|
Inside a surge protector
As a result of recent events, I have two surge protectors that no longer
function without putting out loud noises on HF. I found that the $5 surge protector that my Yaesu was plugged in to was making a loud whistling noise which was covered up by the louder warbling noise being made by the Belkin I had my computer plugged into. So I decided to break them open to see what was inside. The easiest was Old El Cheapo, held together with screws. Inside was a length of wire, a switch and ONE disc capacitor wired into six plugs. IMO that's little better than a plain old power strip. The Belkin had no screws, so it took a little longer to crack. The results: a switch, two LEDs ("protected" and "grounded"), an inductor coil, a couple resistors and transistors, and about 9 or 10 disc capacitors in series. In October 2002 the Belkin cost me $40. I'm hard pressed to say that it was money well spent, if all that's in there are some capacitors and resistors. Question: are surge protectors worth it if all they are is just a bunch of capacitors? I know that my $40 surge protector apparently rolled over and died when hit with a real surge. |
Are you sure the "disc capacitor" wasn't actually a MOV (Metal Oxide
Varistor) ? They look similar, but the MOV is a semiconductor device that drops in resistance when the voltage reaches a certain point. |
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 0:15:46 -0600, tommyknocker wrote
(in message ): As a result of recent events, I have two surge protectors that no longer function without putting out loud noises on HF. I found that the $5 surge protector that my Yaesu was plugged in to was making a loud whistling noise which was covered up by the louder warbling noise being made by the Belkin I had my computer plugged into. So I decided to break them open to see what was inside. The easiest was Old El Cheapo, held together with screws. Inside was a length of wire, a switch and ONE disc capacitor wired into six plugs. IMO that's little better than a plain old power strip. The Belkin had no screws, so it took a little longer to crack. The results: a switch, two LEDs ("protected" and "grounded"), an inductor coil, a couple resistors and transistors, and about 9 or 10 disc capacitors in series. In October 2002 the Belkin cost me $40. I'm hard pressed to say that it was money well spent, if all that's in there are some capacitors and resistors. Question: are surge protectors worth it if all they are is just a bunch of capacitors? I know that my $40 surge protector apparently rolled over and died when hit with a real surge. Durn betcha! It did exactly as it should have and blew out the (I'm reasonably sure) capacitors (RadioShack used to carry them, btw)). That's why they are "cheap" - as I said earlier - they self-destruct rather than your computers or radio gear self-destructing. Stinger mentioned Standby Power Supplies. I have a 500 watt APC SPS that was pretty decently priced and my wife has one of the itsy-bitsy SPS Power Strips (APC Office 280) and I've seen these "PowerSupply in a Power Strip" /very/ cheap lately - 40U$-55U$. My wife and I used to run to the front door when the Back-Up 500 signaled with a short beep; usually we could get to the front porch to hear the transformer self-destruct. Sometimes we were the ones with a power outage and the two SPS's allowed us to "shut down gracefully". Other times we just knew that some residents not too far away had just lost their power. Gray Shockley ------------------------------------------------- They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." - Carl Sagan |
not disc caps! they are metal oxide variable resistors. they look just
like caps. keep the shell and replace the mov's. it will be good as new. buy extras because the mov's can only take so many hits (or just one big one) before they are ruined. if you arent satisfied with the performance of the cheaper surge suppressors then look into a transformer based one. i have two ONAC brand line conditioners. they are more expensive but they never wear out. (excluding direct lightning hits of course) i got them surplus at a junk shop that salvaged computer equipment. its been more than ten years with out power line damage with my set up. i dont have $40 in both of them but i got lucky. when bought new they are not cheap. |
uh.... thanks for your very productive input barry O grady....... i am
sure that the english lesson was helpful in the understanding of line spike damping. oh by the way, god_freee_jones? i do not think freee is a word. use your spell-checker. |
Any protector that is damaged by the first surge is grossly
undersized. No effective surge protector can be damaged. They are not sacrificial devices as urban myth purveyors will claim. Why are 'whole house' protectors so effective? One reason: properly sized. For example, lets say that plug-in protector can withstand three same size 8/20 usec standard transients. Then the 'whole house' protector is rated to withstand on the order of 400 such transients. Properly sized protectors is but another reason why we install 'whole house' protectors and don't waste money on plug-in protectors. That 'whole house' protector costs about $1 per protected appliance. Why would anyone pay $20 or $50 for a plug-in protector that was both grossly undersized AND ineffective? Appliances already have internal protection. Sometimes surges are too small to even damage the appliance - but destroy the grossly undersized (and adjacent) surge protector. What kind of protection is that? Ineffective, overprices, undersized - and too often recommended by one who says, "My surge protector sacrificed itself to protect my computer". This is where ineffective plug-in protectors get recommended. Gray Shockley wrote: Durn betcha! It did exactly as it should have and blew out the (I'm reasonably sure) capacitors (RadioShack used to carry them, btw)). That's why they are "cheap" - as I said earlier - they self-destruct rather than your computers or radio gear self-destructing. Stinger mentioned Standby Power Supplies. I have a 500 watt APC PS that was pretty decently priced and my wife has one of the itsy-bitsy SPS Power Strips (APC Office 280) and I've seen these "PowerSupply in a Power Strip" /very/ cheap lately - 40U$-55U$. My wife and I used to run to the front door when the Back-Up 500 signaled with a short beep; usually we could get to the front porch to hear the transformer self-destruct. Sometimes we were the ones with a power outage and the two SPS's allowed us to "shut down gracefully". Other times we just knew that some residents not too far away had just lost their power. |
In article , w_tom
wrote: Any protector that is damaged by the first surge is grossly undersized. No effective surge protector can be damaged. They are not sacrificial devices as urban myth purveyors will claim. The characteristics of MOV's are well known. Every time a MOV turns on due to the device threshold being exceeded they degrade based on how much power is absorbed. If you are whom I think you are the facts won't bother you one bit and further nonsense posts can be expected. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
A wire also absorbs some power when it shorts a large
current. Does that mean the purpose of a wire is to absorb electricity? Of course not. MOVs are not installed to absorb power. But then if one first consults manufacturer datasheets, then that becomes woefully obvious. http://www.nteinc.com/Web_pgs/MOV.html Let's use the 2V130 as example. This device will shunt up to 4500 amps during the standard 8/20 usec surge. A 1000 volt transient at 4500 amps would be well over 600 joules. But this device is only rated at 39 joules maximum. How can that be? Because MOVs, like wire, are not installed to absorb the energy. They are designed to shunt. If an MOV was absorbing the transient, then MOV voltage must increase as more energy is absorbed. That means more voltage confronts the adjacent appliance. But MOVs don't work that way. If their purpose was to absorb a transient, then they must connect in series with the appliance. But MOVs connect in parallel - a shunt mode device. To be effective as shunt mode devices (like wire), the MOV must conduct massive transients and absorb less of that transient. That is what MOVs do. They shunt. They do not stop, block, absorb, or filter a transient. They operate like a wire during the transient. They shunt. As previously demonstrated from manufacturer datasheets (and not from wild speculation about what 'joules' measures): If that MOV in a plug-in protector that can only withstand 3 standard 8/20 microsecond transient, then the larger 'whole house' protector (that costs about same) will withstand about 300+ such surges. Joules is a measure of MOV life expectancy. MOVs are not designed to absorb a transient - which is in direct contradiction to what many web sites, written by English majors, will claim. The better an MOV, then the more energy it can shunt - per joule. Read manufacturer datasheets; not web sites written by English majors. It is the difference between fact and fiction. Now for your insults - which apparently are due to insufficient electrical knowledge. First learn before insulting others. There is a datasheet. Read it before posting. Keep it civil - if you can. Posted previously are accurate electrical engineering facts taken from manufacture datasheets. Any protector that is damaged by the first surge is grossly undersized - an ineffective protector usually sold to those who like to throw money at urban myths. BTW, MOV degradation is not due to power absorption. It is due to energy absorption - a major technical difference that English majors will not understand. Telamon wrote: In article , w_tom wrote: Any protector that is damaged by the first surge is grossly undersized. No effective surge protector can be damaged. They are not sacrificial devices as urban myth purveyors will claim. The characteristics of MOV's are well known. Every time a MOV turns on due to the device threshold being exceeded they degrade based on how much power is absorbed. If you are whom I think you are the facts won't bother you one bit and further nonsense posts can be expected. |
Mr. Sharp, there is no need for you to continue arguing with an idiot. You
are quite correct an have the documentation to prove it. "Clifton T. Sharp Jr." wrote in message ... w_tom wrote: |
"w_tom" wrote in message ... [snip] If refrigerators and air conditioners were creating destructive surges, then all would be trooping daily to hardware stores to replace damaged dimmer switches, electronic timers switches, X-10 remote controllers, and touch on-off lamps. Surges created by refrigerators, et al are urban myth because you don't replace those other appliances daily. Well, who'd have figured? Here's a variation on that urban legand. Cut the current to an inductive load such as a motor, and it makes a surge of voltage! I'm so glad the clued-in know better. Furthermore if refrigerators, et al created those surges, then surge protector must be installed in that surge creating appliance - not on every other appliance. As all the Clueminati know, that's a big, big if. If refrigerators created those voltages in excess of 330 volts (as listed on surge protector boxes), then we must remove those appliances as a threat to human life. We don't remove those appliances because they don't create 'urban myth' surges. E-mail is certainly more responsible than appliances for the urban myth surges. We have the case down cold. MOVs have limited life expectancy as defined by joules. If refrigerators and air conditioners were creating destructive surges, then those plug-in surge protectors would be degraded in weeks or months without any indication of failure. What good is a $50 surge protector that must be replaced every month? Ineffective. I ruined my surge supressor by reading posts on AFU. HowStuffWorks on surge protectors has numerous technical errors. It begins accurately, but then makes serious errors. It preaches what plug-in surge protectors promote rather than the principles of surge protection proven in the 1930s. It preaches concept that if accurate, negate any need for 'whole house' type protectors. The author probably did not have sufficient knowledge to see through half truths promoted by his information source - plug-in protector manufacturers. Therefore HowStuffWorks is riddled with errors and misrepresentations. That's right. Don't trust advertising literature! Because plug-in surge protectors don't claim protection from direct lightning strikes, then instead HowStuffWorks claims most surge damage comes from refrigerators, et al. Demonstrated is that such surges don't typically exist. In reality, lightning is a most common source of surge damage - in direct contradiction to plug-in manufacturer claims and to text in HowStuffWorks. Surges occur typically once every eight years. Surges every eight years? Then I gotta ask Art Bell just what's ruining those surge supressors! HowStuffWorks provides so much wrong information that it should be outrightly avoided and should not be recommended - except to demonstrate how to promote urban myths. Example: since plug-in surge protectors don't claim protection from lightning, then an outright lie is declared: You know it, d00d!! Here's what the liar Wendell H. Laidley, President, Zero Surge Inc., wrote: "Myth #10. NOTHING CAN STOP LIGHTNING. While this simple statement is true in absolute terms" This is from: http://www.totse.com/en/technology/c...ogy/surge.html Well, he goes on to claim that his products offer better partial protection from induced lightning surges than the partial protection offered by the supressors offered by other companies. Well, I say protection and partial protection aren't exactly the same thing. I wish I could get one of those surge protectors the Clueminati use. Those supressors must throw the lightning bolts back into the clouds, where they belong. Actually lightning only overpowers the undersized surge protector sold by plug-in manufacturers. Visit real surge protector manufacturers to learn why man has shunted direct strikes without damage since before WWII. Man has shunted direct strikes without damage since before WWI. Man has shunted direct strikes without damage since before the Spanish-American war. Man has shunted direct strikes without damage since before the Civil War. Man has shunted direct strikes without damage since before the Mexican American war. Man has shunted direct strikes without damage since before the War of 1812. Man has shunted direct strikes without damage since before the Revolution. Man has shunted direct strikes without damage since Ben "Freemason" Franklin figured it out. But why? Why shunt protection when series protection is claimed to be better? And why is such manly knowledge parceled out by the manufacturers of real surge protectors? Must be a Clueminati thing. 'Whole house' protectors are properly sized to avoid lightning damage. HowStuffWorks is biased towards grossly overpriced, undersized, ineffective, plug-in surge protectors - that cannot protect from the most common source of surge damage - the common mode transient. Yes! Finally we get to the all damaging common mode transient! There are still morons who discount the dangers!! To quote from the idiotic, inane fools at the ZeroSurge website: "We can readily see the common mode surge risk is not just low, it is nonexistent." This is from: http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/mode2.html Thank goodness the unnamed makers of Real Surge Protectors who know what the hell they are talking about. More errors are about those indicator lamps. The OK lamp does not report that a surge protector is functional. Remove all MOVs and the indicator lamp would still claim the surge protector is OK as demonstrated in these scary pictures: http://www.zerosurge.com/truth.htm Did Art Bell clip those out? HowStuffWorks provides so much wrong information that it should be avoided. Only a grossly undersized surge protector will fail catastrophically. Only catastrophic type of failures can be reported by the light. Properly sized surge protectors only degrade. A degraded surge protector will still indicate OK on that lamp. Indicator can report that a surge protector has grossly failed (because it was undersized) BUT cannot report that a surge protector is good. Scary pictures demonstrate this problem by removing all MOVs - and still the surge protector indicator lamp says it is OK: http://www.zerosurge.com/truth.htm HowStuffWorks has outrightly mislead about that indicator lamp since the English major did not really understand how that light works. They forget to mention that phone lines have been installed with 'whole house' surge protector for decades. Yes. The telco provides a 'whole house' protector on household phone lines - for FREE! Again propaganda from ineffective plug-in manufacturers that routinely forgets to mention, for example, that surge protection is earth ground. An effective surge protector only connects to surge protection - earth ground. A surge protector is not surge protection - as they would have everyone believe to sell their overpriced product. The HowStuffWorks article ignores the most critical component in all surge protection 'systems' - central earth ground. However *real* surge protector manufacturers discuss earthing extensively: http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_technical.asp Why does HowStuffWork ignore fundamentals of surge protection? Why does it completely ignore the most critical component of a surge protection 'system'? Urban myths are common even though those fundamentals have been proven since the 1930s. Unfortunately, HowStuffWorks mixes accurate information with urban myths. For example, we are not replacing damaged dimmer switches and other appliances daily. Therefore refrigerator and air conditioner are not creating those damaging surges claimed by HowStuffWorks. Here's another related urban myth for 'ya. Underwriter's Labs requires electrical devices to withstand these surges or they don't get approved! The HowStuffWorks surge protectors article is chock full of such misrepresentations. So full of errors and misrepresentations as to best avoid. Fundamental to surge protection and not mentioned by HowStuffWorks - a surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground. HowStuffWorks does not even mention the most critical component in any surge protection 'system' - single point earth ground - because it is not discussing effective surge protectors. What can you expect? They hardly mention the miracle of shortwave radio!! Maybe you could write some clear articles about grounding and SW radio. Show those English majors a thing or two! Frank Dresser |
"Clifton T. Sharp Jr." wrote:
w_tom wrote: Now for your insults - which apparently are due to insufficient electrical knowledge. [snip] BTW, MOV degradation is not due to power absorption. It is due to energy absorption Wow, a fact! A correct fact! Who told you? - a major technical difference that English majors will not understand. Ah, insults - which apparently are due to insufficient electrical knowledge. This guy 'w-tom' is a notorious troll on the subject of whole house surge protectors. He's been doing it for years on other groups. He's probably a schill for the manufacturers of whole house protectors. -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
In article , w_tom
wrote: A wire also absorbs some power when it shorts a large current. Does that mean the purpose of a wire is to absorb electricity? Of course not. MOVs are not installed to absorb power. But then if one first consults manufacturer datasheets, then that becomes woefully obvious. http://www.nteinc.com/Web_pgs/MOV.html Let's use the 2V130 as example. This device will shunt up to 4500 amps during the standard 8/20 usec surge. A 1000 volt transient at 4500 amps would be well over 600 joules. But this device is only rated at 39 joules maximum. How can that be? Because MOVs, like wire, are not installed to absorb the energy. They are designed to shunt. If an MOV was absorbing the transient, then MOV voltage must increase as more energy is absorbed. That means more voltage confronts the adjacent appliance. But MOVs don't work that way. If their purpose was to absorb a transient, then they must connect in series with the appliance. But MOVs connect in parallel - a shunt mode device. To be effective as shunt mode devices (like wire), the MOV must conduct massive transients and absorb less of that transient. That is what MOVs do. They shunt. They do not stop, block, absorb, or filter a transient. They operate like a wire during the transient. They shunt. As previously demonstrated from manufacturer datasheets (and not from wild speculation about what 'joules' measures): If that MOV in a plug-in protector that can only withstand 3 standard 8/20 microsecond transient, then the larger 'whole house' protector (that costs about same) will withstand about 300+ such surges. Joules is a measure of MOV life expectancy. MOVs are not designed to absorb a transient - which is in direct contradiction to what many web sites, written by English majors, will claim. The better an MOV, then the more energy it can shunt - per joule. Read manufacturer datasheets; not web sites written by English majors. It is the difference between fact and fiction. Now for your insults - which apparently are due to insufficient electrical knowledge. First learn before insulting others. There is a datasheet. Read it before posting. Keep it civil - if you can. Posted previously are accurate electrical engineering facts taken from manufacture datasheets. Any protector that is damaged by the first surge is grossly undersized - an ineffective protector usually sold to those who like to throw money at urban myths. BTW, MOV degradation is not due to power absorption. It is due to energy absorption - a major technical difference that English majors will not understand. Telamon wrote: In article , w_tom wrote: Any protector that is damaged by the first surge is grossly undersized. No effective surge protector can be damaged. They are not sacrificial devices as urban myth purveyors will claim. The characteristics of MOV's are well known. Every time a MOV turns on due to the device threshold being exceeded they degrade based on how much power is absorbed. If you are whom I think you are the facts won't bother you one bit and further nonsense posts can be expected. The notorious Tom troll. Explaine the meaning of the chart "Peak current per pulse versus pulse duration" at the top of this page. http://www.worldproducts.com/MOVPeakPulse.htm I see you are still up to par with your long winded nonsense and you still have not learned to post to Usenet properly either. Up next... a kill file update. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
HFguy wrote:
This guy 'w-tom' is a notorious troll on the subject of whole house surge protectors. He's been doing it for years on other groups. He's probably a schill for the manufacturers of whole house protectors. I put in one of those units last week. The instructions on the back of the package say to connect the two leads of the device to the two power lines where they enter the house OR inside of the meter base on two of the lugs. (Highly illegal and unsafe, too). Pure stupidity on the part of the manufacturer. This is a major law suit waiting to happen. I don't know how it got past the 'certification' types. I wound up wiring the thing into it's own two pole 15A. breaker via a half inch knockout on the side of the panel. It's the ONLY way to do it right. mike -- __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / / / /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/ / /_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ ..let the cat out to reply.. |
Name of manufacturer and model number? Where were the
important leads to earth ground. It only had two leads? Rather surprised so little knowledge here about how effective protection has long been installed. After all, earliest research was on amateur radio equipment. Much of what we know about protection today - why 'whole house' protectors are so effective - was proven by early 1900s radio amateurs. In the radio industry, properly earthed surge protector are so well appreciated that these industry benchmark application notes are considered legendary. Do they discuss their product line? Of course not. They discuss the most important feature in any surge protection system - earthing: http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_pen_home.asp A surge protector being only as effective as its earth ground. m II wrote: I put in one of those units last week. The instructions on the back of the package say to connect the two leads of the device to the two power lines where they enter the house OR inside of the meter base on two of the lugs. (Highly illegal and unsafe, too). Pure stupidity on the part of the manufacturer. This is a major law suit waiting to happen. I don't know how it got past the 'certification' types. I wound up wiring the thing into it's own two pole 15A. breaker via a half inch knockout on the side of the panel. It's the ONLY way to do it right. |
In article
, Telamon wrote: snip Telamon wrote: In article , w_tom wrote: Any protector that is damaged by the first surge is grossly undersized. No effective surge protector can be damaged. They are not sacrificial devices as urban myth purveyors will claim. The characteristics of MOV's are well known. Every time a MOV turns on due to the device threshold being exceeded they degrade based on how much power is absorbed. If you are whom I think you are the facts won't bother you one bit and further nonsense posts can be expected. The notorious Tom troll. Explaine the meaning of the chart "Peak current per pulse versus pulse duration" at the top of this page. http://www.worldproducts.com/MOVPeakPulse.htm I see you are still up to par with your long winded nonsense and you still have not learned to post to Usenet properly either. Up next... a kill file update. Answering my own post because Tom can't. I figured you could not answer a simple question. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Posted by worldproducts.com is a chart demonstrating MOV
life expectancy for various pulse widths and peak current - as was described in the previous post. Chart simply demonstrates how an MOV degrades; not self destructs. As stated earlier, an MOV self destructs when operating well outside the ratings of that chart - when grossly undersized - insufficient joules to provide effective protection. Any MOV that 'sacrifices itself' does not even appear on the chart and does not provide effective protection. Any MOV that 'sacrifices itself' was grossly undersized - ineffective protection. Telamon wrote: Explaine the meaning of the chart "Peak current per pulse versus pulse duration" at the top of this page. http://www.worldproducts.com/MOVPeakPulse.htm I see you are still up to par with your long winded nonsense and you still have not learned to post to Usenet properly either. Up next... a kill file update. |
Over the years I have replaced dozens of MOVs in my
numerous high-end surge-limiting power strips rather than shell out another couple hundred dollars for new strips after major power company events. I get on average a year's life out of the strips before another power company event comes along. The cause of some of these events is known. Another power company had three-phase lines going over the street-side power lines. Under certain wind conditions they would make contact. I observed a large, long 1/2 second over-voltage event that blew out the breaker panel suppressor and at least one MOV in each power strip with a bang and smoke. Other times lightning would induce the event. I theorize that a flashover resulted in a nearby power company voltage regulator's (a big variac) storage of a large amount of energy due to large following currents. Somehow this energy then dumps onto the street-side lines, causing another failure of the surge protectors. The power company regulator also failed to 8% high and this may have contributed to the problem. But the AC system and major household appliances were not damaged. This indicates that while there was a serious over-voltage, it was not enough to pierce the insulation on motor windings and an unprotected wall wart. Anyway, I bought a few dozen replacement MOVs and 3 or 5 amp pigtail fuses for repairs. Usually just one MOV and fuse fail per strip. The strip can be recovered with sufficient skill. Good surge protector strips have inductors in them to block the high frequency components of the surge. Otherwise, plugged-in power transformers without effective shielding between the primary and secondary (typical) can pass along these potentially large high-frequency components to the following circuitry. In my case, 130V MOVs for the 125VAC service would blow out at the next event. So I upped the replacements to 150V with some hope that it will make a difference. The replacement fuses are standard AGC 250V sized at 3 or 5 Amp. They really take a beating when one of these events comes along. The inside surface of the glass fuse body has lots of metal globules embedded in the glass. Professional lightning protection systems use a multi-layered approach. It used to be that Polyphaser Corp sold a book called "The 'Grounds' for Lightning and EMP Protection" that described this in usable engineering terms. Now they don't offer it on the website as far as I can tell. Just salesman's faqs. Henry As a result of recent events, I have two surge protectors that no longer function without putting out loud noises on HF. I found that the $5 surge protector that my Yaesu was plugged in to was making a loud whistling noise which was covered up by the louder warbling noise being made by the Belkin I had my computer plugged into. So I decided to break them open to see what was inside. The easiest was Old El Cheapo, held together with screws. Inside was a length of wire, a switch and ONE disc capacitor wired into six plugs. IMO that's little better than a plain old power strip. The Belkin had no screws, so it took a little longer to crack. The results: a switch, two LEDs ("protected" and "grounded"), an inductor coil, a couple resistors and transistors, and about 9 or 10 disc capacitors in series. In October 2002 the Belkin cost me $40. I'm hard pressed to say that it was money well spent, if all that's in there are some capacitors and resistors. Question: are surge protectors worth it if all they are is just a bunch of capacitors? I know that my $40 surge protector apparently rolled over and died when hit with a real surge. Email address: "see_signature" - "a0015717" Newsgroup replies may serve better the public interest. |
In article ,
"Clifton T. Sharp Jr." wrote: w_tom wrote: Any MOV that 'sacrifices itself' does not even appear on the chart and does not provide effective protection. Any MOV that 'sacrifices itself' was grossly undersized - ineffective protection. You can't produce a protection device that will not sacrifice itself given a direct lightning strike, not even a 10" diameter solid steel rod. Your constant repetition of this silliness does not make it true. w_tom is a complete idiot. The sooner you kill file him the sooner he will leave the group and go bother someone else. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
Clifton's posts without technical details. Common among
naysayers, who know but cannot even be bothered to learn the numbers, is this classic example of technical naivety: You can't produce a protection device that will not sacrifice itself given a direct lightning strike, not even a 10" diameter solid steel rod. Yes, Clifton would have us believe that lightning could vaporize a 10" diameter steel rod. He did not even post how many amps must be in a lightning strike to vaporize that 10 inch diameter steel rod! Instead we learn from industry professionals: http://www.harvardrepeater.org/news/lightning.html Well I assert, from personal and broadcast experience spanning 30 years, that you can design a system that will handle *direct lightning strikes* on a routine basis. It takes some planning and careful layout, but it's not hard, nor is it overly expensive. At WXIA-TV, my other job, we take direct lightning strikes nearly every time there's a thunderstorm. Our downtime from such strikes is almost non-existant. The last time we went down from a strike, it was due to a strike on the power company's lines knocking *them* out, ... Since my disasterous strike, I've been campaigning vigorously to educate amateurs that you *can* avoid damage from direct strikes. The belief that there's no protection from direct strike damage is *myth*. ... The keys to effective lightning protection are surprisingly simple, and surprisingly less than obvious. Of course you *must* have a single point ground system that eliminates all ground loops. And you must present a low *impedance* path for the energy to go. That's most generally a low *inductance* path rather than just a low ohm DC path. Only the naive would believe one needs $thousands to install an earthing system. And yet that is what Clifton would have us believe. If a surge protector fails, then it was clearly undersized for the task. Surge protectors should be so effective that one never knows it did its job - in direct contradiction to what Clifton posts. The most critical component in surge protection is earthing. Direct lightning strike without damage is routine. Clifton would even deny this. A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground. No earth ground means no effective surge protection. Clifton has some wild idea that sacrificial MOVs will provide the protection - which is why he insults rather than post a single technical number. Instead Clifton would have us believe that lightning would vaporize a 10 inch diameter steel rod - without even a single numerical fact. "Clifton T. Sharp Jr." wrote: ... w_tom wrote: In the radio industry, properly earthed surge protector are so well appreciated that these industry benchmark application notes are considered legendary. The radio industry can afford hundred-thousand-dollar Ufer grounds and ten-thousand-dollar lightning shunts. And radio stations STILL go down in storms from lightning strikes. Do they discuss their product line? Of course not. They discuss the most important feature in any surge protection system - earthing: http://www.polyphaser.com/ppc_pen_home.asp A surge protector being only as effective as its earth ground. The radio industry can afford hundred-thousand-dollar Ufer grounds and ten-thousand-dollar lightning shunts. And radio stations STILL go down in storms from lightning strikes. |
w_tom wrote:
Only the naive would believe one needs $thousands to install an earthing system. And yet that is what Clifton would have us believe. If a surge protector fails, then it was clearly undersized for the task. Surge protectors should be so effective that one never knows it did its job - in direct contradiction to what Clifton posts. The most critical component in surge protection is earthing. Direct lightning strike without damage is routine. Clifton would even deny this. A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground. No earth ground means no effective surge protection. Clifton has some wild idea that sacrificial MOVs will provide the protection - which is why he insults rather than post a single technical number. Instead Clifton would have us believe that lightning would vaporize a 10 inch diameter steel rod - without even a single numerical fact. Hey w-tom, Why are you obsessed with posting countless diatribes on the subject of surge protectors on dozens of newsgroups? Are you a shill for the whole house surge protector industry? -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
Hey HFguy,
Why are you obsessed with promoting a scam? For that matter, why do you post so often in this newsgroup? If what was posted is technically erroneous, then please feel free to discuss technical errors. Please demonstrate how a plug-in protector can protect from both common mode and differential mode transients. This assumes you reply also knowing what common and differential mode transients are. Technical concepts taught in a first year electrical course and essential to understanding if and why a surge protector is effective. Demonstrated from manufacturer datasheets is that MOVs self destruct when grossly undersized; when operating beyond specifications. Posted previously was specifications for a 39 joule MOV - that would protect as long as a transient current was under 4500 amps. Excessive currents could vaporize (explode) a grossly undersized MOV. Posted previously was the exponential relationship between joules and MOV life expectancy. MOVs, properly installed, can protect from tens or hundreds of transients without exploding. MOVs, properly installed, degrade (do not explode) as demonstrated by chart at: http://www.worldproducts.com/MOVPeakPulse.htm Why would anyone recommend a grossly overpriced surge protector that explode rather than provide effective protection? Why would anyone recommend spending tens of times more money per protected appliance for a surge protector that is also grossly undersized? Simple foolishness. It would be improper to let those technical lies go unchallenged. Any surge protector that is suppose to explode- to provide sacrificial protection - is simply ineffective. But then that is obvious. It has no dedicated connection to earth ground AND it avoids all discussion about earthing. A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground - which others also forget to mention. But when selling ineffective surge protectors, then undersize so that the technically deceived will recommend this overpriced and ineffective product. How to increase sales? Undersize it so that it explodes - the A Team solution. And avoid all mention of earthing. How ineffective protector manufacturers promote their myths at excessive profit. Exposed in this thread are those myths and the deceived who would promote those myths. HFguy wrote: Hey w-tom, Why are you obsessed with posting countless diatribes on the subject of surge protectors on dozens of newsgroups? Are you a shill for the whole house surge protector industry? |
Low pressure inert gas devices were the original surge
protectors. Like most shunt mode protector devices, they remain as an open circuit until a transient voltage becomes too high. Then like MOVs, they become short circuits to shunt that transient to earth. As noted previously, these principles of protection were well understood and routinely installed in the 1930s. Back then, a surge protector was typically a low pressure, inert gas discharge tube (GDT) similar to an NE-2 neon glow lamp (often still found inside lighted switches). In fact, some radios used NE-2 on the antenna to protect RF amplifier transistors. Unfortunately Gas Discharge Tubes (GDTs) degrade quickly with each use. Anode would vaporize into the gas, causing threshold voltage to rise with each use. IOW like MOVs, they degraded; but even faster. By the 1970s, MOVs (or equivalent) were replacing GDTs. Most every home had something equivalent provided free by the telco: http://www.inwap.com/inwap/chez/Phoneline.jpg This Western Electric device was different from MOVs in that, like GDTs, they were low capacitance devices. Two cylinder cartridges called 'the carbons' were underneath those hex bolts heads and could be replaced. Today, telcos have long since obsoleted the carbons with a semiconductor device. Both GDTs and 'the carbons' would degrade without the human knowledge. Semiconductors either work properly everytime or become short circuits. Either they work or report their failure by shorting out the phone line. Therefore GDTs have been obsoleted twice over. For AC electric, a semiconductor type of 'whole house' protector is available - albeit more expensive. The best 'whole house' (AC electric) protector for the buck uses MOVs since destructive surges are so infrequent and MOVs (properly sized) have such long life expectancy. GDTs, in the meantime, are still used in special applications such as commercial radio facilities. But even electric utilities today use MOVs for substation protection. GDTs, MOVs, or semiconductor protectors - all are only as effective as the central earth ground. That essential earthing principle, demonstrated by Franklin in 1752 and widely installed in the 1930s, has not changed. No what what the technology, a surge protector was only as effective as its earth ground. Barry OGrady wrote: What about gas arrestors? -Barry |
w_tom wrote:
Name of manufacturer and model number? Where were the important leads to earth ground. It only had two leads? Rather surprised so little knowledge here about how effective protection has long been installed. Manufacturer: Sycom Model: SYC-120/240TC 150,000amp surge current capacity. The wire to ground was a given, so I didn't mention it. mike -- __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / / / /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/ / /_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ ..let the cat out to reply.. |
That protector does claim to be a 'whole house' protector,
but also makes claims that imply 50,000 amps of that claimed 150,000 amps really provides the protection. Again, specs or even a wiring diagram, is so unavailable making it difficult to say what this SYC-120/240TC surge protector really does: http://www.lightningrodparts.com/surge.html Basically, it appears to be 'whole house' protector. But is also says, for example, that an indicator lamp can detect a missing ground. Wrong. It cannot possibly detect a missing 'earth' ground - the critically essential ground. It could detect a missing safety ground connection - which is not relevant to surge protection. And so they forget to mention which ground. That makes me suspicious even though I suspect it is an effective 'whole house' protector. Also missing is its joules ratings - another reason to be suspicious. In that cited URL is another protector that says Keep the wires as short as possible and avoid sharp bends and kinks. Wire routing that is very important for effective surge protection - and that ineffective protector would rather not discuss. But this telephone protector also does not say which ground. Not any ground is effective protection. For example grounding to dirt inside a flower box is not effective surge protection. But it too can be an electrical ground - but not earth ground. This is fundamental. A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Not any ground. Single point earth ground. No earth ground means no effective protection. Benchmarks in surge protection make that point often, repeatedly, and obnoxiously - because it is that essential to selling effective surge protectors. Plug-in surge protectors and UPSes do not appear on the list of effective protectors. Why? Their "ground" is not central earth ground. No earth ground means no effective protection. m II wrote: Manufacturer: Sycom Model: SYC-120/240TC 150,000amp surge current capacity. The wire to ground was a given, so I didn't mention it. |
More crap from the electric troll.
"w_tom" wrote in message ... That protector does claim to be a 'whole house' protector, but also makes claims that imply 50,000 amps of that claimed 150,000 amps really provides the protection. Again, specs or even a wiring diagram, is so unavailable making it difficult to say what this SYC-120/240TC surge protector really does: http://www.lightningrodparts.com/surge.html Basically, it appears to be 'whole house' protector. But is also says, for example, that an indicator lamp can detect a missing ground. Wrong. It cannot possibly detect a missing 'earth' ground - the critically essential ground. It could detect a missing safety ground connection - which is not relevant to surge protection. And so they forget to mention which ground. That makes me suspicious even though I suspect it is an effective 'whole house' protector. Also missing is its joules ratings - another reason to be suspicious. In that cited URL is another protector that says Keep the wires as short as possible and avoid sharp bends and kinks. Wire routing that is very important for effective surge protection - and that ineffective protector would rather not discuss. But this telephone protector also does not say which ground. Not any ground is effective protection. For example grounding to dirt inside a flower box is not effective surge protection. But it too can be an electrical ground - but not earth ground. This is fundamental. A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Not any ground. Single point earth ground. No earth ground means no effective protection. Benchmarks in surge protection make that point often, repeatedly, and obnoxiously - because it is that essential to selling effective surge protectors. Plug-in surge protectors and UPSes do not appear on the list of effective protectors. Why? Their "ground" is not central earth ground. No earth ground means no effective protection. m II wrote: Manufacturer: Sycom Model: SYC-120/240TC 150,000amp surge current capacity. The wire to ground was a given, so I didn't mention it. |
w_tom wrote:
Wire routing that is very important for effective surge protection - and that ineffective protector would rather not discuss. But this telephone protector also does not say which ground. Not any ground is effective protection. For example grounding to dirt inside a flower box is not effective surge protection. But it too can be an electrical ground - but not earth ground. This is fundamental. A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Not any ground. Single point earth ground. No earth ground means no effective protection. Benchmarks in surge protection make that point often, repeatedly, and obnoxiously - because it is that essential to selling effective surge protectors. Plug-in surge protectors and UPSes do not appear on the list of effective protectors. Why? Their "ground" is not central earth ground. No earth ground means no effective protection. In any electrical code that I'm aware of, ground *means* earth ground. In this neck of the woods it is defined as: A connection to earth using a grounding electrode. I don't know what other kinds of 'any ground' can possibly be. It's either a ground or it isn't. mike -- __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / /\ / / / /\ \/ /\ \/ /\ \/ / /_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ \/_/ ..let the cat out to reply.. |
The safety ground is typically a bus bar in main disconnect
box. The central point at which neutral and safety ground wires meet. This is a ground different from the earthing rod, which is different from a receptacle safety ground, which is different from the computer chassis ground, which is different from motherboard ground, which is different from the entertainment system single point ground to eliminate hum between various stereo components. All may be interconnected - but not by a perfect conductor. And all serve different functions. Therefore all are considered different grounds. Take a 50 foot connection from breaker box to receptacle using a 20 amp wire. That safety ground wire may be 0.2 ohms 'resistance'. However to transients, the same wire may measure 130 ohms 'impedance'. If trying to earth a trivial 100 amp transient, then the wire would be something less than 13,000 volts from plug-in surge protector to breaker box ground bus. Clearly wire impedance makes that receptacle ground all but no connection to earth. Earth ground and safety ground in that wall receptacle are not same. Therein also lies reason for a single point ground between stereo components and why breaker box ground is not same as earth ground. Wire has electrical characteristics that make each interconnected ground different. Wire becomes an electronic component when discussing transient protection. For human safety, the single point ground of significance is inside a breaker box. To eliminate hums in stereo equipment, the single point ground is where all component grounds meet. To protect computer motherboard from static shock interruptions, a motherboard ground connects to chassis ground at only one point. To discharge a static electric charged human is a ground located underneath the shoe (no earth ground involved in that static electric discharge). So that various signals don't interfere, then A/D converters have separate analog and digital grounds - that meet at a single point typically at the A/D converter. For surge protection, the single point ground of significance is central earth ground. Many grounds. All different even if interconnected. Again, every ground may be interconnected but each ground is different because wire is an electronic component. Distance also determines quality of that earthing - because again, wire is an electronic component. Plug-in protectors do not 'shunt' a less than 10 foot connection from each incoming power wire to earth ground. Therefore they cannot earth that incoming wire. Distance in that 50 foot wire at 130 ohms impedance demonstrates why, for example, wall receptacles are not earth ground. m II wrote: In any electrical code that I'm aware of, ground *means* earth ground. In this neck of the woods it is defined as: A connection to earth using a grounding electrode. I don't know what other kinds of 'any ground' can possibly be. It's either a ground or it isn't. mike |
Another meaningless message from the electric troll. Plonk.
"w_tom" wrote in message ... The safety ground is typically a bus bar in main disconnect box. The central point at which neutral and safety ground wires meet. This is a ground different from the earthing rod, which is different from a receptacle safety ground, which is different from the computer chassis ground, which is different from motherboard ground, which is different from the entertainment system single point ground to eliminate hum between various stereo components. All may be interconnected - but not by a perfect conductor. And all serve different functions. Therefore all are considered different grounds. Take a 50 foot connection from breaker box to receptacle using a 20 amp wire. That safety ground wire may be 0.2 ohms 'resistance'. However to transients, the same wire may measure 130 ohms 'impedance'. If trying to earth a trivial 100 amp transient, then the wire would be something less than 13,000 volts from plug-in surge protector to breaker box ground bus. Clearly wire impedance makes that receptacle ground all but no connection to earth. Earth ground and safety ground in that wall receptacle are not same. Therein also lies reason for a single point ground between stereo components and why breaker box ground is not same as earth ground. Wire has electrical characteristics that make each interconnected ground different. Wire becomes an electronic component when discussing transient protection. For human safety, the single point ground of significance is inside a breaker box. To eliminate hums in stereo equipment, the single point ground is where all component grounds meet. To protect computer motherboard from static shock interruptions, a motherboard ground connects to chassis ground at only one point. To discharge a static electric charged human is a ground located underneath the shoe (no earth ground involved in that static electric discharge). So that various signals don't interfere, then A/D converters have separate analog and digital grounds - that meet at a single point typically at the A/D converter. For surge protection, the single point ground of significance is central earth ground. Many grounds. All different even if interconnected. Again, every ground may be interconnected but each ground is different because wire is an electronic component. Distance also determines quality of that earthing - because again, wire is an electronic component. Plug-in protectors do not 'shunt' a less than 10 foot connection from each incoming power wire to earth ground. Therefore they cannot earth that incoming wire. Distance in that 50 foot wire at 130 ohms impedance demonstrates why, for example, wall receptacles are not earth ground. m II wrote: In any electrical code that I'm aware of, ground *means* earth ground. In this neck of the woods it is defined as: A connection to earth using a grounding electrode. I don't know what other kinds of 'any ground' can possibly be. It's either a ground or it isn't. mike |
Barry: That used to be known as the MEN system, as in multiple earth
neutral. In this PC world it had to be changed to PERSON, as in place earth return strap on neutral. Oh my Deity! That's a good one! Bill, K5BY |
"w_tom" wrote in message ... Hey HFguy, Why are you obsessed with promoting a scam? For that matter, why do you post so often in this newsgroup? If what was posted is technically erroneous, then please feel free to discuss technical errors. Please demonstrate how a plug-in protector can protect from both common mode and differential mode transients. This assumes you reply also knowing what common and differential mode transients are. Technical concepts taught in a first year electrical course and essential to understanding if and why a surge protector is effective. I see you learned a few technical buzz words from our last debate! But, you still fail to understand that transverse protection DOES NOT require an earth ground to work. You're in my kill file, so don't bother with the third-person ignorant retorts. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:22 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com