Any really effective surge protectors?

[bud--]

You can use the protector. But it does not do protection. In some cases, it compromises protection already inside adjacent appliances. Even the manufacturer says to not use it on an ungrounded receptacle. But you can use it. You are permitted to compromise existing protection.

Do you want protection? Or do you really only need a power strip so that all interconnected appliances can further protect themselves by sharing a common ground inside a power strip? What specific problem is to be solved?

The best information on surges and surge protection I have seen is at:
<http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf>
- "How to protect your house and its contents from lightning: IEEE guide for surge protection of equipment connected to AC power and communication circuits" published by the IEEE in 2005 (the IEEE is the major organization of electrical and electronic engineers in the US).
And also:
<http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf>
- "NIST recommended practice guide: Surges Happen!: how to protect the appliances in your home" published by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology in 2001

The IEEE guide is aimed at those with some technical background. The NIST guide is aimed at the unwashed masses.

Plug-in protectors will actually protect equipment even with no ground wire (but I wouldn't recommend it - if you do, plug it into a GFCI). Read the IEEE surge guide starting page 30. Plug-in protectors don't protect mainly by earthing a surge. They protect by limiting the voltage from all wires (signal and power) to the ground at the protector. The voltage between the wires going to the protected equipment is safe for the protected equipment. With no ground wire that still happens, but the voltage shifts detailed in the IEEE surge guide may be higher.

If using a plug-in protector all interconnected equipment needs to be connected to the same protector. External connections, like phone, also need to go through the protector. Connecting all wiring through the suppressor prevents damaging voltages between power and signal wires. (Did the phone or other signal wire go through the plug-in protector for the "credit card machine"?)

The NIST surge guide suggests that most equipment damage is from high voltage between power and phone/cable wires.

A service panel protector is a real good idea. But from the NIST surge guide:
"Q - Will a surge protector installed at the service entrance be sufficient for the whole house?
A - There are two answers to than question: Yes for one-link appliances [electronic equipment], No for two-link appliances [equipment connected to power AND phone or cable or....]. Since most homes today have some kind of two-link appliances, the prudent answer to the question would be NO - but that does not mean that a surge protector installed at the service entrance is useless."

That is because a service panel protector does not limit the voltage between power and phone/cable/... wires. Anything connected to only the power wires is very likely protected.

If power, phone, cable, dish enter near each other, and entry protectors for the signal wires have short ground wires to a common connection to the power earthing system, then all wiring is more likely protected. The National Electrical Code, which is the basis for local codes, does not require residential power, phone, cable, ... to enter near each other. The IEEE surge guide, in the example cited above, shows a cable entry point that is too far distant. In that case the guide says "the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport [plug-in] protector." (Another way would be to run the phone/cable/... wire to the power service area and install another entry protector with a short ground wire to the common connection point. Wires to the house are from that point.)

The maximum surge current that has any reasonable probability of occurring is 10,000A per power service wire. (This is mentioned in the IEEE surge guide.) That is based on a 100,000A strike to an adjacent utility pole in typical urban over head distribution. Service panel protectors with much higher ratings are readily available. The IEEE surge guide has recommendations. (Protection from a direct lightning strike to the house requires lightning rods.)

The author of the NIST surge guide looked at the amount of energy that can reach a plug-in protector. With branch circuits of 10 m and longer, and surges up to 10,000A (as above) the maximum was a surprisingly small 35 joules. In 13 of 15 cases it was 1 joule or less. A plug-in protector with high ratings and CONNECTED CORRECTLY is likely to protect from a very near very strong lightning strike.

One reason the energy is so low is that at about 6,000V (US) there is arc-over from service panel busbars to the enclosure. After the arc is established the voltage is hundreds of volts. Because the enclosure is connected to the earthing system most of the energy is dumped to earth. The neutral is connected to ground/earth at the service (US) further limiting the exposure in the house.

Neither service panel or plug-in protectors protect by absorbing the surge. They absorb some energy in the process of protecting.

Contrary to what some have said, the IEEE and NIST surge guides both say plug-in protectors are effective.

For about 10 years the NEC has required including a "concrete encased electrode" (commonly called a Ufer ground) for most new construction. The minimum length of the conductor is 20 feet, and can be rebar. Ground rods are lousy earthing electrodes.

If you unplug equipment for lightning protection you also need disconnect phone connections.

 

[GoodEnough]

So, bottom line, will a 4000 jules surge protector protect my PC if plugged into a non-grounded, non GFCI 3 prong outlet? I am not worried about human safety, just PC safety. Ha.

 

[GoodEnough]

I just noticed a coaxial cable jack. I assume this is for a cable modem? Cool. I just need to find a spare coax cable for the out jack.

 

[westom]

So, bottom line, will a 4000 jules surge protector protect my PC if plugged into a non-grounded, non GFCI 3 prong outlet?

1) How does a 4000 joule protector absorb hundreds of thousands of joules? It doesn't. It claims to protect from surges that are typically not destructive.

2) So how does a 2 cm part inside that protector stop what three miles of sky could not? Again, it doesn't.

3) Where are manufacturer spec numbers that claim protection from each type of surge? Bud, who is paid to promote these protectors, cannot even provide those numbers for one simple reason. It does not even claim that protection.

4) Without earthing, a protector is ineffective. The NIST (see Bud's citation) says so quite bluntly on page 19 of 24:
> A very important point to keep in mind is that your surge protector
> will work by diverting the surges to ground. The best surge protection
> in the world can be useless if grounding is not done properly.

I simply called it ineffective. The NIST is blunter. That protector without an earthing connection is *useless*.

5) A protector adjacent to appliances cannot stop or absorb that energy. So that energy will go hunting for earth. That adjacent protector simply gives surges more paths to find earth destructive via nearby appliances. View Figure 8 (page 42 of 61) in that IEEE brochure. It earths the surge 8000 volts destructively via TV2. What kind of protection makes surge damage easier? Protectors that are profit centers; that do not even claim surge protection.

Use a well proven solution:

6) How has protection been done everywhere that damage cannot happen? Never stop a surge. Always give it a path to what it wants (earth). As cited previously with pictures from other professionals. A path that is non-destructive. As Ben Franklin even demonstrated in 1752. And a solution that costs tens or 100 times less money. The only solution implemented even 100 years ago. Technology is that well proven. And not found in a plug-in protector.

Stop wasting time worrying about a receptacle safety ground or a protector that does not even claim protection. A less expensive and superior solution is installed without any household wiring changes. It can be installed in any house even with 1930 wiring. It was described repeatedly previously.

Protection is always about the earth ground. Always. A protector will only be as effective as an earth ground that you must provide. Informed consumers earth one 'whole house' protector from more responsible companies such as Siemens, Intermatic, ABB, General Electric, Leviton, or Square D. A Cutler-Hammer solution sells in Lowes and Home Depot for less than $50. These well proven solutions always have a wire for that required low impedance (ie 'less than 10 foot') connection to earth ground. As noted previously, this is your secondary protection layer. It must exist to even protect that grossly undersized power strip protector.

An adjacent protector will not earth a surge 8000 volts destructively through adjacent appliances if you have upgraded earthing and a &#8216;whole house&#8217; protector. Stop wasting times with what the NIST calls "useless". Install a solution that is proven by over 100 years of well proven science, experience, and numbers.

 

[Lemon law]

I agree with Weston as I have been using his basic system since 2004.

But if I really want internet access during a severe T storm, I just fire up a battery operated Lap top computer and use a battery operated wireless modem. Otherwise, at the first hint of thunder, I shut down any AC powered computer, and unplug anything wired from all other computers. And since such T storm damage can occur even if the computer is off, I always do that every time I shut the computer off.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I've been curious about this myself, so do those whole house protectors really work as advertised? Some of them also have plugs for coax and phone, so I'd pass everything through there as well before it goes to the patch panel to distribute to the rest of the house.

 

[Lemon law]

Before I used the Weston System, I lost 3 surge suppressor and one modem in one single month. And in past years I have had a number of PC's burn out lost to T-storms.

Since I adopted the basic Weston system in 2004, I have had zero T-storms losses.

Surge suppressors are quite good, but they still take some 10 nano seconds to trigger, and in that time extremely high voltage surges can travel 10 feet. Its not the volts that do the damage, its the amps as the surge seeks ground through any available path. Kill all paths to ground before the surge hits the computers, and the resultant amps are zero.

As I also strongly suspect my buried telephone cables run somewhere along a pile of buried iron fence posts, so any electrical strike that hits the ground, also can induce a zillion volt surge into buried phone or coax cables.

 

[bud--]

1) How does a 4000 joule protector absorb hundreds of thousands of joules? It doesn't.

Nonsense.

You can't get large surge currents on a branch circuit. As a result you can't get large energy dissipation in plug-in protectors.

In my previous post I cited an investigation done by the NIST surge guru (who also wrote the NIST surge guide). With the maximum surge that has any probability of occurring the energy absorbed at a plug-in protector was *a surprisingly small 35 joules. In 13 of 15 cases it was 1 joule or less. A plug-in protector with high ratings and CONNECTED CORRECTLY is likely to protect from a very near very strong lightning strike.* I gave one of the reasons why the energy was so small.

And neither service panel or plug-in protectors protect by absorbing the surge.

Both the IEEE and NIST surge guides say plug-in protectors are effective.

It claims to protect from surges that are typically not destructive.

Nonsense.

2) So how does a 2 cm part inside that protector stop what three miles of sky could not? Again, it doesn't.

Of course it doesn't. Protectors don't work by *stopping*.

3) Where are manufacturer spec numbers that claim protection from each type of surge? Bud, who is paid to promote these protectors, cannot even provide those numbers for one simple reason. It does not even claim that protection.

More nonsense.

I have provided specs. Others have provided specs. A 10 year old could find specs. Westom always ignores them. Apparently westom knows that plug-in protectors can't possibly work so specs can't exist.

And if westom had valid technical arguments he wouldn't have to lie about me. My only association with surge protection is I use some protectors.

4) Without earthing, a protector is ineffective. The NIST (see Bud's citation) says so quite bluntly on page 19 of 24:

What does the NIST guide really say about plug-in protectors?
They are *the easiest solution*.
And *one effective solution is to have the consumer install* a multiport plug-in protector

Both the IEEE and NIST surge guides say plug-in protectors are effective.

5) A protector adjacent to appliances cannot stop or absorb that energy. So that energy will go hunting for earth. That adjacent protector simply gives surges more paths to find earth destructive via nearby appliances. View Figure 8 (page 42 of 61) in that IEEE brochure. It earths the surge 8000 volts destructively via TV2. What kind of protection makes surge damage easier?

If poor westom could only read and think he could discover what the IEEE guide says in this example:

- A plug-in protector protects the TV connected to it.
- *To protect TV2, a second multiport protector located at TV2 is required.*
- In the example a surge comes in on a cable service with the ground wire from cable entry ground block to the ground at the power service that is far too long. In that case the IEEE guide says *the only effective way of protecting the equipment is to use a multiport [plug-in] protector.*
- westom's favored power service protector would provide absolutely NO protection.

It is simply a lie that the plug-in protector in the IEEE example damages the second TV.
Westom tries to stand an example of how plug-in protectors work on its head.

Both the IEEE and NIST surge guides say plug-in protectors are effective.

Protectors that are profit centers; that do not even claim surge protection.

Continuing nonsense.

Some plug-in protectors even have protected equipment warranties.

Protection is always about the earth ground. Always. A protector will only be as effective as an earth ground that you must provide.

Earthing appears to be a religious belief (immune from challenge) for westom. Since plug-in protectors don't work primarily by earting a surge westom thinks they can't possibly work. Unfortunately for westom, the IEEE surge guide explains that plug-in protectors work primarily by limiting the voltage on all wires (power and signal) to the ground at the protector.

Being evangelical about his belief in earthing westom googles for *surge* to spread his beliefs. That is why he is here.

Some of what westom says is very good, some not so good, and some is nonsense. Everything westom says about plug-in protectors is nonsense.

Informed consumers earth one 'whole house' protector from more responsible companies such as Siemens, Intermatic, ABB, General Electric, Leviton, or Square D.

All these *responsible companies* except SquareD make plug-in protectors and say they are effective. SquareD says for their *best* service panel protector *electronic equipment may need additional protection by installing plug-in [protectors] at the point of use.*

And repeating from the NIST surge guide:
*Q - Will a surge protector installed at the service entrance be sufficient for the whole house?
A - There are two answers to than question: Yes for one-link appliances [electronic equipment], No for two-link appliances [equipment connected to power AND phone or cable or....]. Since most homes today have some kind of two-link appliances, the prudent answer to the question would be NO - but that does not mean that a surge protector installed at the service entrance is useless.*

That is because a service panel protector does not limit the voltage between power and phone/cable/... wires.

