sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Triple ganged pots - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/0db7c3a79a7550cb?hl=en
* Modifying a USB cable to charge iPod without PC connection - 5 messages, 4
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/c6ee222855c74ad2?hl=en
* Old style filament lamps? - 18 messages, 7 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/8b70a4142ec9c2ec?hl=en
* Vietnamese Marshall - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/83dfedaa7815fcd1?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Triple ganged pots
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/0db7c3a79a7550cb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 8:09 am
From: spamtrap1888

On Apr 28, 2:11 pm, "caius" <bric...@yahoo.it> wrote:
> "spamtrap1888" <spamtrap1...@gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggionews:ef7e1ca7-7806-48fa-ad18-6eed4d346405@s34g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >You could start at potentiometers.com. I see they have >KKK triple gang
> >pots, as well as modular pots that go eight deep.
>
> Thanks.Sadly they accept only order from a minimum of 50 pieces and each
> piece of the KKK pot is 50$..

Try this:

http://www.surplussales.com/potentiometers/PBM-Shafted/PBM-Shafted-3.html

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Modifying a USB cable to charge iPod without PC connection
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/c6ee222855c74ad2?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 8:32 am
From: spamtrap1888

On Apr 29, 7:04 am, Man-wai Chang <toylet.toy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/07/simple_hack_turns_usb_charger_units...
>
> +5V ---50k --- D-
>                 |
>                10k
>                 |
> GND ---40K --- D+
>
> Is this safe? Would it work?
>

Show your work -- why make people duplicate your analysis?

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 8:44 am
From: Man-wai Chang

>> +5V ---50k --- D-
>> |
>> 10k
>> |
>> GND ---40K --- D+
>>
> Show your work -- why make people duplicate your analysis?

I dont' wanna kill my iPod Touch... :)

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and farces be with you!
/( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.38.4
^ ^ 23:40:01 up 5 days 3:41 1 user load average: 1.00 1.04 1.05
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 9:06 am
From: spamtrap1888

On Apr 29, 8:44 am, Man-wai Chang <toylet.toy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> +5V ---50k --- D-
> >>                  |
> >>                 10k
> >>                  |
> >> GND ---40K --- D+
>
> > Show your work -- why make people duplicate your analysis?
>
> I dont' wanna kill my iPod Touch... :)
>

Why not just use the two resistor dividers your link claims do work?

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 9:17 am
From: lsmartino

On 29 abr, 10:04, Man-wai Chang <toylet.toy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/07/simple_hack_turns_usb_charger_units...
>
> +5V ---50k --- D-
>                 |
>                10k
>                 |
> GND ---40K --- D+
>
> Is this safe? Would it work?
>
> --
>    @~@   Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
>   / v \  Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and farces be with you!
> /( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10)  Linux 2.6.38.4
>    ^ ^   22:00:02 up 5 days 2:01 1 user load average: 1.10 1.08 1.05
> 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

Seems to me that this mod should work. All that this mod does is to
put some voltage in D- and D+ pins, and that voltage will never be
greater than 5V, so I don´t see why it will not work.

Just give it a try. You won´t fry anything.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 10:15 am
From: "John Keiser"

I made an iPod charger to run off 4 AA batteries using a similar divider.
Not sure why you are modifying the example given, but the values are not
especially critical. Any reason you can't measure the output?

.
"Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ipegh4$qd0$1@dont-email.me...
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/07/simple_hack_turns_usb_charger_units_into_iphone_chargers-2/
>
>
> +5V ---50k --- D-
> |
> 10k
> |
> GND ---40K --- D+
>
> Is this safe? Would it work?
>
> --
> @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
> / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and farces be with you!
> /( _ )\ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.38.4
> ^ ^ 22:00:02 up 5 days 2:01 1 user load average: 1.10 1.08 1.05
> ???! ???! ???! ???! ???! ???! ????? (CSSA):
> http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Old style filament lamps?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/8b70a4142ec9c2ec?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 5:07 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipd6e4$ml9$1@dont-email.me...
>> >> They give you full brightness at switch on, unlike
>> >> compact fluorescents that take time to warm-up.
>> >
>> > Yes, but...
>> >
>> > The better CFLs are quite bright at turn-on -- bright enough that you
>> > don't feel you bought a defective lamp.
>
>> The operative word being "quite". I thought you said that your Home
>> Despot
>> types came on quicker than an incandescent. Certainly doesn't sound that
> way
>> from that description ... And as far as I'm concerned, any incandescent
>> replacement technology lamp that does not produce the *full* light output
>> within a few mS of switch on, or is ambient temperature dependant for its
>> performance, *is* a defective lamp.
>
> The Home Depot lamps come on instantly at a level I'd judge to be around
> 60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another
> 30
> seconds or so. This is a huge improvement over the bulbs from 15 years
> ago.
>
>

With all due respect William, that is the most feeble justification that you
have come up with so far. It's like the government banning cars and making
everybody buy bikes instead, and then turning round and saying that riding a
bike is still better than when you had to walk before the bike was invented
... If it has taken 15 years so far to get these dreadful things from
total crap to utter crap, then by the time they are actually at a point
where they can properly replace incandescent lamps, I will be a pile of dust
anyway. I'm afraid that I cannot, by any stretch of my imagination, equate
"60%" and "30 seconds" to either "instant" or satisfactory replacement
technology. If they really were 'good', they wouldn't need defending against
all of the criticisms that are levelled against them by (colour blind ??)
people the world over.

Arfa

== 2 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 9:01 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ipeaeg$7t2$1@dont-email.me...
>> Yes, indeed -- I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the
>> difference between someone who does have an issue with
>> CFLs, and someone who doesn't, then 12% -- one eighth --
>> of the population being forced to suffer because of this legislation,
>> seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers that be, in
>> insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to.
>
> I assume you suffer from protanopia or deuteranopia. My father did. (I
> don't.)
>
> I worked with a guy with that problem. One day he asked me to help him
> pick
> colors for a Web site. It was causing him all kinds of confusion. I showed
> him a fluorescent-green pen, and asked him what color it looked to him --
> "Orange". (That doesn't mean he saw it in the way a person with normal
> color
> vision would see orange. Rather, he could not distinguish it from what we
> would call orange.)
>
> Peter Wensberg, the author of "Land's Polaroid" (a beautifully written and
> wonderfully entertaining book) told how, during a lunch of Chinese
> takeout,
> Dr Land administered one of the standard color perception tests (the kind
> with colored circles, where you indicate which letter or number you see).
> Wensberg utterly flunked it, getting every one wrong.
>
> I've lived with fluorescent light for more than 60 years, and have never
> suffered (except in my early days at Microsoft, when the office lights
> gave
> me (and some others) headaches). It appears to me that your suffering is
> primarily aesthetic.
>
>

As I've said on a number of occasions, linear flourescent light doesn't
affect me in anything like the same way as CFL. I can read perfectly well
under it. I work perfectly well under it. I don't find the light displeasing
in either colour or quality. I don't know how to reconcile this apparent
disparity, as I too have lived under flourescent light for over fifty years.
I don't know what my type of colour blindness is called, nor whether it is
common in type, or rare. I am apparently red blind and green insensitive, as
far as I recall. It is many years since I took the test. I think it meant
that I couldn't see some shades of red at all, when they were mixed in with
other colours, and that I couldn't distinguish some shades of green amongst
other shades of green. Oddly enough though, the light from CFLs always
appears to have a slightly 'sick' green caste to me, irrespective of the
quoted colour temperature.

Arfa

== 3 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 9:27 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"Roger Blake" <rogblake@iname.invalid> wrote in message
news:20110429133740@news.eternal-september.org...
> On 2011-04-29, Phil Allison <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>> ** Here, all that has to happen is someone report the shop keeper to the
>> relevant Energy Authority.
>
> Very Orwellian, and I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg.
>
> Rather than fawning all over the "royal couple" (it's hard to imagine a
> more worthless set of parasitical leeches than the "royal" family), it may
> be time for the Brits to start planning revolution.

Not wishing to be rude, Roger, but what exactly is it that you purport to
know about my country's Royal Family in general, or indeed the couple who
today got married, that gives you the right to rubbish them in this way ?
For the most part, they work very hard in ambassadorial roles for our
country around the world. The one that got married today is a nice enough
lad who's a serving officer in our military, and his new wife is a very nice
girl who is not herself from a royal background. I have seen little evidence
of people 'fawning' over this event. Most seem genuinely pleased for them,
and if, in these difficult and depressing financial times, the occasion
provides the general population with a bit of a boost, what's wrong with
that ?
>
>

Arfa

== 4 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 9:39 am
From: Terry Pinnell

Geo <hw9j-s5hw@dea.spamcon.org> wrote:

>Or £6.99 for 10 (post free) on ebay:-
>item no. 230611860137

Thanks Geo.

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

== 5 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 9:45 am
From: Terry Pinnell

adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:

>Terry Pinnell <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
>>
>> >Terry Pinnell <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
>> >> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining stock
>> >> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>> >
>> >http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
>>
>> Thanks Adrian. Phoned at 7pm but I see they're closed all day Thursdays
>> anyway. I'll try again on Saturday after the Wedding. Doesn't look like
>> they have any online ordering but presumably they will despatch? Bath's a
>> little too far to justify the trip!
>
>He told me he intends to open the shop tomorrow (Friday).
>
>I warned him that, if he had a website, people would expect him to do
>mail order, but I don't know if he is ready for it yet.

Adrian: I phoned this morning but it appears as you suspected that Mr
Wright supplies only to those visiting his shop. He did say he'd have a
think and "talk to Adrian...". However, I'm pleased to say I've now found
another local source. I bought 20 x 60W and they've ordered the same
number of 100W.

BTW, I was surprised to learn that no 'pearl' types are now made, all are
clear glass.

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

== 6 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 9:56 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"Terry Pinnell" <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote in message
news:jhqlr6pjpkocn6uv6iel56b1kspatujmud@4ax.com...
> adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
>
>>Terry Pinnell <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
>>>
>>> >Terry Pinnell <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
>>> >>
>>> >> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the
>>> >> UK
>>> >> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining
>>> >> stock
>>> >> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>>> >
>>> >http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
>>>
>>> Thanks Adrian. Phoned at 7pm but I see they're closed all day Thursdays
>>> anyway. I'll try again on Saturday after the Wedding. Doesn't look like
>>> they have any online ordering but presumably they will despatch? Bath's
>>> a
>>> little too far to justify the trip!
>>
>>He told me he intends to open the shop tomorrow (Friday).
>>
>>I warned him that, if he had a website, people would expect him to do
>>mail order, but I don't know if he is ready for it yet.
>
> Adrian: I phoned this morning but it appears as you suspected that Mr
> Wright supplies only to those visiting his shop. He did say he'd have a
> think and "talk to Adrian...". However, I'm pleased to say I've now found
> another local source. I bought 20 x 60W and they've ordered the same
> number of 100W.
>
> BTW, I was surprised to learn that no 'pearl' types are now made, all are
> clear glass.
>
> --
> Terry, East Grinstead, UK

Yes Terry. See my other posts making mention of this. Apparently, pearlised
types were the first to be phased out, because they consume more energy to
make than clear ones. Oh brother ! And I suppose that CFLs, with their
hundreds of manufacturing processes, don't ... ?

Arfa

== 7 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 10:08 am
From: lsmartino

On 29 abr, 12:01, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:ipeaeg$7t2$1@dont-email.me...
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Yes, indeed -- I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the
> >> difference between someone who does have an issue with
> >> CFLs, and someone who doesn't, then 12% -- one eighth --
> >> of the population being forced to suffer because of this legislation,
> >> seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers that be, in
> >> insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to.
>
> > I assume you suffer from protanopia or deuteranopia. My father did. (I
> > don't.)
>
> > I worked with a guy with that problem. One day he asked me to help him
> > pick
> > colors for a Web site. It was causing him all kinds of confusion. I showed
> > him a fluorescent-green pen, and asked him what color it looked to him --
> > "Orange". (That doesn't mean he saw it in the way a person with normal
> > color
> > vision would see orange. Rather, he could not distinguish it from what we
> > would call orange.)
>
> > Peter Wensberg, the author of "Land's Polaroid" (a beautifully written and
> > wonderfully entertaining book) told how, during a lunch of Chinese
> > takeout,
> > Dr Land administered one of the standard color perception tests (the kind
> > with colored circles, where you indicate which letter or number you see).
> > Wensberg utterly flunked it, getting every one wrong.
>
> > I've lived with fluorescent light for more than 60 years, and have never
> > suffered (except in my early days at Microsoft, when the office lights
> > gave
> > me (and some others) headaches). It appears to me that your suffering is
> > primarily aesthetic.
>
> As I've said on a number of occasions, linear flourescent light doesn't
> affect me in anything like the same way as CFL. I can read perfectly well
> under it. I work perfectly well under it. I don't find the light displeasing
> in either colour or quality. I don't know how to reconcile this apparent
> disparity, as I too have lived under flourescent light for over fifty years.
> I don't know what my type of colour blindness is called, nor whether it is
> common in type, or rare. I am apparently red blind and green insensitive, as
> far as I recall. It is many years since I took the test. I think it meant
> that I couldn't see some shades of red at all, when they were mixed in with
> other colours, and that I couldn't distinguish some shades of green amongst
> other shades of green. Oddly enough though, the light from CFLs always
> appears to have a slightly 'sick' green caste to me, irrespective of the
> quoted colour temperature.
>
> Arfa- Ocultar texto de la cita -
>
> - Mostrar texto de la cita -

Linear flourescent tubes usually uses a type of phosphor called
halophosphate. That phosphor normally emits light in a very narrow
band of the spectrum, and since you are collor blind, probably what
happens is that your eyes are fully sensitive to that particular band.
In the other had, halophosphate phosphors aren´t suitable for CFL´s
because they produce less light output than triphosphors. A
triphosphor can be seen like a mix of three different phosphors, each
one emitting in a particular band. The sum of all three produces the
light coming from the CFL tube. Probably you are blind to one of these
bands, making you uncomfortable with the light.

This is just a theory, of course.

== 8 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 10:18 am
From: adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham)

Terry Pinnell <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:

> adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
>
> >Terry Pinnell <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> adrian@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Terry Pinnell <terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> (Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc group.)
> >> >>
> >> >> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
> >> >> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining
>>>stock
> >> >> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.wrightshardware.co.uk/Eaccess.htm
> >>
> >> Thanks Adrian. Phoned at 7pm but I see they're closed all day Thursdays
> >> anyway. I'll try again on Saturday after the Wedding. Doesn't look like
> >> they have any online ordering but presumably they will despatch? Bath's a
> >> little too far to justify the trip!
> >
> >He told me he intends to open the shop tomorrow (Friday).
> >
> >I warned him that, if he had a website, people would expect him to do
> >mail order, but I don't know if he is ready for it yet.
>
> Adrian: I phoned this morning but it appears as you suspected that Mr
> Wright supplies only to those visiting his shop. He did say he'd have a
> think and "talk to Adrian...". However, I'm pleased to say I've now found
> another local source. I bought 20 x 60W and they've ordered the same
> number of 100W.

Thanks for letting me know, I'll pass the information on to him. He
didn't seem at all keen on posting them when I spoke to him this
morning, the chance of breakage is too high.

The website was intended to draw in local trade and his stock changes so
rapidly that I have never managed to get it up to date.

--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

== 9 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 11:05 am
From: josephkk

On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 05:20:35 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

>> Yes, indeed -- I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the
>> difference between someone who does have an issue with
>> CFLs, and someone who doesn't, then 12% -- one eighth --
>> of the population being forced to suffer because of this legislation,
>> seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers that be, in
>> insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to.
>
>I assume you suffer from protanopia or deuteranopia. My father did. (I
>don't.)
>
>I worked with a guy with that problem. One day he asked me to help him pick
>colors for a Web site. It was causing him all kinds of confusion. I showed
>him a fluorescent-green pen, and asked him what color it looked to him --
>"Orange". (That doesn't mean he saw it in the way a person with normal color
>vision would see orange. Rather, he could not distinguish it from what we
>would call orange.)
>
>Peter Wensberg, the author of "Land's Polaroid" (a beautifully written and
>wonderfully entertaining book) told how, during a lunch of Chinese takeout,
>Dr Land administered one of the standard color perception tests (the kind
>with colored circles, where you indicate which letter or number you see).
>Wensberg utterly flunked it, getting every one wrong.
>
>I've lived with fluorescent light for more than 60 years, and have never
>suffered (except in my early days at Microsoft, when the office lights gave
>me (and some others) headaches). It appears to me that your suffering is
>primarily aesthetic.
>

I don't think so. Expanding beyond just fluorescent versus incandescent
we can observe more of what is being discussed. For most people, mercury
vapor (MV) lighting is easier to read by but tends to make people look
ghastly, especially in photographs. On the other hand people look better
and photographs look better with high pressure sodium (HPS) lighting, and
many find it easier to see large objects especially at very low light
levels, but reading is more difficult. It is primarily a matter of
spectral intensities and the placement of the various strong lines. Many
comparisons of MV vs HPS lighting are available but most rarely touch on
these issues, especially the reading and fine resolution issue. Now that
white (fluorescent) LED lighting is becoming more available with yet
different color balances, the whole subject becomes even more complicated.

== 10 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 11:11 am
From: josephkk

On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:05:57 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

>> >> They give you full brightness at switch on, unlike
>> >> compact fluorescents that take time to warm-up.
>> >
>> > Yes, but...
>> >
>> > The better CFLs are quite bright at turn-on -- bright enough that you
>> > don't feel you bought a defective lamp.
>
>> The operative word being "quite". I thought you said that your Home Despot
>> types came on quicker than an incandescent. Certainly doesn't sound that
>way
>> from that description ... And as far as I'm concerned, any incandescent
>> replacement technology lamp that does not produce the *full* light output
>> within a few mS of switch on, or is ambient temperature dependant for its
>> performance, *is* a defective lamp.
>
>The Home Depot lamps come on instantly at a level I'd judge to be around
>60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another 30
>seconds or so. This is a huge improvement over the bulbs from 15 years ago.
>
>
Mine are 'faster' still. Hitting about 85% to 90% faster than i can
detect with my eyes, say under 100 ms.

== 11 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 11:18 am
From: josephkk

On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 06:54:48 +0100, Terry Pinnell
<terrypingm@DELETEgmail.com> wrote:

>M.Joshi <M.Joshi.7ff7fc8@diybanter.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>'Terry Pinnell[_3_ Wrote:
>>> ;2636067'](Re-posted from the lower traffic sci.electronics.misc
>>> group.)
>>>
>>> Does anyone know where I can buy 'normal' filament lamp bulbs in the UK
>>> please? I just cannot get on with the new economy type. My remaining
>>> stock
>>> of 60W and 100W is dwindling rapidly.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>>
>>Do you mean that your light fittings cannot accomodate the larger
>>compact fluorescent bulbs?
>
>No, my gripes are more basic: I like instant light when I flick a switch
>and I like bright light to work and read by. I also resent what seems to
>be downright misleading statements by the manufacturers about 'equivalent'
>ratings. I've never found one that warrants the claim.

Agreed, i have always had to go one lamp higher output.
>
>>If so, there are halogen bulbs available in the same form factor as the
>>old incandescent filament bulbs. These are classed as lower energy than
>>a standard incandescent and can be purchased from most supermarkets and
>>DIY stores. See the link below:
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/68nocgh
>>
>>They give you full brightness at switch on unlike compact fluorescents
>>that take time to warm-up.
>
>Thanks, I'll investigate and try a few, although from what I've read
>up-thread it sounds as if I'll still favour the old filament types.
>
>That link gave me a nice picture but can anyone recommend a specific 60W
>and 100W UK supplier please?

== 12 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 11:51 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"lsmartino" <luismartino76@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6327313c-9341-48b4-9866-cea9a660767e@r20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> On 29 abr, 12:01, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:ipeaeg$7t2$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Yes, indeed -- I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the
>> >> difference between someone who does have an issue with
>> >> CFLs, and someone who doesn't, then 12% -- one eighth --
>> >> of the population being forced to suffer because of this legislation,
>> >> seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers that be, in
>> >> insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to.
>>
>> > I assume you suffer from protanopia or deuteranopia. My father did. (I
>> > don't.)
>>
>> > I worked with a guy with that problem. One day he asked me to help him
>> > pick
>> > colors for a Web site. It was causing him all kinds of confusion. I
>> > showed
>> > him a fluorescent-green pen, and asked him what color it looked to
>> > him --
>> > "Orange". (That doesn't mean he saw it in the way a person with normal
>> > color
>> > vision would see orange. Rather, he could not distinguish it from what
>> > we
>> > would call orange.)
>>
>> > Peter Wensberg, the author of "Land's Polaroid" (a beautifully written
>> > and
>> > wonderfully entertaining book) told how, during a lunch of Chinese
>> > takeout,
>> > Dr Land administered one of the standard color perception tests (the
>> > kind
>> > with colored circles, where you indicate which letter or number you
>> > see).
>> > Wensberg utterly flunked it, getting every one wrong.
>>
>> > I've lived with fluorescent light for more than 60 years, and have
>> > never
>> > suffered (except in my early days at Microsoft, when the office lights
>> > gave
>> > me (and some others) headaches). It appears to me that your suffering
>> > is
>> > primarily aesthetic.
>>
>> As I've said on a number of occasions, linear flourescent light doesn't
>> affect me in anything like the same way as CFL. I can read perfectly well
>> under it. I work perfectly well under it. I don't find the light
>> displeasing
>> in either colour or quality. I don't know how to reconcile this apparent
>> disparity, as I too have lived under flourescent light for over fifty
>> years.
>> I don't know what my type of colour blindness is called, nor whether it
>> is
>> common in type, or rare. I am apparently red blind and green insensitive,
>> as
>> far as I recall. It is many years since I took the test. I think it meant
>> that I couldn't see some shades of red at all, when they were mixed in
>> with
>> other colours, and that I couldn't distinguish some shades of green
>> amongst
>> other shades of green. Oddly enough though, the light from CFLs always
>> appears to have a slightly 'sick' green caste to me, irrespective of the
>> quoted colour temperature.
>>
>> Arfa- Ocultar texto de la cita -
>>
>> - Mostrar texto de la cita -
>
> Linear flourescent tubes usually uses a type of phosphor called
> halophosphate. That phosphor normally emits light in a very narrow
> band of the spectrum, and since you are collor blind, probably what
> happens is that your eyes are fully sensitive to that particular band.
> In the other had, halophosphate phosphors aren´t suitable for CFL´s
> because they produce less light output than triphosphors. A
> triphosphor can be seen like a mix of three different phosphors, each
> one emitting in a particular band. The sum of all three produces the
> light coming from the CFL tube. Probably you are blind to one of these
> bands, making you uncomfortable with the light.
>
> This is just a theory, of course.

Nice explanation, and seems on the face of it, to hold water. Good that
someone can actually come up with a reasonable theory, instead of telling me
that the problem doesn't affect them, therefore I must be wrong, or using
the wrong CFLs. I really have tried to embrace these lamps since their first
inception, but the fact is that for practical reasons, as discussed, I
simply cannot get on with them. Yes, I hate the fact that they have been
forced on us for dubious reasons of ecology, and I freely admit that does
colour my perception of them a little, but my fundamental problem with them
is just that - they are a problem to my (obviously defective) eyesight.

Arfa

== 13 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 11:53 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"josephkk" <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:bdulr6l61q2rktvogn1eobtf7kj16nvb77@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 05:20:35 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
> <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>> Yes, indeed -- I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the
>>> difference between someone who does have an issue with
>>> CFLs, and someone who doesn't, then 12% -- one eighth --
>>> of the population being forced to suffer because of this legislation,
>>> seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers that be, in
>>> insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to.
>>
>>I assume you suffer from protanopia or deuteranopia. My father did. (I
>>don't.)
>>
>>I worked with a guy with that problem. One day he asked me to help him
>>pick
>>colors for a Web site. It was causing him all kinds of confusion. I showed
>>him a fluorescent-green pen, and asked him what color it looked to him --
>>"Orange". (That doesn't mean he saw it in the way a person with normal
>>color
>>vision would see orange. Rather, he could not distinguish it from what we
>>would call orange.)
>>
>>Peter Wensberg, the author of "Land's Polaroid" (a beautifully written and
>>wonderfully entertaining book) told how, during a lunch of Chinese
>>takeout,
>>Dr Land administered one of the standard color perception tests (the kind
>>with colored circles, where you indicate which letter or number you see).
>>Wensberg utterly flunked it, getting every one wrong.
>>
>>I've lived with fluorescent light for more than 60 years, and have never
>>suffered (except in my early days at Microsoft, when the office lights
>>gave
>>me (and some others) headaches). It appears to me that your suffering is
>>primarily aesthetic.
>>
>
> I don't think so. Expanding beyond just fluorescent versus incandescent
> we can observe more of what is being discussed. For most people, mercury
> vapor (MV) lighting is easier to read by but tends to make people look
> ghastly, especially in photographs. On the other hand people look better
> and photographs look better with high pressure sodium (HPS) lighting, and
> many find it easier to see large objects especially at very low light
> levels, but reading is more difficult. It is primarily a matter of
> spectral intensities and the placement of the various strong lines. Many
> comparisons of MV vs HPS lighting are available but most rarely touch on
> these issues, especially the reading and fine resolution issue. Now that
> white (fluorescent) LED lighting is becoming more available with yet
> different color balances, the whole subject becomes even more complicated.

Interesting. See my reply to Ismartino, elsewhere in the thread.

Arfa

== 14 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 12:11 pm
From: "William Sommerwerck"

>>>>> They give you full brightness at switch on, unlike
>>>>> compact fluorescents that take time to warm-up.

>>>> Yes, but...

>>>> The better CFLs are quite bright at turn-on -- bright enough that you
>>>> don't feel you bought a defective lamp.

>>> The operative word being "quite". I thought you said that your Home
>>> Despot
>>> types came on quicker than an incandescent. Certainly doesn't sound that
> > way
>>> from that description ... And as far as I'm concerned, any incandescent
>>> replacement technology lamp that does not produce the *full* light
output
>>> within a few mS of switch on, or is ambient temperature dependant for
its
>>> performance, *is* a defective lamp.

>> The Home Depot lamps come on instantly at a level I'd judge to be around
>> 60% -- maybe higher -- of full brightness. Full brightness takes another
>> 30 seconds or so. This is a huge improvement over the bulbs from 15 years
>> ago.

> With all due respect William, that is the most feeble justification that
you
> have come up with so far. It's like the government banning cars and making
> everybody buy bikes instead, and then turning round and saying that riding
a
> bike is still better than when you had to walk before the bike was
invented
> ... If it has taken 15 years so far to get these dreadful things from
> total crap to utter crap, then by the time they are actually at a point
> where they can properly replace incandescent lamps, I will be a pile of
dust
> anyway. I'm afraid that I cannot, by any stretch of my imagination, equate
> "60%" and "30 seconds" to either "instant" or satisfactory replacement
> technology. If they really were 'good', they wouldn't need defending
against
> all of the criticisms that are levelled against them by (colour blind ??)
> people the world over.

From my perspective, I don't know why I /need/ to justify the better current
CFLs. To only slightly paraphrase Sam Spade... "They're good. They're very
good."

I don't think objections come solely from people with non-standard color
vision (though, obviously, they're more-sensitive to non-continuous
spectra). There are multiple issues.

People are used to lights reaching "full" brightness very quickly. This is
of no concern to me, if the lamp more-than-sufficiently bright when it's
turned on. (This one reason I use only 90W or 100W-equivalent CFLs. When
you're using only one-fourth the energy of a standard incandescent, why use
anything smaller?)

People object to the shape of coiled CFLs -- at least when they're visible.
The choice of shade should fix this.

People object to being forced to buy something they don't want. This is a
political issue that should perhaps be discussed later.

== 15 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 12:14 pm
From: "William Sommerwerck"

> As I've said on a number of occasions, linear flourescent light doesn't
> affect me in anything like the same way as CFL. I can read perfectly well
> under it. I work perfectly well under it. I don't find the light
displeasing
> in either colour or quality. I don't know how to reconcile this apparent
> disparity, as I too have lived under flourescent light for over fifty
years.
> I don't know what my type of colour blindness is called, nor whether it is
> common in type, or rare. I am apparently red blind and green insensitive,
as
> far as I recall. It is many years since I took the test. I think it meant
> that I couldn't see some shades of red at all, when they were mixed in
with
> other colours, and that I couldn't distinguish some shades of green
amongst
> other shades of green. Oddly enough though, the light from CFLs always
> appears to have a slightly 'sick' green caste to me, irrespective of the
> quoted colour temperature.

That's hardly "odd" if you have little or no red sensitivity. It's to be
expected.

The obvious question is... Why doesn't tungsten lighting show a similar
green cast? The answer might be that tungsten lighting puts out more red
energy, over a wider band.

== 16 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 12:50 pm
From: lsmartino

On 29 abr, 14:51, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> "lsmartino" <luismartin...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6327313c-9341-48b4-9866-cea9a660767e@r20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 29 abr, 12:01, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:ipeaeg$7t2$1@dont-email.me...
>
> >> >> Yes, indeed -- I am colour blind, and if that is what makes the
> >> >> difference between someone who does have an issue with
> >> >> CFLs, and someone who doesn't, then 12% -- one eighth --
> >> >> of the population being forced to suffer because of this legislation,
> >> >> seems a pretty poor show of arrogance by the powers that be, in
> >> >> insisting that we suffer in the way that we are being made to.
>
> >> > I assume you suffer from protanopia or deuteranopia. My father did. (I
> >> > don't.)
>
> >> > I worked with a guy with that problem. One day he asked me to help him
> >> > pick
> >> > colors for a Web site. It was causing him all kinds of confusion. I
> >> > showed
> >> > him a fluorescent-green pen, and asked him what color it looked to
> >> > him --
> >> > "Orange". (That doesn't mean he saw it in the way a person with normal
> >> > color
> >> > vision would see orange. Rather, he could not distinguish it from what
> >> > we
> >> > would call orange.)
>
> >> > Peter Wensberg, the author of "Land's Polaroid" (a beautifully written
> >> > and
> >> > wonderfully entertaining book) told how, during a lunch of Chinese
> >> > takeout,
> >> > Dr Land administered one of the standard color perception tests (the
> >> > kind
> >> > with colored circles, where you indicate which letter or number you
> >> > see).
> >> > Wensberg utterly flunked it, getting every one wrong.
>
> >> > I've lived with fluorescent light for more than 60 years, and have
> >> > never
> >> > suffered (except in my early days at Microsoft, when the office lights
> >> > gave
> >> > me (and some others) headaches). It appears to me that your suffering
> >> > is
> >> > primarily aesthetic.
>
> >> As I've said on a number of occasions, linear flourescent light doesn't
> >> affect me in anything like the same way as CFL. I can read perfectly well
> >> under it. I work perfectly well under it. I don't find the light
> >> displeasing
> >> in either colour or quality. I don't know how to reconcile this apparent
> >> disparity, as I too have lived under flourescent light for over fifty
> >> years.
> >> I don't know what my type of colour blindness is called, nor whether it
> >> is
> >> common in type, or rare. I am apparently red blind and green insensitive,
> >> as
> >> far as I recall. It is many years since I took the test. I think it meant
> >> that I couldn't see some shades of red at all, when they were mixed in
> >> with
> >> other colours, and that I couldn't distinguish some shades of green
> >> amongst
> >> other shades of green. Oddly enough though, the light from CFLs always
> >> appears to have a slightly 'sick' green caste to me, irrespective of the
> >> quoted colour temperature.
>
> >> Arfa- Ocultar texto de la cita -
>
> >> - Mostrar texto de la cita -
>
> > Linear flourescent tubes usually uses a type of phosphor called
> > halophosphate. That phosphor normally emits light in a very narrow
> > band of the spectrum, and since you are collor blind, probably what
> > happens is that your eyes are fully sensitive to that particular band.
> > In the other had, halophosphate phosphors aren´t suitable for CFL´s
> > because they produce less light output than triphosphors. A
> > triphosphor can be seen like a mix of three different phosphors, each
> > one emitting in a particular band. The sum of all three produces the
> > light coming from the CFL tube. Probably you are blind to one of these
> > bands, making you uncomfortable with the light.
>
> > This is just a theory, of course.
>
> Nice explanation, and seems on the face of it, to hold water. Good that
> someone can actually come up with a reasonable theory, instead of telling me
> that the problem doesn't affect them, therefore I must be wrong, or using
> the wrong CFLs. I really have tried to embrace these lamps since their first
> inception, but the fact is that for practical reasons, as discussed, I
> simply cannot get on with them. Yes, I hate the fact that they have been
> forced on us for dubious reasons of ecology, and I freely admit that does
> colour my perception of them a little, but my fundamental problem with them
> is just that - they are a problem to my (obviously defective) eyesight.
>
> Arfa- Ocultar texto de la cita -
>
> - Mostrar texto de la cita -

