ADSL router and lightning

[Jorgen]

Time for a "factory" comment re the Astraphobe. Just to make sure there are no misunderstandings I need to state I am a director of Jacstech the manufacturer of the Astraphobe.

@ Biometrics. Yes it does work, very well in fact. Ignore the overly (contradictory) postulations in this thread.
@ Dolby - thanks!
@gfmalan. The Astraphobe is overdesigned re the switch mechanism. The switch opens some 110mm, not a mm or a few mm. Although lightning does travel a huge distance as you say from heavens to earth, we do not need to stop a lightning bolt. What we do need is to stop the damaging voltage that is induced in your line. The Astraphobe does this no problem.

Quick general comment here on this - The Astraphobe was fully tested independently as a pre-requisite for ICASA licence. The company that tested the Astraphobe tests a lot of surge protectors, they have a specialist machine to do so. Offhand I can't remember what the standard energy test is they use for surge protectors (maybe someone here knows?), but I do remember laughing about it and asking them to crank their machine up to the max. This was obviously no problem.

@Westom. I asked you questions previously and you never give a straight reply except for more contradictory rubbish that you post all over the Internet. But I do not like you bad-mouthing a great product. So please stop with rubbish such as "a millimetres gap" when I have told you previously the gap is about 110mm. And I have to laugh at your "different product that does the same in a manner that makes it effective" - you use lots of scientific terms, then talk about something that does not and can not exist with todays technology. I challenge you to name this product.

Folks some common sense here please: we all know that if we unplug our line then we safe - the Astraphobe is not magic, its a simple device that detects and ranges storms, and when a storm gets too close it unplugs your line. And of course plugs it back in some minutes later when the storm moves on.

 

[westom]

@Westom. I asked you questions previously and you never give a straight reply except for more contradictory rubbish that you post all over the Internet. But I do not like you bad-mouthing a great product. So please stop with rubbish such as "a millimetres gap" when I have told you previously the gap is about 110mm.

Answers were straight, technically honest, and with numbers. Realtiy cannot be explained in a soundbyte. Myths and scams get promoted with soundbyte logic. So you attack reality because reality cannot be explained in soundbytes? Your intentionally demeaning answers expose technical myths that promote Astraphobe.

If a product was that good, then specification numbers from a test house were posted that say how good. Posting numbers would have identified the myth. So numbers were intentionally withheld. Protector is tested to meet human safety issues - not for how well it protects. Numbers for human safety say nothing about transistor safety - how well a protector works. Why did you forget to mention that? Because profits are at risk?

A protector part must never create a house fire or other human safety issues. A protector can do no protection, not threaten human life, and pass tests that only address human safety. Where is a number that says how its millimeters (near zero 110 mm) gap will stop what three kilometers of sky could not? Never provided. The challenge repeatedly ignored. Where is a number that says how a disconnect, that takes milliseconds or seconds, will somehow stop a microseconds surge? Never provided. Scam get promoted by ignoring or denying numbers.

If polite or if responding with technical integrity, then this post need not be so blunt. Your only number - 110 mm - is a near zero gap. If claims were honest, then we have all numbers from that test house that support your claims. No numbers is how scams and lies get promoted. Missing technical numbers explain why you must be nasty - so that others will not demand those testing house numbers. Shame on you for attacking the person who expooses your scam. Anyone can be as nasty as you.

Back to honest technical reality. Numerous standards define protector testing. Many, such as those in Britian (ie BS), Australiz/New Zealand (JAS-ANZ), and DEMKO are based on UL1449 standards. UL standards define human safety issues (because UL standards are written by the National Fire Protection Association). Engineering knowledge that Jorgen avoids to claim tesing for human safety is testing for transistor safety. Those tests do not even test for the many types of surges (ie longitudinal, transverse).

What determines appliance (transistor) safety? Protection is about where hundreds of thousands of joules are harmlessly absorbed. Another number, ignored by Jorgen, to protect sales of an expensive and less effective product. If an Astraphobe did what was only subjectively claimed, then Jorgen says where that energy dissipates. He cannot. So yes, bluntly defined is why he now posts nasty and outright lies. He never once posted a number that defines protection ... as if 110 mm will stop what even 3 kilometers of sky could not. As if a gap that takes millimeters to open will stop what is done in microseconds.