For real science read the IEEE and NIST surge guides. Both say plug-in protectors are effective.

Then read the sources that agree with westom that plug-in protectors are not effective. There are none.

========================================================
========================================================
4000 joules is a high rating for a plug-in protector. If connected correctly it should protect and not fail.

Correct connection - all interconnected equipment connected to the same protector and ALL external connections (power, phone, cable, dish, ...) go through the protector.

A non-grounded receptacle is some problem. I would much rather get a grounded outlet. But for equipment protection, and from a GFCI receptacle, the surge protection should work.

----------------------------------------------
Service panel protectors certainly can provide protection for anything connected only to power wires. If phone and coax go through the protector and then to the house they are likely to protect anything connected to power and phone and coax. This is one way of handling a phone or cable entry that is distant from the power service.

------------------------------------------------------
The MOVs that provide protection in the vast majority of protectors are plenty fast for surges that get to the house. The inductance of wire from the surge to the house lowers the rise time of any fast surges.

 

[Unheard]

clip

New member, posts defending surge protectors. Who do you work for? Monster?

 

[westom]

He is paid to promote plug-in protectors. He follows me everywhere to promote those products. But if his protectors did that protection, then he could post manufacturer specification numbers that says so. He cannot. Even the manufacturer does not make those protection claims. Those plug-in protectors are promoted by the hearsay and misrepresentation that he is paid to promote.

He could post manufacturer numbers that list protection from each type of surge. Instead he will make subjective claims and accusations.

Nobody said a 'whole house' protector does 100&#37; protection. IEEE makes all recommendations in Standards. Consult the IEEE Green Book (Standard 142) entitled 'Static and Lightning Protection Grounding':
> Lightning cannot be prevented; it can only be intercepted or diverted to a
> path which will, if well designed and constructed, not result in damage.
> Even this means is not positive, providing only 99.5-99.9% protection. ...
> Still, a 99.5% protection level will reduce the incidence of direct strokes
> from one stroke per 30 years ... to one stroke per 6000 years ...

As the IEEE notes, earthing (not a protector) does the protection. Plug-in protectors have no low impedance (ie 'less than 10 foot') connection to earth.

Earth one 'whole house' protector for over 99.5% of the protection at about $1 per protected appliance. Then spend tens or 100 times more money for power strips to do maybe an additional 0.2% protection. Yes, power strips sometimes protect from residual transients that are often too tiny to do damage. One might spend $thousands for a power strip on everything including the dishwasher, each smoke detector, and furnace. Or ignore what is made irrelevant by only one 'whole house' protector.

Most everyone is satisfied with protection from 99.5-99.9% of surges. Do you expect to be living there for the next 6000 years?

A 'whole house' protector also protects power strip protectors. Especially important due to rare house fires created by power strip protectors. Power strip protectors accomplish little if not part of a solution that always earths a 'whole house' protector. Worry more about what does 99.5-99.9% of the protection.

 

[bud--]

New member, posts defending surge protectors. Who do you work for? Monster?

I have never worked in anything even remotely connected with the surge protection industry.

I posted links to surge guides from the IEEE and NIST.
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/practiceguides/surgesfnl.pdf

The IEEE is an association of electrical, electronic and other engineers. It has over 400,000 members world wide. It developed some of the basic standards used in surge research and protection. The IEEE surge guide comes the IEEE Surge Protection Devices Committee and was written by 5 EEs experienced in the field.

The NIST is the science agency of the US government. The author of the NIST surge guide is an expert in field with many published papers on surges and surge protection. I have provided information from at least 2 of them.

There simply are not more reliable sources of information on surges and surge protection than the IEEE and NIST. Most of what I wrote comes from one of the surge guides or from what the NIST author has written

(Compare that to westom who has no sources that agree with him that plug-in protectors are not effective.).

Both guides say plug-in protectors are effective.

Have you read either of them?

Where is your source that surge protectors are not effective, if that is what you are saying?

What specifically that I have posted do you disagree with?

 

[bud--]

He is paid to promote plug-in protectors.

Simply a lie.

If westom had valid technical arguments he wouldn't have to lie.

He follows me everywhere to promote those products.

I got real tired of multiple times westom posted blatantly wrong information in a short period on a couple newsgroups I watch. Like here, westom got there by googling for *surge*. He has been doing it for years. His technobabble arguments sound reasonable. The more I have studied surge protection the more I have found that he is wrong about.

And I promote only accurate information. Once people have accurate information they can make appropriate decisions.

What I write centers around plug-in protectors because of the misinformation from westom.

But if his protectors did that protection, then he could post manufacturer specification numbers that says so. He cannot.

One of westom's favorite lies.

A few of the times I have posted specs (which westom ignored)
http://preview.tinyurl/3nxbwqw
add the obvious .com

Even the manufacturer does not make those protection claims. Those plug-in protectors are promoted by the hearsay and misrepresentation that he is paid to promote.

The lie repeated. If westom only had valid arguments....

No protection claims? How about protected equipment warranties.

As the IEEE notes, earthing (not a protector) does the protection. Plug-in protectors have no low impedance (ie 'less than 10 foot') connection to earth.

How about airplanes? They get hit by lightning regularly. Do they drag an earthing chain? Is it only 10 feet long?

It is westom's religious belief in earthing.

The IEEE surge guide explains, for anyone who can read and think, that plug-in protectors do not work primarily by earthing a surge. They work primarily by limiting the voltage on wires (both power and signal) to the ground at the protector. The guide explains that earthing occurs elsewhere. Read the guide starting page 30. This is the 3rd time I have said this.

The IEEE surge guide has 2 examples of protection. Both of them use plug-in protectors (to illustrate how to connect them).

A 'whole house' protector also protects power strip protectors.

Complete nonsense.

Especially important due to rare house fires created by power strip protectors.

UL has, since 1998, required thermal disconnects for overheating protection elements. Westom has no claims of fires of UL listed protectors made since 1998.

For real science read the IEEE and NIST surge guides. Both say plug-in protectors are effective.

Westom still can't find any source that agrees with him that plug-in protectors do not work.

 

[GoodEnough]

And a solution that costs tens or 100 times less money. The only solution implemented even 100 years ago. Technology is that well proven. And not found in a plug-in protector. Stop wasting time worrying about a receptacle safety ground or a protector that does not even claim protection. A less expensive and superior solution is installed without any household wiring changes. It can be installed in any house even with 1930 wiring. It was described repeatedly previously.
.

Well, what the heck is this mysterious solution? You sound like a TV infomercial scam.

Right, now I have my 4009 joules surge protector plugged into an un-grounded socket. I already paid the $25, so screw it.
This weekend, I will try to ground the housing, or replace it with a GFCI socket.

 

[westom]

Right, now I have my 4009 joules surge protector plugged into an un-grounded socket. ... This weekend, I will try to ground the housing, or replace it with a GFCI socket.

A GFCI is only for human safety. Does nothing for computer protection.

Ground to what? A computer motherboard has a ground plane. So a protector connected there is grounded? Grounding is that simple by ignoring expressions such as 'less than 10 feet'.

That motherboard ground connects to a computer's chassis ground, which connects to a PSU ground, which connects to receptacle safety ground, which connects to grounds on all other appliances, which connects to a bus bar ground inside the breaker box, which connects to earth ground. Therefore a connection to the motherboard ground must be a connection to earth ground? No.

All those grounds (interconnected or floating) are electrically different. To be effective, a protector must connect to a ground that will absorb hundreds of thousands of joules. Earth ground. A low impedance connection typically means less than 10 feet.

Install a 'whole house' protector in the breaker box. Upgrade earth ground (if necessary) to both meet and exceed post 1990 National Electrical code. Make no changes to any household wiring. Earth ground will harmlessly absorb hundred of thousands of joules - also called a surge.

Or, maybe convert that $25 power strip protector into a kludge equivalent of a 'whole house' protector. Cut its power cord as short as possible. Less than one foot if possible. Plug that power strip into a receptacle attached to the breaker box. If the breaker box is earthed (as described above), then that power strip may be earthed. Then that power strip might earth surges that would otherwise threaten the computer.

That kludge solution requires no household rewiring. May only require a replacement three prong plug. Then no receptacles need be rewired.

 

[GoodEnough]

I live in an apt and have no access to anything except my ungrounded receptacle. What is the best plan of action?

 

[bud--]

All those grounds (interconnected or floating) are electrically different. To be effective, a protector must connect to a ground that will absorb hundreds of thousands of joules. Earth ground. A low impedance connection typically means less than 10 feet.

Not explained - airplanes regularly get hit by lightning. Are they crashing? Do they drag an earthing chain? Is it only 10 feet long?

Repeating for the 4th time - the IEEE surge guide explains plug-in protectors do not work primarily by earthing a surge. They work by limiting the voltage between all wires (power and signal) to the ground at the protector. The guide explains that earthing occurs elsewhere in the system.

And repeating for at least the 3rd time, you can't get high surge currents on branch circuits. As a result you don't get high joules. The NIST surge expert found a maximum of 35 joules, far less than the rating of about any protector. That was with surges that included the equivalent of a 100,000A lightning strike to the utility pole next to a house. A major reason is that at about 6,000V there is arc-over from the service panel bus bars to the enclosure. After the arc is established the voltage is hundreds of volts. The enclosure is connected to the earthing system which dumps most of the surge energy to earth.

Contrary to westom's repeated claims, plug-in protectors are effective.
Both the IEEE and NIST surge guides say plug-in protectors are effective.

With no supply ground wire the voltage limitation above still happens - the protector still provides surge protection. The ground potential rise, detailed in the IEEE surge guide, is likely higher.

There is not a great fix in a rented apartment without action by the landlord.

Install a 'whole house' protector in the breaker box.

This is what you call westom's *mysterious solution*. It must be done by the landlord or with the permission of the landlord.

============================
A major surge hazard is high voltage between power and phone/cable/dish/... wires. Sounds like you have only a power connection which reduces your risk.

Best fix would be finding a grounded receptacle to plug your protector and computer into.

Next best would be for the landlord to install a grounded receptacle.

Next best would be a service panel protector (done by or allowed by the landlord). (Not necessarily complete protection if the equipment connects to power and phone/cable/dish/...)

A plug-in protector plugged into a GFCI will provide protection, but is not good solution.

 

[westom]

I live in an apt and have no access to anything except my ungrounded receptacle. What is the best plan of action?

You could buy a 'whole house' protector from one of those more responsible manufacturers. And have the landlord install it. Better informed landlords would be happy to also have their appliances protected.

One that I know learned the hard way. Both at his home and in the apartment building. He is now installing 'whole house' protectors in all his buildings after a surge even took out a new and very expensive computerized furnace controller.

Otherwise, lease a 'whole house' protector from the electric company. The girl who reads meters may install it behind that meter.

A worst solution is to find a three prong receptacle closest to the breaker box. Then with its power cord cut short, connect that protector to that receptacle. To connection the protector as close as possible to earth ground via the safety ground. If outlets have no safety ground, then this worst case solution will not work. To make this inferior solution better, locate a receptacle farthest from the breaker box to power the computer.

 

[Modelworks]

I live in an apt and have no access to anything except my ungrounded receptacle. What is the best plan of action?

The best thing you can do is to unplug things you worry about before a storm. It is an apt so you can't change the wiring. You can get some protection by using a surge protector, most have some sort of protection that utilizes just the hot+neutral and converts it to heat rather than directing it along another path.

Back in the 1950s it was common to find appliances that used neutral as ground and had it bonded to the frame . It was replaced by a dedicated ground because should that neutral become loose the frame would then carry the current of the hot wire making it a safety hazard.

 

[GoodEnough]

Back in the 1950s it was common to find appliances that used neutral as ground and had it bonded to the frame . It was replaced by a dedicated ground because should that neutral become loose the frame would then carry the current of the hot wire making it a safety hazard.

I'm not following. Can you explain what you mean here? Maybe a diagram?

You're saying, in an old 1950's appliance, you'd have 2 prongs. The HOT current would go into the motor/filament/etc, and then be routed back out via the WHITE, correct? What exactly is touching the frame for "ground"?

 

[Itchrelief]

I'm not following. Can you explain what you mean here? Maybe a diagram?

You're saying, in an old 1950's appliance, you'd have 2 prongs. The HOT current would go into the motor/filament/etc, and then be routed back out via the WHITE, correct? What exactly is touching the frame for "ground"?

I would assume the "white"

 

[Modelworks]

I'm not following. Can you explain what you mean here? Maybe a diagram?

You're saying, in an old 1950's appliance, you'd have 2 prongs. The HOT current would go into the motor/filament/etc, and then be routed back out via the WHITE, correct? What exactly is touching the frame for "ground"?

The frame would be connected to the neutral /white. Even in modern homes the ground and neutral are connected together but not in the appliance but inside the service panel.

Modern homes are powered from a transformer. That transformer is a step down transformer. The transformer is center tapped meaning it has three outputs with one output being taken from the center of the winding.

One the left you have the two input wires to the transformer from the high voltage lines from the utility. On the right you have the output to the home. The voltage between the top right and center right is 120VAC and the voltage between the bottom right and center right is 120VAC. Between top right and bottom right the voltage is 240VAC. When the power is connected to the home the homes ground system is connected to the center wire, making the white wire/neutral at the same potential inside the service panel as the ground wire.

That is why they could use it as a ground in the old power setups. The problem with using it for that though is that the neutral or white had to power the load and carry any additional current for the grounding system back to the panel. The other problem was that if the ground rod became loose in the early homes the grounded appliances could pose a safety threat because they would be at the voltage of the neutral but not that of ground. So a difference existed between where someone was standing and the appliance frame.

 

[GoodEnough]

I probably need to do some foundational reading on this topic if I truly want to understand, but is the basic idea of 2 prong wiring that HOT comes into the appliance via prong 1. It goes into the motor to power it. Then the current leaves the motor, gets routed to the frame (to "ground" / spread the current around), goes back into the wire, and then is routed back to the wall via prong 2?

 

[Modelworks]

I probably need to do some foundational reading on this topic if I truly want to understand, but is the basic idea of 2 prong wiring that HOT comes into the appliance via prong 1. It goes into the motor to power it. Then the current leaves the motor, gets routed to the frame (to "ground" / spread the current around), goes back into the wire, and then is routed back to the wall via prong 2?

Hot would connect to one side of the motor, neutral would connect to the other side of the motor and also connect to the metal frame.

I know you have probably seen these ground adapter plugs:

These convert the ground prong to the tab. That tab is then screwed to the outlet where the screw connects with the grounding. Most people don't put the screw in and so the grounding is defeated. In older home when grounding was just coming into use it was common to find outlets that had the neutral jumpered across the ground screw and the neutral screw. It is against code to do this.

 

[Itchrelief]

I probably need to do some foundational reading on this topic if I truly want to understand, but is the basic idea of 2 prong wiring that HOT comes into the appliance via prong 1. It goes into the motor to power it. Then the current leaves the motor, gets routed to the frame (to "ground" / spread the current around), goes back into the wire, and then is routed back to the wall via prong 2?

The current normally comes in from hot, exits from neutral. Frame normally carries no current.

The frame is also connected to neutral/ground just in case the hot wire accidentally shorts to the frame. Then, the frame can shunt the short circuit current to neutral (ground) instead of passing the current through a person touching the frame and then to the ground.

 

[westom]

The problem was defined earlier. Electricity is different at both ends of any wire. Neutral and safety ground wires that are common in the breaker box must have no connections elsewhere. At the receptacle, those wires are electrically different.

Connecting a frame to a neutral wire was legal only in some jurisdictions. A jumper existed so that the appliance could be 'rewired' per local codes. Today (and decades ago), a neutral wire connection to the frame violates so many safety standards.

Discussion here is surge protectors. If a wire to earth ground has too much impedance (ie 'more than 10 feet', with sharp bends or splices, etc) then that protector is not earthed. For surge protection, wire distance is critical. Because electricity is always different at two ends of a wire.

For example, a 200 watt transmitter connects to a long wire antenna. Touch one part of that antenna and feel no electricity. Touch another part and be shocked by a voltage that exceeds 100 volts. How can two completely different voltages exist on the same wire? Welcome to concepts that also say why neutral and safety ground wires are electrically different at a wall receptacle. Why a wall receptacle cannot earth a surge protector. And concepts not taught to electricians.

Essential to surge protection is a short (ie 'less than 10 foot') connection to single point earth ground. Necessary for human safety is the wall receptacle safety ground only wired to a breaker box 'bus bar' ground. And not connected to earth.