Exactly. For instance, I do like CFL lamps, but I understand people
who find them objectionable just because they don´t like their shape
(I admit that spiral ones are ugly), or because they don´t like the
quality of the light produced by them. I also avoid store brand lamps
because most of the time they are rubbish. I usually find that store
brand lamps are either short lived, blueish, or completely lacking in
light output.

Thats why I only buy Osram, Philips or General Electric CFL´s. To my
tastes, the best CFL regarding light quality is the 2700K General
Electric. They are almost indistinguishable from an incandescent lamp,
and I find them perfect for household use. They start pretty quick at
a 70% ilumination level and have very good life. I have some that are
still running since I bought them 7 years ago, 5 - 6 hour of daily
use.That makes more than 15000 hours in each, and they are still going
strong. Then the second best one is the Philips, but I don´t like
their 2700K CFL´s because I find them a little pinkish for my tastes,
and sometimes they are hit or miss. If the ballast doesn´t get blown
the first year of use, they will last for a long time.

For general purpose use, like illuminating exterior areas, I prefer
4100 K lamps. Osram lamps are excellent for that application, they are
the longer lasting of all, but their 2700K lamps aren´t available in
my country, so I avoid they use at home.

I personally hate 6500 K lamps for general household use except inside
a task lamp. I think they don´t have a place in a household, perhaps
in a kitchen but they are too bluish for my tastes. In a commercial
environment they are ok, or in a photographic studio, but not in a
household.

In the end, I think that CFL´s will be superseded by led lamps, once
that led lamps become more powerful for general use. Problem is that
regarding light quality, led lamps have the same shortcomings of CFL
´s, at least right now.

== 17 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 3:34 pm
From: Father Haskell

On Apr 29, 4:49 am, "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <g...@mendelson.com>
wrote:
> Jim Yanik wrote:
> > you need color rendering accuracy to READ?
>
> I don't have a way of quantifying it, but a continous source is much easier
> for me to use as a reading lamp. So a 20 watt halogen lamp on "low" is
> easier to read than an 11 watt flourescent at the same distance.

Flicker frequency? CFLs flicker in the kHz range. Imperceptable.
Bigger difference is incandescents are more of a point light source,
which is easier to read fine details -- including letter fonts --
by.
I still prefer them for paint and finishing work, where I need
more accurate color (halogens are second only to sunlight)
and shadow rendition.

> Farther away it works the same way too, but I no longer have an incandesent
> lamps except for special purpose ones (reading lamps, photgraphic safelights,
> etc) to do an eaual distance comparison.

Bunsen grease spot photometer:
http://users.snip.net/~veraandscience/Light/Bunsen_P.html
Essentially a sheet of paper with a grease spot in the
middle.

== 18 of 18 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 3:39 pm
From: Father Haskell

On Apr 29, 8:05 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> > Probably warm / soft white; any other fluorescent is
> > horror movie lighting.  If you don't have the color temp
> > spec, hold a lit, known temperature bulb next to it and
> > see if it looks redder, bluer, or the same.
>
> It is difficult to specify a "color temperature" for a non-continuous
> source.
>
> The bare bulbs look "white", leaning a bit to the warm side.

It's amazing how blue a 3500K warm white bulb will look when
held next to a 2700K.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Vietnamese Marshall
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/83dfedaa7815fcd1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Apr 29 2011 8:50 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:91vtv0FgsmU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Arfa Daily"
>>
>> I have three different issue numbers of schematics for the MA100, but
>> none seem to identify specifically an MA100 "H". If they are any use to
>> you, contact me off-group.
>
>
> ** Marshall sell ( note not make) an MA100H and an MA100C.
>
> H = head and C = combo.
>
> Decades ago, H-H made an amp called the MA100.
>
>
> ..... Phil
>
>

So are my schematics for the Marshall MA100 any use to you ? If so, contact
me and I'll send them to you ...

Arfa

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

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