Surge suppressors (not wiring)
mathog at mendel.bio.caltech.edu
Mon Nov 4 10:48:17 PST 2002
> Jim Lux wrote:
> >Good luck though finding a review on something like an EDCO AC-RACK:
> > http://www.edcosurge.com/products/telecom/acRack.asp
> >Which is pretty close to my desired products specs (except
> >joules, which seems low at 900) and does have the "remove
> >load on suppression failure" feature. So on paper it looks good.
> >Be a bit more comforting if some independent group had tested
> >it though!
> The fact that it is UL1449 listed means that some NRTL (Nationally
> Recognized Testing Laboratory) has tested it, and you should be able
> the test report from the MFR...
> Interestingly, that page cites IEEE 584, and I can't find IEEE 584
The UL standards generally mean "this device will not burn your house
down". When a UL standard requires some level of functionality
it is usually set so low that the poorest exemplar of any given
device will pass.
IEEE 584 appears to be a typo for IEEE 587 (currently
known as ANSI/IEEE C62.41). The other EDCO devices refer to
> so they can
> advertise it as "fully designed to meet the intent of IEEE and ANSI
> standard xyz", which is almost meaningless, but sounds real good to a
> unsophisticated buyer)
It's particularly meaningless because almost without exception one
cannot obtain such standards without sending a check for $100 x small
factor to the relevant organization. Which is just ridiculous
for a "standard" but that rant belongs in another thread.
mathog at caltech.edu
Manager, Sequence Analysis Facility, Biology Division, Caltech
More information about the Beowulf