Driver to drive?

[MrTallyman]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:15:24 -0500, Jamie
<jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:


And my posts were RESPONSES to a DUMB AS A STUMP attacker.

You do notice flubber is slinking away >:-}

...Jim Thompson
Maybe, or he's just letting nature take its course, Jim.

Jamie

You'll have to make a call to the fumigators then.

That stink is worse than acid rain.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 14:10:39 -0800, Robert Baer
<robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

amdx wrote:
I ran across this History of OpAmps.
Thought some might find it interesting.
From tubes to ~ 1990.



http://www.analog.com/library/analogDialogue/archives/39-05/Web_ChH_final.pdf


Mikek




PS. I was looking for info on a Analog devices 118A that I have.
Closest I came was the 118.

http://www.analog.com/library/analogDialogue/archives/39-05/Web_ChH_final.pdf


Page 30

The historical origins are rather short and incomplete.
Fleming is mentioned, but NOT Cy Ellwell (the Baby Bird has no clue..).

It's rigged to ADI. One of my early OpAmps, the MC1530/31 is still
being sold, yet nary a mention in that "history".

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[BubbleSorter]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 09:50:55 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

No, idiot, it IS an engineering reference guide.

Engineers don't assemble connectors. It looks like a shop floor thing.

'Shop floor' personnel utilize engineering reference guides and
documents to produce the goods, IDIOT!

Engineers, while designing a system, need to refer to such a reference
when they are making a decision about which configuration to make use of
in their design. Engineers also prepare such documents for the
manufacturing personnel to make use of.

You are pathetic, child.

If you were any more of a total retard or any more immature, I'd swear
your name was John Larkin. Oh... wait!

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:13:03 -0800, BubbleSorter
<BubbleSorter@URallinyerplace.org> wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 09:50:55 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

No, idiot, it IS an engineering reference guide.

Engineers don't assemble connectors. It looks like a shop floor thing.


'Shop floor' personnel utilize engineering reference guides and
documents to produce the goods, IDIOT!

Engineers, while designing a system, need to refer to such a reference
when they are making a decision about which configuration to make use of
in their design. Engineers also prepare such documents for the
manufacturing personnel to make use of.

You are pathetic, child.

If you were any more of a total retard or any more immature, I'd swear
your name was John Larkin. Oh... wait!

You snipped the important stuff. You always do.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

 

[BubbleSorter]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:30:55 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You snipped the important stuff. You always do.

Sorry, you retarded fuck, but NOTHING you wrote was of ANY importance

whatsoever.

IF this were to be made into a formal document, it would contain a
simple cover sheet carrying all the requisite info needed to track
changes and place it in the company's standard documentation system.

You are fucking pathetic, child.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:59:02 -0800, BubbleSorter
BubbleSorter@URallinyerplace.org> wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:16:48 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


Silly old fool.



Says the guy who thinks excel has no purpose.

Check this out, brainiac.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?etit3m4st7fb6hy

I do these as an excel exercise. Even though the chart can be looked
up, this gives the assembler no question about the configuration.
Anything found online seems to leave a slight ambiguity.

It is always good to be concise. Sweating the small stuff *does*
matter.

That's not an engineering document.

It's not even a good assembly drawing, without details of what it's
used for. It doesn't have anything to make it tracable, or tell you
what level the assembly or subassembly it is intended for.

 

[P E Schoen]

"Jasen Betts" wrote in message
news:ke33lb$pct$2@gonzo.reversiblemaps.ath.cx...

it seems 400Kg of small batteries would half the price of 400Kg
of big batteries.

That depends on whether a half-ton of small batteries weighs less than a
half-ton of big ones.

There is probably a flat rate plus an additional charge per unit weight.

Paul

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:53:30 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:59:02 -0800, BubbleSorter
BubbleSorter@URallinyerplace.org> wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:16:48 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


Silly old fool.



Says the guy who thinks excel has no purpose.

Check this out, brainiac.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?etit3m4st7fb6hy

I do these as an excel exercise. Even though the chart can be looked
up, this gives the assembler no question about the configuration.
Anything found online seems to leave a slight ambiguity.

It is always good to be concise. Sweating the small stuff *does*
matter.

That's not an engineering document.


It's not even a good assembly drawing, without details of what it's
used for. It doesn't have anything to make it tracable, or tell you
what level the assembly or subassembly it is intended for.

Yeah, don't let the ISO9001 auditors see this sort of uncoltrolled stuff being
used, either in engineering or on the shop floor. He said himself that it
controls configuration.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

 

[E]

I don't quite understand why they don't use good old inductive ballast (or
current-limiting transformer) in those led things?
Cheap shit ballast is way more reliable than any cheap shit switchmode psu.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:44:40 +0200) it happened "E"
<invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in <ke43jn$ki6$1@dont-email.me>:

I don't quite understand why they don't use good old inductive ballast (or
current-limiting transformer) in those led things?

Copper is expensive, shipping weight too, efficiency, size...

Cheap shit ballast is way more reliable than any cheap shit switchmode psu.

You throw away the converter with the lamp,
at least one I have has it buld in.
The lamp will only work for a few thousand hours (LED life).
So makes no sense to make the converter last longer.

 

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:58:14 GMT, Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:44:40 +0200) it happened "E"
invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in <ke43jn$ki6$1@dont-email.me>:

I don't quite understand why they don't use good old inductive ballast (or
current-limiting transformer) in those led things?

Copper is expensive, shipping weight too, efficiency, size...

If you try to put some 50 Hz inductances into some E27 lamps, the
thing would be quite heavy and existing luminaries could not handle
it.

Cheap shit ballast is way more reliable than any cheap shit switchmode psu.

You throw away the converter with the lamp,
at least one I have has it buld in.
The lamp will only work for a few thousand hours (LED life).
So makes no sense to make the converter last longer.

Please read the LED specs carefully.

If the LED is marketed by (absolute) maximum current of say 1000 mA
and hence marketed as "3 W" LED, the life time (after LED and phosphor
degradation) is a few thousand hours.

However if respectable manufacturers only specify the lumen output
(with 1000 mA abs max) at 350 mA (1 W) and the 30.000-50.000 hours
might be believable.

 

[BubbleSorter]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:53:30 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:59:02 -0800, BubbleSorter
BubbleSorter@URallinyerplace.org> wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:16:48 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


Silly old fool.



Says the guy who thinks excel has no purpose.

Check this out, brainiac.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?etit3m4st7fb6hy

I do these as an excel exercise. Even though the chart can be looked
up, this gives the assembler no question about the configuration.
Anything found online seems to leave a slight ambiguity.

It is always good to be concise. Sweating the small stuff *does*
matter.

That's not an engineering document.


It's not even a good assembly drawing,

It isn't a drawing at all, you retarded fuck!

without details of what it's
used for.

It defines EXACTLY what it is used for, idiot.

It doesn't have anything to make it tracable, or tell you
what level the assembly or subassembly it is intended for.

Google 'ARINC Index Keying', you fucking retard. See what "documents"
are out there for it. Then see that my SPREADSHEET WORKBOOK is not any
document at all, and is EXACTLY what it states it is. A GUIDE.

It DOES state what it is, idiot.

It is an ARINC keying guide.

IF you have enough of a clue to know what ARINC is, then your
familiarity will carry into knowing what this is.

IF you re a clueless, retarded bastard, like Larkin is, you will piss
and moan like the little retarded bitch you are.

So, fucktard, which type of total fucking retard are you?

An INEXPERIENCED IDIOT, or LARKINESQUE fucking immature TWIT?

Oh... That's right... You are Mike Terrell, the total FUCKING RETARD
WHO IS SO FULL OF HIMSELF THT HE ACTUALLY THINKS HIS GARAGE FULL OF DEAD
(FAIAP)CRTs ACTUALLY HAS SOME WORTH IN THE WORLD.

Have another drink, fat ass. I know your time is close. I hope that
jaw takes you down painfully too. Fuck you, Terrell. stew in your utter
stupidity, fuckhead.

Wipe that shit stain off your nose and mouth from Larkin's ass while
you are at it.

 

[BubbleSorter]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:44:00 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:53:30 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:59:02 -0800, BubbleSorter
BubbleSorter@URallinyerplace.org> wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:16:48 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


Silly old fool.



Says the guy who thinks excel has no purpose.

Check this out, brainiac.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?etit3m4st7fb6hy

I do these as an excel exercise. Even though the chart can be looked
up, this gives the assembler no question about the configuration.
Anything found online seems to leave a slight ambiguity.

It is always good to be concise. Sweating the small stuff *does*
matter.

That's not an engineering document.


It's not even a good assembly drawing, without details of what it's
used for. It doesn't have anything to make it tracable, or tell you
what level the assembly or subassembly it is intended for.

Yeah, don't let the ISO9001 auditors see this sort of uncoltrolled stuff being
used, either in engineering or on the shop floor. He said himself that it
controls configuration.

There are provisos for using reference only documents, idiots.

I did not place any reference only watermark on this as that is not
it's purpose.

One looks up the key number and then creates a bit map image of the
result to paste into their document defining the construction of the
connector assembly.

You are a fucking loser, boy.

And Terrell's mouth and nose is more than a little familiar with the
stench of your ass right now too.

 

[MrTallyman]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:58:14 GMT, Jan Panteltje
<pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:44:40 +0200) it happened "E"
invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in <ke43jn$ki6$1@dont-email.me>:

I don't quite understand why they don't use good old inductive ballast (or
current-limiting transformer) in those led things?

Copper is expensive, shipping weight too, efficiency, size...


Cheap shit ballast is way more reliable than any cheap shit switchmode psu.

You throw away the converter with the lamp,
at least one I have has it buld in.
The lamp will only work for a few thousand hours (LED life).
So makes no sense to make the converter last longer.

The right move for the entire industry would be to place the DC source
conversion IN THE LAMP and make the "light bulbs" just the LEDs and
current limit elements and attachment socket stub.

 

[Adrian Jansen]

On 28/1/2013 8:05 AM, MrTallyman wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:58:14 GMT, Jan Panteltje
pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

On a sunny day (Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:44:40 +0200) it happened "E"
invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in <ke43jn$ki6$1@dont-email.me>:

I don't quite understand why they don't use good old inductive ballast (or
current-limiting transformer) in those led things?

Copper is expensive, shipping weight too, efficiency, size...


Cheap shit ballast is way more reliable than any cheap shit switchmode psu.

You throw away the converter with the lamp,
at least one I have has it buld in.
The lamp will only work for a few thousand hours (LED life).
So makes no sense to make the converter last longer.


The right move for the entire industry would be to place the DC source
conversion IN THE LAMP and make the "light bulbs" just the LEDs and
current limit elements and attachment socket stub.

We already have that, and they have much the same problems of CCL lamps
- the temps generated by the lamp itself impact on the electronics.
Much better to separate the LED and its heat from the electronics.

With the long life ( quoted ) on the LEDs, they essentially become
fixtures in the building, rather than replacable elements like the
tungsten lamps we have all used. So it makes more sense to have the
entire lamp installation permanent. That is, if the rest of the driver
can also be made long life.

I rather doubt that inductive ballasts can supply the relatively
stringent constant current requirements of LEDs, although it is
tempting. Certainly the simplicity is attractive. And weight is not
really an issue in permanent fittings. Copper and iron cost maybe.



--
Regards,

Adrian Jansen adrianjansen at internode dot on dot net
Note reply address is invalid, convert address above to machine form.

 

[Jon Elson]

Jon wrote:

The two female vocalists in the band ABBA have synchronized vibratos,
making
their singing particularly pleasing.
Geez, how the heck do (did) they do that? As far as I know, vibrato

is not a consciously controlled thing, so you can't sync it. I
wonder if it was done by running their voices through a MIDI-Verb
in the production process?

Jon

 

[Robert Baer]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:54:11 -0800) it happened Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in<6gYMs.3609$Hq1.943@newsfe23.iad>:

Jamie wrote:
At the lab, there is a smoke chamber and it has a photo tube.

This is this problem, for what ever reason the lab has 0 documentation
of the electronics and the service tech they tend to use for calibration
does not know any more.. All he knows is what it suppose to be at the
end of the anode with a 1MEg load on it, which is 0..5V ..

Ok, all that is just fine however, there is some confusion about
the voltage requirements for this tube, of course, we can't find any
spec's on that either.

In any case, after looking at generic photo multiplier tubes and
circuits it appears that -600DC at the cathode seems to allow this to
work ok when we calibrate for dark current. We need the tube to have
some linkage at dark current so when the filter is applied we have a
detectable view of the smoke.

Does 600V sound about right?

The calibration tech seems to think it should be down around -350VDC
which works fine for a clear view but has a drop off so the filter view
has very low sensitivity, which makes perfect sense to me since the tube
needs to be ionized to get some leakage.

We do have photo multipliers in use elsewhere however, those supplies
are up around 1kVDC and that we do have proper specs and design work but
they are a much larger tube, the supply in the smoke chamber unit can
only output up to -700DC.

What's your take on this voltage scale?


Jamie

From Wikipedia, "Photomultiplier tubes typically utilize 1000 to 2000
volts to accelerate electrons within the chain of dynodes."
And i can attest to that, as the manager for Oil 4 Less LLC, we sell
high voltage shunt regulators designed for PMTs in downhole applications.
The only time we sell 400V regulators is in conjunction with 1250V
regulators, giving 1650V for the PMT and a voltage tap for one of the
dynodes.
Use the Baby Bird (Goo Gull) and look up Hammamatsu PMT specs.

No way without looking it up.
* Lazy...

I have some Russian PMTs here that start at 350V, PMT_FEU-35.
Type number should be on the internet really.

 

[Robert Baer]

MrTallyman wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 14:10:39 -0800, Robert Baer<robertbaer@localnet.com
wrote:

amdx wrote:
I ran across this History of OpAmps.
Thought some might find it interesting.
From tubes to ~ 1990.



http://www.analog.com/library/analogDialogue/archives/39-05/Web_ChH_final.pdf


Mikek




PS. I was looking for info on a Analog devices 118A that I have.
Closest I came was the 118.

http://www.analog.com/library/analogDialogue/archives/39-05/Web_ChH_final.pdf


Page 30

The historical origins are rather short and incomplete.
Fleming is mentioned, but NOT Cy Ellwell (the Baby Bird has no clue..).

I am quite sure that advances have been made since '91.
...and that comment relates to Cy Ellwell HOW?

 

[Robert Baer]

Jamie wrote:

And I can't put it down.

Jamie

Is that supposed to be punny?

 

[Robert Baer]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Sat, 26 Jan 2013 18:31:34 -0500) it happened Jamie
jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_@charter.net> wrote in
dyZMs.125142$kp4.28287@newsfe09.iad>:

And I can't put it down.

Probably needs a fev rounds from a Kalashnikov.


Another gun crazy European wallpaper hanger, who thinks everything
can be solved with guns.
Levitation is FAR easier..