appliances.

Protector adjacent to equipment, in some cases, can compromise internal protection and make equipment damage easier. We demonstrated what Dr Martzloff defined. A power strip protector earthed a surge destructively through a network of powered off computers. We traced that surge current by identifying each damaged semiconductor on each printed circuit board. Few (the naysayer) here have that knowledge and experience. Or read IEEE papers on this subject.

Protection of equipment on earth is always about how a surge connects to earth. Either inside and destructively via (ie HVAC) equipment. Or harmlessly and outside on a lower impedance connection to earth.

BTW a grounded airplanes must be earthed to avert damaged. Every airplane is electrically connected to an earthing network inside the tarmac. Airplanes in the air are not damaged. Lightning is not hunting for earth destructively inside a plane that is not on earth. Trader_4 was told that repeatedly. He is simply reposting his lie hoping you are dumb enough to believe him. He is not here to be helpful or informative. So he again posts his airplane myth to keep you confused and ignorant.

Protection of HVAC equipment is about dissipating a potentially destructive surge harmlessly in earth - as was understood over 100 years ago.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 8:40:25 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 4:55:00 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
Really? There is an earth ground on the line cards? In days gone by
you denied there was any protection on the line cards period.

I did not say that. You are again inventing fiction to only be nasty. Trader_4 has never worked in any facility that cannot have damage. He had absolutely no reason to believe a line card has an earth ground. I never said that. He is here only to be nasty and demaning. As he usually is.

I said that because your mantra is that there can be no surge protection
without a direct, short connection to earth ground. You claim that's
why plug-in surge protectors are useless. Still not answered, if plug-ins
can't work because they have no earth ground, how can the surge protection
in every appliance work? How can the protection on line-cards at a Telco
work? Note: At least now you don't deny that line-cards have surge
protection on them. In the past, you claimed they didn't.




Facilities that cannot have damage always implement the 'whole house' solution. As in always. Even 'point of connection' protectors (ie in HVAC equipment) need that protection. IEEE defines how effective a properly earthed 'whole house' solution is with numbers, "99.5% to 99.9% protection".

Once a major and destructive surge is earthed, then that adjacent (point of connection) protector might pick up some residuals. It might add another 0.2% protection. But if a 'whole house' protector is not properly earthed, then Dr Martzloff defines the problem in a conclusion of his 1994 IEEE paper:


Here is what Martzloff says about the actual issue of interest in a
guide to surge protection he wrote:

"Plug-in Surge Protectors

This is the easiest solution and there are a wide variety of brands
in the stores. These come in two forms: a box that plugs directly
into a wall receptacle or a strip with a power cord and multiple outlets."

http://pml.nist.gov/spd-anthology/fi...es_happen!.pdf

That's from the National Institute of Technology and Standards,
Martzloff wrote it. Note that he doesn't say they can't work because
they have no earth ground, that they are worthless, or that they
actually cause damage. He says they are the easiest solution.




Conclusion:

The conclusion is that if you read what Martzloff wrote, he obviously
disagress with you too.

BTW a grounded airplanes must be earthed to avert damaged. Every airplane is electrically connected to an earthing network inside the tarmac. Airplanes in the air are not damaged. Lightning is not hunting for earth destructively inside a plane that is not on earth. Trader_4 was told that repeatedly. He is simply reposting his lie hoping you are dumb enough to believe him. He is not here to be helpful or informative. So he again posts his airplane myth to keep you confused and ignorant.


No, I posted it because you claim no protection is possible, without a
direct connection to earth ground. Yet, airplanes have surge protection
and they do it partly by doing the same thing plug-in protectors do,
which is by clamping voltages. As to who is dumb, viewers can read the
references I've cited, read Marzloff in his own words and decide for
themselves.

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 8:44:32 AM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
No, I posted it because you claim no protection is possible, without a
direct connection to earth ground. Yet, airplanes have surge protection
and they do it partly by doing the same thing plug-in protectors do,
which is by clamping voltages.

So again he posts same accusations that were already rebutted. If he keeps alleging the same bogus lies, then some people will actually believe him. Again: When an airplane is on the ground, protection exists because a plane must be earth grounded. Tarmacs have numerous connection points to provide this earthing connection. Planes in the air are designed so that the current remains outside - does not hunt for earth ground via interior electronics. Then protection that is standard in all electronics is not overwhelmed; surge currents remain outside. How curious. A 'whole house' solution does same.

A surge is connected to earth on a current path that remains on the outside of the plane - so no damage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IRfbC0RHsY

trader_4 will ignore this as he always does. All others need not be manipulated by his acidic spin. He constantly posts that airplane lie hoping you will fall for his rhetoric.

trader_4 also did not comprehend Martzloff's paper. It is what he does. Claim it agrees with his lies. Meanwhile, Martzloff was quite blunt about 'point of connection' protectors even causing damage. Martzloff demonstrates how destructive voltages can "occur even when or perhaps because, surge protective devices are present at the point of connection of appliances." That same damage was observed by engineers even long before Martzloff wrote his paper. But then we engineers did this stuff. trader_4 never did.

He never posts specification numbers or other relevant sources. He even and intentionally misrepresented what both Martzloff and the IEEE brochure say. As if Figure 8 does not show a 'point of connection' protector earthing a surge 8000 volts destructively through a nearby TV. Can the IEEE make Martzloff's point any clearer?

I never said plug-in protectors are useless. trader_4 reads what he wants to see - not what was said. He has a problem with integrity. A plug-in protector only does what it claims to do. It only claims to protect from a completely different type of surge that typically does not do equipment damage. When adjacent to equipment, it must either block or absorb a surge. It is only useless doing what it does not claim to do - and what trader_4 insists it will do. It only does what it claims to do.

But again, I have said what trader_4 will intentionally misrepresent.

Protector numbers only claim to block or absorb tiny surges. And only one type of surge. Not the other type that typically causes damage. All reasons why a plug-in protector, without a 'whole house' protector, is near zero (ineffective) protection. 'Whole house' protector is necessary for the plug-in protector to do something useful. Plug-in protector creates problems such as making damage easier and fire.

Trader_4 will ignore another problem - fire. Otherwise he must admit to serious shortcomings in his denials. He never did this stuff. So he intentionally misrepresents airplane protection, Martzloff and IEEE brochure citations. and what I said. Integrity and honesty are not his strongest assets.

Any protector inside HVAC equipment needs every typically destructive surge earthed - either by a 'whole house' solution or by a lightning rod.

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 9:25:36 AM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
http://www.sandman.com/surge.html

The type I installed the most was the type in the link below. It will take industry standard plugin fuse modules of different types. The modules can be gas tube or solid state arresters. The plug in fuses are at the bottom of the page. ^_^

http://www.discount-low-voltage.com/...ks/CR-2606QCQC

http://tinyurl.com/osl3u4r

Those protectors have what makes them effective - a connection for a 6 to 14 AWG ground wire. Then the surge is harmlessly absorbed in earth.

An AT&T forum also discusses this protection in [quote] "How can I protect my DSL/dialup equipment from surges?". It also defined what is most critically important for protection - earth ground:
Surge protection for DSL and dialup service.
Surge protection takes on many forms, but always
involves the following components: Grounding
bonding and surge protectors. ...
Grounding is required to provide the surge
protector with a path to dump the excess energy
to earth. A proper ground system is a mandatory
requirement of surge protection. Without a proper
ground, a surge protector has no way to disburse
the excess energy and will fail to protect
downstream equipment.
Bonding is required to electrically connect together
the various grounds of the services entering the
premises. Without bonding, a surge may still enter
a premise after firing over a surge protector, which
will attempt to pass the excess energy to its ground
with any additional energy that the services surge
protector ground cannot instantly handle, traveling
into and through protected equipment, damaging
that equipment in the process. ...
Now, if all the various service entrance grounds are
bonded together there are no additional paths to
ground through the premise. Even if all of the
grounds cannot instantly absorb the energy, the lack
of additional paths to ground through the premise
prevents the excess energy from seeking out any
additional grounds through that premise and the
electronic equipment within. As such, the excess
energy remains in the ground system until
dissipated, sparing the protected equipment
from damage. ...
By far, the whole house hardwired surge protectors
provide the best protection. When a whole house
primary surge protector is installed at the service
entrance, it will provide a solid first line of
defense against surges which enter from the power
company's service entrance feed. These types of
protectors can absorb/pass considerably more energy
than any other type of protector, and if one does
catastrophically fail, it will not typically be in
a living space. ...
Plug in strip protectors are, at best, a compromise.
At worst, they may cause more damage than they
prevent. While they may do an acceptable job of
handling hot to neutral surges, they do a poor job
of handling any surge that must be passed to
ground. ...
Then, to add insult to injury, some strip protectors
add Telco and/or LAN surge protection within the
same device, trying to be an all-in-one sale.
Remember bonding? When Telco or LAN protection is
added to a strip protector, if the premise ground,
which is not designed to handle surges, cannot
handle all of the energy, guess where that excess
energy seeks out the additional grounds? You got
it! The Telco and LAN connections now becomes
the path, with disastrous results to those
devices. ...

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 8:13:40 PM UTC-5, westom wrote:
On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 9:25:36 AM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
http://www.sandman.com/surge.html

The type I installed the most was the type in the link below. It will take industry standard plugin fuse modules of different types. The modules can be gas tube or solid state arresters. The plug in fuses are at the bottom of the page. ^_^

http://www.discount-low-voltage.com/...ks/CR-2606QCQC

http://tinyurl.com/osl3u4r

Those protectors have what makes them effective - a connection for a 6 to 14 AWG ground wire. Then the surge is harmlessly absorbed in earth.

An AT&T forum also discusses this protection in [quote] "How can I protect my DSL/dialup equipment from surges?". It also defined what is most critically important for protection - earth ground:
Surge protection for DSL and dialup service.
Surge protection takes on many forms, but always
involves the following components: Grounding
bonding and surge protectors. ...
Grounding is required to provide the surge
protector with a path to dump the excess energy
to earth. A proper ground system is a mandatory
requirement of surge protection. Without a proper
ground, a surge protector has no way to disburse
the excess energy and will fail to protect
downstream equipment.
Bonding is required to electrically connect together
the various grounds of the services entering the
premises. Without bonding, a surge may still enter
a premise after firing over a surge protector, which
will attempt to pass the excess energy to its ground
with any additional energy that the services surge
protector ground cannot instantly handle, traveling
into and through protected equipment, damaging
that equipment in the process. ...
Now, if all the various service entrance grounds are
bonded together there are no additional paths to
ground through the premise. Even if all of the
grounds cannot instantly absorb the energy, the lack
of additional paths to ground through the premise
prevents the excess energy from seeking out any
additional grounds through that premise and the
electronic equipment within. As such, the excess
energy remains in the ground system until
dissipated, sparing the protected equipment
from damage. ...
By far, the whole house hardwired surge protectors
provide the best protection. When a whole house
primary surge protector is installed at the service
entrance, it will provide a solid first line of
defense against surges which enter from the power
company's service entrance feed. These types of
protectors can absorb/pass considerably more energy
than any other type of protector, and if one does
catastrophically fail, it will not typically be in
a living space. ...
Plug in strip protectors are, at best, a compromise.
At worst, they may cause more damage than they
prevent. While they may do an acceptable job of
handling hot to neutral surges, they do a poor job
of handling any surge that must be passed to
ground. ...
Then, to add insult to injury, some strip protectors
add Telco and/or LAN surge protection within the
same device, trying to be an all-in-one sale.
Remember bonding? When Telco or LAN protection is
added to a strip protector, if the premise ground,
which is not designed to handle surges, cannot
handle all of the energy, guess where that excess
energy seeks out the additional grounds? You got
it! The Telco and LAN connections now becomes
the path, with disastrous results to those
devices. ...

What I like about them is that plugin modules fail "open" and and spares left on sight often in unused connections can get a system back on line immediately. No tools needed. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Plug Monster

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 8:56:56 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:

A surge is connected to earth on a current path that remains on the outside of the plane - so no damage:

Similar to most of a lightning strike hitting a utility pole or the
service entrance mast, where it flashes over and most of the energy never
gets to the TV inside. What does get inside the airplane is clamped
just like a plug-in surge protector.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IRfbC0RHsY

trader_4 will ignore this as he always does.

Ignore it? Actually I've brought it up many times. In this latest case,
Mark brought it up. How is that airplane protected when you keep telling
us no protection is possible without a direct, short wire to ground?




trader_4 also did not comprehend Martzloff's paper.
It is what he does. Claim it agrees with his lies.

In Martzloff's own words:

"Plug-in Surge Protectors

This is the easiest solution and there are a wide variety of brands
in the stores. These come in two forms: a box that plugs directly
into a wall receptacle or a strip with a power cord and multiple outlets."




Meanwhile, Martzloff was quite blunt about 'point of connection' protectors even causing damage.


In Martzloff's own words:

"Plug-in Surge Protectors

This is the easiest solution and there are a wide variety of brands
in the stores. These come in two forms: a box that plugs directly
into a wall receptacle or a strip with a power cord and multiple outlets."



Martzloff demonstrates how destructive voltages can "occur even when or perhaps because, surge protective devices are present at the point of connection of appliances." That same damage was observed by engineers even long before Martzloff wrote his paper. But then we engineers did this stuff. trader_4 never did.

He never posts specification numbers or other relevant sources. He even and intentionally misrepresented what both Martzloff and the IEEE brochure say. As if Figure 8 does not show a 'point of connection' protector earthing a surge 8000 volts destructively through a nearby TV. Can the IEEE make Martzloff's point any clearer?


Fig 8 actually clearly shows a house with two TVs getting hit by a surge.
TV1 has a plug-in surge protector and is undamaged. TV2 has no plug-in
surge protector and is damaged. They conclude by saying that to protect TV2,
a second plug-in surge protector is required.

http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf

Fig 8 is on page 33. Everyone can look and read for themselves.




I never said plug-in protectors are useless.

Right, you said they are worse than useless, because according to you
they actually cause damage, which you do again in this post, later on.



trader_4 reads what he wants to see - not what was said. He has a problem
with integrity.


No problems here. I gave you the IEEE guide that clearly endorses using
plug-in surge protectors. They show diagrams of them being used. They
show one TV that has one being protected from a surge, while TV2 that doesn't
have a plug-in surge protector is damaged. They state that "to protect TV2
another plug-in surge protector is required". Only a liar with no integrity
would take that diagram and try to say that the IEEE is actually showing
the plug-in at TV1 damaging TV2.

I also gave you Martzloff, in his own words, from a guide on surge
protection he wrote for NIST. Just the facts.



A plug-in protector only does what it claims to do. It only claims to protect from a completely different type of surge that typically does not do equipment damage. When adjacent to equipment, it must either block or absorb a surge. It is only useless doing what it does not claim to do - and what trader_4 insists it will do. It only does what it claims to do.

But again, I have said what trader_4 will intentionally misrepresent.

Protector numbers only claim to block or absorb tiny surges. And only one type of surge. Not the other type that typically causes damage. All reasons why a plug-in protector, without a 'whole house' protector, is near zero (ineffective) protection.



'Whole house' protector is necessary for the plug-in protector to do something useful. Plug-in protector creates problems such as making damage easier and fire.


Then why does Martzloff, in the surge guide say:

"Plug-in Surge Protectors

This is the easiest solution and there are a wide variety of brands
in the stores. These come in two forms: a box that plugs directly
into a wall receptacle or a strip with a power cord and multiple outlets."


Trader_4 will ignore another problem - fire. Otherwise he must admit to serious shortcomings in his denials. He never did this stuff. So he intentionally misrepresents airplane protection, Martzloff and IEEE brochure citations. and what I said. Integrity and honesty are not his strongest assets..

Any protector inside HVAC equipment needs every typically destructive surge earthed - either by a 'whole house' solution or by a lightning rod.

Further proof that you're the village idiot. A lightning rod is going
to do absolutely zero when the surge hits the utility wires, service
cable, etc.