Trying to claim testing for human safety proves a protector works? Please. No way around over 100 years of well proven science and experience. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules are harmlessly absorbed. And never about stopping or blocking a surge with a near zero 110 mm gap.

 

[Jorgen]

Westom, I do not have a lot of time on my hands, but let me try address your issues.

First off, I think it would be fair to identify yourself and your position in regards to competitive products. I have publically stated who I am and my interest, how about you do the same? What is your name and for who do you work?

In response to one of your comments, I am responding with technical integrity, I suggest you do the same and not wonder off at some tangent.

In this latest post of yours you have said I post "nasty and outright lies". Now I am neither a nasty person nor a liar, but I am frustrated with your constant attacks and misinformation. But you I am afraid, cannot answer a straight question, not only asked by myself, but by others on this forum. This is why I replied some +- 6 months back saying I will not respond further to your attacks. Now you create a situation again where I feel I am forced to respond, as I do not want to see a great product badmouthed by yourself. So I will try again, and rise to your challenge. In order to keep it civil and orderly without wondering off at a tangent, lets keep it simple.

Please answer this question: What voltage do you estimate would be present at the telephone / ADSL entry point in a house?

 

[mister]

I'm really getting tired of this babble from westom - he just goes on and on and on babbling away but saying nothing

 

[westom]

First off, I think it would be fair to identify yourself and your position in regards to competitive products.

I am en engineer who has been doing this stuff for many decades. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipiate. Concepts were originally demonstrated by Franklin in 1752.

Lightning seeks earth ground. A path for a 20,000 amp electric surge is via a wooden church steeple destructively to earth. Wood is not a good conductor. So 20,000 amps creates a high voltage. 20,000 amps times a high voltage is high energy. Church steeple damaged.

Franklin installed a lightning rod. Now 20,000 amps is via a wire to an earthing electrode. High current creates near zero voltage. 20,000 amps times a near zero voltage is near zero energy. Structure not damaged.

Lightning seeks earth ground. A lightning strike to utility wires far down the street is a direct strike, incoming to every household appliance, destructively to earth. Appliances are not a good conductor. So lightning creates a high voltage. Lightning current times a high voltage is high energy. Appliances damaged.

For over 100 years, facilities that cannot have damage installed superior earthing connected low impedance (ie 'less than 3 meters') via a direct connection or a 'whole house' protector. Then high current creates near zero voltage. 20,000 amps times a near zero voltage is near zero energy. Appliances not damaged.

Either lightning finds a path harmlessly to earth BEFORE entering a structure. Or lightning hunts for earth destructively via appliances. In this case, it easily arcs across 110 mm to make a connection to earth via phone line appliances (ie DSL modem).

Nothing stops or blocks a surge. Facilities that cannot have damage always connect destructive surges to earth on a path that remains outside the building. Otherwise that current will hunt for earth destructively inside. This has never changed for over 100 years. The Astraphobe can only work in conjuction with other and well proven technologies that ALWAYS make a low impedance (ie less than 3 meter) connection to earth.

More examples: A Nebraska radios station suffered damage. To stop all damage: restoring grounds that naive station engineers disconnected AND upgraded earthing for the utility power transformer:
http://www.copper.org/applications/electrical/pq/casestudy/nebraska.html

Another professional describes how protection has always been done

Well I assert, from personal and broadcast experience spanning 30 years, that you can design a system that will handle *direct lightning strikes* on a routine basis. It takes some planning and careful layout, but it's not hard, nor is it overly expensive. At WXIA-TV, my other job, we take direct lightning strikes nearly every time there's a thunderstorm. Our downtime from such strikes is almost non-existant. The last time we went down from a strike, it was due to a strike on the power company's lines knocking *them* out, ...
Since my disasterous strike, I've been campaigning vigorously to educate amateurs that you *can* avoid damage from direct strikes. The belief that there's no protection from direct strike damage is *myth*. ...
The keys to effective lightning protection are surprisingly simple, and surprisingly less than obvious. Of course you *must* have a single point ground system that eliminates all ground loops. And you must present a low *impedance* path for the energy to go. That's most generally a low *inductance* path rather than just a low ohm DC path.

Astraphobe does not have any of that. Disconnecting alone does not provide protecxtion. Another product (seen, if I remember, in Singapore) does something similar to Astraphobe - but not by disconnecting. Instead is does what all effective protection systems do - a low impedance (ie wire has no sharp bends) connection to single point earth ground.

Dr Kenneth Scneider writes in WHEN SHOULD YOU WORRY ABOUT LIGHTNING?

Conceptually, lightning protection devices are switches to ground. Once a threatening surge is detected, a lightning protection device grounds the incoming signal connection point of the equipment being protected. Thus, redirecting the threatening surge on a path-of-least resistance (impedance) to ground where it is absorbed.
Any lightning protection device must be composed of two "subsystems," a switch which is essentially some type of switching circuitry and a good ground connection-to allow dissipation of the surge energy.

Need we quote MIL Standards, Motorolas famous R-56 manual, Sun Microsystems Installation Manual for a server center, or application notes from Polyphaser (an industry benchmark). Described is how it is done in every telco switching center all over the world.

No way around that well proven reality. Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate. A protector is only as effective as the other item that does the protection - single point earth ground.

At best, an Astraphobe is only supplementary protection. Only effective when used in conjunction with other and proven solutions. Those proven solutions demonstrated by other professionals.

 

[mister]

At best, an Astraphobe is only supplementary protection. Only effective when used in conjunction with other and proven solutions. Those proven solutions demonstrated by other professionals.

Example of proven solution for a residence?

 

[biometrics]

Example of proven solution for a residence?

Exactly. This is all I want to know. I'm not interested in reading walls of text.

Just give me some home products that work please.

 

[westom]

Exactly. This is all I want to know. I'm not interested in reading walls of text.

Sales myths are promoted by soundbytes. I'm sorry. But reasons why with numbers are the only useful posts.

From that are hundreds of other devices that 1) are protectors designed for phone service (ie low capacitance) and 2) always have that low impedance (ie less than 3 meter) and dedicated wire connection to single point earth ground.

No protector does protection. Repeated too many times because so many read it and ignore it. Protection is always about (and defined by) what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules. Apparently that was not said enough times. In that wall of text is the same one item that does the protection - single point earth ground. No protector does protection. Effective protectors connects low impedance to what should have most of your attention - single point earth ground.

Companies that make these devices include Polyphaser, Keison, Siemens, ABB, Eaton, Bornes, Clipsal, Novaris,

A local company also discusses this stuff. Just one of what - maybe hundreds of products - that make that always required low impedance connection to earth:
http://www.instrumentation.co.za/papers/C13509.pdf?a
Why so much text? Because the protector is only a part that is doing what a wire does better. How that protector is installed (not the manufacturer's name) determines protection. Protectors are simple science. Listed are mimimal features it must have. Protection is really about the 'art' - where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate. I'm sorry, but this stuff requires learning some layman concepts; is not found in a magic box.

Need examples for protectors? Start on page 10 in:
http://bourns.com/data/global/pdfs/bourns_osp_product_guide.pdf
Need examples for what actually does protection? Read the MTL Primer including the many application notes TAN10xx. Or the legendary application notes from Polyphaser (http://www.smithspower.com/SiteMedi...PapersandTechnicalNotes/1485-040.pdf?ext=.pdf) and consider their solutions.

One entitled "Telephone Network & Computer Interfaces at Communication Sites" is at:
http://www.smithspower.com/SiteMedi...PapersandTechnicalNotes/1485-040.pdf?ext=.pdf

Foolish is to recommend one product since requirements for any house can vary. Essential is to appreciate what does the protection. That is not a protector; that is single point earth ground.

Plenty of options exist. Selection is only possible by identifying what the effective devices do. Not just low capacitance. Most important is that always required and essential connection low impedance to earth.

 

[RoganDawes]

FWIW, I have a surge protector from Northern Technologies, which so far has done a pretty good job of protecting my home systems. It plugs into the wall, and diverts surges on the phone line and mains to the earth. While not as good as a dedicated "single earth" point, it seems to have been effective to date.

http://www.ntsa.co.za/products.html

 

[Jorgen]

Westom, in my previous post I asked you 2 simple questions - no need for a rehash of history vis a vis Franklin etc. Allow me to repeat the questions.

First request was to identify yourself? What is your name? Who do you work for?

2nd question I asked (I will expand it a bit to make it more clear): What voltage / energy / amperes do you estimate would be present at the telephone / ADSL line's entry point in a house? (meaning from a nearby strike).

 

[westom]

First request was to identify yourself? What is your name? Who do you work for?

I am not permitted to say anything more than I am an engineer who does this stuff. Obviously all that is irrelevant if one concentrates only on what matters - how protection must be installed and how it works.

Examples are provided for facilties that cannot have damage. Those techniques have been standard for over 100 years. Because protetors do not do protection. Protection is done by the item that must harmlessly absorb hundreds of thousands of joules. And not just from the phone line. Every wire in every incoming cable must make that connection.

Most common source of damage to phone equipment is a surge incoming on AC mains. If not earthed, then that surge goes hunting for earth via appliances. One excellent path is a phone line properly earthed by a service entrance protector. Inoming on AC mains. Outgoing to earth via the phone line. Damage is often on the outgoing path - that phone line. Not on incoming path (AC electric). Damage because every incoming wire (not just phone lines) were improperly earthed to the same one and commmon single point earth ground.

A plug-in protector has no earth ground. Another expression, repeated often, makes that obvious. Low impedance means a less than 3 meter connection, no sharp wire bends, no splices, not inside metallic conduit, and separated from non-grounding wires. Safety ground in a receptacle violates most if not all requirements. Safety ground is not an earth ground.

Provided by RogenDawes was one example of what everyone should have to also protect phone equipment:
http://www.ntsa.co.za/mer_25.html

 

[Jorgen]

Westom when you badmouth my company's product (that you have no experience with whatsoever) and categorically state that it does not work, and then go on to say or imply it has baseless marketing claims in the name of profit, then your real name and who you work for becomes very relevant. Please state your real name and company you work for - I have.

You still never answered my very simple question, repeated here for the 3rd time:

2nd question I asked (I will expand it a bit to make it more clear): What voltage / energy / amperes do you estimate would be present at the telephone / ADSL line's entry point in a house? (meaning from a nearby strike).

And now also you raise another point which creates a 3rd, related question - you state :

Most common source of damage to phone equipment is a surge incoming on AC mains. If not earthed, then that surge goes hunting for earth via appliances. One excellent path is a phone line properly earthed by a service entrance protector. Inoming on AC mains. Outgoing to earth via the phone line.

So here is 3rd related question: What sort of voltage / energy / amperes do you estimate would be present at the mains line that then exits via the telephone / ADSL line's entry point in a house? meaning from a nearby strike).

 

[westom]

Westom when you badmouth my company's product (that you have no experience with whatsoever) and categorically state that it does not work,

If your product makes that always required connection to single point earth ground, then you would have said so long ago. Since it does not, then a 110 mm gap must somehow block what three kilometers of sky could not. It is that simple. A simple challenge. How does that 110 mm gap stop what three kilometers of sky cannot? Why ignore that relevant question? Are you marketing a proven product? Good. Then explain how that gap (that takes milliseconds to open) will stop a surge - when every professional says protection is never about blocking or stopping a surge. Protection is always about *diverting* a surge to what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules.

Every professional organization says where hundreds of thousands of joules must harmlessly dissipate. That is not badmouthing. That is proven science. To be effective, your protector also must connect low impedance (ie less than 3 meters) to that earth ground. If not, well this is not badmouthing (a cheapshot accusation). That is the defect in your product that says why it can only supplement another, proven, and properly earthed protector - from companies known for their integrity.

From "Planning guide for Sun Server room", Section 6.4.7 Lightning Protection:

Lightning surges cannot be stopped, but they can be diverted. The plans for the data center should be thoroughly reviewed to identify any paths for surge entry into the data center. Surge arrestors can be designed into the system to help mitigate the potential for lightning damage within the data center. These should divert the power of the surge by providing a path to ground for the surge energy.

Professionals constantly refer to what must exist to have protection - earth ground. Protection is always about 'diverting' to what harmlessly absorbs that energy; not about blocking a surge with a gap.

How many hundred more professional citations would you like? Only relevant topic here (and your only relevant questions) is how protection is installed and why it works. How does that 110 mm gap block what three kilometers of sky could not?

 

[biometrics]

If your product makes that always required connection to single point earth ground, then you would have said so long ago. Since it does not, then a 110 mm gap must somehow block what three kilometers of sky could not. It is that simple. A simple challenge. How does that 110 mm gap stop what three kilometers of sky cannot? Why ignore that relevant question? Are you marketing a proven product? Good. Then explain how that gap (that takes milliseconds to open) will stop a surge - when every professional says protection is never about blocking or stopping a surge. Protection is always about *diverting* a surge to what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules.

Every professional organization says where hundreds of thousands of joules must harmlessly dissipate. That is not badmouthing. That is proven science. To be effective, your protector also must connect low impedance (ie less than 3 meters) to that earth ground. If not, well this is not badmouthing (a cheapshot accusation). That is the defect in your product that says why it can only supplement another, proven, and properly earthed protector - from companies known for their integrity.

From "Planning guide for Sun Server room", Section 6.4.7 Lightning Protection: Professionals constantly refer to what must exist to have protection - earth ground. Protection is always about 'diverting' to what harmlessly absorbs that energy; not about blocking a surge with a gap.

How many hundred more professional citations would you like? Only relevant topic here (and your only relevant questions) is how protection is installed and why it works. How does that 110 mm gap block what three kilometers of sky could not?

Have you even read the description of their product?

 

[ScottulusMaximus]

westom you're confused, the 110mm gap you're harping on about does divert the surge by massively increasing the resistance to the path you're protecting, and electricity ALWAYS takes the path of least resistance... It diverts it way from whatever is the other side of the gap and down somewhere else on the line, usually your neighbour or just another telephone that's not protected(and therefore less valuable).

As for the "takes milliseconds to open", this device detects lightning at a distance, lightning far enough away that it will dissipate long before it damages whatever you're trying to protect, and switches off BEFORE the lightning gets close enough to do any damage.

As for your "engineering qualifications" you would know that the vast majority of lightning damage comes through phone lines rather than power lines, why? Because there are less grounding opportunities on a phone line compared to an electricity line, therefore the limited grounds get hit harder and further away from the strike point.

Now I agree that if it's a direct strike on the house or the telephone pole in the corner of the garden then yes this device probably won't protect(nothing will) but that is an edge case... For the vast majority of cases this will help.

 

[airborne]

I can see the point Westom is trying to make, very interesting and I can see the common sense logic in it, you learn something everyday. You can't really dispute it either as he has given numerous credible sources.

Westom does sound like a typical engineer though, not such hot communication skills!

At the same time, while it appears a bit overpriced at R1499 I would think the 110mm switch gap in the Astraphope will be enough to isolate a device if it is activated in time and has no other inherent design short comings. I have never heard anyone say unplug the router when a storm approaches and make sure the unplugged telephone line is more than 100mm from the router so the lightening surge can't jump the gap?

That being said from the info Westom has directed us to, a correctly implemented surge protection system can take a direct lighting strike whereas the Astraphope in that case will just get fried along with the connected device.

 

[Jorgen]

Westom, the reason I keep asking you to answer some simple questions was to illustrate how the Astraphobe operates, and allow you to come to an insight by yourself that the product is effective. The fact that you refuse to reveal yourself or answer my questions make me think that you are competitively engaged in the industry, hence the constant criticism of the Astraphobe that you also clearly do not understand. This is most unprofessional, first rule of business is not to knock a competitor's product, but to highlight your product's benefits.

The Astraphobe does not have to stop what "3km of sky could not", simply because you don't get lightning as such coming out your phone line, nor trying to go down it. Most of a nearby lightning strike's energy has already been expended by the mere fact that its going to ground at the strike point.

Lets look at the ability of the cables to transfer energy from a strike to your favourite router. The cable infrastructure is vast, 99% underground, and has many termination points. Therefore also many points where a charge may be dissipated. The twisted pair cables carrying your ADSL signal are only 0.5mm in diameter, these cannot carry much energy without overheating and melting, just like a fuse. The bad news, is that we still see damaging high voltage spikes or transients entering our houses via these lines. Our electronics connected to these lines (routers, Ethernet switches, NAS drives, computers etc.) are very sensitive to these transient surges. Our need for more bandwidth, faster processors, more memory etc means we have steadily reduced the voltages at which our equipment operates making them very susceptible to high voltage spikes and transients on the line. Then, we go and connect them all up via Ethernet and thus provide a path from outside to all our favourite, sensitive toys. Which is why they are destroyed regularly in our lightning conditions.

So with that in mind, the Astraphobe is actually over-engineered in terms of its 110mm internal switching mechanism. A consulting electronics engineer to the Astraphobe project recommended a 25mm gap, but we overrode that and went all out for the current design to stop that 1 in a million moerse strike next door! Don't believe me, check http://www.kronjaeger.com/hv/hv/msr/spk/ . The distance a spark will jump is given in some tables there, in normal conditions a 25,000V potential will not jump a 25mm gap, and you would need 80,000 volts of sustained energy to jump the Astraphobe's opening distance. The distance a spark will jump is not only dependant on the voltage, but the current behind it - the research talks about infinite current for that spark length to be attained, but remember we talking unshielded 0.5mm twisted pair cable here. That cable cannot even carry enough current to power a lightbulb. We have guesstimated the Astraphobe being able to withstand anything between 125,000V to 200,000V of transient voltage before any voltage will arc through the device.

Sorry for the long post, but I needed to make some things clear, we put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into the Astraphobe and I don't like to see it being knocked unfairly. I am the ultimate critic, having lived with an Astraphobe myself for the last few years, going through dev software, prototype designs, etc etc.

We do not market the Astraphobe as a magic cure all for lightning. What it does do, and do very well, is listen out for storms, pre-emptively disconnect the line before any lightning happens, and reconnect afterward. It does this to prevent damage from transients on the phone / ADSL line damaging routers and downstream devices. You can of course do this manually, but its nice having it automated. There are many happy Astraphobe users out there. Besides "joe soap" that bought via Makro or wherever, there are many I have personally dealt with, all with previous horror stories (5 routers gone in one summer, no more insurance etc). Not one has had lightning damage since installing an Astraphobe.

 

[biometrics]

Westom, the reason I keep asking you to answer some simple questions was to illustrate how the Astraphobe operates, and allow you to come to an insight by yourself that the product is effective. The fact that you refuse to reveal yourself or answer my questions make me think that you are competitively engaged in the industry, hence the constant criticism of the Astraphobe that you also clearly do not understand. This is most unprofessional, first rule of business is not to knock a competitor's product, but to highlight your product's benefits.

The Astraphobe does not have to stop what "3km of sky could not", simply because you don't get lightning as such coming out your phone line, nor trying to go down it. Most of a nearby lightning strike's energy has already been expended by the mere fact that its going to ground at the strike point.

Lets look at the ability of the cables to transfer energy from a strike to your favourite router. The cable infrastructure is vast, 99% underground, and has many termination points. Therefore also many points where a charge may be dissipated. The twisted pair cables carrying your ADSL signal are only 0.5mm in diameter, these cannot carry much energy without overheating and melting, just like a fuse. The bad news, is that we still see damaging high voltage spikes or transients entering our houses via these lines. Our electronics connected to these lines (routers, Ethernet switches, NAS drives, computers etc.) are very sensitive to these transient surges. Our need for more bandwidth, faster processors, more memory etc means we have steadily reduced the voltages at which our equipment operates making them very susceptible to high voltage spikes and transients on the line. Then, we go and connect them all up via Ethernet and thus provide a path from outside to all our favourite, sensitive toys. Which is why they are destroyed regularly in our lightning conditions.

So with that in mind, the Astraphobe is actually over-engineered in terms of its 110mm internal switching mechanism. A consulting electronics engineer to the Astraphobe project recommended a 25mm gap, but we overrode that and went all out for the current design to stop that 1 in a million moerse strike next door! Don't believe me, check http://www.kronjaeger.com/hv/hv/msr/spk/ . The distance a spark will jump is given in some tables there, in normal conditions a 25,000V potential will not jump a 25mm gap, and you would need 80,000 volts of sustained energy to jump the Astraphobe's opening distance. The distance a spark will jump is not only dependant on the voltage, but the current behind it - the research talks about infinite current for that spark length to be attained, but remember we talking unshielded 0.5mm twisted pair cable here. That cable cannot even carry enough current to power a lightbulb. We have guesstimated the Astraphobe being able to withstand anything between 125,000V to 200,000V of transient voltage before any voltage will arc through the device.

Sorry for the long post, but I needed to make some things clear, we put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into the Astraphobe and I don't like to see it being knocked unfairly. I am the ultimate critic, having lived with an Astraphobe myself for the last few years, going through dev software, prototype designs, etc etc.

We do not market the Astraphobe as a magic cure all for lightning. What it does do, and do very well, is listen out for storms, pre-emptively disconnect the line before any lightning happens, and reconnect afterward. It does this to prevent damage from transients on the phone / ADSL line damaging routers and downstream devices. You can of course do this manually, but its nice having it automated. There are many happy Astraphobe users out there. Besides "joe soap" that bought via Makro or wherever, there are many I have personally dealt with, all with previous horror stories (5 routers gone in one summer, no more insurance etc). Not one has had lightning damage since installing an Astraphobe.

Fact is people in Gauteng unplug their phone lines when there's a storm, right? So it makes sense to me.

How about sending me a unit to review ... :twisted:

 

[Jorgen]

@airborne. We recognise the R1499 price tag is a bit steep, we wanted it on the market for sub 1000, but this was not possible. Its a quality device throughout. MILSPEC contacts rated at 1,000,000 cycles, precision motorised drive for the disconnect mechanism etc. Tried many cheaper components during R&D and discarded them.

@ScottulusMaximus. Thanks for taking the time to understand the Astraphobe, and for your understanding and comment re the dynamics behind a strike in terms of the damage via the phone line vs mains line. (although the Astraphobe would stop that too, but that's probably a moot point).

@biometrics Clearly he hasn't

 

[westom]

That being said from the info Westom has directed us to, a correctly implemented surge protection system can take a direct lighting strike whereas the Astraphope in that case will just get fried along with the connected device.

Let's address the Astraphobe's advantage. It can supplement (increase) protection IF used with a well proven solution. All telco switching centers earth every wire in every incoming cable via a protector. 'Carbons' were once standard.
http://www.inwap.com/inwap/chez/Phoneline.jpg
Today, that has been replaced by properly earthing semiconductor devices (ie Sidactor or low capacitance avalanch diode). These devices are effective due to a low impedance connection to earth AND separation between protector and electronics (up to 50 meters). That long distance (high impedance) increases protection. That is where an Astraphobe can be useful. To increase that impedance. So that more surge is 'diverted' to earth.

However, that proven and existing protection means no DSL or telephone connection need be interrupted - as that device once sold in Singapore also did. That is another down side to Astraphobe.

Telco switching centers (COs) suffer about 100 surges with each storm only using the above defined and well proven protection. How often is your town without phone service for four days while they replace that surge damaged computer? Never. They never disconnect expensive electronics due to quality and performance of this above described and properly earthed solution. Since direct lightning strikes are connected low impedance to earth WHEN this proven solution is properly installed and earthed.

A well proven solution found in all telco switching centers is for no damage after every lightning storm - a typically 100 incoming surges per storm.

AT&T forum also describes how to protect DSL and phone equipment:

Surge protection takes on many forms, but always involves the following components: Grounding bonding and surge protectors. ...

Grounding is required to provide the surge protector with a path to dump the excess energy to earth. A proper ground system is a mandatory requirement of surge protection. Without a proper ground, a surge protector has no way to disburse the excess energy and will fail to protect downstream equipment.

Bonding is required to electrically connect together the various grounds of the services entering the premises. Without bonding, a surge may still enter a premise after firing over a surge protector, which will attempt to pass the excess energy to its ground with any additional energy that the services surge protector ground cannot instantly handle, traveling into and through protected equipment, damaging that equipment in the process. ...

Now, if all the various service entrance grounds are bonded together there are no additional paths to ground through the premise. Even if all of the grounds cannot instantly absorb the energy, the lack of additional paths to ground through the premise prevents the excess energy from seeking out any additional grounds through that premise and the electronic equipment within. As such, the excess energy remains in the ground system until dissipated, sparing the protected equipment from damage. ...

By far, the whole house hardwired surge protectors provide the best protection. When a whole house primary surge protector is installed at the service entrance, it will provide a solid first line of defense against surges which enter from the power company's service entrance feed. These types of protectors can absorb/pass considerably more energy than any other type of protector, and if one does catastrophically fail, it will not typically be in a living space. ...

Plug in strip protectors are, at best, a compromise. At worst, they may cause more damage than they prevent. While they may do an acceptable job of handling hot to neutral surges, they do a poor job of handling any surge that must be passed to ground. ...

Then, to add insult to injury, some strip protectors add Telco and/or LAN surge protection within the same device, trying to be an all-in-one sale. Remember bonding? When Telco or LAN protection is added to a strip protector, if the premise ground, which is not designed to handle surges, cannot handle all of the energy, guess where that excess energy seeks out the additional grounds? You got it! The Telco and LAN connections now becomes the path, with disastrous results to those devices. ...