 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Electronics - Misc Forum » Switching Circuit... |
|
Page 2 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| JosephKK... |
 Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:38:57 -0500, John Fields
<jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
[quote:ef57722740]On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:21:39 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:32:15 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 08:01:44 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:03:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:19:42 -0400, "Jon" <jon8338 at (no spam) peoplepc.com> wrote:
Switching Circuit
A buried wire between house and garage has only 3 conductors. How do you
utilize them to provide both constant power from house to garage, and 3-way
switching for lights in the garage at either house or garage?
I used two 3-way switches and a relay.
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/jon8338/math/id50.html
---
I already replied to this on alt.electronics, where you didn't
crosspost, and I'm crossposting it to sci.electronics.basics for good
measure.
You don't need a relay: (View in Courier)
HOT NEUT
| |
+---O-->\ <--O--+
| \ |
| O |
| | |
| | |
HOUSE | | |
--------|---------|--------|------
| | |
--------|---------|--------|------
GARAGE | | |
| | |
| [LAMP] |
| | |
| O |
| / |
+---O-->/ <--O--+
| |
| |
+---[RECEPTACLE]---+
John F you should have looked at his link.
---
What makes you think I didn't?
Because he included your circuit and gave you credit for it in that
page. I would thus have expected a different response that reposting
your circuit.
---
If I hadn't followed his link, how would I have been able to determine
what his wiring looked like and suggest a way to get rid of the relay?
The sequence of events was:
1. He posted his link.
2. I followed it, modified the circuit, and posted the mods and some
info about crossposting.
3. Ed posted a fix for my neutral-switching error.
4. The OP read my post, and Ed's, and posted them to his site, showing
them as mods to his circuit.
Any other way would be the cart leading the horse, no?
JF
[/quote:ef57722740]
It seems that i might have missed an update to OP's site, or did the
change occur before i saw it the first time? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| John Fields... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 6:29 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:19:45 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com>
wrote:
[quote:be53a0f83d]On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:38:57 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:21:39 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:32:15 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 08:01:44 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:03:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:19:42 -0400, "Jon" <jon8338 at (no spam) peoplepc.com> wrote:
Switching Circuit
A buried wire between house and garage has only 3 conductors. How do you
utilize them to provide both constant power from house to garage, and 3-way
switching for lights in the garage at either house or garage?
I used two 3-way switches and a relay.
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/jon8338/math/id50.html
---
I already replied to this on alt.electronics, where you didn't
crosspost, and I'm crossposting it to sci.electronics.basics for good
measure.
You don't need a relay: (View in Courier)
HOT NEUT
| |
+---O-->\ <--O--+
| \ |
| O |
| | |
| | |
HOUSE | | |
--------|---------|--------|------
| | |
--------|---------|--------|------
GARAGE | | |
| | |
| [LAMP] |
| | |
| O |
| / |
+---O-->/ <--O--+
| |
| |
+---[RECEPTACLE]---+
John F you should have looked at his link.
---
What makes you think I didn't?
Because he included your circuit and gave you credit for it in that
page. I would thus have expected a different response that reposting
your circuit.
---
If I hadn't followed his link, how would I have been able to determine
what his wiring looked like and suggest a way to get rid of the relay?
The sequence of events was:
1. He posted his link.
2. I followed it, modified the circuit, and posted the mods and some
info about crossposting.
3. Ed posted a fix for my neutral-switching error.
4. The OP read my post, and Ed's, and posted them to his site, showing
them as mods to his circuit.
Any other way would be the cart leading the horse, no?
JF
It seems that i might have missed an update to OP's site, or did the
change occur before i saw it the first time?
[/quote:be53a0f83d]
---
Dunno... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ehsjr... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
John Fields wrote:
[quote:c15a0e7458]On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:21:39 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:32:15 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 08:01:44 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:03:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:19:42 -0400, "Jon" <jon8338 at (no spam) peoplepc.com> wrote:
Switching Circuit
A buried wire between house and garage has only 3 conductors. How do you
utilize them to provide both constant power from house to garage, and 3-way
switching for lights in the garage at either house or garage?
I used two 3-way switches and a relay.
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/jon8338/math/id50.html
---
I already replied to this on alt.electronics, where you didn't
crosspost, and I'm crossposting it to sci.electronics.basics for good
measure.
You don't need a relay: (View in Courier)
HOT NEUT
| |
+---O-->\ <--O--+
| \ |
| O |
| | |
| | |
HOUSE | | |
--------|---------|--------|------
| | |
--------|---------|--------|------
GARAGE | | |
| | |
| [LAMP] |
| | |
| O |
| / |
+---O-->/ <--O--+
| |
| |
+---[RECEPTACLE]---+
John F you should have looked at his link.
---
What makes you think I didn't?
Because he included your circuit and gave you credit for it in that
page. I would thus have expected a different response that reposting
your circuit.
---
If I hadn't followed his link, how would I have been able to determine
what his wiring looked like and suggest a way to get rid of the relay?
The sequence of events was:
1. He posted his link.
2. I followed it, modified the circuit, and posted the mods and some
info about crossposting.
3. Ed posted a fix for my neutral-switching error.
[/quote:c15a0e7458]
Well, some comment here. Yes, by today's code it is an error.
But it's not like the typical (at least for me) error where
I put the &$*%+*! resistor in the wrong place on the schematic
or leave the damn thing off altogether, etc. It's a NEC code
error because they changed the rules after the game was started.
Electrician friends tell me it used to be allowed by code years
ago. They call it "Chicago wiring" and say they still run into
it on occasion today. I don't know when the rules changed.
Ed
[quote:c15a0e7458]
4. The OP read my post, and Ed's, and posted them to his site, showing
them as mods to his circuit.
Any other way would be the cart leading the horse, no?
JF[/quote:c15a0e7458] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| JosephKK... |
| Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:08 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 07:29:34 -0500, John Fields
<jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:19:45 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:38:57 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:21:39 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:32:15 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 08:01:44 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue at (no spam) yahoo.com
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:03:04 -0500, John Fields
jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:19:42 -0400, "Jon" <jon8338 at (no spam) peoplepc.com> wrote:
Switching Circuit
A buried wire between house and garage has only 3 conductors. How do you
utilize them to provide both constant power from house to garage, and 3-way
switching for lights in the garage at either house or garage?
I used two 3-way switches and a relay.
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/jon8338/math/id50.html
---
I already replied to this on alt.electronics, where you didn't
crosspost, and I'm crossposting it to sci.electronics.basics for good
measure.
You don't need a relay: (View in Courier)
HOT NEUT
| |
+---O-->\ <--O--+
| \ |
| O |
| | |
| | |
HOUSE | | |
--------|---------|--------|------
| | |
--------|---------|--------|------
GARAGE | | |
| | |
| [LAMP] |
| | |
| O |
| / |
+---O-->/ <--O--+
| |
| |
+---[RECEPTACLE]---+
John F you should have looked at his link.
---
What makes you think I didn't?
Because he included your circuit and gave you credit for it in that
page. I would thus have expected a different response that reposting
your circuit.
---
If I hadn't followed his link, how would I have been able to determine
what his wiring looked like and suggest a way to get rid of the relay?
The sequence of events was:
1. He posted his link.
2. I followed it, modified the circuit, and posted the mods and some
info about crossposting.
3. Ed posted a fix for my neutral-switching error.
4. The OP read my post, and Ed's, and posted them to his site, showing
them as mods to his circuit.
Any other way would be the cart leading the horse, no?
JF
It seems that i might have missed an update to OP's site, or did the
change occur before i saw it the first time?
---
Dunno...
[/quote]
Fair enough. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Greegor... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 9:03 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
So how many wires must you have to comply with NEC?
Surely NEC does not allow the use of relays for this!
Can't switch hot side to bulb threads in a light bulb cleat.
And if outlets and light circuits can not share
a hot line or neutral then can they share the
ground wire?
I count 5 wires and a ground.
HELL of a cable to run to a GARAGE!
That's a lot of copper!
3 wires #14
2 wires #12
minimum?
Even an X10 module would violate NEC
if the lights are on the same hot as the outlets,
only eliminates one #14 wire.
Running that one more wire would be cheaper
and X10 modules are a maintenance liability.
Garage door opener would push #12's to #10 wire, right?
Fluorescent Lights are nice in garages but
they're a nightmare if you get freezing weather.
So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
Among the new fluorescent ""light bulbs""
I found a flourescent flood light.
Totally worthless in Northern US states
in the winter time.
Not a mere convenience because severe
weather is NOT a time to have such a failure.
There's no mention of this problem on the product.
How will the Californa mentality green weenies
resolve this little problem for over 25% of the USA?
BTW, one solution for flourescents that won't light
in the cold is to LEAVE THEM ON! HORRORS!
Tell me there's some magic to these new fluorescents
to overcome this [ not too small ] problem! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Paul Keinanen... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:03:54 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
<greegor47 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]
Among the new fluorescent ""light bulbs""
I found a flourescent flood light.
Totally worthless in Northern US states
in the winter time.
Not a mere convenience because severe
weather is NOT a time to have such a failure.
There's no mention of this problem on the product.
[/quote]
There are two problems with fluorescent lights in cold climate, one is
starting and the other is low light output. There are at least full
sized fluorescent tubes that are intended to start at temperatures
below -30 C.
Using a well insulated light fixture will allow the tube to start at a
low intensity and gain normal intensity after a few minutes when the
tube has reached nominal operating temperature due to the losses of
the tube itself (and electronics). Of course, using this light fixture
on a hot summer day will increase the internal temperature too high,
again reducing the light output and reduce the lifetime of the
electronics.
[quote]How will the Californa mentality green weenies
resolve this little problem for over 25% of the USA?
BTW, one solution for flourescents that won't light
in the cold is to LEAVE THEM ON! HORRORS!
[/quote]
At least here above 60 N where the winter day is short, there is not
much point in turning some out door light for the day. Of course some
low power (less than 5 W) should be used. Such a low power light
source will give sufficient light when switching on a high power
fluorescent light or HPS lamp and waiting for the full luminous output
for a few minutes.
Paul |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:08 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:00:39 +0200, Paul Keinanen <keinanen at (no spam) sci.fi>
wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:03:54 -0700 (PDT), Greegor
greegor47 at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Among the new fluorescent ""light bulbs""
I found a flourescent flood light.
Totally worthless in Northern US states
in the winter time.
Not a mere convenience because severe
weather is NOT a time to have such a failure.
There's no mention of this problem on the product.
There are two problems with fluorescent lights in cold climate, one is
starting and the other is low light output. There are at least full
sized fluorescent tubes that are intended to start at temperatures
below -30 C.
Using a well insulated light fixture will allow the tube to start at a
low intensity and gain normal intensity after a few minutes when the
tube has reached nominal operating temperature due to the losses of
the tube itself (and electronics). Of course, using this light fixture
on a hot summer day will increase the internal temperature too high,
again reducing the light output and reduce the lifetime of the
electronics.
How will the Californa mentality green weenies
resolve this little problem for over 25% of the USA?
BTW, one solution for flourescents that won't light
in the cold is to LEAVE THEM ON! HORRORS!
At least here above 60 N where the winter day is short, there is not
much point in turning some out door light for the day. Of course some
low power (less than 5 W) should be used. Such a low power light
source will give sufficient light when switching on a high power
fluorescent light or HPS lamp and waiting for the full luminous output
for a few minutes.
Paul
[/quote]
Even in relaively warm Atlanta,Georgia, the local Home Depot carries
outdoor fluorescent lights that work to -5 F.
The least power wasting option I've found is to use a LED bulb to
provide minimal lighting while waiting for a fluorescent (or CFL -
some of them are slow even at 70 F).
I have a fixture in the front entry that will accept two bulbs.
There's a CFL in one socket and a 2 watt LED bulb in the other. The
LED bulb provides instant response to the light switch and keeps
people from flipping the switchrepeatedly because the CFL takes a
half-second or more to produce noticeable light.
John |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| ehsjr... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:56 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Greegor wrote:
[quote]So how many wires must you have to comply with NEC?
[/quote]
New construction requires neutral, hot and ground (egc)
conductors. Metallic raceway is allowed for the egc,
so the minimum _wire_ count for any circuit is 2;
minimum _conductor_ count is 3. The minimum for the
OP's question if it were new construction and to be
done with standard wiring is 2 travelers, hot, neutral
and egc. If X10 were used, then hot, neutral and egc
is the minimum.
Older existing circuits that do not have an egc that were
compliant with the code when installed are grandfathered.
[quote]
Surely NEC does not allow the use of relays for this!
[/quote]
The NEC does not prohibit relays.
[quote]
Can't switch hot side to bulb threads in a light bulb cleat.
And if outlets and light circuits can not share
a hot line or neutral then can they share the
ground wire?
[/quote]
Receptacles and lights can and do share all of those.
[quote]
I count 5 wires and a ground.
[/quote]
That's the way to wire the OP's situation if it was new
construction: hot, neutral, egc and 2 travellers between
3-way switches.
[quote]HELL of a cable to run to a GARAGE!
[/quote]
Not bad in new construction, where you have to dig anyway.
It's just two runs of uf - easy. But with an open trench
it would be foolhardy not to plan for the future - you
might put some REAL cable in that trench if plans included
using the garage as a shop with some heavy duty power
machines. :-)
[quote]
That's a lot of copper!
3 wires #14
2 wires #12
[/quote]
That doesn't work. Your switch circuit would be the #14,
and it needs 2 conductors. The power circuit is the #12
and it needs the hot, neutral and ground conductor. Again,
this applies to new construction. The OP's situation can be
fixed differently.
[quote]
minimum?
Even an X10 module would violate NEC
if the lights are on the same hot as the outlets,
only eliminates one #14 wire.
[/quote]
No, the X10 solution is compliant.
House | Garage
---Hot---------+--[X10]----+
| | |
Recpt--+----Light
| | |
---Neutral------+-----------+
|
---egc---------------+
The X10 controller on the house side can be plugged in
anywhere*; the X10 switch on the garage side must be
installed in series with the hot feed to the light.
I don't recall if the X10 switch needs to connect
to neutral or not.
* = if the X10 is plugged into a circuit on the opposite
phase a bridge may be needed.
[quote]
Running that one more wire would be cheaper
and X10 modules are a maintenance liability.
Garage door opener would push #12's to #10 wire, right?
[/quote]
No way. They don't draw much current at all, maybe 3
amps as a guess.
Ed |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Don Klipstein... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 7:16 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In <b27df2b6-38bd-465f-ad2c-0775191b3dc6 at (no spam) l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Greegor wrote in part:
[quote]So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
[/quote]
The 2012/2014 USA "bans" of incandescents have exceptions that I
consider to be a set of loopholes sufficient to reroute the Mississippi
River through:
http://members.misty.com/don/incban.html
What I would do is use fluorescent ballasts rated for cold temperatures
and compatible 4-foot bulbs in those protective sleeves used in cold
temperature duty, or else outdoor-rated CFLs that have outer bulbs over
the CFL tubing.
In colder weather, these tend to work, but easily require 5-10 minutes
to warm up and then they may be warmed up only most-of-the-way. I would
deploy a bit of surplus lighting ability if I had to make major use of
fluorescent lighting in far-from-optimum temperatures.
Meanwhile, I am very satisfied with the cold-weather performance of
Philips SL/O CFLs, especially 18 watt ones.
[quote]Among the new fluorescent ""light bulbs""
I found a flourescent flood light.
Totally worthless in Northern US states in the winter time.
Not a mere convenience because severe
weather is NOT a time to have such a failure.
There's no mention of this problem on the product.
How will the Californa mentality green weenies
resolve this little problem for over 25% of the USA?
[/quote]
Over 95% of the population of California has yet to be affected by cold
severe enough to be much of a problem for outdoor-rated CFLs and many
other CFLs that have outer bulbs over the CFL tubing.
Put such CFLs into an an enclosed fixture, let it warm up for 5 or 6
minutes, result is around or over 75% of full light output even if it is
cold enough to snow. I have even seen Philips SL/O bare units achieve
around or a bit over half of full brightness in single digits degrees F
after warming up 6-10 minutes.
Even with San Francisco often being chilly even in early and mid
afternoon in July and August, and snow reported in L.A. every several
years, mostly in included high elevation points, (more frequently than in
SF even including their "Twin Peaks" and "Mount Suttro"), how much, more
like how little, of California's population has to deal with so much as a
majority of individual years having a single hour colder than 25 F? And
I know CFLs that work fairly well in conditions that cold! I mention some
of them above.
[quote]BTW, one solution for flourescents that won't light
in the cold is to LEAVE THEM ON! HORRORS!
Tell me there's some magic to these new fluorescents
to overcome this [ not too small ] problem!
[/quote]
- Don Klipstein (don at (no spam) misty.com) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| krw... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:16 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 05:16:52 +0000 (UTC), don at (no spam) manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:
[quote]In <b27df2b6-38bd-465f-ad2c-0775191b3dc6 at (no spam) l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Greegor wrote in part:
So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
The 2012/2014 USA "bans" of incandescents have exceptions that I
consider to be a set of loopholes sufficient to reroute the Mississippi
River through:
[/quote]
Good. Though I'll have at least 500 spares by then. That should be
good for a decade or two. Maybe even some extra retirement income.
[quote]http://members.misty.com/don/incban.html
What I would do is use fluorescent ballasts rated for cold temperatures
and compatible 4-foot bulbs in those protective sleeves used in cold
temperature duty, or else outdoor-rated CFLs that have outer bulbs over
the CFL tubing.
[/quote]
How am I going to fit the 4' tube into the spots.
[quote]In colder weather, these tend to work, but easily require 5-10 minutes
to warm up and then they may be warmed up only most-of-the-way. I would
deploy a bit of surplus lighting ability if I had to make major use of
fluorescent lighting in far-from-optimum temperatures.
Meanwhile, I am very satisfied with the cold-weather performance of
Philips SL/O CFLs, especially 18 watt ones.
[/quote]
They won't even light at -20F, though I don't intend to see those
temperatures again. ;-)
[quote]Among the new fluorescent ""light bulbs""
I found a flourescent flood light.
Totally worthless in Northern US states in the winter time.
Not a mere convenience because severe
weather is NOT a time to have such a failure.
There's no mention of this problem on the product.
How will the Californa mentality green weenies
resolve this little problem for over 25% of the USA?
Over 95% of the population of California has yet to be affected by cold
severe enough to be much of a problem for outdoor-rated CFLs and many
other CFLs that have outer bulbs over the CFL tubing.
[/quote]
Californica <> US.
[quote]Put such CFLs into an an enclosed fixture, let it warm up for 5 or 6
minutes, result is around or over 75% of full light output even if it is
cold enough to snow. I have even seen Philips SL/O bare units achieve
around or a bit over half of full brightness in single digits degrees F
after warming up 6-10 minutes.
[/quote]
I don't want 75% after 5 minutes. Incandescents give me 100% in zero
minutes.
[quote]Even with San Francisco often being chilly even in early and mid
afternoon in July and August, and snow reported in L.A. every several
years, mostly in included high elevation points, (more frequently than in
SF even including their "Twin Peaks" and "Mount Suttro"), how much, more
like how little, of California's population has to deal with so much as a
majority of individual years having a single hour colder than 25 F? And
I know CFLs that work fairly well in conditions that cold! I mention some
of them above.
[/quote]
Californica <> US. Let Californica screw themselves. They're too far
gone to save anyway. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 1:01 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"krw" <krw at (no spam) att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:m7gre5119h2f3vvf06uo8j3eqmmrr9jgre at (no spam) 4ax.com...
[quote]
So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
The 2012/2014 USA "bans" of incandescents have exceptions that I
consider to be a set of loopholes sufficient to reroute the Mississippi
River through:
Good. Though I'll have at least 500 spares by then. That should be
good for a decade or two. Maybe even some extra retirement income.
[/quote]
The "green police" will get you. The "environmental inspection" of your
house will find you in violation of the US signed "carbon tax" treaty (of
course unconstitutional, but who really cares anyway?) and you will be
heavily fine.
So, get back in line of people happily marching to the glorious future of
USSA.
[quote]Put such CFLs into an an enclosed fixture, let it warm up for 5 or 6
minutes, result is around or over 75% of full light output even if it is
cold enough to snow. I have even seen Philips SL/O bare units achieve
around or a bit over half of full brightness in single digits degrees F
after warming up 6-10 minutes.
I don't want 75% after 5 minutes. Incandescents give me 100% in zero
minutes.
[/quote]
It is not about what your want. It is about what is good for you. And The
State being a good parent knows better
--
Andrew |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| krw... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 1:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 12:01:42 -0600, "Andrew" <andyvbel at (no spam) yahoo.com>
wrote:
[quote]"krw" <krw at (no spam) att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:m7gre5119h2f3vvf06uo8j3eqmmrr9jgre at (no spam) 4ax.com...
So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
The 2012/2014 USA "bans" of incandescents have exceptions that I
consider to be a set of loopholes sufficient to reroute the Mississippi
River through:
Good. Though I'll have at least 500 spares by then. That should be
good for a decade or two. Maybe even some extra retirement income.
The "green police" will get you. The "environmental inspection" of your
house will find you in violation of the US signed "carbon tax" treaty (of
course unconstitutional, but who really cares anyway?) and you will be
heavily fine.
[/quote]
You don't think black markets will appear? You believe anyone,
besides the loony lefty sheeple, is going to replace all their
lighting fixtures?
[quote]So, get back in line of people happily marching to the glorious future of
USSA.
[/quote]
We're there now. We're on the way to embarrassing even the USSR.
[quote]Put such CFLs into an an enclosed fixture, let it warm up for 5 or 6
minutes, result is around or over 75% of full light output even if it is
cold enough to snow. I have even seen Philips SL/O bare units achieve
around or a bit over half of full brightness in single digits degrees F
after warming up 6-10 minutes.
I don't want 75% after 5 minutes. Incandescents give me 100% in zero
minutes.
It is not about what your want. It is about what is good for you. And The
State being a good parent knows better
[/quote]
I understand. What's good for me is what Nancy Pelosi tells me is
good for me. No thanks; read that book. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Michael A. Terrell... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 2:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Andrew wrote:
[quote]
"krw" <krw at (no spam) att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:m7gre5119h2f3vvf06uo8j3eqmmrr9jgre at (no spam) 4ax.com...
So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
The 2012/2014 USA "bans" of incandescents have exceptions that I
consider to be a set of loopholes sufficient to reroute the Mississippi
River through:
Good. Though I'll have at least 500 spares by then. That should be
good for a decade or two. Maybe even some extra retirement income.
The "green police" will get you. The "environmental inspection" of your
house will find you in violation of the US signed "carbon tax" treaty (of
course unconstitutional, but who really cares anyway?) and you will be
heavily fine.
[/quote]
Where are they going to hire inspectors stupid enough to go into the
homes of people who own guns, and demand a search warrant? They would
have to be Europeans to be arrogant enough to think that they can get
away with it.
[quote]So, get back in line of people happily marching to the glorious future of
USSA.
Put such CFLs into an an enclosed fixture, let it warm up for 5 or 6
minutes, result is around or over 75% of full light output even if it is
cold enough to snow. I have even seen Philips SL/O bare units achieve
around or a bit over half of full brightness in single digits degrees F
after warming up 6-10 minutes.
I don't want 75% after 5 minutes. Incandescents give me 100% in zero
minutes.
It is not about what your want. It is about what is good for you. And The
State being a good parent knows better
--
Andrew
[/quote]
--
The movie 'Deliverance' isn't a documentary! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:sridnTQRJL_AfXDXnZ2dnUVZ_oRi4p2d at (no spam) earthlink.com...
[quote]
Andrew wrote:
"krw" <krw at (no spam) att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:m7gre5119h2f3vvf06uo8j3eqmmrr9jgre at (no spam) 4ax.com...
So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
The 2012/2014 USA "bans" of incandescents have exceptions that I
consider to be a set of loopholes sufficient to reroute the Mississippi
River through:
Good. Though I'll have at least 500 spares by then. That should be
good for a decade or two. Maybe even some extra retirement income.
The "green police" will get you. The "environmental inspection" of your
house will find you in violation of the US signed "carbon tax" treaty (of
course unconstitutional, but who really cares anyway?) and you will be
heavily fine.
Where are they going to hire inspectors stupid enough to go into the
homes of people who own guns, and demand a search warrant? They would
have to be Europeans to be arrogant enough to think that they can get
away with it.
[/quote]
It will be done slowly. Tax on firearms. Mandatory yearly training.
Mandatory yearly registration. Tightening requirements for registration.
Increased registration fee. increased mandatory insurance. Increase health
insurance. Prohibition of "assault" weapons. Widening definitions of
"assault" weapon to leave you with bbgun.
And it will *never* be called gun prohibition. It all will be done for the
kids and for you, silly gun-loving American.
Gold was confiscated in 1933. Why not confiscate firearms?
--
Andrew |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| krw... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 7:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 17:43:47 -0600, "Andrew" <andyvbel at (no spam) yahoo.com>
wrote:
[quote]"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:sridnTQRJL_AfXDXnZ2dnUVZ_oRi4p2d at (no spam) earthlink.com...
Andrew wrote:
"krw" <krw at (no spam) att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:m7gre5119h2f3vvf06uo8j3eqmmrr9jgre at (no spam) 4ax.com...
So what are people going to use in Garages
when incandescents are outlawed in favor
of flourescent ""light bulbs""?
The 2012/2014 USA "bans" of incandescents have exceptions that I
consider to be a set of loopholes sufficient to reroute the Mississippi
River through:
Good. Though I'll have at least 500 spares by then. That should be
good for a decade or two. Maybe even some extra retirement income.
The "green police" will get you. The "environmental inspection" of your
house will find you in violation of the US signed "carbon tax" treaty (of
course unconstitutional, but who really cares anyway?) and you will be
heavily fine.
Where are they going to hire inspectors stupid enough to go into the
homes of people who own guns, and demand a search warrant? They would
have to be Europeans to be arrogant enough to think that they can get
away with it.
It will be done slowly. Tax on firearms. Mandatory yearly training.
Mandatory yearly registration. Tightening requirements for registration.
Increased registration fee. increased mandatory insurance. Increase health
insurance. Prohibition of "assault" weapons. Widening definitions of
"assault" weapon to leave you with bbgun.
[/quote]
Good luck. Too many unregistered guns out there and that's a great
way to make more.
[quote]And it will *never* be called gun prohibition. It all will be done for the
kids and for you, silly gun-loving American.
[/quote]
No it won't.
[quote]Gold was confiscated in 1933. Why not confiscate firearms?
[/quote]
Gold doesn't shoot back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:54 pm
|
|