Driver to drive?

[Sylvia Else]

On 6/04/2014 4:19 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

On Saturday, April 5, 2014 12:16:04 AM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 5/04/2014 5:38 AM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:



That's very boring, like you're going to construct a homemade
heater

anywhere near as efficient as off-the-shelf models



Who mentioned efficiency? I certainly didn't.



Sylvia.

Yes, of course, that would have been to practical for someone like
you. Looks like you're hung up on much more elementary
considerations.

It's hard to make an inefficient immersion heater.

Sylvia.

 

On Sunday, April 6, 2014 10:20:42 AM UTC-4, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 16:34:17 +1000, Sylvia Else

sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:



On 6/04/2014 4:19 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

On Saturday, April 5, 2014 12:16:04 AM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 5/04/2014 5:38 AM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:







That's very boring, like you're going to construct a homemade

heater



anywhere near as efficient as off-the-shelf models







Who mentioned efficiency? I certainly didn't.







Sylvia.



Yes, of course, that would have been to practical for someone like

you. Looks like you're hung up on much more elementary

considerations.





It's hard to make an inefficient immersion heater.



Sylvia.



By responding to Bloggs you give his opinion credence, when it really

had none. Don't feed the trolls... spare the rest of us from enduring

Bloggs even though he's in our killfiles.

Nah, as usual you have things backwards. You and your kind are on your way out, and no one in their right mind would give serious consideration to any of your fringe opinions.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 16:34:17 +1000, Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

On 6/04/2014 4:19 PM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, April 5, 2014 12:16:04 AM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 5/04/2014 5:38 AM, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:



That's very boring, like you're going to construct a homemade
heater

anywhere near as efficient as off-the-shelf models



Who mentioned efficiency? I certainly didn't.



Sylvia.

Yes, of course, that would have been to practical for someone like
you. Looks like you're hung up on much more elementary
considerations.


It's hard to make an inefficient immersion heater.

Sylvia.

By responding to Bloggs you give his opinion credence, when it really
had none. Don't feed the trolls... spare the rest of us from enduring
Bloggs even though he's in our killfiles.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

..FUNC[PLINK] BYE >:-}

Note to all: Replying to Larkin will _not_ be seen by me. I finally
figured out how to kill subthreads, so I have no annoyance whatsoever.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:19:18 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

...Jim Thompson

I suppose that was your list of fast CMOS opamps.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:22:03 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

.FUNC[PLINK] BYE >:-}

Note to all: Replying to Larkin will _not_ be seen by me. I finally
figured out how to kill subthreads, so I have no annoyance whatsoever.

...Jim Thompson

Chicken! You are wrong about CMOS amps, and are going off to hide in the back of
your coop.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 4/6/2014 1:22 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

.FUNC[PLINK] BYE >:-}

Note to all: Replying to Larkin will _not_ be seen by me. I finally
figured out how to kill subthreads, so I have no annoyance whatsoever.

...Jim Thompson

Hallelujah. Let's hope you can keep it up this time.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 4/6/2014 1:22 PM, John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:19:18 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

...Jim Thompson


I suppose that was your list of fast CMOS opamps.

There are some pretty good ones, though not in the ADA4899 or ADA4817
class. I've got quite fond of the AD8605 series--RRIO but with some
real output drive, so they run into ADCs really well.

IBM stuck with bipolar ECL until the early '90s, because of its huge
transconductance advantage over CMOS. When they made the switch, which
was due to the heat problem, Amdahl (Fujitsu) ate their lunch for one
product generation before switching themselves.

An advanced ECL process of that era had about 600 process steps, vs. 300
for CMOS, so the cost delta was pretty significant, but the extra
performance made it worthwhile.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[rickman]

On 4/6/2014 1:22 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

.FUNC[PLINK] BYE >:-}

Note to all: Replying to Larkin will _not_ be seen by me. I finally
figured out how to kill subthreads, so I have no annoyance whatsoever.

...Jim Thompson

Finally a rational act in this "conversation"...

--

Rick

 

[rickman]

On 4/6/2014 1:24 PM, John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:22:03 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 10:09:43 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 08:42:04 -0500, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:48:29 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 15:28:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:49:43 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

[snip]

Who uttered their profound statement of ignorance, "Thing about CMOS
is its terrible ratio of capacitance to transconductance. I've
seen CMOS opamps that have PSRR *gain*." ???

