A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

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.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » The Basics
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Is Zone Alarm necessary with a DSL firewall?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old November 14th 06, 02:19 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
w_tom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default Is Zone Alarm necessary with a DSL firewall?

Surge damage occurs typically once every seven years. Sample the
neighborhood for a better local number. Damage may occur with or
without modem on. Depending on a human to disconnect wires (even to
furnace) is unreliable and unnecessary. An earthed 'whole house'
solution is so effective and costs so much less money.

Others erroneously suggested using a UPS. A recommended 'whole
house' protector costs about $1 per protected appliance - DSL modem and
other items essential to human safety would be protected. An
ineffective $25 or $100 plug-in solution obviously unnecessary,
ineffective, and expensive. Fact that previous damage existed (and you
got lucky with no modem damage) means a single and so effective 'whole
house' protector provides benefits - such as eliminating all that
unplugging.

Pappion wrote:
I only wanted to know if I should keep my Zone Alarm operating when I have
XP Pro, and a DSL firewall in the modem--it was turned on by going to my IE
browser and entering my IP address, and clicking "ON." That's all I needed.

the only time I've had a fried situation was after leaving home for a week,
and returning I had no Internet. It was really the phone cord (I'd forgotten
to unplug it from the wall outlet), and it was a 50' cord that had to go
from my office, over the doorways, into another room, and it was fried. My
modem did have to be replaced, but nothing else was affected, except my
pride.


Ads
  #62  
Old November 14th 06, 08:55 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
DanS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 327
Default [OT Now] UPS's are effective at protecing devices

Leythos wrote in
:



What do you want to bet that IF he replies he doesn't answer that
question.


He won't be back Leythos.

w_tom is exactly like a troll in new.software.readers named AlanConner.

AC is EXACTLY the same way.....makes claim's and when questioned about it,
or given info contradicting him, he NEVER addresses those. AC has been
around a LONG time too. So long that there is at least one web page about
him. http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/

Time to put this thread to rest.

Regards,

DanS


  #63  
Old November 15th 06, 01:16 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
DanS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 327
Default [OT Now]

Leythos wrote in
:

SNIP


Time to put this thread to rest.


Sorry, you're right, I think I actually let him get under my skin for
a moment. Dang, almost never had that happen in the 20+ years I've
been on Usenet.

Oh, and here is something interesting, I'm actually 70 miles from the
nearest city, moving 65mph, with my laptop connected to a 2000W
inverter, and my verizon wireless broadband card, and then VPN'd into
my office, where I'm bridging through my network to use the Usenet
server in my local area to post this

I'm amazed at how well connected we can be when we want to be -
getting almost 600kpbs and I'm 70! miles from any major city.


People like that get under my skin too. Believe me, I'm all for
intelligent discussions, debates, and even some actual arguing. In the
help newsgroups though, there aren't many actual discussions that go on,
just helping people to get there stuff together. And really, how can you
debate a blown-up PSU, or whatever. But w_ (dubya_) needs to get a grip.

And about the mobile broadband........I'm just wrapping up a project to
provide wi-fi wireless to riders of mass transit. The first systems are
going in in California.

Just what people need, more opportunity to work on the way to work AND
the way back home !!!!
  #64  
Old November 15th 06, 10:58 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
w_tom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default [OT Now]

DanS wrote:
People like that get under my skin too. Believe me, I'm all for
intelligent discussions, debates, and even some actual arguing. In the
help newsgroups though, there aren't many actual discussions that go on,
just helping people to get there stuff together. And really, how can you
debate a blown-up PSU, or whatever. But w_ (dubya_) needs to get a grip.


DanS is invited to put forth some technical numbers. Those who
disagree post insults as technical proof. Where does the cadre of
nay-sayers post manufacturer numerical specifications for each type of
transient? They do not because those numbers - those technical facts
- do not exist.

Most damning is Leythos who ignores all those undamaged and
unprotected appliances to proclaim his few surge protectors did
something useful. Leythos uses 'selective data sampling'
apparently because he has 'invisible' protectors.

