sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Lithium Cells Exploding - 14 messages, 11 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/181af8dd8c2e6fde?hl=en
* american beer inferier? - 6 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/79cf21563e25cfa2?hl=en
* RAC Portable Power Station, need DC adaptor spec - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/b105b15b5ad9d933?hl=en
* Roland XP 60 , 5 octave keyboard , 1997 - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/3078908fbe1e3ff8?hl=en
* PSU voltage instability - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/640c794886b1e24f?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Lithium Cells Exploding
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/181af8dd8c2e6fde?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 1:03 am
From: "N_Cook"

Michael Kennedy <mike@com> wrote in message
news:ZOCdncHYbe3p4mHRnZ2dnVY3goWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in checked
> luggage on airplanes in the US.
>
> Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never had
> them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff out.
>
> I would understand if this referred to litium-ion cells.. Does anyone have
> any bad expirence with standard lithium coin cells catching fire? Since
> this seems to be what they are concerned with.[
> -
> Mike
>

Have they also banned flying on planes using Rolls Royce Trent engines which
are proven to catch fire and explode in flight.

== 2 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 4:34 am
From: "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"

Michael Kennedy wrote:
> I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in checked
> luggage on airplanes in the US.
>
> Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never had
> them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff out.

There was an Austrian Airlines jet brought down because a shipment of
watches had a large number of the lithium cells in them leak in the
unpressurized cargo hold and catch fire.

The "nasty stuff" is extremely flamable in large quantities.

Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.

== 3 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 4:48 am
From: "Brenda Ann"

"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote in message
news:slrnifplum.6fq.gsm@cable.mendelson.com...

Michael Kennedy wrote:
> I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in checked
> luggage on airplanes in the US.
>
> Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never had
> them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff out.

There was an Austrian Airlines jet brought down because a shipment of
watches had a large number of the lithium cells in them leak in the
unpressurized cargo hold and catch fire.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How long before they quit letting us take any electronics at all on a plane?

== 4 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 5:17 am
From: Jim Yanik

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in
news:l22pf69g6sgk8thhkk91hrpp9njtths033@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:15:24 +0900, "Michael Kennedy" <mike@com> wrote:
>
>>I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in
>>checked luggage on airplanes in the US.
>>
>>Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never
>>had them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff
>>out.
>>
>>I would understand if this referred to litium-ion cells.. Does anyone
>>have any bad expirence with standard lithium coin cells catching
>>fire? Since this seems to be what they are concerned with.[
>
> Are you sure?
>
><http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/lithiummangdioxide-coin_psds.pdf>
> "Energizer lithium coin batteries are exempt from the
> classification as dangerous goods as they meet the requirements
> of the special provisions listed below. (Essentially, they are
> properly packaged and labeled, contain less than 1 gram of
> lithium and pass the tests defined in UN model regulation
> section 38.3)."
>
> However, these comments may have gotting their attention:
> "Handling: Accidental short circuit for a few seconds will not
> seriously affect the battery. Prolonged short circuit will
> cause the battery to lose energy, generate significant heat
> and can cause the safety release vent to open. Sources of
> short circuits include jumbled batteries in bulk containers,
> metal jewelry, metal covered tables or metal belts used for
> assembly of batteries into devices. Damaging a lithium battery
> may result in an internal short circuit."
>
> "The contents of an open battery, including a vented battery,
> when exposed to water, may result in a fire and/or explosion.
> Crushed or damaged batteries may result in a fire."
>
> I had a 2032 coin cell get shorted by my car keys while in my pocket.
> No explosion or fire, but it sure burned my leg.
>
> Not exactly a coin battery, but interesting:
> Primary Lithium battery explodes!
><http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?121303-Primary-Lithi
>um-battery-explodes!>
>

is the flight prohibition against lithium CELLS or battery PACKS?
like the laptop PC battery packs that have had fire problems,and would have
exposed contacts that could be shorted by other items in the baggage.
Or spare cellphone battery packs,out of their OEM packaging.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

== 5 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 5:20 am
From: bok118@zonnet.nl (Gerard Bok)

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 09:03:09 -0000, "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk>
wrote:

>Michael Kennedy <mike@com> wrote in message
>news:ZOCdncHYbe3p4mHRnZ2dnVY3goWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in checked
>> luggage on airplanes in the US.
>>
>> Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never had
>> them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff out.
>>
>> I would understand if this referred to litium-ion cells.. Does anyone have
>> any bad expirence with standard lithium coin cells catching fire? Since
>> this seems to be what they are concerned with.[

>Have they also banned flying on planes using Rolls Royce Trent engines which
>are proven to catch fire and explode in flight.

That's why they are only used on the outside of an airplane :-)

--
Kind regards,
Gerard Bok

== 6 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 7:29 am
From: Spamm Trappe

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 21:48:40 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote:
>
> How long before they quit letting us take any electronics at all on a
> plane?

They won't be happy until we're required to show up naked with no
luggage.

== 7 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 7:48 am
From: all2001@spambog.com (Wolfgang Allinger)

On 06 Dec 10 at group /sci/electronics/repair in article
<gsm@mendelson.com> (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote:

>Michael Kennedy wrote:
>> I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in
>> checked luggage on airplanes in the US.
>>
>> Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never
>> had them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty
>> stuff out.

>There was an Austrian Airlines jet brought down because a shipment of
>watches had a large number of the lithium cells in them leak in the
>unpressurized cargo hold and catch fire.

There are no unpressured cargo holds in civil passenger or cargo planes
since 60 or more years! They are even heated. The pressure is about
2000m MSL (or 2400m? I forgot)

>The "nasty stuff" is extremely flamable in large quantities.

Yes, especially in non existing worlds and movies :)

Saludos Wolfgang

--
Meine 7 Sinne:
Unsinn, Schwachsinn, Bl�dsinn, Wahnsinn, Stumpfsinn, Irrsinn, L�tzinn.
Wolfgang Allinger Paraguay reply Adresse gesetzt !
ca. 15h00..21h00 MEZ SKYPE:wolfgang.allinger

== 8 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 7:48 am
From: Bob Villa

On Dec 6, 8:29 am, Spamm Trappe <knock_yourself_...@example.net>
wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Dec 2010 21:48:40 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote:
>
> > How long before they quit letting us take any electronics at all on a
> > plane?
>
> They won't be happy until we're required to show up naked with no
> luggage.

A cavity probe would still be necessary...sorry!

== 9 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 8:35 am
From: Jeff Liebermann

On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 07:17:34 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov>
wrote:

>is the flight prohibition against lithium CELLS or battery PACKS?
>like the laptop PC battery packs that have had fire problems,and would have
>exposed contacts that could be shorted by other items in the baggage.
>Or spare cellphone battery packs,out of their OEM packaging.

Duh... I should have looked for that first. The regs have been in
place since Jan 1, 2008.
<http://safetravel.dot.gov/whats_new_batteries.html>
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

== 10 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 8:50 am
From: Jeff Liebermann

On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 08:35:06 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 07:17:34 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov>
>wrote:
>
>>is the flight prohibition against lithium CELLS or battery PACKS?
>>like the laptop PC battery packs that have had fire problems,and would have
>>exposed contacts that could be shorted by other items in the baggage.
>>Or spare cellphone battery packs,out of their OEM packaging.
>
>Duh... I should have looked for that first. The regs have been in
>place since Jan 1, 2008.
><http://safetravel.dot.gov/whats_new_batteries.html>

More:
<http://safetravel.dot.gov/quick_chart.html>

Are lithium-ion batteries the next threat to airline safety?
<http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/travel/2010-08-16-airlinebatteries16_CV_N.htm>
FAA data show that from March 20, 1991, through Aug. 3, 2010,
batteries and battery-powered devices were involved in 113
incidents with "smoke, fire, extreme heat or explosion" on
passenger and cargo planes. The data are for lithium and
non-lithium batteries and are not a complete list of such
incidents, the agency says.

I think this is what inspired the TSO to step up enforcement:
<http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101026/ap_on_bi_ge/us_planes_on_fire>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

== 11 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 9:01 am
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote:
>
> Michael Kennedy wrote:
> > I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in checked
> > luggage on airplanes in the US.
> >
> > Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never had
> > them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff out.
>
> There was an Austrian Airlines jet brought down because a shipment of
> watches had a large number of the lithium cells in them leak in the
> unpressurized cargo hold and catch fire.
>
> The "nasty stuff" is extremely flamable in large quantities.

NASA won't allow any litium cells in space. We had to use 'Capstore'
NVRAM in our products for space applications. Since the cost difference
was small, we dropped the battery backed NVRAM from our products.

--
For the last time: I am not a mad scientist, I'm just a very ticked off
scientist!!!

== 12 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 10:24 am
From: "Michael Kennedy"

"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:gm4qf6dp2n0aprcopk0b4nkaccr3n1ucnj@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 08:35:06 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 07:17:34 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>is the flight prohibition against lithium CELLS or battery PACKS?
>>>like the laptop PC battery packs that have had fire problems,and would
>>>have
>>>exposed contacts that could be shorted by other items in the baggage.
>>>Or spare cellphone battery packs,out of their OEM packaging.
>>
>>Duh... I should have looked for that first. The regs have been in
>>place since Jan 1, 2008.
>><http://safetravel.dot.gov/whats_new_batteries.html>
>
> More:
> <http://safetravel.dot.gov/quick_chart.html>
>
> Are lithium-ion batteries the next threat to airline safety?
> <http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/travel/2010-08-16-airlinebatteries16_CV_N.htm>
> FAA data show that from March 20, 1991, through Aug. 3, 2010,
> batteries and battery-powered devices were involved in 113
> incidents with "smoke, fire, extreme heat or explosion" on
> passenger and cargo planes. The data are for lithium and
> non-lithium batteries and are not a complete list of such
> incidents, the agency says.
>
> I think this is what inspired the TSO to step up enforcement:
> <http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101026/ap_on_bi_ge/us_planes_on_fire>
>
>

Well I didn't know the regulations, but I was told by the post office here
in Japan that no lithium battery Coin cell included or lead acid batteries
are allowed in Air Mail.

Go figure they got the translation wrong and of course nobody knows enough
about how things work to even ask the question why they are banning it.
Honestly I can understand Li-ion batteries being banned, but non rechargable
coin cells didnt make any sense to me.

That clears that up I guess.

- Mike

== 13 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 10:25 am
From: "Michael Kennedy"

"N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:idi8pg$5j0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Michael Kennedy <mike@com> wrote in message
> news:ZOCdncHYbe3p4mHRnZ2dnVY3goWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in checked
>> luggage on airplanes in the US.
>>
>> Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never had
>> them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff out.
>>
>> I would understand if this referred to litium-ion cells.. Does anyone
>> have
>> any bad expirence with standard lithium coin cells catching fire? Since
>> this seems to be what they are concerned with.[
>> -
>> Mike
>>
>
>
> Have they also banned flying on planes using Rolls Royce Trent engines
> which
> are proven to catch fire and explode in flight.
haha.

No they aren't worried about solving any acutal safety problems. They are
just here to inoconvience everyone to the virge of insanity.

== 14 of 14 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 10:28 am
From: "Michael Kennedy"

"Michael Kennedy" <mike@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:rv2dnT5AiZMot2DRnZ2dnVY3go-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:idi8pg$5j0$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Michael Kennedy <mike@com> wrote in message
>> news:ZOCdncHYbe3p4mHRnZ2dnVY3goWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> I recently found out that Lithium cells are no longer allowed in checked
>>> luggage on airplanes in the US.
>>>
>>> Personally I have tortured those lithium button cells and have never had
>>> them do anything really dangerous other than spew some nasty stuff out.
>>>
>>> I would understand if this referred to litium-ion cells.. Does anyone
>>> have
>>> any bad expirence with standard lithium coin cells catching fire? Since
>>> this seems to be what they are concerned with.[
>>> -
>>> Mike
>>>
>>
>>
>> Have they also banned flying on planes using Rolls Royce Trent engines
>> which
>> are proven to catch fire and explode in flight.
> haha.
>
> No they aren't worried about solving any acutal safety problems. They are
> just here to inoconvience everyone to the virge of insanity.
>

On that note as well.. Did anyone know there is a 1lb / 455gram limit on all
parcels flying airmail to the USA? It isnt being enforced everywhere yet,
but this is what the TSA requested / demanded.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: american beer inferier?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/79cf21563e25cfa2?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 1:32 am
From: Christopher Helms

On Dec 5, 7:25 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> I am, by the way, a teetotaler.
>
> The story goes that American beers were once "better". But during WWII, they
> were lightened to appeal more to females, who had become a larger percentage
> of the drinking population (the males being away at war). No reversal to the
> original taste occurred after the war.

Another reason was because ingredients were in shorter supply due to
rationing. IIRC, almost no beer was sold in cans during the war
because they were metal, which was also in short supply. Even packs of
Lucky Strikes turned white because the green they had been using for
their label was derived from copper which was needed for the war
effort.

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 3:24 am
From: "William Sommerwerck"

> I don't get this light beer thing. What is the point? Beer
> should have some body and flavour. You don't have to
> drink it until it's coming out your nose.

It's a social thing. Shmoozing with your buddies for hour after hour, while
downing beer after beer, is a mark of True Masculinity. So a lower-calorie
beer seems desirable.

There was a short-lived low-carb beer in the late 60s, long before low-carb
became a trend. I remember seeing the ads in New York, but I don't remember
the name.

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 4:39 am
From: Dave Smith

On 05/12/2010 10:20 PM, spamtrap1888 wrote:
> On Dec 5, 5:06 pm, ravenlynne<ravenly...@somecraphere.com> wrote:
>> On 12/5/2010 7:40 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>>> Back in 2002 I was in Golden Colorado to visit some friends. We had gone
>>> down tot he hotel bar for happy hour and their special was buy one draft
>>> beer get one free. I asked the bar tender if it was Coors. His answered
>>> "No sir. We have some good beers too"
>>
>> LOL! That's awesome.
>>
>
> In a beer bar in Bruges they talked me out of ordering a Blanche de
> Bruges, for the same reason: the local product was clearly inferior.

The day we passed through Bruges we ended up staying in Ypres. It was a
hot summer day and I ordered a glass of beer. It was incredible. I was
too busy enjoying the best beer of my life to find out what it was. It
was incredible.

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 8:59 am
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

William Sommerwerck wrote:
>
> > I don't get this light beer thing. What is the point? Beer
> > should have some body and flavour. You don't have to
> > drink it until it's coming out your nose.
>
> It's a social thing. Shmoozing with your buddies for hour after hour, while
> downing beer after beer, is a mark of True Masculinity. So a lower-calorie
> beer seems desirable.
>
> There was a short-lived low-carb beer in the late 60s, long before low-carb
> became a trend. I remember seeing the ads in New York, but I don't remember
> the name.

Some states allowed the sale of 3.2% alcohol beer to 18 year olds,
while you had to be 21 to buy 6%. It was commonly referred to as 'Near
beer'.

--
For the last time: I am not a mad scientist, I'm just a very ticked off
scientist!!!

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 9:54 am
From: Smitty Two

In article <o9adnUJjidcdi2DRnZ2dnUVZ_s8AAAAA@earthlink.com>,
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>
> Some states allowed the sale of 3.2% alcohol beer to 18 year olds,
> while you had to be 21 to buy 6%. It was commonly referred to as 'Near
> beer'.

I remember 3.2, but I don't remember that law. In my home state, you
could drink any alcohol at 18. Neighboring state was 21 so we had quite
an influx of partyers on weekends.

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 10:00 am
From: "William Sommerwerck"

>> There was a short-lived low-carb beer in the late 60s,
>> long before low-carb became a trend. I remember
>> seeing the ads in New York, but I don't remember
>> the name.

> Some states allowed the sale of 3.2% alcohol beer to
> 18 year olds, while you had to be 21 to buy 6%. It was
> commonly referred to as 'Near beer'.

True, but that wasn't what I was referring to.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: RAC Portable Power Station, need DC adaptor spec
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/b105b15b5ad9d933?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 1:55 am
From: "Dave Plowman (News)"

In article <P8SdnUBQ2eqr92HRnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > So how much current do you think they're actually capable of
> > delivering--say with the little battery fairly fresh and fully charged?

> Too many variables. What is the amp hour rating of the battery?

Tiny in automotive terms.

> What is the internal resistance of the switch?

Dunno

> The resistance of the
> cables?

Mine has 16mm� cables. The resistance of the alligator clamps is more
likely the limiting factor.

> The resistance of the starter motor? The temperature? How
> clean are the battery clamps, and what is the resistance of the battery
> cables? The resistance of the starter solenoid?

Non of which matters since the power pack makers claim a maximum output.

--
*When you've seen one shopping centre you've seen a mall*

Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 8:58 am
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
>
> In article <P8SdnUBQ2eqr92HRnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > So how much current do you think they're actually capable of
> > > delivering--say with the little battery fairly fresh and fully charged?
>
> > Too many variables. What is the amp hour rating of the battery?
>
> Tiny in automotive terms.

Really? My jump packs have 17 Ah batteries.

Product ID: BSL1117
Cold Cranking Amps: 240
Voltage: 12
Termination: NUT & BOLT
Chemistry: SLA OR VRLA VALVE REGULATED S
Weight: 13.3
Width: 2.99
Length: 7.13
Height: 6.57

My truck uses a size 27 battery with these specs:

Product ID: MTP-27
Amps: 1000
Cranking Amps: 1000
Cold Cranking Amps: 810
Voltage: 12
Termination: A
Pro-rata Warranty: 85
Weight: 47.4
Width: 6.81
Length: 12.06
Height: 8.88

So, it has 24% of the rating of the truck battery which isn't
'tiny'. It is intended to start a vehicle with a run down battery, not
one with mechanical problems. The portable pack is designed with a
different type of battery, as well. The available current is determined
by the plate area and thickness.

I've seen someone use 12V alarm batteries to jump start a service
truck. They were rated at 7 Ah.

> > What is the internal resistance of the switch?
>
> Dunno
>
> > The resistance of the
> > cables?
>
> Mine has 16mm� cables. The resistance of the alligator clamps is more
> likely the limiting factor.

No, all of it is important. If the resistance of the clamps is as
high as the leads, they will overheat since all the resistance is at the
same spot rather than distributed along the length of the cables.

> > The resistance of the starter motor? The temperature? How
> > clean are the battery clamps, and what is the resistance of the battery
> > cables? The resistance of the starter solenoid?
>
> Non of which matters since the power pack makers claim a maximum output.

BS. They all matter, if you aren't an ignorant troll.

What do you think the short circuit current of a fully charged 12V
car battery is?

--
For the last time: I am not a mad scientist, I'm just a very ticked off
scientist!!!

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 10:26 am
From: "Dave Plowman (News)"

In article <o9adnUNjide7i2DRnZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

> "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
> >
> > In article <P8SdnUBQ2eqr92HRnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> > Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > So how much current do you think they're actually capable of
> > > > delivering--say with the little battery fairly fresh and fully
> > > > charged?
> >
> > > Too many variables. What is the amp hour rating of the battery?
> >
> > Tiny in automotive terms.

> Really? My jump packs have 17 Ah batteries.

I suppose it depends on your definition of tiny, but 17 amp.hr is a lot
smaller than any battery in any car I've owned or seen. Both my current
ones have 70 Ah types.

> Product ID: BSL1117
> Cold Cranking Amps: 240
> Voltage: 12
> Termination: NUT & BOLT
> Chemistry: SLA OR VRLA VALVE REGULATED S
> Weight: 13.3
> Width: 2.99
> Length: 7.13
> Height: 6.57

> My truck uses a size 27 battery with these specs:

> Product ID: MTP-27
> Amps: 1000
> Cranking Amps: 1000
> Cold Cranking Amps: 810
> Voltage: 12
> Termination: A
> Pro-rata Warranty: 85
> Weight: 47.4
> Width: 6.81
> Length: 12.06
> Height: 8.88

> So, it has 24% of the rating of the truck battery which isn't
> 'tiny'.

Err, you don't appear to have given the amp.hr capacity - the very thing
you mentioned.

> It is intended to start a vehicle with a run down battery, not
> one with mechanical problems.
> The portable pack is designed with a
> different type of battery, as well. The available current is determined
> by the plate area and thickness.

> I've seen someone use 12V alarm batteries to jump start a service
> truck. They were rated at 7 Ah.

Batteries? Parallel them and they become like a larger one.

> > > What is the internal resistance of the switch?
> >
> > Dunno
> >
> > > The resistance of the
> > > cables?
> >
> > Mine has 16mm� cables. The resistance of the alligator clamps is more
> > likely the limiting factor.

> No, all of it is important. If the resistance of the clamps is as
> high as the leads, they will overheat since all the resistance is at the
> same spot rather than distributed along the length of the cables.

> > > The resistance of the starter motor? The temperature? How clean
> > > are the battery clamps, and what is the resistance of the battery
> > > cables? The resistance of the starter solenoid?
> >
> > Non of which matters since the power pack makers claim a maximum
> > output.

> BS. They all matter, if you aren't an ignorant troll.

> What do you think the short circuit current of a fully charged 12V
> car battery is?

Are you trolling? The maker of the jump start pack claims a maximum
current. Since they can't possibly know exactly what the starter motor etc
draw is, just how is it relevant?

My point is (with experience of several jump start packs including
expensive ones) is that they will not do lots of starts of a vehicle with
a flat battery without permanent damage to the SLA. Somewhere round a
dozen or so seems to be it.

--
*Corduroy pillows are making headlines.

Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Roland XP 60 , 5 octave keyboard , 1997
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/3078908fbe1e3ff8?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 6:13 am
From: asdf

On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 14:11:54 +0000, N_Cook wrote:

> In for a power supply fault but while in there, the floppy drive has
> never worked. Would it be a standard PC drive? or known simple
> repairable stock fault? It does klunk once, on pwering up , sort of PC
> fashion

I had similar troubles with the S330 sampler floppy drive. A standard PC
one didn't work but someone told me that floppy drives with jumpers on
their back work if you set the right ones. Could not yet find a drive w/
jumpers to test if the advice was BS or not though.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: PSU voltage instability
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/640c794886b1e24f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 9:01 am
From: Meat Plow

On Sun, 05 Dec 2010 23:46:50 -0500, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

> David Nebenzahl wrote:
>>
>> On 12/5/2010 11:51 AM Phil Allison spake thus:
>>
>> > "Jeff Liebermann = a lying AUTISTIC ASSHOLE "
>> >
>> > ** Drop dead you pathetic fuckwit.
>>
>> OK, so my guess is, oh, another week or so before Phil posts a calm,
>> reasonable (and correct) message here.
>>
>> Guess it takes that long for the meds to take effect ...
>
>
> A baseball bat is quicker.

Sometimes that doesn't work and you end up like Dave.

--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 6 2010 9:04 am
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

Meat Plow wrote:
>
> On Sun, 05 Dec 2010 23:46:50 -0500, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> > David Nebenzahl wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/5/2010 11:51 AM Phil Allison spake thus:
> >>
> >> > "Jeff Liebermann = a lying AUTISTIC ASSHOLE "
> >> >
> >> > ** Drop dead you pathetic fuckwit.
> >>
> >> OK, so my guess is, oh, another week or so before Phil posts a calm,
> >> reasonable (and correct) message here.
> >>
> >> Guess it takes that long for the meds to take effect ...
> >
> >
> > A baseball bat is quicker.
>
> Sometimes that doesn't work and you end up like Dave.

"Don't try this without a firm grip, and a good follow through..."

--
For the last time: I am not a mad scientist, I'm just a very ticked off
scientist!!!

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sci.electronics.repair"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en