philo wrote:
On 05/19/2016 12:05 PM, wrote:
O

snip
All appliances contain robust protection. Your concern is a rare
transient that might occur once every seven years. That transient must
be connected low impedance (ie less than 3 meters) to earth BEFORE
entering. Otherwise it will go hunting for earth destructively via
appliances. Nothing adjacent to an appliance claims to 'block' or
'absorb' that transient. If anything needs that protection, then
everything needs that protection.


Your assumption that all appliances contain robust protection is open
to discussion. and dissagreement.





Many years the utility pole directly behind my house got a direct
lightning hit. I was in the kitchen and almost lost it when I observed
the simultaneous lightning and thunder!


My answering machine was on the closest run to the outdoor wiring and was
taken out...but nothing else in the house was damaged.

Came in on phone line. Phone line also needs protection.

Greg

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:44:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Tom sells whole house protection and you definitely need it, connected
to a good grounding electrode. The only thing Tom disagrees about is
whether a point of use protector does anything. I do believe it will
damp out locally induced shots that get into the system after it
enters the house.

We don't sell these things. We installed effective protection. Direct lightning strike without damage were routine. In one venue, all wires were underground. Since single point earthing was missing, all computers in the block house (on surge protectors) were damaged. That strike to earth was a direct strike to underground wires.

I never said plug-in protectors do nothing. Constantly stated is that it only does what it claims to do - nothing more. To protect from a type of surge that typically causes no damage; a transient made irrelevant by robust protection inside every appliance. A plug-in protector does exactly what it claims to do. It does not claim to protect from the other and typically destructive type of surge. Lightning is but one example of that other type of surge.

A tree struck by lightning can be a direct connection to incoming conductors - especially buried wires or metal pipes. EMP did not cause damage. Current in a tree is then passing into buried conductors to causes damage. Using appliances as part of the path that connects to earthborne charges maybe 4 kilometers distant. That same current can be so harmful as to even kill four legged animals.

That current through a struck tree is especially destructive when all incoming conductors do not enter at a common service entrance. Makes little difference whether those conductors are overhead or underground since both need same properly earthed protection.

International design standards defined internal protection for electronics long before PCs existed. It is not debatable. Otherwise that other's denials included numbers - not personal speculation. Surges that are hundreds of joules are routinely converted into rock stable, low DC voltages to safety power semiconductors. Tiny joule (plug-in) protectors, doing what its manufacturer claims, are doing near zero protection. It does exactly what the manufacturer says it will do.

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 5:22:29 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
When I was a kid growing up on the family farm on the mountaintop in Northeast Alabamastan, lightning was a constant menace. I remember being in the basement of the house when I would hear an arc jump from the metal heating duct that ran the length of the house to one of the 6" steel poles supporting the center beams that ran down the center of the house. I could often count more than 10 seconds before I heard thunder.

Your example demonstrates why underground wires are just as exposed to lightning. Ten second delay means that lightning struck earth some 2 miles away. That current traveled through earth, then through more conductive materials inside the house (resulting in an arc), and then back into earth to travel maybe more miles to earthborne charges.

How did it get into the house? Maybe buried wires. Maybe an underground pipe. But we know this. It got into the house by connecting to earth some 2 miles distant.

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 5:35:17 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
It's hard to get most people to understand that surge arresters actually wear out.

All protectors wear out. Those that are properly sized remain robust and functional ten and more years later. Especially since destructive surges happen maybe once every seven years. And since properly sized 'whole house' protectors are rated at least 50,000 amps.

That destructive surge (incoming to every appliance) means a near zero protector may even fail catastrophically. MOV manufacturers are blunt about this. No protector must fail catastrophically. But grossly undersizing means a surge too tiny to damage appliances can destroy that protector. It promotes a myth that a protector must be replaced frequently. Protectors wear out. Effective protectors remain functional for decades.

On 05/19/2016 04:55 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/19/2016 6:50 PM, Will wrote:
On 5/19/2016 3:40 PM, Frank wrote:
Also have usb's on all computers.

Some have DisplayPort, some have hdmi and all of mine have USB.


Top or front loading? And do you use surge
supressors?


Most ports are front and rear. Never really seen a port on top though I suppose it's possible.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 1:57:33 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
Here the statement should have skipped half of the first sentence and
been "Risk from surges () remains whether the AC service is overhead
or underground." That's all you are saying, but for some reason** you
want to say O vs. U doesn't matter, even though, if the risk is lower,
of course it matters.

No spin in that statement. Another has demonstrated why why surges can even enter a house from underground conductors or geology. He heard the arc of lightning current passing through his house. Ten second later, he heard the sound from that lightning entering earth some two miles distant.

How at risk are your household appliances? Geology is a major parameter. That current enters on overhead or underground conductors - wires or pipes. A nearby struck tree can be a surge current connected directly into household applies - if a properly earthed 'whole house' solution is not implemented.

On 05/20/2016 02:12 AM, westom wrote:
We don't sell these things. We installed effective protection. Direct lightning strike without damage were routine. In one venue, all wires were underground. Since single point earthing was missing, all computers in the block house (on surge protectors) were damaged. That strike to earth was a direct strike to underground wires.

What does an effective protection system like this typically cost?

On Fri, 20 May 2016 01:41:02 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 1:57:33 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
Here the statement should have skipped half of the first sentence and
been "Risk from surges () remains whether the AC service is overhead
or underground." That's all you are saying, but for some reason** you
want to say O vs. U doesn't matter, even though, if the risk is lower,
of course it matters.

No spin in that statement. Another has demonstrated why why surges can even enter a house from underground conductors or geology. He heard the arc of lightning current passing through his house. Ten second later, he heard the sound from that lightning entering earth some two miles distant.

I wouldn't have used the word before, but now I think that's just what
you're doing. Spinning. You didn't answer my questions.

"Do you disagree that the risk with underground is lower?
If yes, then why do you say it doesn't matter which it is?"

I'm going to assume you know that one story about one house, or even
100 houses, does not make a risk as great when there are many 1000's
of houses with overhead wires whose contents are damaged by lightning.
So it does matter whether your service is overhead or underground.

Don't complain when politicians give you doubletalk. You do the
same.

How at risk are your household appliances? Geology is a major parameter. That current enters on overhead or underground conductors - wires or pipes. A nearby struck tree can be a surge current connected directly into household applies - if a properly earthed 'whole house' solution is not implemented.

I don't care. That's not what I posted about or what I thought you
would address if you answered.

On 5/20/2016 4:35 AM, Megan wrote:
On 05/19/2016 04:55 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/19/2016 6:50 PM, Will wrote:
On 5/19/2016 3:40 PM, Frank wrote:
Also have usb's on all computers.

Some have DisplayPort, some have hdmi and all of mine have USB.


Top or front loading? And do you use surge
supressors?


Most ports are front and rear. Never really seen a port on top though I
suppose it's possible.

Does it use a surge supressor? Do you
need the new high efficiency detergent?

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:18:54 AM UTC-5, westom wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 5:22:29 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
When I was a kid growing up on the family farm on the mountaintop in Northeast Alabamastan, lightning was a constant menace. I remember being in the basement of the house when I would hear an arc jump from the metal heating duct that ran the length of the house to one of the 6" steel poles supporting the center beams that ran down the center of the house. I could often count more than 10 seconds before I heard thunder.

Your example demonstrates why underground wires are just as exposed to lightning. Ten second delay means that lightning struck earth some 2 miles away. That current traveled through earth, then through more conductive materials inside the house (resulting in an arc), and then back into earth to travel maybe more miles to earthborne charges.

How did it get into the house? Maybe buried wires. Maybe an underground pipe. But we know this. It got into the house by connecting to earth some 2 miles distant.

The house is 100 yards from the very highest point on the mountain. The long metal duct in the basement of the house acts as an antenna to pick up the EMP or static pulse from the lightning strike. I can only remember a few times that we had any damage to our TV or anything else. Back in the 1960's, the family tube type TV suffered some power supply damage during a thunderstorm and an old box fan shot sparks during a storm. Those are the only items I can remember off hand that were ever damaged by lightning. My dad, me and my brothers wired the house. In fact, we built the house. We did everything but pour the concrete basement slab. My dad was an engineer with the steel plant and he, his father and brother built several homes for the paternal side of the family. Anyway the farm was my dad's hobby and a great place for young mad scientists to grow up because we could shoot guns, blow things up and build all kinds of dangerous contraptions. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Flashy Monster

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:30:28 AM UTC-5, westom wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 5:35:17 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
It's hard to get most people to understand that surge arresters actually wear out.

All protectors wear out. Those that are properly sized remain robust and functional ten and more years later. Especially since destructive surges happen maybe once every seven years. And since properly sized 'whole house' protectors are rated at least 50,000 amps.

That destructive surge (incoming to every appliance) means a near zero protector may even fail catastrophically. MOV manufacturers are blunt about this. No protector must fail catastrophically. But grossly undersizing means a surge too tiny to damage appliances can destroy that protector. It promotes a myth that a protector must be replaced frequently. Protectors wear out. Effective protectors remain functional for decades.

I've replaced a lot of MOV's in equipment and have done a lot of work in telecom where I had to protect not only power supply but phone lines. I never lost a commercial phone system, computer or point of sale system to lightning once I gave it the Monster treatment. One of the worst problems I ever had with phone or network wiring was caused by rats and mice. Those critters did more damage than lightning. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Power Monster

On 5/18/2016 7:56 PM, Steve Stone wrote:
A friend with a new state of the art super high tech electronic dash
computer controlled washer claims it is best to power the beast thru a
surge suppressor.

Was wondering if the learned members of this group thought this was a
good idea or a not so good idea.

Steve


Steve, Pleasance makes me wear one of them on my penis, as protection
against violent surging.
Just sayin'.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:12:20 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:44:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Tom sells whole house protection and you definitely need it, connected
to a good grounding electrode. The only thing Tom disagrees about is
whether a point of use protector does anything. I do believe it will
damp out locally induced shots that get into the system after it
enters the house.

We don't sell these things. We installed effective protection. Direct lightning strike without damage were routine. In one venue, all wires were underground. Since single point earthing was missing, all computers in the block house (on surge protectors) were damaged. That strike to earth was a direct strike to underground wires.

I never said plug-in protectors do nothing.

You sure have said that and far worse over the years.



Constantly stated is that it only does what it claims to do - nothing more. To protect from a type of surge that typically causes no damage; a transient made irrelevant by robust protection inside every appliance.

And so it begins. Again what you're saying is contradictory to what the
electrical engineer experts in surge protection that wrote both the NIST
and IEEE guides clearly say in those guides. Readers are encouraged to
read them. They show plug-in type surge protectors being used. Which
would of course make no sense if they are irrelevant by "robust" protection
inside every appliance. Open up those appliances and you'll find small
MOVs. Look inside a decent plug-in and you'll find ones that are many
times larger. And notice who provided the links to those guides and who
does not.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:18:54 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 5:22:29 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
When I was a kid growing up on the family farm on the mountaintop in Northeast Alabamastan, lightning was a constant menace. I remember being in the basement of the house when I would hear an arc jump from the metal heating duct that ran the length of the house to one of the 6" steel poles supporting the center beams that ran down the center of the house. I could often count more than 10 seconds before I heard thunder.

Your example demonstrates why underground wires are just as exposed to lightning. Ten second delay means that lightning struck earth some 2 miles


It demonstrates nothing of the sort. An overhead service running into
a house provides an additional target in very close proximity to the
house. Clearly a strike on that line, close to where it enters the house,
presents the potential for a larger, more destructive surge than
lightning that strikes two miles away.




away. That current traveled through earth, then through more conductive materials inside the house (resulting in an arc), and then back into earth to travel maybe more miles to earthborne charges.

How did it get into the house? Maybe buried wires. Maybe an underground pipe. But we know this. It got into the house by connecting to earth some 2 miles distant.

How many volts and joules do you think you see at the panel from that
2 mile away strike, versus one at the masthead?

Next!

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 1:57:33 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2016 08:10:46 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 10:56:06 PM UTC-4, Steve Stone wrote:
A friend with a new state of the art super high tech electronic dash
computer controlled washer claims it is best to power the beast thru a
surge suppressor.

If a washer needs protection, then so does every household item including clocks, RCD, furnace, recharging phones, and the most critical item during a surge - smoke detectors. Nothing adjacent to an appliance claims to protect from destructive surges. Protection means a surge is connected to earth BEFORE it enters a building. No way around that well proven science.

Does not matter if AC service is overhead or underground. Risk from surges (lightning and other sources) remains.

Do you disagree that the risk with underground is lower?

If yes, then why do you say it doesn't matter which it is? This kind
of clever phrasing is what politicians use to make a point that sounds
stronger than it should. But I see it a lot from regular folk.



Interesting that you picked up on that does not matter point too.




Here the statement should have skipped half of the first sentence and
been "Risk from surges () remains whether the AC service is overhead
or underground." That's all you are saying, but for some reason** you
want to say O vs. U doesn't matter, even though, if the risk is lower,
of course it matters.

**It may just be a habit people pick up from listening to others who
speak in the same way. But IMVSO it's a bad habit.

Even underground wires can carry a direct lightning strike into a building. Every wire in every incoming cable must connect to single point earth ground BEFORE entering. Otherwise a surge is inside hunting for earth destructively via appliances. Earth ground (not a protector) is the most critical component in every protection 'system'.

What does an adjacent protector do? MOVs might connect that surge from hot wire to neutral or safety ground wires. Now that surge has even more paths to find earth ground destructively via a washer or other nearby appliance. Adjacent protectors can even make damage easier if a 'whole house' solution is not implemented.

All appliances contain robust protection.

Now I"m just quibbing but you must mean major appliances. I've taken
toasters, table radios, etc. apart and there was no surge protection.


All AC appliances that have electronics in them should have and almost
certainly would have it. So, you'd find them in a new toaster with
digital controls, but not in one with no electronics.

A related question that W Tom has never been able to answer is how these
small MOVs inside an appliance are all peachy keen, robust, effective, etc,
yet a plug-in that's placed right before it with much larger MOVs and
operating with the same limitations, can actually cause destruction.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:32:29 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2016 01:41:02 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 1:57:33 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
Here the statement should have skipped half of the first sentence and
been "Risk from surges () remains whether the AC service is overhead
or underground." That's all you are saying, but for some reason** you
want to say O vs. U doesn't matter, even though, if the risk is lower,
of course it matters.

No spin in that statement. Another has demonstrated why why surges can even enter a house from underground conductors or geology. He heard the arc of lightning current passing through his house. Ten second later, he heard the sound from that lightning entering earth some two miles distant.

I wouldn't have used the word before, but now I think that's just what
you're doing. Spinning. You didn't answer my questions.


Welcome to W Toms world. Been there, done that. You posed a simple, direct
question that goes to the heart of the issue, instead of answering it, he spins
and diverts. Of course your analysis is correct. The scenario with overhead
service conductors, power lines overhead down the street, provides a scenario
where damaging surges with more energy can arrive at the panel than the scenario
with them underground.



"Do you disagree that the risk with underground is lower?
If yes, then why do you say it doesn't matter which it is?"

I'm going to assume you know that one story about one house, or even
100 houses, does not make a risk as great when there are many 1000's
of houses with overhead wires whose contents are damaged by lightning.
So it does matter whether your service is overhead or underground.

Don't complain when politicians give you doubletalk. You do the
same.

How at risk are your household appliances? Geology is a major parameter.. That current enters on overhead or underground conductors - wires or pipes. A nearby struck tree can be a surge current connected directly into household applies - if a properly earthed 'whole house' solution is not implemented.

I don't care. That's not what I posted about or what I thought you
would address if you answered.

Welcome to W Toms world. It's like trying to have a conversation with a
bowl of jello.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 06:21:19 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:12:20 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:44:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Tom sells whole house protection and you definitely need it, connected
to a good grounding electrode. The only thing Tom disagrees about is
whether a point of use protector does anything. I do believe it will
damp out locally induced shots that get into the system after it
enters the house.

We don't sell these things. We installed effective protection. Direct lightning strike without damage were routine. In one venue, all wires were underground. Since single point earthing was missing, all computers in the block house (on surge protectors) were damaged. That strike to earth was a direct strike to underground wires.

I never said plug-in protectors do nothing.

You sure have said that and far worse over the years.



Constantly stated is that it only does what it claims to do - nothing more. To protect from a type of surge that typically causes no damage; a transient made irrelevant by robust protection inside every appliance.

And so it begins. Again what you're saying is contradictory to what the
electrical engineer experts in surge protection that wrote both the NIST
and IEEE guides clearly say in those guides. Readers are encouraged to
read them. They show plug-in type surge protectors being used. Which
would of course make no sense if they are irrelevant by "robust" protection
inside every appliance. Open up those appliances and you'll find small
MOVs. Look inside a decent plug-in and you'll find ones that are many
times larger. And notice who provided the links to those guides and who
does not.

Tom is very effective in selling his Polyphaser and he dismisses point
of use protectors because he doesn't have them to sell.
My experience was built up over many years and thousands of customers
in Florida who were not going to power off their computers, ATMs and
cash registers every afternoon and unplug them. There is no single
solution. Real protection involves many layers of protection. In some
cases we went as far as to bond the cases of interconnected equipment
together with fat wire because that is what it took to minimize those
"interior transients" that Tom thinks are harmless. We also used
ferrite beads on signal wires and other methods to mitigate transients
that showed up on the load side of the service entrance.

When lightning hit the lightning rod above my weather station, it
completely bypassed anything on the service entrance ... but my PC and
the station survived.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 11:58:47 AM UTC-4, bud-- wrote:
On 5/20/2016 2:30 AM, westom wrote:

But grossly undersizing means a surge too tiny to damage appliances can destroy that protector.

In westom's mind all plug-in protectors are "undersized". The amount of
energy that can make it to a plug in protector is surprisingly small
(explained in another post). UL listed plug-in protectors are very
unlikely to fail.

And if a protector failed, the far lower protection in an appliance
would have failed.

I pointed out earlier that contradiction is one that I've asked W Tom to
explain every time he brings this up. How can MOVs insides appliances
be "robust protection", while much larger MOVs in a plug-in surge protector
be ineffective and dangerous? Both operate in exactly the same environment.

And given that MOVs degrade with each surge, which would you rather
have take the hit from a surge? The $20 plug-in or the one in the
$1000 TV? In reality, both will likely have some of the surge current,
but anything that gets shunted by the plug-in, is that much less into
the TV.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 10:48:10 -0600, bud-- wrote:

A surge expert at the NIST 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."


That was our experience. In places with very long data lines, we
actually bonded the cases of the machines together with a large wire
that was significantly shorter than the signal wire. You can use
ferrite beads to essentially "lengthen" the signal wire but we also
looped up some extra data cable through the ferrite. That stopped the
problem of losing POS terminals in pool bars every time it rained.

"Ground" is a misnomer anyway. We have documented several volts
difference between the electrode systems of buildings that were less
than 100' apart. That causes it's own problems. You also have the
problem that in why distribution, the PoCo is using earth as a
parallel return path to that little neutral wire they have in the
distribution system. There is a significant amount of current in those
8ga wires you see going down the pole from a transformer. There is no
rod at the end of that wire. it is just tacked to the bottom of the
pole before they set it.
There is almost 3 amps on this one. (on the single phase distribution
line)
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/First%20xfmr.jpg

This one is where the 3 phases of the distribution split out. (less
than an amp)
http://gfretwell.com/electrical/dist...20braodway.jpg

On Fri, 20 May 2016 02:18:22 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 20 May 2016 01:57:13 -0400, Micky
wrote:

Now I"m just quibbing but you must mean major appliances. I've taken
toasters, table radios, etc. apart and there was no surge protection.

Most of these things are fairly immune to transients. A toaster will
just get momentarily and imperceptibly hotter for a few microseconds.
This stuff really did not become a huge issue until we started using
CMOS and that is everywhere now.
Microwaves and washing machines would still be fine if they did not
have that little circuit board. Usually the bad part is the clock.
We had a real nice "lightning damaged" microwave in our shop. I
drilled a hole through that touch panel and put in a spring wound
timer. It worked great.
On "inverter" microwaves you have a lot more to be damaged.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 01:12:17 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:44:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Tom sells whole house protection and you definitely need it, connected
to a good grounding electrode. The only thing Tom disagrees about is
whether a point of use protector does anything. I do believe it will
damp out locally induced shots that get into the system after it
enters the house.

We don't sell these things. We installed effective protection. Direct lightning strike without damage were routine. In one venue, all wires were underground. Since single point earthing was missing, all computers in the block house (on surge protectors) were damaged. That strike to earth was a direct strike to underground wires.

I never said plug-in protectors do nothing. Constantly stated is that it only does what it claims to do - nothing more. To protect from a type of surge that typically causes no damage; a transient made irrelevant by robust protection inside every appliance. A plug-in protector does exactly what it claims to do. It does not claim to protect from the other and typically destructive type of surge. Lightning is but one example of that other type of surge.

The surges a plug in surge protector protects from are not the ones
that do instant catastrophical damage, but the ones that to damage a
little bit at a time - causing things like hard drive failures and
accellerated aging of components.

A tree struck by lightning can be a direct connection to incoming conductors - especially buried wires or metal pipes. EMP did not cause damage. Current in a tree is then passing into buried conductors to causes damage. Using appliances as part of the path that connects to earthborne charges maybe 4 kilometers distant. That same current can be so harmful as to even kill four legged animals.

That current through a struck tree is especially destructive when all incoming conductors do not enter at a common service entrance. Makes little difference whether those conductors are overhead or underground since both need same properly earthed protection.

International design standards defined internal protection for electronics long before PCs existed. It is not debatable. Otherwise that other's denials included numbers - not personal speculation. Surges that are hundreds of joules are routinely converted into rock stable, low DC voltages to safety power semiconductors. Tiny joule (plug-in) protectors, doing what its manufacturer claims, are doing near zero protection. It does exactly what the manufacturer says it will do.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:07:56 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
I pointed out earlier that contradiction is one that I've asked W Tom to
explain every time he brings this up. How can MOVs insides appliances
be "robust protection", while much larger MOVs in a plug-in surge protector
be ineffective and dangerous?

This was explained to you even years ago. You ignored it then. Please do not ignore it this time.

Superior protection in all appliances is not using MOVs. Read spec numbers, for example, for a PSU. One particularly good Seasonic supply defined AC line protection at 1800 volts.

Telephone equipment should be protected to at least 600 volts. Although I have seen some designs that only used parts rated at 500 volts.

Ethernet should withstand up to 2000 volts. Where are these protectors that you only assumed? Robust internal protection is provided by what other parts do.

Surges that can overwhelm this robust protection must earth that energy BEFORE it can enter a building.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 02:35:35 -0600, Megan wrote:

On 05/19/2016 04:55 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/19/2016 6:50 PM, Will wrote:
On 5/19/2016 3:40 PM, Frank wrote:
Also have usb's on all computers.

Some have DisplayPort, some have hdmi and all of mine have USB.


Top or front loading? And do you use surge
supressors?


Most ports are front and rear. Never really seen a port on top though I suppose it's possible.
Stormy's just being a smart-ass again because the subject is washing
machines and someone DARED mention computers.

Well, the REAL subject is surge protectors - so we are covered

On Fri, 20 May 2016 03:10:44 -0600, Just Joe wrote:

On 05/20/2016 02:12 AM, westom wrote:
We don't sell these things. We installed effective protection. Direct lightning strike without damage were routine. In one venue, all wires were underground. Since single point earthing was missing, all computers in the block house (on surge protectors) were damaged. That strike to earth was a direct strike to underground wires.

What does an effective protection system like this typically cost?
The QO Surgebreaker designed for and supplied by Square D for the QO
panel is just over $100 Canadian, so likely about $50 street price in
the USA. Add the cost of a good ground.if you do not already have it.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 12:35:07 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 20 May 2016 02:18:22 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 20 May 2016 01:57:13 -0400, Micky
wrote:

Now I"m just quibbing but you must mean major appliances. I've taken
toasters, table radios, etc. apart and there was no surge protection.

Most of these things are fairly immune to transients. A toaster will
just get momentarily and imperceptibly hotter for a few microseconds.
This stuff really did not become a huge issue until we started using
CMOS and that is everywhere now.
Microwaves and washing machines would still be fine if they did not
have that little circuit board. Usually the bad part is the clock.
We had a real nice "lightning damaged" microwave in our shop. I
drilled a hole through that touch panel and put in a spring wound
timer. It worked great.
On "inverter" microwaves you have a lot more to be damaged.

The problem is that the "clock" (and that circuit board) is on all the
time. The actual cooking part is only on if you are cooking. The ones
that use relays are very well isolated when it is "off".
The same will be true of the new washing machines that started this
thread. That $400 circuit board is always on.

On 5/19/2016 2:24 AM, Roscoe wrote:


Anything you do to minimize voltage spikes on your power line is a good
thing...just keep in mind that the typical surge suppression device
needs a good path to ground to function properly.

Plug-in protectors do not work primarily by earthing a surge.

The IEEE surge guide (link in trader's post) explains (starting page 30)
plug in protectors work by limiting the voltage from each wire (power
and signal) to the ground at the protector. The voltage between the
wires going to the protected equipment is safe for the protected equipment.

Since protection is by limiting the voltage between wires, all
interconnected equipment needs to be connected to the same protector and
all external connections, like coax, must go through the protector.


FWIW, most homes don't have a good ground system. You'll typically find
the outdoor connection from the #6 ground wire to the ground rod is
loose and/or corroded.

Suppose you have a house earthed with a ground rod having near
miraculous 10 ohms resistance to earth (and ignoring the impedance of te
connecting wire), and a 1,000A surge is earthed. The building "ground"
system will rise 10,000A above 'absolute' earth potential. In general
70% of the voltage drop away from a ground rod is in the first 3 feet.
The earth over 3 feet away will be at least 7,000V from the building
'ground' system.

Much of the protection is that all wiring - power, phone, cable, ... -
rises together. That requires a short ground wire from phone and other
entry protectors to a common connection point on the power earthing
system. (An example of a ground wire that is too long is in the IEEE
surge guide starting page 30.)

A surge expert at the NIST 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."

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:10:47 AM UTC-4, Just Joe wrote:
What does an effective protection system like this typically cost?
About $1 per protected appliance.

Solution does not use products with obscene profit margins from APC, Belkin, Tripplite, Panamax, Monster or Bud. An effective system would feature protectors from other companies with integrity such as Intermatic, Square D, Ditek, Siemens, Polyphaser (an industry benchmark), Syscom, Leviton, ABB, Delta, Erico, General Electric, and Cutler-Hammer. It should be rated at least 50,000 amps. These are available in any electrical supply house, and in both Lowes and Home Depot.

Protector at 50,000 amps defines system reliability (life expectancy) 'over many' surges.

More important is its single point earth ground - the item that harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules. Earthing the art of protection and should have most of your protection. Earthing defines protection during 'each' surge.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:10:47 AM UTC-4, Just Joe wrote:
What does an effective protection system like this typically cost?

BTW, you should also inspect the protection installed for free by the telco, cable company, and satellite dish. Dish installers are particularly bad. And inspect your 'primary' protection layer as detailed elsewhere.

On 5/19/2016 12:19 PM, philo wrote:
On 05/19/2016 07:55 AM, wrote:
philo: "MOV"?



http://www.howtogeek.com/212375/why-...rge-protector/

Pretty much internet garbage.

For instance (contrary to the link) if a MOV with a 1000J rating is hit
with 1000 - 1J hits, the cumulative rating is far greater than 1000J.
Look up a data sheet.

And the amount of energy that can make it to a plug-in protector over a
branch circuit is surprisingly low. A surge expert at the NIST
investigated how much energy can reach the MOVs. Branch circuits were
10m and longer, and surges coming in on power wires were up to 10,000A.
The maximum energy was a surprisingly small 35 joules. In 13 of 15 cases
it was 1 joule or less. Plug-in protectors with much higher ratings are
readily available. (There are a couple reasons the energy is so low, if
anyone is interested.)

(The surge of 10,000A is, for practical purposes, the maximum surge
exposure for a house. It is the result of a 100,000A lightning strike
(only 5% are stronger) to an adjacent utility pole in typical urban
overhead distribution.)

And the IEEE surge guide (link in trader's post) describes how the
protected load can be connected to the incoming power, or connected
across the MOVs. In the latter case, if the MOVs fail the protected
equipment is disconnected. I believe protectors made now are required to
state if the protected load is not disconnected.

Some manufacturers have protected equipment warranties. They are
possible because the risk is much more limited than we expect (as
explained above).

I don't expect any of my plug-in protectors, which have good ratings, to
fail.

On 5/19/2016 1:40 PM, Frank wrote:

Few years ago I had several surge protectors get fried by a voltage
surge when a tree fell dropping the high tension wire on the low one.
Only item I lost was a microwave without a surge protector. Many years
ago we had lost a couple of unprotected TV sets now all electron stuff
in my house is protected. Also have usb's on all computers.

A surge expert at the NISThas written "in fact, the major cause of
[surge protector] failures is a temporary overvoltage, rather than an
unusually large surge." An example of overvoltage is crossed power wires
(as above). While MOVs can handle thousands of surge amps for the maybe
hundred microsecond duration of a surge they are rapidly burned out by
much longer lasting "overvoltage".

On 5/19/2016 3:35 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:

It's hard to get most people to understand that surge arresters actually wear out.

But not likely.

I've taken apart favorite surge strips and replaced the MOV's inside with better ones. I have some strips that fit a certain way in a space and a newer one may not fit. I write the date of repair on the back with a Sharpie. ^_^


MOVs typically fail by starting to conduct at normal voltage and going
into thermal runaway. That is a fire hazard, so since 1998 UL has
required thermal protectors to disconnect overheating MOVs. You
compromised that protection. I would never modify a protector.

On 5/20/2016 2:30 AM, westom wrote:

But grossly undersizing means a surge too tiny to damage appliances can destroy that protector.

In westom's mind all plug-in protectors are "undersized". The amount of
energy that can make it to a plug in protector is surprisingly small
(explained in another post). UL listed plug-in protectors are very
unlikely to fail.

And if a protector failed, the far lower protection in an appliance
would have failed.

On 5/19/2016 9:10 AM, westom wrote:

Someone says "surge" and, like magic, the village idiot appears.

Westom googles for "surge". He has joined an astonishing number of
forums to spread his misinformation.


If a washer needs protection, then so does every household item including clocks, RCD, furnace, recharging phones, and the most critical item during a surge - smoke detectors. Nothing adjacent to an appliance claims to protect from destructive surges.

Nonsense.

Protection means a surge is connected to earth BEFORE it enters a building. No way around that well proven science.

For proven science read the IEEE and NIST surge guides (links in
trader's post).

Both the IEEE and NIST surge guides say plug-in protectors are effective.


Earth ground (not a protector) is the most critical component in every protection 'system'.

It is westom's religious belief - immune from challenge. Since plug-in
protectors are not well earthed westom can not figure out how they work.
It is clearly explained in the IEEE surge guide, starting page 30 (and
summarized in another post)


easier if a 'whole house' solution is not implemented.

Service panel protectors are a real good idea.
But from the NIST surge guide:
"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."

Service panel protectors do not by themselves prevent high voltages from
developing between power and phone/cable/... wires. The NIST surge
guide suggests most equipment damage is from high voltage between power
and signal wires.


All appliances contain robust protection.

May have some or none. Never as much as a plug-in protector.

Nothing adjacent to an appliance claims to 'block' or 'absorb' that transient.

Of course not.
Protection is not by "blocking" or "absorbing". If westom could only
think he could find out how protection works.

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 6:03:02 AM UTC-4, philo wrote:
Not really. A surge suppressor is simply an MOV which will shunt voltage
spikes.
And where does it shunt those spike to? If not connected low impedance (ie less than 10 feet) to single point earth ground, then it must shunt those spikes elsewhere - such as destructively through adjacent electronics.

Protection is always about where energy dissipates. If a protector is adjacent to an appliance, it can only protect by 'blocking' or 'absorbing' that energy. How does its 2 cm part 'block' what three kilometers of sky could not? It doesn't. How does its hundreds of joules absorb surges that can be hundreds of thousands of joules? It doesn't. And does not have to. A surge too tiny to destroy appliances can also destroy near zero plug-in protectors. Then the naive consumer uses wild speculation to assume, "My protector sacrificed itself to save my computer."

More robust protection already inside appliances protect those appliances. Near zero joule protectors fail to even promote more sales.

A properly earthed 'whole house' protector does not 'block' or 'absorb' anything. It connects hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly to what does all protection - single point earth ground. Then even near zero plug-in protectors are protected. Then near zero plug-in protectors can protect from other and tinier anomalies.

Plug-in protectors are only useful if used in conjunction with properly earthed 'whole house' protection. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules are harmlessly absorbed. Any solution that does not discuss that energy is best considered a scam.

MOVs are effective when connected low impedance (ie less than 10 feet) to what actually does protection - single point earth ground.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-4, Stormin Mormon wrote:
Does it use a surge supressor? Do you
need the new high efficiency detergent?

How does it do stain protection?

On 5/19/2016 12:44 PM, wrote:

Tom sells whole house protection and you definitely need it, connected
to a good grounding electrode.


The only thing Tom disagrees about is
whether a point of use protector does anything. I do believe it will
damp out locally induced shots that get into the system after it
enters the house.

It will do a lot more than that, as detailed in a post to philo.

On 5/20/2016 2:12 AM, westom wrote:

I never said plug-in protectors do nothing. Constantly stated is that it only does what it claims to do - nothing more. To protect from a type of surge that typically causes no damage

Complete nonsense.

A plug-in protector does exactly what it claims to do. It does not claim to protect from the other and typically destructive type of surge.

Complete nonsense.

Some manufacturers even have protected equipment warranties.

Lightning is but one example of that other type of surge.

As detailed in a post to philo, the amount of energy that can make it to
a plug-in protector is very small, even with a very strong, very near
lightning strike to power wires.


EMP did not cause damage.

Complete nonsense.

Tiny joule (plug-in) protectors, doing what its manufacturer claims, are
doing near zero protection. It does exactly what the manufacturer says
it will do.

Complete nonsense.

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

Then read westom's sources that say they do not work. There are none.

On 5/20/2016 10:48 AM, bud-- wrote:


Suppose you have a house earthed with a ground rod having near
miraculous 10 ohms resistance to earth (and ignoring the impedance of te
connecting wire), and a 1,000A surge is earthed. The building "ground"
system will rise

10,000 volts

above 'absolute' earth potential. In general
70% of the voltage drop away from a ground rod is in the first 3 feet.
The earth over 3 feet away will be at least 7,000V from the building
'ground' system

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:40:20 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:07:56 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
I pointed out earlier that contradiction is one that I've asked W Tom to
explain every time he brings this up. How can MOVs insides appliances
be "robust protection", while much larger MOVs in a plug-in surge protector
be ineffective and dangerous?

This was explained to you even years ago. You ignored it then. Please do not ignore it this time.

Superior protection in all appliances is not using MOVs.

More lies. It's the most common surge protection device in electronic appliances as anyone who's looked at circuit boards or schematics knows.
What miracle device do you claim is in a typical stereo, TV, or PC? Note
that it's again typical of your silly games, that you deny that MOVs are
used, but don't even tell us what you claim is actually used in typical
appliances instead.

Here, from a major manufacturer of power supply components, Littlefuse, an application note on how to design a switching power supply. Note the MOV that's shown on the schematic.


http://www.littelfuse.com/~/media/el...ion_ note.pdf


"An overvoltage component, usually
a metal-oxide varistor and an
overcurrent component, usually
a blow-type fuse, is placed in the
devices input circuitry."



http://www.littelfuse.com/varistor

Look on the right hand side at all the application notes from
Littlefuse on how to use their MOVs in:

DVD players
Phones
Dishwashers
Washing machine
TV
PC
Printer
Network Gear


Why do you insist on lying and further embarrassing yourself?

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:32:29 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
I'm going to assume you know that one story about one house, or even
100 houses, does not make a risk as great when there are many 1000's
of houses ...

Underground wires that enter telco COs get same protection as wires that are overhead. In one venue, that protector failed at the subscriber interface. That wire from CO to subscriber was completely underground. Why did he have a surge if a threat does not exist as you only assume? Because the threat does exist. Because the threat has been well understood for longer than any of us have existed.

Professionals demonstrate how protection must be installed in a Tech Note. Protection is even on the incoming underground phone line because (as indicated in the picture) a lightning strike can enter via buried wires:
https://www.erico.com/catalog/literature/TNCR002.pdf

Legendary application notes from Polyphaser state same:
http://www.polyphaser.com/SiteMedia/...3.pdf?ext=.pdf
The power and telephone feeds to your house can be either aerial
or underground. Most people think underground is better from a
lightning standpoint. Buried underground, it will not be hit
directly, but if a nearby tree is hit, the amount of energy
coupled through the conductive ground medium can be almost
equal to a direct hit. By being underground, the shielding
effect to the wires is not great.

A Bell System Technical Journal paper in the late 1950s by Bodle and Gresh describe lightning strikes to underground cables over 5 month period in NJ, MI, GA, and MD. Somehow professionals have it wrong?

Does not matter if wires are overhead or underground. All incoming wires - overhead or underground - must connect low impedance to properly earthed 'whole house' protection before entering a structure - assuming one wants to protect appliances.