That is strange w_tom accusing someone else of his own Tactics.....
w_tom is unable to point to a Data sheet of a MOV capable of diverting a Direct (or even near) strike with out suffereing degredation and damage
One that does not exist let me repeat myself once more for the retard :
Must have been a damn thin issue of the Bell system Technical Journal In October 1960!
Because we go from Volume 39 Issue 5 In September of 1960 which has the contributer acknowledgements starting page 1379 to the Next article ("Signalling Systems for the control of Telephone switching") in Volume 39 Issue 6 starting page 1381 on November 1960.
It looks suspiciously like they did not publish a Bell System Technical guide in October 1960!
By the way none of the volumes I could find from 1960 had such an article....
Sounds like w_tom is making stuff up again!
He knows that it is pretty well pointless I just respond to the moron to highlight to other posters what an ignorant cretin w_tom is.
Because w_tom was hoping that no-one was able to check if the article existed or not
They have been cited but w_tom just ignores them as inconvenient Facts that get in the way of his fantasies
They may have done the research (if they exsisted) but we only have w_toms word for what conclusion was reached....
Was this Transistor protection before WWII ????
Yes? and so ? this line does not actually state any conclusions.
We cannot because the paper does not exsist where w_tom says it is - and those of us who have followed w_toms ravings before know well that he has a propensity for reaching the opposite conclusion from a paper that the Author reached - as an example w_tom recently referred to data sheet for TVS Diodes on how to select the appropriate TVS for your high speed data service as proof that TVS's were not appropriate for use on high speed data
once again w_tom assumes that protecting Strowger switch gear is the same as protection for a Modern digital exchange But really w_tom is sidetracking the gentle reader as w_tom holds protection of Exchange equipment up as an illustration of how effective MOV protection is when in fact modern exchanges do not use MOVs and MOVs have not ever really been particularly popular for exchange protection (not even before they were invented around the 1960's ;-)
w_tom is the one who insults the readers intelligence by posting misquotes and lies
Time and Time again I point this out to w_tom but he still misses the basic ohms law :
a Good ground resistance for a single earth stake is considered to be 5-10 Ohms the current in a typical Lightning strike is 30,000 to over 200,000 Amps Lets take the lowest Figures of 5 Ohms at 30,000 Amps
5*30,000 gives us an EPR of 150,000 Voltswhat this means is that in the event of Lightning being shunted to the Earth stake then the Earth stake will rise to 150,000 Volts above ground (at best! at worst try about 2,000,000 Volts).
w_tom accuses others of note quoting numbers but ignores them when they are thrown at him as incovenient.
Yes forget the LED indicator as only w_tom ever brings this up in conversation - But at least it tells you when your MOV is stuffed - oh thats roight w_tom is still having trouble with MOVs degrading and reckons that if you get a big enough one it will last for ever - shame he cannot provide a link to the Data sheet for this mythical MOV...
Well maybe the manufacturer is merely being realistic and not pretending that a Single Earth stake is adequate ....
Who ??? Not w_tom thats for sure he obviously does not have a clue ..
oh dear looks like he has Blocked me - Damn shame ;-)