Next message: Jeff Smith: "Re: lv-ab: Re: Worthless Circuitbreakers"
Man, this thread is getting difficult. Now I have to go through all my
Engineering books and correct this current/charge/flow thing. This could
take weeks. How did the authors of all these books get it wrong?
Stan
S/V Seabird V
At 11:07 PM 9/2/2003 -0400, ahmet erkan wrote:
>Lew,
>
>I think you read only half of what I wrote. Here is the other half :
>
>Ahmet Erkan Wrote :
>"IMHO it is an undesirable and potentially unsafe situation to rely on
>mechanical contacts interrupting large currents on a regular basis. The
>manufacturer of the windlass should provide some form of electronic
>sensing and maybe timing of the overload condition and either sounding an
>alarm or overriding the operator controls. (For mission critical equipment
>such as a windlass there should also be an override for the protection
>circuit that can be activated in the heat of a battle.)"
>
>Yes I agree with you once again, a circuit breaker or a fuse should be
>there as means to survive a malfunction. As said before my humble "WRONG"
>opinion is we should not rely on mechanical contacts to interrupt large
>currents on a regular basis. (BTW: relays also have mechanical contacts.)
>
>Why do you have to be so hostile when someone is agreeing with you ?
>
>We are all sailors here trying to benefit from each others area of
>expertise. Stop this nonsense and buy me a beer when we meet.
>
>If hundreds of amperes can be controlled by modulating a only few amperes
>through a transistor, then that is what makes sense to utilize as a means
>of protectionl on a regular basis.
>Once an arc is striked in a DC circuit, the electrodes (or contacts inside
>a circuit breaker) have to be seperated a large distance before the arc
>extinguishes, any welder will tell you that. So why use the arc generating
>DC circuit breaker to interrupt the current on a regular basis. Norm has a
>lot of wisdom about a lot of things but he ought to stop tripping his DC
>circuit brakers, just in case the theory is right.
>
>BTW (By The Way) the phrase "Current Flow" is redundant. Current does not
>flow, "charge" flows, current is "rate of flow of charge". This is another
>misconcemption people have, just like the characteristics of molded case
>circuit breakers.
>
>Regards,
>
>Ahmet
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Help protect your PC: Get a free online virus scan at McAfee.com.
>http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
>|| The Live-Aboard List : send a "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" request ||
>|| in body of message to: ||
Stan Gardner ~~~_/) ~~~ NPTest, Inc.
Senior Mechanical Engineer 150 Baytech Drive
Tel - 408 586 6532 San Jose, CA
95134-2302
FAX - 408-586 4662 Email -
___________________________________________________________________________
|| The Live-Aboard List : send a "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" request ||
|| in body of message to: ||
