![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Which industry standard would that be? Computer Business
Equipment Manufacturer's Association? National Electrical Code? Underwriter's Laboratory? CSA? ISO? FCC Part 68? US Army's TM5-690? Which type of transients does APC claim to protect from? As stated previously, protection from a surge that typically does not exist. They do not claim protection from surges that typically damage electronics - or even ponds. So they make an ambiguous statement about protecting from "some" spikes and surges. They don't even say which ones, how long, or how big. In typical 'junk science' reasoning, they fail to provide numbers. Lets look at one standard that a surge protector claims to meet - UL1449 2nd Edition. UL does not test that anything works. UL only tests for threats to human safety. Testing for UL1449 does not care if the surge protector works or even survives. Survival is not relevant to human safety. UL1449 is about protecting humans from dangerous conditions such as shock and fire. UL1449 is not about testing to protect a transistor. Worded to make many think that UL1449 means a surge protector is effective. Actually, a surge protector can meet the criteria for UL1449 by making the protector less effective. What kind of protection is that? One that does not burn down the house but also does not protect transistors. That is effective protection? Real world surge protectors, such as Polyphaser, don't even discuss their products in application notes. Instead they discuss the most critical component of a surge protection 'system' - earth ground. Where does APC even mention earth ground? Where does APC even ask the homeowner to verify that most critical 'system' component? You have the paperwork. Where do they discuss earthing - the component that even Franklin demonstrated in 1752? APC is mute because they don't claim protection from that type of surge - the surge that destroys transistors. Missing statement from APC means they don't even claim that protection. You know a surge protector is not effective IF 1) it has no dedicated connection to earth ground or 2) it avoids all discussion about earthing. That APC is ineffective twice over - meets both criteria for ineffective protector. Its called lying by telling half truths. They make ambiguous statements because they don't claim protection from surges that damaged electronics. Where are the specs - with numbers - that claim common mode surge protection? Real world protectors provide those numbers. Back to same concept - why lightning struck that pond is also why Franklin demonstrated effective protection. Same protection so well proven that your local phone company, connected to overhead wires everywhere, need not shutdown phone service for thunderstorms. All use the most critical component in lightning protection. Be it a lightning rod over the pond or a surge protector - effective protection is about earthing a surge, which that APC UPS does not do and avoids mentioning. A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Polyphaser, an industry benchmark, discusses earthing extensively in application notes. Where did APC even mention the word 'earth' even once? Where do they put numbers to their claims. Where do they even specify which industry standards? They meet the standard that says the surge protector will not kill you - human protection. Where is the claim for transistor protection?. No earth ground means no effective protection - as was well proven even in 1930s research papers. One electronic device essential to ponds and easily destroyed by surges is that GFCI. Just another reason why 'whole house' protector is important and why a lightning rod over that pond might be considered (depending on the frequency of CG lightning). Anne Lurie wrote: "w_tom" wrote in message ... Lightning is not stopped, blocked, or absorbed. Others are still confused. They actually think a plug-in UPS claims protection from such surges even though the manufacturer makes no such claim. A UPS connects appliance directly to AC mains when not in battery backup mode. No protection there. Protectors only work when they connect the incoming surge to surge protection - earth ground. Well, I happened to have the paperwork from one of our APC UPS units right here, and it says (in part): "Power line transients that APC products have been designed to protect against, as recognized by industry standards, include spikes and surges on AC power lines." Anne Lurie Raleigh, NC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Betta on a hunger strike? | FishNewbie | General | 10 | April 30th 04 08:20 PM |
Lightning | Paulo | General | 1 | February 7th 04 06:24 AM |
Tank temp dropped | C | Reefs | 37 | November 1st 03 12:42 AM |