sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Type of ceramic wirewound resistor? - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/24e3fe2e41d78acc?hl=en
* Panasonic Viera TH-L32C30D Price in India - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4f89b1ac032ec280?hl=en
* Marshall JCM 2000, DSL 50W, year 2005 - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/8505b3e6d02ed640?hl=en
* Store that sells ceiling fan capacitors? - 6 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4792acac41b3eaae?hl=en
* Sherwood RX-5502 Receiver Protection Shutdown, Repair, thoughts wanted... -
7 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/ba9b4799ea243157?hl=en
* hi - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/f6d9e8720e870eb1?hl=en
* OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors - 6 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4b33f31f667954a0?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Type of ceramic wirewound resistor?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/24e3fe2e41d78acc?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 12:25 am
From: "N_Cook"

Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:j55lq.21321$N14.13209@newsfe12.ams2...
>
>
> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:j71kel$g1i$1@dont-email.me...
> > Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > news:1VXkq.287$F95.92@newsfe11.ams2...
> >>
> >>
> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:j70r0t$i9p$1@dont-email.me...
> >> > Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:KXLkq.2469$651.887@newsfe04.ams2...
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> >> news:j6u7ru$hnh$1@dont-email.me...
> >> >> > I have one in front of me labelled
> >> >> > UTM 210-9 25435,3 watt probably Russian and can find no info
> >> >> > Like the standard pillar white/grey ceramic resistors but instead
of
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > wire returning down the flute of the ceramic there is a sprung
join
> > set
> >> > in
> >> >> > the flute with bismuth solder or something. Anyone know a generic
> > name
> >> > for
> >> >> > this type of thermal cut out resistor or a maker name ?
> >> >> > Other than the opening temperature must be greater than the
> >> >> > sustained
> >> >> > power
> >> >> > rating temp of the resistor and lower than standard solder, anyone
> > know
> >> >> > what
> >> >> > sort of safety cut out temperature?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Back in the day when I was a TV engineer, they were very common, and
> >> >> known
> >> >> as 'spring-off resistors'. Often used to be used in the feed to the
> >> >> HOP
> >> >> stage, and would spring open when the HOP valve failed. They were
> > usually
> >> >> re-soldered with what we knew just as 'high melting point solder'.
> >> >> I've
> >> >> no
> >> >> idea what actual temperature the stuff was, just that it was issued
to
> >> >> us,
> >> > a
> >> >> few feet at a time, for re-soldering these devices. The Adcola irons
> > that
> >> > we
> >> >> used (about 50 watts, as I recall ??) struggled a bit with it, but
> >> >> were
> >> >> ultimately capable of making the joint quite nicely.
> >> >>
> >> >> Arfa
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Are you saying it was somehow solder that needed a lot of heat rather
> > than
> >> > a
> >> > lot of temperature?
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Dunno really. No. I think I mean that it needed a lot of temperature.
The
> >> Adcola, with its solid copper bit, certainly produced enough heat at
the
> >> tip to handle a small job like resoldering that spring, but it did have
a
> >> little difficulty taking the solder to a 'full flow' consistency, so
> >> probably didn't have quite the temperature required. Remember that this
> > was
> >> nearly 40 years ago, when a TV engineer's soldering iron was little
more
> >> than an electric poker ...
> >>
> >> The solder was just designated "HMP" for high melting point, and as I
> >> recall, was a little greyer looking on the reel than 'standard' solder.
> >>
> >> Arfa
> >>
> >
> >
> > So a more sophisticated version of the aluminium foil and nail for a
fuse
> > replacement ?
> >
> >
>
> No, I would say not. I worked for Rediffusion, and they were one of the
best
> 'technical' rental companies in the business. Their training and attention
> to detail, was second to none, and they used these resistors in their own
TV
> set designs, so if that's what they said was the right way to handle
> remaking one of these devices after it had sprung off, then you can be
> pretty sure that it was right. There was never any question of the
resistor
> having to be replaced because it had sprung open ...
>
> Arfa
>

I must be missing something here , what is the point of the spring off
disconnect?

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 12:56 pm
From: Baron

N_Cook Inscribed thus:

> Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:j55lq.21321$N14.13209@newsfe12.ams2...
>>
>>
>> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:j71kel$g1i$1@dont-email.me...
>> > Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1VXkq.287$F95.92@newsfe11.ams2...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >> news:j70r0t$i9p$1@dont-email.me...
>> >> > Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> >> > news:KXLkq.2469$651.887@newsfe04.ams2...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:j6u7ru$hnh$1@dont-email.me...
>> >> >> > I have one in front of me labelled
>> >> >> > UTM 210-9 25435,3 watt probably Russian and can find no info
>> >> >> > Like the standard pillar white/grey ceramic resistors but
>> >> >> > instead
> of
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > wire returning down the flute of the ceramic there is a
>> >> >> > sprung
> join
>> > set
>> >> > in
>> >> >> > the flute with bismuth solder or something. Anyone know a
>> >> >> > generic
>> > name
>> >> > for
>> >> >> > this type of thermal cut out resistor or a maker name ?
>> >> >> > Other than the opening temperature must be greater than the
>> >> >> > sustained
>> >> >> > power
>> >> >> > rating temp of the resistor and lower than standard solder,
>> >> >> > anyone
>> > know
>> >> >> > what
>> >> >> > sort of safety cut out temperature?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Back in the day when I was a TV engineer, they were very
>> >> >> common, and known
>> >> >> as 'spring-off resistors'. Often used to be used in the feed to
>> >> >> the HOP
>> >> >> stage, and would spring open when the HOP valve failed. They
>> >> >> were
>> > usually
>> >> >> re-soldered with what we knew just as 'high melting point
>> >> >> solder'. I've
>> >> >> no
>> >> >> idea what actual temperature the stuff was, just that it was
>> >> >> issued
> to
>> >> >> us,
>> >> > a
>> >> >> few feet at a time, for re-soldering these devices. The Adcola
>> >> >> irons
>> > that
>> >> > we
>> >> >> used (about 50 watts, as I recall ??) struggled a bit with it,
>> >> >> but were
>> >> >> ultimately capable of making the joint quite nicely.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Arfa
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Are you saying it was somehow solder that needed a lot of heat
>> >> > rather
>> > than
>> >> > a
>> >> > lot of temperature?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Dunno really. No. I think I mean that it needed a lot of
>> >> temperature.
> The
>> >> Adcola, with its solid copper bit, certainly produced enough heat
>> >> at
> the
>> >> tip to handle a small job like resoldering that spring, but it did
>> >> have
> a
>> >> little difficulty taking the solder to a 'full flow' consistency,
>> >> so probably didn't have quite the temperature required. Remember
>> >> that this
>> > was
>> >> nearly 40 years ago, when a TV engineer's soldering iron was
>> >> little
> more
>> >> than an electric poker ...
>> >>
>> >> The solder was just designated "HMP" for high melting point, and
>> >> as I
>> >> recall, was a little greyer looking on the reel than 'standard'
>> >> solder.
>> >>
>> >> Arfa
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > So a more sophisticated version of the aluminium foil and nail for
>> > a
> fuse
>> > replacement ?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> No, I would say not. I worked for Rediffusion, and they were one of
>> the
> best
>> 'technical' rental companies in the business. Their training and
>> attention to detail, was second to none, and they used these
>> resistors in their own
> TV
>> set designs, so if that's what they said was the right way to handle
>> remaking one of these devices after it had sprung off, then you can
>> be pretty sure that it was right. There was never any question of the
> resistor
>> having to be replaced because it had sprung open ...
>>
>> Arfa
>>
>
> I must be missing something here , what is the point of the spring off
> disconnect?

