sci.electronics.repair - 21 new messages in 9 topics - digest

sci.electronics.repair
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair?hl=en

sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: hi
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/282772a2eef2b522?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 12:56 am
From: "shahzypk@hotmail.com"

Just Visite These Sites
http://fashion1298.blogspot.com

http://cricketin2011.blogspot.com

http://fashion4paki.blogspot.com

http://hollywood1233.blogspot.com

http://hotbollywoodactressesno1.blogspot.com

http://pakihealthpk.blogspot.com

http://dogbreedspk.blogspot.com

http://super1213.blogspot.com

http://fashion1299.blogspot.com

http://mehndipk12.blogspot.com

http://goldandsilverpk.blogspot.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: unijunction needed
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/ecf807243db79a90?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 1:45 am
From: alp soandso

Looking for an SSI part.

MSU 112-2

I need ONE but will take a few more if absolutely necessary.
I am not looking for a minimum order of a few hundred.

remove the first alp in the adrs to contact.
I live in canada

Thanks

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 11:05 am
From: JeffM

alp soandso wrote:
>Looking for an SSI part.
>MSU 112-2
>
For a repair, right?

Y'know, this is exactly the sort of situation
where cross-posting would be appropriate.
(That would allow *everyone* reading your request
to read **all** of the responses to it.)
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?enc_author=2fiP5RcAAAB5Xk017D4zkvfWFGI6OM2mHqZiDvCVswhrZ6TQxKj0ww&q=ssi&scoring=d

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 2:50 pm
From: "Charles"

"alp soandso" wrote in message news:%GXeq.27166$eS.6738@newsfe03.iad...

Looking for an SSI part.

MSU 112-2

http://www.newark.com/transistors-unijunction-ujt

One of those will probably work.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: CRT TV repair, power supply defect.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/d4c2d93f9d169dcb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 1:40 am
From: jango2

On Sep 22, 12:36 pm, Franc Zabkar <fzab...@iinternode.on.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:00:20 -0700 (PDT), Vernon Paul
> <vernondop...@gmail.com> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>
> >An update on my repair situation. I decided to follow all the
> >instruction gathered here and some from Sam, beginning with the
> >easiest first. This is what I got. By reducing the G2 and brightness
> >all the way down the TV works fine, no shutdown. Even with a decent
> >brightness and G2 cranked up and decent picture available, it does not
> >shutdown. However when there is some bright scene there is signs of
> >tendency to shutdown. When the the brightness and G2 is cranked up too
> >much it shutdowns. The voltages from the power supply seems to be
> >stable during the shutdown, not sure about the currents though.
>
> > Is the problem more likely in the power supply or deflection side?
>
> Is there an ABL (automatic beam limiter) circuit? I have seen ABL
> failures that have caused shutdown.
>
> - Franc Zabkar
> --
> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

Sometimes called x ray protect.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Exploring rotary encoder problems
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/5b678ef9db12089e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 4:10 am
From: "Mark Zacharias"

"N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j5f6eu$2vg$1@dont-email.me...
> Mark Zacharias <mark_zacharias@labolgcbs.net> wrote in message
> news:4e7b0416$0$26397$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews.com...
>> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:j5c6e0$34i$1@dont-email.me...
>> > Deeper than just saying clear out the grease. 2 in 2 days, first input
>> > selector of an amp , not explored in depth, second vol control of a
> music
>> > centre.
>> >
>> > First had radial contacts that were slightly staggered and the fixed
>> > contacts were in line , second was exact radial contacts and staggered
>> > fixed
>> > contacts. On the second I took some R measurements before and after.
>> > There are 3 contacts, one common and the other 2 staggered to pick up
>> > CW
>> > or
>> > CCW rotation. Just measuring between the 2 sense contacts as at some
> point
>> > they are cross connected, measured 2.5R each of the posistions but very
>> > tiny
>> > position to get this reading. Ladled out and then dissolved the grease,
>> > reassembled and took readings again . Now 1.5R each bridging posistion
>> > and
>> > a lot easier to find that posistion, ie more latitude. I imagine from
> the
>> > consistency of the R readings that something to do with deforming or
> block
>> > under one of the contacts reducing the contact to a very small area and
>> > then
>> > only marginal connection posistion bridging the 2 contacts. I assumed
> the
>> > electronic sensing was one line before the other but perhaps duration
>> > of
>> > both contacts on simulataneously, or not, is also something to do with
>> > normal sensing
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Clean the moving contacts and stationary contact area as you would relay
> and
>> switch contacts. Better to replace the control, but this will fix it.
>>
>> Mark Z.
>>
>
>
> I've never seen a relay with grease it it. Rotary encoders or the BCD type
> ones, it is the grease thats the problem but exactly why it is a problem
> is
> still not fathomed. I assume a hardening or accretion process that
> eventually wedges under a wiper. Why do they not use "dry lubricant"
> perhaps
> locksmith's graphite as long as in a minute quantity.
>
>

The problem on rotary encoders is not so much the grease, although I believe
that is a contributing factor.

Every encoder I've seen with this problem suffers from tarnished contacts.
It's obvious, and you can tell by a simple close inspection. Just like a vcr
rotary mode switch. Clean with a fiberglass brush and De-Oxit. Repeat the
process. Turns tarnished metal clean and bright.

I still favor replacement when possible.

Mark Z.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 5:14 am
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

N_Cook wrote:
>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> >
> > Not 'between tracks', but between the pads a moving contact uses. 25
> > years ago I serviced CATV converters for a living. I had to use a soft
> > eraser to remove the tracking between contacts if the original lube had
> > hardened, or where an outside service company had wiped away the old
> > grease and used a fiberglass brush in a half assed attempt to clear away
> > the smear of silver. I did well over 1000 repairs in four years with a
> > return rate of a little over .2%. Over 50% of the units returned from
> > the outside service company were either bad, out of the box or failed
> > within a month. I was hired to create the in house service department
> > because we had over 1/3 of our converters either at the outside company,
> > or on a UPS truck and in transit. We added 350 new customers without
> > buying any new equipment, after I had the in house repair facility set
> > up. We went from the worst rated CATV company in the reigion to the
> > top, in under six months.
>
> What was the spacing between pads on those CATV units? The pads or tacks in
> these switches were about 5mm. As far as I can tell the problem was not
> metalisation smear over the insulated gaps but a problem while in pad
> contact. No visible smearing of metalisation seen on either switch. These
> pads are just like spokes of a wheel and once the problem started it is much
> the same around the whole disc, not specific to one or two positions.

They were about half the width of the moving contact. You didn't have
to be able to see the silver tracking before it would detune a dozen
channels. the board was phenolic, instead of fiberglass, and the
switches weren't meant to be cleaned. I may still have a couple of the
boards form the switches, but it's been 25+ years since I serviced that
equipment.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 5:16 am
From: "Michael A. Terrell"

Mark Zacharias wrote:
>
> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:j5f6eu$2vg$1@dont-email.me...
> > Mark Zacharias <mark_zacharias@labolgcbs.net> wrote in message
> > news:4e7b0416$0$26397$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews.com...
> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:j5c6e0$34i$1@dont-email.me...
> >> > Deeper than just saying clear out the grease. 2 in 2 days, first input
> >> > selector of an amp , not explored in depth, second vol control of a
> > music
> >> > centre.
> >> >
> >> > First had radial contacts that were slightly staggered and the fixed
> >> > contacts were in line , second was exact radial contacts and staggered
> >> > fixed
> >> > contacts. On the second I took some R measurements before and after.
> >> > There are 3 contacts, one common and the other 2 staggered to pick up
> >> > CW
> >> > or
> >> > CCW rotation. Just measuring between the 2 sense contacts as at some
> > point
> >> > they are cross connected, measured 2.5R each of the posistions but very
> >> > tiny
> >> > position to get this reading. Ladled out and then dissolved the grease,
> >> > reassembled and took readings again . Now 1.5R each bridging posistion
> >> > and
> >> > a lot easier to find that posistion, ie more latitude. I imagine from
> > the
> >> > consistency of the R readings that something to do with deforming or
> > block
> >> > under one of the contacts reducing the contact to a very small area and
> >> > then
> >> > only marginal connection posistion bridging the 2 contacts. I assumed
> > the
> >> > electronic sensing was one line before the other but perhaps duration
> >> > of
> >> > both contacts on simulataneously, or not, is also something to do with
> >> > normal sensing
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Clean the moving contacts and stationary contact area as you would relay
> > and
> >> switch contacts. Better to replace the control, but this will fix it.
> >>
> >> Mark Z.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I've never seen a relay with grease it it. Rotary encoders or the BCD type
> > ones, it is the grease thats the problem but exactly why it is a problem
> > is
> > still not fathomed. I assume a hardening or accretion process that
> > eventually wedges under a wiper. Why do they not use "dry lubricant"
> > perhaps
> > locksmith's graphite as long as in a minute quantity.
> >
> >
>
> The problem on rotary encoders is not so much the grease, although I believe
> that is a contributing factor.
>
> Every encoder I've seen with this problem suffers from tarnished contacts.
> It's obvious, and you can tell by a simple close inspection. Just like a vcr
> rotary mode switch. Clean with a fiberglass brush and De-Oxit. Repeat the
> process. Turns tarnished metal clean and bright.
>
> I still favor replacement when possible.

Fiberglass brushes did more damage than good on the equipment I
serviced. I had to repalce every switch that had been cleaned with one.
A soft ink eraser removed the tracking without scratching up the board.
The later replacements came with notches cut into the board to prevent
tracking.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 6:07 am
From: "N_Cook"

Mark Zacharias <mark_zacharias@labolgcbs.net> wrote in message
news:4e7c6928$0$26513$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews.com...
> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:j5f6eu$2vg$1@dont-email.me...
> > Mark Zacharias <mark_zacharias@labolgcbs.net> wrote in message
> > news:4e7b0416$0$26397$a8266bb1@newsreader.readnews.com...
> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:j5c6e0$34i$1@dont-email.me...
> >> > Deeper than just saying clear out the grease. 2 in 2 days, first
input
> >> > selector of an amp , not explored in depth, second vol control of a
> > music
> >> > centre.
> >> >
> >> > First had radial contacts that were slightly staggered and the fixed
> >> > contacts were in line , second was exact radial contacts and
staggered
> >> > fixed
> >> > contacts. On the second I took some R measurements before and after.
> >> > There are 3 contacts, one common and the other 2 staggered to pick up
> >> > CW
> >> > or
> >> > CCW rotation. Just measuring between the 2 sense contacts as at some
> > point
> >> > they are cross connected, measured 2.5R each of the posistions but
very
> >> > tiny
> >> > position to get this reading. Ladled out and then dissolved the
grease,
> >> > reassembled and took readings again . Now 1.5R each bridging
posistion
> >> > and
> >> > a lot easier to find that posistion, ie more latitude. I imagine from
> > the
> >> > consistency of the R readings that something to do with deforming or
> > block
> >> > under one of the contacts reducing the contact to a very small area
and
> >> > then
> >> > only marginal connection posistion bridging the 2 contacts. I assumed
> > the
> >> > electronic sensing was one line before the other but perhaps duration
> >> > of
> >> > both contacts on simulataneously, or not, is also something to do
with
> >> > normal sensing
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Clean the moving contacts and stationary contact area as you would
relay
> > and
> >> switch contacts. Better to replace the control, but this will fix it.
> >>
> >> Mark Z.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I've never seen a relay with grease it it. Rotary encoders or the BCD
type
> > ones, it is the grease thats the problem but exactly why it is a problem
> > is
> > still not fathomed. I assume a hardening or accretion process that
> > eventually wedges under a wiper. Why do they not use "dry lubricant"
> > perhaps
> > locksmith's graphite as long as in a minute quantity.
> >
> >
>
>
> The problem on rotary encoders is not so much the grease, although I
believe
> that is a contributing factor.
>
> Every encoder I've seen with this problem suffers from tarnished contacts.
> It's obvious, and you can tell by a simple close inspection. Just like a
vcr
> rotary mode switch. Clean with a fiberglass brush and De-Oxit. Repeat the
> process. Turns tarnished metal clean and bright.
>
> I still favor replacement when possible.
>
> Mark Z.
>

I'm still going with a mechanical grease problem. If it was tarnish it would
have to be tarnish on a sprung contact as once erroneous it is near enough
the same problem on all spokes of the disc. The hardening grease is also in
the shaft area and puts up noticeable resistance to turning, the first
indication it is a grease problem. I first came across the grease problem on
sub min mixer pots that are more the size of presets. The wipers are made of
such fine metal it takes little compaction of the grease to get under them,
the resistive track is fine no wear at all .

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Need help with switching power supply repair
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/efc81d21dede85df?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 6:54 am
From: Jim Yanik

"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in
news:bPQeq.11661$fR1.8387@newsfe24.ams2:

>
>
> "sci.electronics.repair" <rnewman36@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:26b39f80-37e4-4dd2-bdae-46c118a3c01c@1g2000vbu.googlegroups.com...
>> On Sep 21, 8:08 pm, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>> "senator richards" <rnewma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:dd3e3ab9-1f98-41b8-a7ec-08431af9a33d@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.co
>>> m...
>>>
>>> > I am trying to troubleshoot a small SMPS that came from an A/V
>>> > switcher. Input is 120vac and it is supposed to output + and -
>>> > 15vdc at .8A. Currently it is outputting +17 on one output and
>>> > somewhere between +22 and +30 on the other output. My experience
>>> > with SMPS has usually been shorted rectifiers or bad output filter
>>> > caps so the first thing I did was check all the diodes and replace
>>> > the output caps. Obviously that didn't fix the problem. The high
>>> > voltage is about 170vdc. The supply to the pwm chip is fluctuating
>>> > between 7-15v, so i'm thinking this might be the problem, but
>>> > maybe its something else. In case its not obvious, i'm fairly new
>>> > to tinkering with these things. Thanks in advance for any help.
>>>
>>> > Randy
>>>
>>> The cap that filters the supply to the pwm chip on the primary side,
>>> maybe ?
>>> It's pretty common on most designs of switcher. Work on the thing on
>>> an isolation transformer if at all possible. They are potentially
>>> very very dangerous if you are not fully competent with them
>>>
>>> Arfa
>>
>> Thanks for the help. I borrowed an ESR meter and checked the cap that
>> supplies the pwm chip. The cap is a 47uf 50v and esr measures .5
>> which appears to be about right.
>>
>> I don't have an isolation transformer but will look into getting one.
>>
>> Thanks for your help.
>>
>> -R
>
> A brand new cap might be a little better than that, but certainly
> right ball park at 0.5 ohms, and would not be an issue at that figure.

IIRC,the values on the DSE meter are MAX values,so IMO,if a cap is reading
what's listed,it's marginal.

> About the only other thing that you could try, assuming that it uses a
> startup resistor from the 170v, is to disconnect the self-feed diode
> from the switching transformer. That way, you will force it to run
> from the startup supply only, just in case the self-run voltage is
> fluctuating, and interfering with your reading on the pwm chip's
> supply. Bear in mind though, that you can't run it for too long on the
> startup resistor, as it will get quite hot, being normally intended to
> supply current to the chip, only for as long as it takes the supply to
> fully start up and settle. If the voltage supply to the chip still
> jiggles around when it is only being fed by the resistor, then after
> the 47uF cap, which may yet be faulty, but not in an ESR way, the next
> prime suspect would have to be the chip itself.
>
> Arfa
>
>

usually,the startup resistor doesn't supply enough current to keep the IC
running,just enough to start,that's why they have the housekeeping supply
from the XFMR. Otherwise,you get a "burst" or "chirp" mode of operation;the
PS starts,then dies because the IC isn't getting enough power.
Often,it's the housekeeping supply electrolytic cap that's gone bad,as you
said.

I've also seen where the start resistor goes high in value,even
open,preventing starting.(but not this guy's problem)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 6:57 am
From: Jim Yanik

Kripton wrote in news:4e7c30a0$0$16475$426a34cc@news.free.fr:

>
> I've never seen a chip 3842 dead...
> but the small cap 10uF beside it has really often been solving the
> case !!!!!
>

I've had to replace a lot of 3842's.

it depends on the PS design,some designs leave the IC
vulnerable,particularly if the switcher FET/XSTR blows.

but the 3842 makes a nice PS circuit.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 8:16 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

"Kripton" wrote in message news:4e7c30a0$0$16475$426a34cc@news.free.fr...
> On 2011-09-23 02:56:37 +0200, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> said:
>
>>
>>
>> "sci.electronics.repair" <rnewman36@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:26b39f80-37e4-4dd2-bdae-46c118a3c01c@1g2000vbu.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Sep 21, 8:08 pm, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>> "senator richards" <rnewma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:dd3e3ab9-1f98-41b8-a7ec-08431af9a33d@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>> > I am trying to troubleshoot a small SMPS that came from an A/V
>>>> > switcher. Input is 120vac and it is supposed to output + and - 15vdc
>>>> > at .8A. Currently it is outputting +17 on one output and somewhere
>>>> > between +22 and +30 on the other output. My experience with SMPS has
>>>> > usually been shorted rectifiers or bad output filter caps so the
>>>> > first
>>>> > thing I did was check all the diodes and replace the output caps.
>>>> > Obviously that didn't fix the problem. The high voltage is about
>>>> > 170vdc. The supply to the pwm chip is fluctuating between 7-15v, so
>>>> > i'm thinking this might be the problem, but maybe its something else.
>>>> > In case its not obvious, i'm fairly new to tinkering with these
>>>> > things. Thanks in advance for any help.
>>>>
>>>> > Randy
>>>>
>>>> The cap that filters the supply to the pwm chip on the primary side,
>>>> maybe ?
>>>> It's pretty common on most designs of switcher. Work on the thing on an
>>>> isolation transformer if at all possible. They are potentially very
>>>> very
>>>> dangerous if you are not fully competent with them
>>>>
>>>> Arfa
>>>
>>> Thanks for the help. I borrowed an ESR meter and checked the cap that
>>> supplies the pwm chip. The cap is a 47uf 50v and esr measures .5 which
>>> appears to be about right.
>>>
>>> I don't have an isolation transformer but will look into getting one.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your help.
>>>
>>> -R
>>
>> A brand new cap might be a little better than that, but certainly right
>> ball park at 0.5 ohms, and would not be an issue at that figure. About
>> the only other thing that you could try, assuming that it uses a startup
>> resistor from the 170v, is to disconnect the self-feed diode from the
>> switching transformer. That way, you will force it to run from the
>> startup supply only, just in case the self-run voltage is fluctuating,
>> and interfering with your reading on the pwm chip's supply. Bear in mind
>> though, that you can't run it for too long on the startup resistor, as it
>> will get quite hot, being normally intended to supply current to the
>> chip, only for as long as it takes the supply to fully start up and
>> settle. If the voltage supply to the chip still jiggles around when it is
>> only being fed by the resistor, then after the 47uF cap, which may yet be
>> faulty, but not in an ESR way, the next prime suspect would have to be
>> the chip itself.
>>
>> Arfa
>
> I've never seen a chip 3842 dead...
> but the small cap 10uF beside it has really often been solving the case
> !!!!!
>
> --
> ----------
> Kripton

No ? There are a number of chips in the 35 and 38 series pwm controllers,
which are all pretty similar in function, and whilst I'm not certain that I
have specifically had a 3842 faulty, I have certainly replaced many of those
series over the years, usually for a dead symptom, due to the internal
voltage reference having failed. I agree that the caps decoupling the supply
and reference voltages are by far the commonest problem though, and that was
what I first suggested to the OP as a possibility for his problem. The
symptoms that he has, are pretty weird for a switcher. I, like others on
here, would initially have suspected the filter cap for the rail that the
regulation feedback is derived from, but the fact that he replaced all of
the secondary caps right off, seems to knock that one on the head.

Arfa

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 8:52 am
From: "Arfa Daily"

>> A brand new cap might be a little better than that, but certainly
>> right ball park at 0.5 ohms, and would not be an issue at that figure.
>
> IIRC,the values on the DSE meter are MAX values,so IMO,if a cap is reading
> what's listed,it's marginal.

"Approx worst case ESR values for new capacitors at 20deg C"

is what it actually says. Bob once told me that when he put that chart on
the front, he took it directly from a manufacturer's data sheet - Pan IIRC

I guess that there are two ways you can take that. I have always taken it on
the positive side, rather than the negative view that you take. As I'm sure
you well know from your own experience, using an ESR meter is a black art
anyway, as much magic as it is science, but given that, in the many years
that I have owned and used daily, a Bob Parker (DSE) meter, I have always
found the chart to be an excellent guide. From many years of experience with
SMPS's, and having found and replaced many pwm chip supply decoupling caps,
I would not feel the immediate need to replace one of that value and voltage
rating, that went 0.5 ohms. I would not consider it 'marginal' and
potentially the source of the problem, until it had got a lot closer to 1
ohm. Typically, caps that have failed in that position, will be up around
the 10 ohm mark, or open circuit.

>
>> About the only other thing that you could try, assuming that it uses a
>> startup resistor from the 170v, is to disconnect the self-feed diode
>> from the switching transformer. That way, you will force it to run
>> from the startup supply only, just in case the self-run voltage is
>> fluctuating, and interfering with your reading on the pwm chip's
>> supply. Bear in mind though, that you can't run it for too long on the
>> startup resistor, as it will get quite hot, being normally intended to
>> supply current to the chip, only for as long as it takes the supply to
>> fully start up and settle. If the voltage supply to the chip still
>> jiggles around when it is only being fed by the resistor, then after
>> the 47uF cap, which may yet be faulty, but not in an ESR way, the next
>> prime suspect would have to be the chip itself.
>>
>> Arfa
>>
>>
>
> usually,the startup resistor doesn't supply enough current to keep the IC
> running,just enough to start,that's why they have the housekeeping supply
> from the XFMR. Otherwise,you get a "burst" or "chirp" mode of
> operation;the
> PS starts,then dies because the IC isn't getting enough power.
> Often,it's the housekeeping supply electrolytic cap that's gone bad,as you
> said.
>
> I've also seen where the start resistor goes high in value,even
> open,preventing starting.(but not this guy's problem)
>
> --
> Jim Yanik

Yes, agreed, but you've got to admit that the supply to the chip fluctuating
between 7 and 15 volts is a pretty bizarre state of affairs, and there's not
actually too much bar the startup R and it's decoupling cap, connected to
that pin. Of course, the self-powering supply, also connected to this point,
might be interfering with the reading, which is why I suggested
disconnecting it. As to whether the supply will run in this condition,
depends on the value of the startup resistor, but running or not, it might
at least give an indication of where next to look, depending on whether the
voltage on the chip side of the resistor is now steady, indicating that the
fluctuating voltage is coming back via the self-powering supply, and in
which case is a red herring, or still varying as a result of the chip
drawing current erratically. I might have felt inclined to think that the
fluctuation was the startup bleed via the startup resistor at 7 volts,
followed by the self-power coming on line at 15 volts as the supply gets
going, followed by the supply shutting back down and so on, due to some
secondary side problem. However, that then doesn't stack up with the
secondary side voltages being steady, but wrong, and worse than wrong,
unbalanced.

It is an odd state of affairs to be sure, but of course, as we all know,
some problems on switchers can be very obscure.

Arfa

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 4:22 pm
From: Jamie

Jim Yanik wrote:

> "Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in
> news:bPQeq.11661$fR1.8387@newsfe24.ams2:
>
>
>>
>>"sci.electronics.repair" <rnewman36@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:26b39f80-37e4-4dd2-bdae-46c118a3c01c@1g2000vbu.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>On Sep 21, 8:08 pm, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"senator richards" <rnewma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>news:dd3e3ab9-1f98-41b8-a7ec-08431af9a33d@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.co
>>>>m...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I am trying to troubleshoot a small SMPS that came from an A/V
>>>>>switcher. Input is 120vac and it is supposed to output + and -
>>>>>15vdc at .8A. Currently it is outputting +17 on one output and
>>>>>somewhere between +22 and +30 on the other output. My experience
>>>>>with SMPS has usually been shorted rectifiers or bad output filter
>>>>>caps so the first thing I did was check all the diodes and replace
>>>>>the output caps. Obviously that didn't fix the problem. The high
>>>>>voltage is about 170vdc. The supply to the pwm chip is fluctuating
>>>>>between 7-15v, so i'm thinking this might be the problem, but
>>>>>maybe its something else. In case its not obvious, i'm fairly new
>>>>>to tinkering with these things. Thanks in advance for any help.
>>>>
>>>>>Randy
>>>>
>>>>The cap that filters the supply to the pwm chip on the primary side,
>>>>maybe ?
>>>>It's pretty common on most designs of switcher. Work on the thing on
>>>>an isolation transformer if at all possible. They are potentially
>>>>very very dangerous if you are not fully competent with them
>>>>
>>>>Arfa
>>>
>>>Thanks for the help. I borrowed an ESR meter and checked the cap that
>>>supplies the pwm chip. The cap is a 47uf 50v and esr measures .5
>>>which appears to be about right.
>>>
>>>I don't have an isolation transformer but will look into getting one.
>>>
>>>Thanks for your help.
>>>
>>>-R
>>
>>A brand new cap might be a little better than that, but certainly
>>right ball park at 0.5 ohms, and would not be an issue at that figure.
>
>
> IIRC,the values on the DSE meter are MAX values,so IMO,if a cap is reading
> what's listed,it's marginal.
>
>
>>About the only other thing that you could try, assuming that it uses a
>>startup resistor from the 170v, is to disconnect the self-feed diode
>>from the switching transformer. That way, you will force it to run
>>from the startup supply only, just in case the self-run voltage is
>>fluctuating, and interfering with your reading on the pwm chip's
>>supply. Bear in mind though, that you can't run it for too long on the
>>startup resistor, as it will get quite hot, being normally intended to
>>supply current to the chip, only for as long as it takes the supply to
>>fully start up and settle. If the voltage supply to the chip still
>>jiggles around when it is only being fed by the resistor, then after
>>the 47uF cap, which may yet be faulty, but not in an ESR way, the next
>>prime suspect would have to be the chip itself.
>>
>>Arfa
>>
>>
>
>
> usually,the startup resistor doesn't supply enough current to keep the IC
> running,just enough to start,that's why they have the housekeeping supply
> from the XFMR. Otherwise,you get a "burst" or "chirp" mode of operation;the
> PS starts,then dies because the IC isn't getting enough power.
> Often,it's the housekeeping supply electrolytic cap that's gone bad,as you
> said.
>
> I've also seen where the start resistor goes high in value,even
> open,preventing starting.(but not this guy's problem)
>
Talking about switching supplies. Today I decided to look at a supply
removed from an allen Bradley Panel computer, this is the second time
the supply has quick, we were able to buy exact replacement supplies so it
was cheaper to do that at the time.

