Posted by Rick Merrill on 02/11/06 21:58

Trevor wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 13:24:59 -0600, "Deke" <no spam@today.com> wrote:
>
>
>><felixcct@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1139413957.810444.161570@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>w_tom wrote:
>>>
>>>>If his problem was solved by a surge protector, then nothing in the
>>>>player would function. Furthermore, a surge protector "in series" is a
>>>>myth. Plug-in protector promoted by people who don't even know what a
>>>>surge protector does. A protector that 'looks' like it is between a
>>>>VCR/DVD player and AC electric is really only in parallel. A
>>>>destructive transient hits protector and player simultaneously. Since
>>>>players already have internal protection, then a trivial surge may not
>>>>damage the player - and yet fully vaporize the typically undersized
>>>>protector. Trivial surge struck both equally and simultaneously. But
>>>>only grossly undersized protector failed - provided ineffective
>>>>protection.
>>>
>>>Actually this is not quite a correct version of how a surge protector
>>>works.
>>>
>>>Real surge protectors typically have the following specifications:
>>>1. Peak voltage allowed to pass
>>>2. Response time to respond to over-voltage
>>>3. Maximum energy sinked to ground before destruction
>>>
>>>When a voltage spike arrives at the surge protector, if it exceeds the
>>>peak limit, the surge protector will drop to very low resistance and
>>>begin diverting the current to ground. The response time is critical in
>>>determining how much of the spike's energy will reach the protected
>>>equipment. It's not the voltage of the spike that matters, it's the
>>>total energy that gets through - i.e., voltage x current x time, with
>>>the time being the critical factor that's up to the surge protector.
>>>
>>>Surge protectors also have a maximum energy capacity. If it is
>>>exceeded, the surge protector will be destroyed, which may allow
>>>additional energy to get through to the now-unprotected equipment (but
>>>hopefully by then a line fuse or breaker in the current loop will have
>>>opened). Many types of surge protectors are intended for one-time-use -
>>>if they divert a surge, they are permanently affected, and need to be
>>>replaced.
>>>
>>
>>Well said, and exactly correct. Its also why I use several surge protectors
>>plugged one into another.
>
>
> My assumption is that devices typically sold as "surge protectors"
> offer little or no actual protection, other than some (misplaced?)
> peace of mind. If that assumption is correct, what benefit would be
> gained by daisy chaining several of them together? (The old 0+0=0
> theory.) Am I wrong?
>
>
>>And theres also Panamax's $25,000.00 replacement
>>guarantee, altho I've never known anyone to use it. I have known of them
>>replacing damaged protectors for free though. Thats why my local
>>electronics shop sells them.
>
>
> What if the local shop sells them simply because there's demand for
> them, and not because they actually work? :)
>

In fact, if you "daisy chain" them you may actually wind up defeating
the purpose (the way they are designed) and get LESS protection.

Look for the kind that have "3-wire" protection.

Also, know that the devices plugged into even the "best" protectors will
not protect Against Each Other! (Yeah, i learned this the hard way: had
a lamp pluggedin the circuit "protector" and static from my hand hit the
lamp and zapped the computer!)

[Back to original message]