Load shedding means you need a surge protector – but they’re not all created equal

Sorry, but that comment has cost you the last vestige of credibility you might have had left.
I design stuff. You do not. Everything electronics must not be damaged by any voltage from an overvoltage down to zero. Never saw even one product in over 40 years that did not meet that requirement. Variac is standard design hardware. Even that TV worked without damage at 37 volts. And only powered off, without damage, when voltage was lower.

Credibility means posting a specification number that supports those speculations. You never did because none exist.

Credibility means posting a component damaged by a low voltage. You never did because none exist.

Denials only exist so that you need not admit to having been scammed by lies, wild speculation, and hearsay. Which explains every post without even one relevant number.

Show me the numbers. You cannot. Those numbers never exist.

Engineers routinely comply with those standards. Otherwise products fail (are damaged) even when powered off. You would not know. You never did this stuff. And apparently do not even know what a number is.
 
The troll still being entertained.... :laugh::ROFL::laugh::ROFL::laugh::ROFL:

Show me the numbers.... Hehehehe

Listen properly:
 

The vast majority of responses to this thread do not address the original question in any meaningful way. You would not miss anything by ignoring this thread entirely, and if you want an actual answer, it is best to look elsewhere...
 
I find it interesting and annoying that companies just follow whatever logic and standards they want here is a good example, https://e-systems.co.za/System/FabSheets/4FBWP.pdf ellies surge safe plug, no mention of joules rating and also I love this part "Protects 1 appliance only", so if I put this on an extension cord that connects to my ups , pc monitor etc then what it wont work anymore , I doubt I will be exceeding 250V ~ 16A.

How does this make sense or is it just to lower the cost of potentially warranty claims.
 
The statement means it is not something you can plug into a socket and thus protect everything in your home. It is meant for "protecting" one appliance based on the normal use which is on a cord going to one appliance.

Rather get a proper extension box from a company like Clearline for better protection for a range of appliances than trying to create one out of a replacement plug and a cheap extension box.

I carry one of those in my toolbox, but simply because it is a quick and nasty ELCB checker and allows one to quickly detect wiring faults. As for its value as surge protection? maybe maybe not.
 
I find it interesting and annoying that companies just follow whatever logic and standards they want here is a good example, https://e-systems.co.za/System/FabSheets/4FBWP.pdf ellies surge safe plug, no mention of joules rating ...
That product does nothing for surge protection. It does not mention joules or any other relevant spec number because it is only a receptacle tester. Obviously, it can only report some receptacle defects. And cannot report a receptacle as safe (properly wired).

It does as much to protect any one appliance as a knot tied in a wire. Yes that knot is also protection. How much? Does not matter. They are only selling a product that does near zero. Using spin (subjective claims) to hype it to some (apparently successfully) as 100% protection.

Another does not even know that it is only a receptacle tester. But claims to know this stuff.

Effective protection always answers this question. Where do hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate? So many expensive solutions that cannot answer (and avoid) that question.

Every effective solution is only as effective as its connection to and quality of earth ground. That has not changed on over 100 years. And is why even direct lightning strikes at properly installed facilities causes no damage. Using solutions that often cost tens of times less money.

Load shedding does not damage electronics as previously explained with so many reason why.
 
Unfortunately, the typical surge protector is only designed to clamp transients or spikes of extremely short duration (i.e meant for lightning induced spikes). They are usually not designed to protect equipment against undervoltages, overvoltages, dips and swells. During loadshedding, you may get some transients from switching on the network that the surge protector will clamp but the other effects that are caused by large loads switching on and off in the network may cause damage to sensitive appliance despite a surge protector.

You may also get damage to appliances from poorly/incorrectly installed or low quality backup generators that are used during the loadshedding that a surge protector will not protect against.
 
Unfortunately, the typical surge protector is only designed to clamp transients or spikes of extremely short duration (i.e meant for lightning induced spikes). They are usually not designed to protect equipment against undervoltages, overvoltages, dips and swells.
Correct. Numbers (previously posted) put that into perspective. The let-through voltage of a protector is something above 500 volts. That means it does absolutely nothing until a 230 volts well exceeds 500 volts. So it does nothing for load shedding, undervoltages, swells, dips, and so many other anomalies.

Due to standard design practice and international design standards implemented throughout the world (even before PCs existed), most anomalies are already made irrelevant by what is already inside electronics. As required when the IBM PC was created. Today's electronics are even more robust.

Protectors (when properly sized and properly earthed - not safety grounded) must protect all appliances (not just one item) from transients created by linemen errors, tree rodents, stray cars, utility switching, wind, and a typically blamed anomaly - lightning. Effective protectors mean even a direct lightning strike is not inside the building and does not even damage that protector.

Again, numbers. A direct lightning strike can be 20,000 amps. So that effective 'whole house' solution should be at least 50,000 amps. That is not only best protection from transients. It also does not fail after many decades and many direct lightning strikes.

But again, the most critical part. A protector never does protection. It is only a connecting device to what does all protection. To what must harmlessly absorb hundreds of thousands of joules. That is earth ground electrodes. A protector is only as effective as its connection to and quality of earth ground. Then robust protection already inside all appliances is not overwhelmed.
 
Due to standard design practice and international design standards implemented throughout the world (even before PCs existed), most anomalies are already made irrelevant by what is already inside electronics. As required when the IBM PC was created. Today's electronics are even more robust.

To an extent. It depends on what that conditions the standard expects and what the relevant device should tolerate. A design is about the reduction of risk of appliance failure to an acceptable level for a given set of circumstances. Designing a device to specific standard is no guarantee that the device will not get damaged by a power anomaly. If a design complies with a set of standards, it merely has an acceptably low risk of failure if exposed to abnormal conditions as envisioned by the writers of the standards.

A surge arrestor does not have to be designed to accommodate direct strikes. Nearby lightning strikes can induce spikes in power and telecom lines by induction. A small household arrestor is intended to absorb these relatively low energy (but high voltage) transients. Modern electronics usually contains sensitive silicon components especially communication hardware. Unlike robust magnetic transformers etc, low energy, high voltage transients can damage such silicon relatively easily so having protection such as gap arrestors, MOVs and transorbs reduce the risk of failure.

In South Africa, lightning is very prevalent. The electrical conditions that appliances are exposed to can be harsher than Europe. The high lightning strike density increases the risk of electrical damage to appliances due to induced lightning spikes. The resultant rate of failure of appliances may be unacceptable so having additional protection against transients may be required.

A surge protector is not a panacea or cure-all. It will not magically make your appliances immune to damage from lightning transients however if properly designed and implemented, it can reduce the risk of appliance failure.

Will a standard plugin protector reduce the risk sufficiently? That is a matter for debate. It depends on what conditions one expects locally keeping in mind that typical surge protection requires a number of stages. Depending on the severity of the lightning gas arrestors at the incoming point of supply and then MOV based arrestors installed in the DB.

Again, all this is only for transients, it will not cover all power anomalies.

Then robust protection already inside all appliances is not overwhelmed.

There is no guarantee that devices are "robust". Also no guarantee that appliances have any internal protection at all. Again, "robust" is purely by the definition of the electrical conditions expected. Conditions on the South African electrical grid can be harsh. Unfortunately due to global economic pressures, typical consumer goods implement designs that survive the bare minimum of anomalies required as dictated by the standards (Which for South Africa is based on IEC or Europe standards assuming the appliances comply with the relevant standards at all.)

As an example, in a recent storm, I lost a powerline ethernet adapter (completely dead, no power lights come one anymore) and a DVR lost a camera as well as the ethernet port being damaged and unusable. In another storm a TV lost HDMI ports that have become non functional. A work colleague lost a number of appliances, routers, smart TVs etc from a spike that came down the telephone line and coupled into nearby ethernet lines.

From my experience, typical household appliances are not always robust enough for the electrical storms we experience here in South Africa.
 
Last edited:
To an extent. It depends on what that conditions the standard expects and what the relevant device should tolerate. A design is about the reduction of risk of appliance failure to an acceptable level for a given set of circumstances. Designing a device to specific standard is no guarantee that the device will not get damaged by a power anomaly. If a design complies with a set of standards, it merely has an acceptably low risk of failure if exposed to abnormal conditions as envisioned by the writers of the standards.
You said exactly what I was constantly saying here. An answer means nothing if not always tempered by numbers.

For example, a magic strip, that so many assume is a surge protector, has numbers that say "It does not protect from surges that can do damage." Anyone can read numbers on plug-in power strips. Notice so many posts without even one number - let alone that critical specification number.

How does its 2 cm protector part 'block' what three kilometers of sky cannot? It doesn't. How does its thousand joules 'absorb' a surge that can be hundreds of thousands of joules. An adjacent protector MUST either 'block' or 'absorb' that surge.

It is intentionally designed to fail on a surge too tiny to damage appliances. Then the naive use observation to wildly speculate "My protector sacrificed itself to save my computer."

Remember, this is electricity. A surge incoming to that protector was also outgoing (at the exact same time) into an attached appliance. That surge current easily destroyed the protector. Electronics converts a surge (that tiny) into rock stable, low DC voltages. To safely power semiconductors.

Because that conclusion was not tempered by numbers, and because it was made only from observation (also called junk science), then the manufacturer got naive consumers to recommend it and buy more. A surge too tiny to damage that (or any other appliances) destroyed a near zero (thousand) joule protector.

More numbers. Something completely different - unfortunately also called a surge protector - is why direct lightning strikes cause no damage to facilities that cannot have damage. Every telco CO is a classic example. It will suffer about 100 surges with each thunderstorm. How often is your town without phone service for four days while they replace that switching computer? Never? Never in your town or any other town in the world. Because money is not wasted on plug-in scams. Instead they use the completely different solution - unfortunately also called a surge protector.

A homeowner can install same for many times less money (compared to magic plug-in boxes). And again, if the recommendation does not say why with numbers, then honest consumers ignore it. Lightning is typically 20,000 amps. So a minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Because an effective protector remains functional for many decades after many direct lightning strikes.

Those numbers define protector life expectancy over many surges. Protection during each surge is define by THE most critical item in any protection layer. That is the item that harmlessly absorbs (again, the relevant number) 'hundreds of thousands of joules'. It is called single point earth ground. It was demonstrated even by Ben Franklin over 250 years ago. Earth ground electrode that made his lightning rod effective is the same earth ground that also makes a protector effective.

Your TV cable, telephone, satellite dish, etc should already have best protection installed for free. For example, locate the TV cable, satellite dish, or OTA antenna wire where it enters a building. A hardwire must make a low impedance (ie less than 3 meter) connection from that coax to the same earth ground used by AC electric. A single point earth ground. Only then is a surge current not anywhere inside hunting for earth ground destructively via any appliance. Only then is best protection, already inside every appliance, not overwhelmed.

Notice best protection without a protector. Protector only exists when a direct connection is not possible. Protector only does what that hardwire does better. As well understood over 100 years ago.

Did I mention why numbers are critical? All appliances already contain best protection. Concern is for anomalies so large as to overwhelm that existing robust protection. For many, that might mean one transient every seven years. For others, it might mean none in 20 years. And when that transient connects low impedance (ie hardwire must have no sharp bends) to earth, then best protection already and routinely inside appliances is not overwhelmed.

So again, where do 'hundreds of thousands of joules' harmlessly dissipate? Anybody who does not discuss that number and answer that question is probably lying even to himself. Protection is about how that current connects to earth. Either outside and harmlessly. Or inside where it hunts for earth ground destructively via appliances.

Show me even one magic plug-in strip that discusses these numbers. Or claims to protect from potentially destructive surges such as lightning. Effective protectors must protect from all surges - including lightning.

The naive invent myths - subjectively - no numbers. Even claim surges occur daily. OK. How many RCDs, dishwashers, clocks, central airs, LED & CFL bulbs, washing machines, door bells, routers, dimmer switches, toasters, and smoke detectors were damaged today? Or is each on an invisible protector?

If anything needs protection, then everything needs that protection - refrigerator, clock radios, recharging electronics - everything.

These numbers were well understood longer than any of us have existed. This solution is standard in power plants, nuclear hardened communication facilities, radio stations, telco switching centers, emergency response centers, skyscrapers, airports, AC electric distribution hardware, server farms, rocket launch pads (and blockhouse), television broadcast stations, mobile phone towers, and munitions dumps. Since all must suffer direct lightning strikes without damage. If damage does happen, then a search for that human mistake begins. That search always begins with the only item that defines protection: a low impedance connection to and quality of earth ground.

Effective protection (that is many times cheaper than plug-in protectors) always answers this question. Where do hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate? Even honest answer also comes with such numbers. Numbers such as the impedance of that connection to earth ground. Because a protector never does protection. An effective protector is a connecting device to what does the protection - earth ground.
 
Last edited:
It needs to be a bit more discriptive ... maybe "wall of misguided text"?
That was a soundbite - an executive summary - to the educated. Trump supporter become obvious. Anything over 140 characters is too hard to read. So it must be wrong.

Described is over 100 years of well proven science. But reality is too hard. Anything after the first paragraph must be wrong. Which says why scams are now so easily promoted.
 
That was a soundbite - an executive summary - to the educated. Trump supporter become obvious. Anything over 140 characters is too hard to read. So it must be wrong.

Described is over 100 years of well proven science. But reality is too hard. Anything after the first paragraph must be wrong. Which says why scams are now so easily promoted.

Albert Einstein Quotes:

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
 
Albert Einstein also wrote something so simple that you cannot understand it. Text was simple and easily understood. But an attention span, lost after one paragraph, that is the problem.
How does its 2 cm protector part 'block' what three kilometers of sky cannot? It doesn't. How does its thousand joules 'absorb' a surge that can be hundreds of thousands of joules. An adjacent protector MUST either 'block' or 'absorb' that surge.
Paragraph number three. So it was too complicated.
 
Back
Top