Inline Electric Timer Switch...

[whit3rd]

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 10:31:14 AM UTC-7, Cydrome Leader wrote:

whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote:

A friend [in a rural home] got my last ferroresonant power supply, so I don\'t have a really good
surge protector any more, and for a few decades now, I haven\'t missed it.

Glad somebody brought up ferroresonant power supplies.

Simple, reliable, but terribly expensive and inefficient.

Yeah; they claim 85% efficient, BUT that means the 400VA unit wasted 60W
even when lightly loaded.

I need to move a
2000VA unit soon.

You\'ll want a cart; that\'s gonna be circa 100 pounds of steel and copper.

>The garbage from a line they will block is impressive.

Yeah. Mass does good that way.

 

[Cydrome Leader]

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 10:31:14 AM UTC-7, Cydrome Leader wrote:
whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote:

A friend [in a rural home] got my last ferroresonant power supply, so I don\'t have a really good
surge protector any more, and for a few decades now, I haven\'t missed it.

Glad somebody brought up ferroresonant power supplies.

Simple, reliable, but terribly expensive and inefficient.

Yeah; they claim 85% efficient, BUT that means the 400VA unit wasted 60W
even when lightly loaded.

That number is only at full load. Since they run at saturation in one leg
at all times, the amount of heat they generate is impressive, even at no
usable load. I\'ve never tossed a scope on the resonant section with the
high voltage capacitors, but there has to be square waves in there
somewhere, yet the output is a perfect sine wave. Fascinating stuff, up
there with magnetic amplifiers and saturable chokes for controlling
lighting or heating loads.

I need to move a
2000VA unit soon.

You\'ll want a cart; that\'s gonna be circa 100 pounds of steel and copper.

The garbage from a line they will block is impressive.

Yeah. Mass does good that way.

Never thought of it that way, but they sure store some energy in the
magnetics, sort of like synchronous AC flyweel.

 

[Cydrome Leader]

Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 12:29:25 AM UTC-4, bud-- wrote:
On 3/29/2022 2:22 PM, Rickster wrote:
On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 3:35:04 PM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:


Surge protector socket adaptors or outlet
strips are common and cheap.

I don\'t agree with that. Most \"surge\" protectors are nearly worthless, such as the one the microwave was plugged into when it stopped working. It was a bit funny, in that it came on and I started warming up something that didn\'t get warm. After a few tries of resetting and unplugging for a bit, it still didn\'t cook, but started to give an error code after a bit. Now it gives the error code as soon as you start it cooking. H98 means a problem in the power supply.

The IEEE guide, cited elsewhere, does not indicate that \"Most \'surge\'
protectors are nearly worthless\". Buy one from a competent company. And
UL listed provides at least a minimum floor.

MOVs fail by the voltage at which they start to conduct lowering after
hits totaling at least the joule rating to the source voltage, and the
MOV goes into thermal runaway. All UL listed suppressors should have a
disconnect for failing MOVs that operates at least partly on heat.
Recent UL listed suppressors disconnect the connected load with the MOVs
(or inform you that they don\'t). UL listed suppressor? Do you know it
failed? Was there a surge? Is there a reason to believe the microwave
didn\'t just fail (fairly new is not a guarantee)?

There are no guarantees in life, or even in death, except that it will happen someday.
There\'s no guarantees at all for birth, most of which never happen.


Suppressors with protected equipment warranties are available. They are
possible because of the disconnect feature above, and the low amount of
energy that can actually reach a suppressor (in another post).

The $10 surge protectors come with warranties, including coverage of the connected equipment. Need I say more?

lol, I\'d love to see the details of a $25k damage claim against a $10
power strip, with photo of the payout check.

There\'s a reason they cost $10 and real surge/transient protection costs
way more.

In the continental US, you can get surge arrestors to install at a home
service entrance, even at home depot now. Stuff like this used to be hard
to get, even at a supply house, with a special order. If you have
electronics damaged, it\'s a good $100 buy. Strings of power strips, even
without surges are dangerous anyways. I\'ve seen dozens of them with burned
or melted receptables, even from moderate loads.

tripp-lite mostly produces garbage these days, but the Isobar grey power
strip devices are still OK. I have never seen on fail past the neon light
on the power switch dying after many years. They\'re about the safest bet
for permanent use for a temporary power strip.

 

[Cydrome Leader]

bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:

On 3/31/2022 8:25 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

bud-- wrote:
On 3/29/2022 4:04 PM, Dan Purgert wrote:

A UPS, such as from APC. Or one of those surge suppressor bars (but, as
you noted, they have a relatively short lifespan -- once the internals
get burned out, they need replaced).


I have not read that \"they have a relatively short lifespan\".

My understanding is such that the MOVs used in the cheapo 4- or 6-outlet
bars have a finite lifespan in general terms (even if it\'s just from
internal heat buildup), which may be further shortened by power surges.

Is not what I have read anywhere.

And not true of suppressors with a UL listing. They are tested as
plug-strips. And have at least a specified minimum (also tested) surge
rating. And much higher ratings are readily available. And, as explained
yesterday, the amount of energy that can make it to a suppressor is
surprisingly small.

MOVs absolutely have a finite life. It\'s in the datasheets and the prime
reason they glue thermal fuses to them in the first place. When they fail,
they short and catch on fire.

Fancy commercial surge arrestors are potted to avoid the smoke cloud, and
even offer alarm contacts to let you know when they failed. The \"is
working\" LED on consumer powe strips is essentialy the same concept.

A big problem isn\'t the number of joules making it to and outlet, but how
stuff is connected in your home. For example, your cable box may have a
earth better ground than your outlets if they\'re poorly wired or just old.
You get the surge or nearyby ligtning strike and now your computer blows
up. Might be from the huge swing across your devices, even though each
would have survived the event if they were not connected.

There have been other fun posts here about massive destruction at the
telco wiring at buildings when there\'s an electrical issue. Two systems at
different potentials, even for brief periods of time can cause huge
problems.

There\'s plenty of videos of people drawing sparks off the service panel
ground cables to water pipes or ground rods, and that\'s not during a
lightning storm, and that\'s just a few volts.

Now, that \"finite lifespan\" is merely for expectation of the MOVs to do
their job -- long as the bar itself is still physically sound, it\'ll
work as an extension cord (etc.) practically forever (albeit without any
\"safety features\").

As I wrote yesterday, a UL listed suppressor is likely to not work as a
plug strip if the MOVs fail (IEEE guide pg. 38).


Even assuming my understanding is wrong (i.e. that the MOVs never
actually degrade), they\'re less than $20, it\'s not exactly going to
break the bank to replace them every 3-5 years.


The two suppressors I use are from reputable companies, with high
ratings, protected equipment warranties and ports for relevant signal
wires. I do not have to worry about whether they will fail.

 

[bud--]

On 4/3/2022 1:03 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:

bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:
On 3/31/2022 8:25 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

bud-- wrote:
On 3/29/2022 4:04 PM, Dan Purgert wrote:

A UPS, such as from APC. Or one of those surge suppressor bars (but, as
you noted, they have a relatively short lifespan -- once the internals
get burned out, they need replaced).


I have not read that \"they have a relatively short lifespan\".

My understanding is such that the MOVs used in the cheapo 4- or 6-outlet
bars have a finite lifespan in general terms (even if it\'s just from
internal heat buildup), which may be further shortened by power surges.

Is not what I have read anywhere.

And not true of suppressors with a UL listing. They are tested as
plug-strips. And have at least a specified minimum (also tested) surge
rating. And much higher ratings are readily available. And, as explained
yesterday, the amount of energy that can make it to a suppressor is
surprisingly small.

MOVs absolutely have a finite life.

As I have written a couple times, published research by the NIST surge
expert found that with the maximum surge with any reasonable probability
of occurring on power service wires, the energy absorbed at a plug-in
suppressor on a branch circuit was 35J. In 13 of 15 cases it was 1 joule
or less.

The MOV energy rating is for a single event that puts the MOV at its
defined end of life (but still functional). If the energy hits are much
smaller, the cumulative energy rating is much higher. For example a MOV
might have a (single event) rating of 1,000 J. If the individual hits
are 14 J the cumulative energy rating might be 13,000 J. High ratings
give a much longer life.

The Belkin suppressor I looked at has a rating of 1045 J.

As I wrote previously, a UL listed suppressor will disconnect the
protected load if the MOVs fail and are disconnected (or inform you that
they don\'t) (IEEE guide pg. 38).

And the NIST surge expert has written:
\"in fact, the major cause of [surge protector] failures is a temporary
overvoltage, rather than an unusually large surge.\" An example of
overvoltage is crossed distribution and secondary wires. MOVs can handle
thousands of surge amps for the microseconds duration of a surge but are
rapidly burned out by much longer lasting \"overvoltage\".

It\'s in the datasheets and the prime
reason they glue thermal fuses to them in the first place. When they fail,
they short and catch on fire.

Among the UL tests is that suppressors fail safely (thermal fuses).

Fancy commercial surge arrestors are potted to avoid the smoke cloud, and
even offer alarm contacts to let you know when they failed. The \"is
working\" LED on consumer powe strips is essentialy the same concept.

A big problem isn\'t the number of joules making it to and outlet, but how
stuff is connected in your home. For example, your cable box may have a
earth better ground than your outlets if they\'re poorly wired or just old.
You get the surge or nearyby ligtning strike and now your computer blows
up. Might be from the huge swing across your devices, even though each
would have survived the event if they were not connected.

As I wrote in one of my first posts:
\"When using a plug-in surge suppressor all wires (power and signal) to a
set of protected equipment needs to go through the suppressor. The
voltage on all wires is clamped to the ground at the suppressor.\" (An
example (pg 31f) shows protection from a surge entering on the cable
service.) If signal wires do not go through the suppressor, the
suppressor can actually cause damage,

It is one of the major points made in the IEEE surge guide (for those
who can read).

There have been other fun posts here about massive destruction at the
telco wiring at buildings when there\'s an electrical issue. Two systems at
different potentials, even for brief periods of time can cause huge
problems.

Because it is a major cause of damage avoiding different potentials is a
major subject of the IEEE guide.

For science based information on surge protection read the IEEE surge guide
<http://lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf>

There\'s plenty of videos of people drawing sparks off the service panel
ground cables to water pipes or ground rods, and that\'s not during a
lightning storm, and that\'s just a few volts.

So what?

Now, that \"finite lifespan\" is merely for expectation of the MOVs to do
their job -- long as the bar itself is still physically sound, it\'ll
work as an extension cord (etc.) practically forever (albeit without any
\"safety features\").

As I wrote yesterday, a UL listed suppressor is likely to not work as a
plug strip if the MOVs fail (IEEE guide pg. 38).


Even assuming my understanding is wrong (i.e. that the MOVs never
actually degrade), they\'re less than $20, it\'s not exactly going to
break the bank to replace them every 3-5 years.


The two suppressors I use are from reputable companies, with high
ratings, protected equipment warranties and ports for relevant signal
wires. I do not have to worry about whether they will fail.

 

[Cydrome Leader]

bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:

On 4/3/2022 1:03 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:
On 3/31/2022 8:25 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

bud-- wrote:
On 3/29/2022 4:04 PM, Dan Purgert wrote:

A UPS, such as from APC. Or one of those surge suppressor bars (but, as
you noted, they have a relatively short lifespan -- once the internals
get burned out, they need replaced).


I have not read that \"they have a relatively short lifespan\".

My understanding is such that the MOVs used in the cheapo 4- or 6-outlet
bars have a finite lifespan in general terms (even if it\'s just from
internal heat buildup), which may be further shortened by power surges.

Is not what I have read anywhere.

And not true of suppressors with a UL listing. They are tested as
plug-strips. And have at least a specified minimum (also tested) surge
rating. And much higher ratings are readily available. And, as explained
yesterday, the amount of energy that can make it to a suppressor is
surprisingly small.

MOVs absolutely have a finite life.

As I have written a couple times, published research by the NIST surge
expert found that with the maximum surge with any reasonable probability
of occurring on power service wires, the energy absorbed at a plug-in
suppressor on a branch circuit was 35J. In 13 of 15 cases it was 1 joule
or less.

I have yet to see any commercial surge supressors with a history of
working well slap any NIST reference on the sell sheet. Nobody cares about
your random NIST paper from 1988.

The MOV energy rating is for a single event that puts the MOV at its
defined end of life (but still functional). If the energy hits are much
smaller, the cumulative energy rating is much higher. For example a MOV
might have a (single event) rating of 1,000 J. If the individual hits
are 14 J the cumulative energy rating might be 13,000 J. High ratings
give a much longer life.

The Belkin suppressor I looked at has a rating of 1045 J.

I\'d love to see that thing try to deal with 1045J.

As I wrote previously, a UL listed suppressor will disconnect the
protected load if the MOVs fail and are disconnected (or inform you that
they don\'t) (IEEE guide pg. 38).

Why are you mixing and matching UL listings, with no numbers or categories
with IEEE guides? This makes no sense.

And the NIST surge expert has written:
\"in fact, the major cause of [surge protector] failures is a temporary
overvoltage, rather than an unusually large surge.\" An example of
overvoltage is crossed distribution and secondary wires. MOVs can handle
thousands of surge amps for the microseconds duration of a surge but are
rapidly burned out by much longer lasting \"overvoltage\".

Whatever this claim is, it sure sounds stupid. I\'d love to hear more about
distribution and secondary wires and how to cross them for microseconds,
harmlessly.

It\'s in the datasheets and the prime
reason they glue thermal fuses to them in the first place. When they fail,
they short and catch on fire.

Among the UL tests is that suppressors fail safely (thermal fuses).

Can you cite the NIST paper or IEEE publications used in this UL test?

Fancy commercial surge arrestors are potted to avoid the smoke cloud, and
even offer alarm contacts to let you know when they failed. The \"is
working\" LED on consumer powe strips is essentialy the same concept.

A big problem isn\'t the number of joules making it to and outlet, but how
stuff is connected in your home. For example, your cable box may have a
earth better ground than your outlets if they\'re poorly wired or just old.
You get the surge or nearyby ligtning strike and now your computer blows
up. Might be from the huge swing across your devices, even though each
would have survived the event if they were not connected.

As I wrote in one of my first posts:
\"When using a plug-in surge suppressor all wires (power and signal) to a
set of protected equipment needs to go through the suppressor. The
voltage on all wires is clamped to the ground at the suppressor.\" (An
example (pg 31f) shows protection from a surge entering on the cable
service.) If signal wires do not go through the suppressor, the
suppressor can actually cause damage,

It is one of the major points made in the IEEE surge guide (for those
who can read).


There have been other fun posts here about massive destruction at the
telco wiring at buildings when there\'s an electrical issue. Two systems at
different potentials, even for brief periods of time can cause huge
problems.

Because it is a major cause of damage avoiding different potentials is a
major subject of the IEEE guide.

For science based information on surge protection read the IEEE surge guide
http://lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf


There\'s plenty of videos of people drawing sparks off the service panel
ground cables to water pipes or ground rods, and that\'s not during a
lightning storm, and that\'s just a few volts.

So what?

It sounds like you missed the IEEE and NIST publications on ground loops.
Better head back to the library.

[the rest of the parroted garbage about unspecificed UL tests removed]

 

[bud--]

On 4/4/2022 12:04 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:

bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:
On 4/3/2022 1:03 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:
On 3/31/2022 8:25 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

bud-- wrote:
On 3/29/2022 4:04 PM, Dan Purgert wrote:

A UPS, such as from APC. Or one of those surge suppressor bars (but, as
you noted, they have a relatively short lifespan -- once the internals
get burned out, they need replaced).


I have not read that \"they have a relatively short lifespan\".

My understanding is such that the MOVs used in the cheapo 4- or 6-outlet
bars have a finite lifespan in general terms (even if it\'s just from
internal heat buildup), which may be further shortened by power surges.

Is not what I have read anywhere.

And not true of suppressors with a UL listing. They are tested as
plug-strips. And have at least a specified minimum (also tested) surge
rating. And much higher ratings are readily available. And, as explained
yesterday, the amount of energy that can make it to a suppressor is
surprisingly small.

MOVs absolutely have a finite life.

As I have written a couple times, published research by the NIST surge
expert found that with the maximum surge with any reasonable probability
of occurring on power service wires, the energy absorbed at a plug-in
suppressor on a branch circuit was 35J. In 13 of 15 cases it was 1 joule
or less.

I have yet to see any commercial surge supressors with a history of
working well slap any NIST reference on the sell sheet. Nobody cares about
your random NIST paper from 1988.

The NIST surge expert was François Martzloff. I have read at least 40
papers written by, or partly by Martzloff. At least half were published
by the IEEE. You may not have heard of it.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Electrical_and_Electronics_Engineers>
The IEEE surge guide was also published by the IEEE. The IEEE guide
credits Martzloff (pg iv).

Martzloff papers have also been published by the IEC
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Electrotechnical_Commission>
and many others.

I have no idea what the \"random NIST paper from 1988\" is.

I am interested in reading your published papers.

The MOV energy rating is for a single event that puts the MOV at its
defined end of life (but still functional). If the energy hits are much
smaller, the cumulative energy rating is much higher. For example a MOV
might have a (single event) rating of 1,000 J. If the individual hits
are 14 J the cumulative energy rating might be 13,000 J. High ratings
give a much longer life.

The Belkin suppressor I looked at has a rating of 1045 J.

I\'d love to see that thing try to deal with 1045J.

As I wrote previously, a UL listed suppressor will disconnect the
protected load if the MOVs fail and are disconnected (or inform you that
they don\'t) (IEEE guide pg. 38).

Why are you mixing and matching UL listings, with no numbers or categories
with IEEE guides? This makes no sense.

With minimal reading ability you would see that the IEEE guide refers to
the UL standard.

And you may not be familiar with referencing different sources (as is
done in footnotes).

The UL standard for surge protection is UL1449, as I have written. I am
sure that will be very helpful to you.

And the NIST surge expert has written:
\"in fact, the major cause of [surge protector] failures is a temporary
overvoltage, rather than an unusually large surge.\" An example of
overvoltage is crossed distribution and secondary wires. MOVs can handle
thousands of surge amps for the microseconds duration of a surge but are
rapidly burned out by much longer lasting \"overvoltage\".

Whatever this claim is, it sure sounds stupid. I\'d love to hear more about
distribution and secondary wires and how to cross them for microseconds,
harmlessly.

With minimal reading ability you would have understood primary and
secondary wires were not crossed for microseconds. That is the whole
point of TOV.

It\'s in the datasheets and the prime
reason they glue thermal fuses to them in the first place. When they fail,
they short and catch on fire.

Among the UL tests is that suppressors fail safely (thermal fuses).

Can you cite the NIST paper or IEEE publications used in this UL test?

I have not written about any NIST papers.

UL test procedures do not cite NIST or IEEE publications.

(Not that the question makes any sense anyway.)

Fancy commercial surge arrestors are potted to avoid the smoke cloud, and
even offer alarm contacts to let you know when they failed. The \"is
working\" LED on consumer powe strips is essentialy the same concept.

A big problem isn\'t the number of joules making it to and outlet, but how
stuff is connected in your home. For example, your cable box may have a
earth better ground than your outlets if they\'re poorly wired or just old.
You get the surge or nearyby ligtning strike and now your computer blows
up. Might be from the huge swing across your devices, even though each
would have survived the event if they were not connected.

As I wrote in one of my first posts:
\"When using a plug-in surge suppressor all wires (power and signal) to a
set of protected equipment needs to go through the suppressor. The
voltage on all wires is clamped to the ground at the suppressor.\" (An
example (pg 31f) shows protection from a surge entering on the cable
service.) If signal wires do not go through the suppressor, the
suppressor can actually cause damage,

It is one of the major points made in the IEEE surge guide (for those
who can read).


There have been other fun posts here about massive destruction at the
telco wiring at buildings when there\'s an electrical issue. Two systems at
different potentials, even for brief periods of time can cause huge
problems.

Because it is a major cause of damage avoiding different potentials is a
major subject of the IEEE guide.

For science based information on surge protection read the IEEE surge guide
http://lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf


There\'s plenty of videos of people drawing sparks off the service panel
ground cables to water pipes or ground rods, and that\'s not during a
lightning storm, and that\'s just a few volts.

So what?

It sounds like you missed the IEEE and NIST publications on ground loops.
Better head back to the library.

A non-answer.
Small currents to earthing electrodes do not cause surges. Surges,
thousands of amps, can cause thousands of volts between an electrical
system \"ground\" and earth 40 ft. from the earthing electrode.

[the rest of the parroted garbage about unspecificed UL tests removed]

You are skilled at posts saying nothing.

For real science on surge protection read the IEEE surge guide
<http://lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf>

 

[Cydrome Leader]

bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:

On 4/4/2022 12:04 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:
On 4/3/2022 1:03 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bud-- <null@void.com> wrote:
On 3/31/2022 8:25 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

bud-- wrote:
On 3/29/2022 4:04 PM, Dan Purgert wrote:

A UPS, such as from APC. Or one of those surge suppressor bars (but, as
you noted, they have a relatively short lifespan -- once the internals
get burned out, they need replaced).


I have not read that \"they have a relatively short lifespan\".

My understanding is such that the MOVs used in the cheapo 4- or 6-outlet
bars have a finite lifespan in general terms (even if it\'s just from
internal heat buildup), which may be further shortened by power surges.

Is not what I have read anywhere.

And not true of suppressors with a UL listing. They are tested as
plug-strips. And have at least a specified minimum (also tested) surge
rating. And much higher ratings are readily available. And, as explained
yesterday, the amount of energy that can make it to a suppressor is
surprisingly small.

MOVs absolutely have a finite life.

As I have written a couple times, published research by the NIST surge
expert found that with the maximum surge with any reasonable probability
of occurring on power service wires, the energy absorbed at a plug-in
suppressor on a branch circuit was 35J. In 13 of 15 cases it was 1 joule
or less.

I have yet to see any commercial surge supressors with a history of
working well slap any NIST reference on the sell sheet. Nobody cares about
your random NIST paper from 1988.

The NIST surge expert was Fran??ois Martzloff. I have read at least 40
papers written by, or partly by Martzloff. At least half were published
by the IEEE. You may not have heard of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Electrical_and_Electronics_Engineers
The IEEE surge guide was also published by the IEEE. The IEEE guide
credits Martzloff (pg iv).

Martzloff papers have also been published by the IEC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Electrotechnical_Commission
and many others.

I have no idea what the \"random NIST paper from 1988\" is.

I am interested in reading your published papers.

I don\'t publish papers, I solve real problems. Some of my sources include
the designer of surge supressors for commercial use, including remote
towers for radio relays. I trust him and his decades of real experience
over martzloff and his recycled book reports. The products he designed are
still in production by emerson electric.

The MOV energy rating is for a single event that puts the MOV at its
defined end of life (but still functional). If the energy hits are much
smaller, the cumulative energy rating is much higher. For example a MOV
might have a (single event) rating of 1,000 J. If the individual hits
are 14 J the cumulative energy rating might be 13,000 J. High ratings
give a much longer life.

The Belkin suppressor I looked at has a rating of 1045 J.

I\'d love to see that thing try to deal with 1045J.

As I wrote previously, a UL listed suppressor will disconnect the
protected load if the MOVs fail and are disconnected (or inform you that
they don\'t) (IEEE guide pg. 38).

Why are you mixing and matching UL listings, with no numbers or categories
with IEEE guides? This makes no sense.

With minimal reading ability you would see that the IEEE guide refers to
the UL standard.

So we\'re supposed to chase after IEEE guide to UL standards which you use
in place of the UL standard itself? I can sort of understand why ground
loops just don\'t register with you at all.

And you may not be familiar with referencing different sources (as is
done in footnotes).

The UL standard for surge protection is UL1449, as I have written. I am
sure that will be very helpful to you.


And the NIST surge expert has written:
\"in fact, the major cause of [surge protector] failures is a temporary
overvoltage, rather than an unusually large surge.\" An example of
overvoltage is crossed distribution and secondary wires. MOVs can handle
thousands of surge amps for the microseconds duration of a surge but are
rapidly burned out by much longer lasting \"overvoltage\".

Whatever this claim is, it sure sounds stupid. I\'d love to hear more about
distribution and secondary wires and how to cross them for microseconds,
harmlessly.

With minimal reading ability you would have understood primary and
secondary wires were not crossed for microseconds. That is the whole
point of TOV.

So dollar sure surge arrestors work great, but only in improbable
scenarios?

[garbage trimmed]

Your academic, delusional world of UL stickers and mass produced
publications don\'t take into account the real world and how things
actually work.

The reality is all a UL sticker on a power strip means is somebody faked
it, or somebody payed a fee. Testing of most products isn\'t even needed.

Nobody has your back when a dollar store power strip catches on fire.
Atrocious products like christmas tree light can carry a UL tag. It
doesn\'t make them safe or fault-proof by any measure.

 

[whit3rd]

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:04:56 AM UTC-7, Cydrome Leader wrote:

bud-- <nu...@void.com> wrote:

So dollar sure surge arrestors work great, but only in improbable
scenarios?

\'dollar\' isn\'t the important quality in a surge arrestor. A
burned-out spark plug is an excellent surge arrestor, albeit somewhat
messy, and you can have some of mine for a dime.

Your academic, delusional world of UL stickers and mass produced
publications don\'t take into account the real world and how things
actually work.

That\'s just snark; academics aside, UL certification is backed by insurance
companies (the \"U\" stands for \'Underwriters\') who are completely grounded in
reality. Their reality doesn\'t require, however, that all devices survive lightning
strikes and function for decades.

A product for market will always have some formal requirements for safety, and
it is in a manufacturer\'s best interest to pay close attention to those, and only those,
requirements. It\'s safety, not durability, that tops their list of concerns.

That\'s a good thing.

 

[Cydrome Leader]

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:04:56 AM UTC-7, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bud-- <nu...@void.com> wrote:

So dollar sure surge arrestors work great, but only in improbable
scenarios?

\'dollar\' isn\'t the important quality in a surge arrestor. A
burned-out spark plug is an excellent surge arrestor, albeit somewhat
messy, and you can have some of mine for a dime.

Your academic, delusional world of UL stickers and mass produced
publications don\'t take into account the real world and how things
actually work.

That\'s just snark; academics aside, UL certification is backed by insurance
companies (the \"U\" stands for \'Underwriters\') who are completely grounded in
reality. Their reality doesn\'t require, however, that all devices survive lightning
strikes and function for decades.

A product for market will always have some formal requirements for safety, and
it is in a manufacturer\'s best interest to pay close attention to those, and only those,
requirements. It\'s safety, not durability, that tops their list of concerns.

That\'s a good thing.

You are quite delusional if you think safety is of any concern for even
half of consumer products being made.