It is currently Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:48 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
westom wrote:
AC electricity is first filtered (with or without active or passive PFC). Then converted to DC voltages.
The 3rd time. Were these 2 sentences correct? Could you
show one circuit diagram where the rectifier comes after the PFC?

Olle, the question is specifically about the rectifier after the PFC. Related to my previous question:"Who converts to well over 300V DC, if not active PFC?" And what is "well over"? I suppose something like 380V, but not 308V.


Last edited by Klusu on Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:08 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 6:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:03 am
Posts: 611
Location: Sweden
westom wrote:
A surge is electricity. It must have an incoming and a completely different outgoing path. If incoming was on a TV cable, then what was the outgoing path?
The cable consist of two wires (coaxial) that typically only has a low voltage between them.
When there's a lightning strike into the ground near (not into) the cable that current can/will induce a very high voltage on the outer cable, and that voltage will spread along the wire. When that high voltage spike eventually hits the router a relatively easy way for it is opened to the inner cable, creating a local current that destroys the delicate electronics.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 6:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:03 am
Posts: 611
Location: Sweden
Klusu wrote:
westom wrote:
AC electricity is first filtered (with or without active or passive PFC). Then converted to DC voltages.
The 3rd time. Was this sentence correct?
Just look at any decent PSU review: The first thing at the inlet is a ferrite coil or similar filter.
Then, as stated, the AC is rectified before being chopped up into a higher frequency signal that can be transformed more efficiently using smaller transformers.

A simple diagram (and in-depth description) can be found here:
https://www.hardwaresecrets.com/anatomy-of-switching-power-supplies/2/
Here's also an article about Surge Protectors:
https://www.hardwaresecrets.com/anatomy-of-surge-suppressors/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Olle P wrote:
The cable consist of two wires (coaxial) that typically only has a low voltage between them.

Obviously you did not learn how and why modems are damaged. For some strange reason, assumed is a surge is incoming on a cable, it has no outgoing path, and magically does damage. That entire conclusion is only from wild speculation even contradicted by simple electrical knowledge.

Obvious homeowner mistakes that make damage possible were explained in simple layman terms. If not understood, then an honest person quotes the sentence, says how it was interpreted, and then asks what is causing confusion. Those who only want to argue post outright denials and complain that they do not understand something that they refuse to define.

Basic electrical knowledge says many modes of electricity can exist on one cable. For some strange reasons, you have assumed all electricity is differential mode. Clearly unknown is the type of electricity that was previously defined and that does damage - longitudinal mode.

Best protection must already exist on the TV cable. If missing, then a homeowner is required to maintain / repair that protection. An honest person would be asking to learn what must be inspected and how a defect is corrected. Instead, I am only reading accusations that deny posted facts and numbers - without one reason to justify that denial.

Your modem damage is typically of an electric current that enters (incoming) on any or all AC electric wires. And is outgoing on any or all wires in a TV cable.

Either reply to only argue. Or start asking questions that quote the specific sentence or paragraph, what you think it means, and why you are confused. An informed homeowner would be asking how to verify that required 'installed for free' protection already on a TV cable. And what homeowner mistake can compromise that best protection. IOW post to learn; not to argue.

Your article entitled "Anatomy of Switching Power Supplies" is in agreement with what I have posted.

Your article entitled "Anatomy of Surge Suppressors" is clearly written by someone who has no grasp of simple concepts - such as two completely different and unrelated grounds. Safety ground on an appliance does nothing - absolutely nothing. Earth grounding an appliance is even a human safety code violation.

Incoming consumers safety ground appliances. And earth ground surges (not appliances). Only then do hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate.

Worse, that pathetic article never once mentions something completely different (also called surge protectors) that are always found in every structure that has effective protection. Clearly that author has been brainwashed by propaganda; never learned basic electrical concepts. Assumes all grounds are same. And never learned what even Franklin demonstrated over 250 years ago.

A protector (or lightning rod) is only as effective as its earth ground. Why is well proven science (routinely implemented over 100 years ago) so confusing? It was always this simple. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. (Obviously wall receptacle safety ground is not earth ground.)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
He has done nothing to deserve this attitude.
westom wrote:
If not understood, then an honest person quotes the sentence, says how it was interpreted, and then asks what is causing confusion.
He wrote clearly what he believes. Why didn't you point at where his fallacy was? What have you against the sentence you quoted? That sentence was true.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 7:41 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Posts: 7154
Location: Monterey Bay, CA
less snark, please.

_________________
1080p Gaming build: i5-4670K, Mugen 4, Asrock Z97 Anniversary, MSI GTX 760 2GB Gaming, 8GB 1866 RAM, Samsung 860 Evo 500GB, Crucial MX100 256GB, WD Red 2TB, Samsung DVD burner, Fractal Define R4, Antec True Quiet 140 (2 front + rear) case fans, Seasonic SSR-550FX. 35W idle, 45-55W video streaming, 170-200W WoW, 318W stress test (Prime95 + Furmark)

Support SPCR through these links: Amazon and Newegg


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
OP asked for surge protection. But only discussed mythical solutions including a Novaris plug in, Eaton POD, SurgeX series mode filter, tiny joule Tripplite Isobar, Monster cables (that routinely identifies scams, then sells an equivalent product at higher prices), and Ferroresonant transformer.

Facilities that cannot have damage use something completely different. Protection over 100 years ago was always defined by what Franklin demonstrated over 250 years ago. Your telco suffers over 100 incoming surges to their switching computer with each thunderstorm. They do not foolishly use any of those above devices. And do not disconnect anything with approaching storms. Every wire inside every cable is safely earth grounded by a lowest impedance connection. To increase protection, telcos want up to 50 meter separation between protectors and electronics. That increased separation (impedance) increases protection.

Do they unplug with each storm? Of course not. Only the naive believe that is effective.

How often is your town without phone service for four days while they replace that CO's computer? Never. If damage happens, it would be an international news story. Protection was and is always about connecting all incoming wires to single point earth ground BEFORE that transient can get anywhere inside a building. For a CO, that can be hundreds of thousands of wires. All connected low impedance (ie hardwire has no sharp bend or splices) to single point earth ground.

A home need only do same to a few wires. For a transient that only might happen once every seven years. Some wires have best protection by not even using a protector. But in every case, each wire's connection to earth must be low impedance. Because a protector is only as effective as its earth ground. None of those above 'miracle' solutions have or will even discuss earth ground. Nor use facts with numbers. Missing facts and no numbers exposes the fallacy of subjective (bogus) recommendations.

So many urban myths (without any reason why and with no numbers) were posted. Those myths only exist due to advertising, wild speculation, hearsay, subjective reasoning, and classic junk science. Effective protection always answers this question. Where do hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate? Those hearsay and unjustified suggestions can not and never do answer that question. A protector is only a connecting device to what does protection. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. So every telco CO works normally throughout every thunderstorm in every nation all over the world - without surge damage. Those protectors remains functional even after direct lightning strikes. Since properly earthed protectors also must not fail catastrophically - shorted or disconnected.

When hundreds of thousands of joules are harmlessly absorbed outside, then best protection already inside all appliances is not overwhelmed. Homeowners protect everything, for about $1 per appliance, by properly installing one 'whole house' protector. That 'whole house' solution necessary to even protect all OP's above discussed protectors.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 6:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:03 am
Posts: 611
Location: Sweden
Westom, you're barking up the wrong tree.
I've been working professionally with electrical safety (in medical devices) for more than twenty years and have education in how electrical installations is done in medical facilities such as hospitals.

What clearly tip me off about your proficiency is this:
westom wrote:
... (Obviously wall receptacle safety ground is not earth ground.)
1. The correct term is "Protective Earth" (PE for short), not "safety ground".
2. PE is in fact, by all intent and purpose, a direct low resistance connection to the ground.
3. In three phase power distribution the neutral is ground. This is in older installations, that are based on a four wire system, utilized by having PE and neutral using the same wire. In newer installations PE must use a separate wire.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Olle P wrote:
I've been working professionally with electrical safety (in medical devices) for more than twenty years and have education in how electrical installations is done in medical facilities such as hospitals.

An electrician is only taught concepts relevant to human safety. Clearly impedance is completely unknown. Impedance is irrelevant to protecting humans. Impedance is essential to protecting appliances.

Your post has no numbers. And fails to even use relevant terms. Wall receptacle safety ground is called equipment ground in code. Single point earth ground is a completely different ground. Meanwhile I am discussing terms relevant to surge protection - not terms used only to discuss human protection.

View numbers that an engineer (who was doing this stuff before you were born) learned so many generations ago. Safety ground in a receptacle is not earth ground. Numbers make that obvious.

Let's assume a magic box protector will connect a tiny 100 amps surge to earth ground. (via a safety ground or neutral wire) In homes, that wire may be less than 0.2 ohm resistance. And something like 120 ohms impedance.

100 amps times 120 ohms impedance is something less than 12,000 volts. That 12,000 volts means a safety ground is earth ground? Please learn how electricity works before posting constant denials based only in half truths.

Why less than 12,000 volts? Electricity must find other paths to earth - often destructively via other nearby appliances. An IEEE brochure is blunt obvious about this. A plug-in protector connected to a wall receptacle safety ground earths a surge 8000 volts destructively through a TV in an adjacent room. Where is this earth ground connection? Does not exist. Impedance (determined by wire length and not by wire thickness) is excessive. But electricians are never taught any of this. Code only discusses human protection; not appliance protection.

Why do the informed always connect a 'whole house' protector less than 10 feet to single point earth ground? Less than 10 feet means low impedance. Let's discuss what you did not know - impedance.

If that ground hardwire goes up over a foundation and down to earth, then code (that only discussed human safety) says it is OK. Impedance (what the electrically informed understand) is excessive. That wire is unnecessarily too long. It has sharp bends over a foundation. Best is to route that hardwire to earth through a foundation and down to earthing electrodes. Then sharp bends do not exist. Then wire is shorter. Then the ground wire is separated from non-grounding wires. Things an electrician are never taught are also essential to protect appliances.

Code only teaches what is necessary to protect humans. Code says nothing about protecting appliances. So electricians are never taught about impedance. First semester engineers learn it. Please stop saying you know this stuff. You do not even know what impedance is. And repeatedly post myths about appliance protection.

If wall receptacle safety ground is earth ground, then earth lightning rods and surge protectors to a computer's motherboard ground. Since that too must be earth ground - using your reasoning without basic electrical knowledge.

Any electrician can learn ths. Connect a three light tester to the wall receptacle. It says safety ground is good. Disconnect the earth ground. That wall receptacle tester still says safety ground is good. Wall receptacle safety ground is not earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.

How much is unknown to electricians? Reams of profession citations discuss the other ground - earth ground - as essential to appliance protection: https://www.reddit.com/r/crtgaming/comm ... t/dq8qkdf/

Only one of us knew this stuff even over forty years ago. You should be asking to learn rather than denying using constant subjective hearsay and speculation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
westom wrote:
already posted is an example from over 30 years ago of "... one circuit diagramm support... "AC electricity is first filtered (with or without active or passive PFC). Then converted to DC voltages."
No. An example of "filtering with PFC" has not been posted.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:35 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Posts: 7154
Location: Monterey Bay, CA
So, why did you two decide to restart this conversation/argument after 6+ years?

_________________
1080p Gaming build: i5-4670K, Mugen 4, Asrock Z97 Anniversary, MSI GTX 760 2GB Gaming, 8GB 1866 RAM, Samsung 860 Evo 500GB, Crucial MX100 256GB, WD Red 2TB, Samsung DVD burner, Fractal Define R4, Antec True Quiet 140 (2 front + rear) case fans, Seasonic SSR-550FX. 35W idle, 45-55W video streaming, 170-200W WoW, 318W stress test (Prime95 + Furmark)

Support SPCR through these links: Amazon and Newegg


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:29 am
Posts: 1644
Location: UK
+1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
Don't you think somebody who
Quote:
seem to be knowledgeable

should be exposed for what he is?

As to myself - I have been rather busy since 2012 (but not right now). Miss the great community here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 6:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Klusu wrote:
No. An example of "filtering with PFC" has not been posted.

PFC is irrelevant. Circuits that do protection, better than an adjacent protector, exist with or without PFC - active or passive.

Why constantly discuss things totally irrelevant to these electrical concepts. You even foolishly argued about the waveform, spike, or radio frequency AC as if there were some difference - that you could not even define. Those radio frequency spikes are are routine in power supplies. Those supplies convert those 300 plus volt spikes into rock stable, low DC voltages that do not vary by even 0.2 volts.

If PFC is so relevant (per that unjustified insistence), then you have numerous PFC examples. So where is it? Why do you not post even one example? PFC knowledge is lacking. Apparently somebody said something about PFC. So wild speculation was converted into some kind of conclusoin. If PFC is relevant, they you have posted examples. And then stated why that is relevant to hardware protection - with numbers.

Protection superior to plug-in protectors is routine inside electronics. Concern is for a rare transient (maybe once every seven years) that might overwhelm that protection. So the fewer and informed consumers properly earth one 'whole house' protector. Since plug-in protectors, such as this one: https://i.redd.it/e34962ah06q11.jpg , desperately need that effective and properly earthed protection.

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Then even direct lightning strikes do not overwhelm robust protection routinely found in electronics - with or without PFC. That solution is the topic of this thread. Your denials, without contributing any knowledge, is spurious.

PFC is obviously irrelevant to the OP questions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
CA_Steve wrote:
So, why did you two decide to restart this conversation/argument after 6+ years?

Where was a previous discussion about useless PFC and the robust protection already inside electronics? Where did he declare that radio frequency spikes, AC electricity, and waveforms are all somehow different (without saying why each is different)? Real question is why so much nonsense about PFC is posted when 'what PFC does' is both completely unknown to him and is irrelevant to the topic?

OP asked about ineffective protectors, MOV failures (that must never happen), warranties (that he accurately identified as bogus), and prolonged brownouts (that do not cause hardware damage and that are made irrelevant by what a power supply does).

A first sentence from his post accurately describes himself. He really doesn't know what he is talking about. He does not even know what PFC does. PFC is totally irrelevant to everything the OP has asked about.

When did a PFC circuit cure all ills? Posted with numbers is what the OP really needs to protect hardware. It costs tens of times less money. Remains functional for many decades even after many direct lightning strikes. Provides specifications numbers that define its robust nature. And even protects PFC circuits - that he cannot seem to locate.

I don't recall any of this irrelevant PFC speculation posted six years ago. Were any of his posts back then relevant to what the OP has asked here?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
westom wrote:
Converts 120 volts to well over 300 volts DC
This is why I mentioned PFC. Seems to me you were the first to write about PFC. I never wrote PFC was relevant (still, PFC helps). You have not answered any of my questions. Let's add some more. What makes an earth ground good (with numbers)? 4 ohms?
westom wrote:
Then a 20,000 amps surge (ie lightning) creates a near zero voltage.
Is not it 80kV?
westom wrote:
At least one Seasonic power supply said, quite bluntly, that it can withstand up to 1800 volt transients.
I found "Dielectric withstand, input to frame/ground" and "Dielectric withstand, input to output" 1800 VAC, 1 sec. Is this what you wrote about? This is no wonder, this is what "millimeters isolation" does. Can a PSU survive 1000V between AC wires? Writing about incoming path and outgoing path, you missed one scenario. Incoming path may be one AC wire, outgoing path the other AC wire.
westom wrote:
MOVs on a power cord are obviously ineffective once one learns the technology and numbers. Better manufacturers stop doing that long ago for a long list of reasons.
The main reason is cheap manufacturers want to save those 5 cents. Better manufacturers still use MOVs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 4:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Klusu wrote:
This is why I mentioned PFC. Seems to me you were the first to write about PFC. ... Is not it 80kV? ...The main reason is cheap manufacturers want to save those 5 cents. Better manufacturers still use MOVs.


Defined was how a power supply works and why it already is protection superior to any of those silly plug-in devices. Klusu used wild speculation to assume that power supply operation was PFC. Described (and exampled) were power supplies even without PFC. With basic power supply knowledge, then that would have been obvious. Apparently what PFC does is even unknown.

Provided were schematics for a typical power supply (without PFC). And again irrelevant questions about PFC continue. PFC was not in that example of effective protection and was never relevant to the entire topic.

So, rather than apologize not even reading those schematics (the example), instead he now accuses me of mentioning PFCs. When guilty as hell and technically naive, then blame others.

Electronics, before an IBM PC existed, would withstand 600 volts without damage. Repeatedly defined and from datasheets are voltage numbers that electronics can withstand. Even low voltage interface semiconductors were rated to withstand 2000 or 15,000 volts.

A typically destructive surge can be 20,000 amps. Basic electrical concepts says hearsay is just plain wrong. Surges are a current source. That means no voltage exists when something foolishly does not try to 'block' that current. An obstruction means voltage increases as necessary so that current continues to flow. That 20,000 amps may create 100 volts if a low impedance connection exists, 8000 volts when a plug-in protector connects that current to earth via a TV in a next room, or even higher voltage if the 'blocking' device break down voltage is that high.

Protection is not about voltage. Protection is about current. Franklin demonstrated this over 250 years ago. A church no longer conducted lightning (destructively) when a lightning rod connected lightning to earth on a better conductive device - a wire. Then no destructive voltage exists. Then earth ground protects that church steeple.

This concept was taught in math. Voltage is a dependent variable. Current is an independent (relevant) variable. Effective protectors are rated by the independent variable (numbers of amps that connect harmlessly to earth).

Informed consumers spend about $1 per appliance for a 'whole house' solution that is at least 50,000 amps. Any protector that fails on a surge is ineffective - probably only contains five cent protector parts to increase profits. An effective protector puts money into the protector - not into advertising, propaganda, hyping myths, and an inflated profit margin.

No protector does protection - not one. Effective protector (that costs tens of times less money) always has a low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) hardwire connection to single point earth ground. Because protection is defined by quality of and connection to that ground - where hundreds of thousands of joules are harmlessly 'absorbed'.

Nothing is new. All this has been described repeatedly. And is the best answer for our OP. Posted again because it was ignored. Anyone with basic electrical knowledge would know why a potentially destructive surge is defined by its current (ie 20,000 amps) and not by a voltage (ie 80Kv). Since that concept was even demonstrated by Franklin over 250 years ago.

If hardware protection is known, then one knew why MOVs are so useful in a 'whole house' solution. And why near zero joule (five cent) MOVs in expensive plug-in protectors even cause this: http://imgur.com/hwCWHMW

Price of a protector says nothing about quality. The most expensive plug-in protectors are inferior to a 'whole house' solution costing $1 per protected appliance. Reasons why with numbers posted previously.

Informed consumers always ignore a recommendation that does not say why using basic electrical concepts and that is not tempered by numbers. Unacceptable damage to expensive plug-in protectors is obvious with basic electrical knowledge combined with specification numbers.

Any effective solution will always say where hundreds of thousands of joules are harmlessly 'absorbed'. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground - today and over 100 years ago in facilities that could not have damage. Basic knowledge is that well understood and proven. And so often unknown by many who only deny without one honest reason why.

Electronics can be more robust than expensive, near zero joule protectors. Described were circuits without any mention of PFC. Described are how surges (that can overwhelm superior existing protection) are routinely earthed so that even direct lightning strikes cause no damage - to anything inside the building. No damage even to a protector.

All that was described using basic electrical concepts and with perspective - numbers. It has not changed. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.

Having said that, only a 'secondary' protection layer has been discussed. Not yet discussed is a 'primary' protection layer. Obviously plenty more to learn. But that cannot happen when urban myths and speculation have invented fictional accusations.

Obvious is who did not know how a power supply works. And then used wild speculation to assume those well over 300 volt radio frequency spikes were in an active PFC circuit. Apparently, even passive PFC was unknown.

Best protection for the OP means properly earthing a 'whole house' solution. An IEEE Standard says that should do 99.5% to 99.9% of the protection. Even an IEEE Standard makes recommendations with numbers. So that recommendation has credibility.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2018 3:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:03 am
Posts: 611
Location: Sweden
westom wrote:
Olle P wrote:
I've been working professionally with electrical safety (in medical devices) for more than twenty years and have education in how electrical installations is done in medical facilities such as hospitals.
An electrician is only taught concepts relevant to human safety. Clearly impedance is completely unknown. Impedance is irrelevant to protecting humans. Impedance is essential to protecting appliances.
"Human safety" (in general) include prevention of electrical installations and devices bursting into flames, so I expect electricians (which I'm not) to know better. I happened to left out the part that I've also got a masters degree in applied physics and electrical engineering, which is directly applicable to the points you try to make.

Human safety sometimes relies on medical devices staying functional even when there's a thunderstorm outside you know. You don't want a life support system to just quit or a surgery theater have a sudden black out while in use.
Furthermore "impedance" is very relevant when it comes to the protecting human beings from the effects of electricity since human skin has both capacitive and resistive properties. At very low frequencies and frequencies >1 kHz the impedance is very high, but it's relatively low at the frequencies used in power distribution.

While some of your statements are true, and some I can't comment upon since I don't know about US building and installation codes, other is utter crap from a pure physics perspective.

Just an example from a few posts above:
"... Protection was and is always about connecting all incoming wires to single point earth ground BEFORE that transient can get anywhere inside a building. ... All connected low impedance (ie hardwire has no sharp bend or splices) to single point earth ground."
Not really.
* Protection is about reducing any incoming voltage spike by temporarily lowering the impedance between the leads (and Earth) to let the energy pass that shunt rather than destroy any equipment down the line. While there is no spike the impedance lead-lead and lead-ground must be high.
* Ideally that shunt, or parts of it, should lead to Earth, since our planet acts like a huge capacitor that absorb and spread the energy.
* Realistically more layers of similar protections are required to really make the event harmless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2018 6:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Olle P wrote:
Just an example from a few posts above:
* ... Not really.
* ...
* Ideally that shunt, or parts of it, should lead to Earth, since our planet acts like a huge capacitor that absorb and spread the energy.
* Realistically more layers of similar protections are required to really make the event harmless.

The denied technology is well proven and was standard solution for protection even over 100 years ago. "Not really" is not a comment from an educated person. "Not really" must say why with numbers. Reasons why it is true were posted. None of those reasons why are even disputed.

You do not justify your own "Not really" comment. And you do not show how facts that justify that proven science is wrong. So you have violated what an educated person must do - twice.

Second, earth is not a giant capacitor. That statement is common among the many who did not learn the technology. Demonstrates why denials come from insufficient knowledge. And would not happen from one with the education that you have claimed. Even Feynman's Lectures on Physics describes the relevant current paths. Charges in a cloud maybe three miles up must connect to charges on earth maybe four miles distant. Shortest connection is not five miles across the sky. It is three miles down to earth and four miles through earth. How that connection is made without passing through a structure is called surge protection.

Third, no protector creates a layer of protection. With basic electrical engineering education, that should have been obvious. Above discussion about effective protection (how it is done in every facility that cannot have damage) obviously described the 'secondary' protection layer. Basic electrical knowledge means one knows where the 'primary' protection layer is. Every layer of protection is only defined by what does that protection - earth ground.

What has been described exists in every G-20 nation where damage cannot happen. Protection is always defined by the single point earth ground. Facilities that fail to implement it have ineffective protection. Even some codes only for human safety require it. Single point earth ground must exist to have appliance protection - today and well over 100 years ago.

Virtually every professional source defines each protection layer in terms of earth ground. For example, a case study for a Nebraska radio station even upgraded a utility pole's earth ground. Every protection layer is only defined by earth ground - never by a protector. Next post will demonstrate what informed physicists understood long ago and what engineers have always done to have effective protection.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2018 6:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
From an AT&T forum on "How can I protect my DSL/dialup equipment from surges?":
Quote:
Surge protection takes on many forms, but always involves the following components: Grounding bonding and surge protectors. ...

Grounding is required to provide the surge protector with a path to dump the excess energy to earth. A proper ground system is a mandatory requirement of surge protection. Without a proper ground, a surge protector has no way to disburse the excess energy and will fail to protect downstream equipment.

Bonding is required to electrically connect together the various grounds of the services entering the premises. Without bonding, a surge may still enter a premise after firing over a surge protector, which will attempt to pass the excess energy to its ground with any additional energy that the services surge protector ground cannot instantly handle, traveling into and through protected equipment, damaging that equipment in the process. ...

Now, if all the various service entrance grounds are bonded together there are no additional paths to ground through the premise. Even if all of the grounds cannot instantly absorb the energy, the lack of additional paths to ground through the premise prevents the excess energy from seeking out any additional grounds through that premise and the electronic equipment within. As such, the excess energy remains in the ground system until dissipated, sparing the protected equipment from damage. ...

By far, the whole house hardwired surge protectors provide the best protection. When a whole house primary surge protector is installed at the service entrance, it will provide a solid first line of defense against surges which enter from the power company's service entrance feed. These types of protectors can absorb/pass considerably more energy than any other type of protector, and if one does catastrophically fail, it will not typically be in a living space. ...

Plug in strip protectors are, at best, a compromise. At worst, they may cause more damage than they prevent. While they may do an acceptable job of handling hot to neutral surges, they do a poor job of handling any surge that must be passed to ground. ...

Then, to add insult to injury, some strip protectors add Telco and/or LAN surge protection within the same device, trying to be an all-in-one sale. Remember bonding? When Telco or LAN protection is added to a strip protector, if the premise ground, which is not designed to handle surges, cannot handle all of the energy, guess where that excess energy seeks out the additional grounds? You got it! The Telco and LAN connections now becomes the path, with disastrous results to those devices. ...

That author even discusses how plug-in (point of connection) protectors can even make damage easier.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
Physics and electrical engineer Olle P, can't you spot what is wrong even in these latest posts?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Klusu wrote:
Physics and electrical engineer Olle P, can't you spot what is wrong even in these latest posts?

Repetitive naysayer Klusu cannot and does not because his denials come from hearays - no knowledge. An engineer, who was doing this stuff, says what works, what is a scam, and says so by even citing specification numbers.

Industry professionals throughout the world note what is always required to make protection effective - earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Since that is where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate. The actual engineer (not an electrician) who does this stuff is again posting reasons why from well understood research:
https://www.reddit.com/r/crtgaming/comm ... t/dq8qkdf/

Another professional also says same:
Quote:
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.
A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. That has not changed in over 100 years. Electrical engineers know that. Naysayers do not.

So many naysayer posts that never once say WHY they disagree. Sounds like a well known politician who also is believed because he constantly lies.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 2:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
westom wrote:
Even Feynman's Lectures on Physics describes the relevant current paths. Charges in a cloud maybe three miles up must connect to charges on earth maybe four miles distant. Shortest connection is not five miles across the sky. It is three miles down to earth and four miles through earth.
Lightning wants to connect to the Earth. Any place will do. No reason to connect to the specific place four miles distant.
All places on the Earth are connected.
(I read Feynman's lecture on lightning. Interesting, thanks for the tip.)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 7:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Klusu wrote:
All places on the Earth are connected.

Apparently you also think electricity is same at both ends of a wire. Obviously it is not. Obviously all places on earth are not fully conductive.

A lightning strike to earth means nearby earth is quite charged. And earth miles away is not.

Lightning struck a tree. Some cows 10 meters away are killed. And no cows are killed (not even shocked) in the adjacent farm. Why? Because earth near that tree is not fully connected to earth in a nearby farm or in farms on other continents. Obvious all places on the Earth are not connected ... as mistakenly assumed.

Explained are basic surge protection concepts - especially the need for a single point earth ground - that are critical. You never knew any of them.

Why keep arguing? Basic knowledge, that would be known by one trained in physics or EE, is clearly not apparent. But knowledge of an electrician (or technician) is demonstrated. Electricians are taught that all earth is connected. Others, trained in the relevant science, know better. You do not even know what impedance is. Impedance is taught to first semester engineers. Since impedance is irrelevant to human safety codes, then electricians are not taught impedance. Impedance is essential to understanding surge protection.

Single point earth ground is critical because all earth is not sufficiently connected. Only electricians are told what you have posted. Because all earth is not connected, then a building with multiple earth ground can easily suffer surge damage.

A protector is only as effective as its low impedance connection to and quality of single point earth ground. That has not changed in over 100 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 8:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
westom wrote:
Shortest connection is not five miles across the sky. It is three miles down to earth and four miles through earth.
This implies hitting 4 miles away would be somehow a better connection, without current inside the Earth from there to here.
Tell some story about cows killed 4 miles away.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 8:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Klusu wrote:
Tell some story about cows killed 4 miles away.

Please read what is written; not what you want to see. Nobody said cows four miles away were killed. Another strawman is invented. And further suggests you do not have he education that was claimed. Please only read what is written; not what you want to see.

These stories are common. Far more relevant is why.

If I remember, Dr Copper from U of Illinois writes extensively about this. For example, some campers were sleeping near a lightning struck tree. Those who were sleeping pointed at that tree required evacuation to a hospital. Others who were sleeping tangential suffered no ill effects.

Because earth is not all connected, then lightning went down that tree, into earth, up via feet, through that body, and then down to earth via the head. The human body is a better conductor because earth is no all connected. Others sleeping tangential were not a better conductor; were not harmed.

All should have learned this. During a storm, keep feet together. Then a surge only has an incoming path; no outgoing path. If feet are apart, then incoming from earth on one foot and outgoing on the other. That earth between two feet is not that conductive as some only assume.

Anyone who has learned about surge protection would know earth is not a big capacitor.

Those examples also demonstrate why single point earth ground must be implemented to have effective protection.

A Florida home was repeatedly struck on one wall by lightning. Homeowner had lightning rods installed. Lightning struck that wall again. They also learned that earth is not all connected. That wall contained plumbing that connected to deeper (more conductive) limestone. Lightning simply found a better earth ground. Lightning rods were only earthed in sand.

Anyone who knows surge protection obviously know their solution. Those lightning rods were connected to longer electrodes that connected to deeper limestone. Then a best path to charges some four miles distant was harmlessly via lightning rods. Plumbing (and that wall) was not struck again.

Why did that house suffer so many more surges? Because geology at that location was different. That house became a better connection to earth and earthborne charges. Geology is a major factor when considering appliance risk from surges. Because earth is not all connected. Because earth varies significantly even in same neighborhoods.

Even geology says why some protectors do nothing useful. And why a properly earthed 'whole house' solution is essential. Only choose protectors that have that dedicated wire for the low impedance connection to earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Some of the least effective protectors are also the most expensive. And will not discuss earth ground.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
westom wrote:
Even Feynman's Lectures on Physics describes the relevant current paths. Charges in a cloud maybe three miles up must connect to charges on earth maybe four miles distant. Shortest connection is not five miles across the sky. It is three miles down to earth and four miles through earth.
What is the value of this text and what Feynman has to do with it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 6:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Klusu wrote:
What is the value of this text and what Feynman has to do with it?

What Feynman discusses was also discussed here. But again, you do not even read what is written. Instead you only read what you want to believe. Somehow confused is how lightning travels through earth (what Feynman discusses) with animals dying four miles away (that was never written).

OP has asked for hardware protection. But those many devices are only near zero protection. Others who know this stuff know that effective protection always answers this question: Where do hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate? Those tiny (near zero joule) devices will not even discuss that question. Even over 100 years ago, the answer was obvious and routinely implemented. Protectors are only connecting devices to what does that protection. Every layer of protection is always defined by a connection to and the quality of single point earth ground. Using concepts that educated physicists and and EE know. And that electricians are not taught.

PLease learn to read what is written. Feynman (and so many other professional organizations) also explains principles that apply to the OP's question and desired answer.

Each layer of protection is defined by how that current connects a cloud (maybe three miles up) to earthborne charges (maybe four miles distant). Either destructively though household appliances. Or harmlessly outside without being anywhere inside a building. A protector (just like a lightning rod) is only as effective as its earth ground.

OP best ignores those near zero protectors. Since others who want effective protection, instead, spend about $1 per protected appliance to properly earth one 'whole house' solution. Using numbers (repeatedly posted) that defines effective products provided by companies known for integrity.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 6:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 180
Location: Riga
westom wrote:
must connect to charges on earth
westom wrote:
earth is not a big capacitor.
Can you make both ends meet? "Charges" is a capacitor.

Edit:
This text above has no value. Many parts of your posts have no value, making your posts have no value. You have not answered any of my questions. You don't have knowledge even to grasp what it was I was asking.


Last edited by Klusu on Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Choosing surge protectors
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 6:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:20 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
Klusu wrote:
Can you make both ends meet? "Charges" is a capacitor.

How were campers harmed by a big capacitor? And why did others, located miles away, feel nothing? Why were cows ten meters from a struck tree killed? And none on that other farm felt anything?

Electricians are never taught these basic electrical concepts.

A large copper ground plate is one layer inside a computer's motherboard. Are voltages across that copper ground plate same? Of course not. Obviously not. Another example of what electricians are not taught because it is too complex (involves impedance that Klusu does not understand) and irrelevant to human safety codes.

Just like a motherboard's ground plane, voltages everywhere in earth vary significantly. Earth clearly clearly is not a big capacitor. But that is what we tell electricians since that is all they need know about electricity.

Connect a 200 watt transmitter to a long wire antenna. Touch one spot and feel no voltage. Touch another part of that same wire to feel over 100 volts. How can two completely different voltages exist in that same wire? Another basic electrical concept understood by engineers and completely unknown to electricians. So it is simplified for electricians. They are told earth is a big capacitor. It isn't. But is enough for an electrician.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group