On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 8:30:13 AM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
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.

Lightning strikes only 50 feet from a long wire antenna. That EMP to a device intended to maximize EMP effects is easily removed by a milliamp current device - one an NE-2 neon glow light. Same bulb also found in lighted wall switches. EMP would not create that arcing. Something more robust created it - such as currents in earth that traveled two miles into the house and probably more miles after the house.

Those current are why both overhead and underground wires must have that same service entrance protection. As even addressed by Mil Std 419.

Same problem is why mines must be carefully earthed. In one case, a lightning strike direct to earth some distance from a mine caused wires inside the mine to arc. Arcing caused a small explosion. Even underground mines must have effective and properly earthed protection from lightning.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:07:56 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
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.

Only near zero protectors do significant degrading. In reality, those near zero protectors can also fail catastrophically. A near zero protector must disconnect protector parts as fast as possible to avert a fire. And leave that surge still connected to attached TV or washing machine.

A 5000 volt surge is approaching TV or washing machine electronics on a black (hot) wire. A consumer foolishly installed a plug-in protector without any properly earthed 'whole house' solution. So that surge is at the washer hunting for earth ground. That surge is all but invited inside to hunt destructively for earth.

A protector with a 330 volt let-through voltage shunts that surge onto white (neutral) and green (safety ground) wires. Now 5000 volts is incoming on the hot wire. 4670 volts is incoming on the green and white wires. That protector shunts current onto more incoming wires. Where is the protection? Protected are profit margins in that near zero protector manufacturer.

If anything needs that protection then everything needs that protection. One can buy a power strip protector for $10 from Walmart. Or pay up to $100 for an equivalent protector from Monster. They are profit centers; 'magic' boxes marketed to the naive.

Informed consumers earth a 'whole house' solution for about $1 per appliance. Then a direct lightning strike is not inside hunting for earth ground destructively via a washer, TV, or any other appliance. Then hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate harmlessly outside in earth. Then even near zero plug-in protectors are protected - are less likely to create a house fire.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 1:41:47 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
Why do you insist on lying and further embarrassing yourself?

Wow you do have an ego today. You attack to make yourself feel superior. Meanwhile reality is found in appliances. Eevn without using any protectors, all appliances already have superior internal protection. Even early electro-mechanical clocks were once upgraded in design to withstand over 2000 volt surges without damage. No protector parts were used.

All appliances routinely have robust protection rated at 600 volts, 1800 volts, 2000 volts, etc. And all feature this protection without protectors. If a manufacturer wishes to upgrade that superior protection, he may also add protector parts. Meaning your denials are wasted bandwidth.

Surges that are hundreds or thousand joules are routinely made irrelevant by protection already inside appliances. Informed consumers worry about destructive surges that might occur once every seven years. And that put all household appliances at risk. Informed consumers spend tens of times less money on a properly earthed 'whole house' solution to even protect those near zero plug-in protectors.

Reality does not change no matter how often you get your panties in a knot and still do not post any relevant or honest denials.

As usual, I will post the same answers next year since learning and civility appears to cause you difficulty.

Others can learn why so many waste so much money on near zero protection. Some will adamently denial even when manufacturer numbers says something completely different. Plug-in protectors without a 'whole house' solution can even make damage and fire easier.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 2:12:14 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:07:56 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
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.

Only near zero protectors do significant degrading.

Baloney. All MOVs degrade based on the energy of a given surge and the
number of times it's exposed. It's true a bigger one can take larger
hits, more hits, etc, but the effect is universal. And if "zero" is the
issue, then how do those MOVs inside appliances work? They are closer to
"zero" than the ones that are 10x inside the plug-in surge protector.




In reality, those near zero protectors can also fail catastrophically. A near zero protector must disconnect protector parts as fast as possible to avert a fire. And leave that surge still connected to attached TV or washing machine.


Yeah, I knew we'd be on to the fires soon enough.



A 5000 volt surge is approaching TV or washing machine electronics on a black (hot) wire. A consumer foolishly installed a plug-in protector without any properly earthed 'whole house' solution. So that surge is at the washer hunting for earth ground. That surge is all but invited inside to hunt destructively for earth.


That 5000V surge would likely arc over somewhere before it ever got to
the washing machine. But regardless, if it gets to the washing machine
receptacle, the washing machine is better off with the plug-in there,
then without it, because the surge is still there. With the plug in,
all the lines are voltage clamped together, there is no huge, damaging
voltage.


A protector with a 330 volt let-through voltage shunts that surge onto white (neutral) and green (safety ground) wires. Now 5000 volts is incoming on the hot wire. 4670 volts is incoming on the green and white wires. That protector shunts current onto more incoming wires. Where is the protection? Protected are profit margins in that near zero protector manufacturer.

The protection is that the hot, neutral and ground at the washing machine
are clamped to 330 volts, instead of seeing 5000 volts.



If anything needs that protection then everything needs that protection. One can buy a power strip protector for $10 from Walmart. Or pay up to $100 for an equivalent protector from Monster. They are profit centers; 'magic' boxes marketed to the naive.

Informed consumers earth a 'whole house' solution for about $1 per appliance. Then a direct lightning strike is not inside hunting for earth ground destructively via a washer, TV, or any other appliance. Then hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate harmlessly outside in earth. Then even near zero plug-in protectors are protected - are less likely to create a house fire.

The $1 per appliance is a myth. Even if you have 30 appliances, that's
just $30. A decent whole house surge protector is $100+ and that doesn't
include installation. Typical homeowner is going to need an electrician,
so figure it's more like $300+, if you're lucky.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:47:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
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.

Obviously a millimeters gap in a relay does not block what three miles of sky cannot. Appliances contain robust protection from a type of surge that a power strip might protect from. Concern is for a completely different type of surge that actually does damage - will even blow through a millimeters gap inside a relay.

That means that surge must be connected low impedance to earth BEFORE entering a building - so that it does not blow through millimeter relay gaps and other robust protection that already exists inside each appliance.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:08:59 AM UTC-4, Gz wrote:
Came in on phone line. Phone line also needs protection.

Phone line must already have been protection installed for free. Unfortunately that protector is only as effective as an earth ground that you provide and are responsible for maintaining.

Most common incoming surge path is AC electric. Once inside, it hunts for earth destructively via household appliances. Damage means both an incoming and an outgoing path must exist. Damaged are appliances that make a best outgoing connection to earth.

Incoming on AC mains into an answering machine. Outgoing to earth via the telco 'installed for free' protector. Damage is often on the outgoing path..

You assumed the outgoing path was an incoming path. Why would a surge enter on a protected wire. And not enter on the most commonly unprotected wire - AC electric. You had damage because a surge was all but invited inside. It more likely found an excellent outgoing path to earth destructively via the answering machine and phone line.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 2:23:27 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 1:41:47 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
Why do you insist on lying and further embarrassing yourself?

Wow you do have an ego today. You attack to make yourself feel superior. Meanwhile reality is found in appliances. Eevn without using any protectors, all appliances already have superior internal protection. Even early electro-mechanical clocks were once upgraded in design to withstand over 2000 volt surges without damage. No protector parts were used.

All appliances routinely have robust protection rated at 600 volts, 1800 volts, 2000 volts, etc. And all feature this protection without protectors.. If a manufacturer wishes to upgrade that superior protection, he may also add protector parts. Meaning your denials are wasted bandwidth.


You really are the wasted bandwith. Anyone here who has any experience with
electronics and who has looked at any typical appliances with electronics
knows that they all have MOVs. I can't recall an last electronics board
for an appliance that didn't have them. I see that Littlefuse reference,
all their app notes went right over your head. No, we shouldn't believe
LF, that makes and sells MOVs as to where they are used: TV, phones,
washers, dryers, PC, printers, etc. They have app notes on how to use
them in all that and more. No, we should believe you, with nothing but
your flapping BS gums. You still haven't described how surge protection
is accomplished in all those appliances without using MOVs. Of course
that is because they actually do use MOVs. Even a curious child that
smashes them apart with a hammer knows that there are those round disk
things near where the power enters the unit.




Surges that are hundreds or thousand joules are routinely made irrelevant by protection already inside appliances.

Like Bud has told you a hundred times now, surges that are thousands of
joules don't make it to the appliance. And the same question remains.
Explain to us the physics whereby you claim that the modest amount of
surge protection in a typical cheap appliance will protect against thousands
of joules, while surge protection at a plug-in can't work, because it
has no earth ground? Of course you can't, because it would violate all
the laws of physics.



Informed consumers worry about destructive surges that might occur once every seven years. And that put all household appliances at risk. Informed consumers spend tens of times less money on a properly earthed 'whole house' solution to even protect those near zero plug-in protectors.

Reality does not change no matter how often you get your panties in a knot and still do not post any relevant or honest denials.

As usual, I will post the same answers next year since learning and civility appears to cause you difficulty.


Bud and I post links to the IEEE, NIST, Littlefuse, etc. You have your
flapping gums. And you want to talk about learning?



Others can learn why so many waste so much money on near zero protection. Some will adamently denial even when manufacturer numbers says something completely different. Plug-in protectors without a 'whole house' solution can even make damage and fire easier.

Show us where IEEE or NIST guides on surge protection say that. You can't
because they don't.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 2:39:51 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:

Obviously a millimeters gap in a relay does not block what three miles of sky cannot.

Obviously only a tiny part of the energy of a lightning bolt traveling through 3 miles of sky is going to make it to an appliance in a house.



Appliances contain robust protection from a type of surge that a power strip might protect from.

Yes, and it almost always uses MOVs as I showed you with the Littlefuse
reference, app notes, etc. You deny that MOVs are used in appliances
period. So, we're all still waiting to hear exactly how this "robust" protection
is accomplished in your world?

Poor W Tom. Supposed to be an expert on surge protection, but doesn't
know what's in an appliance power circuit.



Concern is for a completely different type of surge that actually does damage - will even blow through a millimeters gap inside a relay.

That means that surge must be connected low impedance to earth BEFORE entering a building - so that it does not blow through millimeter relay gaps and other robust protection that already exists inside each appliance.

That "robust" protection inside the appliance has no low impedance path
to ground. So, how can it possibly work? And note that you rant on about
impedance in one direction only and ignore it in the other direction.
The same wiring impedance also limits the surge that can reach an appliance.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 10:57:05 AM UTC-5, bud-- wrote:
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.

Every time an MOV conducts a surge to ground it heats up. I would liken it to bruising. If the MOV gets beat on enough it will fail. Quite often the circuit breaker/power switch trips when the MOV's sink enough current to ground but again, if the MOV's get slammed enough they'll fail. If I take a surge arrester apart and notice the MOV's are discolored, I'll replace them. I've also had the thermal cutouts open up and I replace them along with the MOV's. I have a lot of high end surge arresters at home, some of them have chokes and capacitors to filter out electrical noise. I can usually repair one cheaper than buying a new one because the parts cost me less than a new unit. Back in the late 1970's, I rebuilt some control boards for industrial cranes and the MOV's looked like 2 inch long axial lead molded capacitors. When I was working, I'd replace toasted surge arresters on customer equipment and fix the old ones for my own use. The new arresters have a warranty and I'd always fill out the warranty card and send it in to the manufacturer. I don't like to trash things that I can repair and reuse. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Repair Monster

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 11:13:56 AM UTC-5, wrote:
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

When I worked as an electrician out in The Marshall Islands for a construction company building the mission control center for The SDI test program, we drove ground rods 10 feet apart around the building, bonded them together and to a ground grid under the raised computer floor where there were ground rods driven through holes in the slab under the raised flooring. It was what The Army Corps of Engineers wanted. It was a giant ground plane/grid that all the electronics including the Cray supercomputer and peripherals were grounded to. That was in the late 1980's. There is no telling WTF is out there now. Part of the replacement for The Space Fence is or is being built out there now. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Space Monster

On Fri, 20 May 2016 10:49:44 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

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.


NOBODY said there was No threat - just that the threat is
significantly reduced - and nothing you have said has come close to
providing evidence that is not true. Lightning isn't the only threat
to above-ground wiring that causes surges and spikes either - most of
which are even more uncommon with underground services.

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.
NOTHING can guarantee 100% protection from lightning. You reduce your
exposure as much as yopu can within the limits of cost vs probability.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 11:12:10 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:07:56 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
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.

Only near zero protectors do significant degrading. In reality, those near zero protectors can also fail catastrophically. A near zero protector must disconnect protector parts as fast as possible to avert a fire. And leave that surge still connected to attached TV or washing machine.

A 5000 volt surge is approaching TV or washing machine electronics on a black (hot) wire. A consumer foolishly installed a plug-in protector without any properly earthed 'whole house' solution. So that surge is at the washer hunting for earth ground. That surge is all but invited inside to hunt destructively for earth.

A protector with a 330 volt let-through voltage shunts that surge onto white (neutral) and green (safety ground) wires. Now 5000 volts is incoming on the hot wire. 4670 volts is incoming on the green and white wires. That protector shunts current onto more incoming wires. Where is the protection? Protected are profit margins in that near zero protector manufacturer.

If anything needs that protection then everything needs that protection. One can buy a power strip protector for $10 from Walmart. Or pay up to $100 for an equivalent protector from Monster. They are profit centers; 'magic' boxes marketed to the naive.

Informed consumers earth a 'whole house' solution for about $1 per appliance. Then a direct lightning strike is not inside hunting for earth ground destructively via a washer, TV, or any other appliance. Then hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate harmlessly outside in earth. Then even near zero plug-in protectors are protected - are less likely to create a house fire.

Most electronics these days can be destroyed by dozens of joules.
Thousands of joules are rare and I agree, are best dealt with before
your wires get in the house in the first place but an EMP in the back
yard will wipe out the board in the washing machine before it ever
gets to the protection in the front of the house.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 11:39:47 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:47:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
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.

Obviously a millimeters gap in a relay does not block what three miles of sky cannot. Appliances contain robust protection from a type of surge that a power strip might protect from. Concern is for a completely different type of surge that actually does damage - will even blow through a millimeters gap inside a relay.

That means that surge must be connected low impedance to earth BEFORE entering a building - so that it does not blow through millimeter relay gaps and other robust protection that already exists inside each appliance.

You have no concept of what kind of transients can damage CMOS I
guess. We are talking about a few dozen joules at a couple hundred
volts.
Certainly the static electricity from shuffling across the rug will do
it but it does not take much to bleed that off.
If you are talking about lightning protection itself, you really need
a superior path before you have protected anything. As I have stated
several times. I have a weather station on a mast above my garage.
There is a lightning rod 3' above it. Lightning has hit that at least
twice and perhaps more than that. 99.99999% of that strike went
straight to ground. There was still an EMP on the signal wire. My
entrance protectors are useless against that hit, yet I have survived
those strikes. The PC it is connected to survived the first one but I
lost the serial port (it still worked but it was flaky). The second
time, after adding more protection, I only had to reboot it.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 10:49:44 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

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.

I don't care about surge protection that is added. The topic was what
the risk was without protection.

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?

Don't put words in my mouth, especially words I said the opposite of.
I never said there a thread doesn't exist. In fact even the part at
the top here makes clear that I believe that a house with underground
wires can have lightning damage.

It was bad enough when you avoided my question, but that's about you.

Putting words in my mouth that I didn't say or imply is about me, and
that's worse.

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?

That quote doesn't address whether the risk is greater or not. If
you think the risk is the same underground or overhead, just say that.
You've never said that. Had you said that after my first post, we
would have been done by now.

That you go to so much effort not to say the risk is the same makes me
think you think the risk is greater for overhead.

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.

Proper whole house protection is irrelevant to the topic.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 11:45:39 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:08:59 AM UTC-4, Gz wrote:
Came in on phone line. Phone line also needs protection.

Phone line must already have been protection installed for free. Unfortunately that protector is only as effective as an earth ground that you provide and are responsible for maintaining.

Most common incoming surge path is AC electric. Once inside, it hunts for earth destructively via household appliances. Damage means both an incoming and an outgoing path must exist. Damaged are appliances that make a best outgoing connection to earth.

Incoming on AC mains into an answering machine. Outgoing to earth via the telco 'installed for free' protector. Damage is often on the outgoing path.

You assumed the outgoing path was an incoming path. Why would a surge enter on a protected wire. And not enter on the most commonly unprotected wire - AC electric. You had damage because a surge was all but invited inside. It more likely found an excellent outgoing path to earth destructively via the answering machine and phone line.

Modems were the first things we determined would benefit from a point
of use protector and with thousands of them installed, we had lots of
chance to test the theory. The telco protection was designed to keep
an old style Western Electric phone from catching on fire, not to
protect CMOS. On a recording volt meter we saw alarming transients
getting past their "gas" protectors. If you still had the carbon rods,
you might as well just tie a knot in the cord.
Certainly you need to be sure the Telco protector is bonded to the GES
on the service but that is not all you need. The longer the phone
wires are on the customer side of the Dmark, the less protection you
have.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 12:51:45 PM UTC-5, westom wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 8:30:13 AM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
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.

Lightning strikes only 50 feet from a long wire antenna. That EMP to a device intended to maximize EMP effects is easily removed by a milliamp current device - one an NE-2 neon glow light. Same bulb also found in lighted wall switches. EMP would not create that arcing. Something more robust created it - such as currents in earth that traveled two miles into the house and probably more miles after the house.

Those current are why both overhead and underground wires must have that same service entrance protection. As even addressed by Mil Std 419.

Same problem is why mines must be carefully earthed. In one case, a lightning strike direct to earth some distance from a mine caused wires inside the mine to arc. Arcing caused a small explosion. Even underground mines must have effective and properly earthed protection from lightning.

It's been years since I was back there but the power is coming in from overhead and now that I think about it, the furnace and metal ductwork could have been grounded to the incoming power line and the arc could have been caused by a difference in potential from the electrical system ground and the steel support poles embedded in the concrete slab and its metal reinforcement grid. I don't recall if the reinforcement was rebar or screen wire. I just remember being in the basement involved in some evil mad scientist stuff when I'd hear a loud crack followed seconds later by thunder. It's been more than 40 years since I was back on the family farm in that basement so I can't investigate with old experienced eyes. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Potential Monster

On Fri, 20 May 2016 15:41:43 -0400, Micky
wrote:

I don't care about surge protection that is added. The topic was what
the risk was without protection.

In the case of this washer, I would say Tom's polyphaser would give
you plenty of protection. There are no other parallel paths. You are
only looking at L/N spikes.
Everyone should have main panel or meter can protectors.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 06:37:59 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

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.


This is one of my biggest interests. We all have very different or
somewhat different goals, and while the world is not entirely a
zero-sum game, there definitely are times when one party's gain is
another's loss.

I can't make that go away, but I don't think things should be made
worse by misstatements of fact, or competing parties unintentionally
or intentionally using the same word with different definitions, or
lying, or exaggerating, or any of the various communication problems
that don't have to exist. I'd like to make them go away.



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 3:02:29 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 10:57:05 AM UTC-5, bud-- wrote:
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.

Every time an MOV conducts a surge to ground it heats up. I would liken it to bruising. If the MOV gets beat on enough it will fail. Quite often the circuit breaker/power switch trips when the MOV's sink enough current to ground but again, if the MOV's get slammed enough they'll fail. If I take a surge arrester apart and notice the MOV's are discolored, I'll replace them.. I've also had the thermal cutouts open up and I replace them along with the MOV's. I have a lot of high end surge arresters at home, some of them have chokes and capacitors to filter out electrical noise. I can usually repair one cheaper than buying a new one because the parts cost me less than a new unit. Back in the late 1970's, I rebuilt some control boards for industrial cranes and the MOV's looked like 2 inch long axial lead molded capacitors. When I was working, I'd replace toasted surge arresters on customer equipment and fix the old ones for my own use. The new arresters have a warranty and I'd always fill out the warranty card and send it in to the manufacturer. I don't like to trash things that I can repair and reuse. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Repair Monster


Would Uncle Repair Monster care to share his repair knowledge and comment on
W Tom's claim that electronic appliances don't typically use MOVs for surge protection?

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:42:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2016 11:45:39 -0700 (PDT), westom
wrote:

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:08:59 AM UTC-4, Gz wrote:
Came in on phone line. Phone line also needs protection.

Phone line must already have been protection installed for free. Unfortunately that protector is only as effective as an earth ground that you provide and are responsible for maintaining.

Most common incoming surge path is AC electric. Once inside, it hunts for earth destructively via household appliances. Damage means both an incoming and an outgoing path must exist. Damaged are appliances that make a best outgoing connection to earth.

Incoming on AC mains into an answering machine. Outgoing to earth via the telco 'installed for free' protector. Damage is often on the outgoing path.

You assumed the outgoing path was an incoming path. Why would a surge enter on a protected wire. And not enter on the most commonly unprotected wire - AC electric. You had damage because a surge was all but invited inside. It more likely found an excellent outgoing path to earth destructively via the answering machine and phone line.

Modems were the first things we determined would benefit from a point
of use protector and with thousands of them installed, we had lots of
chance to test the theory. The telco protection was designed to keep
an old style Western Electric phone from catching on fire, not to
protect CMOS. On a recording volt meter we saw alarming transients
getting past their "gas" protectors. If you still had the carbon rods,
you might as well just tie a knot in the cord.
Certainly you need to be sure the Telco protector is bonded to the GES
on the service but that is not all you need.

+1

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:59:25 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:02:29 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 10:57:05 AM UTC-5, bud-- wrote:
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.

Every time an MOV conducts a surge to ground it heats up. I would liken it to bruising. If the MOV gets beat on enough it will fail. Quite often the circuit breaker/power switch trips when the MOV's sink enough current to ground but again, if the MOV's get slammed enough they'll fail. If I take a surge arrester apart and notice the MOV's are discolored, I'll replace them. I've also had the thermal cutouts open up and I replace them along with the MOV's. I have a lot of high end surge arresters at home, some of them have chokes and capacitors to filter out electrical noise. I can usually repair one cheaper than buying a new one because the parts cost me less than a new unit. Back in the late 1970's, I rebuilt some control boards for industrial cranes and the MOV's looked like 2 inch long axial lead molded capacitors. When I was working, I'd replace toasted surge arresters on customer equipment and fix the old ones for my own use. The new arresters have a warranty and I'd always fill out the warranty card and send it in to the manufacturer. I don't like to trash things that I can repair and reuse. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Repair Monster

Would Uncle Repair Monster care to share his repair knowledge and comment on
W Tom's claim that electronic appliances don't typically use MOVs for surge protection?

Didn't you set him straight? Every modern electronic device that plugs into a wall outlet that I've had apart, has 1 or more MOV's on the 120vac line in. The low voltage powered devices may not have an MOV on the DC jack but there is usually an MOV in the wall wart across the 120vac plug. The last thing I pried apart is a little 5vdc USB wall wart that stopped working and it's a bit bigger than my thumb and it has a tiny MOV soldered onto the circuit board. What do I know? I've worked on and off in the field of electronic repair for more that 40 years so I've seen all kinds of stuff. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Broken Monster

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:48:30 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:59:25 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:02:29 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 10:57:05 AM UTC-5, bud-- wrote:
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.

Every time an MOV conducts a surge to ground it heats up. I would liken it to bruising. If the MOV gets beat on enough it will fail. Quite often the circuit breaker/power switch trips when the MOV's sink enough current to ground but again, if the MOV's get slammed enough they'll fail. If I take a surge arrester apart and notice the MOV's are discolored, I'll replace them. I've also had the thermal cutouts open up and I replace them along with the MOV's. I have a lot of high end surge arresters at home, some of them have chokes and capacitors to filter out electrical noise. I can usually repair one cheaper than buying a new one because the parts cost me less than a new unit. Back in the late 1970's, I rebuilt some control boards for industrial cranes and the MOV's looked like 2 inch long axial lead molded capacitors. When I was working, I'd replace toasted surge arresters on customer equipment and fix the old ones for my own use. The new arresters have a warranty and I'd always fill out the warranty card and send it in to the manufacturer. I don't like to trash things that I can repair and reuse. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Repair Monster

Would Uncle Repair Monster care to share his repair knowledge and comment on
W Tom's claim that electronic appliances don't typically use MOVs for surge protection?

Didn't you set him straight? Every modern electronic device that plugs into a wall outlet that I've had apart, has 1 or more MOV's on the 120vac line in. The low voltage powered devices may not have an MOV on the DC jack but there is usually an MOV in the wall wart across the 120vac plug. The last thing I pried apart is a little 5vdc USB wall wart that stopped working and it's a bit bigger than my thumb and it has a tiny MOV soldered onto the circuit board. What do I know? I've worked on and off in the field of electronic repair for more that 40 years so I've seen all kinds of stuff. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Broken Monster

Thank you. Lots of us here have tried to set W Tom straight over the
years, but it's like whack-a-mole or trying to nail jello to the wall.
His insistence that appliances don't typically have MOVs in them for
surge protection is one of the most bizarre and ridiculous claims he's
made so far. I've seen the insides of quite a few appliances to know
I'm right. But it's good to have someone else that's seen a whole lot
more confirm it.

I75 in what state??????

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:06:15 PM UTC-5, wrote:
I75 in what state??????

Mr.G resides in Florida. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Southern Monster

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:58:03 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:48:30 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:59:25 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:02:29 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 10:57:05 AM UTC-5, bud-- wrote:
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.

Every time an MOV conducts a surge to ground it heats up. I would liken it to bruising. If the MOV gets beat on enough it will fail. Quite often the circuit breaker/power switch trips when the MOV's sink enough current to ground but again, if the MOV's get slammed enough they'll fail. If I take a surge arrester apart and notice the MOV's are discolored, I'll replace them. I've also had the thermal cutouts open up and I replace them along with the MOV's. I have a lot of high end surge arresters at home, some of them have chokes and capacitors to filter out electrical noise. I can usually repair one cheaper than buying a new one because the parts cost me less than a new unit. Back in the late 1970's, I rebuilt some control boards for industrial cranes and the MOV's looked like 2 inch long axial lead molded capacitors. When I was working, I'd replace toasted surge arresters on customer equipment and fix the old ones for my own use. The new arresters have a warranty and I'd always fill out the warranty card and send it in to the manufacturer. I don't like to trash things that I can repair and reuse. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Repair Monster

Would Uncle Repair Monster care to share his repair knowledge and comment on
W Tom's claim that electronic appliances don't typically use MOVs for surge protection?

Didn't you set him straight? Every modern electronic device that plugs into a wall outlet that I've had apart, has 1 or more MOV's on the 120vac line in. The low voltage powered devices may not have an MOV on the DC jack but there is usually an MOV in the wall wart across the 120vac plug. The last thing I pried apart is a little 5vdc USB wall wart that stopped working and it's a bit bigger than my thumb and it has a tiny MOV soldered onto the circuit board. What do I know? I've worked on and off in the field of electronic repair for more that 40 years so I've seen all kinds of stuff. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Broken Monster

Thank you. Lots of us here have tried to set W Tom straight over the
years, but it's like whack-a-mole or trying to nail jello to the wall.
His insistence that appliances don't typically have MOVs in them for
surge protection is one of the most bizarre and ridiculous claims he's
made so far. I've seen the insides of quite a few appliances to know
I'm right. But it's good to have someone else that's seen a whole lot
more confirm it.

I'd agree that appliances with "mechanical" controls don't normally have MOV protection but I'm pretty sure any electronically controlled appliance will have one or more MOV's on the incoming AC power. Like I wrote, even the darn wall wart switching power supplies have MOV's in them to protect the electronic components. I haven't seen MOV's in AC wall warts but those could have a thermal breaker, fuse link or thermal fuse in the winding as the only protection. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Fused Monster

On Fri, 20 May 2016 15:52:11 -0400, Micky
wrote:


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.


This is one of my biggest interests. We all have very different or
somewhat different goals, and while the world is not entirely a
zero-sum game, there definitely are times when one party's gain is
another's loss.

I can't make that go away, but I don't think things should be made
worse by misstatements of fact, or competing parties unintentionally
or intentionally using the same word with different definitions, or
lying,

I don't want to give the impression I think lying is always bad. That
idea is overly simple. There are times when it's not just okay, it's
the proper thing to do.

One can divide lies into three categories, those made to benefit a
third party, those made to benefit the party one is talking to, and
those meant to benefit oneself.

The third category, to benefit oneself, is most likely to include bad
and terrible lies, and probably some that are okay.

The second category, to benefit the person you are talking to, clearly
includes both bad and good lies.
Bad: You steal 100 dollars from your girlfriend's wallet, or 100,000
from the place you work, and when asked you say, "No, I didn't steal
it." Bad.
Good: Your 2-year old son's father is killed when he's raping a
woman and she or someone else kills him. Now because of the web, he
might be able to learn about this when he's an adult, but when that
was impossible, and you had no family that would tell him, the proper
thing was to tell him he died in car accident, for example. Even now
there are people killed while doing terrible things but who don't live
a public record of it.

The third category, to benefit a 3rd party (when the speaker is
benefitting not much or not at all). Examples escape me now, but it's
late, the computer is short of RAM, and I want to post this. Anyhow,
most people don't like to lie** and if they lie to benefit some good
third party, it may weel be the right thing to do.

**Except Rump and his ilk.
or exaggerating, or any of the various communication problems
that don't have to exist. I'd like to make them go away.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 15:06:10 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

I75 in what state??????

Florida

On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 1:04:57 AM UTC-4, Micky wrote:


**Except Rump and his ilk.
or exaggerating, or any of the various communication problems
that don't have to exist. I'd like to make them go away.


Of course lies from Hillary and all the libs, why they are peachy keen
to you. Never see you bitching here about those lies or corruption,
not even once. You're just like Trump in some ways. You just have
your own little version of the world and the facts don't matter.

On 5/20/2016 12:23 PM, westom wrote:

All appliances routinely have robust protection rated at 600 volts, 1800 volts, 2000 volts, etc. And all feature this protection without protectors.

Last time westom actually provided information on this protection it was
for ESD protection, as in shuffle over a rug and touch the device. That
is a trivial energy.


Surges that are hundreds or thousand joules are routinely made irrelevant by protection already inside appliances.

It is one of westom's fantasies.

Hundreds of joules can not make it over a branch circuit. See the reply
to philo, where a surge expert determined the maximum energy at a
protector in his test series was 35 joules, and most were less than 1
joule. The surges coming in were the equivalent of a 100,000A lightning
strike to the primary wire on a utility pole adjacent to the house.

And it is insane that any appliance can handle hundreds of joules.

Informed consumers spend tens of times less money on a properly earthed 'whole house' solution

And repeating from elsewhe
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."

to even protect those near zero plug-in protectors.

Maximum energy at a plug-in protector of 35 joules with 100,000A
lightning strike - without a service panel protector to protect it.


As usual, I will post the same answers next year since learning and civility appears to cause you difficulty.

As usual westom will post the same misinformation tomorrow and next year.

As usual westom will continue to refuse to answer simple obvious questions:
- Why do the only 2 detailed examples of protection in the IEEE surge
guide use plug-in protectors?
- Why does the NIST surge guide says plug-in protectors are "the
easiest solution"?
- Why does the NIST surge guide say "One effective solution is to have
the consumer install" a multiport plug-in protector?
- Why does the NIST surge guide say "Plug-in...The easiest of all for
anyone to do. The only question is 'Which to choose?'"
- Why do westom's "companies with integrity" make plug-in protectors?
- Why does "integrity" manufacturer SquareD says "electronic equipment
may need additional protection by installing plug-in [protectors] at the
point of use"?
- Why does the IEEE surge guide explain how plug-in protectors work -
and it is not primarily by earthing?
- Why did the investigation by surge expert find only 35 joules (and
usually far less) at a plug-in protector when the surge was the maximum
that will occur?

As usual westom will never have any reliable sources that agree with his
belief that plug-in protectors do not work.

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

On 5/20/2016 12:12 PM, westom wrote:

Only near zero protectors do significant degrading. In reality, those near zero protectors can also fail catastrophically. A near zero protector must disconnect protector parts as fast as possible to avert a fire.

Nonsense.
But it is westom's simple minded picture based on his rejection of
anything that conflicts with his substantially religious beliefs about
protection.


A protector with a 330 volt let-through voltage shunts that surge onto white (neutral) and green (safety ground) wires. Now 5000 volts is incoming on the hot wire. 4670 volts is incoming on the green and white wires.

With minimal technical knowledge westom could figure out that with a 5kV
surge at the panel, the wires at a plug-in protector would be at about
1600V. The voltage between the wires going to the protected equipment is
be safe for the protected equipment.

Where is the protection?

Both the IEEE and NIST surge guides say plug-in protectors protect what
is properly connected to them.

Then even near zero plug-in protectors are protected - are less likely to create a house fire.

Lacking valid technical arguments westom likes scare tactics.
UL listed plug-in protectors have, since 1998, had disconnects for
overheating MOVs. Where is the record of fires westom claims?

On 5/20/2016 11:01 AM, westom wrote:

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.

Of course it doesn't Protectors do not work by "blocking" or "absorbing"
a surge.
(But both service panel and plug-in protectors do absorb some energy in
the process of protecting.)

How does its hundreds of joules absorb surges that can be hundreds of thousands of joules? It doesn't.

Of course not. Protectors do not work by "absorbing".

And as has been pointed out many times, in an expert investigation the
maximum energy that can make it to a plug-in protector is quite small -
35 joules and usually far less even with the worst probable surge on
power service wires.

But it is all too complicated for westom's simple minded beliefs.

And does not have to. A surge too tiny to destroy appliances can also destroy near zero plug-in protectors.

And his stupid idea that appliances have intrinsic protection higher
than a plug-in protector
If they did, the manufacturer would list them under the UL standard for
surge protection - an advertizing advantage.


Plug-in protectors are only useful if used in conjunction with properly earthed 'whole house' protection.

The maximum energy that can make it to a plug-in protector is quite
small - 35 joules, and usually far less, even with the worst probable
surge on power service wires. And no service panel protector.


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

It is westom's religiious belief in earthing.

Unfortunately the IEEE surge guide (starting page 30) explains that
plug-in protectors do not work primarily by earthing. But since that
conflicts with westom's religious belief he ignores it.

On 5/20/2016 10:48 AM, westom wrote:

Solution does not use products with obscene profit margins from APC, Belkin, Tripplite, Panamax, Monster or Bud.

I have nothing to do with surge protection other than what I use.
If westom had valid technical arguments he wouldn't have to lie.

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.

At least half of these "companies with integrity" make and sell plug-in
protectors.

SquareD does not, and makes service panel protectors. Last time I looked
SquareD said for their "best" service panel protector "electronic
equipment may need additional protection by installing plug-in
[protectors] at the point of use."
For the next best protector, SquareD said the connected equipment
warranty $ does not include "electronic devices such as: microwave
ovens, audio and stereo components, video equipment, televisions, and
computers."

On 5/20/2016 10:39 AM, wrote:

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.

From an expert investigation - maximum energy at a plug-in protector
was 35 joules, and almost all cases under 1 joule, with a power line
surge including those caused by a 100,000A lightning strike to the
primary wire at an adjacent utility pole. The maximum energy wasn't even
from the worst surge.

When the voltage at service panel busbars reaches about 6,000V there is
arc-over to the enclosure. The voltage of the established arc is
hundreds of volts. Since the enclosure is connected to the earthing
system that dumps most of the surge energy to earth. Since the "ground"
and neutral are also connected to the enclosure, the exposure beyond the
panel if far less than imagined.

A strong surge will drive the voltage on the busbars to 6,000V and
arc-over. With a weaker surge, a plug-in protector on a short branch
circuit may keep the service panel voltage below arc-over. The 35 joule
energy in the investigation was with one of those weaker surges.

I don't suggest that people use plug-in protectors. I suggest they make
decisions based on science.
Discussion centers on plug-in protectors because of the misinformation
posted by westom (and other misinformation that has been posted).

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 3:18:16 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
When I worked as an electrician out in The Marshall Islands for a construction company building the mission control center for The SDI test program, we drove ground rods 10 feet apart around the building, bonded them together and to a ground grid under the raised computer floor where there were ground rods driven through holes in the slab under the raised flooring. It was what The Army Corps of Engineers wanted. It was a giant ground plane/grid that all the electronics including the Cray supercomputer and peripherals were grounded to.

Then you installed what we told you to do so that protection even exceeded what all homeowners need and should do. You create a single point earth ground. Protection is defined by the quality of what absorbs energy - earthing. How energy gets into earth defines why energy is not inside causing damage.

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:48:30 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
Every modern electronic device that plugs into a wall outlet
that I've had apart, has 1 or more MOV's on the 120vac line in.


Again, protection is provided by how the entire thing works. We may add MOVs (or other devices such as avalanche diodes) to supplement that already robust protection. As I have been saying all along - and trader does not want to read it. Many appliances stopped adding MOV to still have robust internal protection. For example, Apple II once used MOVs. Later Apple stopped because better protection that is part of a PSU design made those MOVs irrelevant.

Why does he find MOVs in appliances? Because all appliance must already have robust protection. So MOVs are added to even increase that protection.

MOV only protect from metallic mode currents. Protection from other destructive currents is performed by other parts already inside each appliance. Best protection from those other surges is already inside electronics - with or without MOVs. MOVs may supplement robust protection that is already inside all electronics. But that protection exists even without MOVs.

Effective 'whole house' protection is installed so that robust internal protection inside appliances is not overwhelmed by something that might occur once every seven years.

With or without MOVs, all appliances still have robust protection provided by how other parts are designed. Trader intentionally misrepresents that to argue incessantly for egotistical gratification.

On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 11:01:49 AM UTC-5, westom wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:48:30 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
Every modern electronic device that plugs into a wall outlet
that I've had apart, has 1 or more MOV's on the 120vac line in.

Again, protection is provided by how the entire thing works. We may add MOVs (or other devices such as avalanche diodes) to supplement that already robust protection. As I have been saying all along - and trader does not want to read it. Many appliances stopped adding MOV to still have robust internal protection. For example, Apple II once used MOVs. Later Apple stopped because better protection that is part of a PSU design made those MOVs irrelevant.

Why does he find MOVs in appliances? Because all appliance must already have robust protection. So MOVs are added to even increase that protection..

MOV only protect from metallic mode currents. Protection from other destructive currents is performed by other parts already inside each appliance. Best protection from those other surges is already inside electronics - with or without MOVs. MOVs may supplement robust protection that is already inside all electronics. But that protection exists even without MOVs.

Effective 'whole house' protection is installed so that robust internal protection inside appliances is not overwhelmed by something that might occur once every seven years.

With or without MOVs, all appliances still have robust protection provided by how other parts are designed. Trader intentionally misrepresents that to argue incessantly for egotistical gratification.

I believe the power company here will install a meter base surge arrester and charge a few bucks a month to basically guarantee you'll have do damages to your electronics from surges. I couldn't find the info on their site so I think I'll call one of the CSR's on Monday. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Zapped Monster

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 6:46:01 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
I'd agree that appliances with "mechanical" controls don't normally have MOV protection but I'm pretty sure any electronically controlled appliance will have one or more MOV's on the incoming AC power.

Electric clocks (non-digital type) suffered surge damage. So manufacturer used better electrical parts to increase internal protection. Same applies to all other appliances. Protection that always exists (with or without MOV) is defined by how those other parts are designed. As a result, appliance spec protection from 600, 1800, or 2000 volts transients - that even that MOV cannot protect from.

MOVs inside an appliance only increase protection for metallic type transients. It does nothing for other and typically more destructive transients. Other parts (that are not protector parts) provide the robust protection. Just like with clocks. Protection was increased by upgrading internal parts - not by adding MOVs.

On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
I believe the power company here will install a meter base surge arrester and charge a few bucks a month to basically guarantee you'll have do damages to your electronics from surges.

They will not guarantee it. Because that protector, like all protectors, are only as effective as your earth ground. You (not them) provide that low impedance (ie hardwire has no sharp bends) earth ground. You determine how effective it will be.

On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 12:20:46 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 12:10:45 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
I believe the power company here will install a meter base surge arrester and charge a few bucks a month to basically guarantee you'll have do damages to your electronics from surges.

They will not guarantee it. Because that protector, like all protectors, are only as effective as your earth ground. You (not them) provide that low impedance (ie hardwire has no sharp bends) earth ground. You determine how effective it will be.

How can one person be so consistently wrong about so many things?

An example from Duke Energy, their warranty for the meter base surge
protector available from them:

"Most common household electronics and appliances that plug in to an outlet are covered under StrikeStop Monetary Coverage. This includes your computers, TVs, refrigerators and even electronic garage door openers. Some limitations exist, such as appliances located outside your home or devices used to support a business."

Or Omaha Public Power:

"Triple protection for $6.99 a month. Quick and easy online enrollment.
Enroll

OPPDs Residential Surge Guard Protection can prevent damage to your electronic equipment, and it's backed by a $50,000 repair or replacement warranty."

Each time a claim is filed against a Monetary Coverage plan, the reimbursement is limited to $1,500. The lifetime reimbursement amount is $10,000."


Plenty more examples for those willing to open their eyes.

On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 12:01:49 PM UTC-4, westom wrote:
On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 5:48:30 PM UTC-4, Uncle Monster wrote:
Every modern electronic device that plugs into a wall outlet
that I've had apart, has 1 or more MOV's on the 120vac line in.


Again, protection is provided by how the entire thing works. We may add MOVs (or other devices such as avalanche diodes) to supplement that already robust protection.

I see, so now it's gone from appliances don't typically use MOVs period,
to they use them, but only to "supplement". Another failed attempt.
There isn't existing robust protection. Which of course is why you
just keep vaguely insisting that such protection exists, but can't
describe what the hell you claim it to actually be.




As I have been saying all along - and trader does not want to read it. Many appliances stopped adding MOV to still have robust internal protection. For example, Apple II once used MOVs. Later Apple stopped because better protection that is part of a PSU design made those MOVs irrelevant.


Provide us a schematic for an iMac or similar that shows it doesn't use MOVs
in the power supply. Then we'll believe you. So far, your record of accuracy
is near zero. For example, you just claimed that power companies will not
provide a warranty with their meter based surge protectors. I refuted that
in 30 secs. I've seen plenty of switching power supplies that use
MOVs. By what miracle of Apple design do you claim that Apple doesn't need
them? Note that so far you haven't told us how any appliance is already
protected from surges.





Why does he find MOVs in appliances? Because all appliance must already have robust protection. So MOVs are added to even increase that protection..


The bizarre nature of that logic and reasoning speaks for itself.




MOV only protect from metallic mode currents.

WTF is a "metallic mode current"? Did Maxwell know about that?


Protection from other destructive currents is performed by other parts already inside each appliance.

Alleged components which W Tom can't even name.


Best protection from those other surges is already inside electronics - with or without MOVs. MOVs may supplement robust protection that is already inside all electronics. But that protection exists even without MOVs.


I see, first they were not there at all. Now designers just put them
there as ornaments that don't really do anything.



Effective 'whole house' protection is installed so that robust internal protection inside appliances is not overwhelmed by something that might occur once every seven years.

With or without MOVs, all appliances still have robust protection provided by how other parts are designed. Trader intentionally misrepresents that to argue incessantly for egotistical gratification.

The lie repeated. And despite all this bloviating, still no description
of all that "robust" protection.