The only thing I really disagree with you on is that surge protectors, and
here I'm implicitly refering to the common ones that the average person can
buy, do not need earth ground to protect against your average surge and
minimize damage to the device connected. It greatly minimizes the damage to
devices connected compared to not having anything at all(Even if you have
earth ground).
You have assumed the only surge protector available to a layman is
power strip (plug-in) type. A layman must buy multiple plug-in
protectors sold by less responsible companies such as Tripplite,
Belkin, APC, Monster Cable, etc. for much more money. Or a layman can
purchase one effective protector sold by well respected companies.
Names understood by any guy who visit electrical supply departments
even in Lowes or Home Depot. Effective protector with a dedicated
earth ground is sold to layman by GE, Siemens, Cutler-Hammer,
Intermatic, Leviton, Square D and others.
An effective protector costs tens (maybe 100) times less money per
protected appliance. That 'so expensive' plug-in protector can even
contribute to damage of an adjacent appliance. No earth ground means
it must earth that surge somewhere. Published is this very first
conclusion in one 1996 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.
Which one of us traced a surge destructively through a plug-in
protector; earthed that surge, destructively, through adjacent
computers. BTW, that plug-in protector did what its numerical
specifications claim. I and this IEEE author witnessed the same
problem.
Again you have assumed only one kind of surge - the one that is not
typically destructive. Again, you are ignoring what the typically
destructive surge seeks - earth ground. Again, you are ignoring wire
impedance - or why that earthing connection must be so short. Again,
where is the surge energy dissipated?
What happens if that plug-in protector grounds a surge on neutral
wire? A transient is then induced on all other adjacent wires - more
transients inside a building. Where is the protection? Just another
reason why the plug-in solution is ineffective.
Nothing new here. What is required for surge protection was well
proven even 80 years ago. The principles are based in what Ben
Franklin demonstrated in 1752. Protection without earthing was not
effective. Ham radio operators would even disconnect antenna leads,
put that connector inside a mason jar, and still suffer damage. When
did the damage stop? When the antenna was earthed. Why? Effective
surge protection is always about earthing surges.
Does your telco install plug-in protectors adjacent to their $multi-
million switching computers? Of course not. Your telco does not
waste money on ineffective and grossly expensive devices. Your telco
installs protectors to be more effective AND cost less money. To make
protection even better, your telco installs a better earthing system.
Better earthing makes better protectors.
Jon. You claim earthing is not essential? Why is earthing THE most
critical part of every protection system including your telco's surge
protection? They don't shutdown for every thunderstorm. They cannot
suffer surge damage. Their computer is connected to overhead wires
all over town. Each thunderstorm may result in 100 surges. Why does
the telco not suffer damage? Their protectors connect as short as
possible to earth ground. Tto make that protection even better, a
telco wants that protector up to 50 meters distant from electronics.
Appreciate the separation that also makes a protector more effective.
Short to earth ground and separated from electronics means better
protection. How curious. Homeowners can obtain same protection in
one 'whole house' protector with proper earthing. What follows are
example after example; what both professionals and experience teach.
In literally every IEEE paper on surge protection, what is always
required? Earth ground. How did van der Laan and Deursen correct
surge damage in a nuclear hardened, Norwegian, maritime radio station
in their 1998 IEEE paper? They fixed the earthing. They corrected
how protectors were earthed.
How did another construct a radio station so as to not suffer damage
from direct lightning strikes?
http://scott-inc.com/html/ufer.htm
The NIST defines what a protector does on page 6 (Adobe page 8 of
24) .
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
You cannot really suppress a surge altogether, nor
"arrest" it. What these protective devices do is
neither suppress nor arrest a surge, but simply
divert it to ground, where it can do no harm.
Another professional with decades of experience describes
protection:
http://www.harvardrepeater.org/news/lightning.html
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.
Jon - how many decades ago were you building these systems; learning
from experience? How many decades ago were you tracing surge damage
by even replacing semiconductors to make electronics completely
functional? You claim we all have been wrong all this time? You did
not even know about wire impedance - why the earthing wire must be so
short, no sharp bends, separated from other wires (which is why the
ground or neutral wire inside Romex is not sufficient for earthing),
no splices, not inside metallic conduit, etc. Why do we know about
things so important for earthing? Do you even know why that wire must
not be inside metallic conduit?
How many semesters did you take in Electromagnetic Wave Theory?
Jon. Again I appreciate your spirit. But your analysis completely
ignores fundamental electrical concepts. Do you know why wire inside
conduit makes a bad surge conductor? You did not even answer this
question - where does surge energy get dissipated? If not earth, then
where?
You have recommended protection from one type of transient that is
made irrelevant by standard electronic designs. Where is surge
energy dissipated? Earth ground is where that energy is dissipated
without damage.
How did Orange Country stop surge damage to their emergency response
facilities? Did they install plug-in protectors? Of course not.
Orange County fixed their earthing systems - nothing more:
http://www.psihq.com/AllCopper.htm
Defined was a 'whole house' protector - a *secondary* protection
system. What is the center of that system? Building earth ground.
What is *primary* protection? A homeowner should also inspect the
essential component of their *primary* protection system:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html
Where surge damage is not acceptable, earthing is the one component
always required for effective protection. A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. Some protection systems don't even
require a protector - but always require earthing. How many examples
of professionally installed solutions were provided? 15?
Of course, none of this addresses human safety problems created by
unreliable wiring - an internal problem. Earthing is also important
for human safety reasons as well as for transistor safety. This is
about earthing to avoid externally source problems. One properly
earthed protector is - by far - the most effective solution and the
best solution per dollar. It is the only solution for a house with
two wire receptacles.
Too many older homes are missing an earthing system - let alone one
that both meets and exceeds post 1990 National Electrical Code
requirements. We are not discussing 100% protection. Discussed is
protection that is well over 90% effective. Earthing both for
transistor safety and for human safety. Even those 'scary pictures'
demonstrate the pathetic nature of plug-in protectors - near zero
proteciton. Don't agree? Then where does that plug-in protector's
specs even claim protection from the type of surge that does damage?
It does not. Those cheap plug-in protectors may even earth surges,
destructively, through adjacent electronics. No earth ground means no
effective protection.
Even worse, those cheap protectors cost tens of times more money per
protected appliance - are more expensive as well as ineffective. The
effective protector costs about $1 per protected appliance. The only
effective protector is the one that can earth typically destructive
surges.
How many of your protector designs have been tested by direct
lightning strikes? Well, show us how fifteen times over how all this
is wrong. Explain the importance of wire impedance. Explain where
surge energy is dissipated. Explain how to a plug-in protector stop
surges from seeking eath ground. Explain why the plug-in manufacturer
does not even claim protection. Explain why so many professionals are
wrong. Instead, a protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
I appreciate what you have posted. But it is what you don't know
that has led you to erroneous conclusions. One glaringly obvious
problem. Where is the surge energy dissipated? Another obvious
problem. Why do locating that cannot suffer damage not use the
protectors you have recommended?
