With the field reports disagreeing with the theory I posted, I made it a science project, and the theory won: It is not possible to trip a GFCI driven by an eu2000i if there isn't a bond upstream of the GFCI.
GFCI is a Leviton N7599, the standard Home Depot 15 amp GFCI outlet.
On shore power, a 27k resistor hot-to-ground (4.4 mA.) causes a trip.
A 32k resistor hot-to-ground (3.8 mA.) does not cause a trip.
A 36 ohm resistor neutral-to-ground causes a trip, 56 ohms does not.
This all looks ok.
Connected to the eu2000i with no bonding, nothing would trip the GFCI including a direct hot-to-ground or neutral-to-ground bond at or downstream of the GFCI.
A neutral-to-ground bond at or downstream of the GFCI did not enable it to trip with any hot-to-ground leakage down to a 1k resistor (the resistor gets darn hot trying it). With the same bond upstream of the GFCI, it behaved exactly the same as on shore power.
I tested with no load on the GFCI, a 100 watt incandescent bulb, and a WFCO converter pushing a 5 amp load. The no load and light bulb behavior was identical. With the WFCO converter plugged in, the 27k (4.4 mA.) resistor did not cause a trip. I had to go down to a 22k (5.5 mA.) resistor to cause the trip.
I suppose I should also run the same test with the generator powering the RV. With the RV not tripping the shore power GFCI, I can't imagine why its GFCI outlets would behave any differently than the one on the workbench.
I doubt that it's possible to pop a GFCI driven by an eu2000i unless there's an intentional or unwanted bond between one of the power lines and earth or safety ground. It takes ~ 5mA. to trip the GFCI, and the eu2000i's isolated output will not provide that much current even if connected directly to its case/safety ground.
it sill amazes me why most think it 'won't happen to them'.
Do you feel lucky?
but you don't think the insurance of a,one time purchase, surge protector is worth it for your RV?
If you can afford a $3000-$5000.00 out of pocket bill and the inconvenience don't do it. You can self insure.
You never sleep then?
your time could be coming.
This is sounding more like modern politics than a technical discussion. A few people have made informed decisions to accept the risk of not using a surge protector device. They haven't disputed any of the claimed benefits or recommended that anybody NOT use one. Everybody is entitled to their opinions, but what's behind all of the "Do it my way or you're gonna pay" here. Do all of you use a TPMS? Bigger risk if you don't. If you pull a 5th wheel do you use a pincatcher? Bigger risk if you don't. Do you all have a tranny temp gauge? Bigger risk there, too.
I'm starting to feel like words are being put in my mouth:
"If there is a direct hit on the power line, or even a nearby hit, an open breaker is unlikely to protect you."
I didn't claim I'm eliminating the risk, rather reducing and managing it. I don't think an EMS or surge protector will survive that direct hit either.
"it sill amazes me why most think it 'won't happen to them'."
I never said that. I'm formulating my opinion of the cost vs. risk and making what I think is the better choice for me. I do the same thing when choosing deductibles on insurance coverage. So far I've made out well with high deductibles, while others do better with low deductibles.
I'll probably be told I have my head in the sand.Yep, and I'm there with you. I'm willing to take the risk, mitigated by (1) There's a good chance I'll identify a flaky power system and not plug into it, (2) If I do have damage I can most likely repair it myself, (3) I don't use very many 120 volt devices, and (4) If there's lightning around I kill the main breaker.
Another PagePlus user here. I need data on the road only a couple of months during the year. For those months I switch the the $55/month plan with 2 gB of data. The rest of the year I pay 2.50/month to keep the phone active and make calls at 10 cents per minute. I obviously don't use it a lot for voice calls.
FYI, the scope I'm using is a Rigol DS2072. It's a fairly new offering in the world of digital storage oscilloscopes. There seem to be 2 major tiers of DSOs at around 100 mHz bandwidth: (1) A hobbyist level in the $400 ballpark, with incredible capabilities for the price, and (2) a professional level (Tek, Agilent, etc.) with more features and less buggy software for over $1,000. The hardware I believe is all from China, and a couple of the professional and hobbyist scopes are actually the same hardware. The DS2072 is in-between these 2 levels in terms of price, features, and quality. The capabilities just blow me away and I'll never absorb them all. With the right trigger it's a time machine allowing you to look way back at what happened before the trigger. Viewing 60 Hz. signals you can record maybe a minute's worth of data, then expand it to a nice viewable format. There's a big thread about it here EEvblog DS2072 thread . Why do I have it? Mainly because I've used scopes all my life and think it's a basic necessity. Kind of like a musician having an expensive instrument even though he no longer plays concerts. And it's really handy for the occasional electronics tinkering.
Oddly crest factors are higher for the same power supply when operating from PSW.Doesn't this make sense with the higher peak voltage of PSW?
PT, I'm not sure if you mean the 735 PD watts as its specs or what you actually measured. If this is an actual measurement I'm surprised it pulled this much. From what I've seen of the PDs, they are highly dependent on the waveform peaks and I'd expect them to be a huge flop on MSW. The WFCOs, on the other hand, are very tolerant of low voltage peaks.
Bfl,I didn't attempt any comparison to PSW. I don't think what I posted has any value other than however interesting the current waveform might be. Both the inverter and converter were on the ragged edge of not working at all and IMO just small design differences between your hardware and mine would make huge differences in the behavior of the devices. The first picture showed 140 watts in and 50 watts out of the converter (36% efficiency), and just increasing the voltage into the inverter changed it to about 190 watts in and 135 watts out (a more normal ~70% efficiency). That's why I'm concluding that the converter was on its ragged edge. All of the power supplies have some minimum requirement for the peak waveform voltage, and MSW's peak is significantly lower than PSW's peak, so how a power supply works on MSW is IMO undefined and to some extent, random. I think the peaks aren't as critical for a lower power device like a laptop or cell phone charger than for something like a power converter.
Curiosity got the better of me wondering how a converter runs on MSW power. It's all dependent on the specific inverter and converter of course. These are pictures of a WFCO converter running from a VectorMaxx 175 watt inverter. After it was too late I realized I have the current waveform upside-down with respect to the voltage waveform. Here's the converter AC input with the inverter fed by 13.5 volts. The converter could only manage 10 volts output into a ~5 amp load. The power going into the converter is 140 watts.
Upping the inverter's input to 14.5 volts makes a big difference. The converter's power input increases to 191 watts, and its output drives a 10 amp load at 13.6 volts.
When applying power to the converter, the inverter shut down the large majority of the time. The startup current spike in this picture is about 45 amps, more than 10 times the surge rating of the inverter.
A successful startup looks like this, with the peak current about 14 amps, still about 5 times the inverter's surge rating.
Conclusions? (1)Converter doesn't like MSW, (2) The pictures make it look like the MSW is really hard on the electronics. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but it sure looks bad, (3) There's no useful info here because running the converter from an inverter is silly.
A nice overall summary. I think anybody who has used CFLs for a long time has discovered for themselves many of the issues pointed out in this link. The claimed lifetime is an obvious joke. I don't like CFLs either but use them in some situations. One is outside security lights that run all night (yes, they are a lot dimmer in cold weather), and the other is the garage that was wired for 18 incandescent lamps. With 60 watt incandescents, that's 1,080 watts and runs the bill up noticeably. I came out lucky here, with the Home Depot 60 watt "equivalent" CFLs being actually brighter than the incandescents after a few minutes warmup time. I'm starting to dabble in LED lamps as the price goes down and look forward to the day when they totally kill off the CFLs. CFLs have the worst power factor I've seen on anything. They must have a hidden cost on the power grid that's of course ignored by the proponents.
I tried a Duracell branded generator that looks very suspiciously like the IN 1000, has the same engine, gas tank size, and almost identical other specs. I think the odds are high they are from the same manufacturer (Jiangsu Tigey Yacht Manufacture Co. for the Duracell) but can't be positive. I returned the Duracell generator. Its biggest and very significant fault was that it didn't handle a change in load without a big voltage swing and long recovery time. I posted an Amazon Review here. Mine is the one titled "Nice try but misses the mark". As is typical, the reviews are all over the place.
There are 2 types of power factor, unfortunately called the same thing. With a reactive linear load, like a motor, the current curve is a sine wave but it out-of-phase with the voltage curve. This is the type of power factor (called displacement power factor) that returns energy to the supply. The peak value of the current is correct for a sine wave, but with it occurring at a lower instantaneous voltage, the resistive losses in the generation and transmission infrastructure are greater on a percentage basis.
Power supplies generate the other type of power factor (distortion power factor), where the current curve is in phase with the voltage curve but is not a sine wave. The higher peak currents cause higher resistive losses in the system, and the harmonics that are generated may very well go up as heat. I'm abstaining from the discussion if this type of power factor returns energy to the system. Above my pay grade!
I never had any problem running the 13.5 k BriskAir with the eu2000i at low altitudes, even in 90+ temps. I did find out last summer that when the temp is over 90 at 3,500 feet the eu2000i won't sustain its 1,600 VA output.
I would expect to see more of a flat top on the voltage waveform.
It might be a factor that I measured at the plug-in end of the 25' shore power cord, with only a few feet of wire between a 100 amp panel and the outlet. Come to think of it that might explain the ringing on the current waveform. One of these days I'll look at the WFCO on the workbench and get the probes right at the converter. I'm not attempting to quantify the actual loss due to PF, rather just inserting an actual converter picture into the explanations.
Here's a trace for a fairly heavily loaded (~50 amps in boost mode) PD9160 on shore power. If the numbers aren't readable, the RMS current is 10.5 amps and the peak current is 24.8 amps. The power in watts is 121*10.5=1270.5 . For a PF=1 load the peak current would be 14.85 amps instead of the actual 24.8. The resistive power loss in the wiring is greater with the higher peak current, lowering the efficiency of the overall system. The overshoots I assume show a small amount of power being "returned" into the supply. Or maybe just an artifact of the current transformer? Hard to tell as the new toy shows things I never saw on the 20 mHz scope.
It is impractical to measure current with a multimeter, I'd like to disagree with this as a blanket statement. I personally don't trust DC clamp readings to be very accurate. Too many variables related to how you hold the clamp, outside magnetic fields, and how carefully the meter was zeroed. I think they're great for a quick-and-dirty approximate reading, but if I want good accuracy I open up the circuit for a series current reading. Many multimeters go up to 10 amps. For small currents (example: propane detector), I think the clamp meter is flat-out unreliable.
The noise level appears to be highly dependent on the installation. My Onan is loud enough inside the motorhome to be considered obnoxious. Others have reported the same generator is pretty quiet on the inside. Outside, mine isn't too bad but still can't compete with the Honda eu2000i, which I use for battery charging.