chip swelling up and getting fried

: It's fairly easy to prove, try it yourself. To make it fair you
need someone
: to come close to you with some phones, one of which has a call
on it and you
: will be suprised how many of you can allways tell which phone is
active.
:
: I can tell from about 2 feet but I do have friends who can do it
from 6 ft
: or more.

No one I know can feel a telephone signal, you have some strange
friends. I can see when they hold it to their ear though.
Have you tried it? I think that at least half the people that read this
group will be supriosed by the outcome of an unbiased test as outlined.

I do have soem strange friends, I'll grant you that. I am the only normal
person I know.

BTW: What has this to do with getting a material to show the
presence of RF?
Nothing, aren't newsgroups wonderful. :)
 
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:h%H_c.136$rj1.87@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
: It's fairly easy to prove, try it yourself. To make it fair you
: need someone to come close to you with some phones, one of which has a
call
on it and you
: will be suprised how many of you can allways tell which phone is active.
:
: I can tell from about 2 feet but I do have friends who can do it from 6
ft
: or more.

No one I know can feel a telephone signal, you have some strange
friends. I can see when they hold it to their ear though.


Have you tried it? I think that at least half the people that read this
group will be supriosed by the outcome of an unbiased test as outlined.
Yes, no effect. I said that.


I do have soem strange friends, I'll grant you that. I am the only normal
person I know.

BTW: What has this to do with getting a material to show the
presence of RF?

Nothing, aren't newsgroups wonderful. :)
Apparently not.
 
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iYH_c.133$rj1.89@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
"Clarence" <No@No.Com> wrote in message
news:mWG_c.11927$QJ3.10315@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:YzB_c.43$rj1.31@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
: > There is NO proof that there is any harm done by the low level
RF
: > from Cell phone. THAT has been proven.
: I thought I had already said that.
I thought you implied the data was incomplete.

? Confusing me now. The data is incomplete and can never be any other way.
All that happens is that as time goes on then the chance of "no harm" being
correct increases, it is never proven.
If there is no evidence of harm, and we have many years of observation, then it
is proven that low levels of RF such as used in a Cell Phone is not harmful.

The statement above says :-
It has been proven that there is no proof that any harm is done by RF
emmissions from a cell phone.
or, another way:-
As yet it has not been proven whether or not harm is done by radio
emmissions from cell phones.

Your rephrasing the line doesn't change what I said.
1. "There is NO proof that there is any harm done by the low level RF from (a)
Cell phone.

2. "THAT has been proven." Statement one is true!

So claiming the data is incomplete is 'only' YOUR view, not the generally
accepted view.
 
"Clarence" <No@No.Com> wrote in message
news:2AJ_c.16204$ww4.15390@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iYH_c.133$rj1.89@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
"Clarence" <No@No.Com> wrote in message
news:mWG_c.11927$QJ3.10315@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:YzB_c.43$rj1.31@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
: > There is NO proof that there is any harm done by the low level
RF
: > from Cell phone. THAT has been proven.
: I thought I had already said that.
I thought you implied the data was incomplete.

? Confusing me now. The data is incomplete and can never be any other
way.
All that happens is that as time goes on then the chance of "no harm"
being
correct increases, it is never proven.

If there is no evidence of harm, and we have many years of observation,
then it
is proven that low levels of RF such as used in a Cell Phone is not
harmful.

The statement above says :-
It has been proven that there is no proof that any harm is done by RF
emmissions from a cell phone.
or, another way:-
As yet it has not been proven whether or not harm is done by radio
emmissions from cell phones.


Your rephrasing the line doesn't change what I said.
1. "There is NO proof that there is any harm done by the low level RF from
(a)
Cell phone.

2. "THAT has been proven." Statement one is true!

So claiming the data is incomplete is 'only' YOUR view, not the generally
accepted view.
I obviously have problems understanding the English what you writ. Or you
didn't writ wat you wanted to speak

Anyway, whatever.
 
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:YIz_c.143$Ux5.37@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
Well I suppose if we knew that then we could probably try to ascertain the
effect now. It's just an unknown. What bothers me is the fact that I can
"feel" a GSM phone transmit.
Before we go too far down this particular path -
exactly how have you determined this?

Bob M.
 
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:h%H_c.136$rj1.87@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
Have you tried it? I think that at least half the people that read this
group will be supriosed by the outcome of an unbiased test as outlined.
Except that what you have outlined is not an
"unbiased test." To truly demonstrate the effect
you're describing would require a more carefully-
designed test, one which is truly double-blind.

Bob M.
 
"R Adsett" <radsett@junk.aeolusdevelopment.cm> wrote in message
news:IAv_c.143505$pTn.97721@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
In article <otrjj094ea6es3qp4rsqa59f6qhggmhaaf@4ax.com>, Bennet
Williams
says...
On 4 Sep 2004 08:19:15 -0700, veryfree123@hotmail.com (Watson
A.Name)
wrote:

It takes 124VDC, yeah, DC, at 16.6 AMPS or something like that. I
have no idea why it has to be DC, since it's obviously from some
big
heavy stationary equipment. After all, one can get different
speeds
from an AC motor. Maybe it has to be continuously variable speed.
In
any case, my thoughts were that it would make a great generator if
it
has permanent magnets in it. I haven't had a chance to check it
out,
or put a meter on it to see if it generates. That'll come later.
Maybe if I get a chance I'll take a pic and post it to ABSE. I'm
just
wondering if anyone has worked with something like this, and if it
will make a decent generator.


Any brushed DC motor can be used as a generator. If you want a DC
generator, this motor will do the job. I would recommend checking
the
condition of the brushes and commutator.
Well, yes, but some are easier than others. A series wound motor
could
be used as a generator but driving the field could be interesting.

How may terminals does it have? (and if more than 2 are the the same
size?)
It has two heavy (16ga?) wires, a red and a black.

Given the description I doubt that it's series wound but it might be
shunt wound.
What? Series? Shunt? A permanent magnet motor has only one winding!

> Robert
 
Tim Auton wrote:

"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:17R_c.9772$TY1.6132@news.cpqcorp.net...
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:h%H_c.136$rj1.87@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
Have you tried it? I think that at least half the people that read
this group will be supriosed by the outcome of an unbiased test as
outlined.

Except that what you have outlined is not an
"unbiased test." To truly demonstrate the effect
you're describing would require a more carefully-
designed test, one which is truly double-blind.

It is fairly easy just get a friend with a mobile phone who is 20 feet
away to walk towards you several times with the phone turned off and on
one occason to do it with a phone active, ie making a call.

This is not a double-blind test and therefore does not constitute
useful evidence.


Tim
I wasn't submitting evidence I was just suggesting a way you can try it. It
really isn't that important to me. I know I can detect them and I know that
I have friends that can. I don't need convincing and I don't want to design
tests to prove or disprove it. If anyone is that interested then try it
yourself either with a "double blind" test or just try it.
 
In article <10joqh3jc61v30c@corp.supernews.com>, "Watson A.Name - \"Watt
Sun, the Dark Remover\"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com> says...
"R Adsett" <radsett@junk.aeolusdevelopment.cm> wrote in message
news:IAv_c.143505$pTn.97721@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
On 4 Sep 2004 08:19:15 -0700, veryfree123@hotmail.com (Watson
A.Name)
wrote:

It takes 124VDC, yeah, DC, at 16.6 AMPS or something like that. I
have no idea why it has to be DC, since it's obviously from some
big
heavy stationary equipment.
snip

How may terminals does it have? (and if more than 2 are the the same
size?)

It has two heavy (16ga?) wires, a red and a black.

Given the description I doubt that it's series wound but it might be
shunt wound.

What? Series? Shunt? A permanent magnet motor has only one winding!
Well, you didn't mention that you already knew it was a PM motor :). A
two terminal motor could be either PM or series wound. Given the voltage
and current rating, and the fact that the leads are different colours I
would strongly suspect PM.

A series wound motor with 2 terminals is commonly used for pump motors
(the field is wired to the armature internally eliminating 2 of the usual
terminals from what would atherwise be a four terminal motor, brushed DC
motors come in variations from two terminals to six terminals at least).
They have the advantage of not needed extra jumper wiring and they cannot
be hooked up backwards. No matter which polarity you hook the 2 terminals
up in the motor always rotates in the same direction.

And to be picky a PM motor has multiple windings, that's what the
commutator and brushes are for, to switch between windings. But you
already knew that ;)

Robert
 
Mjolinor <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote:
Tim Auton wrote:
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote:
[snip]>>>It is fairly easy just get a friend with a mobile phone who
is 20 feet
away to walk towards you several times with the phone turned off and on
one occason to do it with a phone active, ie making a call.

This is not a double-blind test and therefore does not constitute
useful evidence.

I wasn't submitting evidence I was just suggesting a way you can try it.
And I was pointing out that it is a worse-than-useless way of trying
it.


Tim
--
Guns Don’t Kill People, Rappers Do.
 
A strip of liquid crystal simular to the stripes taht they install on LPG
tanks with a 1/4 wavelength thim piece of wire taped to the back migh do the
trick.

--
"Doyle" <dndowd13@charter.net> wrote in message
news:2b10adbe.0409020916.616b33d8@posting.google.com...
I am looking for a material that either glows or changes color in the
presence of RF energy. I have found nothing so far so any help at this
point would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Doyle
 
"R Adsett" <radsett@junk.aeolusdevelopment.cm> wrote in message
news:jA5%c.700$ZjZ1.378@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
[snip]
And to be picky a PM motor has multiple windings, that's what the
commutator and brushes are for, to switch between windings. But
you
already knew that ;)

Yeah, but a shunt wound motor could be connected internally with
only
two leads externally. I forget which kind a vacuum motor is but I
remember that one kind isn't used for some things because it can rev
up
excessively if there's no load, so it's usually used for something
like
a vacuum that has impellers permanently attached. Been a long time,
tho, so I'm not sure. Generally tho the vacuums have only two
wires.

Haven't run across that configuration (that would run in the same
direction regardless of polarity as well), all the shunt wound motors
I've seen were done that way for speed and/or torque control so the
fiels and armature sections were separately controllable. The
universal
appliance motors i've seen (only a few) have all been series wound.
The
larger series wound motors I've dealt with have had enough physical
(as opposed to electrical) resistance that runaway was not a practical
problem, not that I was tempted to rely on that often.
Yeah, I believe series wound is the one that can rev up real high. My
dad knew a guy who had more muscle than brains, who took an old vacuum
cleaner motor and put an old saw blade on the end of the shaft. Made
himself a great edger, back before the days of the weed whackers. Thing
made a nasty hissing sound. Threw some nasty sparks, too.

Anyway, I'll have to investigate further to see what this beasty
really
is. It's heavy, so it's gonna stay in my garage. Maybe I'll put a
light bulb on the leads and give it a spin to see what happens.
Thanks.

Or short it and see if you get a braking effect.
Yeah, I took a 327 (28V) lamp and some alli clips out to the garage and
connected them to the wires and gave it a spin. The lamp lit up amber,
probably 10 or 12V at .04 A or so. That's pretty decent for the hundred
or two RPMs I can spin the flywheel.

Here's what the nameplate said on it.

Pacific Scientific Automation Technology Group Motor Products Div.

Model Number PWM3636-5250-7-1
Volts 124VDC Amps 16.8 H.P. 2.3 RPM 3590 Duty CONT

And here's the dead giveaway: Field Class: PM

I had suspected that it was PM - permanent magnet, because I could feel
the poles of the armature pulling on the magnets as I spun it.

I took some pics, I'll have to post some of them on ABSE after I get
them out of my digi-cam.

> Robert
 
"Clarence" <No@No.Com> wrote in message
news:QC8%c.16989$_U.14949@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com...
"Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"" <NOSPAM@dslextreme.com
wrote in
message news:10jq0hpesud3r0b@corp.supernews.com...

"R Adsett" <radsett@junk.aeolusdevelopment.cm> wrote in message
news:jA5%c.700$ZjZ1.378@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
[snip]
And to be picky a PM motor has multiple windings, that's what
the
commutator and brushes are for, to switch between windings.
But
you
already knew that ;)

Yeah, but a shunt wound motor could be connected internally with
only
two leads externally. I forget which kind a vacuum motor is but
I
remember that one kind isn't used for some things because it can
rev
up
excessively if there's no load, so it's usually used for
something
like
a vacuum that has impellers permanently attached. Been a long
time,
tho, so I'm not sure. Generally tho the vacuums have only two
wires.

Haven't run across that configuration (that would run in the same
direction regardless of polarity as well), all the shunt wound
motors
I've seen were done that way for speed and/or torque control so
the
fiels and armature sections were separately controllable. The
universal
appliance motors i've seen (only a few) have all been series
wound.
The
larger series wound motors I've dealt with have had enough
physical
(as opposed to electrical) resistance that runaway was not a
practical
problem, not that I was tempted to rely on that often.

Yeah, I believe series wound is the one that can rev up real high.
My
dad knew a guy who had more muscle than brains, who took an old
vacuum
cleaner motor and put an old saw blade on the end of the shaft.
Made
himself a great edger, back before the days of the weed whackers.
Thing
made a nasty hissing sound. Threw some nasty sparks, too.

Anyway, I'll have to investigate further to see what this beasty
really
is. It's heavy, so it's gonna stay in my garage. Maybe I'll
put a
light bulb on the leads and give it a spin to see what happens.
Thanks.

Or short it and see if you get a braking effect.

Yeah, I took a 327 (28V) lamp and some alli clips out to the garage
and
connected them to the wires and gave it a spin. The lamp lit up
amber,
probably 10 or 12V at .04 A or so. That's pretty decent for the
hundred
or two RPMs I can spin the flywheel.

Here's what the nameplate said on it.

Pacific Scientific Automation Technology Group Motor Products Div.

Model Number PWM3636-5250-7-1
Volts 124VDC Amps 16.8 H.P. 2.3 RPM 3590 Duty CONT

And here's the dead giveaway: Field Class: PM

I had suspected that it was PM - permanent magnet, because I could
feel
the poles of the armature pulling on the magnets as I spun it.

I took some pics, I'll have to post some of them on ABSE after I get
them out of my digi-cam.
Robert

That's a winner. I have one of somewhat smaller size.
Name plate says McMILLAN Electric Company
Model S3348B2716
DP FITNESS P/N 37073300
120 VDC 6.0AMP
Insulation Class 130-2(B)
WOODVILLE, WI 54028

I haven't done curves on it yet, but like you I put a lamp (#47) and
spun it by
hand. Lit up nicely! So I get over 6VDC at only a couple hundred
RPM. Should
make a fine wind charger.
I doubt if I'll ever get a chance to use it unless I put it on an
exercise bike. The amount of power needed to spin it means it'll have
to have a substantial set of blades. And it needs to be geared up (or
more appropriately, pulleyed up) so that it'll spin several times as fas
t as the blades. The flywheel probably doesn't serve any purpose and
isn't needed, and could be left off. Maybe I'll sell it. Your motor
seems like it might be from some exercize bike??
 
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tDT_c.6$5%4.0@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
It is fairly easy just get a friend with a mobile phone who is 20 feet
away
to walk towards you several times with the phone turned off and on one
occason to do it with a phone active, ie making a call. I can't believe
that
there is anything special in detecting it, it is so obvious, you really do
feel it inside your head. If there are several switched on mobile phones
about it won't work you just have to have the one.
But again, you do NOT know from this test that it is
the detection of transmitted RF energy from the phone,
and not some other cue (something that your friend is
doing subconsciously to indicate the active phone, or
possibly low-level audio cues generated by the phone
itself). In fact, you should NOT be able to reliably
distinguish which phone is "making a call" in this manner,
since even a phone which is NOT in the process of
making a call will regularly emit RF energy just to "keep in
touch" with the cell site.

I have one particular friend who will say "your phone is going to ring"
before it makes any noise and I carry it in my pocket, it is not visible
to
him and more often than not he doesn't even know it is in my pocket. He
can
do this totally reliably.
But once again, there's nothing particularly special from
an RF emissions standpoint, with respect to the phone in
question, at the moment the phone is GOING to ring. It
does this when it RECEIVES the incoming call signal from
the cell site, but that signal is blanketing the area - it is not
localized to the phone in question. Further, again all other
phones in the area are regularly emitting RF energy, whether
they are "going to ring" or not - it is not possible that your
friend is somehow isolating the phone which is going to ring
based on RF signals alone, and you have made no effort
to consider and remove the possibility of other unrelated
cues.

It would be fairly easy to design an experiment which actually
WOULD test for this sort of detection, but to date nothing
you have described comes close to being valid as that sort of
a test.

Bob M.
 
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:vW%_c.492$PJ4.408@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
I wasn't submitting evidence I was just suggesting a way you can try it.
It
really isn't that important to me. I know I can detect them and I know
that
I have friends that can.
And it is indisputable that many, many people "know"
things in just this manner which on closer examination
turn out not to be true. You sound, in fact, exactly
like those people who defend astrology, telepathy,
"remote viewing," etc. - all sorts of pseudoscientific
notions which utterly fail when someone tries to actually
find evidence for them under controlled conditions.
With critical thinking skills like that, I sure hope you don't
come across anyone trying to sell you a bridge today...

Bob M.
 
"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:Mol%c.9843$E13.3117@news.cpqcorp.net...
"Mjolinor" <mjolinor@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:vW%_c.492$PJ4.408@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
I wasn't submitting evidence I was just suggesting a way you can try it.
It
really isn't that important to me. I know I can detect them and I know
that
I have friends that can.

And it is indisputable that many, many people "know"
things in just this manner which on closer examination
turn out not to be true. You sound, in fact, exactly
like those people who defend astrology, telepathy,
"remote viewing," etc. - all sorts of pseudoscientific
notions which utterly fail when someone tries to actually
find evidence for them under controlled conditions.
With critical thinking skills like that, I sure hope you don't
come across anyone trying to sell you a bridge today...

Bob M.
:)

Apologies for that. I am not trying to persuade anyone, I am only reporting
what I believe I have seen.

It may be an audio thing that is being detected. I cannot tell a phone that
is on but the beaconing signals are infrequent anyway as opposed to almost
constant transmit when a phone is making a call. I cannot distinguise which
phone is making a call if there are several.

I would like someone to try it, I don't believe anyone has. Anyway enough, I
am not a crazy (I don't think) the sun is nearly set and I have to go and
worship it.
 
Use a shunt resistor in series with the circuit, then measure the voltage
across the shunt and by applying Ohm's law you have the current. (for
example 0.01 ohm shunt would give you 0.25V @ 25A)
Gene
 
Gene wrote:
Use a shunt resistor in series with the circuit, then measure the
voltage across the shunt and by applying Ohm's law you have the
current. (for example 0.01 ohm shunt would give you 0.25V @ 25A)
Gene
--

Have a look at
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.knott/elect349.htm.htm
 
Graham Knott wrote:
Gene wrote:
Use a shunt resistor in series with the circuit, then measure the
voltage across the shunt and by applying Ohm's law you have the
current. (for example 0.01 ohm shunt would give you 0.25V @ 25A)
Gene
--
Sorry, but for some reason there are two htm's. Just delete onre as shown.

My most up-to-date website
Electronics for Beginners & Intermediate Electronics
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.knott/elect349.htm
 
Hadry LittleWood wrote:
hi

I have a volt meter which can reads DC current up to 0.250A
How do I make it able to read up to 25A

maybe just adding some resistors?

thanks

jif
-------------
Parallel shunt.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top