prolong the life of electronics and bearings

[Paul]

lets consider "conservation of energy". When items wear out and need to be
replaced energy and resources are being used to manufacture those
replacements. So, in the name of making an item last longer (even by using
energy) I am saving energy and resources.

 

[Paul]

we are now getting off topic. I NEVER leave my auto unattended with the
engine running. I also never leave children or animals in it.

 

[Paul]

ok, my turn to off topic. ref: "applies it to everything"

I will never forget my grade school science teacher who said (while speaking
of scientific and natural laws) "If someone says "always" or "never" they
are wrong, because there are exceptions to everything". To this I said "It
that ALWAYS true?"


"David Candy" <.> wrote in message
He is 1/2 right but becomes wrong once he applies it to everything.

 

[w_tom]

Actually David Candy posted no such facts. Here, he posts
insults - not technical facts. Leythos discovered he cannot
just invent facts which is why he has a new anus. Leythos
also posts insults because he cannot post opinions as facts
without being exposed.

However, David Candy. You are welcome to cite technical
documents and other numbers. You don't. But surprise me.
Show me you really do have a grasp of technology. Show me how
power cycling is so destructive. Don't cite subjective
maintenance documents for technicians. Show us engineering
numbers for why power cycling is so destructive to commercial
products. Show us your grasp of technology rather than your
ability to post disparaging remarks. Show us your grasp of
knowledge rather than just attack the messenger.

 

[w_tom]

If starting a car was so destructive, then hybrids will fail
at unacceptably high rates. We don't leave the car running to
reduce wear. Long term idle can be even more destructive to
some parts of an engine.

Bottom line - once we apply manufacturer data sheet numbers
- power cycling is not destructive. Those myths about
destructive power cycling come from those who only 'feel' what
they know. Power it down or hibernate it when done for the
day.

 

[Leythos]

Leythos discovered he cannot
just invent facts which is why he has a new anus. Leythos
also posts insults because he cannot post opinions as facts
without being exposed.

Yea, just like you said a UPS would not protect any devices connected to
it, then I posted a link to the SU2200 that we use for our servers, from
the APC site, and you backtracked to cheap UPS's won't protect
anything... And so your sad saga goes.

Post something that explains how devices appear to be saved that are
connected to a UPS and how devices on the same AC line were not, and how
that the UPS had no protection for the saved devices - come on, you
can't, I'm sure of it. Know why you can't, because you're wrong.

UPS's, ones that are properly designed and connected to AC lines, DO
provide protection against surges, sags, outages, spikes, etc... I have
server/node after server/node to prove it.

 

[w_tom]

Lets see. Leythos cannot provide technical facts on this
topic. So he posted his 'feelings' from another topic. An
honest Leythos would instead post facts for the benefit of
all. He would show us, using technical facts, how power
cycling is so destructive. But again, Leythos does not do
that.

Meanwhile, power cycling has been demonstrated destructive
only when numbers are not provided. No numbers is a symptom
of junk science reasoning. Once numbers are provided, damage
created by power cycling is so trivial as to be irrelevant -
virtually zero.

 

[Guest]

Leythos has a new anus.

OH NO!!! Now leythos has ANOTHER ONE to talk out of constantly and to
incessantly spew his drivel into these groups with?!??

 

[Leythos]

Lets see. Leythos cannot provide technical facts on this
topic. So he posted his 'feelings' from another topic. An
honest Leythos would instead post facts for the benefit of
all. He would show us, using technical facts, how power
cycling is so destructive. But again, Leythos does not do
that.

Dude - you really have a facts problem. My feelings from the other
issue, UPS Protection, are fact, anything I can see, time and time
again, documented, repeatable, is fact. It was you that backed down
after myself and two others mentioned quality UPS devices, you suddenly
had nothing more to say. You were the one that was spouting partial
truths. You still have not said anything about the SU2200 line since you
left that thread after it was mentioned that the SU2200 is a UPS and
protects against surges/spikes...

And here you go again - You pull the same BS in every thread you're
involved in. You spout some numbers, but they are not backup by real
world experience. You continually discount EXPERIENCE and never make any
attempt to explain why the experience isn't possible.

I didn't read a think of this thread, except to see that you disagree
with someone and that was enough for me - I have never seen you post
anything that can prove a UPS won't protect devices connected to it, so
I don't believe anything you say on any electrical issues.

 

[Leythos]

8?B?Y291bGRuJ3QgYmUgYXJzZWQgdG8=?=" <couldn't be arsed
(e-mail address removed)> says...

OH NO!!! Now leythos has ANOTHER ONE to talk out of constantly and to
incessantly spew his drivel into these groups with?!??

I'll make you a deal, you prove him right, or you prove that butts
actually owns those files and I won't post here again.

 

[Paul]

why do filament light bulbs burn out 95% of the time right at power on?

 

[Paul]

hybrids are. Their engines rarely last more then 50k miles.

 

[David Candy]

Because they are damaged and the filiment is of uneven thickness so the thin parts heat up quickly and burn up.

I sold electrical equipment for many years. Lighting, motor control, cable, fuzes etc (my biggest sale was in 1986 of $500,000 for connectors to join the NW Shelf project together). Have attended many a training session incl one on the common light bulb (run by the one Australian factory, owned jointly by all lighting comp, that makes all aust bulbs of whatever brand) around 1980.

I haven't seen this on the internet. But it's to do with how tungston (in gas) reforms arond what is left of the filliment on turn off (or something like that. Note when it blows it blows from uneven heat from power on. But this is just the final straw - it reached the end of it's rated life.

 

[w_tom]

From where did you get that 95% claim?

Meanwhile, we instead consult industry sources. Notice that
a light bulb that even failed during power up already had
vaporized its filament. Those black deposits inside the bulb
did not come from explosive power on. Those black deposits
are filament vaporization due to hours of operation and line
voltage. IES Handbook - the lighting industry bible - even
provides mathemtatical formulas for those numbers. Notice a
necessary parameter - the numbers.

Did you first learn facts before jumping to a conclusion
that power on destroys light bulbs? Did you first learn how
bulbs fail? And how do you explain the longer life of amber
light bulbs that power cycles so many more times overnight -
and still last longer - survives according to formulas from
the IES? Why do you ignore this example when you assume power
cycling causes light bulb failure?

Some humans just know because they saw it happen once. That
is not taught in junior high school science. To have a fact,
one must have both theorectical comprehension AND experimental
evidence. Without both, one has only speculation or a
hypothesis. Facts are what the IES Handbook provides. The
amber traffic signal also demonstrates that speculation - that
power cycling damages incandescant bulbs - is not based in
principles of science - as taught in junior high school.

Why do well over 95% of light bulbs in the 'all night' diner
fail when never power cycled? Bulbs fail during power on AND
during normal operation as even defined by formulas in the IES
Handbook. Hours of operation and voltage. A third source of
filament damage requires something far more stressful than
power on - mechanical vibration when the filament is hot.

Power cycling causing bulb failure is a classic example of
junk science reasoning based only upon speculation and in
direct contradiction to principles taught in junior high
school science.

 

[David Candy]

Well he seems not to like your character reference.

 

[w_tom]

hybrids are. Their engines rarely last more then 50k miles.

Another fact based upon junior high school science
principles - or just more wild speculation to fend off damning
challenges? You provided the number. Show me. Show me that
you have posted responsibly. Show me how hybrid cars
routinely require new engines in 50,000 miles.

Unfortunately your 50,000 miles comes from the same source
that said light bulb power cycling causes light bulb failure -
and that power cycling computers is destructive.

What I notice. Many who claim power cycling causes computer
failure cannot even provide valid numbers for those claims.
Its called junk science reasoning. But show me. Show me how
hybrid engines must be replaced every 50,000 miles.

 

[David Candy]

I used to like to say never say never (as in cognitive therapy/self help)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read David defending the concept of violence.
http://margokingston.typepad.com/harry_version_2/2005/10/entering_the_ga.html#more
=================================================

ok, my turn to off topic. ref: "applies it to everything"

I will never forget my grade school science teacher who said (while speaking
of scientific and natural laws) "If someone says "always" or "never" they
are wrong, because there are exceptions to everything". To this I said "It
that ALWAYS true?"


"David Candy" <.> wrote in message
He is 1/2 right but becomes wrong once he applies it to everything.

 

[w_tom]

I have no problem with what Plato has posted. I post when I
can provide the facts. However David Candy has a problem
providing facts which is why his post, instead, attacked the
messenger. Light bulb filaments slowly vaporize - depositing
filament on the inside of the glass envelope. And that is
what the IES - industry standard numbers - even provide with
formulas. David Candy would tell us these facts in the IES
Handbook are wrong? Well yes. And that is what I have a
problem with. People who just know - facts be damned. Even
worse, he knows because he is a salesman? When did that
profession make him more knowledgeable than the IES Handbook?

 

[David Candy]

never flames, curses, etc
You turned him into a liar.

 

[David Candy]

The cycles affect condensation back to the filiment.
i