|
Home > Archive > Electrical Engineering > May 2007 > power strip phone jack
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
power strip phone jack
|
|
| Jeff Dieterle 2007-05-28, 9:25 am |
| Is there a better way to provide surge protection for my pc modem than the
phone jack built into a power strip. The phone surge protector blew last
night during a thunder storm.
| |
| Palindrome 2007-05-28, 9:25 am |
| Jeff Dieterle wrote:
> Is there a better way to provide surge protection for my pc modem than the
> phone jack built into a power strip. The phone surge protector blew last
> night during a thunder storm.
>
>
Unplug it during thunderstorms/when not in use?
--
Sue
| |
| phil-news-nospam@ipal.net 2007-05-28, 9:25 am |
| On Mon, 28 May 2007 08:03:56 -0500 Jeff Dieterle <djdieterle@localnet.com> wrote:
| Is there a better way to provide surge protection for my pc modem than the
| phone jack built into a power strip. The phone surge protector blew last
| night during a thunder storm.
It did it's job. Replace it. This is why I have extra surge protector
strips already purchased and ready to deploy (to replace existing units
that "took the surge" or to expand in a hurry as needed).
Do not go cheap with surge protectors, as they can be a fire hazard under
two conditions: a very large surge can explosively destroy the MOV devices
that provide the protection, and: cheap sockets make poor contacts. Both
problems can cause a fire, which could be better contained in a metal
enclosed power strip as opposed to a cheap plastic one. Choose only a
name brand you known (where they are) and trust. I personally use the
heavy duty Iso-bar products from TrippLite. I pay more and sleep better.
I just wish they would make plugs designed for those of us that have the
safer "ground-pin up" receptacle installations.
You want to either unplug things during times you are away or asleep when
any significant chance of a storm exists, or construct some kind of system
to provide isolation to minimize damage, such as fiber optic or wireless
connections, if you want something better than what a surge protector can
provide. If you need to keep something online all the time, you might
want to go with a low power laptop or SBC/embedded system coupled with a
large UPS that can be unplugged from the mains for an extended period of
time.
--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / spamtrap-2007-05-28-0832@ipal.net |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|
| |
| gfretwell@aol.com 2007-05-28, 1:25 pm |
| On Mon, 28 May 2007 08:03:56 -0500, "Jeff Dieterle"
<djdieterle@localnet.com> wrote:
>Is there a better way to provide surge protection for my pc modem than the
>phone jack built into a power strip. The phone surge protector blew last
>night during a thunder storm.
>
Other than the protector the telco provides in the Demark, the answer
is no. You want your point of use protection common with the power for
that equipment so it all clamps to the same point.
You also need to go look at that Demark protector. be sure it uses the
same ground as your electric service panel. Telcos and cable companies
have a bad habit of driving their own rod and not bonding that to the
service. That is not code compliant and will cause you to blow modems
or the whole PC (or TVs in the case of cable). If you don't have a
panel protector ... get one. They have them at Dale-electric.com at a
reasonable price.
| |
| TimPerry 2007-05-28, 5:25 pm |
| Jeff Dieterle wrote:
> Is there a better way to provide surge protection for my pc modem
> than the phone jack built into a power strip. The phone surge
> protector blew last night during a thunder storm.
if you are persistant and lucky you can get you telco to provide a gas
discharge protection device at your demarc.
additional protection devices on each item conected can be a prudent
measure.
in some cases boadcast engineers modify devices by adding small fuses (1/10
amp or therabouts) to equipment at problem or remote locations. it is much
easier and cheaper and faster to change a fuse now and then to repair fried
equipment.
| |
|
| gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2007 08:03:56 -0500, "Jeff Dieterle"
> <djdieterle@localnet.com> wrote:
>
>
> Other than the protector the telco provides in the Demark, the answer
> is no. You want your point of use protection common with the power for
> that equipment so it all clamps to the same point.
Agree - when using a plug-in suppressor you really want all wires,
signal and power, to go through the suppressor.
> You also need to go look at that Demark protector. be sure it uses the
> same ground as your electric service panel. Telcos and cable companies
> have a bad habit of driving their own rod and not bonding that to the
> service. That is not code compliant and will cause you to blow modems
> or the whole PC (or TVs in the case of cable). If you don't have a
> panel protector ... get one. They have them at Dale-electric.com at a
> reasonable price.
You also want a *short* connecting wire from the signal demark protector
to the earthing electrode wire at the power service.
--
bud--
| |
|
| TimPerry wrote:
> Jeff Dieterle wrote:
>
> if you are persistant and lucky you can get you telco to provide a gas
> discharge protection device at your demarc.
I thought that's what the phone demarc uses (US).
>
> additional protection devices on each item conected can be a prudent
> measure.
>
> in some cases boadcast engineers modify devices by adding small fuses (1/10
> amp or therabouts) to equipment at problem or remote locations. it is much
> easier and cheaper and faster to change a fuse now and then to repair fried
> equipment.
>
A fuse might isolate equipment from the line, but a surge, by
definition, is faster than a fuse can operate. Large surges, like
lightning induced, are likely to arc across a fuse as it opens.
--
bud--
| |
| TimPerry 2007-05-29, 8:25 pm |
| Bud-- wrote:
> TimPerry wrote:
>
> I thought that's what the phone demarc uses (US).
if you are lucky... there are many Telcos with many different procedures.
>
>
> A fuse might isolate equipment from the line, but a surge, by
> definition, is faster than a fuse can operate. Large surges, like
> lightning induced, are likely to arc across a fuse as it opens.\
problem locations may suffer repetitive hits on the structure, the power
lines, and the phone lines in a single storm.
anything you can do to minimize downtime and repair costs while maintaining
functionality is appropriate.
a direct hit is probably going to toast something, it all the near misses
that the little protectors can sometimes help with.
this company make a respectable array of products that seem to be effective
when properly installed. http://www.polyphaser.com/
| |
| Jeff Dieterle 2007-05-30, 9:25 am |
| I've had the phone co. out in the past to look for problems but they
reported everything normal. All told I've lost a computer modem, DSS
receiver modem, and a couple of power strips.
I've purchased a gas discharge protector mfg. by Hyperlink Technologies
Model Al-D2VW that installs at my phone terminal box. My electrical system
grounding is not near the phone terminal box. Will I create any problems by
driving a separate ground rod at the phone terminal box to earth the surge
protector?
"TimPerry" <timperry@noaspama.net> wrote in message
news:465ccf07$0$9939$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Bud-- wrote:
>
> if you are lucky... there are many Telcos with many different procedures.
>
>
> problem locations may suffer repetitive hits on the structure, the power
> lines, and the phone lines in a single storm.
>
> anything you can do to minimize downtime and repair costs while
> maintaining
> functionality is appropriate.
>
> a direct hit is probably going to toast something, it all the near misses
> that the little protectors can sometimes help with.
>
> this company make a respectable array of products that seem to be
> effective
> when properly installed. http://www.polyphaser.com/
>
>
| |
|
| Jeff Dieterle wrote:
> I've had the phone co. out in the past to look for problems but they
> reported everything normal. All told I've lost a computer modem, DSS
> receiver modem, and a couple of power strips.
> I've purchased a gas discharge protector mfg. by Hyperlink Technologies
> Model Al-D2VW that installs at my phone terminal box. My electrical system
> grounding is not near the phone terminal box. Will I create any problems by
> driving a separate ground rod at the phone terminal box to earth the surge
> protector?
>
In the US, the NEC requires a ground rod if the grounding conductor from
the phone entry protection to the power system is over 20 feet
(residential). If a separate ground rod is used, the entry surge
protector *must* still be connected to the power grounding system as
gfretwell said. Not connecting them is inviting big problems for
anything connected to both power and phone.
An excellent guide on surges and surge protection is at:
http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guid...sion_May051.pdf
Starting on page 31, pdf page 40, is an illustration of what can happen
if the phone entry protector and the power service are connected but
distant. In systems like the US, where the neutral and grounding wires
are connected together at the power service, you want the phone, CATV,
.... entry protectors connected with a short distance to the
neutral-ground bond point. In the event of a major surge the voltage at
the house ground will lift from 'absolute' earth potential. You want the
phone, power ground and power to lift together.
I suggest running your phone wire from the entry point to near the power
service and mounting your new protector there. Distribute the phone
wiring from the new protector.
The IEEE guide, after the illustration above, shows how a plug-in surge
protector with power and signal wires running through it can protect
when the phone entry point is distant from the power service. As
gfretwell said, voltage on power and signal wires are clamped to the
same point.
--
bud--
| |
|
| Phone company is required to make that earthing connection in 20
feet. For effective transistor protection, that distance is too far.
You want to connect 'less than 10 feet'. And as gfretwell noted, all
earthing from every utility must be to a common point.
A telephone protector blew. Does that mean a surge entered on phone
line? No. Remember how electricity works. First an electrical path
forms from cloud, through your house, to earthborne charges maybe
miles away. Then electricity flows in everything in that path. Then
something in that path fails. Surge could have been incoming on AC
mains, through whatever, then out via that telephone protector.
Do not think the protector is protection. The protector is only a
connecting device to protection. Protection is earth ground. A
protector is only as effective as its earthing.
How to connect everything to a single point ground? Cinergy
provides examples of good, bad, and ugly earthing:
http://www.cinergy.com/surge/ttip08.htm
Of course a better solution is to surround the building with that
buried ground wire - a halo ground. When building a new home, surge
protection is installed when footings are poured - Ufer ground. In
each case, surge protection is defined by the quality of earthing.
Most common source of damage on phone line is a surge on AC
electric. Every wire in an AC cable must connect to that same
earthing either directly (neutral wire) or via a 'whole house'
protector (each hot wire).
Bud provides a perfect example of what happens when using a
protector too far from earth ground, too close to transistors, and
without the single point earth ground:
http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guid...sion_May051.pdf
Page 42 Figure 8 shows a TV destroyed by 8000 volts because the surge
was not earthed where it entered the building. Bud promotes for plug-
in manufacturers and therefore recommends protector without earthing.
You can learn from facts. Notice how the plug-in protector
contributed to TV damage. Why? Where was the short path to
earthing? Did not exist. Therefore electronics damage resulted.
You had surge damage. Therefore a surge was not earthed - was
permitted inside the building. Why is your earthing system
defective? Even the phone company will only use whatever earthing you
provided. For better protection, provide the teleco, cable TV,
satellite dish, and AC electric a superior, single point earth ground
so that each connection is less than 10 feet to the same earthing.
Protection is only as effective as the earthing system - and it must
be single point earthing.
On May 30, 9:19 am, "Jeff Dieterle" <djdiete...@localnet.com> wrote:
> I've had the phone co. out in the past to look for problems but they
> reported everything normal. All told I've lost a computer modem, DSS
> receiver modem, and a couple of power strips.
> I've purchased a gas discharge protector mfg. by Hyperlink Technologies
> Model Al-D2VW that installs at my phone terminal box. My electrical system
> grounding is not near the phone terminal box. Will I create any problems by
> driving a separate ground rod at the phone terminal box to earth the surge
> protector?
| |
| Jeff Dieterle 2007-05-31, 9:25 am |
| You-all are probably correct in my case. The person that wired my house was
infatuated with tail-panels. In a 3500sq.ft house I have 6 tail panels and
none of them are bounded properly to the main panel grounding system. By
that I mean a separate bond wire was not ran from each tail panel to the
main panel bond, only 3-wire cable was used to feed the tail panels.
So far I've replaced the main service entrance and panel with proper nec
compliant wiring methods. The main panel I installed is large enough to
eliminate all the tail panels and as I do away with each tail-panel I'll
carry the correct size bonding wire to each branch circuit.
It's impractical for me to bond my telephone & catv at the service entrance
grounding electrode or have the ufer system, so if I'm understanding all
this I need to run a #6 cu bonding wire from my service entrance grounding
electrode to the entry locations of the telephone and catv to establish the
ground path for surge protection devices. Is that correct ? and thanks
for your help
"w_tom" <w_tom1@usa.net> wrote in message
news:1180554090.252239.87730@q66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Phone company is required to make that earthing connection in 20
> feet. For effective transistor protection, that distance is too far.
> You want to connect 'less than 10 feet'. And as gfretwell noted, all
> earthing from every utility must be to a common point.
>
> A telephone protector blew. Does that mean a surge entered on phone
> line? No. Remember how electricity works. First an electrical path
> forms from cloud, through your house, to earthborne charges maybe
> miles away. Then electricity flows in everything in that path. Then
> something in that path fails. Surge could have been incoming on AC
> mains, through whatever, then out via that telephone protector.
>
> Do not think the protector is protection. The protector is only a
> connecting device to protection. Protection is earth ground. A
> protector is only as effective as its earthing.
>
> How to connect everything to a single point ground? Cinergy
> provides examples of good, bad, and ugly earthing:
> http://www.cinergy.com/surge/ttip08.htm
>
> Of course a better solution is to surround the building with that
> buried ground wire - a halo ground. When building a new home, surge
> protection is installed when footings are poured - Ufer ground. In
> each case, surge protection is defined by the quality of earthing.
>
> Most common source of damage on phone line is a surge on AC
> electric. Every wire in an AC cable must connect to that same
> earthing either directly (neutral wire) or via a 'whole house'
> protector (each hot wire).
>
> Bud provides a perfect example of what happens when using a
> protector too far from earth ground, too close to transistors, and
> without the single point earth ground:
> http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guid...sion_May051.pdf
> Page 42 Figure 8 shows a TV destroyed by 8000 volts because the surge
> was not earthed where it entered the building. Bud promotes for plug-
> in manufacturers and therefore recommends protector without earthing.
> You can learn from facts. Notice how the plug-in protector
> contributed to TV damage. Why? Where was the short path to
> earthing? Did not exist. Therefore electronics damage resulted.
>
> You had surge damage. Therefore a surge was not earthed - was
> permitted inside the building. Why is your earthing system
> defective? Even the phone company will only use whatever earthing you
> provided. For better protection, provide the teleco, cable TV,
> satellite dish, and AC electric a superior, single point earth ground
> so that each connection is less than 10 feet to the same earthing.
>
> Protection is only as effective as the earthing system - and it must
> be single point earthing.
>
> On May 30, 9:19 am, "Jeff Dieterle" <djdiete...@localnet.com> wrote:
>
| |
|
| w_tom wrote:
> Phone company is required to make that earthing connection in 20
> feet. For effective transistor protection, that distance is too far.
> You want to connect 'less than 10 feet'. And as gfretwell noted, all
> earthing from every utility must be to a common point.
In the US, the phone company (1 & 2 unit residential) can use a longer
than 20 foot connection but must then also add a grounding electrode.
>
> Do not think the protector is protection. The protector is only a
> connecting device to protection. Protection is earth ground. A
> protector is only as effective as its earthing.
w_ has a religious belief (immune from challenge) that surge protection
must use earthing. Thus in his view plug-in suppressors 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 (as gfretwell and I both said). The IEEE guide explains
earthing occurs elsewhere.
>
> Of course a better solution is to surround the building with that
> buried ground wire - a halo ground. When building a new home, surge
> protection is installed when footings are poured - Ufer ground. In
> each case, surge protection is defined by the quality of earthing.
From
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi...efinitions.html
“Halo Grounded Ring: A grounded No. 2 wire, installed around all four
walls inside a small building, at an elevation of approx. six inches
below the ceiling. There are drops installed from the halo to the
equipment cabinets and to waveguide ports, interior cable trays etc.
Halo rings serve as connector points to achieve ground references of
interior metallic objects. These, in turn, are connected to the main
ground bus bar.”
It is a “ground ring”, not a “halo ground”.
>
> Bud provides a perfect example of what happens when using a
> protector too far from earth ground, too close to transistors, and
> without the single point earth ground:
> http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guid...sion_May051.pdf
> Page 42 Figure 8 shows a TV destroyed by 8000 volts because the surge
> was not earthed where it entered the building.
It is not my example, it is the IEEE’s.
The illustration has a surge coming in on a CATV drop. There are 2 TVs,
one is on a plug-in suppressor. The point of the illustration is "to
protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required”.
Right before this illustration, the IEEE guide shows how a plug-in
suppressor can protect when a CATV service entrance protector is too far
from the power service (is not a single point ground). The IEEE guide
says plug-in suppressors are effective.
> Bud promotes for plug-
> in manufacturers and therefore recommends protector without earthing.
To quote w_: "It is an old political trick. When facts cannot be
challenged technically, then attack the messenger." My only association
with surge protectors is I have some.
Then w_ makes up opinions.
> You can learn from facts. Notice how the plug-in protector
> contributed to TV damage. Why? Where was the short path to
> earthing? Did not exist. Therefore electronics damage resulted.
For anyone with minimal reading and thinking skills the “protector” did
not contribute to any damage. The “protector” protected the first TV
that was connected to it, and reduced the voltage at the second TV from
10,000V to 8,000V.
Bizarre claim - plug-in surge suppressors don't work
No sources that say plug-in suppressors are NOT effective.
Distorts opposing sources.
Attempts to discredit opponents.
w_ is a purveyor of junk science.
--
bud--
| |
|
| Jeff Dieterle wrote:
>
> It's impractical for me to bond my telephone & catv at the service entrance
> grounding electrode or have the ufer system, so if I'm understanding all
> this I need to run a #6 cu bonding wire from my service entrance grounding
> electrode to the entry locations of the telephone and catv to establish the
> ground path for surge protection devices. Is that correct ? and thanks
> for your help
That will still not give you a "single point ground", which emphasizes a
*short* connection between the ground systems. Look at:
http://omegaps.com/Lightning%20Guid...sion_May051.pdf
starting on page 31, pdf page 40.
#6 is good for power grounds. But surges are very short events. A
lightning surge may last 200 MICROseconds. Currents are, in effect, high
frequency. The inductance of the wire dominates over resistance. Large
wire doesn't give the advantage you expect for surges. (In the US, only
#14 wire is required to connect signal protectors.)
You can put a second phone (CATV, ...) surge protector near the power
panel and distribute everything from there.
Or you can use multiport plug-in surge suppressors at equipment
connecting to both phone (CATV,...) and power - with power and signal
wires going through the suppressor. The IEEE guide says that if there is
not a 'single point ground' then "equipment can only be protected by
multiport protectors".
The NIST also has a good (and less technical) guide on surges and surge
protection at:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/...s/surgesfnl.pdf
According to a NIST guide, US insurance information indicates equipment
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.
--
bud--
| |
|
| On May 31, 7:34 am, "Jeff Dieterle" <djdiete...@localnet.com> wrote:
> It's impractical for me to bond my telephone & catv at the service entrance
> grounding electrode or have the ufer system, so if I'm understanding all
> this I need to run a #6 cu bonding wire from my service entrance grounding
> electrode to the entry locations of the telephone and catv to establish the
> ground path for surge protection devices. Is that correct ? and thanks
> for your help
In the Cinergy example, a separated phone and AC electric connect to
a single point earthing because the entire earthing wire is buried.
If the wire was not buried, then one end of that wire would be too
long - excessive impedance - not effectively earthed.
Earthing wire for telephone need not be 6 AWG. I believe 12 is
sufficient; 10 AWG is usually what telcos install. The buried wire
according to code must be 4 AWG solid and must be buried 18 inches
under. This wire is typically connected to 10 foot earthing rods at
one or both ends. The earthing - those rods - must obtain earth that
is below the frost line.
BTW, these wires are carrying surges. Therefore they should be
routed separated from all other wires so as to not induce surges on
those other wires.
If ground wire was above earth, then it has too much impedance.
Wire gauge (diameter) is not the critical parameter here. Wire length
is important. A wire that is buried for twenty feet makes both ends
of that 20 feet into a single point earthing electrode. That is what
cable TV & satellite dish ground wires, and telephone & AC electric
surge protectors must connect to in 'less than 10 feet'.
One final suggestion. Some will put a four or six foot plastic pipe
with covered on over the point where ground wire joins earthing rod.
Therefore the junction can be inspected, additional earthing
connections can be made, and the entire junction can even be covered
(camouflaged) by dirt.
|
|
|
|
|