How often does your 120 VAC exceed 300 volts? Every day?
Surge protector ignores anything less. Minor voltage
variations (see next paragraph for numbers) are less than what
appliances must withstand - as defined by industry standards.
Appliances already contain internal protection sufficient for
utility voltage variations. Internal protection that assumes
a destructive transient (typically once every eight years)
will be earthed before entering the building.
View numbers provided by Colon Terminus. 141 volts is
ignored by plug-in protectors. Let-through voltage that is
printed on every box! 300+ volts. Furthermore, 120 volt
appliances must work uninterrupted even when AC voltage drops
below 100 volts. Intel only specs what was defacto
requirement even 30 years ago. With maximum load of
peripherals, a 120 volt ATX power supply must work just fine
even when AC mains are only at 90 VAC. Colon Terminus
provides numbers that says appliance works uninterrupted - and
no surge exists. I love numbers because junk science reasoning
dies when numbers are provided. Colon Terminus demonstrates
voltage variations that are within appliance operation limits.
If suffering daily 'surges', then one is constantly
replacing furnace controls, clock radio, electronic timer
switch, motion detecting lights, microwave oven, etc. What
protects these appliances? Nothing. Therefore appliances are
damaged weekly? Of course not. Internal protection is
standard in appliances.
Also based only upon urban myths and junk science reasoning
is the idea that "... a surge protector ... did its job then
it took the bullet". Please first learn what a surge
protector does. It does not stop, block, or absorb surges -
as such speculation would have us believe. Effective
protector does not "take a bullet". Even manufacturer
datasheets don't make that claim. A protector that "takes a
bullet" was grossly undersized and operates in violation of
MOV manufacturer specifications - does not protect.
An incoming surge confronts computer and surge protector
simultaneously. That's right. Surge does not confront
protector first. A surge too small to damage computer
destroys the grossly undersized protector. What kind of
protection is that? Undersized, overpriced, and
ineffective. Surge protectors are effective when they are
not destroyed - properly designed and installed - when they
remain functional for the next transient.
After protector explodes, a human uses junk science
reasoning. He assumes protector protected his computer only
because it exploded. He recommends more of the grossly
undersized and overpriced protectors. IOW to increase sales
and to get junk scientists to promote their protector ---
manufacturer undersizes it. In the meantime, effective 'whole
house' protector do provide protection, are not destroyed, and
cost many times less money.
Effective protector earths the surge AND remains functional
for a next transient. A fully functional protector does its
job without human even knowing the surge existed.
Like the erroneous plug-in protector recommendation, we now
have more wild speculation - that "Power losses are often
accompanied by spikes and surges when power is restored."
Violation of reality. During reality, power restoration is
slow because virtually everything - all connected appliances -
are consuming maximum current. Again, the utility sees a
major surge in current (load) demand while consumer's
appliances only see a gentle voltage increase. That massive
load would literally quash any surge or spike. Reality: no
destructive surge or spike typically during power
restoration. But then if surge or spike existed, then a
'whole house' protector would make it irrelevant.
Surge protection is recommended by utilities and other
standards such as the CBEMA. Protection therefore is inside
the appliance. Protection that is dependent on a 'whole
house' protector so that internal protection is not
overwhelmed. 'Whole house' protector that costs about $1 per
protected appliance verses the $15 or $50 per appliance for
ineffective and overhyped plug-in protectors. Even costs say
the plug-in protector is ineffective.
Again, if freda suffered a surge, then she suffered hardware
damage; not corrupted or lost data.
BTW, the 'whole house' protector is a secondary protector.
Primary protection is provided by utility. Protection that
may be compromised. Pictures tell a disturbing story. A
story that one who recommends surge protectors (responsibly)
should understand:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html
But again, a protector is only as effective as its earth
ground. Just another engineering fact that says plug-in
protectors are ineffective.
