w_tom wrote:
> Bud must post anything to avoid what is standard and fundamental to
> surge protection. A protector is only as effective as its earth
> ground. Earth ground - not a protector - provides protection.
..
w_ has a religious belief (immune from challenge) that surge protection
must use earthing. Thus in his view plug-in suppressors (which are not
well earthed) can not possibly work. The IEEE guide explains plug-in
suppressors work by CLAMPING the voltage on all wires (signal and power)
to the common ground at the suppressor. Plug-in suppressors do not work
primarily by earthing (or stopping or absorbing). The guide explains
earthing occurs elsewhere. (Read the guide starting pdf page 40).
..
> Why does Bud recommend an ineffective
> solution that is irrelevant to the OP's question?
..
My only recommendation was: “I agree with w_ that ethernet between
buildings should connect to an entrance protector at each building“ and
short connection of that protector to the earthing wire at the power
service. Or fiber.

I made a comment in passing about plug-in surge suppressors in response
to w_’s ‘magic box’ nonsense. But w_ has to defend his religious
belief in earthing.
..
> A protector is only as
> effective as its earth ground.
..
The religious mantra #2.
Everyone is for earthing. The question is whether plug-in suppressors
are effective. Both the IEEE and NIST guides say they are effective.

w_ still has not provided a link to a source that says plug-in
suppressors are NOT effective. There is only w_’s opinion based on his
religious belief in earthing.

Never answered:
- Why do the only 2 examples of protection in the IEEE guide use plug-in
suppressors?
- Why does the NIST guide says plug-in suppressors are "the easiest
solution"?

Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
Never any sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Twists opposing sources to say the opposite of what they really say.
Attempts to discredit opponents.
w_ is a purveyor of junk science.

--
bud--