Are mains surge protectors needed in the UK?

In article , w_tom
writes

'Whole house'
protectors and earth ground are quite inexpensive as well as
more effective. If the house has computers, RCDs, kitchen
appliances, touch on-off lights, alarm system, smoke
detectors, digital timer switches, etc; then by all means the
'whole house' protector protects so much for so little money.

I'll repeat my earlier question. Do you work for, or otherwise have an
interest in, a manufacturer of these whole house "protection" devices?
If the answer is yes, you should declare your interest each time you
recommend them.

What is the alternative? Plug-in protectors on each and
every appliance?

It's simply not necessary in the UK. Electricity feeds to homes are
underground, not overhead, so are less prone to surges caused by
lightning strikes. It's more cost-effective to buy individual surge
protection devices for more expensive devices (stereo systems,
computers.)

The costs and advantages of 'whole house' protectors and
single point earth ground make a mains surge protector quite
reasonable protection even for the UK where lightning is not
as frequent.

Nonsense. If that were the case, such surge protectors would be
recommended by industry professionals designing new construction. I
accept they're installed in commercial enterprises and in datacentres,
where the effects of a surge would impact on the organisation's
business, but for the typical UK domestic home, they're simply not
needed.

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

In article , w_tom
writes

Protection from the most lightning prone locations is
routine and well understood. Others who have been in Mike's
Canary Island situation say "no problem":

Nobody said otherwise. You need to work on your reading comprehension
and stop grasping at straws to try and bolster your case.

At our Canary Islands site, we paid a lot of money for a comprehensive
earthing system consisting of multiple copper rods driven into the
ground encircling the site and linked together by a thick copper cable
to be installed (no mean feat, given that it's 8000ft high, on bedrock,
on top of a volcano) and for surge protection on the incoming mains to
be fitted. Given the value of the equipment inside, that's a sensible
precaution. This is not a domestic residence in the UK, which is the
context of the discussion.

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

In article , w_tom
writes

Mike would have us believe that an inferior US electrical
distribution system creates surge damage in the US. He
forgets that the UK has almost no lightning compared to the US
and still suffered significant damage. Especially true was
the amount of modem damage in the UK during an unusual

exactly - *unusual*.

thunderstorm on 4 July 2004. Trivial storm by American
standards. Numerous UK modems were unnecessarily damaged due
to no properly earthed protectors.

no, because they were cheap and nasty winmodems with capacitive coupling
to the phone line, no surge arrestors built in, no spark gaps fitted,
and no galvanic isolation.

Now it's up to the user - they can replace the modem, and optionally,
buy a plug-in surge protector which includes protection for the phone
line for another tenner or so.

Plug-in protectors in the US are three wire. Makes no
difference.

We're talking about home users here. Those protectors are plugged into
two-wire extension cords available in supermarkets all over North
America for a couple of dollars. Or plugged into an outlet installed
some years ago depending on metal conduit (no separate earth wire) for
its low impedance path to earth. Or plugged into a two-pin to three-pin
adapter, again available in supermarkets everywhere. Or plugged into
one of those multi-way adapters that convert a double wall outlet into a
six-way outlet, requiring the fixing screw of the outlet to be removed
and replaced over a metal tag on the adapter to provide an "earth". Get
the idea?

A distance of much more than 3 meters (10 feet)
to earth ground means the plug-in protector is not earthed -
as demonstrated by previously posted numbers that remain
unchallenged. Excessive wire impedance from wall receptacle
to earth ground

The impedance might be excessive on certain installations in your
country, but UK and European installations have a good path to earth,
which is why plug-in protectors work. How many times do I have to
repeat this?

If the earth pin is so useless, how come American wiring code now
mandates the installation of three-pin outlets?

How does he
explain 25 direct strikes per year to electronics atop the
Empire State Building without damage?

The context of the discussion is home installations, which rather
excludes the Empire State. Please try to keep up.

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

In article , w_tom
writes

Mike would have us believe that an inferior US electrical
distribution system creates surge damage in the US.

