lightning hit PC now dead

[PCBONEZ]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

As I said before.
- Surge protectors are NOT for lightening.
Gee, that dismisses everything you said in one sentence.
.

[westom]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

First it's about the small plug in protector and how they do not protect from lightning (I do agree on this, that is not to say they are useless, I've seen such things be destroyed by lightning but the connected equipment just fine after the plug-in protector was replaced)
Plus if you live in an apartment it might not be possible to go any other route anyway

The scam is obvious. Grossly undersize a protector. A surge too small to harm any appliance routinely destroys a protector. Then the easily scammed consumer says, "but the connected equipment just fine after the plug-in protector was replaced".

Connected equipment contains superior protection. Appliance protected itself. The grossly undersized protector failed to - successfully - promote a scam. It is a $3 power strip with some ten cent protector parts selling for $25 or $150. Increase the price. Then the most naive among us will call it a "quality protector". Scamming is that easy.

Any protector that fails does no protection. What does a scam protector do? Disconnects its MOVs as fast as possible. Disconnect from tiny and otherwise non-destructive surges ASAP. If it does not disconnect, then these scary pictures may happen:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm
http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html
http://tinyurl.com/3x73ol entitled "Surge Protector Fires"
http://www3.cw56.com/news/articles/local/BO63312/
http://www.nmsu.edu/~safety/news/les...tectorfire.htm
http://www.pennsburgfireco.com/fullstory.php?58339

Scary pictures when a plug-in protector does not disconnect fast enough. Absorbs too much energy. But again, where does energy dissipate?

Effective protectors earth all surges - even direct lightning strikes - and remain functional. No exceptions. But scams (profit centers) are grossly undersized to fail. Failure gets the most naive to believe myths. Effective protectors remain functional after each surge. Then nobody even knows a surge existed.

Only those who blindly believe theory (propaganda) - who have no real world experience - would waste money on a plug-in protector.

Surge protection is always about where energy dissipates. How do hundreds of joules inside a plug-in protector absorb surges that are hundreds of thousands of joules? Why, Per Hansson, do you not even answer that question? My experience. Those who avoid such questions and refuse to post those numeric specs are people my father so loved to brainwash. He bragged how so many people only believe the first thing they are told. Their eyes would glaze over when numbers defined reality. Will even insult to avoid admitting they were so easily scammed. A surge too tiny to cause damage easily damaged an ineffective and high profit protector.

Everyone - even renters - have numerous options. For example, informed landlords are more than happy to install a 'whole house' protector bought by the tenant. To also protect the landlord's appliances. Electric companies install a 'whole house' protector behind the meter. Only those entrenched in myths could deny a so many options. But then my father so loved manipulating people who would deny rather than learn. Because they will do anything to avoid admitting reality.

Lightning rods do not protect appliances. Obviously. Lightning rods protect buildings. A lightning strike to AC wires down the street is a direct lightning strike to all household appliances. Why am I repeating what has been posted and ignored so many times? My father explained it. So many people will automatically believe the first thing they are ordered to believe. Then deny anything that proves they were scammed. Only 'officer material' also demands facts and numbers. Only thinkers ignore the majority who make subjective claims and post mockery - who do not even know the numbers.

Hardly anything posted involves theory. Those who learned reality earth a 'whole house' protector. Others manipulated by outright lies, myths, and theory (also called propaganda) are told a protector that fails does protection.

Protector disconnected as fast as possible. Protection routine inside every appliance protected the appliance. But those most easily scammed ignore the obvious. Blindly believe propaganda. The protector failed. Left a surge connected to the appliance. Appliance protected itself from a surge so small as to only damage the protector.

Only theory is that myth about protection from a plug-in protector. Even the manufacturer does not make those claims. Hard facts: where surge damage cannot happen, a 'whole house' protector is earthed. No money is wasted on plug-in protectors. 100 years of well proven, hard facts that must be denied by so many trained in theory – not numbers - retail advertising.

A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Protection is always - always - about where energy dissipates. For your beliefs to be valid, every post must also define where energy dissiaptes.

[EGuevarae]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

Also please try to inform me how all this theoretical discussion helps the original poster?

That's my whole point here ....

[Per Hansson]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

I guess my understanding of the English language is not adequate because I just can't understand what point westom is trying to pass on

First it's about the small plug in protector and how they do not protect from lightning (I do agree on this, that is not to say they are useless, I've seen such things be destroyed by lightning but the connected equipment just fine after the plug-in protector was replaced)
Plus if you live in an apartment it might not be possible to go any other route anyway (like I do, which is why I do use plug in protectors for my TV and computer, better than nothing I figure)

And of course if there is a lightning rod the equipment will be fine IF the lightning rod takes the hit
But what if the lightning decides the nearby oak tree is a more proper conductor to hearth since it might be raining and the oak tree is wet so it has a lower potential to ground than the lightning rod?

Also please try to inform me how all this theoretical discussion helps the original poster?

[Toasty]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

Possibly, or perhaps their mothers shared a preference in controlled substances while they carried.
.

.

[EGuevarae]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

.... Because humans who learned 100+ years old science do not ...

Do you copy & paste, or that is part of your signature and by some mistake it posts in between your philosophical theories?

[PCBONEZ]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

i4004 relative?

Possibly, or perhaps their mothers shared a preference in controlled substances while they carried.
.

[westom]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

Well now if your theory about lightning protection where correct how come the masts gets destroyed each time it is hit?

Others claimed that nothing can protect from direct lightning. Which is why TV and FM electronics (not the mast) atop the Empire State Building are destroyed 23 times annually.

If you did not see obvious sarcasm that mocks their "nothing can protect from lightning" fears, then stop reading. Buy the most expensive plug-in protector you can find.

Routine atop the Empire State Building (23 times annually) and WTC (40 times annually) was to have direct lightning strikes without damage. That lightning rod is also the antenna. Because humans who learned 100+ years old science do not entertain junk science posted by a majority.

Damage by a direct lightning strike is directly traceable to a human educated by hearsay and junk science. You have three choices. Be naive and suffer damage. Be naive, waste vast sums on protectors inside the building, and suffer damage. Or be informed - earth a 'whole house' protector. Then nobody even knew a surge existed.

Learn why 911 Operators remove headsets and leave the room everytime a thunderstorm approaches. That is what a majority here are saying. Clearly they must be right. They outnumber the professionals.

Informed techs use diagnostic analysis to even locate a building defect that permitted computer damage. Techs that only shotgun never learn how this is done. ‘Work harder; not smarter'. Or believe electronics atop the Empire State Building are routinely damaged. I even told them to believe it. That proves it must be true.

[PCBONEZ]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

westom; riddle me this
you say the empire state buildings masts are destroyed 23 times each year

well now if your theory about lightning protection where correct how come the masts gets destroyed each time it is hit?


http://history1900s.about.com/od/193...mpirefacts.htm

2 + 2 = 5

[Per Hansson]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

westom; riddle me this
You say the Empire State Buildings masts are destroyed 23 times each year

Well now if your theory about lightning protection where correct how come the masts gets destroyed each time it is hit?

How tall is it?
There are several numbers to describe the height of the Empire State Building. The total height of the building, including the lightning rod, is 1,454 feet.

http://history1900s.about.com/od/193...mpirefacts.htm

[EGuevarae]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

....principles understood 100 years ago.

The 100 years man .....
And you know what? I want to shotgun something, but not precisely the OP damaged system ....

[EGuevarae]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

i4004 relative?

I know... I remember the signature of PCBONEZ..... "i4004 on Ignore list".......

Toasty! Nice to see you man!

[Toasty]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

i4004 relative?

[PCBONEZ]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

Again you miss the point. First, surge damage is directly traceable to human failure. A human who all but invites surges to hunt for earth destructively via electronics. Failure to learn from their mistakes or failure to even get educated in principles understood 100 years ago.

Second, by doing proper diagnostic analysis (not shotgunning), the OP can learn why surges do damage. How to solve computer problems faster without even disconnecting any wires. And how to avoid that damage with simple, well proven, and less expensive solutions.

Third, most surge damaged computers have few damaged components. Most surge damage computers are easily fixed.

Fourth, proper diagnostics mean spares salvaged from a scrapped computer are not unknown - not overstressed. Once a surge path is identified, then spare parts that have not yet failed are quickly identified as suspect. Proper analysis means one learns how few parts are really damaged by lightning. And how few parts are actually damaged by a surge.

Fifth, those numbers mean the few who actually know this stuff can provide useful replies.

Routine is to have direct lightning strikes without damage to a computer. And routine is an informed tech who uses computer damage to eliminate reasons for that damage. Learning means not doing shotgunning.

That damaged computer is a perfect example to learn better diagnostic techniques, how easily a lightning damaged computer may be restored, and to find a human mistake that made that (rumored) lightning damage possible.

It's blatantly obvious you've never even SEEN a computer that has suffered lightening damage.

[westom]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

... and will not help the original poster,as it is so technically elevated that is out of the scope of the problem ...

Again you miss the point. First, surge damage is directly traceable to human failure. A human who all but invites surges to hunt for earth destructively via electronics. Failure to learn from their mistakes or failure to even get educated in principles understood 100 years ago.

Second, by doing proper diagnostic analysis (not shotgunning), the OP can learn why surges do damage. How to solve computer problems faster without even disconnecting any wires. And how to avoid that damage with simple, well proven, and less expensive solutions.

Third, most surge damaged computers have few damaged components. Most surge damage computers are easily fixed.

Fourth, proper diagnostics mean spares salvaged from a scrapped computer are not unknown - not overstressed. Once a surge path is identified, then spare parts that have not yet failed are quickly identified as suspect. Proper analysis means one learns how few parts are really damaged by lightning. And how few parts are actually damaged by a surge.

Fifth, those numbers mean the few who actually know this stuff can provide useful replies.

Routine is to have direct lightning strikes without damage to a computer. And routine is an informed tech who uses computer damage to eliminate reasons for that damage. Learning means not doing shotgunning.

That damaged computer is a perfect example to learn better diagnostic techniques, how easily a lightning damaged computer may be restored, and to find a human mistake that made that (rumored) lightning damage possible.

[EGuevarae]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

- In the real world it's -ALL- about time and money.
THAT should be taught to students as well.
Outside of Academia recognizing "Beyond ECONOMICAL Repair" is a critical skill.

That's another thing I am trying to say to the guy.Yes, you can learn.....learn how to invest a tremendous amount of time and maybe not so much components (comparable to changing an entire board or the whole rig) but it won't be economical.Not applicable in the real world ....

[EGuevarae]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

Demonstrably false. Some things are a matter of personal preference... PlainBill

I agree.My bad.... what I was trying to say is that everyone is free to give his opinion (so the trailing "freedom of speech" sentence) and then the people could either agree or disagree with it..
Perfectly expressed in the " We agree to disagree to maintain peace; and find safer things to discuss." . Thanks Bill!

[PCBONEZ]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

Say what?
I find no sarcasm in the original posts by westom, perhaps I am as blind as PCBONEZ then
I agree with all you say PCBONEZ!

In fairness I re-read the first few sentences of that last one a several times because I couldn't tell if the intent was sarcasm or not.
Based on content of his/her previous posts, I concluded not.
.

[Per Hansson]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

And I am of the opinion that in this case you failed to detect sarcasm.

PlainBill

Say what?
I find no sarcasm in the original posts by westom, perhaps I am as blind as PCBONEZ then
I agree with all you say PCBONEZ!

[PlainBill]

Re: lightning hit PC now dead

Spoken like a true ideological theorist with no practical real world experience.
- I've lived in 11 US States, 2 countries, and over 20 cities.
- Not a single one of them did this.


Spoken like a true ideological theorist with no practical real world experience.
- "routinely" - This hasn't happened in the US since 1926.


If your theories actually worked they would use them there now wouldn't they.


This is done because, depending on what the wiring is, the ground wires reduce cross-talk and/or EMI.
- DUH!


According to NLSI [National Lightning Safety Institute] the ONLY Absolute protection from lightning is a fully enclosed Faraday Cage.
If there are conductors entering and leaving the cage then it isn't fully enclosed.
- This is because the biggest risk with lightening is the induced voltages [resultant from the EMP/EMI] in the general area and the paths those induced voltages take. - Not the direct path of the strike.
-
On grounding NLSI says: "A spectral study of lightning's typical impulse reveals both a high and a low frequency content. The grounding system appears to the lightning impulse as a transmission line where wave propagation theory applies. A considerable part of lightning's current responds horizontally when striking the ground: it is estimated that less than 15% of it penetrates the earth."
- This means that only 15% of a strike is dissipated via a direct grounding path.
- The remaining 85% is dissipated via inducing voltages in surrounding structures.
That is the EMP I've been talking about.


GCE [Gross Conceptual Error]
Despite advertising claims and the fact that it helps a little if the strike isn't too close, Surge Protection isn't FOR lightening.


Spoken like a true ideological theorist with no practical real world experience.
"In most cases", in the real world, lightning damaged computers are 'beyond economical repair' - aka useless junk. The damage is typically extensive, random, it's diverse, and unique to that machine. There is little or no training value in having a student work on gear with multiple unknown problems. In fact it is DETRIMENTAL to learning because all it does is frustrate the student.
- That's why Electronics schools use test-rig training aids with ONE problem at a time.
- Any respectable, responsible, 'worth his pay' educator isn't going to hand students problems that the instructor himself doesn't know the solutions to, particularly when there may not be a solution.
That is irresponsible and a waste of the students time.


Spoken like a true ideological theorist with no practical real world experience.
- In the real world it's -ALL- about time and money.
THAT should be taught to students as well.
Outside of Academia recognizing "Beyond ECONOMICAL Repair" is a critical skill.


You mean like yourself and surge protection?


Handing a student lightening damaged equipment -IS- shotgunning.
- It's shotgunning education.


Spoken like a true ideological theorist with no practical real world experience.
- One who has never actually worked on ANY kind of damaged equipment beyond simulated problems in a lab and one who has very little real world experience.

.

And I am of the opinion that in this case you failed to detect sarcasm.

PlainBill