Surge / Ground / Lightning
in [Home Built PC]
|
From: w_tom on 4 May 2008 22:11 On May 4, 9:57 pm, bud-- <remove.budn...(a)isp.com> wrote: > Bud has provided 2 sources that directly contradict Phil. (Of course > they are not as smart as Phil.) > > Phil has provided no sources to support Phil's Phantasy Physics. Every Bud citations contradicts Bud's claims. So Bud must do what those without knowledge do - post insults. Bud claims his plug-in protectors provide complete protection. Good. Bud can post those manufacture spec numbers that list each type of surge and protection from that surge. Oh. 400 requests and Bud still cannot provide any specs? So Bud must post insults. How to identify the liar - who does exactly what Rush Limbaugh does? He posts no facts (no manufacturer spec numbers) and his posts are only insults. Bud posts only insults. That says Bud lies (and that he has not technical facts). But then profits are at risk. That justifies anything.
From: w_tom on 4 May 2008 22:16 On May 3, 4:16 am, bud-- <remove.budn...(a)isp.com> wrote: > ... > And you are again discounting a guide written by experts, peer reviewed > by experts, published by the IEEE, and aimed at technical people. You > apparently think electrical engineers are idiots. Where you disagree > with the guide you have not cited a source that supports your belief. > ... > Francois Martzloff was the surge guru at the NIST and has many published > papers on surges and suppression. Both of Bud's citations - guides for laymen - describe how a plug-in protector can work AND how such devices can even create appliance damage. Both state what an effective protector needs - short connection to earth ground. Both state why a protector without earthing can even contribute to appliance damage. Even Martzloff is quite blunt about this. Bud quotes from Martzloff selectively. Meanwhile this conclusion is so fundamental that Martzloff makes it the first point in his IEEE paper: > Conclusion: > 1) Quantitative measurements in the Upside-Down house clearly > show objectionable difference in reference voltages. These occur > even when or perhaps because, surge protective devices are > present at the point of connection of appliances. A plug-in (point of connection) protector can contribute to appliance damage. Every Bud citation says that. Even Martzloff says that. Why do professionals routinely install 'whole house' type protectors instead of plug-in protectors? "Objectionable difference in voltages ... [when] protective devices are ... at the point of connection". Industry professionals note this problem with plug-in protectors. Also are those 'scary pictures of plug-in protectors located where fire hazards are greater. Bud conveniently ignores all that. Profits are at risk.
From: w_tom on 4 May 2008 22:34 On May 4, 9:14 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > Bullshit. Transmitters get knocked off the air, and the anteanna > grounding systems are damaged from repeated strikes. Onece again, you > are blowing smoke. People who are more than TV repairmen learn from their mistakes and correct reasons for that failure. TV repairmen only fix defects - never bother to learn how those failures can be avoided. Let's have some fun. Let's reply using the same mockery and insult that Michael uses. Except this post will be accurate about Michaels intelligence. Others who bother to learn discover what happens when a radio station repeatedly gets knocked off the air. Eventually that station engineer may hire someone who knows more than a TV repairman. What was the solution to so much radio station damage? They fixed mistakes made by a naive station engineer. They installed and upgreaded earthing. No more lightning damage. Michael will deny reality because Michael knows without first learning facts. Others can learn what Michael Terrell denies. Lightning need not cause damage when one thinks, instead, like an engineer. Michael Terrell who learned to think like and engineer - not like the technician - would know this. Radio station repeatedly damaged. Then they finally admited that failure is not acceptable: http://www.copper.org/applications/electrical/pq/casestudy/nebraska.html > Based on a belief that "too much" grounding was attracting > lightning strikes, grounding connections on the tower's six > sets of guy wires had been disconnected sometime in the > past (Figure 4). This action may, in fact, have helped direct > lightning discharge current down the antenna tower itself, > bringing the strike closer to the studio/transmitter building. Why did the station engineer make damage easier? He could not bother to learn about stuff even published in QST magazine - the ham radio operator's magazine. Why does Michael Terrell deny this? He is a technician - a TV repairman. His posts attack the messenger rather than address technology. Michael Terrell is correct. Some stations are knocked off the air by lightning. Those with informed station engineers correct the defect - learn from their mistakes and eliminate future failures. Michael Terrell's attitude declares failure as acceptable. But then Michael Terrell could not think like an engineer which is why he also could never be promoted above enlistedman.
From: w_tom on 6 May 2008 21:57 On May 6, 10:22 am, Eric <m...(a)nomail.com> wrote: > I can attest to vhf/uhf content in lightning strikes. I worked for a > communications outfit. We owned and maintained a number of comm sites > with towers and antennas. One strike on an antenna destroyed the LDF rf > cable all the way to the polyphaser at the bottom of the tower. Eric notes damage only up to the earthed Polyphaser protector. Polyphaser is legendary among professionals who install effective protection. Polyphaser is blunt about what provides protection - why their products are so effective. Polyphaser protectors are earthed. Polyphaser application notes repeatedly discuss what their products must connect to; what provides protection: earth ground: http://www.polyphaser.com/technical_notes.aspx
From: G-squared on 4 May 2008 22:52
On May 4, 9:24 am, "Tantalust" <Tantal...(a)paradise.net> wrote: > "w_tom" <w_t...(a)usa.net> wrote in message <snip> > > We earth a 'whole house' protector AND connect all protectors short > > (ie 'less than 10 feet') to single point earth ground so that > > protection inside all appliances is not overwhelmed. Simple stuff > > that so confused trader. trader *assumed* MOVs rather than read what > > was posted. trader again demonstrates insufficient technical > > kowledge justifies his mockery and insult. Mythical MOV inside > > appliances demonstrate that trader only reads what he wants to see; > > not what is posted. > > > MOVs inside appliances is another trader myth. Had trader read what > > was posted or learned technology, then trader would not invent > > fictional MOVs inside appliances. > > Why do you have this pompous attitude; constantly sermonizing down to people > as if they're your little, personal kindergarten class? > > You read sometimes like one of those old children's "Golden Books". Hey, I LIKED reading Golden Books to my kids. They didn't like W-TOMs posts at all. GG |