Well, you posted this link yourself, showing typical American
installations: http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Power distribution to domestic properties in the UK is almost all
underground, fed from local substations. Not overhead lines and pole-
mounted transformers with dodgy connections to earth and broken surge
protectors/lightning arrestors.

Thank you for proving my point.

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Mike Tomlinson wrote:

In article , w_tom
writes


Mike would have us believe that an inferior US electrical
distribution system creates surge damage in the US. He
forgets that the UK has almost no lightning compared to the US
and still suffered significant damage. Especially true was
the amount of modem damage in the UK during an unusual


exactly - *unusual*.


thunderstorm on 4 July 2004. Trivial storm by American
standards. Numerous UK modems were unnecessarily damaged due
to no properly earthed protectors.


no, because they were cheap and nasty winmodems with capacitive coupling
to the phone line, no surge arrestors built in, no spark gaps fitted,
and no galvanic isolation.

Now it's up to the user - they can replace the modem, and optionally,
buy a plug-in surge protector which includes protection for the phone
line for another tenner or so.


Plug-in protectors in the US are three wire. Makes no
difference.


We're talking about home users here. Those protectors are plugged into
two-wire extension cords available in supermarkets all over North
America for a couple of dollars. Or plugged into an outlet installed
some years ago depending on metal conduit (no separate earth wire) for
its low impedance path to earth. Or plugged into a two-pin to three-pin
adapter, again available in supermarkets everywhere. Or plugged into
one of those multi-way adapters that convert a double wall outlet into a
six-way outlet, requiring the fixing screw of the outlet to be removed
and replaced over a metal tag on the adapter to provide an "earth". Get
the idea?


A distance of much more than 3 meters (10 feet)
to earth ground means the plug-in protector is not earthed -
as demonstrated by previously posted numbers that remain
unchallenged. Excessive wire impedance from wall receptacle
to earth ground


The impedance might be excessive on certain installations in your
country, but UK and European installations have a good path to earth,
which is why plug-in protectors work. How many times do I have to
repeat this?

If the earth pin is so useless, how come American wiring code now
mandates the installation of three-pin outlets?

You're actually talking about two different issues here. One is surge
suppression for device protection and the other is human safety. The
primary reason for the separate earth is it's a redundant return path that
insures an earthed connection should neutral fail and, second, a protective
shield from an internal power fault to case (alternate is double
insulated). Third, it enables ground fault interrupters to work (which
senses the internal power fault to case just mentioned).

For the human safety issues the current involved is breaker/fuse limited
and different than what one might see as a lightning induced surge so the
matter of 'impedance', and whether it's 'good enough' is (potentially)
different.

Surge suppression is piggy backed on that because of the convenience, and
availability, of the earthed third wire but it isn't the originating reason
for having it.




How does he
explain 25 direct strikes per year to electronics atop the
Empire State Building without damage?


The context of the discussion is home installations, which rather
excludes the Empire State. Please try to keep up.

In article , David Maynard
writes

I have my own version of the 'Chinese made' tirade but that's another topic.

It's a frequent lament on sci.electronics.repair.

It's a cute buzz word but the fact of the matter is it's generally cheaper,
regardless of who makes it, to run off a new board with automated
manufacturing equipment than it is to pay someone a decent wage to debug
and repair one.

That's true, but it's a shame about the impact on the environment. And
much of this failed kit makes its way to the Third World for "recycling"
where it poisons the locals and their environment.

http://www.crra.com/ewaste/ttrash2/ttrash2/

But I can assure you there is a quite healthy appliance repair business in
the U.S.; just not for repairing 5 buck telephones.

Fortunately, I got out of the PC/monitor/printer repair industry a few
years ago when I saw the writing on the wall.

And I'm not so sure
that going back to the days of 60 bucks for a basic phone, with 5 buck/hr
repair wages, just so they're 'worth repairing' would be necessarily a
great thing.

It's only with the advance of "creeping featurisation" (i.e. adding more
bells and whistles) that electronic equipment has become more complex
and thus more likely to fail.

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Mike Tomlinson wrote:

In article , David Maynard
writes


I have my own version of the 'Chinese made' tirade but that's another topic.


It's a frequent lament on sci.electronics.repair.

I'm sure.


It's a cute buzz word but the fact of the matter is it's generally cheaper,
regardless of who makes it, to run off a new board with automated
manufacturing equipment than it is to pay someone a decent wage to debug
and repair one.


That's true, but it's a shame about the impact on the environment. And
much of this failed kit makes its way to the Third World for "recycling"
where it poisons the locals and their environment.

http://www.crra.com/ewaste/ttrash2/ttrash2/

That article is so filled with hysterical hyperbole that I can't tell how
much, if any, of it deserves serious consideration.


But I can assure you there is a quite healthy appliance repair business in
the U.S.; just not for repairing 5 buck telephones.


Fortunately, I got out of the PC/monitor/printer repair industry a few
years ago when I saw the writing on the wall.

Yeah. I used to do audio/visual repair quite a while back.

Just repaired two monitors though


And I'm not so sure
that going back to the days of 60 bucks for a basic phone, with 5 buck/hr
repair wages, just so they're 'worth repairing' would be necessarily a
great thing.


It's only with the advance of "creeping featurisation" (i.e. adding more
bells and whistles) that electronic equipment has become more complex
and thus more likely to fail.

I certainly subscribed to a similar theory with automobile 'features', like
power windows, power seats, etc. Just 'one more thing' to break.

However, with electronics it's actually not the case as reliability has
increased so much it's beyond comprehension.

For example, it was hailed as a stunning technological breakthrough when
computers finally achieved a mean time to repair shorter than the mean time
to failure, which meant they could run an 8 hour shift, shut down
operations for an 8 hour maintenance cycle, and be ready to run again the
next morning. (will wonders never cease?)

A simple PDA is orders of magnitude more powerful than that old behemoth
was but can you imagine the outcry if you had to have it repaired every 8
hours? Hell, the battery charge lasts longer than that.

Btw, the biggest driving force to what you call "creeping featurisation" is
the microcontroller (processor). Once you have one to perform the basic
functions of the device it's essentially 'free', or close to it, to throw
in some more 'feature' adding code.

Keep in mind that your computer is connected to the internet and can also
get a surge through the Networking media whether that is from a DSL line or
a cable modem line. Lightning can strike the ground or even the power
station making the power, or your house. Also in some places in times of
heavy use the power company may not be making enough power thus causing
some fluctuation.

computers can handle some fluctuations in power. In the USA in the midwest
where I live we get a lot of irratic thunder storms with lots of lightning.
sometimes the power goes out and that is probably the most dangerous time
for a power surge for a computer. This is when a UPS Uninterruptible Power
Supply can help to protect your computer. Sudden outages and then when the
power tries to come back on is when damage is more likely to occur. I have
also heard of the wiring of the circuits in the house can be a factor. If
you are on the same circuit as say a refrigerator or a
airconditioner/furnace there may be some fluctuation when those devices
start up or shut off.

I have always used a surge protector but I honestly do not know how well
they are made or how much protection they afford. One good thing they
provide is a central location to plug your gear into. This way if you want
to work on your computer you know if you turn off the surge protector that
everything is off.

Are surge protectors on the main power supply actually needed in
the UK?

here in the UK we have few overhead mains power lines and have a
relatively steady mains power supply when compared to many other
countries (including the US).

However there seem to be very many surge protector products
advertised for sale in the UK (Argos, Maplins, etc).

I am quite sure it is not bad practice to use a surge protector but
in fact I have never known anyone who has has a problem from a
surge coming in through the power supply.

So personally I don't bother using a surge protector on my PC.

Am I being too complacent?

In message , Lem writes

My sister in \Cornwall (nr Helston) had a brownout) voltages of several
hundred volts over 230V apparently - lost everything connected - PC,
DVD, TV etc. Power company responsible and they did replace everything -
but they did try to replace decent stuff with cheap brands.

Surge protectors would have almost certainly saved her the hassle..


--
Nigel J Carron

In message , Lem writes
I don't have a surge protector on my TV or my stereo. So, do I need
one on my PC?

Not until the power company stuff up - then its wise to go buy one - of
course nothing works for weeks whilst replaced etc.. But why waste a
fiver to prevent it!


--
Nigel J Carron