Learn a difference between current sources and voltage sources. Concepts from first year engineering. It is a surge. That means same current will flow no matter what. Voltage increases as necessary so that current will still flow. Current will flow even through three miles of a least conductive material - air. Current source means surges flow even though wooden church steeples. Increasing voltage as necessary so that the same current will flow.Take a 1 ohm resistor and short the AC outlet , what path did the electricity take and why did the resistor get hot ? The electricity took the path of least resistance across the resistor.
W = I^2 * R . Lower R means less W watts - less energy. Any device that would stop or absorb surges must increase R. Then W watts increase.
So which is it? For a protector to absorb energy (as you posted), R must increase. If an MOV become more conductive (as you posted), then R decreases. Lower R means it absorb less energy. So which is it? MOV protects by absorbing a surge? Or an MOV decreases resistance - absorbs less energy? You cannot have it both ways - even when APC says so. Please demonstrate that you understand basic electricity or surge protection. Decreased R causing increased energy says you are manipualted by advertising. My father loved such people. If made advertising so much fun.
Correct about the UL - it is also about "how it fails". UL listed appliances must fail without threatening human life. Which says nothing - zero - about surge protection. A protector that fails does no surge protection. So that it fails without taking a human life, scam protectors fail as fast as possible. That failure promotes more sales. UL does not care. UL is not about protecting transistors from surges or humans from scams. UL is only about human safety - ie threat from fire.
MOVs that protect by absorbing energy: destructive surges are hundreds of thousands of joules. Protectors (including least robust circuits in a UPS) are only hundreds of joules. Those numbers say no protection. Marketing people promoted by others as geniuses. After all, they get so many to believe hundreds of joules in a protector will stop and absorb 'hundred of thousands of joules' surges. Then when the protector fails, the naive recommend it.
Monster cable once sold speaker wire marked with speaker and amp ends. Monster said if wire were reversed, then audio sound is perverted. And thousand believed. Thousands paid $70 for Monster speaker wire because they could 'hear' a difference. Because Monster took the time to measure which end best connected to the amp. Bull.
Monster has a long history of identifying scams. Then selling the same product for even higher profits. Monster sold $7 speaker wire for $70 because that is what Monster does. And Monster is selling the same APC protector circuits for Monster profits. You think APC is credibile? Then why is Monster also selling it? Or post those APC numbers that list protection. You don't. And you cannot.
Please do not associate APC with Eaton. A major difference exists. One is credible because advertising says so. Another actually earns their credibility. Cutler-Hammer (Eaton) 'whole house' protectors actually do what protectors did even in the late 1800s. This science is well proven. Found in every facility that can never suffer damage. Is what "useful" protectors do. But APC is selling a protector described by the NIST: The best surge protection in the world can be 'useless' if grounding is not done properly.
APC is selling a protector that magically absorbs hundred of thousand of joules? Even its spec sheets say it cannot. Only a minority ask damning questions to expose advertising myths.
So how does that MOV stop what three miles of sky could not - as you claim? Its not a rhetorical question - even though you will ignore it.
Please do not waste time with credentials. Lying about that is routine. An honest person cites well proven facts and numbers. Demonstrates knowledge of simplest concepts such as current sources or W=I^2 * R. I do not care if you claim to be Albert Einstein. If you do not understand a simple equation (W=I^2 * R), then your posts are wasted bandwidth. An honest poster would have posted manufacturer specs for that protection. You do not. That defines credibility.
Now, you can be a child and get angry. Or you can be an adult and post those manufacturer specs that list protection. Your choice. I don't waste energy being nice. I work hard at being educated and honest. Honesty can be your reply to this challenge - the only facts that matter. Where are numbers (your example uses numbers) that show a decreased R creating an increased W? That proves MOVs protect by absorbing the surge? Where are those manufacturer specs? An honest person would have posted them long ago.
Last edited: