Re: MOVs and surge suppressors

w_tom wrote:


As the guide says repeatedly, a protector works by earthing. If the
earthing is not sufficient, then how does a plug-in protector put more
current into an earth ground what would not accept that current
initially?

Repeating:
“The IEEE guide explains plug-in suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires (signal and power) to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in suppressors do not work primarily by earthing. The guide explains earthing occurs elsewhere. (Read the guide starting pdf page 40).”


How do we make better protection? We enhance what provides the
protection. We upgrade the earthing.

Francois Martzloff, who was the NIST guru on surges and author of the NIST guide, has written "the impedance of the grounding system to `true earth' is far less important than the integrity of the bonding of the various parts of the grounding system." That is, a ‘single point ground’ with short interconnect wires.

Again the scary pictures demonstrate the problem of
grossly undersized plug-in protectors you are recommending:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554

Lie #1 repeated. According to hanford overheating was fixed in 1998.
And the “grossly undersized” red herring.


And that is what the guide is also noting. Plug-in protectors alone
are not effective.

A lie. Where does either guide say that.

The guide says plug-in protectors can work IF
massive cautions are taken.

A lie. Where does either guide say that.

To have effective protection
without spending massively, the telco uses a 'whole house' protector
AND better earthing.

What a surprise! Telcos don’t use plug-in suppressors to protect high amp hard wired switches with thousands of signal wires that would have to go through the suppressor.


How did the Orange County FL emergency response center stop damage?
They spend
money where money would be useful which meant upgrading earthing:
http://www.psihq.com/AllCopper.htm

w_ has a fetish about tower antennas. If you plan on erecting a 280 foot lightning rod (aka. tower antenna) in your yard and connecting it to equipment in your building this may be relevant.


Why do you recommend protectors that the guide even warns as poor?

A lie. Where does either guide say that.

Meanwhile the IEEE defines the only thing that provides protection in
their Red Book (Standard 141) and in many other standards. No they
don't recommend plug-in protectors. IEEE recommends the only thing
that provides protection - earth ground:....

The IEEE Emerald book ("IEEE Recommended Practice for Powering and Grounding Sensitive Electronic Equipment"), an IEEE standard, recognizes plug-in suppressors as an effective protection device. This is the most appropriate IEEE standard for protecting electronics.

And the IEEE guide, which was published by the IEEE, says plug-in suppressors are effective.


Meanwhile Page 42 Figure 8 of the other citation also shows what
telcos know. A protector too close to appliances and too far from
earth ground many even earth the surge 8000 volts destructively
through an adjacent TV.

Lie #2 repeated. A plug-in suppressor at TV1 improves the conditions at TV2, although that is not its job. A service panel suppressor would provide *no* protection to either TV.


Everyone is in favor of earthing. The only question is whether plug-in suppressors work. Both the IEEE and NIST guides say plug-in suppressors are effective. Read the sources.

But still no link to another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Why no links w_? Don’t the other lunatics agree with you?

And never any answers:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest solution"?
- How would a service panel suppressor provide any protection in the IEEE example, pdf page 42?
- Why does the IEEE Emerald book include plug-in suppressors as an effective surge protection device.

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

--
bud--
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: House grounding
    ... The IEEE guide provides an example starting pdf page 40. ... only as effective as its earthing. ... The IEEE guide explains plug-in suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires to the common ground at the suppressor. ... Point of entry protection can provide good protection, but it can not provide protection from internal sources. ...
    (alt.home.repair)
  • Re: Lightning
    ... Being respectful of its power is why effective protection is about ... earthing. ... IEEE makes recommendations only in standards. ... Says nothing about plug-in suppressors. ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.misc)
  • Re: Surge protectors?
    ... necessarily require earthing to be effective. ... And in the example in the IEEE guide, a service panel suppressor would have provided *NO* protection. ... The IEEE guide recognizes earthing, single point ground, service panel suppressor and plug-in suppressors as effective protection components. ...
    (sci.electronics.repair)
  • Re: Surge Protector
    ... Bud is a sales promoter for plug-in protectors. ... protection must directly use earthing. ... If poor w_ could only read and think he could discover what the IEEE ... The IEEE guide explains plug-in suppressors work by CLAMPING ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Lightening & laptop
    ... profitable plug-in protectors. ... My only association with surge protectors is I have some. ... protection must use earthing. ... explains plug-in suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
Loading