Driver to drive?

krw wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:10:06 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)

Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.

Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.


They operated from punched cards for the weave patterns, and had zero
bits of computer processing power.

They are CNC machines. CNC machines don't need to "process" anything.
Click to expand...

Modern CNC is done under computer control. Punched paper tape was a
pain in the ass, but it worked until computers became cheap enough to
replace punched tape readers. It was a play on words.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
 
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:08:45 -0500, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:10:06 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)

Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.

Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.


They operated from punched cards for the weave patterns, and had zero
bits of computer processing power.

They are CNC machines. CNC machines don't need to "process" anything.
And they do NOT need to be Binary Digital, or Hexidecimal.
Click to expand...
 
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:08:28 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:10:06 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)

Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.

Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.


They operated from punched cards for the weave patterns, and had zero
bits of computer processing power.

They are CNC machines. CNC machines don't need to "process" anything.


Modern CNC is done under computer control. Punched paper tape was a
pain in the ass, but it worked until computers became cheap enough to
replace punched tape readers.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the computer isn't much more than a (card/tape) reader.

It was a play on words.
Click to expand...
Ok, but you could have said it wasn't run by a two-bit operating
system.
 
krw wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Modern CNC is done under computer control. Punched paper tape was a
pain in the ass, but it worked until computers became cheap enough to
replace punched tape readers.

Sure, but the computer isn't much more than a (card/tape) reader.
Click to expand...

The machines can store more commands, though.


It was a play on words.

Ok, but you could have said it wasn't run by a two-bit operating
system.
Click to expand...

With dimbulb in the thread? We would have had at least 100 of his
mindless rants that there never were any two bit processors, and if it
doesn't run Vista, bla, bla bla....


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
 
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:14:23 -0400, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:08:45 -0500, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:10:06 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)

Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.

Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.


They operated from punched cards for the weave patterns, and had zero
bits of computer processing power.

They are CNC machines. CNC machines don't need to "process" anything.
And they do NOT need to be Binary Digital, or Hexidecimal.
Click to expand...
Depends on your definition of binary. Certainly paper tape and octal
computers (DECs) worked. OTOH, I can't think of an instance of an
analog CNC machine.
 
"Richard Cranium" <dufus@bunghole.com> wrote in message
news:4a520626.268091750@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 06:27:01 -0700, StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt
Zarathustra@thusspoke.org> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:59:00 -0700, Gunner Asch
gunner@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote:

Im about to put you in the Bozos kill file as you are becoming an
obnoxious little turd.

You're about a goddamned retard for announcing your filter file edit
sessions in Usenet, as if anyone here gives a fat flying fuck what you
read.

You are pathetic. The lack of punctuation alone indicates that fact.

Nonsense! Many here are very interested. It's very funny watching
you flounder around before someone finally calls you out. You're such
a loser and the funny part is you don't have a clue that you're being
revealed as the buffoon you are.
Click to expand...
Chuckle!

You appear to call them the way you see them. Excellent eyesight, I see!

Harold
 
"StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt" <Zarathustra@thusspoke.org> wrote in message
news:ggu35555dr1vph5jk53luid4jiackt1mg7@4ax.com...
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:55:55 -0700, Gunner Asch
gunner@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote:

Shrug...you are among machinests and machine workers son..and you
honestly look like an utter twit when you get your snit on.

I knew what a 10 thousandth inch tolerance was before I was 7 years
old, way back in '67. Likely years before you did, fuckhead.

I think I have more on the ball than your machinIsts (learn to spell,
retard) and your machine workers do.
Click to expand...
Damned shame someone doesn't pay you for your thoughts. Reminds me of what
I like to say about young people that know it all-----if you could buy them
for what they're worth, and sell them for what they *think* they're worth,
you'd achieve instant wealth.

You think you have more on the ball.

I'm sure you don't have.

Smart people can converse without using their entire vocabulary, as you've
just done. I've known some that can actually put together a string of
words without vulgarity-----a task that seems to evade you.

You want readers to think of you as something more than a loser?

Quit acting like one.


Harold
 
"JosephKK" <quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:m1c55555882omeltq51mth2caijlelgq9h@4ax.com...
On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 11:50:31 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net>
wrote:

Equipment is designed to operate +/- 10% of the nameplate rating. In the
case of taps like what happened here, the taps are supposed to be set by
the
electrician to fall within the 10% range. With the taps set at 220v the CNC
machine was good to operate from 218v to 242v. As the power installer, it
was the electrician's responsibility to verify the voltage coming into the
building and adjust the taps on the machine accordingly. He was paid to
correctly hook up power to the machine and failed to do so.

Don't you mean 198 V to 242 V?
Click to expand...

Why yes I did. Good catch!
 
"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:fve555p0l7ekijd9a3b6e79nr7n3j2r8jk@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 21:12:37 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net
wrote:


"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:gb7555lncp8stdca713pnl8lk4on9cu0cl@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 10:55:31 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net
wrote:

"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:ggt255p7rnfffdva5sq20djnj7lsc7ript@4ax.com...
On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 22:06:26 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net
wrote:


I could go on and on posting these links, but I don't see any reason
to
beat
you over your head with your own ignorance.

Yes, please do. ...for *every* jurisdiction in the US.

Better yet, why don't you post what jurisdictions (states) in the USA do
not
regulate the electrical trade. I guarantee that your list would be
smaller
than mine, if your's exists at all.

It's a little tough to Google laws that don't exist, dummy.

Yeah...that's okay, I already knew you couldn't back up your remark.

You're as stupid as DimBulb.
Click to expand...
Now there's a well thought out response filled with due diligents and lots
of hard work. <snicker>
I'm still waiting for you to back up your remarks. I'll accept further
personal attacks on your part as your acknowledgment that you spoke without
first knowing the facts.
 
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:59:00 -0700, Gunner Asch
<gunner@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote:

Im about to put you in the Bozos kill file as you are becoming an
obnoxious little turd.
Click to expand...
You're about a goddamnedretard for announcing your filter file edit
sessions in Usenet, as if anyone here gives a fatflyingfuck what you
read.

You are pathetic. The lack of punctuation alone indicates that fact.
 
On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:08:45 -0500, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:10:06 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)

Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.

Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.


They operated from punched cards for the weave patterns, and had zero
bits of computer processing power.

They are CNC machines. CNC machines don't need to "process" anything.
Click to expand...
Yes, they do. The 'run' (read process, idiot) a program. That IS
processing.
 
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:47:57 -0700, jk <klessig@suddenlink.net> wrote:

StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt <Zarathustra@thusspoke.org> wrote:
(acting like the d-s he accuses others of)




The stipulation was "one side" and "the other side", which sounds to me
like the windings of a single center tapped transformer, so NO, there is
NO way that there could be that much of a variance between the two,
dipshit.


So you think an entire town is fed from not just one substation, but
one (coutem 1) SINGLE phase transformer??
Click to expand...
You're an idiot. READ his post. He was talking about the two sides of
HIS service, idiot.

get real. [You don't even
generally get, two 240 v sources from a singe ph XF anyway, but lets
ignore that]
Click to expand...
You're an idiot.

But even still, you you can have that much variation, especially if
measured at two different times, with different loading, different MV
source voltage, and different connection impedance.
Go back to smoking your own pipe
Click to expand...
Read either side of your house service at ANY time and the two voltages
will be right on each other with perhaps a volt or two variance between
them. Maybe when the power company puts too many houses on the same
transformer, you could see a variance that is greater if the other houses
are all loaded up on one side, but the likelihood id very low.

And reading them one right after the other IS "at the same time" for
this purpose, ya friggin dope!

Of course taking a reading a day later could result in a differing
voltage.

You have about as much common sense as a freshly laid turd.
 
krw Inscribed thus:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 16:00:13 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:22:34 -0700,
StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt <Zarathustra@thusspoke.org
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 12:46:59 -0500, krw
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:33:28 -0700,
StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt <Zarathustra@thusspoke.org
wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:08:59 GMT, spambait@milmac.com (Doug
Miller) wrote:

In article <Wg44m.10923$8P7.9233@newsfe21.iad>, "Rich."
rcres@XXcomcast.net> wrote:

It is not regular practice to inform the owner, unless
something is found to be wrong. Having 245v in the
building is not normal, and there is a lot of equipment
out there that does not have taps. Equipment without taps
could be damaged by this higher than usual voltage.

Nonsense. 245V = 240V + 2%. That's just not a big deal --
as long as it's a nominal 240V supply. If the nominal
supply is 208V, then yes, that's a huge problem. But you
have no idea what the supply in the building is supposed
to be, so you have no basis for saying that it's "not
normal".

It is the responsibility of the electrician to make sure
the equipment he is wiring can correctly run on the power
being supplied.

No, it's not, unless there's a contract specifically
requiring him to do so. The electrician's responsibility
is to install the circuits specified by the person who
hired him. The one who owns the equipment is responsible
for preparing the specs.

IMO the electrician
did not do his job correctly.

In what way?


220 to 245 is an 11.4% difference.

220V service doesn't exist, DimBulb.

Read the post,idiot. If there are no 220 volt service
provisions, why
are there "220 volt taps" on equipment?

Irrelevant to the real world, DimBulb. 220V is so 1950s.


Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)


Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.


Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the fairground organs ! They work on the same punched card
system.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.
 
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 01:01:26 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net>
wrote:

"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:fve555p0l7ekijd9a3b6e79nr7n3j2r8jk@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 21:12:37 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net
wrote:


"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:gb7555lncp8stdca713pnl8lk4on9cu0cl@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 10:55:31 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net
wrote:

"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:ggt255p7rnfffdva5sq20djnj7lsc7ript@4ax.com...
On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 22:06:26 -0400, "Rich." <rcres@XXcomcast.net
wrote:


I could go on and on posting these links, but I don't see any reason
to
beat
you over your head with your own ignorance.

Yes, please do. ...for *every* jurisdiction in the US.

Better yet, why don't you post what jurisdictions (states) in the USA do
not
regulate the electrical trade. I guarantee that your list would be
smaller
than mine, if your's exists at all.

It's a little tough to Google laws that don't exist, dummy.

Yeah...that's okay, I already knew you couldn't back up your remark.

You're as stupid as DimBulb.

Now there's a well thought out response filled with due diligents and lots
of hard work. <snicker
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's hard not to laugh at you.

I'm still waiting for you to back up your remarks. I'll accept further
personal attacks on your part as your acknowledgment that you spoke without
first knowing the facts.
Click to expand...
I don't have to. It's clear that you can't back up your assertion
that *every* jurisdiction requires licensed electricians, which is
clearly laughable.
 
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:44:58 -0700, jk <klessig@suddenlink.net> wrote:

krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:



Depends on your definition of binary. Certainly paper tape and octal
computers (DECs) worked. OTOH, I can't think of an instance of an
analog CNC machine.

Of COURSE you can't. By definition the C and the N sort of preclude
that.
Click to expand...
No, it really doesn't.

Unless you are willing to call what we USED to call "analog
computers" computers these days.
Click to expand...
They most certainly *are* computers.

BUt then almost any servo amp IS
one of those.
Click to expand...
Not really. A servo amp, per se, isn't programmable.

Regardless the N in CNC still precludes it.
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:48:29 -0700, StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt
<Zarathustra@thusspoke.org> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:08:45 -0500, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:10:06 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)

Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.

Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.


They operated from punched cards for the weave patterns, and had zero
bits of computer processing power.

They are CNC machines. CNC machines don't need to "process" anything.

Yes, they do. The 'run' (read process, idiot) a program. That IS
processing.
Click to expand...
Playing a recording is not "processing", DimBulb.
 
On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:57:14 -0500, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:48:29 -0700, StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt
Zarathustra@thusspoke.org> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:08:45 -0500, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:10:06 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


krw wrote:

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:37 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:00:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

krw wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a 1950s CNC machine?

Does a Jaquard loom count? Oh, 1950s, not 1750s. ;-)

Did it have a $4000 controller board? ;-)

In 2009 dollars, quite likely.

Well, Zero bit processors were quite expensive.

Jacquard looms are pretty impressive things to watch. ...and almost
300 years old. Not "zero bits" at all.


They operated from punched cards for the weave patterns, and had zero
bits of computer processing power.

They are CNC machines. CNC machines don't need to "process" anything.

Yes, they do. The 'run' (read process, idiot) a program. That IS
processing.

Playing a recording is not "processing", DimBulb.
Click to expand...

If it interprets instructions and performs tasks and functions based on
those instructions, that is a program, and the operation of the machine
while executing it, regardless of any simplificatio0n a little retarded
twit like you comes up with, IS PROCESSING. It matters not where the
instructions are derived or 'read' from, nor what they get 'read' into.

Even early CNC machines that had no computer whatsoever in them
PROCESSED the program instructions, you total retard.

You lose, again... as usual.
 
StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt <Zarathustra@thusspoke.org> wrote:
(acting like the d-s he accuses others of)


The stipulation was "one side" and "the other side", which sounds to me
like the windings of a single center tapped transformer, so NO, there is
NO way that there could be that much of a variance between the two,
dipshit.
Click to expand...

So you think an entire town is fed from not just one substation, but
one (coutem 1) SINGLE phase transformer?? get real. [You don't even
generally get, two 240 v sources from a singe ph XF anyway, but lets
ignore that]
But even still, you you can have that much variation, especially if
measured at two different times, with different loading, different MV
source voltage, and different connection impedance.
<Go back to smoking your own pipe>

jk
 
krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:


Depends on your definition of binary. Certainly paper tape and octal
computers (DECs) worked. OTOH, I can't think of an instance of an
analog CNC machine.
Click to expand...
Of COURSE you can't. By definition the C and the N sort of preclude
that. Unless you are willing to call what we USED to call "analog
computers" computers these days. BUt then almost any servo amp IS
one of those.
Regardless the N in CNC still precludes it.

jk
 
"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:0vn7559mbpkfs57m6sc0v55jr76fo0pd63@4ax.com...
I'm still waiting for you to back up your remarks. I'll accept further
personal attacks on your part as your acknowledgment that you spoke
without
first knowing the facts.

I don't have to. It's clear that you can't back up your assertion
that *every* jurisdiction requires licensed electricians, which is
clearly laughable.
Click to expand...
I've already posted several links within this thread to show that licenses
are required by law. To date you have posted none, nada, zilch, zip to show
any one place in this country where a license is not required to do
electrical work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top