N
NB
Guest
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
contained those keywords since 2001???
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
S
Sjouke Burry
Guest
NB wrote:
electricity, and even less about general science.Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
He is a crossposting geek who knows nothing about
D
David L. Jones
Guest
On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulf...@ppllaanneett.nnlll>
wrote:
power lines and was going to go try it out?
Dave.
wrote:
Is that the guy who said he figured out a way to safely handle downedNB wrote:
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
He is a crossposting geek who knows nothing about
electricity, and even less about general science.
power lines and was going to go try it out?
Dave.
S
Sjouke Burry
Guest
David L. Jones wrote:
On Apr 30, 12:17 pm, Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulf...@ppllaanneett.nnlll
wrote:
NB wrote:
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
He is a crossposting geek who knows nothing about
electricity, and even less about general science.
Is that the guy who said he figured out a way to safely handle downed
power lines and was going to go try it out?
Dave.
I hope so....
B
Bates
Guest
On Apr 29, 9:35 pm, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
W_TOM are you there?
And yet so far he has not appeared in this thread.Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
W_TOM are you there?
H
Hugh
Guest
Bates wrote:
Maybe he's another Tesla.On Apr 29, 9:35 pm, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
And yet so far he has not appeared in this thread.
W_TOM are you there?
Guest
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:31:39 -0500, Hugh <hugh@spankthemonkey.net>
wrote:
Many have recently filtered out Googlegroups becauise it's become the
overwhelming source of newsgroup spam. That's coincidentally who
wacko_tom posts through. I only see his nonsense if someone else is
foolish enough to respond to his rants.
wrote:
Bates wrote:
On Apr 29, 9:35 pm, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
And yet so far he has not appeared in this thread.
W_TOM are you there?
Maybe he's another Tesla.
Many have recently filtered out Googlegroups becauise it's become the
overwhelming source of newsgroup spam. That's coincidentally who
wacko_tom posts through. I only see his nonsense if someone else is
foolish enough to respond to his rants.
Guest
On 30 Apr 2008 13:58:05 -0400, Jim Prescott <jgp@seas.rochester.edu>
wrote:
Brand Name.
wrote:
You've missed most of his posts, then. He makes recommendations byIn article <4818170b$0$19828$ecde5a14@news.coretel.net>,
Paul E. Schoen <pstech@smart.net> wrote:
"NB" <nobuyout@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b53f2fef-00bd-40d0-9ac1-c69b3bcadf52@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
I think he sells surge suppressor strips and he uses the newsgroups to
promote his products by arguing with people about their effectiveness.
That would be a distinct improvement!
His posts are all about how surge protection has long been well
understood and effective protection isn't that hard but the
methods discussed in this thread are all wrong & stupid.
There is never any suggestion about what one should actually do,
not even an obviously biased one like "buy my product".
Brand Name.
Guest
On Apr 30, 1:44 pm, sa...@dog.com wrote:
last week. I thought it was hillarious after he derided the makers
of plug-in surge protectors and then gave us his list of "real
companies", like Intermatic, GE, Leviton, etc., that were experts at
it. Only problem was, all of the companies on his list sell plug-in
ones too.
Maybe he taken a hiatus after the right propper whopping he got hereOn Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:31:39 -0500, Hugh <h...@spankthemonkey.net
wrote:
Bates wrote:
On Apr 29, 9:35 pm, NB <nobuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???
And yet so far he has not appeared in this thread.
W_TOM are you there?
Maybe he's another Tesla.
Many have recently filtered out Googlegroups becauise it's become the
overwhelming source of newsgroup spam. That's coincidentally who
wacko_tom posts through. I only see his nonsense if someone else is
foolish enough to respond to his rants.
last week. I thought it was hillarious after he derided the makers
of plug-in surge protectors and then gave us his list of "real
companies", like Intermatic, GE, Leviton, etc., that were experts at
it. Only problem was, all of the companies on his list sell plug-in
ones too.
W
w_tom
Guest
On Apr 30, 3:10 pm, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
would sell plug-in protectors to 'experts' who never learned how
electricity works. If one wants to stay ignorant, then I, too, would
be happy to reap profits from their ignorance. But, effective
protectors are sold only by companies with high reputations. Trader
never understood that part.
Some are foolish as to believe APC, Tripplite, Belkin, and Monster
Cable are responsible manufacturers. Effective 'whole house'
protectors are sold by GE, Leviton, Square D, Siemens, Cutler-Hammer,
Keison, and Intermatic - to name but a few. APC, Tripplite, Belkin,
and Monster Cable don't sell effective protectors. Their products do
not even claim to provide protection. But those who know using
insults would also recommend those APC, et al protectors. I would
also sell trader the Brooklyn Bridge should he remain that naive.
Well, this 'sound byte' is already too long for those to know only
by attacking the messenger. Others who would spend tens of times less
money to have significant protection can easily identify the scam
protector.
1) It has no dedicated earthing wire.
2) Its manufacturer does not discuss earthing.
3) It does not claim protection from each type of surge in
manufacturer spec numbers.
All three points identify every protector from APC, Belkin, Tripplite,
and Monster Cable. A grocery store protector is the same ineffective
protector circuit selling for a smaller profit. At a profit?
Equivalent to that profitable $7 protector is a circuit inside that
$150 Monster Cable protector. Higher price means better protection?
Yes, when one would also buy the Brooklyn Bridge. Protection in a $150
Monster Cable product is equivalent to that $7 grocery store
protector. Both protectors make the same protection claims in numeric
specs.
Responsible lurkers ignore the insults; instead learn facts. Every
responsible engineering source defines what the effective protector
does: divert a surge into earth where energy is harmlessly
dissipated. Numerous above posters claim a surge protector somehow
absorbs energy that even three miles of sky could not stop. Does that
silly little one inch part stop what three miles of sky could not?
Many posters believe that myth.
An earthed 'whole house' protector means surge energy gets
dissipated harmlessly in earth AND protector remains functional after
a direct lightning strike. Effective protection means nobody knows a
surge even existed. Did you grasp that technical reality - or know
only because others have posted insults? A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. Three point are provided to quickly
indentify the ineffective (highly profitable) protectors.
Trader ignored a reply that corrected his misconceptions. I, too,Maybe he taken a hiatus after the right propper whopping he got here
last week. I thought it was hillarious after he derided the makers
of plug-in surge protectors and then gave us his list of "real
companies", like Intermatic, GE, Leviton, etc., that were experts at
it. Only problem was, all of the companies on his list sell plug-in
ones too.
would sell plug-in protectors to 'experts' who never learned how
electricity works. If one wants to stay ignorant, then I, too, would
be happy to reap profits from their ignorance. But, effective
protectors are sold only by companies with high reputations. Trader
never understood that part.
Some are foolish as to believe APC, Tripplite, Belkin, and Monster
Cable are responsible manufacturers. Effective 'whole house'
protectors are sold by GE, Leviton, Square D, Siemens, Cutler-Hammer,
Keison, and Intermatic - to name but a few. APC, Tripplite, Belkin,
and Monster Cable don't sell effective protectors. Their products do
not even claim to provide protection. But those who know using
insults would also recommend those APC, et al protectors. I would
also sell trader the Brooklyn Bridge should he remain that naive.
Well, this 'sound byte' is already too long for those to know only
by attacking the messenger. Others who would spend tens of times less
money to have significant protection can easily identify the scam
protector.
1) It has no dedicated earthing wire.
2) Its manufacturer does not discuss earthing.
3) It does not claim protection from each type of surge in
manufacturer spec numbers.
All three points identify every protector from APC, Belkin, Tripplite,
and Monster Cable. A grocery store protector is the same ineffective
protector circuit selling for a smaller profit. At a profit?
Equivalent to that profitable $7 protector is a circuit inside that
$150 Monster Cable protector. Higher price means better protection?
Yes, when one would also buy the Brooklyn Bridge. Protection in a $150
Monster Cable product is equivalent to that $7 grocery store
protector. Both protectors make the same protection claims in numeric
specs.
Responsible lurkers ignore the insults; instead learn facts. Every
responsible engineering source defines what the effective protector
does: divert a surge into earth where energy is harmlessly
dissipated. Numerous above posters claim a surge protector somehow
absorbs energy that even three miles of sky could not stop. Does that
silly little one inch part stop what three miles of sky could not?
Many posters believe that myth.
An earthed 'whole house' protector means surge energy gets
dissipated harmlessly in earth AND protector remains functional after
a direct lightning strike. Effective protection means nobody knows a
surge even existed. Did you grasp that technical reality - or know
only because others have posted insults? A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. Three point are provided to quickly
indentify the ineffective (highly profitable) protectors.
B
bud--
Guest
w_tom wrote:
referred to. All of them make plug-in suppressors but SquareD.
For the SquareD 'best' service panel suppressor - SDSB1175C
- The literature says "electronic equipment may need additional
protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use."
- The connected equipment warranty $ is double when the suppressors "is
used in conjunction with ... a point of use surge protective device."
For the next best suppressor - QO2175SB and HOM2175SB
- The connected equipment warranty $ does not include "electronic
devices such as: microwave ovens, audio and stereo components, video
equipment, televisions, and computers."
It appears none of w_'s companies has a high reputation.
Still never seen - any source that agrees with w_ that plug-in
suppressors are NOT effective. It is w_ against the universe.
--
bud--
On cue w_ comes up with the list of "responsible manufacturers" traderOn Apr 30, 3:10 pm, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
Maybe he taken a hiatus after the right propper whopping he got here
last week. I thought it was hillarious after he derided the makers
of plug-in surge protectors and then gave us his list of "real
companies", like Intermatic, GE, Leviton, etc., that were experts at
it. Only problem was, all of the companies on his list sell plug-in
ones too.
But, effective
protectors are sold only by companies with high reputations.
Effective 'whole house'
protectors are sold by GE, Leviton, Square D, Siemens, Cutler-Hammer,
Keison, and Intermatic - to name but a few.
referred to. All of them make plug-in suppressors but SquareD.
For the SquareD 'best' service panel suppressor - SDSB1175C
- The literature says "electronic equipment may need additional
protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use."
- The connected equipment warranty $ is double when the suppressors "is
used in conjunction with ... a point of use surge protective device."
For the next best suppressor - QO2175SB and HOM2175SB
- The connected equipment warranty $ does not include "electronic
devices such as: microwave ovens, audio and stereo components, video
equipment, televisions, and computers."
It appears none of w_'s companies has a high reputation.
Still never seen - any source that agrees with w_ that plug-in
suppressors are NOT effective. It is w_ against the universe.
--
bud--
Guest
On May 1, 11:24 am, bud-- <remove.budn...@isp.com> wrote:
conflict in another aspect of his position. He says appliance/
electronics manufacturers put surge protection inside the appliance
and that is peachy keen and appropriate. Yet he can't explain how
it is that an MOV inside the electronics actually protects, while an
MOV located in a plug-in is useless. Unless there is a magical earth
ground inside the electronic appliance, it must operate under the same
conditions as the plug-in. Geez, that inescapable conflict must give
w_ nightmares.
And also never heard an explanation from w_ about the inherrentw_tom wrote:
On Apr 30, 3:10 pm, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
Maybe he taken a hiatus after the right propper whopping he got here
last week. I thought it was hillarious after he derided the makers
of plug-in surge protectors and then gave us his list of "real
companies", like Intermatic, GE, Leviton, etc., that were experts at
it. Only problem was, all of the companies on his list sell plug-in
ones too.
But, effective
protectors are sold only by companies with high reputations.
Effective 'whole house'
protectors are sold by GE, Leviton, Square D, Siemens, Cutler-Hammer,
Keison, and Intermatic - to name but a few.
On cue w_ comes up with the list of "responsible manufacturers" trader
referred to. All of them make plug-in suppressors but SquareD.
For the SquareD 'best' service panel suppressor - SDSB1175C
- The literature says "electronic equipment may need additional
protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use."
- The connected equipment warranty $ is double when the suppressors "is
used in conjunction with ... a point of use surge protective device."
For the next best suppressor - QO2175SB and HOM2175SB
- The connected equipment warranty $ does not include "electronic
devices such as: microwave ovens, audio and stereo components, video
equipment, televisions, and computers."
It appears none of w_'s companies has a high reputation.
Still never seen - any source that agrees with w_ that plug-in
suppressors are NOT effective. It is w_ against the universe.
--
bud--
conflict in another aspect of his position. He says appliance/
electronics manufacturers put surge protection inside the appliance
and that is peachy keen and appropriate. Yet he can't explain how
it is that an MOV inside the electronics actually protects, while an
MOV located in a plug-in is useless. Unless there is a magical earth
ground inside the electronic appliance, it must operate under the same
conditions as the plug-in. Geez, that inescapable conflict must give
w_ nightmares.
R
ransley
Guest
On Apr 30, 7:42 pm, w_tom <w_t...@usa.net> wrote:
damages from from surges and lightning offer non such claim or
warranty, thats pure barf. Triplight surge protectors are only one
step a homeowner needs to hopefully protect you. Ive been hit several
times, anything you do helps a bit. Sure to do it right can cost
10000.00 for protection. But if a storm is commin, even with my mains
lightning arrestor and surge protection, and individual Trip units, I
still unplug.
Whaaat, you say my Triplights that offer a life time warranty toOn Apr 30, 3:10 pm, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
Maybe he taken a hiatus after the right propper whopping he got here
last week. I thought it was hillarious after he derided the makers
of plug-in surge protectors and then gave us his list of "real
companies", like Intermatic, GE, Leviton, etc., that were experts at
it. Only problem was, all of the companies on his list sell plug-in
ones too.
Trader ignored a reply that corrected his misconceptions. I, too,
would sell plug-in protectors to 'experts' who never learned how
electricity works. If one wants to stay ignorant, then I, too, would
be happy to reap profits from their ignorance. But, effective
protectors are sold only by companies with high reputations. Trader
never understood that part.
Some are foolish as to believe APC, Tripplite, Belkin, and Monster
Cable are responsible manufacturers. Effective 'whole house'
protectors are sold by GE, Leviton, Square D, Siemens, Cutler-Hammer,
Keison, and Intermatic - to name but a few. APC, Tripplite, Belkin,
and Monster Cable don't sell effective protectors. Their products do
not even claim to provide protection. But those who know using
insults would also recommend those APC, et al protectors. I would
also sell trader the Brooklyn Bridge should he remain that naive.
Well, this 'sound byte' is already too long for those to know only
by attacking the messenger. Others who would spend tens of times less
money to have significant protection can easily identify the scam
protector.
1) It has no dedicated earthing wire.
2) Its manufacturer does not discuss earthing.
3) It does not claim protection from each type of surge in
manufacturer spec numbers.
All three points identify every protector from APC, Belkin, Tripplite,
and Monster Cable. A grocery store protector is the same ineffective
protector circuit selling for a smaller profit. At a profit?
Equivalent to that profitable $7 protector is a circuit inside that
$150 Monster Cable protector. Higher price means better protection?
Yes, when one would also buy the Brooklyn Bridge. Protection in a $150
Monster Cable product is equivalent to that $7 grocery store
protector. Both protectors make the same protection claims in numeric
specs.
Responsible lurkers ignore the insults; instead learn facts. Every
responsible engineering source defines what the effective protector
does: divert a surge into earth where energy is harmlessly
dissipated. Numerous above posters claim a surge protector somehow
absorbs energy that even three miles of sky could not stop. Does that
silly little one inch part stop what three miles of sky could not?
Many posters believe that myth.
An earthed 'whole house' protector means surge energy gets
dissipated harmlessly in earth AND protector remains functional after
a direct lightning strike. Effective protection means nobody knows a
surge even existed. Did you grasp that technical reality - or know
only because others have posted insults? A protector is only as
effective as its earth ground. Three point are provided to quickly
indentify the ineffective (highly profitable) protectors.
damages from from surges and lightning offer non such claim or
warranty, thats pure barf. Triplight surge protectors are only one
step a homeowner needs to hopefully protect you. Ive been hit several
times, anything you do helps a bit. Sure to do it right can cost
10000.00 for protection. But if a storm is commin, even with my mains
lightning arrestor and surge protection, and individual Trip units, I
still unplug.
W
w_tom
Guest
On May 1, 12:21 pm, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
assumptions, then trader would understand appliances contain internal
protection. When trader misread, then trader reclessly invented MOVs
to provide internal protection. What w_tom posted is not found in
trader's wild speculation.
With a grasp of technology, then trader would have known industry
standard numbers that defined internal electronics protection even 35
years ago. Trader does not know these numbers. Trader then assumed
that protection must be provided by MOVs. Trader - learn technology
BEFORE knowing everything. You have no idea of protection inside all
appliances. By reading reclessly and by using wild speculation and
ignorance, trader assumes protection must be provided by MOVs.
Protection inside appliances is integrated within appliance
design. Internal appliance protection that may be overwhelmed if a
'whole house' protector is not installed and properly earthed.
Nothing in that paragraph discusses MOVs. MOVs inside appliances is
another trader 'wild speculation' due to knowledge without first
learning the technology.
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.
If trader read what was posted rather than entertain hisHe says appliance/ electronics manufacturers put surge
protection inside the appliance and that is peachy keen
and appropriate. Yet he can't explain how it is that an
MOV inside the electronics actually protects, while an
MOV located in a plug-in is useless.
assumptions, then trader would understand appliances contain internal
protection. When trader misread, then trader reclessly invented MOVs
to provide internal protection. What w_tom posted is not found in
trader's wild speculation.
With a grasp of technology, then trader would have known industry
standard numbers that defined internal electronics protection even 35
years ago. Trader does not know these numbers. Trader then assumed
that protection must be provided by MOVs. Trader - learn technology
BEFORE knowing everything. You have no idea of protection inside all
appliances. By reading reclessly and by using wild speculation and
ignorance, trader assumes protection must be provided by MOVs.
Protection inside appliances is integrated within appliance
design. Internal appliance protection that may be overwhelmed if a
'whole house' protector is not installed and properly earthed.
Nothing in that paragraph discusses MOVs. MOVs inside appliances is
another trader 'wild speculation' due to knowledge without first
learning the technology.
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.
W
w_tom
Guest
On May 1, 2:18 pm, ransley <Mark_Rans...@yahoo.com> wrote:
destroyed because the plug-in protector earthed an 8000 volt surge
through it. Gross assumptions are also behind that warranty. Did you
read the fine print and learn from so many others who never got that
warranty honored?
For example, some plujg-in protectors state that a protector from
any other manufacturer in the building means their warranty is void.
Another says that if you don't submit the claim on their forms, the
claim may be rejected. Another says reinbursement is based on
depreciation meaning the computer has zero value in a few years.
Another says that every electrical conductor that touches that
appliance must connect through their protector. Did they forget to
mention that a table top is considered an electrical conductor? How
many fine print exemptions make a warranty void? Fine print is chock
full of exemptions. Warranty says nothing about protection.
Steve Uhrig on 17 Jun 2003 in the newsgroup comp.home.automation
entitled "UPS for computer and TV"
been surge damaged during the same surges? How many dimmer switches?
Where are these surges that the Tripplite protected from? Only way
you know that Tripplite provided protection is when everything else -
every smoke detector, clock radio, dimmer switch, washing machine, etc
was destroyed. You have no idea what that Tripplite did. In fact,
Page 42 Figure 8 - the Tripplite may even make create damage to other
items in that room.
Actually some things installed will decrease protection - ie the TVWhaaat, you say my Triplights that offer a life time warranty to
damages from from surges and lightning offer non such claim or
warranty, thats pure barf. Triplight surge protectors are only one
step a homeowner needs to hopefully protect you. Ive been hit several
times, anything you do helps a bit.
destroyed because the plug-in protector earthed an 8000 volt surge
through it. Gross assumptions are also behind that warranty. Did you
read the fine print and learn from so many others who never got that
warranty honored?
For example, some plujg-in protectors state that a protector from
any other manufacturer in the building means their warranty is void.
Another says that if you don't submit the claim on their forms, the
claim may be rejected. Another says reinbursement is based on
depreciation meaning the computer has zero value in a few years.
Another says that every electrical conductor that touches that
appliance must connect through their protector. Did they forget to
mention that a table top is considered an electrical conductor? How
many fine print exemptions make a warranty void? Fine print is chock
full of exemptions. Warranty says nothing about protection.
Steve Uhrig on 17 Jun 2003 in the newsgroup comp.home.automation
entitled "UPS for computer and TV"
Did that protector do protection? Well, how many dishwashers haveI read the terms of their warranty, which I had saved
together with the purchase receipt, and contacted
them to submit a warranty claim. I was nice and
polite and had everything documented including
photos of their product installed next to the fax.
They laughed in my face. Almost could not have
been more insulting.
I wrote to the executive management of the company,
copied customer service, sent both return receipt to
prove they received them, and never got the courtesy
of a reply.
been surge damaged during the same surges? How many dimmer switches?
Where are these surges that the Tripplite protected from? Only way
you know that Tripplite provided protection is when everything else -
every smoke detector, clock radio, dimmer switch, washing machine, etc
was destroyed. You have no idea what that Tripplite did. In fact,
Page 42 Figure 8 - the Tripplite may even make create damage to other
items in that room.
R
ransley
Guest
On May 1, 3:30 pm, w_tom <w_t...@usa.net> wrote:
Tripp was warranting it, and I let my insurance Co go after it. It was
bad, even flourescents 3 floors down lit from PLASMA energy. Tripp
was there,You are a negative
Actualy, Double U, bottom slasch, TOM , I had about a $30,000 strike,On May 1, 2:18 pm, ransley <Mark_Rans...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Whaaat, you say my Triplights that offer a life time warranty to
damages from from surges and lightning offer non such claim or
warranty, thats pure barf. Triplight surge protectors are only one
step a homeowner needs to hopefully protect you. Ive been hit several
times, anything you do helps a bit.
Actually some things installed will decrease protection - ie the TV
destroyed because the plug-in protector earthed an 8000 volt surge
through it. Gross assumptions are also behind that warranty. Did you
read the fine print and learn from so many others who never got that
warranty honored?
For example, some plujg-in protectors state that a protector from
any other manufacturer in the building means their warranty is void.
Another says that if you don't submit the claim on their forms, the
claim may be rejected. Another says reinbursement is based on
depreciation meaning the computer has zero value in a few years.
Another says that every electrical conductor that touches that
appliance must connect through their protector. Did they forget to
mention that a table top is considered an electrical conductor? How
many fine print exemptions make a warranty void? Fine print is chock
full of exemptions. Warranty says nothing about protection.
Steve Uhrig on 17 Jun 2003 in the newsgroup comp.home.automation
entitled "UPS for computer and TV"
I read the terms of their warranty, which I had saved
together with the purchase receipt, and contacted
them to submit a warranty claim. I was nice and
polite and had everything documented including
photos of their product installed next to the fax.
They laughed in my face. Almost could not have
been more insulting.
I wrote to the executive management of the company,
copied customer service, sent both return receipt to
prove they received them, and never got the courtesy
of a reply.
Did that protector do protection? Well, how many dishwashers have
been surge damaged during the same surges? How many dimmer switches?
Where are these surges that the Tripplite protected from? Only way
you know that Tripplite provided protection is when everything else -
every smoke detector, clock radio, dimmer switch, washing machine, etc
was destroyed. You have no idea what that Tripplite did. In fact,
Page 42 Figure 8 - the Tripplite may even make create damage to other
items in that room.
Tripp was warranting it, and I let my insurance Co go after it. It was
bad, even flourescents 3 floors down lit from PLASMA energy. Tripp
was there,You are a negative
Guest
On May 1, 4:08 pm, w_tom <w_t...@usa.net> wrote:
similar. They are widely used for exactly that purpose.
http://www.appliancedesign.com/CDA/Articles/Electronics/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000271505
"New thermally enhanced MOVs help protect a wide variety of low-power
systems against damage caused by over-current, over-temperature and
over-voltage faults, including lightning strikes, electrostatic
discharge (ESD) surges, loss of neutral, incorrect input voltage and
power induction.
These devices help provide protection in a wide range of AC line
applications, including AC mains LED lighting systems, PLC network
adapters, cell-phone chargers, AC/DC power supplies (up to 30 VA as
input power for 230 VAC input voltage), modem power supplies, AC panel
protection modules, AC power meters, and home appliances. "
http://www.appliancemagazine.com/print.php?article=1778&zone=1&first=1
"Protecting increasingly sophisticated and complex control boards from
misconnection, power surges, or short circuit damage is of particular
concern to the equipment manufacturer. Although appliance
transformers, their enclosures, and connections are capable of
withstanding higher voltage transients, the use of sensitive solid-
state devices on the board necessitates improved overcurrent,
overtemperature, and overvoltage control.
Coordinating overcurrent and overvoltage protection can also help
designers comply with safety agency requirements, minimize component
count, and improve equipment reliability. A metal oxide varistor (MOV)
overvoltage protection device used in a coordinated circuit-protection
strategy with a line-voltage-rated PPTC overcurrent device helps
manufacturers meet IEC 6100-4-5, the global standard for voltage and
current test conditions for equipment connected to ac mains."
There, I've provided credible references that MOVs are used for
protection inside electronics and appliances. Now I'd like to see
your reference that says they are not used. As usual, I don't expect
it will be forthcoming.
familiar with repair of typical consumer electronics knows MOVs are
widely used as the component of choice, because they are what best fit
the application. The truth is, for you to admit that they are
commonly used inside electronics/appliances creates an insurmountable
problem for you. And that is to explain how they could possibly be
used there for surge protection when they have to operate under the
same conditions as a plug-in suppressor would, ie without a direct
nearby earth ground. It's impossible to explain, so you are reduced
now to the silly position that MOVs are just not used inside the
electronics/appliance at all.
No, I didn't invent MOV's use in appliances, electronics andOn May 1, 12:21 pm, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
He says appliance/ electronics manufacturers put surge
protection inside the appliance and that is peachy keen
and appropriate. Yet he can't explain how it is that an
MOV inside the electronics actually protects, while an
MOV located in a plug-in is useless.
If trader read what was posted rather than entertain his
assumptions, then trader would understand appliances contain internal
protection. When trader misread, then trader reclessly invented MOVs
to provide internal protection. What w_tom posted is not found in
trader's wild speculation.
similar. They are widely used for exactly that purpose.
Here, from Appliance Magazine and Appliance Design websites:With a grasp of technology, then trader would have known industry
standard numbers that defined internal electronics protection even 35
years ago. Trader does not know these numbers. Trader then assumed
that protection must be provided by MOVs. Trader - learn technology
BEFORE knowing everything. You have no idea of protection inside all
appliances. By reading reclessly and by using wild speculation and
ignorance, trader assumes protection must be provided by MOVs.
Protection inside appliances is integrated within appliance
design. Internal appliance protection that may be overwhelmed if a
'whole house' protector is not installed and properly earthed.
Nothing in that paragraph discusses MOVs. MOVs inside appliances is
another trader 'wild speculation' due to knowledge without first
learning the technology.
http://www.appliancedesign.com/CDA/Articles/Electronics/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000000271505
"New thermally enhanced MOVs help protect a wide variety of low-power
systems against damage caused by over-current, over-temperature and
over-voltage faults, including lightning strikes, electrostatic
discharge (ESD) surges, loss of neutral, incorrect input voltage and
power induction.
These devices help provide protection in a wide range of AC line
applications, including AC mains LED lighting systems, PLC network
adapters, cell-phone chargers, AC/DC power supplies (up to 30 VA as
input power for 230 VAC input voltage), modem power supplies, AC panel
protection modules, AC power meters, and home appliances. "
http://www.appliancemagazine.com/print.php?article=1778&zone=1&first=1
"Protecting increasingly sophisticated and complex control boards from
misconnection, power surges, or short circuit damage is of particular
concern to the equipment manufacturer. Although appliance
transformers, their enclosures, and connections are capable of
withstanding higher voltage transients, the use of sensitive solid-
state devices on the board necessitates improved overcurrent,
overtemperature, and overvoltage control.
Coordinating overcurrent and overvoltage protection can also help
designers comply with safety agency requirements, minimize component
count, and improve equipment reliability. A metal oxide varistor (MOV)
overvoltage protection device used in a coordinated circuit-protection
strategy with a line-voltage-rated PPTC overcurrent device helps
manufacturers meet IEC 6100-4-5, the global standard for voltage and
current test conditions for equipment connected to ac mains."
There, I've provided credible references that MOVs are used for
protection inside electronics and appliances. Now I'd like to see
your reference that says they are not used. As usual, I don't expect
it will be forthcoming.
Mythical? LOL Anyone with a lick of any technical knowledge orWe 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.
familiar with repair of typical consumer electronics knows MOVs are
widely used as the component of choice, because they are what best fit
the application. The truth is, for you to admit that they are
commonly used inside electronics/appliances creates an insurmountable
problem for you. And that is to explain how they could possibly be
used there for surge protection when they have to operate under the
same conditions as a plug-in suppressor would, ie without a direct
nearby earth ground. It's impossible to explain, so you are reduced
now to the silly position that MOVs are just not used inside the
electronics/appliance at all.
B
bud--
Guest
phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
the IEEE at:
http://www.mikeholt.com/files/PDF/LightningGuide_FINALpublishedversion_May051.pdf
Simpler information is in a guide from the NIST at:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
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.
This suppressor includes, in the unit, ports for cable and phone. That
limits the voltages at the entrance point. You can still get problems
downstream. One possibility is a very near strike producing direct
induction with wiring acting as a long wire or loop antenna.
A rather common recommendation is to use a power service suppressor to
provide gross limitation and a plug-in suppressor at "sensitive
electronics" particularly with signal and power connections.
But this one is a plug-onto-the-bus unit with suppression only for power
wires.
A service panel suppressor does not limit the voltage between power and
signal wires. To do that you need a short ground wire from the signal
entrance protector to the ground at the power service (or the combined
suppressor above). SquareD has no idea what is in your house.
There are other possible sources of damage a power-service-only
suppressor does nothing about, including high voltage between conductor
and shield in cable wire, which is not limited by the cable entrance
ground block.
warrantee coverage. Not that that has any particular relevance to
anything either.
What is relevant with respect to w_ is that CH makes plug-in
suppressors. SquareD does not but suggests their use and limits the
claimed protection of power-service-only suppressors.
and surge suppression. You should have figured that out from references
provided previously, which included several technical papers. But you
seem to do minimal reading of reading of what others write.
You have read little on surges and have said you base your beliefs on
your experience. Experience shows astrology works.
You suggest experts in the field "missed a lot of reality" and "flubbed
the experiment".
You discount the IEEE guide. It comes from the IEEE Surge Protection
Devices Committee, was peer reviewed in the IEEE, and is aimed at
technical people including electrical engineers. If you ever read it you
would find "scientific explanations". You might also find "scientific
explanations" in the technical papers I have referenced, which you
probably have not read.
But what could -you- learn by reading what others write. There
apparently is no expert but you.
You have never provided a source that agrees with you on disputed issues.
--
bud--
Excellent information on surges and surge protection is in a guide fromIn alt.tv.tech.hdtv bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
the IEEE at:
http://www.mikeholt.com/files/PDF/LightningGuide_FINALpublishedversion_May051.pdf
Simpler information is in a guide from the NIST at:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf
According to NIST guide, US insurance information indicates equipment| For the SquareD 'best' service panel suppressor - SDSB1175C
| - The literature says "electronic equipment may need additional
| protection by installing plug-in [suppressors] at the point of use."
| - The connected equipment warranty $ is double when the suppressors "is
| used in conjunction with ... a point of use surge protective device."
And do you understand the scientific basis why this is so? I doubt it.
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.
This suppressor includes, in the unit, ports for cable and phone. That
limits the voltages at the entrance point. You can still get problems
downstream. One possibility is a very near strike producing direct
induction with wiring acting as a long wire or loop antenna.
A rather common recommendation is to use a power service suppressor to
provide gross limitation and a plug-in suppressor at "sensitive
electronics" particularly with signal and power connections.
The differences have absolutely no relevance for the response to w_.| For the next best suppressor - QO2175SB and HOM2175SB
| - The connected equipment warranty $ does not include "electronic
| devices such as: microwave ovens, audio and stereo components, video
| equipment, televisions, and computers."
|
| It appears none of w_'s companies has a high reputation.
Or maybe it's a different type of suppressor. Did you even look?
But this one is a plug-onto-the-bus unit with suppression only for power
wires.
A service panel suppressor does not limit the voltage between power and
signal wires. To do that you need a short ground wire from the signal
entrance protector to the ground at the power service (or the combined
suppressor above). SquareD has no idea what is in your house.
There are other possible sources of damage a power-service-only
suppressor does nothing about, including high voltage between conductor
and shield in cable wire, which is not limited by the cable entrance
ground block.
There is a major difference between the units justifying the differentSadly,
when marketing gets in control, they tend to hide the imporant engineering
and scientific details. It even happens with companies like Square-D.
warrantee coverage. Not that that has any particular relevance to
anything either.
Maybe you should look at CH. I don't really care.Maybe you should look at the Eaton-Cutler-Hammer devices.
What is relevant with respect to w_ is that CH makes plug-in
suppressors. SquareD does not but suggests their use and limits the
claimed protection of power-service-only suppressors.
I have read a lot of sources, including many technical papers on surges| Still never seen - any source that agrees with w_ that plug-in
| suppressors are NOT effective. It is w_ against the universe.
The only sources you are looking at simply give a generic list of what kinds
of things you might use. There are no scientific explanations to help you
figure out what is needed in your particular situation for you to achieve the
level of protection you want. OTOH, I have my doubts about your ability to
understand the science, so that may explain why they limited things to a few
simplistic illustrations in what is really just a "to do" guide that does not
cover all situations or all levels of protection.
and surge suppression. You should have figured that out from references
provided previously, which included several technical papers. But you
seem to do minimal reading of reading of what others write.
You have read little on surges and have said you base your beliefs on
your experience. Experience shows astrology works.
You suggest experts in the field "missed a lot of reality" and "flubbed
the experiment".
You discount the IEEE guide. It comes from the IEEE Surge Protection
Devices Committee, was peer reviewed in the IEEE, and is aimed at
technical people including electrical engineers. If you ever read it you
would find "scientific explanations". You might also find "scientific
explanations" in the technical papers I have referenced, which you
probably have not read.
But what could -you- learn by reading what others write. There
apparently is no expert but you.
You have never provided a source that agrees with you on disputed issues.
--
bud--
Guest
On May 2, 3:40 pm, phil-news-nos...@ipal.net wrote:
I suggest you go back and read what w_ has posted in this thread and
do a google for some of his other posts in similar threads on the
subject. The issue is quite simple. If you believe w_, then plug-
in surge protectors offer absolutely no benefit and are in fact
actually destructive. If you believe the IEEE and manufacturer's of
both whole house surge protectors as well as plug-in surge protectors,
as well as other credible sources, then plug-ins do in fact offer
protection and can be part of an effective solution.
Go back and read where w_ posted his list of "real" surge
manufacturers who offer whole house and commercial suppressors, while
disparaging companies who make plug-ins as frauds. Funny thing
happened though. I showed him datsheets and product specs that showed
that every company on his list of "real" surge protection companies
except one, also make plug-ins, discuss their effective use, etc.
If you believe w- is right on this, then maybe you can help him out
by:
1 - Providing a reference that backs up his assertion that plug-in
protectors offer no protection at all
2 - Explain the inescapable contradiction in w_'s position. He has
posted that electronics/appliances, etc have built-in surge protection
that is effective. Yet, those appliances use MOV's and are working
under the same restrictions as a plug-in would, ie they have no direct
earth ground nearby. So, how exactly is it that one can work, while
the other is useless? BTW, w_ faced with this, chose to simply deny
that MOV's are used in electronics/appliances, which just discredits
him more. A few post back I provided references, as if any are
needed, that MOVs are in fact used in electronics/appliances. Plus,
while MOV's are widely used in electronics/appliances, it isn't even
an issue as to the particular component because w_ claims there can be
no protection period, without a direct, nearby earth ground.
In alt.tv.tech.hdtv Tantalust <tantal...@paradise.net> wrote:
|
| <trad...@optonline.net> wrote
|
|>Maybe he taken a hiatus after the right propper whopping he got here
|>last week. I thought it was hillarious after he derided the makers
|>of plug-in surge protectors and then gave us his list of "real
|>companies", like Intermatic, GE, Leviton, etc., that were experts at
|>it. Only problem was, all of the companies on his list sell plug-in
|>ones too.
|
| Huh, so according to all of w_'s sermons, Bud must be working overtime as a
| salesman for all of those companies too? Busy guy!
Both do not appear to be wrong to me. They appear more to be arguing about
entirely different issues.
I suggest you go back and read what w_ has posted in this thread and
do a google for some of his other posts in similar threads on the
subject. The issue is quite simple. If you believe w_, then plug-
in surge protectors offer absolutely no benefit and are in fact
actually destructive. If you believe the IEEE and manufacturer's of
both whole house surge protectors as well as plug-in surge protectors,
as well as other credible sources, then plug-ins do in fact offer
protection and can be part of an effective solution.
Go back and read where w_ posted his list of "real" surge
manufacturers who offer whole house and commercial suppressors, while
disparaging companies who make plug-ins as frauds. Funny thing
happened though. I showed him datsheets and product specs that showed
that every company on his list of "real" surge protection companies
except one, also make plug-ins, discuss their effective use, etc.
If you believe w- is right on this, then maybe you can help him out
by:
1 - Providing a reference that backs up his assertion that plug-in
protectors offer no protection at all
2 - Explain the inescapable contradiction in w_'s position. He has
posted that electronics/appliances, etc have built-in surge protection
that is effective. Yet, those appliances use MOV's and are working
under the same restrictions as a plug-in would, ie they have no direct
earth ground nearby. So, how exactly is it that one can work, while
the other is useless? BTW, w_ faced with this, chose to simply deny
that MOV's are used in electronics/appliances, which just discredits
him more. A few post back I provided references, as if any are
needed, that MOVs are in fact used in electronics/appliances. Plus,
while MOV's are widely used in electronics/appliances, it isn't even
an issue as to the particular component because w_ claims there can be
no protection period, without a direct, nearby earth ground.
But I can't be entirely sure because their rants
are hard to read and I skip a lot of it, including any post where the first
screenful is all quoted text. And my googlegroups filter is killing off the
posts from w_tom that don't have any threading where I have posted.
--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |
W
w_tom
Guest
On May 1, 7:17 pm, ransley <Mark_Rans...@yahoo.com> wrote:
effective protection? Why does your telco (connected to overhead
wires all over town) suffer far more massive surges without damage?
Why no damage using a protector that costs maybe twenty times less
money? Why does the telco instead by a protector without that big
buck warranty?
We properly earth a 'whole house' protector so that lightning causes
no damage. So that a surge remains completely unknown to the
homeowner. So that the protector even remains functional.
Warranty means effective protection? Where was that protection?
Did Tripplite pay for all $30,000 of damage? Of course not.
Tripplite even provides no numeric specs that claim protection.
You had a surge protector, suffered damage, and then call that
damage acceptable? We upgrade earthing and install a 'whole house'
protector so that direct lightning strikes result in no damage. So
that the surge is not even known. Effective protectors don't hype a
mythical quarter million dollar warranty. Effective protectors divert
energy into earth where it does no harm - and at less cost. And no
big buck warranty.
You had a surge protector and still suffered damage? That wasI had about a $30,000 strike, Tripp was warranting it, and I let
my insurance Co go after it. It was bad, even flourescents 3
floors down lit from PLASMA energy. Tripp was there,You are
a negative
effective protection? Why does your telco (connected to overhead
wires all over town) suffer far more massive surges without damage?
Why no damage using a protector that costs maybe twenty times less
money? Why does the telco instead by a protector without that big
buck warranty?
We properly earth a 'whole house' protector so that lightning causes
no damage. So that a surge remains completely unknown to the
homeowner. So that the protector even remains functional.
Warranty means effective protection? Where was that protection?
Did Tripplite pay for all $30,000 of damage? Of course not.
Tripplite even provides no numeric specs that claim protection.
You had a surge protector, suffered damage, and then call that
damage acceptable? We upgrade earthing and install a 'whole house'
protector so that direct lightning strikes result in no damage. So
that the surge is not even known. Effective protectors don't hype a
mythical quarter million dollar warranty. Effective protectors divert
energy into earth where it does no harm - and at less cost. And no
big buck warranty.