Lightning - funny how we're not seeing him any more

[Leythos]

Seems that after presenting the Lightning guru with factual situations
where a APC UPS did protect connected equipment while devices that were
connected to the same electrical outlet (not on the UPS) were damaged,
that he's got nothing to say now....

Don't get me wrong, I would never object to full-house protection, but his
assertions that UPS's provide no protection to connected devices is just
plain BS. I've personally seen devices protected during a storm while
others not on a UPS were damaged.

 

[namniar]

DON'T POKE THE BEAR!!! :-()

r.

 

[PA20Pilot]

Hi Leythos,

You trying to say you know more about the topic than he did?


---==X={}=X==---


Jim Self
AVIATION ANIMATION, the internet's largest depository.
http://avanimation.avsupport.com

Your only internet source for spiral staircase plans.
http://jself.com/stair/Stair.htm

Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA)
Technical Counselor

 

[Leythos]

Hi Leythos,

You trying to say you know more about the topic than he did?

I am NOT trying to say I have more technical information on the topic that
he does, nor am I trying to say that he's entirely wrong. As I tried to
make clear, his ranting about a UPS not providing any protection is
complete BS. Anyone, and there should be quite a few, that has both a UPS
and another device plugged into the same electrical outlet, that can see
(first hand, not through the story mill) where the non-protected device
was damaged and the protected devices were not damaged, can tell you he's
wrong.

We install computer systems ALL over the country in all sorts of
locations. I've never had a device on a UPS damaged, not once, and that
would be thousands of devices, yet, at the same time, I've seen many
non-protected devices damaged in those same installations.

That chap started the same rant in another group I read, same story about
how UPS's don't do anyone any good - I suspect he is just a troll or
someone that has no real-world experience under his belt.

 

[Michael W. Ryder]

I am NOT trying to say I have more technical information on the topic that
he does, nor am I trying to say that he's entirely wrong. As I tried to
make clear, his ranting about a UPS not providing any protection is
complete BS. Anyone, and there should be quite a few, that has both a UPS
and another device plugged into the same electrical outlet, that can see
(first hand, not through the story mill) where the non-protected device
was damaged and the protected devices were not damaged, can tell you he's
wrong.

We install computer systems ALL over the country in all sorts of
locations. I've never had a device on a UPS damaged, not once, and that
would be thousands of devices, yet, at the same time, I've seen many
non-protected devices damaged in those same installations.

I have also found that UPS systems can prevent a lot of hardware
failures even if the power does not go out. On a previous computer in
our office we had constant disk drive failures where one or more of the
boards had to be replaced.
Putting in a power isolator reduced the failures, but we had to put in a
full-time UPS to completely eliminate the problems. After it was
installed our downtime went from a day or more a month to zero. No
whole house ground would have fixed the problem.
Our office is located near a number of industrial businesses and the use
of their equipment was affecting our power just enough to damage the
electronics in the drives but not be noticeable.

 

[w_tom]

Somehow Leythos again just knows that "a UPS not providing
any protection is complete BS." His proof? Two letters:
BS. He also lied about having an EE degree in the discussion
entitled "Lightning and computer?" that started 20 April
2005. He claimed an EE degree but did not even know the
difference between resistance and impedance - a concept taught
to 1st year EE students. One glaring word: credibility.

So we asked Leythos how he knows that UPS provided such
protection. Where is the numerical spec from that APC UPS that
even claims protection? After maybe 10 requests; he provided
zero numbers. Somehow he just knows - just like his EE
degree.

That UPS provides protection from blackouts and brownouts -
as it numerical specs claim. But Leythos knows better. He
plugs equipment all over the country. Therefore he knows that
UPSes provide that hardware protection; and need not know
why. His proof? He posts words such as BS and ranting.
Insults are sufficient to prove he superiority. Numbers are
for others who waste time learning technology before
recommending solutions.

No earth ground (such as with that plug-in UPS) means no
effective protection. Even the UPS manufacturer does not
claim to provide that protection. A fact that Leythos
outrightly denies? A protector is only as effective as its
earth ground. His reply. More insults - and pretend no one
asked for those numbers. He has a mythical EE degree.

He once suffered damage. Therefore he is an expert. It's
called "junk science". Junk scientist will never provide
numbers. Some may even claim to have an EE degree. Why do we
know? He replies with personal insults - and no numbers. He
has no technical knowledge. He even tried to claim the UPS
protected equipment on his phone line. Somehow he just knows
and we have no right to understand why.

 

[Leythos]

So we asked Leythos how he knows that UPS provided such
protection. Where is the numerical spec from that APC UPS that even
claims protection? After maybe 10 requests; he provided zero numbers.
Somehow he just knows - just like his EE degree.

Look Tom, I didn't read into your message properly and incorrectly
responded about impedance and resistance as I only take about half of
anything you say seriously anyway.

What you continue to FAIL TO ADDRESS is that simple example I provided:

Two devices connected to the same electrical outlet, one a UPS with
sensitive devices connected to it, the other a radio. During a storm with
lightning the radio was damaged (as was other devices not on any form of
UPS), but the devices on the UPS were undamaged.

There's not rocket science to it, it's not even personal, it's a
real-world experience (actually many experiences like it in residential
and commercial and industrial locations) that indicate a UPS provides for
surge protection of devices connected to it.

Now, before you rant off again, explain how devices connected to the same
electrical outlet, not on a UPS are damaged and those connected to the UPS
on the same outlet remained undamaged?

 

[Triffid]

Now, before you rant off again, explain how devices connected to the same
electrical outlet, not on a UPS are damaged and those connected to the UPS
on the same outlet remained undamaged?

Easily explained - while consuming less bandwidth than w_tom will

Lightning *always* takes the 'easiest' path to ground. You have observed
cases where a UPS presented a 'harder' path, so the surge went through
the 'unprotected' equipment.

w_tom is right - if you have a perfect grounding system, you have no
need for additional protection. And you are right - in the real world of
imperfect grounding systems, a UPS will often cause the surge to take
another path, but not always, and if everything is on a UPS...

Triffid

 

[Leythos]

Easily explained - while consuming less bandwidth than w_tom will

Lightning *always* takes the 'easiest' path to ground. You have observed
cases where a UPS presented a 'harder' path, so the surge went through
the 'unprotected' equipment.

You could also suggest that the UPS Protected the equipment as there were
many instances in the same office were only the UPS protected devices
remained undamaged.

w_tom is right - if you have a perfect grounding system, you have no
need for additional protection. And you are right - in the real world of
imperfect grounding systems, a UPS will often cause the surge to take
another path, but not always, and if everything is on a UPS...

I've never said his technical information about whole-house grounding was
wrong, in fact, in one reply I agreed with it. What I completely disagree
with, with physical examples to the contrary, is his assertion that a UPS
(and he can look up the specs at APC any time he wants) does NOT protect
anything.

 

[w_tom]

Leythos even claimed a 'whole house' protector contributed
to damage. Now he says otherwise. Which is it? The 'whole
house' protector does provide protection or it contributed to
electronics damage?

Leythos should read with care. The UPS claims to protect
from types of transients that are typically not destructive.
UPS does claim to protect from something. But anything
effective inside that UPS is already accomplished inside the
adjacent appliance. Somehow, Leythos dumbs this down and
distorts reality into "a UPS does NOT protect anything." That
distortion is only posted by Leythos.

If Leythos understood that APC UPS spec - and posted it -
then he could not twist reality into distortions. Ahhh ...
but that means he must first learn the numbers. Numbers are
what junk scientists fear to touch. It's just easier to
misrepresent what others have repeatedly posted.

 

[Michael W. Ryder]

Leythos even claimed a 'whole house' protector contributed
to damage. Now he says otherwise. Which is it? The 'whole
house' protector does provide protection or it contributed to
electronics damage?

Leythos should read with care. The UPS claims to protect
from types of transients that are typically not destructive.
UPS does claim to protect from something. But anything
effective inside that UPS is already accomplished inside the
adjacent appliance.

If I understand your statements above you are saying that a device
attached to a UPS will protect itself from damage as well as an attached
UPS. Is my understanding correct? If it is, you are dead wrong.
I know from experience that a UPS can prevent damage to devices attached
to it. In our case the failures on hard drive electronics went from at
least once a month to zero after we placed the drives on a UPS. In our
area there are a number of industrial concerns. The use of some of
their equipment affected the power to our building enough to stress the
drive electronics, but only enough to maybe cause the florescent lights
to flicker.


Somehow, Leythos dumbs this down and

 

[Leythos]

Leythos even claimed a 'whole house' protector contributed
to damage. Now he says otherwise. Which is it? The 'whole house'
protector does provide protection or it contributed to electronics
damage?

Tom, now I'm sure you're just a troll. I've never claimed, not in any
post, that "whole house" protection was a bad idea, never claimed that it
could cause problems, never disputed your information on Whole House
protection. The only issue I have with your ranting is that you constantly
claim that a UPS does not provide surge protection.

[snip more drivel]

If Leythos understood that APC UPS spec - and posted it -
then he could not twist reality into distortions. Ahhh ... but that
means he must first learn the numbers. Numbers are what junk scientists
fear to touch. It's just easier to misrepresent what others have
repeatedly posted.

I don't fear anything, least of all a troll, but you can't EVER seem to
address the fact that I have (in addition to others) experienced where a
UPS has protected devices on the same outlet that non-ups devices were
damaged. How come you never want to address this? What are you afraid of?

So, please explain how the UPS that protected the devices during a
storm/surge were not really protected while the unprotected devices were
damaged. Come on, I'm sure you'll snip that part too.

 

[Leythos]

If I understand your statements above you are saying that a device
attached to a UPS will protect itself from damage as well as an attached
UPS. Is my understanding correct? If it is, you are dead wrong. I know
from experience that a UPS can prevent damage to devices attached to it.

This is EXACTLY what he states in his rantings - that a UPS will not
protect you from storm surges UNLESS you have a "whole house" grounding
system, and once you have a "whole house" grounding system you don't need
the surge protection of a UPS.

He's very careful to NEVER ADDRESS anything posted by people that have
seen, in person/first hand, where a device connected to an outlet is
damaged during a electrical storm, but the devices connected to the UPS
that is also connected to the SAME outlet have remained undamaged.

In our case the failures on hard drive electronics went from at least
once a month to zero after we placed the drives on a UPS. In our area
there are a number of industrial concerns. The use of some of their
equipment affected the power to our building enough to stress the drive
electronics, but only enough to maybe cause the florescent lights to
flicker.

I can watch the power swings on strip recorder, watch spikes, even watch
high-freq injection in AC lines, and the good quality APC units will
remove almost all of it, in addition to storm surges. I should mention
that none of these locations had "Whole House" grounding system, that my
own home doesn't, and that we've never lost a device connected to a
quality UPS.

He pulled this same crap in another group, where he ranted for days and
snipped/refused to address others with experiences like your/mine, and
then faded away. I think he googles for places that are talking about
power issues just so that he can talk with people, even if he's trolling.

 

[w_tom]

Leythos logic will prove that a TV was protected but an
adjacent VCR was damaged.

Two devices connected to the same electric receptacle; a VCR
and a TV. During a storm with lightning the VCR was damaged,
but the adjacent device - a TV - was not damaged. Paraphrased
right out of the Leythos post quoted below. How could this
be? Why did a TV survive without the UPS? Same event that
Leythos posted for a damaged radio and a computer on UPS.
Replace 'radio' with VCR. Replace 'computer' with TV. Exact
same conclusion. Only one thing is missing. The UPS.
Clearly this is proof that a "missing UPS" protected the TV -
using Leythos logic.

Same logic that said a UPS protected the computer also
proves that a "missing UPS" protected the TV.

Leythos has no idea why some items are damaged and others
not. Leythos saw a UPS and therefore *knows* the UPS must have
provided protection. UPS must have provided protection even
though its manufacturer does not even make that claim.

This same Leythos tried to claim an EE degree ... until he
accidentally admitted no comprehension of impedance and
resistance. He did not even know what a 1st year EE student
learns. However he still knows all about protection because
of his one assumption: a plug-in UPS could have protected
that computer. Therefore the UPS must have protect that
computer. Leythos logic.

Using same Leythos logic, a "missing UPS" also protected a
TV. A miracle device. Spend no money for a "missing UPS" to
get superior protection. I saved so much money using Leythos
logic. I wonder why they never taught us Leythos logic in
engineering school?

One fact that Leythos never learned: protector (such as that
UPS) is only as effective as its earth ground. But that means
reading manufacturer specs and numbers. That means learning
EE concepts rather than speculating.

Leythos did learn something. He posted something technical,
and got caught lying. The reason why he just knew? He
claimed he had an EE degree. Better to simply claim a UPS
protected that computer and never say why. The naive will
always believe that logic. Better to just claim mental
superiority by insulting others. But how will he explain the
"missing UPS" that protected a TV? Leythos will post more
insults.

Unfortunately for some, insults do prove a point. My
question for the lurker. Do you seek posts that provide
technical facts and the numbers - or do you believe one who
insults to prove his point (and lies about an EE degree).
Which makes more sense. Insult from Leythos. Or the mockery
of Leythos logic demonstrated by protection from a "missing
UPS".

The tale of a "missing UPS" protector asks you, the
lurker, about his credibility. He claims a UPS does even what
its own manufacturer will not claim. But then he has an EE
degree <g>.

Leythos is a poster boy for those who recommend ineffective
plug-in protectors. These electronics salesmen will say
anything to make that sale. Even claim an EE degree.

 

[w_tom]

So the person who even lied about having an EE degree will
decree how that UPS stopped what three miles of sky could
not? It will do what the manufacturer does not even claim?
Of course. Leythos said so. It must be true.

Leythos then procedes to post more insults so that we will
fail to notice the bottom line. He still posts no numbers.
He still claims that UPS did what even its manufacturer does
not claim.

What every lurker must remember is that Leythos once tried
to make a technical claim AND tried to claim he had an EE
degree. But he did not even notice the difference between
impedance and resistance - a first year EE course. So
whenever he is cornered by a demand for numbers, he instead
posts insult. It works because so many see the insults and
forget about those demands for numbers.

This is the question a lurker must ask. Will you believe
the electronic salesman who lied about an EE degree and who
fears to even post those UPS specs? Or the EE who was doing
this stuff before Leythos even existed? The engineer who even
designed some of thise stuff, who first learned why things
fail by replacing transistors, and who built electronic
protection circuits says Leythos is lying. That is the extent
of my personal insult vocabulary. Leythos lies. When caught
in a lie, he then used personal insults to accuse the other.
This post not to change Leythos mind. That is impossible.
This post again to warn the lurker about outright liars such a
Leythos - who even lied about having an EE degree and who will
not even apologize for that lie.

 

[Michael W. Ryder]

So the person who even lied about having an EE degree will
decree how that UPS stopped what three miles of sky could
not? It will do what the manufacturer does not even claim?
Of course. Leythos said so. It must be true.

Leythos then procedes to post more insults so that we will
fail to notice the bottom line. He still posts no numbers.
He still claims that UPS did what even its manufacturer does
not claim.

What every lurker must remember is that Leythos once tried
to make a technical claim AND tried to claim he had an EE
degree. But he did not even notice the difference between
impedance and resistance - a first year EE course. So
whenever he is cornered by a demand for numbers, he instead
posts insult. It works because so many see the insults and
forget about those demands for numbers.

I don't know if you are referring to me as the "lurker" or not, but I
have yet to see any thing in your posts that I would trust by itself.
Trusting in only one form of protection is like protecting your house
with a guard dog. Yes, it might work a lot of the time, but there are
times when locks or alarms are also prudent. My own experiences (over
40 years with electronics starting with tubes and mechanical relays) is
that a UPS has its place. It is not the only form of protection, but
neither is a whole house ground, or an isolator.
Our company had both of those installed by electricians (some of who
worked with the major Strip hotels) and these devices only alleviated
part of the power "ripple" we were seeing. A UPS was also necessary to
clean up the power enough that the fragile electronics (discrete
transistors) on the $25,000+ disk drives were not damaged.

This is the question a lurker must ask. Will you believe
the electronic salesman who lied about an EE degree and who
fears to even post those UPS specs? Or the EE who was doing
this stuff before Leythos even existed? The engineer who even
designed some of thise stuff, who first learned why things
fail by replacing transistors, and who built electronic
protection circuits says Leythos is lying. That is the extent
of my personal insult vocabulary. Leythos lies. When caught
in a lie, he then used personal insults to accuse the other.
This post not to change Leythos mind. That is impossible.
This post again to warn the lurker about outright liars such a
Leythos - who even lied about having an EE degree and who will
not even apologize for that lie.

And yet, I have Never seen any proof offered by you as to your
qualifications. Usually when I make a choice I listen to all sides of
the question, regardless of the qualifications of the proponents, and
then make my choice.

 

[Leythos]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:13:21 -0400, w_tom wrote:
[snipped drivel again]

Using same Leythos logic, a "missing UPS" also protected a
TV. A miracle device. Spend no money for a "missing UPS" to
get superior protection. I saved so much money using Leythos
logic. I wonder why they never taught us Leythos logic in
engineering school?

One fact that Leythos never learned: protector (such as that
UPS) is only as effective as its earth ground. But that means
reading manufacturer specs and numbers. That means learning
EE concepts rather than speculating.

[snipped drivel again]

I see you're still not addressing the question I posted to you, completely
ignoring the scenario that I put before you about the UPS's and real-world
examples. What are you afraid of - the numbers?

 

[Leythos]

[snipped w_tom's drivel]

I don't know if you are referring to me as the "lurker" or not, but I
have yet to see any thing in your posts that I would trust by itself.
Trusting in only one form of protection is like protecting your house
with a guard dog. Yes, it might work a lot of the time, but there are
times when locks or alarms are also prudent. My own experiences (over
40 years with electronics starting with tubes and mechanical relays) is
that a UPS has its place. It is not the only form of protection, but
neither is a whole house ground, or an isolator. Our company had both of
those installed by electricians (some of who worked with the major Strip
hotels) and these devices only alleviated part of the power "ripple" we
were seeing. A UPS was also necessary to clean up the power enough that
the fragile electronics (discrete transistors) on the $25,000+ disk
drives were not damaged.

This is the question a lurker must ask. Will you believe
the electronic salesman who lied about an EE degree and who fears to
even post those UPS specs? Or the EE who was doing this stuff before
Leythos even existed? The engineer who even designed some of thise
stuff, who first learned why things fail by replacing transistors, and
who built electronic protection circuits says Leythos is lying. That
is the extent of my personal insult vocabulary. Leythos lies. When
caught in a lie, he then used personal insults to accuse the other.
This post not to change Leythos mind. That is impossible. This post
again to warn the lurker about outright liars such a Leythos - who even
lied about having an EE degree and who will not even apologize for that
lie.

And yet, I have Never seen any proof offered by you as to your
qualifications. Usually when I make a choice I listen to all sides of
the question, regardless of the qualifications of the proponents, and
then make my choice.

Unfortunately he's not going to really identify himself, trolls don't do
that. What he can't, and won't address, is that a quality UPS, properly
installed in a home or business, WILL protect the equipment connected to
it. I've seen it happen (which he won't address), and many others have
seen it happen.

I was doing work at a shipping facility in Oregon in the late 90's. We had
all sorts of storms (electrical) in the area, use to see lightning hit the
large cranes from time to time, once in a while we would get a hit on a
conveyor or building lightning rods (it's really a spectacular sight to
see a strike). The facility, before my team arrived to modernize the
control systems, experienced many device failures each year, and it was
always after/during a storm, never on a bright sunny day. One of the first
things we did was install APC UPS units at each computer/PLC system and
for all networking hardware. It's been about 8 years now and we've not had
one report in all that time of another failure of UPS protected during a
storm - imagine that.

what Tom can't understand is that with all of his day, and it looks good,
is that a simple UPS also provides protection to down-stream devices. To
me, it would seem obvious that he's one of those paper-only technical
types with no real experience in the field, or just a almost clever Usenet
Troll.

 

[w_tom]

I referred to lurkers: people who read and don't
participate. What was posted in reply to Leythos is only for
their benefit.

Now for a typical plug-in UPS. It claims protection from
two of five types of power problems - blackouts and extreme
brownouts. Neither will damage properly constructed
electronic hardware. As noted, other electrical problems are
better solved elsewhere and by other devices. For example, a
modest brownout where incandescent bulbs dim to 50% intensity:
a problem made completely irrelevant by 'protection' already
inside a minimally acceptable computer power supply. Even
Intel specs make this obvious. A computer that does not power
up everything even when lights are only at 50% intensity
violates even Intel power supply requirements.

For transient protection: single point earth ground. A
solution located elsewhere. Anything additional is effective
only if a transient is connected less than 10 feet to that
earth ground. Furthermore, a power cord 'isolator' does not
exist. The green safety ground wire makes such isolation
impossible.

As for ripple, well, a protector is not for such trivial
voltages. On 120 volt service, the protect does zilch until
that 'ripple' increases to 300+ volts. 300+ volts is far above
'ripple' voltages. Ripple being variations of single digit or
tens of volts. But then, this 'ripple' must be eliminated in
any minimally acceptable power supply. An expression
carefully worded because many 'clone' computers don't have
minimally acceptable power supplies. A problem created by
many computer assemblers who don't even have basic electrical
knowledge.

Of course, the numbers posted above should even be provided
in specs for those products and in corresponding standards.
Above concepts are so basic as to be common knowledge among
those with basic technical experience. Those numbers, such as
let-through voltage and normal operating voltage limits, are
even printed on the devices. A messenger need not have any
credibility because those are numbers required to be printed
on the corresponding appliance or protector.

So what does a UPS 'clean'? What does it do? The plug-in
UPS connects computer directly to AC mains when not in power
supply mode. In battery backup mode, plug-in UPS exposes
computer to some of the 'dirtiest' electricity. For example,
a UPS in battery backup mode creates a "modified sine wave"
120 volt AC that is ... two 200 volt square waves with up to a
270 volt spike between those square waves. Is that a sine
wave? Yes. A modified sine wave.

So where is this 'clean' electricity? That 'dirty' battery
backup electricity is still more than clean enough for
computers.

Again, the plug-in UPS outputs a 'clean' sine wave when not
in battery backup mode. Why? It connects computer directly
to AC mains. You can see this on any oscilloscope. Again,
you are expected not to take my word for it. You are expected
to confirm this yourself. Numbers were provided so that you
can even see this yourself.

Other more expensive UPSes do additional functions. A line
interactive UPS would cost $500+. A serious UPS (that even
provides transient protection) is a building wide system
installed back at the breaker box (with a less than 10 foot
connection to earth ground). If you have $25,000 of disk
drives, then you probably has a building wide UPS that
includes many times more functions than found in a plug-in
protector. For example, that building wide UPS may even
address harmonic problems. No plug-in UPS even mentions such
solutions. Your solution would not be a $100 'computer
grade' UPS. Computer grade? It can output a modified sine
wave that may harm electric motors but is sufficient to power
computers. Why? Because computers are more resilient.

Sidebar: we were trying to remember the vacuum tubes used in
virtually all AM radios. We remembered 35W4 and 50C5. Do you
remember the other three vacuum tube part numbers for the RF
amp, IF amp, and detector?

 

[NobodyMan]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:13:21 -0400, w_tom wrote:
[snipped drivel again]

Using same Leythos logic, a "missing UPS" also protected a
TV. A miracle device. Spend no money for a "missing UPS" to
get superior protection. I saved so much money using Leythos
logic. I wonder why they never taught us Leythos logic in
engineering school?

One fact that Leythos never learned: protector (such as that
UPS) is only as effective as its earth ground. But that means
reading manufacturer specs and numbers. That means learning
EE concepts rather than speculating.

[snipped drivel again]

I see you're still not addressing the question I posted to you, completely
ignoring the scenario that I put before you about the UPS's and real-world
examples. What are you afraid of - the numbers?

This is a very enjoyable argument, but as a disinterested third party,
I have to say that w_tom is definitely blowing away Leythos. He is
posting sound facts, while Leythos is posting anectdotal facts.

Keep it up! I love good entertainment!