Anyone with half a clue knows that PSRR is referred to input for a
reason... to hide the fact that there is always a frequency point
above which ALL OpAmps have gain from supplies to output... bipolar's
included.

I was designing bipolar integrated circuits while you were still in
diapers. Sometimes I think you still are.

...Jim Thompson

You're still chicken, and still wrong.

If you dispute the gain:capacitance disadvantage of CMOS amps, name a
CMOS opamp that's as fast as a bipolar THS3201. Or has the speed and
input capacitance of a jfet ADA4817. Or comes anywhere near the specs
of an AD8034.

Come on, try it.


Thanks for the insight.

.FUNC[PLINK] BYE >:-}

Note to all: Replying to Larkin will _not_ be seen by me. I finally
figured out how to kill subthreads, so I have no annoyance whatsoever.

...Jim Thompson

Chicken! You are wrong about CMOS amps, and are going off to hide in the back of
your coop.

But John can't let this end without trying at least to draw blood.

--

Rick

 

[George Herold]

On Saturday, April 5, 2014 12:14:16 AM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 4/04/2014 11:56 PM, George Herold wrote:

snip

Yes.

R1 is the thermal resistance between the heater element[*] and the water.
C1 is the specific heat of the heater element.

R2 is the thermal resistance from the water to ambient. In this
particular situation it appears to be pretty much independent of the
amount of water.
C2 is the specific heat of the water and its container.

OK, then I'd have R2 going to a voltage source set at room temperature.
(I like to use degree's K for this type of stuff... So I'd have R2 going to a 300 V (deg K) voltage source. Rather than to ground. So in my picture ground is zero volts or zero degree's K. That may sound a bit weird but it works.

V1 is the temperature of the heater at the point where it is turned off.
V2 is the temperature of the water at the point where the heater is
turned off.



The main issue I have is determining the point at which to turn off the
heater so that the temperature of the water peaks at a predetermined point.



I wouldn't have expected C1 to matter much, but it clearly does, at
least in conjunction with the also unknown V1. Depending on the amount
of water, I can see an overshoot after the heater is turned off of 20
degrees Celsius.

Well it will make some difference.. C1 heats up and then the heat slowly leaks out into the water.

George H.

The heat capacity of the water certainly dominates C2, and that's easy
to calculate. Similarly, R2 is easy to measure just by observing how
quickly the water cools. V2 is just the temperature of the water
immediately after the heater is turned off.

I can determine a good value for (V1 - V2) / R1 based on the rate of
temperature rise of the water just before the heater is turned off
(after allowing for the known loss through R2). I've yet to look at the
math to see whether that helps much.


Convection in the water seems inevitable, since water is a poor
conductor of heat. The effects are quite visible in the temperature
measurements, though the variability is less than a degree in the setup
I have (admittedly, I'm only measuring the temperature at one point).
Things quieten down once the heater is off.



Sylvia.



[*] Actually, of course, the heater element is a resistance wire inside

an insulator, so it has its own somewhat complex thermal behaviour. I'm

assuming I can ignore that for practical purposes, and treat it as a

single thermal mass at some temperature.

 

[Simon S Aysdie]

On Wednesday, April 2, 2014 3:30:33 PM UTC-7, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Wed, 2 Apr 2014 22:09:50 +0000 (UTC), Geoff <public@email.com

Replace C's with an impedance value 1/(Cs), where "s" is the Laplace
variable, then simply write a transfer V(OUT)/V(IN)

You'll get a second order equation which must be partial-fraction
expanded, then you can write down the time domain by observation.

That is saying you remember some LT table entries. The PFE, some algebraic manipulation, and the tables of transforms are used in place of the calculus, since actually doing a Laplace transform (LT) is doing calculus. In this way, a calculus problem is reduced to an algebra problem.

> The technique, BTW, is courtesy of Oliver Heaviside... not Laplace.

It was Thomas John I'Anson Bromwich that formalized and injected rigor into Heaviside's method. He reframed Heaviside's "Operational Calculus" to the use of the LT as we know it today. Bromwich commited suicide in 1929.

"Heaviside's operational calculus is just the Laplace transform in heavy disguise."--Paul Nahin, p.218 of /Oliver Heaviside/

"He [Heaviside] introduced a new and radical mathematical attack on physical problems which was very powerful but also very obviously full of holes."--Vannevar Bush

 

On Wednesday, April 9, 2014 1:17:13 PM UTC-4, Simon S Aysdie wrote:

> It was Thomas John I'Anson Bromwich that formalized and injected rigor into Heaviside's method. He reframed Heaviside's "Operational Calculus" to the use of the LT as we know it today. Bromwich commited suicide in 1929.

What was Bromwich's problem that drove him to suicide?

"Heaviside's operational calculus is just the Laplace transform in heavy disguise."--Paul Nahin, p.218 of /Oliver Heaviside/

This little circuit doesn't require any theory, compute the impedance function which gets you the the second order characteristic, not a big leap to organize into the canonical form with a single natural frequency and damping coefficient ( expressed as functions of the constituent components ), then it's done.

 

[hamilton]

On 4/9/2014 12:23 PM, petrus bitbyter wrote:

So I have to repair a Yamaha instrument that has its push switches worn
out. The rubber dome switches are known as VE135700. Dimensions
10x10x4mm. About half of the 4mm height is the dome. I'm desparatly
looking for replacements but no luck so far. I found one supplier but he
only ships inside the States which is of no help as I am in Europe.
Anyone has an idea where to find replacements? I looked at Farnell,
Mouser, RS and other well known suppliers already but as I mentioned, no
luck.

petrus bitbyter

Does it look like this ?

http://www.pointy.plus.com/img/img_0301_small.jpg

Check the bottom of:

http://www.electronicspoint.com/threads/switch-identification.53014/

 

[Klaus Kragelund]

On Thursday, April 10, 2014 6:16:12 PM UTC+2, John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:05:30 GMT, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com

wrote:



On a sunny day (Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:47:04 -0700) it happened John Larkin

jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in

b2edk9h9dea9m3ef2ogfa3op4fvvfjfgi7@4ax.com>:





Get used to it. Everything nowadays has a computer in it.



Tennis rackets. Stoves. Refrigerators. Telephones. Toilets.



Imagine when everything is online to "the internet of things." You'll spend most

of your life reprogramming, debuggung, repairing, or returning every lamp,

faucet, thermostat, and toaster oven in your house. Upgrade that blender code

from 0.12.313b 3.19.501a to fix some stack overflow vulnerability, when you'd

rather be making margueritas.



We bought a new kitchen stove ("gas cooker" in some places) and I wanted one

without digital controls. The computerized ones are everywhere and cost about

$500. The ones without computers are in the $2000 to $5000 range. Can you

imagine a worse environment for cheap electronics than in the top of a stove, or

a dishwasher?



We got an NXR for about $2K.



I also ripped out the programmable thermostat in the cabin and replaced it with

an analog one. Guests were always leaving the old one in all sorts of bizarre

modes and states.



Our Orec vacuum cleaner must be close to 10 years old and works fine. It needs a

new belt maybe once a year, but replacement is obvious.



Don't get me started about the controls on my Audi.



Yea, well I also bought a DirtDevil spider, for a fraction of the money the LG rombot costs.

It has (AFAIK) no computah, no remote, and no cameras, it has a bumper sensor with micro switches it seems.

I did great cleaning under the bench, TV table, its only 7 cm high.

I does not scream, complain, it jumps over cables, is not stopped by low hanging curtains like the LG hombot,

did I mention that LG hombot cannot even find its own charging station?

The Spider you just need to plug in yourself to charge.

It probably has some micro, but it works so good there there is no need to investigate it, it just works.

It sucks less than the LG, both for real and figuratively speaking

Never Repair Something That Works.



I avoid battery-powered tools. They are wimpy, and the batteries will die in a

year or two.

I have a vacuum robot cleaner I bought in korea 12 years ago. Still runs fine, no significant drop in charge, it is pretty dumb though, uses random pattern cleaning. But when my wife tells me to vacuum, I can vacuum with the regular powered device and the robot at the same time. Who said men can't multitask?

Cheers

Klaus

 

[Klaus Kragelund]

On Friday, April 11, 2014 12:37:39 AM UTC+2, k...@attt.bizz wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:07:38 -0700, John Larkin

jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:



On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:50:31 GMT, Jan Panteltje

pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:



On a sunny day (Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:16:12 -0700) it happened John Larkin

jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in

asgdk9d29q9ds74218i3r5me51loi12pm5@4ax.com>:



I avoid battery-powered tools. They are wimpy, and the batteries will die in a

year or two.



You have a cellphone?



Sure, a simple one. I charge it about every other week, and I've

replaced the battery once. But it's not a power tool.



You're not going to get a horsepower or so out of a battery for long,

especially when the battery is two years old.



You're not going to get a "horsepower or so" out of a hand tool.

You're in the stationary tool realm at a HP (Craftsman HPs don't

count).

Sure you will

I swear to Festool tools. I am dreaming about this one:

https://www.festool.com/Microsite/Pages/TSC.aspx

Something like 1-2kW, so about 2HP

Cheers

Klaus

 

[Klaus Kragelund]

On Friday, April 11, 2014 4:41:21 AM UTC+2, k...@attt.bizz wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:42:37 -0700, John Larkin

jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:



On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:37:39 -0400, krw@attt.bizz wrote:



On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:07:38 -0700, John Larkin

jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:



On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:50:31 GMT, Jan Panteltje

pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:



On a sunny day (Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:16:12 -0700) it happened John Larkin

jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in

asgdk9d29q9ds74218i3r5me51loi12pm5@4ax.com>:



I avoid battery-powered tools. They are wimpy, and the batteries will die in a

year or two.



You have a cellphone?



Sure, a simple one. I charge it about every other week, and I've

replaced the battery once. But it's not a power tool.



You're not going to get a horsepower or so out of a battery for long,

especially when the battery is two years old.



You're not going to get a "horsepower or so" out of a hand tool.

You're in the stationary tool realm at a HP (Craftsman HPs don't

count).



120 volts, 15 amps is 1800 watts. Lots of circular saws pull 13 amps,

1560 watts.



Utter nonsense. Show me one with a 14GA cord. Better yet, put a

meter on one and show me where it's drawing anything close to 500W, in

use. They may draw 15A at stall (doubtful), but it'll be an

interesting ride if you do stall one. A stalled saw isn't very

useful, either.

I have this one:

https://www.festool.com/Products/Pages/Product-Detail.aspx?pid=561184&name=Circular-saw-TS-75-EBQ

1600W

Cheers

Klaus

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, April 10, 2014 1:58:49 PM UTC-4, k...@attt.bizz wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:16:12 -0700, John Larkin
snip

Try some *decent* LiIon tools. Great stuff.

Hey I need a new cordless drill. (my Makita is ~20 years old.)
With Dad's day coming up some time soon...
(the family never knows what to get me.)
Do you have a favorite?

http://www.makitatools.com/en-us/Modules/Tools/Default.aspx?CatID=4
Geesh... I could do with a lot fewer options!

George H.

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 00:51:38 -0700 (PDT), Klaus Kragelund
<klauskvik@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, April 11, 2014 12:37:39 AM UTC+2, k...@attt.bizz wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:07:38 -0700, John Larkin

jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:



On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:50:31 GMT, Jan Panteltje

pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:



On a sunny day (Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:16:12 -0700) it happened John Larkin

jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in

asgdk9d29q9ds74218i3r5me51loi12pm5@4ax.com>:



I avoid battery-powered tools. They are wimpy, and the batteries will die in a

year or two.



You have a cellphone?



Sure, a simple one. I charge it about every other week, and I've

replaced the battery once. But it's not a power tool.



You're not going to get a horsepower or so out of a battery for long,

especially when the battery is two years old.



You're not going to get a "horsepower or so" out of a hand tool.

You're in the stationary tool realm at a HP (Craftsman HPs don't

count).

Sure you will

I swear to Festool tools. I am dreaming about this one:

https://www.festool.com/Microsite/Pages/TSC.aspx

Something like 1-2kW, so about 2HP

Cheers

Klaus

It must be nice, in europe, having 240 volts for stuff like this.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation