MessageView 421F schematic

[Rich Grise, but drunk]

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:33:22 -0400, Marvin wrote:

John Beardmore wrote:
In message <1121012726.743338.221040@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
WAYNEL <mail@wlawson.com> writes

I've conducted a simple experiment on a glass sample that has two clean
copper electrodes biased with 20v DC. Between the two electrodes I
have placed a drop of de-ionised water with Universal Indicator added.

Over a period of time the electrodes changes colour, as expected, with
the cathode going purple (OH-) and the anode going red (H+).

After a longer period of time the colours start to spread out toward
the opposing electrodes, pH gradient. However, the amount the purple
(OH-)spreads is apx three times greater that that of the red (H+).

I have repeated this 10 times in random positions and I get the same
results.

I would have thought that the H+ ions would have more mobility than the
OH- ions and thus I would have expected the opposite to happen.

Can anyone help and through some light on this phenomena, or have I
missed something?


What is the effect of the charge gradient on the constituents of the
indicator itself ?

If they are charged, they will migrate in a direction and at a rate depending on the gradient.

Would viscosity have anything to do in this equation?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Roger Johansson]

Rich Grise, but drunk wrote:

What is the effect of the charge gradient on the constituents of
the >> indicator itself ?

If they are charged, they will migrate in a direction and at a rate
depending on the gradient.

Would viscosity have anything to do in this equation?

Just an idea about indicator in the liquid.

It is possible to remove small samples of the liquid to test it, so
the indicator does not compromise the experiment.

One way of doing it is to put the liquid in long tubes or ditches, so
any change has to move along a certain path.
Then we can take up a few milli-liters at certain locations at certain
points in time and add a pH indicator to each test sample.


--
Roger J.

 

[Herman Family]

"Roger Johansson" <no-email@no.invalid> wrote in message
news:xn0e4q4jwh2c8lu000@news.sunsite.dk...

Rich Grise, but drunk wrote:

What is the effect of the charge gradient on the constituents of
the >> indicator itself ?

If they are charged, they will migrate in a direction and at a rate
depending on the gradient.

Would viscosity have anything to do in this equation?

Just an idea about indicator in the liquid.

It is possible to remove small samples of the liquid to test it, so
the indicator does not compromise the experiment.

One way of doing it is to put the liquid in long tubes or ditches, so
any change has to move along a certain path.
Then we can take up a few milli-liters at certain locations at certain
points in time and add a pH indicator to each test sample.


--
Roger J.

You might see some sort of an effect due to the seventeen fold difference in
mass of the two ions.

Michael

 

[John Savage]

Mike Monett <no@spam.today> writes:

Any other suggestions for cheap sensitive indicators, preferably ones you
can find in a grocery store or pharmacy on a weekend?

When I was a high school student I discovered I could make a pH indicator
from the juice of inkweed berries. It remained purple at one end of the
scale and changed to green at the other. Inkweed is found growing in rocky
waste ground such as around a heap of illegally dumped builder's brick
rubble.

I presume that inkweed is a European weed introduced here (Australia),
but to describe it just picture a small dock plant with glossy fruit that
looks like a mulberry and undergoes the same red-->black colour transition
as it matures but instead of being spherical the fruit is cylindrical
about 5 cm in length.

ObElectronics: I have previously posted on my experiments with the
fascinating electrolytic rectifer: a beaker of sodium bicarbonate solution
and two metal electrodes--this might interest experimenters.
--
John Savage (my news address is not valid for email)

 

[Steve]

Chris wrote:

that a Hakko 936 is a decent soldering station at a decent pricxe.
However, I recently bumped into the CSI "Deluxe Station 1" at
http://www.circuitspecialists.com/prod.itml/icOid/7307 . Well, that
looks an awful lot like a Hakko 936!

I agree that the Hakko 936 is a good choice for a soldering iron. We used to
use them at my old job and they stood up well to constant use. The CSI unit
sure looks like a Hakko, but the its power consumption is only 40W vs. 60W
for the Hakko. A Hakko 936 can handle jobs such as soldering copper foil
shielding to the shell of a D-Sub connector. A lower-powered iron might not
be able to hold its temperature with that much metal soaking up the heat.



--
--Steve

 

[Art]

jc@sistema.org wrote in news:1121017460.120775.252280
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Hi. I need to interface two devices, both offering a RS-232 port. The
general idea is to read the output (weight) from an electronic scale
using it's RS-232 port, compose a string (containing control codes and
the message to be printed) and send the string to an industrial ink-jet
printer. We are talking about 1 reading/printing per minute. Follows
a simple block diagram:

|----------------------|
Scale -> | Protocol converter | -> Ink-jet system
|----------------------|
^
|
Product sensor

I am borrowing the "protocol converter" concept from a product named
PPC (Programmable Protocol Converter,
http://www.kksystems.com/english/html_files/product_pages/ppc.htm) form
KK Systems.

Assuming that I have both the scale and printer techincal information
(that is, their protocol definition), I request your comments to
determine good options for the "protocol converter" system. "Good"
refers to simple and economical yet robust solutions since this is
intended for use in an industrial environment.

So far I have found the KK product mentioned before, and I am also
considering using a low power (both in terms of power consumption and
processing power) PC/104 solution.

As you might have already guessed, reading the output (I am considering
a few 10-20 bytes long per scale reading) and generating the string
(which should be around 20-30 characters long including the scale
reading) at one per minute does not require a superscalar processor
A 25 MHz processor should be more than enough, I am considering this
speed because is the smallest systems I have found so far.

For your ideas, thanks in advance.

try jkmicro.com
they have range of inexpensive embedded DOS boards for as low as $69 with
3 serial ports (Flahslite186). Dev kit with Borland C++ is only $99. I
use them in number of my projects, good service.
arthur
klocworx AT shaw DOT ca

 

[Rune Christensen]

<jc@sistema.org> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1121017460.120775.252280@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Hi. I need to interface two devices, both offering a RS-232 port. The
general idea is to read the output (weight) from an electronic scale
using it's RS-232 port, compose a string (containing control codes and
the message to be printed) and send the string to an industrial ink-jet
printer. We are talking about 1 reading/printing per minute. Follows
a simple block diagram:

|----------------------|
Scale -> | Protocol converter | -> Ink-jet system
|----------------------|
^
|
Product sensor

I am borrowing the "protocol converter" concept from a product named
PPC (Programmable Protocol Converter,
http://www.kksystems.com/english/html_files/product_pages/ppc.htm) form
KK Systems.

Assuming that I have both the scale and printer techincal information
(that is, their protocol definition), I request your comments to
determine good options for the "protocol converter" system. "Good"
refers to simple and economical yet robust solutions since this is
intended for use in an industrial environment.

So far I have found the KK product mentioned before, and I am also
considering using a low power (both in terms of power consumption and
processing power) PC/104 solution.

As you might have already guessed, reading the output (I am considering
a few 10-20 bytes long per scale reading) and generating the string
(which should be around 20-30 characters long including the scale
reading) at one per minute does not require a superscalar processor
A 25 MHz processor should be more than enough, I am considering this
speed because is the smallest systems I have found so far.

For your ideas, thanks in advance.

Even a small MCU should be able to convert the string into something on
paper. Just look after something with two rs-232 ports.

Rune Christensen
M.Sc.E.E.

 

[Dave M]

On 20 Jul 2005 17:11:17 -0700, giroup01@videotron.ca wrote:

I've just acquired an older 1.4 kVa BEST Micro Ferrups UPS, the one
with the huge and heavy ferro-resonant transformer.

I changed the battery, plugged it in, and it works great. Runtime is
excellent for home use. Just one thing though: It hums and buzzes
like an old neon sign ballast. Almost unbearable. I may not be able
to use it for home because of the noise. It's quite a buzz.

Is there anything I can do to eliminate or minimize this noise?

Probably not... Ferror-resonant transformers are inherently noisy, especially
those of several years ago. You might try opening the unit so that you can get
to the big transformer. ( Remove battery connections first!!!) See if
tightening the assembly bolts in the transformer offers any relief. If that
doesn't fix it, there's probably one thing left to do... consider building a
small housing for it and mount it outside the house. Run a wire from house
wiring to the UPS, and another back into house to feed equipment.
==============

Dave M

Never take a laxative and a sleeping pill at the same time!!

 

[Keyser Soze]

"Dave M" <masondg4xx4@cxxomcast.net> wrote in message
news8vtd1d4291nj43ojpiagkitd221o4u9fl@4ax.com...

On 20 Jul 2005 17:11:17 -0700, giroup01@videotron.ca wrote:

I've just acquired an older 1.4 kVa BEST Micro Ferrups UPS, the one
with the huge and heavy ferro-resonant transformer.

I changed the battery, plugged it in, and it works great. Runtime is
excellent for home use. Just one thing though: It hums and buzzes
like an old neon sign ballast. Almost unbearable. I may not be able
to use it for home because of the noise. It's quite a buzz.

Is there anything I can do to eliminate or minimize this noise?


Probably not... Ferror-resonant transformers are inherently noisy,
especially
those of several years ago. You might try opening the unit so that you
can get
to the big transformer. ( Remove battery connections first!!!) See if
tightening the assembly bolts in the transformer offers any relief. If
that
doesn't fix it, there's probably one thing left to do... consider
building a
small housing for it and mount it outside the house. Run a wire from
house
wiring to the UPS, and another back into house to feed equipment.
==============

Dave M

I'm assuming that when you say "...excellent for home use." that you
may not have a 1kw load on the UPS.

It's possible that the ferro-resonant transformer needs a minimum
load to go into regulation without all that buzzing and humming.

Try adding a 100 or 200 watt incandescent lamp on the output to see if that
helps.

If it does then wire a lamp to the ferro-resonant transformer output
before it goes to the UPS circuit. This will keep it happy when the
mains are up and will not be an additional load when the UPS kicks in.

 

[Chris]

Kryten wrote:

I can see HP's point in that if someone puts poor-quality scans of
their
manuals up, some people might think it reflects HP quality in
documentation.
I'd argue anyone smart enough to need and buy HP kit would not blame
HP/Ag.

HP made a good name for good kit that did a good job and price took
second
place.
They were an American icon, like Harley Davison or Maglite or
Leatherman.

Then some pointy haired bunch threw away the old name, diversified
into new
areas, and promptly turned a steady business into instability.

Hmph.

Perhaps one could ask HP to provide the better versions, maybe donate
mint
condition manuals for scanning or even original files.

It's dramatically counter-productive to
their own business interests

On one hand they pressure people to buy new products by doing so, but
as a
customer I'd be put off buying kit from a company that was so petty
as to
begrudge manuals to a old customers.

Making manuals free in electronic form reduces the waste of paper and
office
space, which helps everyone.

I'd like to be a bit of a contrarian here for once.

<rant>
The instrument manual the OP is seeking is available from several
sources. It's a little pricey, but is still a good value, and only a
small fraction of the price of a reconditioned HP 5370B.

Much of the value of an instrument is contained in its usability and
serviceability. A lot of the effort that goes into making a good
instrument _should_ be spent on the operating and service manuals. To
my experience, HP/Agilent has _always_ produced easily readable,
logically written manuals that are eminently helpful in using the
instrument.

An important point that's being neglected here is that these manuals
are intellectual property which has been copyrighted to make sure the
fruits of that work goes to the owners. This forum has many
well-respected engineers who depend, at least in part, on the residual
value of the intellectual property they have created in order to make a
living, through patents, non-disclosure agreements, and copyrights,
allowing them to sell the same art to more than one customer. I don't
believe they would be happy if the owners of the fruits of their labor
decided to bypass those patents and non-disclosure agreements in order
to swipe some of that value for themselves.

If a certain universally respected textbook of Electronics Engineering
went out of print (may that day never arrive) but was still under
copyright (under current law there will be many years to go), a teacher
who owned one text wouldn't have the right to make copies and sell them
to students. Copyright laws still apply. And whether that certain
universally respected textbook of Electronics Engineering was out of
print or not wouldn't have anything to do with implied warranties of
merchantability. The book would still have the same value.

Some thought should be given to the perceived value of making a really
excellent manual to the manufacturer as well. I'm sure one of the
reasons the engineers at HP were allowed by the bean counters to spend
so much time making top quality manuals was the expected return for
selling copies of those manuals after the sale. I've seen CDs for sale
which have scans of HP/Agilent instruments which are currently
supported or even in production, as well as the obsolete ones. If the
rules are changed to permit copying of manuals, the MBAs will have
another idiotic justification to cut the labor hours spent on making
the manual. I want and need good documentation when I specify an
instrument, so I can get the quality results I want and get the full
value of the meter. If everyone is making poor quality, minimalist
manuals (and those manufacturers know who they are -- so do we), none
of the instrument buyers are going to be happy.

Look at it this way. Let's assume the authors of that universally
respected textbook of Electronics Engineering knew that within several
years of publishing the 2nd edition, everyone would be using Xeroxes of
their text. Would they have taken the time to make the second edition
as great as it is? Or support it in s.e.d.? Would it have remained in
print as long as it has? And would they have enough motivation to
publish a 3rd edition (please -- just give me 30 seconds to cut the
check!).

Agilent has a webpage which recommends a number of resellers of
manuals, several of which have the one the OP is talking about. At
some time, Agilent may also be willing to look at selling the
documentation for obsolete and unsupported instruments in electronic
form, once good digital protection is available which prevents
unauthorized copying. When that happens, A of E will undoubtedly also
be in digital form, too. But either way, the intellectual property
belongs to the author, and should be respected whether the authors are
respected professors or a corporation.

Sorry for the loss of self-control. I've got my asbestos suit on --
let the flames begin.
</rant>

Chris

 

[Chris]

John Woodgate wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Chris <cfoley1064@yahoo.com
wrote
(in <1114188869.579181.154250@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com&gt about
'Copyright on HP service manuals', on Fri, 22 Apr 2005:

An important point that's being neglected here is that these manuals

are intellectual property which has been copyrighted to make sure
the
fruits of that work goes to the owners.

Absolutely NOT!!! There is no objection whatsoever to legitimate
defence
of copyright.

What is NOT acceptable is to use copyright to deny ALL access to
legacy
data.

IIRC, the Sherlock Holmes stories are still just in copyright. Would
it
be reasonable for the estate of the author to assert the right to
prohibit the use of the words 'Sherlock Holmes' in any context?
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

Hi, Mr. Woodgate. Very respectfully, excessively long copyright
protection is a problem, particularly the Sonny Bono Copyright Term
Extension Act in the States, which extended copyrights to 75 to 95
years in the case of corporate copyrights, or 70 years after the death
of the author. That was another act of blatant pandering by Congress,
and it pushes right up against the copyright clause in Article I, Sec.
8 of the Constitution:

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for
limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
respective Writings and Discoveries"

75 to 95 years isn't a "limited time" by my reading.

Since I got burned many years ago, I've never purchased a used
instrument without docs included or available from another source. And
in the last ten years, I've almost always been able to find the
instrument manuals I need from one legal source or another. I admit
that the price of a manual has affected my decision to buy or not once
or twice (the OP's manual costs $75 USD from one vendor), but I don't
see Agilent as actively prohibiting anyone from getting the
information. If they were doing that, they would be trying to buy up
the manuals and take them off the market.

Agilent obviously has an interest in drumming up sales, and if I were
them, I wouldn't be making too much of an effort to get potential
customers to scrounge and repair something I sold 25 years ago. The
real problem, of course, is that the manuals are not free in the age of
the internets. Well, so it goes.

I guess I'm picky about this stuff. When I get responsibility for an
instrument, I'll see that we get the docs. All manuals have to be
filed and signed out. And it really isn't much of a problem to me. I
guess my priorities are different, because I'm willing to pay for my
pleasures. Just a cost of doing business. ;-)

Good luck
Chris

 

[Chris]

Winfield Hill wrote:

Chris wrote...


I feel the IP is embedded in the instrument, not the manual. Thus
the manual provides a way to make use of the IP you've bought and
paid for in the instrument. It's the old instruments HP / Agilent
no longer supports that we're talking about here. The simple fact
is that there are *far* more instruments out there, than original
manuals, because when one goes surplus the company's file drawers
of manuals tend to get thrown away or otherwise lost, while the old
instrument exchanges hands a few times and finds a new home.

Plus there are manuals that disappear for who knows what reason.
The manuals for some HP equipment I purchased new when I came to the
Institute 17 years ago somehow no longer exists at the Institute.
Did a postdoc carry it off with him in his files when he left? Did
it get thrown out by mistake? Who can say, but it's gone. And now
a copy is not available from Agilent, the product line having been
discontinued long ago... So I do rely on others who are willing to
make a copy to keep the IP in my instrument useful.


--
Thanks,
- Win

Thanks for taking the time to respond, Mr. Hill. I stand corrected --
there are far more "orphaned" old HP instruments out there than
original manuals. Your point is valid.

Maintaining an instrument document control system is relatively easy in
a manufacturing facility with a limited number of engineering
personnel. It's certainly much more difficult in an academic
environment with dozens or even hundreds of students who all want
access to the instruments and their manuals, and don't have enough
experience with instruments to make educated guesses about how they
work.

Agilent and other manufacturers might be inclined to cut academic
institutions some slack as far as making copies of manuals for internal
use. I'm sure they want their meters to be specified by as many future
engineers and professors as possible. Considering your special
requirements, they may be inclined to allow a limited waiver in your
case.

People who need the OP/SV manuals will generally get them, whether
through purchasing a used manual, copying one from someone else, or
another means. The market, like life, usually finds a way. Although I
can understand why, I don't think not selling new manuals helps Agilent
get more business. They may wake up some day and farm out their
obsolete instrument documentation orders to either a book on demand or
lawyer's/barrister's Xeroxing firm. They could provide ring- or
comb-bound copies of these operating and service manuals with only an
additional day or two on turnaround compared to keeping thousands of
cubic meters of printed manuals on the shelf in stock. I know of
several automation machinery manufacturers that do just this with their
prints and manuals very profitably. Until then, Agilent is
perpetuating a bad setup, and annoying loyal customers.

I guess I'll keep doing it my way, though. If one is willing to pay,
there isn't much of a shortage of manuals now on most common older
"orphaned" HP instruments these days. (Of course, if more people felt
the way I did, the limited supply would undoubtedly dry up, as you
suggested.) I agree that the value of the instrument is inherent in
the instrument itself, not the manual. But just the fact that we're
having this conversation indicates the documentation is of value,
although of another kind. It allows me to utilize the investment in
the instrument. And I find that value sufficient that, if I cut a CER
for a used/reconditioned "orphaned" HP instrument, I'll make sure to
include the purchase price of a legal copy of the manual from
ManualsPlus or another of the instrument documentation resellers along
with it. I'm saving more than enough by buying used to afford a little
more for the docs. As a bonus, I can get it FedExed so it arrives
before the instrument, and I will have read it and be just about ready
to roll when the box arrives.

Thanks again (and the check is still ready to be signed ;-)
Chris

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Winfield Hill" <hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> wrote in
message news:d4alpg01vk5@drn.newsguy.com...

Stepan, steevjanpan@hotmail.com wrote...

HP is enforcing their copyright over manuals, even for old
unsupported equipment. Look at this:

http://bama.sbc.edu/images/Letter%204-18-05.pdf

I see the BoatAnchor Manual Archive public-service site has
complied, http://bama.sbc.edu/hp.htm removing masses of valuable
documentation for ancient hp instruments from public availability.

That letter from Agilent's counsel is going to bring a massive
response from me as director of a Harvard University research
laboratory, directed to the relevant authorities at Agilent to
get the policy changed. It's dramatically counter-productive to
their own business interests, and it's manifestly unfair to the
owners of old HP / Agilent equipment who for one reason or another
no longer have an operating or service manual, and who cannot get
one from Agilent. For Agilent to close them off from a solution
to their problem is to render their bought and paid-for equipment
useless. It also means Agilent is capriciously denying the implied
warranty of merchantability for their older products; the product
can hardly do what it is supposed to do if the owner doesn't know
what button to push, or how to interpret the panel reading. And
it means Agilent is denying the owners' right to his own self-help
in repairing something he purchased fair and square. Moreover, it
takes a big step toward removing from the public weal the value of
old instruments, no longer manufactured, which in many cases are
not replaced by newer instruments performing the same function.

Agreed. What is it about lawyers? These land sharks have this
mentality that if their corporation doesn't say NO to absolutely
everything - that if even one teeny-weeny yes gets out, that sheer
pandemonium will result.

As a result, counsel recommends (and usually gets their way) that any -
even the smallest - violation be immediately stopped. One example.
http://www.elvislounge.com/barrykoltnow.html It's truly shameful.


Another point. Because of corporate bullying of copyright infringement,
the price of manual often exceeds the price of the used equipment it
belongs to. So sellers buy scrap not for the value of the equipment,
but for the manuals they contain.

--
Thanks,
- Win

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Chris" <cfoley1064@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1114188869.579181.154250@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

[snip]

I'd like to be a bit of a contrarian here for once.

rant
[snip]

An important point that's being neglected here is that these manuals
are intellectual property which has been copyrighted to make sure the
fruits of that work goes to the owners.

Many of these equipoments and manuals are no longer sold or supported by
HP. So I don't see what benefit they get by enforcing their copyrights.
All they seem to do is make it exceedingly difficult and miserable for
the owners of that old equipment.

This forum has many
well-respected engineers who depend, at least in part, on the residual
value of the intellectual property they have created in order to make
a
living, through patents, non-disclosure agreements, and copyrights,
allowing them to sell the same art to more than one customer. I don't
believe they would be happy if the owners of the fruits of their labor
decided to bypass those patents and non-disclosure agreements in order
to swipe some of that value for themselves.

As I said, no longer sold or supported, so this doesn't apply.

[snip]

Agilent has a webpage which recommends a number of resellers of
manuals, several of which have the one the OP is talking about.

Do they get a payment from the manual reseller when a manual is sold? I
doubt it.


[snip]

/rant

Chris

 

[Robert Baer]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On 22 Apr 2005 04:05:20 -0700, Winfield Hill
hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> wrote:


Stepan, steevjanpan@hotmail.com wrote...

HP is enforcing their copyright over manuals, even for old
unsupported equipment. Look at this:

http://bama.sbc.edu/images/Letter%204-18-05.pdf

I see the BoatAnchor Manual Archive public-service site has
complied, http://bama.sbc.edu/hp.htm removing masses of valuable
documentation for ancient hp instruments from public availability.

That letter from Agilent's counsel is going to bring a massive
response from me as director of a Harvard University research
laboratory, directed to the relevant authorities at Agilent to
get the policy changed. It's dramatically counter-productive to
their own business interests, and it's manifestly unfair to the
owners of old HP / Agilent equipment who for one reason or another
no longer have an operating or service manual, and who cannot get
one from Agilent. For Agilent to close them off from a solution
to their problem is to render their bought and paid-for equipment
useless. It also means Agilent is capriciously denying the implied
warranty of merchantability for their older products; the product
can hardly do what it is supposed to do if the owner doesn't know
what button to push, or how to interpret the panel reading. And
it means Agilent is denying the owners' right to his own self-help
in repairing something he purchased fair and square. Moreover, it
takes a big step toward removing from the public weal the value of
old instruments, no longer manufactured, which in many cases are
not replaced by newer instruments performing the same function.


Shakespeare was correct ;-)

But I've had a bias against hp equipment for at least 30 years... a
whole lot of it was crap or became crap within one year. When I ran
the Phoenix Analog Design Center for GenRad I forbade the purchase of
hp 'scopes.

...Jim Thompson
Do not know about their scopes, but i still have an HP410C analog VOM

in excellent condition; only had to replace pass transistor in power
supply once.
I got the manual when i got the meter, so there has never been a
problem for calibration or repair.

 

[Chris]

Winfield Hill wrote:
<snip>

Thanks again (and the check is still ready to be signed ;-)

Which check is that?


--
Thanks,
- Win

The check to purchase the third edition of a "certain universally
respected textbook of Electronics Engineering" mentioned above, of
course.

By the way, I bought the second edition used. I'd consider it an honor
to be able to cut a check for a new copy of the 3rd edition, so the
authors could directly see the benefit.

In business, the best way to say "thanks for the help" is in cash.
Which is kind of the point of this whole discussion, I suppose.

Thanks (of the non-monetary variety this time, I'm afraid)
Chris

 

[Chris]

Watson A.Name - Watt Sun, the Dark Remover wrote:

That doesn't make sense. All the department has to do is hand over
the
manuals to the library (this _is_ in an academic emvironment!) and
let
them put the manuals in Reserve, where they can be checked out for a
very limited amount of time, say two hours, and not be taken from the
facility. The student can then peruse, or even copy them if he has a
pocketful of dimes. At least this is how we do it at the college
where
I work. Actually, the student can now buy credits on a card to put
in
the copier, so he doesn't even need coins to make copies. One can
see
this big warning sign above the copier with legalese about copyright
restrictions etc. Mostly ignored.

[snip]

I agree that the value of the instrument is inherent in
the instrument itself, not the manual. But just the fact that
we're
having this conversation indicates the documentation is of value,
although of another kind. It allows me to utilize the investment
in
the instrument.

Everyone, including the legal system, should view certain types of
manuals as different than other IP. In the case of an instruction
manual, this is is directly related to the instrument, and has no
real
use or value on its own. Therefor the owner of an instrument should
have the right to own this manual, no matter where or how it was
obtained. I would go as far as to say that the instrument maker
should
be obligated to supply one to the owner upon proof of ownership, but
the
makers wouldn't want to be stuck with that responsibility.

OTOH the repair, service, maintenance manuals are another case, and
since they might reveal something about the instrument that's not
notmally available to the owner, the owner wouldn't have any right to
these manuals.

[snip]

It's been too many years -- placing the manuals on reserve in the
Engineering Department library is an obvious idea. A smart instrument
manufacturer might also allow professors to make a copy for their
personal use or to chain down in the lab, where it's most useful.

If I buy a old used car which is no longer supported by the dealer
network (like a '67 Ford Mustang), I expect a set of keys from the
seller, not Ford. I wouldn't buy a car without them. I feel the
manuals are an integral part of the whole instrument package, and I
also feel that a manual should be sold with a used/obsolete instrument
if it was originally sold with that manual. Ideally, the seller of the
obsolete instrument should provide that manual, and buy it if he
doesn't have it.

