Chip with simple program for Toy

[Phil Allison]

"RichD"

I purchased an armband radio recently, for jogging.
Truetech, if that means anything.

I inserted 2 new alkaline AAA batteries, they
are now dead after about 90 minutes use.
Is that normal?

** What does the maker's spec sheet say ?

Have you ask the dealer what is the normal running time?

You dumb question is more suited to some consumer whinger's forum.




...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"RichD"

I purchased an armband radio recently, for jogging.
Truetech, if that means anything.

I inserted 2 new alkaline AAA batteries, they
are now dead after about 90 minutes use.
Is that normal?

** What does the maker's spec sheet say ?

Have you ask the dealer what is the normal running time?

You dumb question is more suited to some consumer whinger's forum.




...... Phil

 

[Lord Garth]

"sp" <swapnapriya2020@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e821035a-64da-4d7b-8aa0-588986bf202e@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

we r doing one project based on uc.we want 2 supply voltages one is
5v,and another is 3.3v.we r using adjustable voltage regulator to
adjust the o/p voltage.i will consume 50mA,but we slowly increase the
voltage, the current at the powersupply increse sharply that is more
than 1A it will consume.Plse tell me what r the reasons the power
supply in cc

What are the specifications for the active components?

If a part needs 5 volts, generally they mean 5 volts plus or
minus 10%. More than this and you will release the magic
smoke (and observe the increase in current as you do so).

 

[Lord Garth]

"sp" <swapnapriya2020@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e821035a-64da-4d7b-8aa0-588986bf202e@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

we r doing one project based on uc.we want 2 supply voltages one is
5v,and another is 3.3v.we r using adjustable voltage regulator to
adjust the o/p voltage.i will consume 50mA,but we slowly increase the
voltage, the current at the powersupply increse sharply that is more
than 1A it will consume.Plse tell me what r the reasons the power
supply in cc

What are the specifications for the active components?

If a part needs 5 volts, generally they mean 5 volts plus or
minus 10%. More than this and you will release the magic
smoke (and observe the increase in current as you do so).

 

[dBc]

Sp..

I realize that you may not fully comprehend the English language but,
you need to consider writing your future questions in English with
complete sentences.

In this case, describing what you're attempting to accomplish for the
sake of the design requirements. I wouldn't assume that everyone knows
what you mean when using acronyms. Example, "r," "cc," or "plse."

Spell them out completely:
1. are
2. please
3. increase

Cheers,
Mr. Mentor


"sp" <swapnapriya2020@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e821035a-64da-4d7b-8aa0-588986bf202e@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| we r doing one project based on uc.we want 2 supply voltages one is
| 5v,and another is 3.3v.we r using adjustable voltage regulator to
| adjust the o/p voltage.i will consume 50mA,but we slowly increase
the
| voltage, the current at the powersupply increse sharply that is more
| than 1A it will consume.Plse tell me what r the reasons the power
| supply in cc

 

[dBc]

Sp..

I realize that you may not fully comprehend the English language but,
you need to consider writing your future questions in English with
complete sentences.

In this case, describing what you're attempting to accomplish for the
sake of the design requirements. I wouldn't assume that everyone knows
what you mean when using acronyms. Example, "r," "cc," or "plse."

Spell them out completely:
1. are
2. please
3. increase

Cheers,
Mr. Mentor


"sp" <swapnapriya2020@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e821035a-64da-4d7b-8aa0-588986bf202e@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| we r doing one project based on uc.we want 2 supply voltages one is
| 5v,and another is 3.3v.we r using adjustable voltage regulator to
| adjust the o/p voltage.i will consume 50mA,but we slowly increase
the
| voltage, the current at the powersupply increse sharply that is more
| than 1A it will consume.Plse tell me what r the reasons the power
| supply in cc

 

[Don Kelly]

----------------------------
"bud--" <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote in message
news:e234c$481f53e8$4213eabe$21042@DIALUPUSA.NET...

Don Kelly wrote:
----------------------------
"Tony Hwang" <dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:dncTj.112858$rd2.31639@pd7urf3no...
phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
In alt.tv.tech.hdtv Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net
wrote:

| Bullshit. Like ALL charges, it simply seeks a complete circuit to
| flow. You have absolutely no grasp of the basic concepts, yet you
| continue to spout your ignorance and lies.

Not true.

When you close a switch between a power source and a pair of wires that
go
out yonder, the electrical energy does not "know" whether the circuit
is
complete or not. If it refused to flow, it would not be able to find
out.
It will flow, whether the circuit is complete or not. What happens
after
that depends on what is at the other end, which could be an open
condition,
a short circuit, or some kind of resistive or reactive load.

You've claimed to have worked in broadcasting in an engineering role.
So
you should understand what happens at the end of an open transmission
line.
The electricity flows to get to the open end. Yet it is not a
"complete
circuit".

Hmmm,
You seem to be confused between current flow(energy) and
voltage(poential) Nothing flows in an open circuit. If not we have to
rewrite Ohm's law. Show your credential to make a stamement like that.
Shameful.
------------------------
Actually, you are showing some confusion. Phil is right in that he is
bringing out a point that normal lumped RLC circuit theory doesn't handle
because it essentially treats the speed of propagation of electrical
signals as if it were infinite- which isn't true.
.
2)Also, on energizing a line whether it is open or closed, there is a
current flow as the applied voltage "sees" the characteristic impedance
of the line (wire or whatever) so a current will flow-even on an open
circuit- until there is a modifying reflection from the termination. For
a house the distances are such that this may be of the order of 0.1-0.2
microsecond. After all such reflections at terminations have ceased or
are negligable, conventional circuit theory is applicable.
In these situations, you are dealing with wave propagation rather than
conventional circuit theory.
This is the regime that is of interest in considering "surge protectors"

The last standards for simulating typical surge waveforms I have seen
(IEEE) were
1.2 us rise time, 50 us duration
8 us rise time, 20 us duration
a ring wave with a frequency about 100kHz.

All are long relative to 0.2 microsecond, so wave propagation should not
be relevant for household circuits.
----------------------------------------

Your point is true- the time interval is so small that for practical
purposes it can be ignored. I am not denying that. Obviously I gave that
impression- sorry for that.

I was simply pointing out that phil had it right in theory and Tony had it
wrong.

After this time for the wave to travel to the end and be reflected (and
other re-reflections die out) then conventional circuit theory is
applicable. The fact that the time is extremely small simply means that we
can pretend that it doesn't even exist.

While Matzloff is right in the time for a round trip is of the order of
200m, it is also dangerous to assume that one can ignore waves for shorter
distances. For example, a stroke to a tower of an EHV line (a lot less than
200m) will go down the tower, meet ground resistance and be reflected.
Such reflections have been found to be more likely to cause flashover than
direct strokes to the line (EPRI). Similarly, the practice in substations
is not "whole station" protection (where this is applicable, it must be done
considering a number of factors- quite interesting ) and putting specific
protection as near as possible to the protected apparatus-definitely within,
say, 10m. - It's not just the time to peak that is the critical factor. Do a
lattice diagram approach or use Bergeron's method (Hermann Dommel did a lot
of work with this at EPRI and has a lot of papers in IEEE- more dealing with
switching surges than lightning).
It's been a long time since I did any calculations in this area so I would
have to brush up.

Now - is this all germane to household protection? You say not and I agree
with you- because household equipment can ride through - at worst- doubling
of the clamped voltage for a very short time even though the clamped voltage
is relatively small compared to the peak of the incoming surge. --

Don Kelly dhky@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer

A favorite article from w_ also uses a "8x20 us impulse as a very rough
representative pulse" with most harmonic content from 20kHz to 100kHz.

Martzloff, using the shorter rise time, has written: "For a 1.2/50 us
impulse, this means that the line must be at least 200 m long before one
can think in terms of classical transmission line behavior."

What reason is there to believe wave propagation is relevant to house
circuits?


As to the advantage of "whole house" vs local surge protection, "whole
house protection depends on distances to all "protected" items being
small.

Longer distances make the system more subject to effects like direct
induction from lightning into the wiring. I don't see why, in general,
the distance has to be small.


--
bud--

 

In alt.engineering.electrical Don Kelly <dhky@shaw.ca> wrote:

| Now - is this all germane to household protection? You say not and I agree
| with you- because household equipment can ride through - at worst- doubling
| of the clamped voltage for a very short time even though the clamped voltage
| is relatively small compared to the peak of the incoming surge. --

What if the surge is an extreme case (e.g. direct strike very near) and it is
arriving at protection devices in common mode (same polarity on all three
wires). Bud's assertion _seems_ to be that no surge could ever be of the
type with substantial energy at high frequencies. My belief is that they
can, and will at times. Lightning strokes have that energy, or else you
would not receive them on UHF. If the stroke is strong _and_ close (e.g.
less line inductance between the point of strike and where it is being
considered), then more of that UHF energy will arrive.

I have seen damage patterns in electronics that strongly suggests that there
were specific paths involved based on minor levels of reactance in the circuit.
A resistor would be melted along one path, but not so along another which had
a small inductor (3 turns in air) in the way. And this device (a VCR) was on
a surge protector along with a TV that was unharmed.

If Bud is just arguing about the _typical_ (median?) surge level, then maybe
we are arguing apples and oranges. I certainly don't intent to protect against
50% of surges. My target is better than 99%. I want to feel comfortable
sleeping through a severe thunderstorm while my computers and media center
remain plugged in.

I do agree that things can survive at the clamping voltage. But there has to
be a clamping situation. It's too easy for a surge to come in as a common
mode surge where the voltage difference across the MOVs would be (nearly) zero.
Then all we have is a propogating wavefront. And if it is strong and/or close
then we have very fast rise times. And it passes by the MOVs "laterally".

There's probably a big difference of opinion about just how much protection is
worth it. But one thing I do see in at least part of this thread is that Bud
focuses on quoting things other people say, and does very little to express
things in his own words. That suggests he reads but does not fully understand.
And that means I can't ask questions of what is said in the thread. Since Bud
can't (or won't) defend what he's saying in his own words based on his own
knowledge, it's not really a two way street. His "experts" are not involved
in the debate; they can neither defend their position nor be questioned about
it to get more details.

It also has brought some other comments from people who are either anti-social
insulting types, or those that just don't understand what is said (apparently
having never dealt with transmission line propogation), or both. But at least
I know who not to trust any technical opinions from when I have question to
ask about things I want to learn more about.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

 

[David L. Jones]

"Gaurav" <selfishgaurav@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:16de3676-b3e9-4d5c-9d1f-b379c128fe4a@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Using IR (infrared) to transmit the sound may be better, and is hardly
a new idea. They existed thirty years ago.
Michael

Interesting idea indeed. But would that not mean that I would have to
remain in the line of sight with the emitters? Anyway, if it is easier
to construct, I am all for it. Could you please point me to some link
that does something of the kind. I will also google it up and see.

Try:
http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_109639/article.html
http://us1.webpublications.com.au/static/images/articles/i1096/109639_12mg.jpg
http://us1.webpublications.com.au/static/images/articles/i1096/109639_18mg.jpg

Dave.

 

[David L. Jones]

"Gaurav" <selfishgaurav@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:16de3676-b3e9-4d5c-9d1f-b379c128fe4a@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Using IR (infrared) to transmit the sound may be better, and is hardly
a new idea. They existed thirty years ago.
Michael

Interesting idea indeed. But would that not mean that I would have to
remain in the line of sight with the emitters? Anyway, if it is easier
to construct, I am all for it. Could you please point me to some link
that does something of the kind. I will also google it up and see.

Try:
http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_109639/article.html
http://us1.webpublications.com.au/static/images/articles/i1096/109639_12mg.jpg
http://us1.webpublications.com.au/static/images/articles/i1096/109639_18mg.jpg

Dave.

 

[David L. Jones]

"sp" <swapnapriya2020@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e821035a-64da-4d7b-8aa0-588986bf202e@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

we r doing one project based on uc.we want 2 supply voltages one is
5v,and another is 3.3v.we r using adjustable voltage regulator to
adjust the o/p voltage.i will consume 50mA,but we slowly increase the
voltage, the current at the powersupply increse sharply that is more
than 1A it will consume.Plse tell me what r the reasons the power
supply in cc

I'm sorry, my newsreader can't read SMS messages.

Dave.

 

[David L. Jones]

"RichD" <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5d913de7-b003-4728-ac19-86cd66b66110@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

I purchased an armband radio recently, for jogging.
Truetech, if that means anything.

I inserted 2 new alkaline AAA batteries, they
are now dead after about 90 minutes use.
Is that normal?

Sounds very low, but depends entirely on the device.
Does it have any specs?
Is this it:?
http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/602-0480377-6420629?asin=B000RB0M1O&AFID=Shopping&LNM=B000RB0M1O|AMFM_Armband_Radio_with_Safety_LED_Light&ref=tgt_adv_XSC10001

If that's the case then the LED light will take some extra juice to run. But
it could just be badly designed, wouldn't be the first time for such a
product.

I can still return the radio,
if it's presumed defective.

What is the capacity of a AAA battery?

