w_tom wrote:
For accurate information on surges and surge protection read:
http://omegaps.com/Lightning Guide_FINALpublishedversion_May051.pdf
- "How to protect your house and its contents from lightning: IEEE guide
for surge protection of equipment connected to AC power and
communication circuits" published by the IEEE in 2005 (the IEEE is the
dominant organization of electrical and electronic engineers in the US).
And/or:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
- "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to protect the
appliances in your home" published by the US National Institute of
Standards and Technology in 2001
The IEEE guide is aimed at those with some technical background. The
NIST guide is aimed at the unwashed masses.
Appreciate why lightning may have found a path to earth via your
modem. First some facts that you may not know and that Paul clearly
does not know.
As Paul correctly indicates, All wires to a computer must be protected.
All interconnected equipment needs to be connected to the same plug-in
suppressor, or interconnecting wires need to go through the suppressor.
External connections, like phone, also need to go through the
suppressor. Connecting all wiring through the suppressor prevents
damaging voltages between power and signal wires. These multiport
suppressors are described in both guides.
According to NIST guide, US insurance information indicates equipment
most frequently damaged by lightning is
computers with a modem connection
TVs, VCRs and similar equipment (presumably with cable TV
connections).
All can be damaged by high voltages between power and signal wires.
Lightning would not enter on phone line. Why would a surge seek
earth ground via phone line when telco protector has already connected
lightning to earth?
A example in the IEEE guide, starting pdf page 40, shows a surge coming
in on a cable service. The same could happen with phone. In the
illustration the cable entry is too far from the power service (common
in many homes). As a result, the ‘ground’ wire from the cable entry
block to the power service earth wire is too long. Wires must be kept
short so the ‘ground’ for the power, cable, phone, ... are at the same
potential during a surge. (The guide says that with the ‘ground’ wire
too long "the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a
multiport protector.")
Paul has assumed a protector will somehow stop or absorb what three
miles of sky could not. He has assumed protectors are some kind of
'magic box' protecting device.
They are ‘magic boxes’ to w_ because he cannot figure out how they work.
Where does that protector discuss earthing?
w_ has a religious belief (immune from challenge) that surge protection
must use earthing. Thus in his view plug-in suppressors (which are not
well earthed) can not possibly work. The IEEE guide explains plug-in
suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires (signal and power)
to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in suppressors do not work
primarily by earthing (or stopping or absorbing). The guide explains
earthing occurs elsewhere. (Read the guide starting pdf page 40).
Where does it cite each type of surge and protection
from that surge?
"Each type of surge" is complete nonsense. Plug-in suppressors have
MOVs (protective elements) from H-G, N-G, H-N. That is all possible
combinations and all possible surges.
Cable and telco installed protector both
must be earthed to the same grounding electrode. Same solution also
applies to AC electric.
Not only the same electrode. The connection from phone, cable,... entry
protectors to the earth wire at the power service must be short to
prevent the voltage differences in the illustration above. (This is
called a ‘single point ground’.)
Protector is only as effective as its earth ground. "Magic box'
solutons hope you never learn that. No earth ground (ie Tripplite)
means no effective protection.
The statement of religious belief in earthing. Everyone is for earthing.
The only question is whether plug-in suppressors work. Both the NIST and
IEEE guides say they are effective.
There are 98,615,938 other web sites, including 13,843,032 by lunatics,
and w_ can't find another lunatic that says plug-in suppressors are NOT
effective. All you have is w_'s opinions based on his religious belief
in earthing.
Never answered by w_:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?
Read the reviews for