Re: Rectifier output?


"whit3rd" <whit3rd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6b880847-eed1-48fa-a8c7-4a32dfbe8073@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sep 24, 5:11 pm, "Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaugh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"John G." <greent...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:4abbf4c9$0$12695$5a62ac22@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx







"Jon Slaughter" <Jon_Slaugh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:h9gh3p$9o1$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"John G." <greent...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

And it has long been proven that the best way to repair a device is to
return it to its design standard rather than redsign it without enough
data or design knowkedge.

So even if it was designed improperly it's still the best to fix it
exactly
the way it was?

It's not 'fix' that's been described, it's 'redesign'. Changing a
branch
circuit from AC to DC might be OK, or (depending on the situation)
might
be disastrous. Switch contacts and fuses that work fine on AC are
unsafe
with DC, for instance.

An acquaintance once had to dismount a 1/4" steel plate to access a
switching SCR, and wasn't keen to lift the plate back into position
when
he was done. He hunted up the original designer, who recalled that
the circuit that SCR was on had a quarter-million joules of stored
energy in a magnetic field. The steel plate went back up that
afternoon.
----

I haven't seen anything mentioned about a redesign. She wants to replace
components that have failed. Replacing components is not considered a
redesign in my book. There have been many things I've "fixed" by replacing
components that have failed yet it would not even have come close to what I
would call being redesigned.

Obviously one has to have some idea about the circuit involved along with
it's intentions. Replacing relays cannot ever cause any serious harm unless
the design was flawed from the begining. Obviously there is the slight
chance of a catastrophic failure but that can happen even with the original
design. No design is perfect and hence has a redesign that can make it more
perfect(theoretically).

Almost all designs, in the universe of designs, are implemented in a cost
effective way. As you know, this directly competes with a perfect design.
While the best option is usually to replace broken components it is not the
only option. We've all experienced poorly designed systems that could be
redesigned. It's neither her nor there because the origina question had
nothing to do with a redesign. Simply replacing components is not
redesigning the system.

When you replace a battery in your remote did you redesign it? Even if it's
not the same battery? (Maybe if your a pedant)

In any case, it's not up to me, you, or anyone else to decide if anyone has
the right to redesign something unless someone's safety is at issue. But we
shouldn't take this too far since every person has the right to put himself
at danger and even someone other people. Most devices that are in wide use
have the potential to kill people but we don't not complain about such
things and ban them. This is the cost of progress and convienence.

i.e., don't get overboard on such a simple thing. Replacing relays isn't
going to cause a nuclear meldown and kill millions of people. Probably not
even 1. If the wrong relays are used either:

1. They will burn up and need to be replaced again.
2. They will burn up something else.
3. They will not work as intented.
4. The device could work even better. (specially if the device no longer
works)
5. Much progress can be made if the device did not work before or cause
major problems because of the relays.

The probability of Gloria killing herself is pretty low. Probably lower than
the probablity of you dieing from a car wreck tomorrow. (yet you don't
hesitate to drive?) The probability of her killing or injuring someone else
is even much lower. The relays could potentially malfunction at the most
inoppurtune time but the likelyhood of this happening is probably rather
low(mainly because relays don't generally fail in such a way).

This is a printing press and not a nuclear reactor. We see many people
doing stupid things on a local scale and don't complain about it so no need
to do it here. If we woried about what *might* happen then we wouldn't get
much done.

If Gloria wants to redesign it then I'm all for it. Who knows... maybe she
will make the thing work much better. If she kills herself in the process
then at least she tried to do something instead of being paralyzed by fear.
Progress has never been easy and never will be. (well, except if Obama gets
his way)

Of course what you guys are really saying is "All you stupid people gotta
leave it up to the "experts"! Just give me a call and we'll discuss how much
it will cost you for me to redesign it for you."




.

Relevant Pages

  • Wilderness Wales 2.0 is online!
    ... seemed an appropriate time for a complete redesign. ... As it is, the design is mostly sorted out, as is the ... many of the old photos will be used in new pages instead. ... The biggest change is the introduction of "area guides", ...
    (uk.rec.walking)
  • Re: CEV history
    ... The current design is launchable on the larger EELVs and Falcon 9 (if ... and that cheap commercial launch will be ... have to redesign everything to work the other way. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: CEV history
    ... can reuse the CEV design itself! ... and engine (and redesign the structure, and the electronics, but ... put those technologies on the shelf, but when you look at the ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Charles Murray "The Plan" ends poverty
    ... The early days of electronic design automation are indeed interesting and if someone is going to write a history they had better hurry up. ... Donald Durr of RCA developed the first automated placement and wire routing program for LSI circuits in '65, ... I've had some experience with large systems in which the wrong circuit bounce in a switch or relay could set some relays to chatter and the system to wildly respond. ...
    (soc.retirement)