Surge suppression

A customer suffers failure of broadband connection after a
thunderstorm. Diagnosis shows that the ADSL modem (or ADSL
modem/router) has failed - presumably due to a surge pulse on the
phone line. After replacing the faulty device, customer usually asks
"What do I need to avoid a recurrence?"

The more readily available and affordable potential solutions appear
to be surge protected power socket strips with surge suppression for
phone lines built-in. Yet there are plenty of references that suggest
these are often ineffective.

To be clear: I am talking about a typical UK domestic environment,
and a lightning strike in the locality. i.e. not premises out in the
wilds, and not a direct strike/very near miss.

Can anyone point me to authoritative info on what works? A
benchmarking site would be ideal.

BTW: w_tom should not respond.




McSpreader

> The more readily available and affordable potential solutions appear
> to be surge protected power socket strips with surge suppression for
> phone lines built-in. Yet there are plenty of references that suggest
> these are often ineffective.
>
> To be clear: I am talking about a typical UK domestic environment,
> and a lightning strike in the locality. i.e. not premises out in the
> wilds, and not a direct strike/very near miss.
>

The reason the protection devices are often ineffective is that the device
can fail anyway because the strength of the of the pulse can just overwhelm
it. As well as the current through the incoming line large currents can be
induced directly inside the modem. The bottom line (No pun intended!) is
that unplugging everything during a storm wll give some protection but even
that is not a 100% solution.



Peter Crosland

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:26:07 GMT, McSpreader wrote:

>Can anyone point me to authoritative info on what works?

Get one that offers compensation for damage. But anything is better
than nothing, weigh up the cost of a new router against the price.

FWIW, 3Com replaced my router that was similarly affected.


--
Nigel M

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:26:07 GMT, McSpreader <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>To be clear: I am talking about a typical UK domestic environment,
>and a lightning strike in the locality. i.e. not premises out in the
>wilds, and not a direct strike/very near miss.
>
>Can anyone point me to authoritative info on what works? A
>benchmarking site would be ideal.

Pass on that score. I've got an APC personal UPS device which provides
surge protection built in, and am running my important (router,
server, 15" TFT) off it. My reasoning is that if that doesn't stop
something, nothing I can afford will. I only really wanted battery
backup anyway.

Peter Crosland <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> The more readily available and affordable potential solutions appear
>> to be surge protected power socket strips with surge suppression for
>> phone lines built-in. Yet there are plenty of references that suggest
>> these are often ineffective.
>>
>> To be clear: I am talking about a typical UK domestic environment,
>> and a lightning strike in the locality. i.e. not premises out in the
>> wilds, and not a direct strike/very near miss.

> The reason the protection devices are often ineffective is that the device
> can fail anyway because the strength of the of the pulse can just overwhelm
> it. As well as the current through the incoming line large currents can be
> induced directly inside the modem. The bottom line (No pun intended!) is
> that unplugging everything during a storm wll give some protection but even
> that is not a 100% solution.

Actually, it pretty much is. If you unplug the cables, you pretty much
need a strike within a meter or two of the equipment to kill it.
Detecting ongoing storms is of course fun.

> Can anyone point me to authoritative info on what works? A
> benchmarking site would be ideal.
>
> BTW: w_tom should not respond.

In a large thread which ran a few years ago on a ng, most of the guys from
the USA said that any sort of lightening suppresion device is a waste of
money. They should know considering the sort and frequency of electrical
storms they get over there.

HTH

Dave

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:54:25 +0100, dave stanton wrote:

>most of the guys from the USA

Were they all called W*nker Tom by any chance?


--
Nigel M

dave stanton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Can anyone point me to authoritative info on what works? A
>> benchmarking site would be ideal.
>>
>> BTW: w_tom should not respond.
>
> In a large thread which ran a few years ago on a ng, most of the guys from
> the USA said that any sort of lightening suppresion device is a waste of
> money. They should know considering the sort and frequency of electrical
> storms they get over there.

Then again, maybe they've just got better paint.

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:58:17 UTC, Ian Stirling <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> dave stanton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >> Can anyone point me to authoritative info on what works? A
> >> benchmarking site would be ideal.
> >>
> >> BTW: w_tom should not respond.
> >
> > In a large thread which ran a few years ago on a ng, most of the guys from
> > the USA said that any sort of lightening suppresion device is a waste of
> > money. They should know considering the sort and frequency of electrical
> > storms they get over there.
>
> Then again, maybe they've just got better paint.

I was going to say that it's easy if the suppression is required indoors
- draw the curtains and avoid using bright lights.
--
[ 7'ism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures - incurable, early
euthanasia recommended. ]