magnetic field

[Folderol]

On Fri, 19 May 2006 22:32:34 GMT
John Stumbles <john.stumbles@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Sorry about all the hyphens

I want to play^H^H^H^Hexperiment and learn about PIC-type systems, and I
run Linux on my PC.

Is there a cheap system with a PIC or similar micro:
- with analogue & digital I/O, timers, PWM outputs and other goodies
- which hooks up to a PC via serial, parallel, USB or ethernet
- can be programmed from the PC e.g. into flash
- with open-source tools for writing & loading code & interfacing to it?

Initial projects I'd like to try include
- measuring temperature at several points using cheap sensors (maybe
diodes or perhaps AD273s), sensing mains voltage on-off signals
(via opto-isolators?) and possibly liquids flows (if I can find or make a
flow sensor)

- similar to above but driving a small AC pump on and off (optocoupler +
triac or SSR)

- driving a bunch of LEDs on a wand to make a moving text display
(project for the nipper)

I'm looking for something available in the UK.

This is something i would also be interested in.

I'm disappointed to see no replies to the OP

--
Will J G

 

[Paul Nutteing]

fancyabrew <kjhoskin@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1150974467.701286.288340@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Due to some shite stirring form someone in our lane, we don't know
who yet, my next door neighbour got a letter from Caradon Council (Its
in Cornwall) planning department yesterday, telling her she hasn't
got planning permission for her satellite dish (we're in a
conservation area). Now the dish has been up for over 8 years, so this
is obviously a load of rubbish from Caradon, as they can't make her
take it down as its been up for a long time and would automatically get
retrospective planning permission, BUT can they still make her apply
for retrospective planning regardless? Which is going to cost her
around Ł100 or could she just tell them to sod off?

This kind of petty crap really winds people up, me included, there are
loads of dishes around in our village and I don't know of one who has
ever applied for planning, yet there are some really big planning
abuses that Caradon do nothing about. I suppose its easier to pick on a
60 year old woman with an 8 yr old satellite dish. I've told her to
put in a Freedom of Information request asking for details of ALL
satellite dish planning applications submitted within Caradon in the
last 8 years, and information on what action they have taken against
those householders who haven't requested planning permission, that
should put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Reply

I thought I'd be constructive by directing you to
a product that was demonstrated on "Tomorrow's World"
in early days of satellite TV (BBC TV prog on gadgetry that has
long since passed over).
It was a Fresnel lens of rings of foil on a carrier that
you stuck to a south facing window and put the
receiver horn at the focus inside the room.
You had to give the company your latitude and longitude
and what satellite and the direction faced by
your window and the asymmetric rings would be
constructed for your situation.
But I can find no reference to it as a product.
Someone posted a tradename Mawzone but
nothing known, anyone know if it was a scam
like this one
http://www.nutteing.2.freeservers.com/scam.htm
Perhaps with the "Mawzone" you had to change your
window glass to something more like the Fylingdale
mushroom covers. Anyone on s.e.m know what
I'm on about?
http://www.setileague.org/articles/fresnel2.htm
for SETI doesn't look promising.
Is there a commercial product based on this?

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://nutteing.boom.ru/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine.

Valid email nutteing@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.

 

[CWatters]

"Paul Nutteing" <nutteing@quickfindit.com> wrote in message
news:4g1i38F1l86jtU1@individual.net...

fancyabrew <kjhoskin@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1150974467.701286.288340@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Due to some shite stirring form someone in our lane, we don't know
who yet, my next door neighbour got a letter from Caradon Council (Its
in Cornwall) planning department yesterday, telling her she hasn't
got planning permission for her satellite dish (we're in a
conservation area). Now the dish has been up for over 8 years, so this
is obviously a load of rubbish from Caradon, as they can't make her
take it down as its been up for a long time and would automatically get
retrospective planning permission, BUT can they still make her apply
for retrospective planning regardless?

I believe she should apply for a "certificate of lawfulness" on the grounds
that the "unauthorised structure" has been there for more than four years.
She will need to prove this. Has she got a bill for the original
installation? How about an old photo of the house? Old Sky bill?

Note that planning decisions are SUBJECTIVE where as COL is OBJECTIVE. In
other words a retrospective planning application could be refused because
the dish is "ugly" where as a COL can only be decided on fact.

Some info here..

http://www.bournemouth.gov.uk/Residents/Planning_Development/Planning_Applications/CertificateOfLawfulness.asp

This kind of petty crap really winds people up, me included,

I know exactly how you feel. I've had my own planning problems and will no
doubt face this exact same one in a few months

Good luck

Colin (colin.watters@turnersoakNO*SPAM.plus.com remove "NO*SPAM")

 

[Peter Crosland]

I believe she should apply for a "certificate of lawfulness" on the
grounds that the "unauthorised structure" has been there for more
than four years.

