From: Watson A.Name
Subject: Re: Parallel LEDs calculation
References: <3D7B8B88.4ED5A338@bellatlantic.net> <3D7D580B.7DBE070D@bellatlantic.net> <3D7EB60D.B730482F@bellatlantic.net> <3D7F6383.7F2A132B@bellatlantic.net> <3D85479D.email@example.com> <0c5YhxA1+eh9EwiG@jmwa.demon.co.uk>
X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.60
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 07:07:32 EDT
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:07:32 GMT
In article <0c5YhxA1+eh9EwiG@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
firstname.lastname@example.org talked about...
> I read in sci.electronics.design that Tim Williams
> wrote (in )
> about 'Parallel LEDs calculation', on Mon, 16 Sep 2002:
> >Here's a real stumper: vitreous wirewound resistors. :^)
> >Especially the variable ones.
> >Interestingly, both types appear to still be quite modern, as Mouser
> >sells them.
> Well, quite *current*; the *vitreous-enamel coated* wire wound resistor
> (that's the full name) dates from around 1940, IIRC.
> The cement-coated types are cheaper but larger. The VE ones are a menace
> if run near rating, because they don't look as if they have a surface
> temperature of 250 C or so, but just touch one ....
Yeh, I remember the tube days. Those resistors and the glass envelopes
were two points that were to be avoided. One could tell from the radiant
heat that they were close to your skin, but I still have some battle scars
to prove that they're there, waiting for the wrong move.
And the occasional soldering iron sizzle on a finger. ;-)
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you put NOSPAM in the
Subject: line. alondra101 hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html