Its a circuit protection device...

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 6:45 pm
From: "Arfa Daily"

"N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j73ffs$ojj$1@dont-email.me...
> Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:j55lq.21321$N14.13209@newsfe12.ams2...
>>
>>
>> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:j71kel$g1i$1@dont-email.me...
>> > Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1VXkq.287$F95.92@newsfe11.ams2...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >> news:j70r0t$i9p$1@dont-email.me...
>> >> > Arfa Daily <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>> >> > news:KXLkq.2469$651.887@newsfe04.ams2...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "N_Cook" <diverse@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:j6u7ru$hnh$1@dont-email.me...
>> >> >> > I have one in front of me labelled
>> >> >> > UTM 210-9 25435,3 watt probably Russian and can find no info
>> >> >> > Like the standard pillar white/grey ceramic resistors but instead
> of
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > wire returning down the flute of the ceramic there is a sprung
> join
>> > set
>> >> > in
>> >> >> > the flute with bismuth solder or something. Anyone know a generic
>> > name
>> >> > for
>> >> >> > this type of thermal cut out resistor or a maker name ?
>> >> >> > Other than the opening temperature must be greater than the
>> >> >> > sustained
>> >> >> > power
>> >> >> > rating temp of the resistor and lower than standard solder,
>> >> >> > anyone
>> > know
>> >> >> > what
>> >> >> > sort of safety cut out temperature?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Back in the day when I was a TV engineer, they were very common,
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> known
>> >> >> as 'spring-off resistors'. Often used to be used in the feed to the
>> >> >> HOP
>> >> >> stage, and would spring open when the HOP valve failed. They were
>> > usually
>> >> >> re-soldered with what we knew just as 'high melting point solder'.
>> >> >> I've
>> >> >> no
>> >> >> idea what actual temperature the stuff was, just that it was issued
> to
>> >> >> us,
>> >> > a
>> >> >> few feet at a time, for re-soldering these devices. The Adcola
>> >> >> irons
>> > that
>> >> > we
>> >> >> used (about 50 watts, as I recall ??) struggled a bit with it, but
>> >> >> were
>> >> >> ultimately capable of making the joint quite nicely.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Arfa
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Are you saying it was somehow solder that needed a lot of heat
>> >> > rather
>> > than
>> >> > a
>> >> > lot of temperature?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Dunno really. No. I think I mean that it needed a lot of temperature.
> The
>> >> Adcola, with its solid copper bit, certainly produced enough heat at
> the
>> >> tip to handle a small job like resoldering that spring, but it did
>> >> have
> a
>> >> little difficulty taking the solder to a 'full flow' consistency, so
>> >> probably didn't have quite the temperature required. Remember that
>> >> this
>> > was
>> >> nearly 40 years ago, when a TV engineer's soldering iron was little
> more
>> >> than an electric poker ...
>> >>
>> >> The solder was just designated "HMP" for high melting point, and as I
>> >> recall, was a little greyer looking on the reel than 'standard'
>> >> solder.
>> >>
>> >> Arfa
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > So a more sophisticated version of the aluminium foil and nail for a
> fuse
>> > replacement ?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> No, I would say not. I worked for Rediffusion, and they were one of the
> best
>> 'technical' rental companies in the business. Their training and
>> attention
>> to detail, was second to none, and they used these resistors in their own
> TV
>> set designs, so if that's what they said was the right way to handle
>> remaking one of these devices after it had sprung off, then you can be
>> pretty sure that it was right. There was never any question of the
> resistor
>> having to be replaced because it had sprung open ...
>>
>> Arfa
>>
>
> I must be missing something here , what is the point of the spring off
> disconnect?
>
>

It opens the resistor, and removes power from the overload condition that
it's there to protect against ...

Arfa

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Panasonic Viera TH-L32C30D Price in India
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4f89b1ac032ec280?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 12:56 am
From: ritesh

The Panasonic Viera TH-L32C30D http://www.naaptol.com/price/881067-Panasonic-TH-L32C30D.html
32 inch LCD TV is designed with 1366 x 768 resolution, IPS-alpha LCD
Panel, 20,000:1 contrast ratio and 300 lines moving picture
resolution. It has 24p Smooth Film/Playback, 5 picture mode, three
HDMI ports and LAN Port.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Marshall JCM 2000, DSL 50W, year 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/8505b3e6d02ed640?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 2:23 am
From: "N_Cook"

I'm waiting on reply from owner wrt footswitch and/or S/R sockets use.
Exploring the Jalco switches, the one nearest the send so. if non grounded
would only induce stray pick up from the Return opamp (assuming bare amp
with no use of S/R). The one furthest from the Send so. cleanly switches
Relay 3 with a transistion point of about 280 ohms. Despite being able to
get about 7Kohm by slightly pushing the switch, and holding there, all it
would do would mute the amp, not attenuate the throughput to the PA. I
cannot get an intermediary ohmage on the other switch above a few ohms

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Store that sells ceiling fan capacitors?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4792acac41b3eaae?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 5:24 am
From: "Phil Allison"

"spamtrap1888"
>
>
> But the usual suspects don't seem to carry them. Not appliance part
> stores or electrical supply stores. I couldn't find them listed at
> Home Desperate or Louse.

** Ceiling fan caps were once readily and cheaply available.

Then the price went right though the roof ......

... Phil

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 5:27 am
From: Rich Webb

On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:09:12 -0700 (PDT), spamtrap1888
<spamtrap1888@gmail.com> wrote:

>This is not precisely on-topic, but this group is resourceful, and it
>does concern an electronic component.
>
>The no-name ceiling fan over our kitchen table was making a strange
>odor of the "electrical" variety. I feared it was coming from the
>insulation of the motor wiring, but googling suggested the capacitor
>as the common source of smells. One or more self-healing film caps are
>potted into a rectangular package. With failed caps the package
>bulges, according to pictures that people posted.
>
>So, before I took everything apart, I decided to find a store that
>stocked such capacitors. Then I would gut the thing and run over with
>the bad part, come back with the good one, wire it in, and have the
>whole thing buttoned up before my wife got home and started
>complaining about the chaos I always introduce to her life. (In
>fairness, there are a lot of ziplock bags with parts in them around
>here.)
>
>But the usual suspects don't seem to carry them. Not appliance part
>stores or electrical supply stores. I couldn't find them listed at
>Home Desperate or Louse. There were only a couple of online ceiling-
>fan-part-only outfits, which I try to avoid: I like to show the
>counter guy what I need, have him give it to me, pay, go home, and
>replace.
>
>Any ideas? If I must buy online I must, but I would really rather not

Try Grainger http://www.grainger.com They do have lots of motor start /
run caps at competitive prices and also do have a brick 'n' mortar
presence around the US (try the "Find a Branch" link).