An informed person does not care what is under their skin. An
informed person has numbers, facts, industry professional citations,
etc to prove a point. So where are numbers from a UPS manufacturer
that define protection from a typically destructive transient? Those
numbers do not exist. DanS, et al never provide those numbers.
Leythos spins 'selective sampling' to prove his myth. Where is the
dedicated earthing wire necessary for effective protection? That
earthing wire does not exist for plug-in solutions. Damning facts.

What is necessary for protecting a DSL modem? Telco already
installed a 'whole house' protector with essential earthing connection
on phone line. Why? Because a well earth protector (installed for
free by the telco) is so effective and so inexpensive. But AC electric
has no such protection required by code. Responsible manufacturers of
effective protectors (Siemens, Intermatic, Cutler-Hammer, Square D, GE,
Leviton, etc) sell effective solutions in Home Depot, Loews, and
electrical supply houses. How do we know these are effective? Each
has a necessary and dedicated earthing wire as 'recommended' by IEEE
Standards.. A 'whole house' protector is essential for protecting DSL
modem and every other household appliance. A protector that is not
'invisible' and that actually does earth transients.

That plug-in UPS does not even provide spec numbers for protection.
One is even a pathetic 900 joules. Another using the same circuit
sells for $160. Effective protectors cost about $1 per protected
appliance. Myths promote those grossly overpriced and ineffective
plug-in solutions.

One irrefutable fact as well proven by industry professional and
denied by those promoting 'miracle' plug-in solutions: no earth ground
means no effective protection. Good reason why responsible
manufacturers sell 'whole house' protectors with that necessary
earthing wire. No reason for skin to crawl. Effective solutions also
costs tens of times less money as well as provide effective protection
for everything inside a building.

  #65  
Old November 15th 06, 11:07 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
w_tom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default Earthgrounding

Pappion wrote:
Is the answer then to literally unplug the surge suppressor from the wall
outlet???


A plug-in protector can be a kludge solution. First, building
earthing should be upgraded to post-1990 code which means an earthing
electrode is connected typically 'less than 10 foot' to AC breaker box.
Second, cut power cord short and connect it to AC receptacle on
breaker box. Now that AC phase has a short connection to earth - can
provide some protection.

Again, this is a kludge solution. One reason is because the power
strip protector is typically so undersized (and yet costs so much
money). Minimally sized protectors earth a nearby and direct strike -
and remain functional. That is but another reason why a 'whole house'
protector from Siemens, Cutler-Hammer, Leviton, Intermatic, GE, etc are
so effective.

Bud promotes plug-in protector manufacturers. Therefore he will avoid
some facts. His 'recommendation' is really a technical discussion
of how different protectors can and fail to protect. Recommendations,
instead, are found in standards. Bud will not challenge that blunt
IEEE statement from the Red Book:
In actual practice, lightning protection is achieve by the
process of interception of lightning produced surges,
diverting them to ground, and by altering their
associated wave shapes.


To convert a plug-in protector to something useful, plug it into a
wall receptacle that makes a short connection to earth - as IEEE says
is necessary for protection. IOW cut that six foot power strip cord
short so that entire connection from power strip to earth ground is
'less than 10 feet'. A shorter connection to earth means even better
protection.

Earthing is the protection. Therefore each protected and incoming
utility wire makes a 'less than 10 foot' connection to same earth
ground. Defined above is 'secondary' protection.

Also confirm integrity of your 'primary' surge protection:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Finally, as a ham, then appreciate this figure from industry
professionals:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf
Two structures (antenna and building): each has a single point earth
ground. To make both earthings more effective, a ground wire
interconnects both earthing electrodes. Yes, even the underground
phone wire is earthed where it enters a building - as the figure
indicates. Every incoming wire on every cable must connect to a common
earthing electrode - either directly or via a 'whole house' protector.