For Alkaline, anywhere from about 1200mAh down to under 500mAh depending
upon the current drain.
So if your device was designed properly, it would be draining say 300-400mA
from the batteries to last that long. That is very high for such a device.
So either you got some dud cells, the device is faulty, or it's badly
designed. Perhaps even a combination of all three.

Also, this is the first time I've tried earbud style
earphones. The damn things won't stay in my ears!
Are there different sizes? I figure it's 'one size fits all'.
Maybe my ear canals are too narrow.... (also
my ears are too big, but that's another story)

They have the foam pads, which are pretty large,
and overflow out the ear canal - they don't squeeze
in completely.

Looks like it uses a standard 3.5mm jack, in that case you can use any
headphones on the market.

Dave.

 

[David L. Jones]

"RichD" <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5d913de7-b003-4728-ac19-86cd66b66110@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

I purchased an armband radio recently, for jogging.
Truetech, if that means anything.

I inserted 2 new alkaline AAA batteries, they
are now dead after about 90 minutes use.
Is that normal?

Sounds very low, but depends entirely on the device.
Does it have any specs?
Is this it:?
http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/602-0480377-6420629?asin=B000RB0M1O&AFID=Shopping&LNM=B000RB0M1O|AMFM_Armband_Radio_with_Safety_LED_Light&ref=tgt_adv_XSC10001

If that's the case then the LED light will take some extra juice to run. But
it could just be badly designed, wouldn't be the first time for such a
product.

I can still return the radio,
if it's presumed defective.

What is the capacity of a AAA battery?

For Alkaline, anywhere from about 1200mAh down to under 500mAh depending
upon the current drain.
So if your device was designed properly, it would be draining say 300-400mA
from the batteries to last that long. That is very high for such a device.
So either you got some dud cells, the device is faulty, or it's badly
designed. Perhaps even a combination of all three.

Also, this is the first time I've tried earbud style
earphones. The damn things won't stay in my ears!
Are there different sizes? I figure it's 'one size fits all'.
Maybe my ear canals are too narrow.... (also
my ears are too big, but that's another story)

They have the foam pads, which are pretty large,
and overflow out the ear canal - they don't squeeze
in completely.

Looks like it uses a standard 3.5mm jack, in that case you can use any
headphones on the market.

Dave.

 

[Tzortzakakis Dimitrios]

? <spamfree@spam.heaven> ?????? ??? ??????
news:hkfu149a5vrit5hmv0diutsv7daiqor67i@4ax.com...

On Mon, 5 May 2008 19:21:16 +0300, "Tzortzakakis Dimitrios"
noone@nospam.void> wrote:


Ď "Tantalust" <Tantalust@paradise.net> Ýăńářĺ óôď ěŢíőěá
news:RPidnaZzhcrV0oXVnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@comcast.com...
"NB" <nobuyout@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b53f2fef-00bd-40d0-9ac1-c69b3bcadf52@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???

He an obsessive-compulsive disorder victim, apparently driven by some
kind
of bizarre fetish involving ground rods.


What kind of ground rods? I prefer steel core, copper clad ones I even
have the special heavy hammer

I'm on 2000' of sand, and at the moment, my house earth is the copper

2000'? I am only 5'10"

water pipes, but the water corp keep adding plastic bits here and
there, so I don't really trust it. I was going to hammer in a 20'
length of 3/4" copper pipe under a large tree which gets the drain
from my grey water. Probably the best I can do.

Perhaps you should get a proper earthing electrode, with a spiked end and a

stell core? It would be really difficult to hammer 20' of 3/4" copper pipe.
They are not that expensive.

I'm not a full bottle on earth loops yet so i don't know about leaving
the water mains connection still connected.
The earth loops matter only in electronic circuits, like amplifiers and the

like. In electricity, the play no role, in fact they reduce even further the
earth resintance.

What's the best way to test an earth?
I heard once that a large electric radiator (fire) connected between
active (hot) and the earth will glow as per normal if the earth has
good capacity. Perhaps a current comparison between the earth return
and neutral return would be more informative?

Although the neutral is at zero potential, still carries a large current.

The earth not. Since the neutral point of the LV side of the local
substation is earthed, for the electricity "is all the same" between neutral
and earth, depending on the neutral earthing system.
--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering
mechanized infantry reservist
hordad AT otenet DOT gr

 

[Tzortzakakis Dimitrios]

? <spamfree@spam.heaven> ?????? ??? ??????
news:hkfu149a5vrit5hmv0diutsv7daiqor67i@4ax.com...

On Mon, 5 May 2008 19:21:16 +0300, "Tzortzakakis Dimitrios"
noone@nospam.void> wrote:


Ď "Tantalust" <Tantalust@paradise.net> Ýăńářĺ óôď ěŢíőěá
news:RPidnaZzhcrV0oXVnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@comcast.com...
"NB" <nobuyout@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b53f2fef-00bd-40d0-9ac1-c69b3bcadf52@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Who is W_TOM and why has he appeared in every single thread that has
contained those keywords since 2001???

He an obsessive-compulsive disorder victim, apparently driven by some
kind
of bizarre fetish involving ground rods.


What kind of ground rods? I prefer steel core, copper clad ones I even
have the special heavy hammer

I'm on 2000' of sand, and at the moment, my house earth is the copper

2000'? I am only 5'10"

water pipes, but the water corp keep adding plastic bits here and
there, so I don't really trust it. I was going to hammer in a 20'
length of 3/4" copper pipe under a large tree which gets the drain
from my grey water. Probably the best I can do.

Perhaps you should get a proper earthing electrode, with a spiked end and a

stell core? It would be really difficult to hammer 20' of 3/4" copper pipe.
They are not that expensive.

I'm not a full bottle on earth loops yet so i don't know about leaving
the water mains connection still connected.
The earth loops matter only in electronic circuits, like amplifiers and the

like. In electricity, the play no role, in fact they reduce even further the
earth resintance.

What's the best way to test an earth?
I heard once that a large electric radiator (fire) connected between
active (hot) and the earth will glow as per normal if the earth has
good capacity. Perhaps a current comparison between the earth return
and neutral return would be more informative?

Although the neutral is at zero potential, still carries a large current.

The earth not. Since the neutral point of the LV side of the local
substation is earthed, for the electricity "is all the same" between neutral
and earth, depending on the neutral earthing system.
--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering
mechanized infantry reservist
hordad AT otenet DOT gr

 

In alt.engineering.electrical bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
| phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
|> In alt.engineering.electrical bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
|> | phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
|> |> In alt.tv.tech.hdtv bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
|>
|> |> | w_' professional engineer source says 8 micoseconds with most of the
|> |> | spectrum under 100kHz.
|> |>
|> |> Even with 1 nanosecond rise time, most of the energy will be present in
|> |> the spectrum below 100 kHz. That means nothing when the surge is strong
|> |> enough to have energy above some frequency that is relevant to the whole
|> |> system involved that can do damage. That frequency might be 100 Mhz for
|> |> some thing, and 1 GHz for other things.
|> |
|> | Still missing - your source. Nanosecond risetime. 100MHz spectrum.
|>
|> Observation. Of course this is a concept you cannot understand.
|
| Observation proves flying saucers and magic.
|
| Without supporting sources it is Phil's Phantasy Physics.
| Where is a source that supports your belief in nanosecond risetimes and
| 100MHz spectrum?

Since you seem unwilling to just discuss technical aspects of things, I have
to conclude that you simply do not understand what it is you read and quote.
Too many times you quote out of context. I don't know where that is because
you are trying to be manipulative or simply on account of ignorance. There
is that old sayind "Do not ascribe to malice that which can be explained by
ignorance". I don't know if I should follow it's advice.

There is no point in spending the effort to find some quotable source because
you wouldn't know what to do with it. How could you possibly comprehend what
I would give you if you can't even comprehend what you post.

After this round of followups, I'm done with this thread and I'm done replying
to you. If curing your ignorance is in your future, it will have to be from
someone else.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

 

In alt.engineering.electrical bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
| phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
|> In alt.engineering.electrical bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
|> | phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
|> |> In alt.tv.tech.hdtv bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
|>
|> |> | w_' professional engineer source says 8 micoseconds with most of the
|> |> | spectrum under 100kHz.
|> |>
|> |> Even with 1 nanosecond rise time, most of the energy will be present in
|> |> the spectrum below 100 kHz. That means nothing when the surge is strong
|> |> enough to have energy above some frequency that is relevant to the whole
|> |> system involved that can do damage. That frequency might be 100 Mhz for
|> |> some thing, and 1 GHz for other things.
|> |
|> | Still missing - your source. Nanosecond risetime. 100MHz spectrum.
|>
|> Observation. Of course this is a concept you cannot understand.
|
| Observation proves flying saucers and magic.
|
| Without supporting sources it is Phil's Phantasy Physics.
| Where is a source that supports your belief in nanosecond risetimes and
| 100MHz spectrum?

Since you seem unwilling to just discuss technical aspects of things, I have
to conclude that you simply do not understand what it is you read and quote.
Too many times you quote out of context. I don't know where that is because
you are trying to be manipulative or simply on account of ignorance. There
is that old sayind "Do not ascribe to malice that which can be explained by
ignorance". I don't know if I should follow it's advice.

There is no point in spending the effort to find some quotable source because
you wouldn't know what to do with it. How could you possibly comprehend what
I would give you if you can't even comprehend what you post.

After this round of followups, I'm done with this thread and I'm done replying
to you. If curing your ignorance is in your future, it will have to be from
someone else.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

 

In alt.engineering.electrical Eric <me@nomail.com> wrote:

| I can attest to vhf/uhf content in lightning strikes. I worked for a
| communications outfit. We owned and maintained a number of comm sites
| with towers and antennas. One strike on an antenna destroyed the LDF rf
| cable all the way to the polyphaser at the bottom of the tower. It had
| blowouts at about 1 foot intervals all down it's length suggesting a
| 1/2 wave of about 1 foot or approx 460 mhz. That's one hell of a lot of
| energy at that frequency..

Apparently you had some kind of resonance involved. Maybe the antenna itself
can cause that. Or the output tank circuit in the transmitter. Once you have
the resonance to narrowband the energy, it would only take a reflection back
up the line and you turn a propogating surge into standing waves.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

 

In alt.engineering.electrical Eric <me@nomail.com> wrote:

| I can attest to vhf/uhf content in lightning strikes. I worked for a
| communications outfit. We owned and maintained a number of comm sites
| with towers and antennas. One strike on an antenna destroyed the LDF rf
| cable all the way to the polyphaser at the bottom of the tower. It had
| blowouts at about 1 foot intervals all down it's length suggesting a
| 1/2 wave of about 1 foot or approx 460 mhz. That's one hell of a lot of
| energy at that frequency..

Apparently you had some kind of resonance involved. Maybe the antenna itself
can cause that. Or the output tank circuit in the transmitter. Once you have
the resonance to narrowband the energy, it would only take a reflection back
up the line and you turn a propogating surge into standing waves.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

 

In alt.engineering.electrical bud-- <remove.budnews@isp.com> wrote:
| phil-news-nospam@ipal.net wrote:
|> In alt.engineering.electrical Don Kelly <dhky@shaw.ca> wrote:
|>
|> | Now - is this all germane to household protection? You say not and I agree
|> | with you- because household equipment can ride through - at worst- doubling
|> | of the clamped voltage for a very short time even though the clamped voltage
|> | is relatively small compared to the peak of the incoming surge. --
|>
|> My belief is that they
|> can, and will at times.
|
| People believe in flying saucers.
| Where is a source that supports your belief?

My observations support my belief. I don't expect YOU to believe it on the
basis if MY observations, as I certainly won't believe things on the basis
of YOUR observations. What I am posting about is for you to UNDERSTAND what
I believe, not that you have to believe it. Maybe someday you will come to
understand it, and then you might realize how you have misread what it is
you have been quoting online.

Since you spend all your keystrokes making person attacks or insisting on
something being cited, or make quotes that are often truncated incorrectly
or misapplied, I can only conclude you have no actual understanding of what
it is you have been quoting. What good would me citing anything do for you
if you can't understand it.


|> I do agree that things can survive at the clamping voltage. But there has to
|> be a clamping situation. It's too easy for a surge to come in as a common
|> mode surge where the voltage difference across the MOVs would be (nearly) zero.
|> Then all we have is a propogating wavefront. And if it is strong and/or close
|> then we have very fast rise times. And it passes by the MOVs "laterally".
|
| Where is a source that supports your belief in nanosecond risetimes and
| 100MHz spectrum?

Another poster followed up to my post you just followed up to that also has
experienced the same thing. That might not be some published citation that
you want. But that doesn't matter. It seems you can't comprehend what this
is about regardless of whether it is observed by others, or yourself, or by
the experts you cite.


|> But one thing I do see in at least part of this thread is that Bud
|> focuses on quoting things other people say, and does very little to express
|> things in his own words.
|
| I focus on the real world. You focus on your beliefs.

You focus on citing and quoting things you do not understand well enough to
just talking about them in technical terms.


| Where is a source that supports your belief in nanosecond risetimes and
| 100MHz spectrum?

See above.

And after this round of followups, I'm done with this thread and with your
posts on this subject. You can have the last say, but I will not even read
it.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating from |
| Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more readers |
| you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |