sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

"J.B. Wood" <arl_123234@hotmail.com>: May 15 11:39AM -0400 Does anyone know what might cause an audio CD transport mechanism to to issue a rumbling noise when playing a commercial CD? I've got beaucoup commercial CDs (mostly classical) in my collection and I've noticed this only on one CD (in this case a Philips label), even though it otherwise plays OK in the CD player. That CD doesn't appear to be warped or abnormal upon visual inspection. Thanks for your time and comment. Sincerely, -- J. B. Wood e-mail: arl_123234@hotmail.com

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>: May 15 09:13AM -0700 On Mon, 15 May 2017 11:39:24 -0400, "J.B. Wood" >plays OK in the CD player. That CD doesn't appear to be warped or >abnormal upon visual inspection. Thanks for your time and comment. >Sincerely,   Off balance CD. I've had it happen when someone attached a stick-on label to a CD. At high RPM's, the CD will vibrate. I've also seen a damaged hole in the CD cause the drive clamping mechanism to lock at an odd angle, also causing vibration. If it's only one CD, try to make a copy of the CD. If there is something wrong with the CD, the copy should play normally.   -- 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

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: May 15 10:16AM -0400 >> "Or repair it and not hand it over until the repair bill was paid."   > Can't do that in Ohio. It used to be, and I never heard of any change, that if you repair the unit they can go to the law and make you pay them double the repair bill and give them the unit repaired for free.   What are you talking about??? If you repair a unit you have to pay THEM? How do you make any money?     > It is a harsh law for servicers but was written to punish unscrupulous car repair shops that either just fixed it or went way over the repair estimate and then took the car. People were losing their car because the bill was twice what was expected and they simply did not have the money. Now they don't have a car either.   I think you have not explained the law very well. What does the law say exactly?     > We had to have a rubber stamp for the invoices until the ran out and the new ones had the estimate statement on them - pretty much what was on the rubber stamp.   I also can't make sense of this. What does the rubber stamp have written on it?   --   Rick C

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: May 15 10:17AM -0400 >> "The customer likely made a mistake about which amp was recently serviced. "   > Maybe where you are, but this is the US.   That's right, in the US everyone is out to get you! Only the mistaken make mistakes!!!   --   Rick C

Foxs Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: May 15 09:53AM -0500 On 5/15/2017 9:16 AM, rickman wrote: > I also can't make sense of this.   It's jurb6006, he makes as much sense as Cook does. Except Nigel does it without all the conspiracy theories and dick waving.   -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com   --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com

ohger1s@gmail.com: May 15 08:13AM -0700 On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 10:16:41 AM UTC-4, rickman wrote:   > > Can't do that in Ohio. It used to be, and I never heard of any change, that if you repair the unit they can go to the law and make you pay them double the repair bill and give them the unit repaired for free.   > What are you talking about??? If you repair a unit you have to pay > THEM? How do you make any money?   I'm pretty sure he's talking about prior estimate approval. I haven't run into this personally because I communicate directly with every customer and I'm very clear on this (well, there's one exception I may bore you all later with).   If an item is repaired without the estimate being approved, the customer doesn't have to pay for it. I'm only aware of double or treble damages being awarded to the customer in small claims court cases in the event of fraud, but laws vary state by state.   In the case we're talking about, if said customer brings in an identical item for warranty repair in an attempt to defraud, and you complete the repair and bill for it because you know it's not the same item, he doesn't have to pay for it if you haven't gotten prior approval. You of course have the option of unrepairing the item and returning it in it's original condition.   In the auto business where I live (CT), a work order *must* be signed by the customer before any work is done. Even if there's no complaint by the customer, the DMV here in Connecticut will heavily fine or even shutter an auto business that doesn't get work orders signed. If anyone thinks the Nazis moved to Argentina after the war, they're wrong: they moved to Connecticut and are writing business regulations here.

"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: May 14 02:37PM -0700 On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 3:07:58 AM UTC-4, Ian Jackson wrote:   > Indeed. WD40 never sets 'hard'.. > -- > Ian   WD-40 does not set "hard". However, it redistributes all the hardened grease into a thin layer throughout the sprayed area that, indeed *DOES* set hard once the volatiles dissipate. Unless thoroughly rinsed away.   WD-40 is wonderful stuff if properly used and well understood.   Too damned bad that, although some here appear to have this in hand, such basic knowledge seems to be scarce in one small corner, under one small rock deep in the Antipodes.   Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

gregz <zekor@comcast.net>: May 15 08:02AM > rock deep in the Antipodes.   > Peter Wieck > Melrose Park, PA   How long have I used it on stuff? I keep wondering, at least over 40 years. I know in the 60s I had some electronic cleaner that really melted some plastics good.   Greg

John Robertson <spam@flippers.com>: May 15 08:03AM -0700 On 2017/05/02 12:39 AM, Ian Jackson wrote: > years, but which has been your saviour on the odd occasion when you've > suddenly needed a general-purpose lubricant / switch cleaner / rusty nut > freer / corrosion inhibitor ?   ATF and acetone are better at loosening rusted nuts that WD-40 will ever be.   As per Machinist's Workshop Magazine March/April (and May/June?) 2007:   No lube 516 lbs WD-40 238 lbs PB-Blaster 214 lbs Liquid Wrench 127 lbs Kano Kroll 106 lbs ATF-Acetone 50:50 mix 53 lbs (yes, Fifty-Three pounds)   However I did find that an Army/Navy/Air Force repair manual for oscilloscope 0S-261/U (NSN 6625-00-127-0079)(Techtronics 475) says:   "There are three recommended switch lubricants. They are Silicone Versilube (General Electric Co.), Rykon R (Standard Oil), and WD-40 (Rocket Chemical Co.)."   Which I find surprising based on my experience (seized up shafts), however note that this is a SWITCH lubricant, not a potentiometer. In the manual they specifically state that you don't lubricate sealed pots.   So, I will revise my comments accordingly, it would appear that WD-40 is OK for switch contacts - at least in the mid-70s. Use sparingly!   Anyone here know anyone at Techtronics who can confirm if they still ahve it on the list of recommended lubricants for switches?   Live and learn, eh?   John

"Colonel Edmund J. Burke" <burkesgurlz@ts-girls.com>: May 15 08:10AM -0700 On 5/1/2017 9:07 AM, Micky wrote:   > WD-40 to clean electric contacts?     WD-40 will spit shine those contacts, and it smells good, too.

"Bailey S." <floppybot@gmail.com>: May 15 12:25AM -0700 Oh, well, I have two real pets as well, but they are fully functional.   I'm trying to fix the electronic one that is not. :)

"Bailey S." <floppybot@gmail.com>: May 15 12:29AM -0700 On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 10:35:48 PM UTC-4, rickman wrote:   > membrane to see if the carbon is worn off.   > --   > Rick C   Rubber switch membrane? The only membranes I've got are the buttons in the front and the reset in the back. I've coated them in CaiKote, which is supposed to help responsiveness, but hasn't helped this time. I guess I could try test a different set of button membranes? Couldn't hurt.

ohger1s@gmail.com: May 15 04:34AM -0700 On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:29:34 AM UTC-4, Bailey S. wrote:   > > --   > > Rick C   > Rubber switch membrane? The only membranes I've got are the buttons in the front and the reset in the back. I've coated them in CaiKote, which is supposed to help responsiveness, but hasn't helped this time. I guess I could try test a different set of button membranes? Couldn't hurt.   I haven't used CaiKote, but I use a carbon paint concoction that a part vender mixed himself, and it works well if not spread on too thick.   Anyway, make a resistance check of the working rubber membrane and compare it to the ones that don't. Usually, with the probes a couple of mm apart, you should get a reading of at least 1K or less for reliable contact.   Also check the resistance of the painted-on circuit traces that often make up the circuit side of the "switch" to see if they're OK, again, comparing it the paths that work.   If everything checks out resistance wise, it's probably the chip (likely printed directly onto the PC and covered with a blob of expoxy).

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: May 15 10:11AM -0400 On 5/15/2017 3:29 AM, Bailey S. wrote:   >> --   >> Rick C   > Rubber switch membrane? The only membranes I've got are the buttons in the front and the reset in the back. I've coated them in CaiKote, which is supposed to help responsiveness, but hasn't helped this time. I guess I could try test a different set of button membranes? Couldn't hurt.   Have you tried checking to see if the buttons work? It will be hard to do, but you can measure the resistance across the buttons when you press on them. Otherwise you would need to inspect the membranes.   BTW, how is "responsiveness" an electrical parameter? I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. Can you explain?   --   Rick C

Tim R <timothy42b@aol.com>: May 15 06:24AM -0700 On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 12:31:17 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:   > > I think you should be locked away for your own good. :-P   > It's called "bulletproof coffee", probably because you need a > bulletproof stomach. ;)   The theory is that fat calories in the morning tend to speed your metabolism. Most caloric output comes from resting metabolism, not from exercise.   I don't know if it really works or not but it delays any craving for a snack until lunch, and that's a good thing.

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: May 15 10:08AM -0400 On 5/15/2017 9:24 AM, Tim R wrote: >> bulletproof stomach. ;)   > The theory is that fat calories in the morning tend to speed your metabolism. Most caloric output comes from resting metabolism, not from exercise.   > I don't know if it really works or not but it delays any craving for a snack until lunch, and that's a good thing.   You can justify anything diet and weight gain related that you want if you cite the right source.   "New evidence from our group, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, found that those assigned to eat breakfast used more energy through physical activity (in particular during the morning) than those fasting. "   "Contrary to popular belief, researchers now say breakfast doesn't kickstart the metabolism and may not be the most important meal of the day. A new study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition had more than 300 overweight participants consume diets that included either eating or skipping breakfast. At the end of 16 weeks, dieters who ate breakfast lost no more weight than the breakfast skippers. "   Which one is right? Notice they both refer to the same journal although they don't cite an article specifically (it may even be the same article).   The argument that most calories are burned through base metabolism is not relevant to the issue. If you can burn 100 extra calories a day through exercise that is the same as boosting your base metabolism by 100 calories. One difference is you don't have to eat 100 extra calories to burn the extra 100 calories through exercise.   --   Rick C

MJC <gravity@mjcoon.plus.com>: May 15 09:09AM +0100 In article <MPG.3382b12549764f42989901@news.east.earthlink.net>, rmowery28146@earthlink.net says...   > Years ago I bought a ultrasonic switch kit from Radio Shack. When I > pointed the hand held unit at my dog about 10 feet away and pressed the > button I could see his ears fly up.   ~ digital pet!   Mike.

MJC <gravity@mjcoon.plus.com>: May 15 09:11AM +0100 In article <EfmdnYILj6eyUoXEnZ2dnUU78bPNnZ2d@brightview.com>, me@privacy.net says... > to quieten noisy dog. It doesn't affect the dog at all but how do I know if > it's working or not, there's no indication on it?   > Kenny Cargill   Find someone surveying for bats using an ultrasonic bat detector and make them jump with your emitter?   Mike.

N_Cook <diverse@tcp.co.uk>: May 15 11:29AM +0100 On 14/05/2017 22:42, Kenny wrote: > reviews first. > https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bark-Stop-x/dp/B00Y8PCFYW   > Kenny Cargill   Would there be enough power to disturb some water, in a paper cup, with the sound source directly under the cup, touching the base?

tabbypurr@gmail.com: May 15 06:44AM -0700 On Sunday, 14 May 2017 22:42:14 UTC+1, Kenny wrote: > reviews first. > https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bark-Stop-x/dp/B00Y8PCFYW   > Kenny Cargill   Meter voltage on the transducer. Use an ultrasonic transducer for a mic & multiply it with variable 20-100kHz signal. Try it on random dogs. etc     NT

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.