Effective protection is a building wide solution. Each protection
'layer' is defined by a common earthing electrode. Earthing should be
upgraded to meet and exceed post-1990 National Electrical Code
requirements because earthing provides appliance protection from direct
lightning strikes.

  #66  
Old November 15th 06, 11:45 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
Pop`
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 615
Default Earthgrounding

Wah, what a bunch of blatant misinformation, misunderstanding and perversion
of the facts! This w_tom can be nothing but a blathering idiot looking for
attention by trolling with misinformed guesses and outright, incorrect
information and interpretations. Another name for the never-read file.

w_tom wrote:
Pappion wrote:
Is the answer then to literally unplug the surge suppressor from the
wall outlet???


A plug-in protector can be a kludge solution. First, building
earthing should be upgraded to post-1990 code which means an earthing
electrode is connected typically 'less than 10 foot' to AC breaker
box. Second, cut power cord short and connect it to AC receptacle on
breaker box. Now that AC phase has a short connection to earth - can
provide some protection.

Again, this is a kludge solution. One reason is because the power
strip protector is typically so undersized (and yet costs so much
money). Minimally sized protectors earth a nearby and direct strike -
and remain functional. That is but another reason why a 'whole house'
protector from Siemens, Cutler-Hammer, Leviton, Intermatic, GE, etc
are so effective.

Bud promotes plug-in protector manufacturers. Therefore he will avoid
some facts. His 'recommendation' is really a technical discussion
of how different protectors can and fail to protect. Recommendations,
instead, are found in standards. Bud will not challenge that blunt
IEEE statement from the Red Book:
In actual practice, lightning protection is achieve by the
process of interception of lightning produced surges,
diverting them to ground, and by altering their
associated wave shapes.


To convert a plug-in protector to something useful, plug it into a
wall receptacle that makes a short connection to earth - as IEEE says
is necessary for protection. IOW cut that six foot power strip cord
short so that entire connection from power strip to earth ground is
'less than 10 feet'. A shorter connection to earth means even better
protection.

Earthing is the protection. Therefore each protected and incoming
utility wire makes a 'less than 10 foot' connection to same earth
ground. Defined above is 'secondary' protection.

Also confirm integrity of your 'primary' surge protection:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Finally, as a ham, then appreciate this figure from industry
professionals:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf
Two structures (antenna and building): each has a single point earth
ground. To make both earthings more effective, a ground wire
interconnects both earthing electrodes. Yes, even the underground
phone wire is earthed where it enters a building - as the figure
indicates. Every incoming wire on every cable must connect to a
common earthing electrode - either directly or via a 'whole house'
protector.

Effective protection is a building wide solution. Each protection
'layer' is defined by a common earthing electrode. Earthing should be
upgraded to meet and exceed post-1990 National Electrical Code
requirements because earthing provides appliance protection from
direct lightning strikes.




  #67  
Old November 16th 06, 01:30 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
DanS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 327
Default [OT Now]

"w_tom" wrote in news:1163627884.763097.267420
@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

DanS wrote:
People like that get under my skin too. Believe me, I'm all for
intelligent discussions, debates, and even some actual arguing. In the
help newsgroups though, there aren't many actual discussions that go

on,
just helping people to get there stuff together. And really, how can

you
debate a blown-up PSU, or whatever. But w_ (dubya_) needs to get a

grip.

DanS is invited to put forth some technical numbers. Those who
disagree post insults as technical proof. Where does the cadre of
nay-sayers post manufacturer numerical specifications for each type of
transient? They do not because those numbers - those technical facts
- do not exist.

Most damning is Leythos who ignores all those undamaged and
unprotected appliances to proclaim his few surge protectors did
something useful. Leythos uses 'selective data sampling'
apparently because he has 'invisible' protectors.

An informed person does not care what is under their skin. An
informed person has numbers, facts, industry professional citations,
etc to prove a point. So where are numbers from a UPS manufacturer
that define protection from a typically destructive transient? Those
numbers do not exist. DanS, et al never provide those numbers.
Leythos spins 'selective sampling' to prove his myth. Where is the
dedicated earthing wire necessary for effective protection? That
earthing wire does not exist for plug-in solutions. Damning facts.


SNIPPED blah...blah....blah

And you choose to ignore that devices protected survive while some
unprotected devices do not. (Again, claiming they are proteced by the
invisible surge supressors placed by the surge suppressor fairies.)

At this point though, I am definately not going to reply to you again,
and should have stopped days ago.

I am just pointing out a couple of things one last time.....

1) I NEVER RECOMMENDED ANY TYPE OF SURGE SUPPRESSION OVER WHOLE HOUSE
PROTECTION, YOU ARE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT WHOLE HOUSE PROTECTION INTO THE
DISCUSSION.

2) WHILE THEORY IS GREAT, IT IS ONLY THEORY.

3) YOU CAN NOT CHOOSE TO IGNORE REAL-WORLD RESULTS JUST BECAUSE THEY
DON'T JIVE WITH THEORY, TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

4) YOU HAVE BEEN HAVING THIS SAME ARGUMENT WITH HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE OVER A
FIVE YEAR SPAN ON USENET, DON'T YOU THINK IT'S TIME TO GIVE IT UP. MANY
PEOPLE IN OTHER GROUPS, FROM WHAT I HAVE READ IN SOME OF THOSE THREADS,
DETEST *ANY* QUESTIONS ABOUT SUGRE SUPPRESSION FROM ANYONE, FOR FEAR YOU
WILL CHIME IN ON THE THREAD. THAT SAYS IT ALL.

Good Night Gracie........
  #68  
Old November 16th 06, 05:45 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
bud--
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default Earthgrounding


Second, cut power cord short and connect it to AC receptacle on
breaker box.

Bizarre idea of the month.

One reason is because the power
strip protector is typically so undersized (and yet costs so much
money).

Plug-in suppressors are available in ratings from junk to very high.
You pay for what you get (but are available at reasonable ratings
relatively cheaply).


Bud promotes plug-in protector manufacturers.

Quoting w_: "It is an old political trick. When facts cannot be
challenged technically, then attack the messenger."

Therefore he will avoid
some facts. His 'recommendation' is really a technical discussion
of how different protectors can and fail to protect. Recommendations,
instead, are found in standards.

I base arguments on the IEEE and NIST guides. You have to be stupid to
say the guides, intended for the general public, would waste a lot of
space on "technical discussion'" about a device the guides don't
recommend.

Bud will not challenge that blunt
IEEE statement from the Red Book:

You also have to be stupid to say the IEEE guide would conflict with
the IEEE color books.


Earthing is the protection. Therefore each protected and incoming
utility wire makes a 'less than 10 foot' connection to same earth
ground.

Your religious views on earthing are not shared by the IEEE or NIST.
Plug-in surge suppressors, as described clearly in the IEEE guide, work
primarily by clamping the voltages on all wires (power and signal) to
the common ground at the surge suppressor, not by earthing.


Finally, as a ham, then appreciate this figure from industry
professionals:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf

w_ has a fetish about 200+ ft lightning rods, aka tower antennas. The
rest of us do not expect our equipment to survive a direct lightning
hit to our house.

The IEEE and NIST guides clearly say that plug-in suppressors are
effective.
Links to sites that say plug-in suppressors are effective: 2
Your links to sites that say plug-in suppressors are not effective: 0

---
bud--

  #69  
Old November 16th 06, 10:22 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
w_tom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default Earthgrounding

bud-- wrote:
Finally, as a ham, then appreciate this figure from industry
professionals:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf

w_ has a fetish about 200+ ft lightning rods, aka tower antennas. The
rest of us do not expect our equipment to survive a direct lightning
hit to our house.


AC electric wires above the street are 'antennas' connected directly
to every AC appliance inside a house. What is struck more often?
Highest wires connect lightning directly to household electronics. We
expect lightning to strike that wire - a direct strike to the house -
resulting in zero appliance damage. Lightning striking that wire is a
direct strike to AC appliances IF surge is not properly earthed by one
well proven 'whole house' protector.

Bud does "not expect our equipment to survive a direct lightning
strike" because Bud recommends plug-in protectors with no earthing.
Direct lightning strikes to household appliances means equipment still
survives. It means protection inside all appliances is not
overwhelmed. No damage from direct lightning strikes was proven about
25 times annually atop the Empire State Building even in the 1930.
Technology has been that well proven for that long.

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground which plug-in
solutions must ignore to sell grossly undersized and overpriced plug-in
protectors. No wonder plug-in protectors avoid earthing discussions.
Names such APC, Tripplite, Isobar, Belkin, and Monster Cable were not
in that list of responsible protector manufacturers. How do you know?
Where is their dedicated earthing wire? Earthing wire does not exist
on ineffective protectors.

Direct lightning strikes to household appliances via something
similar to an antenna (utility wires) means no damage if one properly
earthing 'whole house' protector is installed. That's one dollar per
protected appliance verses $25 or $100 per appliance for ineffective
plug-in solutions. Learn from the industry professional at:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf

No earth ground means no effective protection. Necessary for DSL
modems. Telco installs a properly earthed 'whole house' protector on
phone lines - for free. But homeowner must install same on AC electric
to protect a DSL modem - and computer.

  #70  
Old November 17th 06, 12:10 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
John John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,149
Default Earthgrounding

w_tom wrote:
bud-- wrote:

Finally, as a ham, then appreciate this figure from industry
professionals:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf


w_ has a fetish about 200+ ft lightning rods, aka tower antennas. The
rest of us do not expect our equipment to survive a direct lightning
hit to our house.



AC electric wires above the street are 'antennas' connected directly
to every AC appliance inside a house. What is struck more often?
Highest wires connect lightning directly to household electronics. We
expect lightning to strike that wire - a direct strike to the house -
resulting in zero appliance damage. Lightning striking that wire is a
direct strike to AC appliances IF surge is not properly earthed by one
well proven 'whole house' protector.

Bud does "not expect our equipment to survive a direct lightning
strike" because Bud recommends plug-in protectors with no earthing.
Direct lightning strikes to household appliances means equipment still
survives. It means protection inside all appliances is not
overwhelmed. No damage from direct lightning strikes was proven about
25 times annually atop the Empire State Building even in the 1930.
Technology has been that well proven for that long.

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground which plug-in
solutions must ignore to sell grossly undersized and overpriced plug-in
protectors. No wonder plug-in protectors avoid earthing discussions.
Names such APC, Tripplite, Isobar, Belkin, and Monster Cable were not
in that list of responsible protector manufacturers. How do you know?
Where is their dedicated earthing wire? Earthing wire does not exist
on ineffective protectors.

Direct lightning strikes to household appliances via something
similar to an antenna (utility wires) means no damage if one properly
earthing 'whole house' protector is installed. That's one dollar per
protected appliance verses $25 or $100 per appliance for ineffective
plug-in solutions. Learn from the industry professional at:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf

No earth ground means no effective protection. Necessary for DSL
modems. Telco installs a properly earthed 'whole house' protector on
phone lines - for free. But homeowner must install same on AC electric
to protect a DSL modem - and computer.


You dumb cluck. Every house is grounded at the entrance (meter) plus
every power pole has a ground discharge, a copper wire running the
length of the pole into the ground. Where do you live, in Antartica or
what?

John
  #71  
Old November 17th 06, 05:07 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
w_tom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default Earthgrounding

John John wrote:
You dumb cluck. Every house is grounded at the entrance (meter) plus
every power pole has a ground discharge, a copper wire running the
length of the pole into the ground. ...


Well John John - is your house earthed per post 1990 National
Electrical Code requirements? Many are not even though you insist
otherwise.. Others are missing even a 'no longer sufficient' earthing
to water pipe. Apparently you did not bother to read previous posts
and did not grasp the technicals. Most homes are not earthed as that
industry professional figure demonstrates. Apparently you magically
knew otherwise without first reading what you replied to.