Fact is, though, most sellers of old HP instruments don't provide the
manuals. That means we've got to scrounge them up. Agilent provides a
list of suggested vendors here:

http://tinyurl.com/brg64

I ran down the eight web links listed on the above page looking for the
HP 5370B manual. ManualsPlus has it for $75.00 USD. Consolidated
Surplus (which is double-linked, there are actually only seven in the
list) shows available, price not listed. W.J. Ford Surplus Enterprises
shows Not Available but e-mail to be sure (too bad -- they rent manuals
for $10/month!). The others come up blank. Also, yesterday I made a
call to another vendor I occasionally use and found that he had it,
too. He wanted more than $75 for it, though.

To be honest, I think all of these arguments about how manufacturers
should provide more manuals for old, orphaned instruments, or broadcast
them free on the internet, would hold a lot more water if there weren't
any used, legal manuals out there.

<humor>
If I could be permitted an analogy. Let's look at the user manual "The
Joy of Sex" by Alex Comfort. The book is not sex. You don't need the
manual to engage in sex, or to experience joy in sex. The manual has
no intrinsic use for sex on its own, unless you happen to want to know
how to use your instrument better. However, Dr. Comfort's heirs (he
passed away a few years ago, I hear) would be most unhappy to hear
that, because of these admittedly true facts, you copied the manual.
They would, however, encourage you to engage in sex to your heart's
content, even if the instrument is old, and even if it is no longer
well-"supported". As I remember (it's been about 25 years (since I
*read the book*, Rich!) ), Dr. Comfort actually recommended that.
</humor>

I still think a lot of this discussion comes down to whether
electronics designers (who, after all, are being paid to create
intellectual property) are just trying to skate around the necessity of
paying for somebody else's intellectual property, which has admitted
value. Otherwise, why would we be having this discussion at all?

I understand everything that's been said about this by others, and
actually agree with a lot of it. I respect these opinions, and
everyone here has good arguments. But I'm not going to change my
opinion, because it's a matter of principle and the way I do business.
My employer or customer is paying for his pleasures. Period. If it's
copyrighted, the person who's paying will get a legal copy. There are
better ways to save a few bucks. And if I buy a used and non-supported
HP instrument (like the HP3456A), I'll spend $25 more for a legal
manual, even though I could find a copy. That's one of the joys of
being in business.

If the copyright laws need to be changed (and Frith knows they do),
then let's change 'em.

Chris

 

[Tim Shoppa]

https://www.logsa.army.mil/etms/online.htm
I can't even access that website.

The military is screening IP addresses, trying to match them to
geographic locations, and blocking access from outside the US.

The screening isn't perfect, BTW. Sometimes real USAians cannot get to
it, sometimes foreigners can...

Tim.

 

[Chris]

Winfield Hill wrote:

Chris wrote...
I disagree, we're not talking about manuals that can still be
purchased from HP / Agilent. (And by this I mean real manuals,
not microfiche dups that can't be used at the workbench.) We're
talking about the real shortage of manuals for old instruments,
where more manuals than instruments have been thrown away or lost.


--
Thanks,
- Win

I think I've already taken up too much of your time here. If someone
told me I could have several minutes of Mr. Hill's time to talk about
electronics, I'd be absolutely delighted. But instrument manuals would
be just about the last thing in the world I'd like to talk about.

If you would indulge me anyway, I might add a few personal
observations:

* Just for my own curiosity, I looked at the Yahoo hp_instrument user
group mentioned near the beginning of this thread, and read every post
for this month. It was kind of interesting how many posts this month
involved manual .pdfs and obtaining other non-legitimate copies of HP
manuals. So I read all the posts for the HP model numbers for every HP
instrument, scope, and add-on card where there would have been a
manual. And you know what? Every HP product mentioned in this month's
posts (a few dozen items) has the _real_ OP/SV manuals available from
the same single manual reseller recommended by HP on their website --
ManualsPlus. I didn't even have to look around. But they were selling
for a price, of course.

* Over the years, I've been in several jobs where I've been the only
one who cared about instrument manual document control, and ended up
maintaining the system myself in one case. Engineers would draw and
quarter (on your side) or tar and feather (on our side) someone from
another department who treated other company- or University-owned
engineering IP like prints or purchased software with the same disdain
almost all engineers have for instrument manuals. At best, they will
squirrel them away in their own desk or lab bench so they don't have to
go to the bother of signing them out or returning them. Usually
they'll ignore and lose them or throw them out as clutter. I guess my
personal opinion on this subject is kind of rare.

* Older instruments are generally a better value, as well as usually
being easier to use and less expensive to maintain. I try to specify
used/reconditioned instruments wherever possible, because I feel
they're generally a good deal for my employer or customer. I always
buy used for myself, because that way I can afford a better instrument.
I've specified several "orphan" (manufacturer no longer provides
service or parts, including the manuals) HP instruments, and bought
one myself for my own use. Years back, I got burned by buying a tricky
instrument from another manufacturer, then blowing a project deadline
partly because I couldn't buy, beg, borrow or steal the manual, didn't
use the instrument properly and was getting bad data. Since then, I
make sure not to buy a used instrument without the manual. And while
manual availability has affected which used instrument I chose, I've
never had to buy a new instrument because I couldn't find a used one
that would do the job and that had a manual available from somewhere.

* Let's say that I walked into a job where I was required to use a
piece of existing equipment for which I had to have the manual. Let's
also say I made a good faith effort to find the manual, and couldn't
get a legal one. Would I start scrounging around for a .pdf or other
non-legitimate copy? Sure, I would. I'm not a zealot about this.
Just like everyone else, I've got to do the job, get it done on time,
and if there's no other way, I guess I'd have to clip the coin. But
there's almost always a legal way to do it as things are set up now,
especially for orphan HP instruments. But it _does_ cost money.

* I would also concede it's likely there are many more orphaned HP
instruments out there than there are manuals. What would happen if
more engineers took the copyright law seriously as it relates to
instrument manuals? Well, first off, I suppose existing inventory on
manuals would go down and prices might go up a bit. Not as much as you
might think, because as prices go up, new instruments and other used
instruments with manuals become more attractive options. As demand
increased, suppliers would institute waiting lists, and since they
would be guaranteed fast turnaround, they would loosen their
restrictions on purchasing individual manuals, and pay more for them
(currently most of these manual resellers are miserly, and will only
buy manuals by the bale and "pay" by the ton ;-). Possibly owners of
manuals without instruments would register their copies with resellers
in case someone wanted them. More manuals would crawl out of the
woodwork as useless paper turns into potential cash. Manuals might be
rented, or offered on consignment. Engineers might even form a co-op
to rent or to minimize brokers' fees (the markup on these manuals is
extravagant). And eventually a new balance would be achieved. The new
price of the manuals would more accurately reflect their real value. I
don't think the price would be that much more than it is now, though.
And at that point, if manuals were still printed on unobtainium, we
would all have a legitimate beef against Agilent and the other
manufacturers, and I think they might then be more inclined to offer
either "book-on-demand" or high-quality Xeroxed copies of their old
manuals for a price a little higher than the asking price for used
manuals. And engineers would start getting more serious about spending
the time and effort to maintain document control on these newly
valuable books.

Sorry to bend your ear, but it's kind of a "hot button" issue for me.
I've not found it hard to comply with the law as it now stands. I just
pay for my pleasures, which is my perogative and one of the joys of the
business world. Original manuals for nearly all orphaned HP equipment
do exist out there, and paying for them is a legitimate cost. Of
course the copyright law is messed up, especially in the States. 75 to
95 years is too long for a corporation to own a copyright on anything.
But out of direct respect for the law, and indirectly out of respect
for the creator of the book, I'll try to buy the manual if it's legally
available.

Thanks again for your time.

TAANSTAAFL
Chris

 

[HedgeWarden]

A few observations:

1. Copyright is supposed to help an author receive just compensation
for his/her/its work.

2. Although much work obviously went into the manuals for
non-supported equipment, Agilent is no longer receiving significant
compensation for them - as far as I know.

3. So Agilent is correct as far as the letter of the law, but may not
really be correct as far as the intention of the law. But the letter
is the ruling rule.

4. Tektronix has publically released all copyrights on all their
manuals for equipment which they no longer support. (ONLY the
equipment they no longer support.) This has been a great boon for
hobbists, students, and probably some academic institutions. Maybe
even some of the many small start-up companies that find 25-30 year old
Tek scopes still are useful.

5. Both Agilent and Tektronix are completely within their legal
rights. But Tektronix has opted to be generous to the user community
of their older machines. This is a community of hobbyists, students,
academic institutions, and so on. The same community that Apple found
it cost effective to donate large numbers of computers to.

Release of copyright may cost Tek a few sales of newer machines, but
gains them a lot of respect. The value of the public relations almost
certainly is many times the small loss of potential sales.

I'm sorry to read that Agilent is not so forward thinking. Sounds like
they took their cue from Disney suing day-care centers for using
"Donald Duck" (r) (c) (tm) (etc.) in wall murals.

Ahh, well, the modern corporate mind.

-Howard