--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 6:19 am
From: Bill Gill

On 10/12/2011 12:09 AM, spamtrap1888 wrote:
> This is not precisely on-topic, but this group is resourceful, and it
> does concern an electronic component.
>
> The no-name ceiling fan over our kitchen table was making a strange
> odor of the "electrical" variety. I feared it was coming from the
> insulation of the motor wiring, but googling suggested the capacitor
> as the common source of smells. One or more self-healing film caps are
> potted into a rectangular package. With failed caps the package
> bulges, according to pictures that people posted.
>
> So, before I took everything apart, I decided to find a store that
> stocked such capacitors. Then I would gut the thing and run over with
> the bad part, come back with the good one, wire it in, and have the
> whole thing buttoned up before my wife got home and started
> complaining about the chaos I always introduce to her life. (In
> fairness, there are a lot of ziplock bags with parts in them around
> here.)
>
> But the usual suspects don't seem to carry them. Not appliance part
> stores or electrical supply stores. I couldn't find them listed at
> Home Desperate or Louse. There were only a couple of online ceiling-
> fan-part-only outfits, which I try to avoid: I like to show the
> counter guy what I need, have him give it to me, pay, go home, and
> replace.
>
> Any ideas? If I must buy online I must, but I would really rather not
The last time I needed one I had to do some searching. I finally found
one at a local lighting store here in Tulsa, Ok. But I think they were
left overs from some time before. They didn't even charge me for it.
The store sells all kinds of lighting and fans and what have you. See
if you can find such a place where you live, they might have some.

I do recall being able to just walk into HD or about any hardware
store and find one, but no longer.

Bill

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 10:34 am
From: gregz

Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:09:12 -0700 (PDT), spamtrap1888
> <spamtrap1888@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is not precisely on-topic, but this group is resourceful, and it
>> does concern an electronic component.
>>
>> The no-name ceiling fan over our kitchen table was making a strange
>> odor of the "electrical" variety. I feared it was coming from the
>> insulation of the motor wiring, but googling suggested the capacitor
>> as the common source of smells. One or more self-healing film caps are
>> potted into a rectangular package. With failed caps the package
>> bulges, according to pictures that people posted.
>>
>> So, before I took everything apart, I decided to find a store that
>> stocked such capacitors. Then I would gut the thing and run over with
>> the bad part, come back with the good one, wire it in, and have the
>> whole thing buttoned up before my wife got home and started
>> complaining about the chaos I always introduce to her life. (In
>> fairness, there are a lot of ziplock bags with parts in them around
>> here.)
>>
>> But the usual suspects don't seem to carry them. Not appliance part
>> stores or electrical supply stores. I couldn't find them listed at
>> Home Desperate or Louse. There were only a couple of online ceiling-
>> fan-part-only outfits, which I try to avoid: I like to show the
>> counter guy what I need, have him give it to me, pay, go home, and
>> replace.
>>
>> Any ideas? If I must buy online I must, but I would really rather not
>
> Try Grainger http://www.grainger.com They do have lots of motor start /
> run caps at competitive prices and also do have a brick 'n' mortar
> presence around the US (try the "Find a Branch" link).

Granger does not sell to public. Try drillspot who sells granger parts,
cheaper.

Greg

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 11:38 am
From: Rich Webb

On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:34:29 +0000 (UTC), gregz <zekor@comcast.net>
wrote:

>Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:09:12 -0700 (PDT), spamtrap1888
>> <spamtrap1888@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This is not precisely on-topic, but this group is resourceful, and it
>>> does concern an electronic component.
>>>
>>> The no-name ceiling fan over our kitchen table was making a strange
>>> odor of the "electrical" variety. I feared it was coming from the
>>> insulation of the motor wiring, but googling suggested the capacitor
>>> as the common source of smells. One or more self-healing film caps are
>>> potted into a rectangular package. With failed caps the package
>>> bulges, according to pictures that people posted.
>>>
>>> So, before I took everything apart, I decided to find a store that
>>> stocked such capacitors. Then I would gut the thing and run over with
>>> the bad part, come back with the good one, wire it in, and have the
>>> whole thing buttoned up before my wife got home and started
>>> complaining about the chaos I always introduce to her life. (In
>>> fairness, there are a lot of ziplock bags with parts in them around
>>> here.)
>>>
>>> But the usual suspects don't seem to carry them. Not appliance part
>>> stores or electrical supply stores. I couldn't find them listed at
>>> Home Desperate or Louse. There were only a couple of online ceiling-
>>> fan-part-only outfits, which I try to avoid: I like to show the
>>> counter guy what I need, have him give it to me, pay, go home, and
>>> replace.
>>>
>>> Any ideas? If I must buy online I must, but I would really rather not
>>
>> Try Grainger http://www.grainger.com They do have lots of motor start /
>> run caps at competitive prices and also do have a brick 'n' mortar
>> presence around the US (try the "Find a Branch" link).
>
>
>Granger does not sell to public. Try drillspot who sells granger parts,
>cheaper.

Don't think so. I purchased a replacement dual motor run cap for my
outside HVAC unit from Grainger (not Granger) back in April of this
year. No tax exemption certificate, DUNS number, CAGE code, etc. needed,
just a plain ol' credit card and a residential shipping address.

--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 1:32 pm
From: "Anon"

"spamtrap1888" <spamtrap1888@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:28e34042-2d43-4c49-9142-fc580a9ebfad@l39g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> This is not precisely on-topic, but this group is resourceful, and it
> does concern an electronic component.
>
> The no-name ceiling fan over our kitchen table was making a strange
> odor of the "electrical" variety. I feared it was coming from the
> insulation of the motor wiring, but googling suggested the capacitor
> as the common source of smells. One or more self-healing film caps are
> potted into a rectangular package. With failed caps the package
> bulges, according to pictures that people posted.
>
> So, before I took everything apart, I decided to find a store that
> stocked such capacitors. Then I would gut the thing and run over with
> the bad part, come back with the good one, wire it in, and have the
> whole thing buttoned up before my wife got home and started
> complaining about the chaos I always introduce to her life. (In
> fairness, there are a lot of ziplock bags with parts in them around
> here.)
>
> But the usual suspects don't seem to carry them. Not appliance part
> stores or electrical supply stores. I couldn't find them listed at
> Home Desperate or Louse. There were only a couple of online ceiling-
> fan-part-only outfits, which I try to avoid: I like to show the
> counter guy what I need, have him give it to me, pay, go home, and
> replace.
>
> Any ideas? If I must buy online I must, but I would really rather not

If you have a Dan's Fan City nearby, they almost always have a variety of
single, dual and triple caps in stock.

Alternately, SwitchCo in of Texas, online at ceilingfanparts.com carry a
number of them.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sherwood RX-5502 Receiver Protection Shutdown, Repair, thoughts wanted..
.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/ba9b4799ea243157?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 10:05 am
From: "William R. Walsh"

Hello all...

This is part of a longer story which I won't get into now. Suffice it
to say that I've wanted to get my hands on a failed Sherwood RX-4105
or RX-4109 stereo receiver to see just what it is that kills
them...abuse, misuse, weak parts, bad engineering/quality control or
something else. I've never had any luck coming into a truly broken
one, but someone recently gave me an RX-5502 that would just shut down
right after power on. I've been very happy with all of the RX-4105 and
4109 units I own.

The RX-5502 is a so-called multi-zone receiver. That is to say it can
support up to eight connected pairs of speakers, with four of the
pairs playing a different ("room 2") source if that is desired. It has
two complete stereo amplifiers in place, each one claimed to have an
output power of 100 watts per channel. (Obviously they're dreaming if
they think that this receiver is ever going to output 400 total watts
of power without catching fire, but...) This example was manufactured
sometime in 2008.

As found, this set would indeed power on for a few seconds, and shut
down with a blinking standby LED. I started checking things out. In
this set, the amplifier board is separate from the main board, so this
was not terribly hard to do. Every power device tested good with a
simple ohmmeter check, and nothing looked burnt or distressed on the
amp board. This doesn't look like a case of a failed power transistor
to me.

I'm working without service literature or even a schematic as Sherwood
would not provide them, but there is printing on the board that
identifies what each conductor in the ribbon cable going to the amp
board is used for. This set has a "test mode", and unlike similar
models, the "test mode" allows the power to stay on indefinitely while
the display test is running. Testing for voltages is a lot nicer
without having to constantly turn the set back on again! Voltages are
what I'd expect for B+ and B-, but a twelve volt input to the board is
hovering around a few hundred millivolts at most. That could do it!

Removing the amplifier board from the system and running without it
was probably risky, but it seemed like a worthwhile thing to do. With
the amp board removed, there was still no voltage from the +12 volt
connection. It still hovered around 300mV with the set on.
Interestingly, every now and then, a good power up was possible with
the amp board out, and the set would come out of protection.
Okay...where is the +12 volt supply generated?

Over in the power supply section there are a few linear voltage
regulators--two heatsinked 7812s and one freestanding 7912. One 7812
and the 7912 are doing their jobs, but the other 7812 is cold to the
touch and does not seem to be doing anything. (In fact, it was putting
out 300mV when I later checked it.)

Replacing the failed 7812 with an LM340 solved the problem. The set
immediately came back to life with the amp board in place, and it
plays. It appears, based on simple observation, that one 7812 is
powering the coils leading up to the speaker selection/protection
relays and the other is powering the amp board itself. What other
loads might be powered by these regulators has not been determined.

While the set is working, I don't like the temperature at which the
new regulator is running. Within ten minutes, its heatsink is on the
verge of being too hot to touch for more than a few seconds. There is
evidence on the circuit board that these regulators have always run
very hot. I've been in touch with Sherwood America, who said "the
regulator may become too hot to touch and possibly fail". I strongly
suspect there are bad capacitors on the amp and main boards, which
will need to be replaced and may be stressing the regulator. Yet
Sherwood seems to be saying that the extremely hot operation is
*normal* here. (However, it should be said that there is something of
a language barrier with the folks I've been communicating with.)

I could install a fan above or larger heatsink on the regulator and
I'm not above doing it if that is just the way things will be. I
suspect that would force the regulator to operate more reliably.

What I really want to know, though, is whether or not a drop-in
replacement with more current delivering capability than the LM340 or
78xx series exists. I've looked halfheartedly over the years but never
found anything. I could always build a more capable regulator board
and hack it in there, but I don't really feel like doing that. A fan
would be easier and faster.

I'd also like to know if anyone has had an RX-5502 on their repair
bench, and if they could comment on just how hot its regulators were
running. Any thoughts would be very much appreciated!

Thank you.

William

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 10:28 am
From: spamtrap1888

On Oct 12, 10:05 am, "William R. Walsh" <wm_wa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hello all...
>
> This is part of a longer story which I won't get into now. Suffice it
> to say that I've wanted to get my hands on a failed Sherwood RX-4105
> or RX-4109 stereo receiver to see just what it is that kills
> them...abuse, misuse, weak parts, bad engineering/quality control or
> something else. I've never had any luck coming into a truly broken
> one, but someone recently gave me an RX-5502 that would just shut down
> right after power on. I've been very happy with all of the RX-4105 and
> 4109 units I own.

Why would you care so much about some Korean POS? Sherwood was once a
fine Chicago company, from the era when Chicago was the consumer
electronics center of the world.

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 2:33 pm
From: "Gareth Magennis"

I've been in touch with Sherwood America, who said "the
> regulator may become too hot to touch and possibly fail".>
> William

Well there you go, the manufacturer has backed up your observations that
this regulator does indeed run very hot. Its not that uncommon to find this
kind of thing.

Stick a heatsink on it. Job done.

Gareth.

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 2:57 pm
From: "William R. Walsh"

Hi!

> Stick a heatsink on it.  Job done.

It's already got a goodly sized heatsink on it. In fact, I couldn't
find anything bigger in the TO-220 category. Operating temps turn out
not to be as bad as I thought--about 124F at most. Perhaps the
original regulator was just defective. I'll never know.

I will probably just run a fan from the other, less loaded regulator
and suspend it over the circuit board. That would be a lot less work
than milling some scrap heatsinks from old PC power supplies down to
fit.

William

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 2:53 pm
From: "William R. Walsh"

Hi!

> Why would you care so much about some Korean POS?

Well, because I can? Because I like 'em? Because the internal design
is pretty clean and straightforward? Because I like their sound and
think they're a pretty damn good modern receiver? Maybe because it's
just one other thing that won't end up in the landfill? Has the
purpose of this group changed since I was last here?

That's not the question I asked, or the information I wanted. Pulling
out my IR thermometer reveals that the regulator really isn't getting
as hot as I thought it was...about 124F or so at its hottest point.
I'll not worry about it further, though I probably will add a fan
powered by the lesser loaded regulator.

William

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 5:23 pm
From: "Mark Zacharias"

"Gareth Magennis" <sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:9Jnlq.3718$PP2.252@newsfe23.ams2...
> I've been in touch with Sherwood America, who said "the
>> regulator may become too hot to touch and possibly fail".>
>> William
>
>
>
> Well there you go, the manufacturer has backed up your observations that
> this regulator does indeed run very hot. Its not that uncommon to find
> this kind of thing.
>
> Stick a heatsink on it. Job done.
>
>
>
> Gareth.

Sherwood makes receivers for many others, and there is a common problem the
past several years with cheap fixed regulators failing. Mostly 79 series 12
and 15 volt regs but also 78 series positive types. They are heatsinked, but
fail anyway.

Mark Z.

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 5:36 pm
From: spamtrap1888

On Oct 12, 2:53 pm, "William R. Walsh" <wm_wa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Why would you care so much about some Korean POS?
>
> Well, because I can? Because I like 'em? Because the internal design
> is pretty clean and straightforward? Because I like their sound and
> think they're a pretty damn good modern receiver? Maybe because it's
> just one other thing that won't end up in the landfill? Has the
> purpose of this group changed since I was last here?

Your purpose in coming here seemed quite quixotic, not to say
masochistic, and therefore provoked curiosity:

"Suffice it to say that I've wanted to get my hands on a failed
Sherwood RX-4105 or RX-4109 stereo receiver to see just what it is
that kills them...abuse, misuse, weak parts, bad engineering/quality
control or something else. "

Hard to imagine anything other than frequent failure would provoke
this quest. A likely parallel in the automotive world would be a
mission to isolate failure modes of the Yugo.

Regarding the purpose of the group: Generally people come here to get
information to help them repair various pieces of electronic
equipment, often because their livelihood depends on it. Instead, you
want advice so you can redesign this run of the mill receiver for
greater reliability.

