Thermal Faults

On Thursday, 26 September 2019 23:42:18 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

On 9/26/19 4:44 PM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 26 September 2019 21:46:02 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:
The fact that carbon resistors have a pretty wretched service life and heat tolerance.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

you're clearly misinformed


30 years of servicing vintage radios tells me you're the one
misinformed.

Vintage is the key word there. Ancient carbon composition are indeed prone to rising in value & going oc. However carbon film Rs have an excellent reliability record. I've repaired lots of stuff over however many years, and carbon film Rs are almost never a problem.

I've no doubt your ego will not permit you to get real, so I see little point continuing this. Others who read this will make up their own minds.


NT

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 9/27/19 4:08 AM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, 26 September 2019 Fox's Mercantile wrote:
On 9/26/19 4:44 PM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 26 September 2019 pf...@aol.com wrote:
The fact that carbon resistors have a pretty wretched
service life and heat tolerance.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

you're clearly misinformed


30 years of servicing vintage radios tells me you're the one
misinformed.

Vintage is the key word there. Ancient carbon composition
are indeed prone to rising in value & going oc. However > carbon film Rs have an excellent reliability record. I've
repaired lots of stuff over however many years, and carbon
film Rs are almost never a problem.

I've no doubt your ego will not permit you to get real, so
I see little point continuing this. Others who read this
will make up their own minds.


NT

Do you even pay attention to what you write?

"Carbon comp is used on occasion for its pulse power tolerance."

Which is the worst possible way of using a carbon composition
type of resistor.

Peter told you that. I told you that.

--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

[Arie de Muynck]

On 2019-09-27 12:42, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

"Carbon comp is used on occasion for its pulse power tolerance."

Which is the worst possible way of using a carbon composition
type of resistor.

Why is that? This is IMHO not about the carbon film type but about
modern massive carbon composition. I've used them for > 40 years in e.g.
triac snubber networks and they never failed. All kinds of (same wattage
rating) film types did fail. Wirewound is also OK but too expensive.

Arie

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 9/27/19 6:25 AM, Arie de Muynck wrote:

On 2019-09-27 12:42, Fox's Mercantile wrote:
"Carbon comp is used on occasion for its pulse power tolerance."

Which is the worst possible way of using a carbon composition
type of resistor.

Why is that? This is IMHO not about the carbon film type but about
modern massive carbon composition. I've used them for > 40 years in e.g.
triac snubber networks and they never failed. All kinds of (same wattage
rating) film types did fail. Wirewound is also OK but too expensive.

Arie

Obviously, you're using the film types incorrectly and not specifying
specifying the correct rating for the application.


--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

http://carlscustomamps.com/do-carbon-composition-and-carbon-film-resistors-sound-better

https://www.aikenamps.com/index.php/resistor-types-does-it-matter

And so on.

What it comes down to is cost. And, in my experience, those who wish to believe that cost is not the issue will throw up all sorts of smoke and mirrors around audiophoolery.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

On Friday, 27 September 2019 11:43:04 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

On 9/27/19 4:08 AM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 26 September 2019 Fox's Mercantile wrote:
On 9/26/19 4:44 PM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 26 September 2019 pf...@aol.com wrote:
The fact that carbon resistors have a pretty wretched
service life and heat tolerance.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

you're clearly misinformed


30 years of servicing vintage radios tells me you're the one
misinformed.

Vintage is the key word there. Ancient carbon composition
are indeed prone to rising in value & going oc. However > carbon film Rs have an excellent reliability record. I've
repaired lots of stuff over however many years, and carbon
film Rs are almost never a problem.

I've no doubt your ego will not permit you to get real, so
I see little point continuing this. Others who read this
will make up their own minds.


NT


Do you even pay attention to what you write?

"Carbon comp is used on occasion for its pulse power tolerance."

Which is the worst possible way of using a carbon composition
type of resistor.

Peter told you that. I told you that.

it's the worst way to use any resistor, but that is immaterial. When an EE needs a resistor with large pulse tolerance, carbon comp is the best candidate for the job, and by a long way. There's no other reason to use them nowadays, no other way in which they're better, and they certainly aren't cheaper.

Are you really claiming to not know this stuff?


NT

 

On Friday, 27 September 2019 12:38:39 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

On 9/27/19 6:25 AM, Arie de Muynck wrote:
On 2019-09-27 12:42, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

"Carbon comp is used on occasion for its pulse power tolerance."

Which is the worst possible way of using a carbon composition
type of resistor.

Why is that? This is IMHO not about the carbon film type but about
modern massive carbon composition. I've used them for > 40 years in e.g.
triac snubber networks and they never failed. All kinds of (same wattage
rating) film types did fail. Wirewound is also OK but too expensive.

Arie

Obviously, you're using the film types incorrectly and not specifying
specifying the correct rating for the application.

Oh boy. Carbon comp is so much better at pulse work that a comp R with a given pulse rating is cheaper than a larger film type with the same pulse rating. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE USED.


NT

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

Operative word being "CHEAPER".

Which is what I am getting to with the comment "kicking the can down the road".

Being that this is a hobby for me, there are very few things that I purchase in sufficient quantities that even a 100% premium (and it is nowhere near that for resistors) is not worth the extra cost for the avoidance of trouble. I just purchased a lot of electrolytic capacitors to go into tube equipment - the premium for 105 C High-Hours caps vs. standard caps came to about 5% across 20 caps in total.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 9/27/19 11:51 AM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

On Friday, 27 September 2019 12:38:39 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:
On 9/27/19 6:25 AM, Arie de Muynck wrote:
On 2019-09-27 12:42, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

"Carbon comp is used on occasion for its pulse power tolerance."

Which is the worst possible way of using a carbon composition
type of resistor.

Why is that? This is IMHO not about the carbon film type but about
modern massive carbon composition. I've used them for > 40 years in e.g.
triac snubber networks and they never failed. All kinds of (same wattage
rating) film types did fail. Wirewound is also OK but too expensive.

Arie

Obviously, you're using the film types incorrectly and not specifying
specifying the correct rating for the application.

Oh boy. Carbon comp is so much better at pulse work that a comp R with a given pulse rating is cheaper than a larger film type with the same pulse rating. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE USED.


NT

Oh, that's right. I forgot you're never wrong.

Even when you are.


--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

On Friday, 27 September 2019 19:23:47 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Operative word being "CHEAPER".

Which is what I am getting to with the comment "kicking the can down the road".

No, modern resistors used within their specs are very reliable. They're among the most reliable of electronic components. Further comment is just not worthwhile.


NT

> Being that this is a hobby for me,

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 9/27/19 5:41 PM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

On Friday, 27 September 2019 19:23:47 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Operative word being "CHEAPER".

Which is what I am getting to with the comment "kicking the can down the road".

No, modern resistors used within their specs are very reliable. They're among the most reliable of electronic components. Further comment is just not worthwhile.


NT

Yet you persist on saying carbon composition resistors are better
for a given application.

Make up your mind.



--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

On Saturday, 28 September 2019 00:11:38 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

On 9/27/19 5:41 PM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Friday, 27 September 2019 19:23:47 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Operative word being "CHEAPER".

Which is what I am getting to with the comment "kicking the can down the road".

No, modern resistors used within their specs are very reliable. They're among the most reliable of electronic components. Further comment is just not worthwhile.


NT

Yet you persist on saying carbon composition resistors are better
for a given application.

Make up your mind.

I'm not confused. Nor am I much concerned whether you read up on them or not. Good night.

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 9/28/19 7:09 PM, tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

On Saturday, 28 September 2019 00:11:38 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:
On 9/27/19 5:41 PM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Friday, 27 September 2019 19:23:47 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Operative word being "CHEAPER".

Which is what I am getting to with the comment "kicking the can down the road".

No, modern resistors used within their specs are very reliable. They're among the most reliable of electronic components. Further comment is just not worthwhile.


NT

Yet you persist on saying carbon composition resistors are better
for a given application.

Make up your mind.

I'm not confused. Nor am I much concerned whether you read up on them or not. Good night.

Actually you are confused.
Previously you'd said:

Oh boy. Carbon comp is so much better at pulse work that a comp R with a given pulse rating is cheaper than a larger film type with the same pulse rating. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE USED.

Then you follow up with:
> No, modern resistors used within their specs are very reliable. They're among the most reliable of electronic components. Further comment is just not worthwhile.

Yet carbon composition resistors are made the same way they've
been made for the past 50 years. And with the same time and
temperature drift that they've always had.

--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

[Jeff Urban]

Whatever they all say this is the deal. First of all things that pop up when cold might be connections, if when hot they are almost always component failure.

You have to thermally cycle it several times, so go over your Grandma's place a steal an endtable. Take the case off and get a towel. Fire it up and maybe take some voltages. Cover with towel. Then when it fails take those voltages again.

Then find out where any missing voltages come from. Always remember, 70% of the time or more it only has one problem. I used to say almost all the time but that is no longer true. And things blow each other, but there is one ROOT cause of the problem.

If you can't find a case history on it you are just going to have to do it, all there is to it.

You can try Repairworld if they are still around for $11 a month. Just one month isn't going to break the bank I hope but they might not have anything on it.

Other than that, just troubleshot. Got a print ? Maybe we can look at ? I don't even know what the fuck this thing is. It could be an ICBM or a toaster fr as I know.

 

On Sunday, 29 September 2019 01:28:02 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

On 9/28/19 7:09 PM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Saturday, 28 September 2019 00:11:38 UTC+1, Fox's Mercantile wrote:
On 9/27/19 5:41 PM, tabbypurr wrote:
On Friday, 27 September 2019 19:23:47 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Operative word being "CHEAPER".

Which is what I am getting to with the comment "kicking the can down the road".

No, modern resistors used within their specs are very reliable. They're among the most reliable of electronic components. Further comment is just not worthwhile.


NT

Yet you persist on saying carbon composition resistors are better
for a given application.

Make up your mind.

I'm not confused. Nor am I much concerned whether you read up on them or not. Good night.


Actually you are confused.
Previously you'd said:

Oh boy. Carbon comp is so much better at pulse work that a comp R with a given pulse rating is cheaper than a larger film type with the same pulse rating. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE USED.

Then you follow up with:
No, modern resistors used within their specs are very reliable. They're among the most reliable of electronic components. Further comment is just not worthwhile.

Yet carbon composition resistors are made the same way they've
been made for the past 50 years. And with the same time and
temperature drift that they've always had.

which part of

I'm not confused. Nor am I much concerned whether you read up on them or not. Good night.
did you not grasp? I don't need an answer.

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 19:26:22 -0700, Jeff Urban wrote:

Other than that, just troubleshot. Got a print ? Maybe we can look at ?
I don't even know what the fuck this thing is. It could be an ICBM or a
toaster fr as I know.

It's an old HP 8565A RF spectrum analyser built with good old fashioned
discrete components you can physically see.
The problem I'm having is access. I have identified the failed board: the
x-amplifier module. They've used plug-in boards which is great in one
way, except that they're so closely juxtaposed with other plug-in boards
it's impossible to carry out any traditional troubleshooting techniques
whilst under power. Believe me, I've tried. Tacking on fine wires to
various key connections and running them out for probing and whatnot but
I'd end up with a right old rat's nest of a mess if I carry on like that
much longer.
I've discovered a lot of old tower computers use the same pitch of plug
in board that HP used (3.96mm) so I've ordered a matching socket and will
make up a patch lead that will enable me to probe the board under power
out in the open where I can get at it. It's a PITA, but there's no
alternative I can see.


--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 29/09/2019 9:15 pm, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 19:26:22 -0700, Jeff Urban wrote:

Other than that, just troubleshot. Got a print ? Maybe we can look at ?
I don't even know what the fuck this thing is. It could be an ICBM or a
toaster fr as I know.

It's an old HP 8565A RF spectrum analyser built with good old fashioned
discrete components you can physically see.
The problem I'm having is access. I have identified the failed board: the
x-amplifier module. They've used plug-in boards which is great in one
way, except that they're so closely juxtaposed with other plug-in boards
it's impossible to carry out any traditional troubleshooting techniques
whilst under power. Believe me, I've tried. Tacking on fine wires to
various key connections and running them out for probing and whatnot but
I'd end up with a right old rat's nest of a mess if I carry on like that
much longer.
I've discovered a lot of old tower computers use the same pitch of plug
in board that HP used (3.96mm) so I've ordered a matching socket and will
make up a patch lead that will enable me to probe the board under power
out in the open where I can get at it. It's a PITA, but there's no
alternative I can see.

**It's highly likely that HP made available extension adapters to suit
their test equipment back in the day. You might be able to source one.
Somewhere.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus