Contributor
•
1 Message
surge protector
How do I stop my surge protector from ringing? I have unplugged everything, and when I turn it back on, it starts ringing. It's driving me nuts. Please help
Contributor
•
1 Message
How do I stop my surge protector from ringing? I have unplugged everything, and when I turn it back on, it starts ringing. It's driving me nuts. Please help
Accepted Solution
Official Solution
_xyzzy_
Expert
•
15K Messages
6 years ago
Maybe it's time to replace it? Depending on the number of "surges" you have had over the years it's probably a good idea anyhow. Cheap surge suppressors don't last forever?
Surge suppressors are rated in Joules, i.e., the amount of energy they can absorb to still suppress a surge. Most use MOVs (Metal oxide varistor) to absorb the surge. Think of it as a "gas tank". If you have a 400 Joule surge suppressor and get a 200 Joule surge, there is only 200 Joules "left in the tank". Once the "tank is empty" the surge suppress no longer works and what you are using is essentially a power strip with no surge suppression.
There are surge suppressors that don't use MOVs but they are a lot more expensive. But you should have a surge suppressor with a indicator light that at least shows your suppressor is still working (sort of like an "empty" indicator that you're "out of gas"). Also get one with the highest Joule rating you can afford.
As for your ringing. There's probably a transformer in your surge suppressor which is getting old and that's what is ringing (metal laminated core in the transformer). Probably yet another indication to replace it.
0
westom
Mentor
•
57 Messages
6 years ago
Be cautious. Many recite myths. No numbers indicates one who has only recommended what hearsay has told him to believe.
No transformer is inside a protector.
Numbers. A potentially destructive surge occurs maybe once every seven years. To increase profits, fables are promoted about hourly or monthly surges. No such thing exists.
Numbers: that protector has a let-through voltage - probably 330 volts. That means it does nothing - remains inert - until 120 volts well exceeds 330 volts. How often does your 120 volts exceed 330 volts? Maybe once every seven years.
Where is its joule number? How many joules does that power strip claim to absorb? Hundreds? Thousand? A surge that tiny is routinely converted by electronics into rock stable, low DC voltages to safely power semiconductors.
So what is that adjacent protector doing? It will fail on a surge that is too tiny to damage appliances. Grossly underszing it means a majority (who ignore numbers) will recommend it and buy more.
Grossly undersize increases sales. Also promoted are mythical daily or monthly surges so that you will replace that near zero joule protector every two years. Take a $3 power strip. Add some ten cent protector parts. Sell it for $25 or $85. It is about profits - not protection.
Effective protection means hundreds of thousands of joules safely dissipate outside. Then near zero joule protectors even are protected.. Informed consumers properly earth a 'whole house' protector. With numbers that claim protection even from direct lightning strikes. Then a protector remains functional for decades - after many direct lightning strikes.
This superior solution costs about $1 per protected appliance. Only solution always found in every facility that cannot have damage. It is how surge protection was done even over 100 years ago. And it is mostly unknown by a majority only educated in hearsay - and who routinely ignore numbers.
Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules are harmlessly absorbed. An effective protector must make a low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) connection to single point earth ground. Then even direct lightning strikes dissipate harmlessly outside. Then best protection is even protecting those near zero joule protectors. Then a protector, that is ringing and that can make appliance damage easier, is best disposed.
0
0
_xyzzy_
Expert
•
15K Messages
6 years ago
Are you referring to me? Because it is well documented that MOVs degrade over time (Wiki, Lifehacker, CNet, or any number of google hits).
I did say "probably". Who knows what other functions his "surge suppressor" may be handling other than surge suppression.
0
0
westom
Mentor
•
57 Messages
6 years ago
Also well documented is that switches wear out with use. Now include numbers. A switch is typically rated for 100,000 cycles. That means toggling it seven times every day for ... over 39 years. Once we include numbers, then nobody cares. Fear is no longer relevant.
Same applies to MOVs. Why ddid they forget to include numbers? Then misinformation, fears, and scams get produced. The numbers: potentially destructive surges can be hundreds of thousands of joules. How many joules did your example claim to absorb? 200? So that protector self destructs on a surge too tiny to even harm electronics. Yes, a 200 joule surge should never damage any electronics. Instead it gets converted into low DC voltages to safely power semiconductors. Did they forget to discuss those numbers?
View your cited pictures. An MOV is catastrophically destroyed? MOV manufacturers are quite blunt about this in datasheets. An expression called "Absolute Maximum Parameters" is in every datasheet. No MOV must exceed those numbers. Your picture shows an MOV that was ready to create a house fire. That was not degradation. That was the completely unacceptable catastrophic failure. Degradation leaves no visual indication.
Why would a cruise ship confiscate that protector if found in you luggage? They take fire threats that seriously. So why did your citation not discuss any numbers?
They are not marketing to the fewer who actually learn this stuff before making a recommendation. That means datasheets and spec numbers. They are marketing to others who only believe a first thing told - and never demand numbers.
One number is constantly posted for obvious reasons. Where are hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly absorbed? Your citations will not discuss that. Apparently is propaganda written to promote near zero protectors with a massive profit margin to the naive. Protectors, from other companies known by any guy for integrity, means direct lightning strikes without damage - for many decades. Any 'guy' would know these names: including Intermatic, Square D, Ditek, Siemens, Polyphaser (an industry benchmark), Syscom, Leviton, ABB, Delta, Erico, General Electric, and Cutler-Hammer (Eaton). Who made your protector? Where is their spec number for protection?
A protector must protect from direct lightning strikes. So robust as to not degrade for many decades. Those effective and tens of times less expensive solutions are never located adjacent to an appliance. Since lightning is typically 20,000 amps, then a minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Then your money goes into protection; not into a profit margin.
Fundamental to all protection is where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Not only did your citations not discuss relevant numbers: hundreds of thousands of joules and 50,000 amps. It also failed to mention what is critical to protection (as was true 100 years ago). A hardwire connects low impedance (ie less than 10 feet) to single point earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. How many profit centers with near zero joules protectors forget to mention any of this .. and numbers?
That transformer is not probable. It is never. Obvious for too many reasons to list.
0
0
_xyzzy_
Expert
•
15K Messages
6 years ago
Think what you want. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you. This is my last post to this thread.
0
0
westom
Mentor
•
57 Messages
6 years ago
Many make recommendations because it was a first thing heard. Then become entrenched in that belief. He never demanded what must always exist with an informed reply - numbers. His only numbers - 200 joules - is so tiny that to be any smaller, then it would have to be zero.
Worse are pictures in his subjective (no numbers provided) citation. It confuses degradation with a catastrophic failure. A protector that fails catastrophically is even a threat to human life. Effective protectors come with numbers that define protection even from direct lightning strikes. And that remain functional (need not degrade) for decades.
One can spend $20 or $85 per appliance on that near zero joule protector. Or one can spend $1 per appliance for the protection always found in every facility that cannot have damage. Then one has made an honest decision based in numbers and well proven science. Then near zero joule 'plug-in' protectors are protected.
Why do so many recommend ineffective and sometimes dangerous protectors? Numbers are ignored. First thing told must be true. An inability to separate well proven science from junk science. Some hate to admit they could be scammed. Many reasons might explain why some refuse to learn and then get angry.
That does not change what was well understood over 100 years ago. Effective protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate. Then no surge current is anywhere inside the building. If any appliance needs that protection, then every appliance needs that protection. It costs about $1 per protected appliance. And features what defines every effective solution.
A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Then a ringing protector is best binned (disposed).
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
35K Messages
6 years ago
@westom, while you may be correct about what a proper surge protector will and won't do, most consumers are going to buy the cheapest thing WalMart sells without a thought to specs. As such, it isn't too unlikely to cause issues out of the original package, let alone after any length of use.
Very few consumer-space surge protectors will protect against even nearby strikes.
"Direct strikes" need a properly grounded lightning rod.
0
0
westom
Mentor
•
57 Messages
6 years ago
As such, it isn't too unlikely to cause issues out of the original package, let alone after any length of use.
Really? Did you see pictures in his citation? That was a protector so tiny as to threaten human life - ie fire. That near zero joules and resulting catastrophic failure are why some cruise ships confiscate that tiny protector if found in your luggage.
Learn of fires created by near zero protectors. Norma in "The Power Outage" demonstrates the problem::
> Today, the cable company came to replace a wire. Well the cable
> man pulled a wire and somehow yanked loose their "ground" wire.
> The granddaughter on the computer yelled and ran because sparks
> and smoke were coming from the power surge strip.
How about some 15 million APC power strips that must be removed immediately due to so many fires?
To be used safely, a power strip protector must be used in conjunction with a 'whole house' solution. And then we discuss more numbers. IEEE defines a properly earthed 'whole house' solution as doing 99.5% to 99.9% of the protection. Then we buy cheap power strips to maybe do another 0.2% protection.
Yes, many buy the $90 protector from Monster or its equivalent in Walmart for $10. But the informed only spend $1 per protected appliance for the proven 'whole house' solution.
Lightning rod does not protect appliances. Lightning rod protects a structure because it connects to what does protection - earth ground. 'Whole house' protector protects appliances because it connects low impedance (ie less than 10 feet) to what does protection - single point earth ground. Protection of structure or appliances is always defined by the item that harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules. That is not a rod or protector. That is earth ground. Then protection from direct strikes exist - as also implemented over 100 years ago.
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
35K Messages
6 years ago
You keep harping on about a picture. I see no picture or links to pictures in any post. I see links to several articles. One of those articles had a picture that I assume you must be talking about. You know, your posts read like a sales brochure for whole-house power protection. Probably not a coincidence.
I, like _xyzzy_, am done with this thread.
0
0
westom
Mentor
•
57 Messages
6 years ago
Picture shows a protector threatening fire. Why ignore that threat?
https://lifehacker.com/why-you-should-periodically-replace-your-surge-protecto-1693447062
Subjective recommendation without numbers is best ignored or criticized as if a fable. This is a technical discussion. Honesty is found in recommendations with numbers. So your next post describes how to protect from surges that cause damage - ie are hundreds of thousands of joules. This is about honesty verses naive hearsay. Please post an honest and technical reply; not your emotions
Decide to learn from science. Or continue to denigrate.
A ringing protector is best disposed. Numbers say why. Then effective protection (with the always required low impedance connection to earth ground) is installed. That ringing power strip had no earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
100 years of well proven science does not change because you never learned it.
0
0