Surge Protection Dilemma

[Maple2]

Hi Gurus,

Im in a bit of a dilemma here and need your opinions. A Telecom client of mine is installing his facility in a Co-location building shared by another telecom company. They are not strangers, as they share space in other locations as well. Problem is, there was a thunder storm that caused damage to the other company's equipment's at one of the shared locations, but thanks to my client's SPD my clients equipment's were protected. Mind you, both have SPDs installed at the facility. Problem is, the other company postulates that my client's SPD was to be blamed, that though it protected my clients equipment, that it did not meet the requirement to protect theirs's as well, which completely doesn't make sense.

At the new facility, the other company is demanding a "written" guarantee that my client's SPD would protect their equipment as well, and not "let through" surges. I feel this is preposterous, as my client doesnt manufacture SPDs, and already provided them with stamped electrical drawings of his design. Besides, how could my client SPD, and not their's, be responsible for their damage, when it protected my clients equipment??

This whole thing sound preposterous to me, I wanna hear your thoughts, perhaps there's something I'm missing. Thanks

 

[jghrist]

Is your client responsible for Type 1 surge protectors at the building service entrance? These should be selected to reduce the level of transients within the building, allowing SPDs on feeders and equipment to better protect equipment. The service entrance SPD protects the downstream SPDs.

 

[3DDave]

Seems like two separate problems.

The first is that co-located equipment was damaged. I think, barring your client having affixed the ground for a lighting rod to their equipment, that they are fishing.

Second - great; negotiate a contract to cover that. They can demand all they want or they can sign a contract that, in consideration for your client assuming responsibility for that SPD to protect their equipment, your client will be compensated as desired.

If there is no contract in place to provide that protection and no proof of doing something that caused the damage, your client should wait to see if they care to sue.

The damage is unlikely to be an engineering problem. It's a civil lawsuit legal problem, one that will require a lot more detail than you or your client can likely provide here.

 

[Maple2]

They aint suing my client, or nothing. I doubt it would get to that. What they are requesting is that my client has to provide a "written" guarantee that the proposed SPD at the new location would protect their equipment as well. There's no contract or agreement that my client is responsible for protecting the entire building. And I would not recommend my client undertake such responsibility, as there are many deficiencies that could put their equipment's at risk or cause SPD to fail such as improper grounding, bonding, routing, feeder, building LPS etc. an SPD by itself can not compensate for all these deficiencies, even for my clients facilities, lest theirs. But they dont seem to understand this, despite explanation.

.

 

[waross]

If your SPD is diverting surges to ground, investigate the ground path, from the connection of the SPD to true ground. With a heavy surge there will be a voltage drop on the conductors between the SPD connection to true ground.
Depending on the connection of your SPD relative to the connection of the second SPD to the grounding conductor, there could have been an elevated potential appearing on the ground connection of the second SPD.
This is a possibility that depends on a number of factors. It may not have been an issue at your site.

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!

 

[3DDave]

A "written" guarantee is a contract, one that will have liability attached. Right now the other party is demanding that one-sided contract without consideration be drawn up. Nice work if you can get it. Plus it's the basis for a future lawsuit.