This time I decided to investigate the issue on one of the broken
supplies. I found the main cap on the HV side to be shorted, it was
something like 230Uf 450VDC. This cap did not cause any components to
open that I could see other than a varistor in series to it for the
inrush currents. Any way, I could not get that damn cap out of the
board, I don't know what type of solder they used on that cap but the
only thing I had that would melt the solder was a 140 watt soldering
pistol, and that didn't do me a lot of good since I needed to get to the
other side of it.

My regular station set to 850F would not melt this solder but items
around it had no issues breaking down with that temp.. I guess If I
really want to fix this thing, I will have to use my air iron and some
added heat with another iron on the area to blow the solder out the back
side.

Oh well.

Jamie

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 4:53 pm
From: Archon

On 9/23/2011 7:22 PM, Jamie wrote:
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>
>> "Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in
>> news:bPQeq.11661$fR1.8387@newsfe24.ams2:
>>
>>>
>>> "sci.electronics.repair" <rnewman36@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:26b39f80-37e4-4dd2-bdae-46c118a3c01c@1g2000vbu.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>> On Sep 21, 8:08 pm, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "senator richards" <rnewma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> news:dd3e3ab9-1f98-41b8-a7ec-08431af9a33d@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.co
>>>>> m...
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am trying to troubleshoot a small SMPS that came from an A/V
>>>>>> switcher. Input is 120vac and it is supposed to output + and -
>>>>>> 15vdc at .8A. Currently it is outputting +17 on one output and
>>>>>> somewhere between +22 and +30 on the other output. My experience
>>>>>> with SMPS has usually been shorted rectifiers or bad output filter
>>>>>> caps so the first thing I did was check all the diodes and replace
>>>>>> the output caps. Obviously that didn't fix the problem. The high
>>>>>> voltage is about 170vdc. The supply to the pwm chip is fluctuating
>>>>>> between 7-15v, so i'm thinking this might be the problem, but
>>>>>> maybe its something else. In case its not obvious, i'm fairly new
>>>>>> to tinkering with these things. Thanks in advance for any help.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Randy
>>>>>
>>>>> The cap that filters the supply to the pwm chip on the primary side,
>>>>> maybe ?
>>>>> It's pretty common on most designs of switcher. Work on the thing on
>>>>> an isolation transformer if at all possible. They are potentially
>>>>> very very dangerous if you are not fully competent with them
>>>>>
>>>>> Arfa
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the help. I borrowed an ESR meter and checked the cap that
>>>> supplies the pwm chip. The cap is a 47uf 50v and esr measures .5
>>>> which appears to be about right.
>>>>
>>>> I don't have an isolation transformer but will look into getting one.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your help.
>>>>
>>>> -R
>>>
>>> A brand new cap might be a little better than that, but certainly
>>> right ball park at 0.5 ohms, and would not be an issue at that figure.
>>
>>
>> IIRC,the values on the DSE meter are MAX values,so IMO,if a cap is
>> reading what's listed,it's marginal.
>>
>>
>>> About the only other thing that you could try, assuming that it uses a
>>> startup resistor from the 170v, is to disconnect the self-feed diode
>>> from the switching transformer. That way, you will force it to run
>>> from the startup supply only, just in case the self-run voltage is
>>> fluctuating, and interfering with your reading on the pwm chip's
>>> supply. Bear in mind though, that you can't run it for too long on the
>>> startup resistor, as it will get quite hot, being normally intended to
>>> supply current to the chip, only for as long as it takes the supply to
>>> fully start up and settle. If the voltage supply to the chip still
>>> jiggles around when it is only being fed by the resistor, then after
>>> the 47uF cap, which may yet be faulty, but not in an ESR way, the next
>>> prime suspect would have to be the chip itself.
>>>
>>> Arfa
>>>
>>
>>
>> usually,the startup resistor doesn't supply enough current to keep the
>> IC running,just enough to start,that's why they have the housekeeping
>> supply from the XFMR. Otherwise,you get a "burst" or "chirp" mode of
>> operation;the PS starts,then dies because the IC isn't getting enough
>> power.
>> Often,it's the housekeeping supply electrolytic cap that's gone bad,as
>> you said.
>> I've also seen where the start resistor goes high in value,even
>> open,preventing starting.(but not this guy's problem)
>>
> Talking about switching supplies. Today I decided to look at a supply
> removed from an allen Bradley Panel computer, this is the second time
> the supply has quick, we were able to buy exact replacement supplies so it
> was cheaper to do that at the time.
>
> This time I decided to investigate the issue on one of the broken
> supplies. I found the main cap on the HV side to be shorted, it was
> something like 230Uf 450VDC. This cap did not cause any components to
> open that I could see other than a varistor in series to it for the
> inrush currents. Any way, I could not get that damn cap out of the
> board, I don't know what type of solder they used on that cap but the
> only thing I had that would melt the solder was a 140 watt soldering
> pistol, and that didn't do me a lot of good since I needed to get to the
> other side of it.
>
> My regular station set to 850F would not melt this solder but items
> around it had no issues breaking down with that temp.. I guess If I
> really want to fix this thing, I will have to use my air iron and some
> added heat with another iron on the area to blow the solder out the back
> side.
>
> Oh well.
>
> Jamie
>
>
I find adding fresh solder to difficult melts and sucking it out
repetitively eventually will fill the joint with regular solder. Of
course if theres a heavy plane of copper, its a problem.
JC

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 7:10 pm
From: Franc Zabkar

On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 16:52:09 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>However, that then doesn't stack up with the
>secondary side voltages being steady, but wrong, and worse than wrong,
>unbalanced.

As has already been mentioned, there could be something wrong with the
OP's measurements. He states that "currently it is outputting +17 on
one output and somewhere between +22 and +30 on the other output."

One would expect that the +/-15V supplies would have identical
windings. Moreover, since they would be wound over the same core, then
one would expect that the two outputs should track each other
reasonably well, allowing for slight load differences.

Maybe there is a clue in the fact that the OP's measurements are both
positive. Could it be that he is uing the wrong 0V reference?

For example, if he is mistakenly using the -15V rail as the 0V
reference, then he would be measuring +15V for ground, and +30V for
the +15V rail, if the supply were working correctly.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Electromagnetic spectrum – illusion and absurdity
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/d90219824a5fe1f4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 6:43 pm
From: Sylvia Else

On 20/09/2011 2:38 AM, sorin wrote:
> Electromagnetic spectrum – illusion and absurdity
>
> Classical electrodynamics is build up on a postulate of
> electromagnetic waves emission by accelerated charges. This postulate
> can be ruled out with simple experiment performed home.
> A simple cut off experiment can show that a beam of electrons
> accelerated in a cathode tube do not emit any electromagnetic waves
> during acceleration.

That's rather vague. Could you provide the predicted intensity of the
radiation, its spectrum, and describe the home equipment to be used to
establish that that predicted intensity is absent within the limits of
experimental error? You should include allowance for the properties of
the tube itself through which radiation will have to pass.
Alternatively, describe how to get the measuring instruments inside the
tube.

Sylvia.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4b33f31f667954a0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 6:46 pm
From: "Arfa Daily"

>>
>> Yes. This is kind of my point. And when I was saying that
>> 'background' items like shipping costs are politely ignored, I was
>> referring to the multiple shipping operations that are required for
>> the many components in a CFL, and the many raw materials contained in
>> those components, just to get all the bits and pieces from the
>> individual specialist manufacturers, to the places where the lamps
>> are assembled. In the case of an incandescent lamp, we are talking a
>> few components, simply made from a few raw materials. With a CFL, we
>> are talking semiconductors comprising silicon, dopant chemicals,
>> plastic, metal. Capacitors comprising metal foil, plastic, rubber,
>> maybe paper, metal leads and other chemicals in the electros. Coils
>> comprising processed iron powder, copper wire, insulation, copper
>> foil, epoxy adhesive, steel leadouts. Then there's the complex glass
>> tube, and the chemical phosphors and mercury vapour inside it.
>> Tungsten electrodes. Then the pcb material that its all mounted on.
>> Lots of soldered joints. And then the plastic enclosure for the
>> ballast. And then the 'normal' bits that an incandescent has anyway.
>> Every single one of those components, and the manufacturing processes
>> for *their* component parts, involves energy input for the process.
>> They all need workers who have to be moved from their homes and back
>> again each day, They have to be heated / cooled, fed and watered, and
>> then lit as well. And when they've made their bits of the lamp, these
>> have to be shipped on somewhere else. These are the energy costs that
>> the general public are never made aware of. If they were, they might
>> start to question the perceived wisdom that they've been fed, that
>> these things are actually 'green'.
>
>
> **Indeed. I just did a little research and found that some of these issues
> HAVE been examined. The total manufacturing energy input for a typical CFL
> is around 1.7kWhr. The total manufacturing energy input for a typical
> incandescent is around 0.3kWhr. Considerably less. Or is it?

The thing is, there are so many components to a CFL, and so many processes
to make those components, and so many processes to extracting, refining and
making appropriate the constituents *of* those components, that I think it
is probably an impossible task to analyse the total energy budget of making
one of these things, with any accuracy. There will probably also be a degree
of deliberate distortion downwards to those figures by the greenies that
would produce them, to make them look better. On the other hand, an
incandescent bulb uses - what - seven, eight maybe components, each of which
could be totally accurately pinned down on their production energy costs.
Bear in mind that the processes to produce the components are also very
simple and straightforward, unlike the processes required to make the
components of a CFL.

>
> Let's put that into some kind of perspective:
>
> A typical 100 Watt IC lasts for 1,000 hours (at best).
> A typical 15 Watt CFL lasts for 5,000 hours (I've certainly exceeding that
> figure quite comfortably).

I have to say that in my experience, you have been extremely lucky to get
that sort of life from CFLs. I have used all sorts over the years, from
cheap to expensive, and have never obtained anything like that length of
service from any of them, with the exception of some very early ones that I
installed in a day nursery that we once owned. They were Dulux globe CFLs
and very expensive. We owned that nursery for twelve years, and most of them
were still going when we sold it, so I don't dispute that it is possible to
make long-lasting CFLs. I just don't think that overall, taken across the
whole raft of qualities and costs, they are doing it any more. However, I
have a lot of low voltage halogen downlighters in my house, that I put in
more than ten years ago. Of the eight located above the stairwell, and the
further five along the upstairs corridor, only one has failed in all that
time, and that was only a few months ago. Maybe, like you with your CFLs, I
have been lucky with these halogens. Here in the UK, there have been
governmental drives to push CFLs, by heavily subsidising the cost of them,
and in some cases, almost giving them away in supermarkets, and in others
*actually* giving them away. With the best will in the world, these are
cheap crap, so that is what the general public are having foisted on them as
a result of the drive to try to get people to actually want them, and is
probably why the general experience is that they don't last anything like as
long as the figures that they would try to have us believe. Also, those
figures are only good - if at all- when the ballast is properly cooled,
which means having the lamp in service the 'right' way up. Unfortunately,
many lamp fixtures that they go in, don't do this, and luminaires enclose
them completely. Incandescents didn't care about this, of course.

>
> Over 5,000 hours of use, the CFL has consumed 75kWhr + 1.7kWhr = 76.7kWhr.
> IOW: The energy cost of manufacture is almost insignificant, even though
> is a little higher than 5 incandescents.
>
> Over 5,000 hours, the IC lamp has consumed 500kWhr + 1.5kWhr = 501.5kWhr.
>
> I would argue that the energy cost of manufacture is a spurious argument.

Only possibly, if you feel you are able to trust the figures for
manufacturing energy budget. As I have said, I do not because of the
complexity of arriving at a figure. Plus you also need to factor in the full
energy cost of recycling the toxins contained within it at the end of its
service life. There is zero cost for this with an incandescent, as it does
not contain anything potentially harmful to the environment.

>
> The pollution cost is another matter entirely. During operation, coal
> fired generators (like those here in Australia) emit mercury. A typical
> 100 Watt lamp will cause the emission of around 10mg of mercury over it's
> life. 5 lamps (5,000 hours) will cause the release of 50mg or mercury. By
> comparison, CFLs will cause the release of around 7.5mg of mercury + 4mg
> of mercury contained within the envelope. If the lamp is disposed of
> correctly, then the total mercury release will be 7.5mg. Far less than
> that of IC lamps. Other nations, that employ different power generation
> schemes will see different results.

Again, these figures are only meaningful if you genuinely achieve a figure
of 5000 hours across the board. And that is the important thing. *All* CFLs
need to achieve that figure for the calculations to be valid, and that ain't
never gonna happen, as long as there are cheapo Chinese ones flooding the
market. In any case, in Europe, coal fired power stations have been on the
decline for many years. Most are now gas or nuclear

>
> And this does not take into pollution created at the point of manufacture.
> That is an issue that should be dealt with locally.
>
>>
>> If people want to use CFLs in the belief - mistaken in my opinion -
>> that they are in some way helping the world to use less energy, then
>> that's fine.
>
> **It's not a mistaken belief. It's a fact. CFLs use FAR less energy than
> incandescents. From cradle to grave. Vastly, hugely less energy.

On the face of it, they appear to, and as I said before, that is the *only*
angle that's been exploited by the greenies, to try to gain them widespread
acceptance. Personally, I believe that the situation is far less clear than
this rather simplistic assumption, when you factor in the *true* costs.
Almost certainly, they use less energy if you accept the simple picture, get
the projected life from them, and believe the equivalence figures for light
output, that they put on the boxes. And again, on this score, I understand
that they are now trying to legislate over here, to mark the boxes in lumens
or some such, probably because users are starting to doubt the quoted
equivalence figures. In reality, if you have a genuine like for like in
terms of light output, factor in the *real* costs of producing,
transporting, and disposing of properly at the end, and get the more typical
average service life of 2000 hours from them, then the saving becomes much
less significant, and for me, insufficient reason to ban me from using
incandescents.

>
> If it's really the case, then CFLs will win out the day
>> in the end.
>
> **By a massive margin, in fact.

Distorted by the fact that CFLs are effectively government sponsored, and
that I cannot buy the bulbs I want any more, because they have banned them
to make sure that I can't. If it was still incandescents vs CFLs on a level
playing field, the take up of CFLs would be much less, which was the reason
in the first place that they found it necessary to legislate to force people
to use them.

>
> But I think that it is utterly wrong that the existing
>> technology has been banned completely on thin evidence and a less
>> than truthful declaration of the energy required to make and dispose
>> of the things, the only factor being pushed, being the lower energy
>> consumption when they are in use, as though this is the be-all and
>> end-all of their right to exist, and to be forced on us.
>
> **Your opinion is duly noted. That comment is a political issue. I recall
> EXACTLY the same arguments were made, here in Australia, when leaded
> petrol was legislated out of existence. I susepct that, in 20 years, when
> we look back at this whole discussion, it will appear to be a non-event.
> More efficient lighting will be the standard, incandescents will be
> relegated to specialised applications (oven lighting, etc) and the whole
> issue will be viewed for what it really is - a storm in a teacup.

I fail to see how you equate leaded petrol to the situation with CFLs. It is
a different issue entirely, with very clear motives and outcomes. You would
have to be brain dead not to understand that putting huge quantities of lead
into the atmosphere at ground level and in a form that people could breathe,
is bad in every way. Removing lead from petrol had little if any impact on
the general public, because it was already possible to build engines that
had no requirement for lead in their fuel, without compromising performance.
It was, unlike CFLs, a classic example of a genuine *replacement*
technology, which suffered no disadvantages over the technology that it was
replacing. There was not even any need to challenge this bit of legislation,
because the advantages were very clear to see in large cities the world
over. Even if you clung on to your car that needed leaded petrol, this was
still available at the pumps for some years after unleaded came in, and
after it was finally removed from sale, there was still LRP (lead
replacement petrol) available for some long time after that. Finally, if you
still wanted to run your vintage engine, this could be achieved in most
cases by the simple expedient of altering the ignition timing, and in the
worst case, reducing the compression ratio a little, by fitting a thicker
head gasket. CFLs are nothing like this. They are a substitute technology
which is unable to replace incandescents in a number of areas - such as
decorative light fittings - and having many other shortcomings in comparison
to incandescents, in exchange for the dubious possibility that they in some
way help to save the planet.

>
>>
>> The point that Trevor makes about aircon to mitigate the heat output
>> of incandescents, holds no water here in Northern Europe. Unlike in
>> Australia, it seldom becomes hot enough up here for more than a few
>> days a year, that aircon is needed. And that is only in the summer,
>> when it's light for 16 hours of the day anyway, so there's not much
>> lighting being used. OTOH, for much of the year, it is cool or cold
>> enough to require heating in houses, and in this case, the complete
>> opposite of Trevor's premise, is true, in that the heat output from
>> the incandescent light bulbs, serves to mitigate heat input
>> requirement, from the central heating system.
>
> **So? Northern Europe is not the whole world. Vast swathes of this planet
> consume vast amounts of energy for air conditioning. Northern Europe is a
> small player in that respect. Worse, CO2 emissions from Northern Europe
> impact on those regions where a small amount of warming will lead to
> serious problems. We only have one place that we can all live. We all need
> to work together.

I'm having a bit of trouble picking the bones out of that one, Trevor. You
made a very clear statement that a disadvantage of incandescents was that
they generated heat that needed the use of aircon plant to remove. I merely
stated that this is not the case in Northern Europe, where aircon is not
common in the first place, and where the exact opposite of what you contend,
is true. In the case of what you are stating, we are talking a double whammy
in that the lights waste energy in producing heat, and then your
energy-thirsty aircon plant has to be used to waste a bit more removing that
heat. Here, the heat is not 'wasted' for much of the year, as it partially
mitigates the required heating input from the central heating. 50 watts of
heat pouring off a lightbulb into my living room, is 50 watts that my
heating system has not got to put into my radiators. I fail to see what your
point is regarding Northern Europe against 'vast swathes of the planet etc'.
The population density of Northern Europe is much higher overall than that
of many of these vast swathes that you refer to, so the fact that we don't
use huge amounts of energy for aircon, equates to a much lower energy
requirement per person, taken overall.

>
> And, just to reinforce the point: I do not consider lighting to be a major
> problem in power consumption (and, therefore, CO2 emissions). Nor do I
> consider appliances that use auxiliary power to be a major issue either.

So why do you support the banning of a proven simple technology, which did
the job of providing even-intensity pleasing-quality light, to everyone's
satisfaction ??

Arfa

>
>
> --
> Trevor Wilson
> www.rageaudio.com.au
>

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 7:44 pm
From: Jeff Liebermann

On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:21:50 -0500, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov>
wrote:

>the manufacture of CFLs produces much more pollution than making
>incandescent lamps. it probably outweighs any savings from the use of CFLs
>over I-lamps.
>you don't need -any- mercury in making I-lamps,nor do you need phosphors.

True. Dumping 4 tons of mercury into landfills every year is not a
good thing. However, to put that in perspective, the coal that we use
to generate most of our electricity has an estimated 75 tons of
mercury mixed in, each year, two thirds of which is belched into the
atmosphere. If you include the mercury emissions from generating the
power needed to run an incandescent lamp, the CFL lamp dumps 1/4th the
mercury into the environment as the incandescent.
<http://www.cflknowhow.org/cfl-mercury-information.html>

Permit me to point out that US domestic and commerical electricity
consumption has been increasing quite constantly at the rate of about
1.5%/year. If there were any energy savings from the existing CFL
lamps in service, it would have appeared as a drop in the consumption
trend. It's a bit tricky to use, but you can dig the history and
trends out of:
<http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=AEO2011>

Tungsten, as used in incandescent lamps, may not be all that
environmentally correct:
<http://pubs.acs.org/cen/science/87/8703sci2.html>
There's not much known about the effects of tungsten in the
environment, but it is becoming yet another thing to worry about.

I wouldn't worry much about phosphorus as we're scheduled to run out
in 50-100 years.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_phosphorus>

--
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

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Here's your Meat Plow LOL!
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/ee7ff9b0afb52e12?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 7:24 pm
From: "Russell Tavek, AUK Vote Wrangler"

On Sep 24, 1:59 am, Meat Plow <mhywa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2011-09-22 23:08:38 +0000, Emmett BADASS Gulley said:

> Who got run out of what? And for what? Anonymous posts from another
> 'usenet asshole' who can't
> grow the balls to post with acountability? LMFAO!
>
> Let's stick to the traditional terms like convict. Something Emmett
> wants to be so badly again. And I will help him be what he wants. And
> it wont be that hard judging by his posts of late.

Meathead! Glad to see you're back! I was afraid you'd gone away and
you wouldn't be keeping up the good fight for your Pickett's Charge
Trophy. Silly me: I should have known that the same dogged
persistence you showed in fighting for Emmett's food stamps would
bring you back here for another round as AUK's new favorite spankboi.

So tell us: are you going to be sending Emmett back to prison before
or after you pay off those credit card judgments, Wifekiller?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Brave Little "Russell" Proves How Nadless He Is
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/38161c7645699258?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Sep 23 2011 7:50 pm
From: "Russell Tavek, AUK Vote Wrangler"

On Sep 24, 2:36 am, Meat Plow <mhywa...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > You're such a brave little man, "Russell".
>
> Yep such a brave little obsesso. But not even as brave as Emmett. If I
> had to come up with one modicum of respect for Emmett it would be in
> the bravery department howver missplaced it is it outshines
> chicken-shit Taveck.

I am protected by anonymity: Emmett is protected by poverty (although
I suppose that won't stop you from further threats to garnish his food
stamps). This keeps both of us safe from having to engage in $750
acts of public humiliation like this:

*****
I am the poster known as "Meat Plow." It has come to my attention
that I have made several statements in the preceding years which have
produced harm to various individuals, and which I now regret.
In particular, I caused to be re-published certain libelous and
damaging comments regarding the attorney, Charles Novins, Esq.
Additionally, many of my words evinced disrespect and disdain for Mr.
Novins, all of which was unjustified.

Unfortunately, I and several other participants in these groups lost
sight of the original purposes, mostly entertainment. Instead, as
the online invective grew more bitter, I (and others) got caught up
in the group dynamic, and the lack of accountability engendered by
anonymity caused me to post personal attacks on others that I never
would have made outside the unique environment of the internet,
which allows posters to cast aspersions upon others without having
to do so to their face .

Having communicated with Mr. Novins via counsel, and having obtained
true information about him and his firm, I deeply regret having
participated in threads which disparaged him or his firm. In fact,
Mr. Novins is an excellent attorney as far as I can determine.
Attacks made upon his staff were similarly reprehensible and false.
In the past, I should have ignored all such conversations which
portrayed the Novins Law firm in a negative light, and I will do
so in the future. I should have spoken out against the people
trying to damage him, and I am doing so now. As I personally
pointed out in a years-old post, there was never any reason or
justification for the malicious attacks

I explicitly regret any words I might have posted suggesting that I
approved of any other individual that attacked Novins. I am sorry
I ever associated with any such person.

These are my true sentiments, and a careful review of my postings
will reveal several other instances where I vouched for Mr. Novins's
integrity. Although I did also state negative facts and opinions
about Mr. Novins, I now realize they were stated in anger and in
error. That's because I now have factual information, and I
understand that the anger was unjustified.

****

So how much of your ham radio and guitar equipment went to the pawn
shop in order to pay Ridder for assisting you in that display of
public groveling? Or did you just go with hat in hand to the more
successful members of your family -- which means pretty much all of
them?

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

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

Electronics

sci.electronics.repair - 21 new messages in 9 topics - digest

No Response to "sci.electronics.repair - 21 new messages in 9 topics - digest"

Post a Comment

Blog Roll

Blog Archive