For surge protection, earthing must meet .... and exceed ... post
1990 code requirements. That means every wire in every cable must
connect to earth as defined earlier. Don't bother replying to that
last sentence until learning details of 'connect to earth'. It is
intentionally vague since details were posted previously. Even that
telephone pole earth ground was defined in prevous posts that you never
read.

Next time, John John, you might want to first read before replying;
also learn about concepts such as wire impedance. Wire impedance is
why 'secondary' protection should be earthed 'less than 10 feet'. You
even assume that earthing still exists - is intact? Too many say the
lights work; therefore earthing is OK. Only visual inspection can
confirm that earthing exists - as prevously posted pictures
demonstrated. Learn before jumping to insult. It suggests how
inexperienced you still are.

No earth ground means no effective protection. Learn about primary
and secondary protection systems defined earlier.

  #72  
Old November 17th 06, 05:51 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
John John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,149
Default Earthgrounding

I don't know what the electrical code is in your country but in this
country no earthing = no power. It's a must.

John

w_tom wrote:
John John wrote:

You dumb cluck. Every house is grounded at the entrance (meter) plus
every power pole has a ground discharge, a copper wire running the
length of the pole into the ground. ...



Well John John - is your house earthed per post 1990 National
Electrical Code requirements? Many are not even though you insist
otherwise.. Others are missing even a 'no longer sufficient' earthing
to water pipe. Apparently you did not bother to read previous posts
and did not grasp the technicals. Most homes are not earthed as that
industry professional figure demonstrates. Apparently you magically
knew otherwise without first reading what you replied to.

For surge protection, earthing must meet .... and exceed ... post
1990 code requirements. That means every wire in every cable must
connect to earth as defined earlier. Don't bother replying to that
last sentence until learning details of 'connect to earth'. It is
intentionally vague since details were posted previously. Even that
telephone pole earth ground was defined in prevous posts that you never
read.

Next time, John John, you might want to first read before replying;
also learn about concepts such as wire impedance. Wire impedance is
why 'secondary' protection should be earthed 'less than 10 feet'. You
even assume that earthing still exists - is intact? Too many say the
lights work; therefore earthing is OK. Only visual inspection can
confirm that earthing exists - as prevously posted pictures
demonstrated. Learn before jumping to insult. It suggests how
inexperienced you still are.

No earth ground means no effective protection. Learn about primary
and secondary protection systems defined earlier.

  #73  
Old November 17th 06, 05:54 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
John John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,149
Default Earthgrounding

My house was built in 1977 and even then the power company would not
have connected without earthing at the meter. In this country we have
long ago abandoned knob and tube wiring...

John

w_tom wrote:

John John wrote:

You dumb cluck. Every house is grounded at the entrance (meter) plus
every power pole has a ground discharge, a copper wire running the
length of the pole into the ground. ...



Well John John - is your house earthed per post 1990 National
Electrical Code requirements? Many are not even though you insist
otherwise.. Others are missing even a 'no longer sufficient' earthing
to water pipe. Apparently you did not bother to read previous posts
and did not grasp the technicals. Most homes are not earthed as that
industry professional figure demonstrates. Apparently you magically
knew otherwise without first reading what you replied to.

For surge protection, earthing must meet .... and exceed ... post
1990 code requirements. That means every wire in every cable must
connect to earth as defined earlier. Don't bother replying to that
last sentence until learning details of 'connect to earth'. It is
intentionally vague since details were posted previously. Even that
telephone pole earth ground was defined in prevous posts that you never
read.

Next time, John John, you might want to first read before replying;
also learn about concepts such as wire impedance. Wire impedance is
why 'secondary' protection should be earthed 'less than 10 feet'. You
even assume that earthing still exists - is intact? Too many say the
lights work; therefore earthing is OK. Only visual inspection can
confirm that earthing exists - as prevously posted pictures
demonstrated. Learn before jumping to insult. It suggests how
inexperienced you still are.

No earth ground means no effective protection. Learn about primary
and secondary protection systems defined earlier.

  #74  
Old November 17th 06, 06:01 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
bud--
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default Earthgrounding



On Nov 16, 3:22 pm, "w_tom" wrote:
bud-- wrote:
Finally, as a ham, then appreciate this figure from industry
professionals:
http://www.erico.com/public/library/...es/tncr002.pdf

w_ has a fetish about 200+ ft lightning rods, aka tower antennas. The
rest of us do not expect our equipment to survive a direct lightning
hit to our house. AC electric wires above the street are 'antennas' connected directly

to every AC appliance inside a house. What is struck more often?
Highest wires connect lightning directly to household electronics. We
expect lightning to strike that wire - a direct strike to the house -
resulting in zero appliance damage. Lightning striking that wire is a
direct strike to AC appliances IF surge is not properly earthed by one
well proven 'whole house' protector.

In addition to the comments of John John
- a lightning rod, aka tower antenna, is far higher than the
distribution wires near a house; a tower antenna is FAR more likely to
be hit by lightning
- a direct strike to a house, equivalent to a hit to an adjacent tower
antenna, is VERY unlikely
- distribution wires, which are mounted highest on power poles in
neighborhoods, are likely to have lightning arresters, and surges will
have to pass thorough power transformers
- a hit to distribution wires has significant impedance (you are fond
of impedance) to my house - the further away the hit the higher
impedance - which greatly reduces the surge intensity
- in addition, a hit to distribution wires is divided by all multiple
paths to ground
- if the secondary wires behind my house (or even the service drop to
my house) is hit, the surge is divided between my house, and grounding
through the transformer and all other users on that transformer; it
will also be divided if it comes through the transformer

So no, I don't think your fetish with tower antennas is particularly
relevant to houses.



Bud does "not expect our equipment to survive a direct lightning
strike" because Bud recommends plug-in protectors with no earthing.

I don't remember posts from anyone who thought their house would
survive a direct lightning hit

No damage from direct lightning strikes was proven about
25 times annually atop the Empire State Building even in the 1930.
Technology has been that well proven for that long.

A stupid comparison. The Empire State Building has a steel frame which
is highly conductive because of large metal cross section and multiple
paths. Like sitting in a car that is hit by lightning.


A protector is only as effective as its earth ground which plug-in
solutions must ignore

Your religious views about earthing are still not shared by the IEEE
and NIST. Plug-in surge suppressors still work primarily by clamping,
not earthing.


No earth ground means no effective protection.

And the required statement of religious belief again.

The IEEE and NIST guides clearly say that plug-in suppressors are
effective.
Links to sites that say plug-in suppressors are effective: 2
Your links to sites that say plug-in suppressors are not effective: 0
You are alone on this.

--
bud--

  #75  
Old November 17th 06, 06:16 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
w_tom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 373
Default Earthgrounding

John John wrote:
My house was built in 1977 and even then the power company would not
have connected without earthing at the meter. In this country we have
long ago abandoned knob and tube wiring...


And that requirement is sufficient only for human safety. Power
company cares not whether your appliances have any protection - or are
even damaged every year. They are only concerned about earthing for
human safety.

Chances are your earthing is not sufficient for transistor safety.
Did you read many posts and technical reasons for enhanced earthing?
Most 1977 homes have earthing woefully insufficient for transistorized
appliances AND have virtually no 'whole house' appliance protection.
Does you telephone service have properly earthing protection - that was
only introduced in the mid 1980s? Again, those many older telephone
installations were only earthed for human safety - not for today's
phones. Did you learn from previous posts to discover if your earthing
is sufficient? Or did you just know and therefore post disparagement
accordingly?

Chances are that a house built in 1977 needs its earthing for all
utilities upgraded. Chances are your earthing is the equivalent of
knob and tube wiring. Did you read those posts or just *assume* 1977
earthing will always be sufficient? You have much learning to do.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.