>
Um, your comments about series mode protection are in contradiction with the UL surge protection ratings, and your insistence on relying on Joule ratings means you don’t understand the physics involved. No current = no joules. The same for your ridiculous claims of undersized MOV’s.
Again UL says nothing about hardware protection. Anyone with basic electrical knowledge knows that. UL is only concerned with human safety. A protector can be near zero protection, not protect anything, fail catastrophically, and still be UL listed. Because it did not spit sparks and flames. UL says nothing about protection. If I say it again, will you finally grasp it? UL says nothing about hardware protection. If you cannot get past that, then I must conclude you are incapable of learning even simplest stuff.
UL1449 is about human safety. Unfortunately some near zero joule protectors still create house fires. To meet the latest UL1449 upgrade, many protector manufacturers had to increase their joules. A recent example were some 15 million APC protectors. Why ignore examples of near zero protectors that even create house fires. Do you need another 50 examples to finally admit advertising lies?
Series mode protectors will 'absorb' up to 600 joules. If not, a denial would quote a spec number. No numbers quoted because the denial is an emotion; not based in facts or numbers. Series mode filters protect from surges that typically cause no damage.
600 volts is protection standard in electronics before PCs existed. Appliances today are even more robust. Since you deny specifications (because you don't like it), well, this quote is from Dr Standler's 1992 IEEE paper: :
> This paper is apparently the first publication in the peer-reviewed, archival engineering literature that specifically discusses the ability of unprotected electronic equipment to survive surges in a laboratory. Surprisingly, consumer electronic equipment was able to survive surges with peak voltages of 2000 V,
600 volts. 1800 volts. Those were specification numbers. Standler found 2000 volts is a more realistic number. Why remain entrenched on 600 volts - a number from 40 years ago? Apparently only to argue..
Protection is not about a voltage. High voltage only exists when someone foolishly tried to 'block' or 'absorb' a surge. Protection of expensive equipment is never provided by urban myths - 'magic boxes'. Effective 'whole house' protector never foolishly tries to 'block' a surge - therefore create a high voltage. Instead, near zero voltages exist when effective protection connects a current (not a voltage) low impedance to earth. At what point should we mention it is science proven over 100 years ago.
Facilities that cannot have damage always use a 'whole house' solution. That is, beyond doubt, OP's best recommendation. It even comes with numbers that say so.
Impedance - not resistance. Naysayers do not even know what impedance is. Do not even know what single point earth ground is. And then make bogus accusations because they did not know it; They still do not know what single point earth ground is. Do not have a clue what is or is not dangerous. Apparently near zero protectors creating fires is not dangerous - their reasoning.
Best protection for the OP is a 'whole house' solution from other companies known by any guy for integrity. Furman and APC are not on that list. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground - including that low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) connection. Reality has not changed because near zero joules manufacturers said so. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground - item that does the protection.
Again UL says nothing about hardware protection. Anyone with basic electrical knowledge knows that. UL is only concerned with human safety. A protector can be near zero protection, not protect anything, fail catastrophically, and still be UL listed. Because it did not spit sparks and flames. UL says nothing about protection. If I say it again, will you finally grasp it? UL says nothing about hardware protection. If you cannot get past that, then I must conclude you are incapable of learning even simplest stuff.
UL1449 is about human safety. Unfortunately some near zero joule protectors still create house fires. To meet the latest UL1449 upgrade, many protector manufacturers had to increase their joules. A recent example were some 15 million APC protectors. Why ignore examples of near zero protectors that even create house fires. Do you need another 50 examples to finally admit advertising lies?
Series mode protectors will 'absorb' up to 600 joules. If not, a denial would quote a spec number. No numbers quoted because the denial is an emotion; not based in facts or numbers. Series mode filters protect from surges that typically cause no damage.
600 volts is protection standard in electronics before PCs existed. Appliances today are even more robust. Since you deny specifications (because you don't like it), well, this quote is from Dr Standler's 1992 IEEE paper: :
> This paper is apparently the first publication in the peer-reviewed, archival engineering literature that specifically discusses the ability of unprotected electronic equipment to survive surges in a laboratory. Surprisingly, consumer electronic equipment was able to survive surges with peak voltages of 2000 V,
600 volts. 1800 volts. Those were specification numbers. Standler found 2000 volts is a more realistic number. Why remain entrenched on 600 volts - a number from 40 years ago? Apparently only to argue..
Protection is not about a voltage. High voltage only exists when someone foolishly tried to 'block' or 'absorb' a surge. Protection of expensive equipment is never provided by urban myths - 'magic boxes'. Effective 'whole house' protector never foolishly tries to 'block' a surge - therefore create a high voltage. Instead, near zero voltages exist when effective protection connects a current (not a voltage) low impedance to earth. At what point should we mention it is science proven over 100 years ago.
Facilities that cannot have damage always use a 'whole house' solution. That is, beyond doubt, OP's best recommendation. It even comes with numbers that say so.
Impedance - not resistance. Naysayers do not even know what impedance is. Do not even know what single point earth ground is. And then make bogus accusations because they did not know it; They still do not know what single point earth ground is. Do not have a clue what is or is not dangerous. Apparently near zero protectors creating fires is not dangerous - their reasoning.
Best protection for the OP is a 'whole house' solution from other companies known by any guy for integrity. Furman and APC are not on that list. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground - including that low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) connection. Reality has not changed because near zero joules manufacturers said so. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground - item that does the protection.