If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by w_tom on July 2, 2006, 10:57 pm
A protector that will somehow stop or block what three miles of sky
did not is a myth. Effective protectors are: as in
http://www.telebyteusa.com/primer/ch6.htm
> Conceptually, lightning protection devices are switches to ground. Once
> a threatening surge is detected, a lightning protection device grounds
> the incoming signal connection point of the equipment being protected.
> Thus, redirecting the threatening surge on a path-of-least resistance
> (impedance) to ground where it is absorbed.
> Any lightning protection device must be composed of two "subsystems,"
> a switch which is essentially some type of switching circuitry and a
> good ground connection-to allow dissipation of the surge energy.
A protector is a connection to protection. A protector that does not
have that essential earthing wire AND that avoids discussion of
earthing really does not provide effective protection. Earthing
defines the protection.
To make a 'whole house' protector effective, building earth should
meet and exceed post 1990 earthing requirements. Without something to
shunt into, a protector provides insufficient protection. Furthermore,
that same earthing must be used by all incoming utilities. Even if
utilities are underground, they still require single point earth
ground. Otherwise destructive surges may enter a building to find
earth, destructively, via household appliances.
If using plug-in protectors, then install one for every appliance -
dishwasher, washing machine, clock radio, smoke detector, bathroom
GFCIs, etc. Or install a 'whole house' protector for superior
protection that is also tens of times less money per protected
appliance. But again, which one makes the 'less than 10 foot'
connection to earth.
Earthing determines a protector's effectiveness. 'Whole house'
protector already inside telephone interface box and ground block on
cable must also make a 'less than 10 foot' connection to the same earth
ground. Again, otherwise the transient may find earth destructively via
household appliances. Notice that effective protection does as Ben
Franklin also demonstrated in 1752. Like lightning rods, the protector
is only as effective as its earthing.
the mango wrote:
> ...
> Anyone have any good advice on having a lightning protection system
> installed on a home circuit breaker panel?
>
> Is it worth the money and how good does it really work?
|
|
Posted by Bud-- on July 3, 2006, 2:35 pm
w_tom wrote:
>
> If using plug-in protectors, then install one for every appliance -
> dishwasher, washing machine, clock radio, smoke detector, bathroom
> GFCIs, etc.
Obviously stupid advice - w_ is really saying don't use plug-in protectors.
The best paper I have seen on surge protection is at
http://www.mikeholt.com/files/PDF/LightningGuide_FINALpublishedversion_May051.pdf
- this a paper w_tom originally provided a link to
- the title is "How to protect your house and its contents from
lightning: IEEE guide for surge protection of equipment connected to AC
power and communication circuits"
- it was published by the IEEE in 2005
- the IEEE is the dominant organization of electrical and electronic
engineers in the US
- the 5 authors have broad experience with surge suppression
A second reference is
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
- this is the "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to
protect the appliances in your home"
- it is published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology,
the US government agency formerly called the National Bureau of Standards
- it was published in 2001
- it was written - Francois Martzloff - the NIST guru on surges and
lightning
Both guides were intended for wide distribution to the general public to
explain surges and how to protect against them. The IEEE guide was
targeted at people who have some (not much) technical background. Read
one (or both) to understand surges and protection. They provide info on
what to look for in a service panel surge protector.
Both also say plug-in surge suppressors are effective.
Note that if a device, like a computer, has connections other than
power, like a phone line, that has to be connected through the surge
suppressor also. This type of suppressor is called a surge reference
equalizer (SRE) by the IEEE (also described by the NIST). The idea is
that all wires connected to the device (power, phone, CATV, LAN, ...)
are clamped to the common ground at the SRE. The voltage on all wires
passing through the SRE to the protected device are held to a voltage
safe to the device.
The primary action of a plug-in surge suppressor is clamping, not
earthing. w_tom does not recognize clamping as valid, and as a result
apparently can't read and understand these guides.
bud--
|
|
Posted by w_tom on July 3, 2006, 3:43 pm
If a room is carefully reconstructed to be equivalent to a faraday
cage, and if humans do not routinely compromise that protection design,
then a plug-in protector (that costs so much more money) may protect
one device. Bud routinely follows me around to post half truths. He
routinely forgets to post some additional facts. For example, a kid
with an Xbox would violate protection to a TV. What does Bud's own
citation (which I provided him) note? Two TVs may end up at 8000
volts. Are two TVs at 8000+ volts effectively protected every time?
As long as every electrically conductive material is not violating the
protection system, then that plug-in protector may work. And then we
look at items such as concrete, some wall paints, and Xbox. These
violate the protection system. To make the plug-in protector
effective, you must connect it using an engineering analysis and teach
the kid how to connect his Xbox.
Or you can install an effective protection system that even the Xbox
cannot violate.
IOW the plug-in protector is big bucks for every appliance to
hopefully protect an adjacent appliance. Meanwhile anything that would
be effectve at that appliance is already inside the appliance - which
Bud routinely forgets to mention. So where do we better put less money
for superior protection? Do we buy 100 plug-in protectors for every
appliance? Of course not. We install and earth a protector that will
not be compromised by a kid with an Xbox. We buy a protector that is
not sold by manufacturers that Bud represents. We buy one protector so
that even two TVs do not end up at 8000 volts. This is called the
'whole house' protector.
Ineffective protectors are easily identified. 1) No dedicated
earthing wire and 2) manufacturer avoids discussing earthing. Notice
what lightning seeks and what Bud avoids discussing? Earth ground.
Therefore manufacturers with responsible trade names sell 'whole house'
protectors in Home Depot, Lowes, and electrical supply houses. Some if
not all names will be obvious to anyone who has worked with residential
electricity: Siemens, Square D, Intermatic, Cutler-Hamer, Leviton, and
GE are but some of the manufacturers of effective 'whole house'
protectors. Spend tens of times less money per protected appliance for
protection that will not be compromised by a kid with an Xbox. Bud
would have you believe this is not necessary - the plug-in protector
will somehow do everything.
Meanwhile, what does a plug-in protector also require to be
effective? 'Whole house' protector. Lightning still must be provided
a path to earth. No path to earth and lightning will find destructive
paths even through plug-in protector. Many decades ago, damage to
adjacent and powered off computers was traced through an adjacent
protector. Plug-in protector shunted a surge into powered off
computer, through network, out another computer to earth ground via
phone line. Notice how lightning does damage. It finds a destructive
path to earth. We even traced that path by replacing every damaged IC
to make all computers functional.
Anything that a plug-in protector will do is already inside the
appliance. Internal protection that assumes you have earthed a 'whole
house' protector. Assumes you have earthed the transient before it
even enters the house. Then any trivial transient that still enters a
building is made irrelevant by protection already inside every (maybe
100) appliances.
Protection is about earthing such transients just as Ben Franklin
demonstrated on church steeples in 1752. An earthed transient will not
seek destructive paths via church steeple or household electronics.
'Whole house' protection concept is what protects every telephone COs,
911 response center, commercial radio stations, and everything else
that can never suffer lightning damage. Remember, that $multi-million
computer is connected to overhead wires everywhere in town and its
computer must never fail. Telco also don't waste good money on plug-in
protectors. They also earth transients with a 'whole house' type
protector on every wire of every incoming cable AND with an earth
ground connection that is short as possible. Earthing provides the
protection.
You want reliable protection. Would you spend up to $100 for a
protector that might or might not work? Plug-in protectors are not
effective. Effective protection at the appliance is already inside an
appliance. Internal protection that is effective IF you earth
destructive transients before such transients can enter the building.
One reliable protector for everything or hundreds of plug-in protectors
that might do something useful? Do you have money to burn - or just
want reliable protection? The protector is only as effective as its
earth ground which explains why plug-in protectors don't even claim
such protection in their numerical specifications. Don't take my word
for it. Notice they don't even list protection each type of transient.
Instead, they hope you will believe half truths posted by Bud.
Bud's job is to follow me around and confuse you with half truths.
Buy and earth one 'whole house' to have superior protection. Any
money wasted on plug-in protector is better spent to enhance earthing -
to make protection better. Even your own phone company earths a 'whole
house' protector where their wire enters your building - because a
'whole house' protector is so effective and so inexpensive.
Bud-- wrote:
> Obviously stupid advice - w_ is really saying don't use plug-in protectors.
>
> The best paper I have seen on surge protection is at
>
http://www.mikeholt.com/files/PDF/LightningGuide_FINALpublishedversion_May051.pdf
> - this a paper w_tom originally provided a link to
> - the title is "How to protect your house and its contents from
> lightning: IEEE guide for surge protection of equipment connected to AC
> power and communication circuits"
> - it was published by the IEEE in 2005
> - the IEEE is the dominant organization of electrical and electronic
> engineers in the US
> - the 5 authors have broad experience with surge suppression
>
>
> A second reference is
> http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
> - this is the "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to
> protect the appliances in your home"
> - it is published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology,
> the US government agency formerly called the National Bureau of Standards
> - it was published in 2001
> - it was written - Francois Martzloff - the NIST guru on surges and
> lightning
>
> Both guides were intended for wide distribution to the general public to
> explain surges and how to protect against them. The IEEE guide was
> targeted at people who have some (not much) technical background. Read
> one (or both) to understand surges and protection. They provide info on
> what to look for in a service panel surge protector.
>
> Both also say plug-in surge suppressors are effective.
> ...
|
|
Posted by Bud-- on July 4, 2006, 12:31 pm
w_tom wrote:
> If a room is carefully reconstructed to be equivalent to a faraday
> cage, and if humans do not routinely compromise that protection design,
> then a plug-in protector (that costs so much more money) may protect
> one device.
The IEEE and NIST guides say nothing about Faraday cages or special
precautions.
> Bud routinely follows me around to post half truths.
'Half truths' that come from the IEEE and NIST
>
> Ineffective protectors are easily identified. 1) No dedicated
> earthing wire and 2) manufacturer avoids discussing earthing. Notice
> what lightning seeks and what Bud avoids discussing? Earth ground.
As described plainly in the IEEE guide, the primary action of a plug-in
surge suppressor is clamping, not earthing. As I said in my previous
post, w_tom does not recognize clamping as valid, and as a result
apparently can't read and understand these guides.
> Therefore manufacturers with responsible trade names sell 'whole house'
> protectors in Home Depot, Lowes, and electrical supply houses.
In 1999 Francois Martzloff, who was the NIST guru on surges, wrote a
guide for customer service reps for rural electrical coops. Included was:
"Whole house protection consists of a protective device at the service
entrance complemented by TVSSs [plug-in surge suppressors] for sensitive
appliances [electronic equipment] within the house."
The IEEE and NIST guides and Martzloff recognize plug-in surge
suppressors as effective.
Never seen: any link from w_tom that says plug-in surge suppressors are
not effective.
bud--
|
|
Posted by w_tom on July 5, 2006, 1:25 pm
Bud-- wrote:
> Never seen: any link from w_tom that says plug-in surge suppressors are
> not effective.
He has seen plug-in protectors defined as ineffective for reason
after reason. For example, Bud pretends these pictures don't exist:
http://www.westwhitelandfire.com/Articles/Surge%20Protectors.pdf
> Do not locate a surge protector or power strip in any area
> where the unit would be covered with carpet, furniture,or
> any other item that will limit or prevent air circulation.
http://www.nmsu.edu/~safety/programs/gen_saf/surgeprotectorfire.htm
> An employee arrived at the Greensport Yard in Houston this
> morning to find the field office full of smoke. Investigation led
> him to a melted down surge protector
http://www.rbs2.com/fire.htm
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
Just another reason why 'whole house' protectors sold by responsible
manufacturers such as Leviton, Cutler-Hammer, Square D, GE, Siemens,
and Intermatic as the superior and effective solution.
|
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Breaker panel installed height | June 6, 2007, 9:10 am |
| Weather Protection (Paint) | May 30, 2007, 11:01 am |
| Flickering lights on one circuit | April 11, 2008, 3:27 pm |
| Tankless water heater circuit design... | October 26, 2007, 12:31 pm |
| OSB and siding panel (LP) resistance. | August 20, 2007, 3:22 pm |
| Rotate electrical panel? | February 25, 2008, 12:12 pm |
| Generator transfer panel | August 18, 2008, 9:00 pm |
| Main Power Panel about face | July 15, 2006, 1:40 pm |
| Framing Recessed Electrical Panel | August 23, 2006, 6:50 pm |
| Distance from transformer to service panel/meter | October 28, 2006, 8:32 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap