EMP effect on new Generator?

Discussion in 'Survival & Sustenance Living Forum' started by 12fretter, Oct 30, 2012.

  1. 12fretter

    12fretter New Member

    422
    0
    0
    I'm really hoping someone will tell me I don't have to build a cage for my generator. Has anyone looked into this?
     
  2. vincent

    vincent New Member

    4,123
    0
    0
    I have and came out as confused as I was when I started...:confused:

    Apparently there is a lot of bad info out there when it comes to the EMP question so maybe someone here who we know to be knowledgeable will chime in...(C3 that's your cue!!! ;) )
     

  3. TankTop

    TankTop Active Member Supporter

    2,457
    18
    38
    I used to deliver for an electrical supply company. Did a delivery once to a "communications" site, the building with their backup diesel generators was shielded. If the government shields their generators you may want to as well.
     
  4. Eturnsdale

    Eturnsdale New Member

    1,163
    0
    0
    By and large an EMP from a High altitude air burst will have little effect on small engines, cellphones, Computers that are not plugged into the grid, etc etc. By and large it is the infrastructure that would be damaged not small items like cars and trucks or generators and cellphones.
     
  5. dragunovsks

    dragunovsks New Member

    2,310
    0
    0
    I thought an emp would disable anything electronic, including cell phones cars/trucks and comms equipment? That's what has been discussed anyways.
     
  6. TankTop

    TankTop Active Member Supporter

    2,457
    18
    38
    I wouldn't really worry about the EMP too much, it's the fallout and contaminated soil and water sources. The survivors would drop like flies from the flu and common cold. It isn't difficult to shield from EMP if it is planned into the construction ahead of time. Most of our power grid is already hardened, it's the same protection you would use for a lightning strike. When a high voltage power pole is put up there is a buried grid under it for grounding. You could just ground your generator, drive a 4 foot copper rod into the ground and attach it with a grounding strap. That would at least allow you to have light to watch your family die slowly. I'm kinda rambling but preparing for nuclear war probably isn't worth the effort, sorry, I'm kinda being an asshat.
     
  7. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    I think they were talking about high altitude devices designed for EMP rather than traditional nuking.
     
  8. c3shooter

    c3shooter Administrator Staff Member

    21,328
    173
    63
    Well........ there are two things- SGEMP and TREE (transient radiation effects on electronics) If a nuke is CLOSE enough to a solid state device, a PNP transistor briefly becomes an NPN transistor (bit flip). High energy particles (gamma, X Ray, neutrons) pass thru the device, leaving an ionized track that causes a glitch in the solid state device. And solid state stuff fries and dies. However, if you are close enough for THAT, you got other problems.

    With EMP, it is how intense, how far away, AND what gathers the magnetic pulse and feeds it to the device. Things conencted to phone lines, national power grid, etc, have this huge antennae array to gather the force.

    A generator NOT connected, NOT running at the time has a fair chance of surviving an EMP of moderate strength. The components are already SOMEWHAT inside a Faraday cage- the metal housing and frame of the generator.

    Does DOD shield all their stuff? Hell yeah! They are looking for as close to 100% survival as they can get, knowing THEY are the target.

    In the VERY long run, I would be more concerned with how you plan to fuel a generator for years (yeah, I said years) wind and//or solar will run longer- not indefinitely, but longer (stuff- including storage batteries- wears out)
     
  9. TankTop

    TankTop Active Member Supporter

    2,457
    18
    38
    Oh, that makes it better, I'm sure a high altitude nuclear attack wouldn't result in an escalated response. There's also the issue of an ICBM with a trajectory of COTUS, I'm sure we would wait for a detonation before a response just in case they were only attempting to knock out our electronic infrastructure. My head hurts, think I'll take some aspirin.
     
  10. Chainfire

    Chainfire Well-Known Member Supporter

    5,224
    251
    83
    If we are subject to a high altitude burst, the last thing you will be worrying about is if you can power your fridge or TV........

    Your chance of surviving such a situation would be less then you winning the Power Ball.

    If we were subject to a high altitude burst, it would mean there would probably be hundreds of similar busts. In that case, the entire human race, may well perish within a couple of years from the effects of radiation/starvation and/or nuclear winter. Your best hope in that situation would be for you and your loved ones to be at ground zero when and where the first one popped. Here one second, gone, in a burst of vapor the next. A new species of insects could then rule the world and who knows, in a few hundred million years, they may be building amusment parks, and Atomic weapons....
     
  11. AsSeenOnTV

    AsSeenOnTV New Member

    575
    0
    0
    .....................
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2012
  12. TankTop

    TankTop Active Member Supporter

    2,457
    18
    38
    Lol, I don't think it would be quite that dramatic either. Here's my opinion in short. A single exchange, US, Russia, China, India, Pakistan and Europe. I don't see a prolonged exchange, after a day or so everyone would quit. Most people don't realize that no country has that much of their weapons in a position to be launched, or the ability after an exchange to reload... other than us and Russia. All major cities would be gone as well as naval bases and strategic bases (70% of population). Half the people left would be dead within 30 days because of radiation poisoning. The next problem would be to start growing food and finding soil that isn't contaminated, water filtration is easy but whoever changes the filters is also dead. Your best chance of survival is to move somewhere in the middle of South America, Africa or the middle of Australia. Australia is a bad idea unless you are personal friends with Mel Gibson. North America, Europe, Western Russia and pretty much anywhere in Asia are all screwed. The only real way to survive a nuclear war is to leave any first world country before it happens. The nuclear winter idea was brought to you by the same folks that brought you global warming, I guess if we were actually able to use all our weapons it could happen but I'm more for about 500 - 1000 max and it's over. But back to shielding your generator....
     
  13. Eturnsdale

    Eturnsdale New Member

    1,163
    0
    0
    Cell phones are already fairly well shielded. If they werent they would not work with normal background electronic interference. Cars already have their own pseudo Faraday cage, and as they sit on rubber tires they are not grounded.

    Yes, an EMP with a high enough output will damage a car, or a phone, or whatever. But the energies from an emp at altitude are much much lower than seen in your typical testing facilities.

    Now, tactically, you do not always nuke the hell out of an area. A high altitude air burst will not create any fallout other than that of the devise itself. The only other radiation hazard is neutron induced radiation which only lasts as long as the blast is visible. You only get significant fallout when the fireball touches the ground. If the fireball touches the ground it is not an airburst.

    Yes, the whole MAD thing would lead the undereducated to believe that the entire world would be blanketed with fallout and would create a nuclear winter. For this to happen warheads with a yield high enough to blow fallout into the upper troposphere would need to be used, and enough of them so that the fallout would cover a major portion of the world. Odds are that tactical nukes would be used first (generally between one and ten kilotons) Depending on atmospheric conditions, the down wind hazard of these nukes is only a few hundred kilometers.

    Odds are that it would not likely escalate to the larger weapons. If it did, then yeah. We are all screwed.

    And then there is the whole terrorist thing. "EMP generators" are another thing entirely, and do produce fields at a much higher output, but affect a much smaller area.
     
  14. TankTop

    TankTop Active Member Supporter

    2,457
    18
    38
    Almost, nobody actually uses the big nukes because they aren't practical. The megaton bombs are huge, the biggest one tested by Russia was the size of a railcar. Not sure if Russia has the tech, my assumption is yes, but most of our tactical warheads are variable yield. We can change the target and yield of the weapon mid course, something around 15 kilotons to just over 100 kilotons. The issue is the lower the yield the more fallout and vise versa, basically they are less efficient. Anyway, even a limited exchange would end everyone's desire to continue. Most infrastructure would be gone and whatever was left would be less than organized to say the least. If you're that worried about it though buy a small ranch in Peru, trust me, it's at the bottom of the nuclear target list. Plus with weather patterns and the oceans (salt water is a great radiation filter) you probably won't even notice a large portion of the world's population just died. Your odds are a bazillion times better than stockpiling ammo and iodine somewhere in the Midwest United States :-\
     
  15. Eturnsdale

    Eturnsdale New Member

    1,163
    0
    0
    Um no. Not at all. The larger the detonation the more fallout because a greater area is irradiated and thrown up into the air.

    In a ground burst with a yield of 10 kilotons .01% of the fallout is from the devise itself. If you are talking about an airburst from a variable yield weapon then still no.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2012
  16. TankTop

    TankTop Active Member Supporter

    2,457
    18
    38
    I'll argue tomorrow when I've sobered up.
     
  17. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
    I’m worried about the CR bomb. I hear their strength is variable in flight as well and they can be changed to reduce everyone’s Credit Rating from 20 to 250 points, or even wipe it out entirely making everyone’s credit cards useless. Our consumer economy would be utterly destroyed. You have to ask yourself if you would even want to go on living without the ability to purchase the next best thing?


    ;)
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2012
  18. RJMercer

    RJMercer New Member

    519
    0
    0
    C3 touched on my main concern. Anything with a PN semiconductor junction is at risk. I would figure the smaller the junction the more risk it would be. I dont know if its the germanium or silicon material or the size of the layers. TTL, surface mount, micro processors, multi layer boarded circuits are probably junk. But what about the diodes in a DC welder? That is a PN junction but it is in an insulated metal cage and it is a physically large part, but, connected directly to a huge 000ga inductive antenna.
    Thoughts?
    Thoughts?
     
  19. clr8ter

    clr8ter New Member

    4,015
    0
    0
    My thought is that you could store the welder W/out the leads attached......
     
  20. USEBOTHHANDS

    USEBOTHHANDS New Member

    1,319
    2
    0
    accordin to what i have read about it, and the few "natural" EMPs that hit in the past, IF the EMP burst is large enough, then most, if not all wiring in the area will be toast. it's almost comparable to a lightning strike on a powerline. IF the wiring cannot handle the voltage, then the wiring burns in two. but safety features have been installed to the powerlines so this won't happen. fuses are installed to every house (in rural areas) so the power surge doesn't feed to the transformer, and vice-versa, so a short @ the transformer doesn't short out the rest of the neighborhood.

    BUT lightning is NOT like an EMP burst. EMP bursts travel thru the air, JUST LIKE RADIO WAVES. EMP burst charge(s) are drawn to objects that emit a charge, opposite of it's charge.

    "UNSUITABLE" wiring, and sensitive electrical components, are susceptible to EMP burst like computer components are susceptible to static discharge.

    most of today's mechanical devices have some kind of wiring that is susceptible to EMP bursts. if it's not the wiring, it would be the computer brain. someone said that a vehicle is it's own Faraday cage...........yes, and no. there is plenty of metal in the vehicle to act as a displacent, but the full under-carriage is exposed to EMP waves to be able to invade any and all electrical.

    I NEED TO BE CLEAR ON THIS THOUGH, even though the Faraday cage IS GROUNDED, it DOES NOT "ground" out the EMP's energy discharge, it actually makes the wave of energy "pass AROUND" an object that is protected by the cage.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012