>
> That's not the question I asked, or the information I wanted. Pulling
> out my IR thermometer reveals that the regulator really isn't getting
> as hot as I thought it was...about 124F or so at its hottest point.
> I'll not worry about it further, though I probably will add a fan
> powered by the lesser loaded regulator.
>

Why clutter up such a clean and straightforward internal design with
adequate cooling?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: hi
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/f6d9e8720e870eb1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 11:54 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: OT Re: CFLs - retrofitting low ESR capacitors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/4b33f31f667954a0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 1:26 pm
From: Trevor Wilson

On 10/12/2011 11:36 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
>
>
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
> news:9fjkcdFndaU1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 10/12/2011 1:12 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is your problem with Spencer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **I have serious problems with anyone that embraces 'Creation
>>>>>> Science' as
>>>>>> part of their belief system. Creationism is the most debunked,
>>>>>> discredited
>>>>>> and utterly banal religious belief system on the planet. Spence is a
>>>>>> religious loon, who embraces 'Creation Science'.
>>>
>>> I have to say that I find this a rather disturbing position. As I
>>> understand it, Creationism spans a very wide range of beliefs. Are you
>>> saying that any devout Christian - of which I guess there are many
>>> millions worldwide - is a religious nutter, because they believe in
>>> their religion's holy book ?
>>
>> **Not specifically, though ANY PERSON who holds any kind of religious
>> belief, which requires the suspension of science, has some very clear
>> problems with the ability to think critically. However, in Spencer's
>> case, I was being very precise in that his belief system actively
>> disputes the fact of evolution and the theory of Natural Selection, as
>> espoused by one of the most formidable scientists of all time -
>> Darwin. Creationism is a specific subset of Christianity (and probably
>> other religions) where huge swaths of biology, geology, physics and
>> astro-physics are completely disregarded, in preference for a
>> primitive, childish approach to the universe.
>>
>>
>> The bible tells of a universe created by a
>>> divine being. Whether that's right or wrong, it is a belief that is
>>> strongly held by many sane and rational people and, I would wager, more
>>> than a few of the climate scientists that you put so much faith in.
>>
>> **And I would challenge any climatologist holding such childish beliefs.
>>
>>>
>>> My dear old mum, bless her now-departed soul, had a firm belief in the
>>> bible, and of a God that created the earth that she lived on and
>>> everything on it. Do you think that she was a Creationist and a
>>> religious nutter for holding those beliefs?
>>
>> **I don't know. Possibly, she was just ignorant. Like my own mother,
>> she may have lacked a decent education and had no real grounding in
>> science. My mother has an unshakable belief in the supernatural (she's
>> a Methodist). Spencer has no excuse for his childish beliefs. He has a
>> decent education. For him to reject science, in preference for
>> religious nuttery is a sad indictment of his ability to think critically.
>>
>>
>> I can assure you that she
>>> was one of the most practical and sanest people that I have ever known.
>>> She just came from a time when Christianity in one form or another was
>>> practiced to a greater or lesser degree, by most families in this
>>> country.
>>
>> **Sure. Same as my mum. Doesn't make it correct. It just makes it
>> clear that many people lack a decent education.
>>
>> --
>> Trevor Wilson
>> www.rageaudio.com.au
>>
>>
>
> I think that you are moving onto shaky ground here Trevor.

**Well, we are very off-topic. I did not bring mothers into the
discussion. It was a needless distraction.

Calling
> people ignorant and childish for holding core Christian beliefs, ain't
> gonna win you any friends.

**I don't give a crap. Religion is a blight on society. It is wasteful,
unnecessary, divisive and has held back the progress of humanity for far
too long. Of course, there have been positives associated with religion,
but, IMO, the downsides make it not worth bothering with.

My mother was neither poorly educated, nor
> ignorant, like many millions of other Christians worldwide, and I
> actually take exception at your self-righteous suggestion that she was.

**So be it. I call it the way I see it. Religious thinking is
inconsistent with science. Creationism (like that espoused by Spencer)
is not only inconsistent with science, but it ACTIVELY disputes solid
science. Spencer has the temerity to deny the brilliance of Darwin and
his life-long work. NO ONE should attempt to dispute what is generally
regarded as one of the greatest pieces of scientific investigation of
all time, without supplying some pretty serious supporting evidence.
Spencer supplies nothing. He just denies it.

> Whilst she had no 'formal' grounding in science, she had a lifelong
> interest in many aspects of science, and was an avid reader of
> science-related material, and watcher of scientific and factual TV
> programming.
>
> If you believe that your own mother is a religious nutter for embracing
> her variety of Christianity - and you must do because based on the fact
> that she is a Methodist, and has an "unshakable belief in the
> supernatural", she qualifies admirably for your definition - then I
> think it may be you that has some serious issues here ...

**I argue with my mother regularly. She knows not to bring up the topic
of her religious beliefs in my prescence. I will not tolerate such
nonsense. She is also rapidly learning that when she attempts to argue
that the planet is not warming, that she will be sharply rebuked. Sadly,
parents reach a point where they need to be treated like children.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 1:29 pm
From: Jerry Peters

In sci.electronics.repair Trevor Wilson <trevor@spamblockrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 7:21 AM, Jerry Peters wrote:
>> In sci.electronics.repair Trevor Wilson<trevor@spamblockrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> **Indeed. What it does show is the lack of rigorous standards applied to
>>> how the petition was conducted.
>>>
>> Oh you mean like 97% of all climate scientists, all 79 of them?
>> http://climatequotes.com/2011/02/10/study-claiming-97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-flawed/
>>
>> "First I'm going to address a common response to this study. In this
>> post at The Hockey Schtick, it is pointed out that the 97% statistic
>> is based on only 79 climatologists, and that those participating were
>> self-selected. There are two concerns here. The first is sample size.
>> While climate science isn't a massive field, 79 participants is fairly
>> small. To claim definitely that 97% believe this or that you would
>> need to poll significantly more people. The second concern is the fact
>> that the scientists were self-selected by an online survey. This may
>> not have led to a representative sample."
>
> **Strawman noted.

Strawman? You "97%" figure comes from a deeply flawed poll. You are in
deep denial.

>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Since the head of the IPCC, Rajendra K.
>>>>>> Pachauri, is an economist, and shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Al
>>>>>> Gore, a professional politician, precisely what qualifications do you
>>>>>> believe are required in order to have an opinion on the subject?
>>>>>
>>>>> **ANYONE may have an opinion. ANYONE may present the science. Science is
>>>>> science. Although helpful, a science degree is not essential to present
>>>>> solid evidence of a specific area of science. When a specialist in a
>>>>> particular area of scientific research makes a claim, it makes perfect sense
>>>>> to take careful notice of that claim. When a non-specialist makes a claim,
>>>>> it makes perfect sense to dispense with that clima, unless there is some
>>>>> compelling science to accompany it.
>>>>
>>>> You avoided my question.
>>>
>>> **No, I did not. By ANYONE, I mean ANYONE. Science degrees or not.
>>>
>>>
>>> Precisely what qualifications do you believe
>>>> are required in order to have an opinion on the subject?
>>>
>>> **None, whatsoever. I believe I already clearly stated that.
>>>
>>>
>>> That doesn't
>>>> mean an uninformed opinion, but rather one that you would consider to
>>>> be authoritative?
>>>
>>> **Appropriate education in some form of climate science is appropriate.
>>> Something like atmospheric physics, for instance.
>>
>> I'm *only* an engineer, but I certainly can recognize crap science
>> when I see it. For example here's Andrew Lacis doing an "experiment"
>> http://judithcurry.com/2011/10/09/atmospheric-co2-the-greenhouse-thermostat/
>>
>> This is a *thought* experiment, not a real one. Climate models have
>> not been verified nor validated, yet we're supposed to believe this
>> proves CO2 entirely controls the temperature.
>
> **Why? I would be far more concerned about the lies in the article you
> just cited. In that article, this claim is made (by that religious
> fruitcake, Spencer):
>
> "..there was a very clever paper published in Science this past week . .
> . in an attempt to prove that carbon dioxide is the main driver of the
> climate system."
>
> Spencer lied. NO climatologist would ever make such a bogus claim. The
> Sun is the main driver of climate on this planet.
>
> I suggest you choose your cites with more care in future. Try to avoid
> cites from religious nutters (like Spencer). Stick to science.

I suggest you read climate etc and see what Lacis actually claims.

You persist in ad hominem argument, it makes you look like a
"religious nutter".

>
>
>>
>> Why did we bother to build the LHC? It would have been much cheaper
>> just to buy physicists a couple of super-computers and let them run
>> this same kind of "experiment". The standard model of particle physics
>> is certainly well understood. Could it be perhaps that we want to
>> actually observe reality?
>
> **Which is precisely what the IPCC researchers have done.

You really are delusional. The IPCC has no researchers, it reguritates
whatever scientific studies it's permanent staff thinks will bolster
its political goals.
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do they need to have a degree? Experience in
>>>> writing papers? Well known in their specialty? Involved in weather
>>>> or climate in some manner?
>>>>
>>>> Wisdom does not come from experts. It comes from those who question
>>>> the experts.
>>>
>>> **Not always. Sometimes, idiots need to shut the fuck up and listen.
>>
>> Nope, if the "experts" can't convince us ordinary people then we need
>> better experts. Or better science.
>
> **No. Uneducated swill need to either become educated or shut the fuck
> up. My plumber doesn't understand anything about electronics. He is,
> however, smart enough to not try to tell me my business. Those who don't
> understand climate science (and cannot be bothered reading the IPCC
> AR4), have no excuse. They should either attempt to read and understand
> the information, or fuck off.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> What is your problem with Spencer?
>>>>>
>>>>> **I have serious problems with anyone that embraces 'Creation Science' as
>>>>> part of their belief system. Creationism is the most debunked, discredited
>>>>> and utterly banal religious belief system on the planet. Spence is a
>>>>> religious loon, who embraces 'Creation Science'.
>>>>
>>>> So, you only listen to those who completely agree with your values?
>>>
>>> **Absolutely not. However, ANYONE that embraces Creationism has serious
>>> problems with their ability to think critically. Critical thinking is
>>> essential for any scientific discipline. Ever wondered why we no longer
>>> see major scientific advances from societies mired in religious
>>> fundamentalism?
>>>
>>>
>>> If
>>>> I ran background checks on my favorite scientists, politicians, and
>>>> engineers, I would find a very mixed bag of religions, party
>>>> affiliations, philosophies, and mystical practices. The mistake
>>>> you're making is that you're judging the person, not the content.
>>>
>>> **Partly, yes. Spencer, however, has been proven wrong many times.
>>>
>>>
>>> Man
>>>> has fought many revolutions and wars in the name of freedom of speech,
>>>> thought, religion, philosophy, and economics.
>>>
>>> **And I support a person's right to be an idiot. Spencer is an idiot. Or
>>> do you, too, embrace Spencer's idiotic religious compulsions?
>>
>> Ad hominem argument.
>
> **No. Fact. Spencer believes in 'Creation Science'. He disputes
> evloution and Darwin's beautiful explanation in, what is regarded as one
> of the greatest scientific works of all time. Spencer is, therefore, a
> complete fool. ANYTHING he has to say about any scientific matter is
> seriously suspect, due to his inability to think critically and rationally.
>
>
> Spencer's religious beliefs, or Jeff's religious
>> beliefs, or even *your* religious beliefs are not the question.
>
> **Yes, they are. Spencer's religious beliefs are a clear indication of a
> brain that is unable to think critically and rationally. Unless, of
> course, you happen to agree with 'Creation Science'.
>
>> He's reached different conclusions than you, so that makes him an
>> idiot?
>
> **No. He is an idiot, because he believes in 'Creation Science'.
>
>
> So anyone that disagrees with you is therefore an idiot?
>
> **No. Jeff disagrees with me and I do not regard him as an idiot. OTOH,
> anyone who embraces 'Creation Science' is, by definition, an idiot.
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Now that almost anyone
>>>> has the right to an opinion, without risk of official retaliation, you
>>>> offer the principle that only those that are academically qualified,
>>>> politically correct, and follow the correct religions, are considered
>>>> authoritative.
>>>
>>> **Of course. ANYONE who embraces Creationism is a fool and may be
>>> summarily disregarded, as a serious scientist.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> **Certainly. Trouble is, Spencer is a mover and a shaker in the denialist
>>>>> camp. He is a big target.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what you mean by "target". Assassination is not a useful
>>>> method of argumentation.
>>>
>>> **"Target", in the sense that he is easy to dispute, due to his
>>> preference of religius belef over science.
>>
>> And I would argue that *you* prefer your religious beliefs over actual
>> science too.
>
> **Really? What religious beliefs do you imagine I possess?

Your belief in CAGW and the poor science behind it. Religion doesn't
imply a belief in God, BTW.

>
>
>
> In this case you seem to believe, without question,
>> whatever crap "climate science" and other greenies claim, ass long as
>> they dress it up in something that resembles science.
>
> **Incorrect. I've read the arguments for and against AGW (including IPCC
> AR4). Whilst I do not find absolute certainty in the IPCC AR4, I find
> that it presents far more credible science than the position espoused by
> Spencer and the fossil fuel lobby. Further and for the record: I have no
> interest in what "greenies" claim, UNLESS their opinion is backed by
> solid science.
>
You mean like the crap John Cook promulgates on SKS that you
referenced in prior posts?

>
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Climatologists usually don't do their
>>>>>> own statistics
>>>>>
>>>>> **Don't they?
>>>>
>>>> Some do, most don't. One of the reasons you see a large number of
>>>> names as authors on global warming papers is that the effort usually
>>>> involves a team of specialists. Sometimes its in collaboration with
>>>> other climatologists, but usually some of the names are statisticians,
>>>> professional writers, proof readers, and editors.
>>>>
>>
>> Jeff, one of the concerns many people have about climate science is
>> that they do their statistics. They invent new and novel statistical
>> methods that may or may not be either useful or valid.
>> See the Wegman criticisms of Mann's statistical methods, for example.
>>
>> Judith Curry's site: http://judithcurry.com/ is a useful read.
>
> **This is also a useful read:
>
> www.ipcc.ch
>
> Have you taken the time to read it (all)?

If I want to read political posturing I can find plenty of it on my
own.
The IPCC is *not* a science organization, it's a political
organization.

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

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 1:53 pm
From: Jerry Peters

In sci.electronics.repair Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 20:21:10 +0000 (UTC), Jerry Peters
> <jerry@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Oh you mean like 97% of all climate scientists, all 79 of them?
>
> That begs the question of how many climate scientists are there on the
> planet. Presumably, they would all be members of the AGU (American
> Geophysical Union):
> <http://www.agu.org>
> Looks like about 45,000 members (excluding students and associate
> members). About 27,000 in the USA:
> <http://www.agu.org/membership/>
>
> I'll resist the temptation to count signatures on the IPCC AR4 report
> as a count of IPCC climatologist. Many are economists, statisticians,
> biologists, and chemists. I couldn't find a breakdown of IPCC
> membership by specialty, but did find reports that claims to have that
> information:
> <http://mclean.ch/climate/docs/IPCC_numbers.pdf>
> using data from:
> WGIII:
> <http://www.climate-resistance.org/2007/12/wgiii-but-is-it-science.html>
> WGII:
> <http://www.climate-resistance.org/2007/12/physician-heal-thyself.html>
> and WGI:
> <http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/01/people-in-greenhouses-throwing-stones.html>
> If these author/reviewer breakdowns are correct, then the number of
> qualified climatologist involved in the various IPCC committees is not
> more than about 60.

I keep seeing the claim "97% of all climate scientists" made in all
sorts of places. 97% may agree, but you certainly can't prove it by
this poll. If you look at the questions that were asked, I would
probably agree, there is some degree of human influence on climate, so
what is the worth of this poll, other than propaganda?

>
>>Jeff, one of the concerns many people have about climate science is
>>that they do their statistics. They invent new and novel statistical
>>methods that may or may not be either useful or valid.
>>See the Wegman criticisms of Mann's statistical methods, for example.
>
> Well, to their credit, most such research publishes the raw data for
> anyone to use. The problem is that when I tried to use some of it, I
> started finding oddities that made me very suspicious. For example:
> <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_data.html>
> shows that at:
> <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_timescales.html>
> there are SEVEN different ways of dating the ice cores. The most
> commonly used method (GT4) shows a radical difference between "ice
> age" and "gas age":
> <ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/gt4nat.txt>
> Nowhere in any of the CO2 data or descriptions, can I find a
> corresponding temperature (deuterium) data, or much of an indication
> as to how the historical temperature data was derived (even though
> it's discussed in the associated readme files):
> <http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_co2.html>
> With what little time I've put into this exercise, I've either missed
> something obvious, or found a smoking gun. Hard to tell right now.
>
> To be slightly fair, the infamous "Harry ReadMe" file was heavily
> laced with problems dealing with corrupted, erratic, and missing data.
> Producing pristine data by "repairing" the trashed original data
> doesn't seem quite right, but does require the services of a
> knowledgeable statistician:
> <http://www.anenglishmanscastle.com/HARRY_READ_ME.txt>

That is one of my problems with climate science, the data quality is
extremely poor, yet we get a degree of certainty which is undoubtably
not justified.
Perhaps 6 months or so ago I read an analysis of the probable errors
in the intrumental temperature record by a metrologist, he had some
very interesting insights. For example, mercury an alchohol
thermometers need to be read differently; one you read at the top of
the meniscus, the other at the bottom. His estimated uncertainty was
.6 degreees C. Yet we get "the warmest year on record" by perhaps
.02 degree C. Oh, and the record is only about 150 years old.

>
>>if you haven't yet read it, Lombergs "The Sceptical Environmentalist"
>>is an excellent book. I can understand why the enviros at Unscientific
>>American thought they needed a special issue to try and refute it.
>
> The book has been hotly debated since 1998. I read it in about 2003.
> There's very little in the book on AGW, but plenty on the "true" state
> of the ecology and man's effects on the ecology. Much of the book
> refutes conventional wisdom and political consensus. I'm not
> sufficiently knowledgeable on the wide range of topic covered to offer
> an opinion.
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skeptical_Environmentalist>

Climate science comes off better than some of the other ecological
studies, I thought. Things like species extinction seemed to be
nothing but "expert" opinion. I love expert opinion, tell me is coffee
good or bad this month according to expert medical opinion?
Trevor may believe experts, but my experience has been that experts
know an awful lot about very little, and can be blind to anything
outside their area of expertise.
>
>

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 2:03 pm
From: Trevor Wilson

On 10/13/2011 7:29 AM, Jerry Peters wrote:
> In sci.electronics.repair Trevor Wilson<trevor@spamblockrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 7:21 AM, Jerry Peters wrote:
>>> In sci.electronics.repair Trevor Wilson<trevor@spamblockrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> **Indeed. What it does show is the lack of rigorous standards applied to
>>>> how the petition was conducted.
>>>>
>>> Oh you mean like 97% of all climate scientists, all 79 of them?
>>> http://climatequotes.com/2011/02/10/study-claiming-97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-flawed/
>>>
>>> "First I'm going to address a common response to this study. In this
>>> post at The Hockey Schtick, it is pointed out that the 97% statistic
>>> is based on only 79 climatologists, and that those participating were
>>> self-selected. There are two concerns here. The first is sample size.
>>> While climate science isn't a massive field, 79 participants is fairly
>>> small. To claim definitely that 97% believe this or that you would
>>> need to poll significantly more people. The second concern is the fact
>>> that the scientists were self-selected by an online survey. This may
>>> not have led to a representative sample."
>>
>> **Strawman noted.
>
> Strawman? You "97%" figure comes from a deeply flawed poll. You are in
> deep denial.

**It's a strawman, because the Oregon Petition is:

* Severely flawed.
* A petition of 39,000 scientists (from a pool of several MILLION).
* Not a poll.

>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since the head of the IPCC, Rajendra K.
>>>>>>> Pachauri, is an economist, and shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Al
>>>>>>> Gore, a professional politician, precisely what qualifications do you
>>>>>>> believe are required in order to have an opinion on the subject?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **ANYONE may have an opinion. ANYONE may present the science. Science is
>>>>>> science. Although helpful, a science degree is not essential to present
>>>>>> solid evidence of a specific area of science. When a specialist in a
>>>>>> particular area of scientific research makes a claim, it makes perfect sense
>>>>>> to take careful notice of that claim. When a non-specialist makes a claim,
>>>>>> it makes perfect sense to dispense with that clima, unless there is some
>>>>>> compelling science to accompany it.
>>>>>
>>>>> You avoided my question.
>>>>
>>>> **No, I did not. By ANYONE, I mean ANYONE. Science degrees or not.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Precisely what qualifications do you believe
>>>>> are required in order to have an opinion on the subject?
>>>>
>>>> **None, whatsoever. I believe I already clearly stated that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't
>>>>> mean an uninformed opinion, but rather one that you would consider to
>>>>> be authoritative?
>>>>
>>>> **Appropriate education in some form of climate science is appropriate.
>>>> Something like atmospheric physics, for instance.
>>>
>>> I'm *only* an engineer, but I certainly can recognize crap science
>>> when I see it. For example here's Andrew Lacis doing an "experiment"
>>> http://judithcurry.com/2011/10/09/atmospheric-co2-the-greenhouse-thermostat/
>>>
>>> This is a *thought* experiment, not a real one. Climate models have
>>> not been verified nor validated, yet we're supposed to believe this
>>> proves CO2 entirely controls the temperature.
>>
>> **Why? I would be far more concerned about the lies in the article you
>> just cited. In that article, this claim is made (by that religious
>> fruitcake, Spencer):
>>
>> "..there was a very clever paper published in Science this past week . .
>> . in an attempt to prove that carbon dioxide is the main driver of the
>> climate system."
>>
>> Spencer lied. NO climatologist would ever make such a bogus claim. The
>> Sun is the main driver of climate on this planet.
>>
>> I suggest you choose your cites with more care in future. Try to avoid
>> cites from religious nutters (like Spencer). Stick to science.
>
> I suggest you read climate etc and see what Lacis actually claims.

**I did. Lacis parrotted Spencer's claim. Which is bogus. Spencer lied.
Lacis promulgated that lie.

>
> You persist in ad hominem argument, it makes you look like a
> "religious nutter".

**I cited what was written. Nothing more.

>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Why did we bother to build the LHC? It would have been much cheaper
>>> just to buy physicists a couple of super-computers and let them run
>>> this same kind of "experiment". The standard model of particle physics
>>> is certainly well understood. Could it be perhaps that we want to
>>> actually observe reality?
>>
>> **Which is precisely what the IPCC researchers have done.
>
> You really are delusional. The IPCC has no researchers, it reguritates
> whatever scientific studies it's permanent staff thinks will bolster
> its political goals.

**What are the IPCC's political goals? Supply supporting evidence to
validate your claims.

>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do they need to have a degree? Experience in
>>>>> writing papers? Well known in their specialty? Involved in weather
>>>>> or climate in some manner?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wisdom does not come from experts. It comes from those who question
>>>>> the experts.
>>>>
>>>> **Not always. Sometimes, idiots need to shut the fuck up and listen.
>>>
>>> Nope, if the "experts" can't convince us ordinary people then we need
>>> better experts. Or better science.
>>
>> **No. Uneducated swill need to either become educated or shut the fuck
>> up. My plumber doesn't understand anything about electronics. He is,
>> however, smart enough to not try to tell me my business. Those who don't
>> understand climate science (and cannot be bothered reading the IPCC
>> AR4), have no excuse. They should either attempt to read and understand
>> the information, or fuck off.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is your problem with Spencer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **I have serious problems with anyone that embraces 'Creation Science' as
>>>>>> part of their belief system. Creationism is the most debunked, discredited
>>>>>> and utterly banal religious belief system on the planet. Spence is a
>>>>>> religious loon, who embraces 'Creation Science'.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you only listen to those who completely agree with your values?
>>>>
>>>> **Absolutely not. However, ANYONE that embraces Creationism has serious
>>>> problems with their ability to think critically. Critical thinking is
>>>> essential for any scientific discipline. Ever wondered why we no longer
>>>> see major scientific advances from societies mired in religious
>>>> fundamentalism?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If
>>>>> I ran background checks on my favorite scientists, politicians, and
>>>>> engineers, I would find a very mixed bag of religions, party
>>>>> affiliations, philosophies, and mystical practices. The mistake
>>>>> you're making is that you're judging the person, not the content.
>>>>
>>>> **Partly, yes. Spencer, however, has been proven wrong many times.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Man
>>>>> has fought many revolutions and wars in the name of freedom of speech,
>>>>> thought, religion, philosophy, and economics.
>>>>
>>>> **And I support a person's right to be an idiot. Spencer is an idiot. Or
>>>> do you, too, embrace Spencer's idiotic religious compulsions?
>>>
>>> Ad hominem argument.
>>
>> **No. Fact. Spencer believes in 'Creation Science'. He disputes
>> evloution and Darwin's beautiful explanation in, what is regarded as one
>> of the greatest scientific works of all time. Spencer is, therefore, a
>> complete fool. ANYTHING he has to say about any scientific matter is
>> seriously suspect, due to his inability to think critically and rationally.
>>
>>
>> Spencer's religious beliefs, or Jeff's religious
>>> beliefs, or even *your* religious beliefs are not the question.
>>
>> **Yes, they are. Spencer's religious beliefs are a clear indication of a
>> brain that is unable to think critically and rationally. Unless, of
>> course, you happen to agree with 'Creation Science'.
>>
>>> He's reached different conclusions than you, so that makes him an
>>> idiot?
>>
>> **No. He is an idiot, because he believes in 'Creation Science'.
>>
>>
>> So anyone that disagrees with you is therefore an idiot?
>>
>> **No. Jeff disagrees with me and I do not regard him as an idiot. OTOH,
>> anyone who embraces 'Creation Science' is, by definition, an idiot.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now that almost anyone
>>>>> has the right to an opinion, without risk of official retaliation, you
>>>>> offer the principle that only those that are academically qualified,
>>>>> politically correct, and follow the correct religions, are considered
>>>>> authoritative.
>>>>
>>>> **Of course. ANYONE who embraces Creationism is a fool and may be
>>>> summarily disregarded, as a serious scientist.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> **Certainly. Trouble is, Spencer is a mover and a shaker in the denialist
>>>>>> camp. He is a big target.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what you mean by "target". Assassination is not a useful
>>>>> method of argumentation.
>>>>
>>>> **"Target", in the sense that he is easy to dispute, due to his
>>>> preference of religius belef over science.
>>>
>>> And I would argue that *you* prefer your religious beliefs over actual
>>> science too.
>>
>> **Really? What religious beliefs do you imagine I possess?
>
> Your belief in CAGW and the poor science behind it. Religion doesn't
> imply a belief in God, BTW.

**It implies belief in the supernatural, rather than science:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion

Mostly, that involves some kind of God or Gods.

There is no place for religion or God in science.

>
>>
>>
>>
>> In this case you seem to believe, without question,
>>> whatever crap "climate science" and other greenies claim, ass long as
>>> they dress it up in something that resembles science.
>>
>> **Incorrect. I've read the arguments for and against AGW (including IPCC
>> AR4). Whilst I do not find absolute certainty in the IPCC AR4, I find
>> that it presents far more credible science than the position espoused by
>> Spencer and the fossil fuel lobby. Further and for the record: I have no
>> interest in what "greenies" claim, UNLESS their opinion is backed by
>> solid science.
>>
> You mean like the crap John Cook promulgates on SKS that you
> referenced in prior posts?

**What "crap" would that be?

>
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Climatologists usually don't do their
>>>>>>> own statistics
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **Don't they?
>>>>>
>>>>> Some do, most don't. One of the reasons you see a large number of
>>>>> names as authors on global warming papers is that the effort usually
>>>>> involves a team of specialists. Sometimes its in collaboration with
>>>>> other climatologists, but usually some of the names are statisticians,
>>>>> professional writers, proof readers, and editors.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Jeff, one of the concerns many people have about climate science is
>>> that they do their statistics. They invent new and novel statistical
>>> methods that may or may not be either useful or valid.
>>> See the Wegman criticisms of Mann's statistical methods, for example.
>>>
>>> Judith Curry's site: http://judithcurry.com/ is a useful read.
>>
>> **This is also a useful read:
>>
>> www.ipcc.ch
>>
>> Have you taken the time to read it (all)?
>
> If I want to read political posturing I can find plenty of it on my
> own.
> The IPCC is *not* a science organization, it's a political
> organization.

**I understand now. You decline to read the most comprehensive study on
the topic.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 6:50 pm
From: "Arfa Daily"

>
> **I argue with my mother regularly. She knows not to bring up the topic of
> her religious beliefs in my prescence. I will not tolerate such nonsense.
> She is also rapidly learning that when she attempts to argue that the
> planet is not warming, that she will be sharply rebuked. Sadly, parents
> reach a point where they need to be treated like children.
>
> --
> Trevor Wilson
> www.rageaudio.com.au
>
>

Well, all I can say is that I hope my children never end up treating me with
such disrespect as you clearly have for your parents, or having such dogged
intolerance of the beliefs of others ... :-(

Arfa

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Oct 12 2011 6:57 pm
From: Trevor Wilson

On 10/13/2011 12:50 PM, Arfa Daily wrote:
>
>>
>> **I argue with my mother regularly. She knows not to bring up the
>> topic of her religious beliefs in my prescence. I will not tolerate
>> such nonsense. She is also rapidly learning that when she attempts to
>> argue that the planet is not warming, that she will be sharply
>> rebuked. Sadly, parents reach a point where they need to be treated
>> like children.
>>
>> --
>> Trevor Wilson
>> www.rageaudio.com.au
>>
>>
>
> Well, all I can say is that I hope my children never end up treating me
> with such disrespect as you clearly have for your parents, or having
> such dogged intolerance of the beliefs of others ... :-(

**Again, this is well and truly off topic. I have no issue for the
sacrifices that my parents made for me, nor the values that they
instilled in me. I was raised to be free to express my opinions and
beliefs at all times. Family dinners often resulted in robust
discussions. Particularly, since both my parents shared different
political views to mine. At all times, we conducted such discussions
without rancour and with respect for the views of the opponent. Not the
issue. When we discuss science, my mother is ignorant of the facts. She
lacks the education and the critical thinking required. I remind her of
that.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

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

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