Not in a conservation area. The rules are different.

Peter Crosland

 

[CWatters]

"Peter Crosland" <g6jns@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:449c554c$0$955$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...

I believe she should apply for a "certificate of lawfulness" on the
grounds that the "unauthorised structure" has been there for more
than four years.

Not in a conservation area. The rules are different.

Thanks for that. I've not been able to find anything on the web that says
the four year rule doesn't apply in a conservation area. Can you expand a
bit?

 

[Palindr☝me]

CWatters wrote:

"Peter Crosland" <g6jns@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:449c554c$0$955$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...

I believe she should apply for a "certificate of lawfulness" on the
grounds that the "unauthorised structure" has been there for more
than four years.

Not in a conservation area. The rules are different.



Thanks for that. I've not been able to find anything on the web that says
the four year rule doesn't apply in a conservation area. Can you expand a
bit?


Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

....

2) Subsection (3) of section 63 of the principal Act (references to
applications for planning permission to include applications for
permission to retain existing works and uses) does not apply to the
construction of this section.

--
Sue

 

[CWatters]

"Palindr?me" <me9@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:129q0tbr9oi2le6@corp.supernews.com...

CWatters wrote:
"Peter Crosland" <g6jns@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:449c554c$0$955$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...

I believe she should apply for a "certificate of lawfulness" on the
grounds that the "unauthorised structure" has been there for more
than four years.

Not in a conservation area. The rules are different.



Thanks for that. I've not been able to find anything on the web that
says
the four year rule doesn't apply in a conservation area. Can you expand
a
bit?


Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
...

2) Subsection (3) of section 63 of the principal Act (references to
applications for planning permission to include applications for
permission to retain existing works and uses) does not apply to the
construction of this section.

--
Sue

Thanks Sue but if this is the right act...
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1990/Ukpga_19900009_en_1.htm

I can only find the paragraph you quoted in subsecton 67 and that appears to
relate to listed buildings not conservation areas....

67.-(1) This section applies where an application for planning permission
for any development of land is made to a local planning authority and the
development would, in the opinion of the authority, affect the setting of a
listed building.
<2-7 snip>
(8) Subsection (3) of section 63 of the principal Act (references to
applications for planning permission to include applications for permission
to retain existing works and uses) does not apply to the construction of
this section.

 

[Palindr☝me]

CWatters wrote:

"Palindr?me" <me9@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:129q0tbr9oi2le6@corp.supernews.com...

CWatters wrote:

"Peter Crosland" <g6jns@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:449c554c$0$955$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...


I believe she should apply for a "certificate of lawfulness" on the
grounds that the "unauthorised structure" has been there for more
than four years.

Not in a conservation area. The rules are different.



Thanks for that. I've not been able to find anything on the web that

says

the four year rule doesn't apply in a conservation area. Can you expand

a

bit?



Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
...

2) Subsection (3) of section 63 of the principal Act (references to
applications for planning permission to include applications for
permission to retain existing works and uses) does not apply to the
construction of this section.

--
Sue


Thanks Sue but if this is the right act...
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1990/Ukpga_19900009_en_1.htm

I can only find the paragraph you quoted in subsecton 67 and that appears to
relate to listed buildings not conservation areas....

67.-(1) This section applies where an application for planning permission
for any development of land is made to a local planning authority and the
development would, in the opinion of the authority, affect the setting of a
listed building.
2-7 snip
(8) Subsection (3) of section 63 of the principal Act (references to
applications for planning permission to include applications for permission
to retain existing works and uses) does not apply to the construction of
this section.

Section 67 deals with listed buildings in this respect, section 73 of
"General Duties of Planning Authority." deals with conservation areas,
and says as much. The principal act being the Town and Country Planning
Act 1990.

In any event, there is no automatic right to the approval of a
certificate of lawfulness - there is only provision for a request for
certification based on the time that has elapsed. The decision still
rests with the Planning Authority.

I do strongly endorse the views expressed by others - far better to
negotiate what will be allowed than fight this one. They may be entirely
mistaken about the size, colour, location and visibility of this dish.
They may allow it to stay, subject to a splash of paint. They may just
want it moved a little away from the front aspect. If it can't be put
elsewhere, they may easily not be aware of that. Caradon Planning has a
reputation for a much more flexible attitude than its neighbour, my
planning body, Dartmoor National Park..


I do have a certain sympathy with them - dishes and aerials are best
kept out of sight. The Holy Land, with the skyline of its towns and
cities a mass of television aerials on poles, shows what lack of control
brings..

--
Sue

 

[CWatters]

"Palindr?me" <me9@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:129qqat47gk1692@corp.supernews.com...

I do have a certain sympathy with them - dishes and aerials are best
kept out of sight. The Holy Land, with the skyline of its towns and
cities a mass of television aerials on poles, shows what lack of control
brings..

Hi Sue,

Thanks for all the good info. I agree with you that compromise is the best
route - it's just nice to know sometimes if you are negotiating from a
position of strength.. Looks like the OP is out of luck this time.

In my case I'm going to have to find a way to hide a sat dish in a paddock
as there are too many trees in the line of site nearer the house.

Colin

 

[jasen]

On 2006-07-05, <PigVideo@bellsouth.net> <PigVideo@bellsouth.net> wrote:

Subject: Looking for a simple circuit to demux/split/de-linterlace
NTSC video signals

That's a complex task, but there are chips out there that can do it.

Bye.
Jasen

 

[Arfa Daily]

"Chris Jones" <lugnut808@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12basn5a8h3olcf@corp.supernews.com...

Fred Mann wrote:

Hello,
I have a piece of audio gear which has an illuminated power switch. The
LED inside flickers. Should I replace the LED, or is something else at
play here? I was under the impression (for no good reason) that LEDs are
like light bulbs - either they work or they don't -- no flickering.
Thanks!!
Fred

Are you sure it isn't a neon tube? They do sometimes flicker when they
are
old.

Chris

LEDs can and do go intermittent. There is a particular model of Sony mini
HiFi, which uses a LED bar to illuminate the see-thru LCD panel on the front
of the tape deck door. It is very common for these to go intermittent and
flicker. However, in this case, I am inclined to agree with the rest that
it's more likely to be a neon lamp, that's just worn out. Usually easy to
tell. If the switch just has two or four spade connectors for switching the
line power, then the internal illumination will be by neon lamp.

Arfa

 

[Fred Mann]

I took the switch apart, and the "light" may in fact be a neon tube. It
looks like a very small condom with a reservoir tip (sorry, but that's just
what it looks like. I don't think this is an LED, but the size is similar.
Thanks again,
Fred



"Chris Jones" <lugnut808@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12basn5a8h3olcf@corp.supernews.com...

Fred Mann wrote:

Hello,
I have a piece of audio gear which has an illuminated power switch. The
LED inside flickers. Should I replace the LED, or is something else at
play here? I was under the impression (for no good reason) that LEDs are
like light bulbs - either they work or they don't -- no flickering.
Thanks!!
Fred

Are you sure it isn't a neon tube? They do sometimes flicker when they
are
old.

Chris

 

[James Sweet]

Also many 1/4W resistors are not rated for 240VAC use, but you might be able
to put two in series to get sufficient voltage rating if you can't get the
proper rating in a single resistor from your source of components.

Chris

In a pinch, buy one of those little round neon nightlights and take it
apart.

 

[Allan Adler]

"MasterBlaster" <Nobody's.Home@My.Place> writes:

Here's some:
http://qbnz.com/pages/downloads/software/qb11.zip
http://www.petesqbsite.com/sections/introduction/qbasic11.zip

OK, I downloaded qbasic, added it to the boot floppy, booted the HP Pavilion
and ran the mouse demo program. It reported that there was no mouse available
for demonstration. I tried this on three machines, all with the same results.
I think at least one of the mice on these three machines does in fact work
(e.g. a non-PS/2 mouse which I can't use on the HP Pavilion), but the
non-HP Pavilion machines aren't running any programs that use mice. So,
I'm a little suspicious of the demo program.

At first I thought there was a typo in the program because there is a
routine called mouseinit and also something called mouseint, but that is
probably ok. Maybe, if there is an error in the program, it has to do with
the stuff immediately following mousein: in the program, i.e. a block
of what looks like assembly language that might be making some assumptions
about the hardware or interrupt settings.

With Linux running on the HP Pavilion, I looked at /proc and did find a
mention of /dev/psaux, which is the mouse. I ran kudzu and now have it run
every time the machine boots. It consistently says that a PS/2 mouse seems
to have been removed from the system. On the other hand, I think I saw a
boot message detecting the mouse port. So, if all of these observations
are correct, the OS can detect the mouse port but not the mouse.

I'm not good at cleaning anything, certainly not my apartment, and I don't
have a successful track record of cleaning mice: I think I cleaned one other
one in my life and couldn't get it to work and simply replaced it. So it is
quite possible that whatever I did to clean the mouse was inadequate.

Let me ask you this: is there any direct way to test a mouse without using
a computer? E.g. can I test it using a Radio Shack voltmeter, which also
measures amperage and resistance? After all, the issue should really be
whether certain connections on the mouse are any good. That sounds like a
purely electrical problem, and for that reason I'm cross posting this
to sci.electronics.misc.
--
Ignorantly,
Allan Adler <ara@zurich.csail.mit.edu>
* Disclaimer: I am a guest and *not* a member of the MIT CSAIL. My actions and
* comments do not reflect in any way on MIT. Also, I am nowhere near Boston.

 

[RST Engineering (jw)]

And the source for this little bit of misinformation would be?????

Jim

Also many 1/4W resistors are not rated for 240VAC use

Chris

 

[jasen]

On 2006-07-15, Allan Adler <ara@nestle.csail.mit.edu> wrote:

"MasterBlaster" <Nobody's.Home@My.Place> writes:

Here's some:
http://qbnz.com/pages/downloads/software/qb11.zip
http://www.petesqbsite.com/sections/introduction/qbasic11.zip


OK, I downloaded qbasic, added it to the boot floppy, booted the HP Pavilion
and ran the mouse demo program. It reported that there was no mouse available
for demonstration. I tried this on three machines, all with the same results.

You probably need a dos mouse driver too.

Bye.
Jasen

 

[Sjouke Burry]

jasen wrote:

On 2006-07-15, Allan Adler <ara@nestle.csail.mit.edu> wrote:

"MasterBlaster" <Nobody's.Home@My.Place> writes:


Here's some:
http://qbnz.com/pages/downloads/software/qb11.zip
http://www.petesqbsite.com/sections/introduction/qbasic11.zip


OK, I downloaded qbasic, added it to the boot floppy, booted the HP Pavilion
and ran the mouse demo program. It reported that there was no mouse available
for demonstration. I tried this on three machines, all with the same results.


You probably need a dos mouse driver too.

Bye.
Jasen
Google for "cute mouse" ,a generic free dos

mouse driver. Works nicely.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Omer Suleimanagich wrote:

This is a twenty five year old integrated amp with a defective left channel.

From my plug 'n' play computer experience I replaced what I thought could
be bad, I replaced the 180 ohm resistor, 2N2955 , 2N3055, 2N6551, 2N6554,
and BD 139. Even after doing all of this the left channel reads 25 volts
on the multimeter where the speaker is supposed to be connected!

What is even more unusual, is that the feeds to the power transistors on
both channels read 62 volts, and the wires to the bridge rectifier read 62
volts AC with no load.

At present, the right channel barely works as well.

Omer

Name: NAD_3020.pdf
NAD_3020.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
Encoding: x-uuencode

Name: NAD_3020s20.pdf
NAD_3020s20.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
Encoding: x-uuencode

This is NOT a binaries nesgroup. This should have been posted on
news:alt.binaries.schematics.electronic or even
news:alt.binaries.pictures.radio if you want people to see it.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Omer Suleimanagich]

My sincerest apologies Michael I wasn't aware of the protocol in this
newsgroup!

Omer


"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:44B9B70C.F95719FE@earthlink.net...

Omer Suleimanagich wrote:

This is a twenty five year old integrated amp with a defective left
channel.

From my plug 'n' play computer experience I replaced what I thought
could
be bad, I replaced the 180 ohm resistor, 2N2955 , 2N3055, 2N6551,
2N6554,
and BD 139. Even after doing all of this the left channel reads 25
volts
on the multimeter where the speaker is supposed to be connected!

What is even more unusual, is that the feeds to the power transistors on
both channels read 62 volts, and the wires to the bridge rectifier read
62
volts AC with no load.

At present, the right channel barely works as well.

Omer

Name: NAD_3020.pdf
NAD_3020.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
Encoding: x-uuencode

Name: NAD_3020s20.pdf
NAD_3020s20.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
Encoding: x-uuencode




This is NOT a binaries nesgroup. This should have been posted on
news:alt.binaries.schematics.electronic or even
news:alt.binaries.pictures.radio if you want people to see it.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Omer Suleimanagich wrote:

My sincerest apologies Michael I wasn't aware of the protocol in this
newsgroup!

Omer

Not just this newsgroup. You should only post binaries to groups
with binaries in their name because most Usenet servers will drop the
message, or at least strip off the attachment.

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida