w_tom wrote:


Bud is promoting for plug-in protector manufacturers.

I agree with w_ when he said: "It is an old political trick. When
facts cannot be challenged technically, then attack the messenger." My
only interests in surge protectors are that I have 3.

Anything or anyone that challenges w_'s belief in earthing it has to be
distorted, misinterpreted or discredited.


Since those
protectors have no earthing connection, then Bud must pervert the
definition of clamping.

w_ apparently has no concept of what clamping means. It does not
intrinsically involve earthing.



Obviously a protector cannot be clamped to nothing. And yet
nothing is what Bud calls protection. No earth ground means no
effective protection.

The required statement of religious belief in earthing. Since plug-in
suppressors do not work primarily by earthing w_ believes they cannot
possibly work. I repeat what the IEEE guide says - plug-in suppressors
work primarily by clamping the voltage on all wires to the common ground
at the suppressor.

US plug-in suppressors, as in the UK, have an earthing connection. w_’s
argument is that the connection is too long to effectively conduct a
surge to earth. But surge currents get earthed elsewhere - primarily
conductors bonding service entrance of signal conductors to the power
earthing system. The IEEE guide explains that conducting surge currents
to earth is not the intended function of wiring through a plug-in
suppressor.

For those with minimal reading and thinking ability, the IEEE guide says
plug-in suppressors are effective. The guide shows 2 examples of surge
suppression - for a TV/tape system and a computer. Both use plug-in
suppressors.


Even the NIST says a protector must ground
surges - from Bud's other citation page 6 (Adobe page 8):

Repeating for the 3rd time, the NIST guide says plug-in
suppressors are "the easiest solution".



Bud assumes tables, linoleum, wall paint, concrete floors, etc are
not conductive.

Wow, the 5 electrical engineers that wrote the IEEE guide completely
missed that. And the electrical engineer who wrote the NIST guide has
many published papers on surges and suppression and he missed it too.


Just another reason why Page
42 Figure 8 shows a plug-in protector clamping (shunting) a surge 8000
volts destructively through the TV.

Repeating for the 3rd time, the plug-in suppressor did not “shunt a
surge ... destructively through a TV”. It protected the TV that was
connected to it and lowered the surge voltage at a second TV from
10,000V to 8,000V. For those not blinded by religious ideology the
point of the IEEE illustration is "to protect TV2, a second multiport
protector located at TV2 is required".


No earth ground means no effective protection; as demonstrated by a
plug-in protector clamping a surge destructively thru that TV.

The required statement of religious belief in earthing. And the 5th time
that w_ distorts what the IEEE guide says.

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

As always, w_ has no links that say plug-in suppressors are NOT
effective. Why no links w_?? Could it be nobody agrees with you??


Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
No sources.
Distort opposing sources.
Attempt to discredit opponents.
w_ is a purveyor of junk science.

--
bud--