Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+STEPPIR\s+QUESTION\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+STEPPIR\s+QUESTION\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:05:02 -0400; That's great info, Jerry. So, if I understand the design correctly, if one of the two wires in a pair is accidentally disconnected, and it happens to be the return current line, the chip will burn it; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00282.html (15,307 bytes)
22. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:11:33 -0700 (PDT); I had an intermittent in one of the connectors on my MonstIR and it got disconnected many times without damage (the MonstIR worked fine once I fixed the intermittent). I don't know whether it was the; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00283.html (9,310 bytes)
23. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:48:00 -0400; When my lightning disaster occurred, I was using K5FD suppressor boards, which have two MOVs per line plus a 5A inline fuse. Each wire in the control cable was connected to a suppressor board at both; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00286.html (15,480 bytes)
24. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:28:53 -0500; WC1M wrote: That's great info, Jerry. So, if I understand the design correctly, if one of the two wires in a pair is accidentally disconnected, and it happens to be the return current line, the chip; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00287.html (16,657 bytes)
25. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: Rick Stealey <rstealey@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:18:14 +0000; Dick - Your scenario sounds plausible to me. From the standpoint of MOVs. You have 82 v MOVs at the base of the tower and at the shack on a good ground. Fine. Your tower takes a hit and a portion of; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00288.html (10,996 bytes)
26. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 20:15:25 -0400; I though that MOVs degrade with each protection event and that their breakdown voltage decreases. Is a 45v MOV appropriate for a 33v system? John KK9A When my lightning disaster occurred, I was using; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00289.html (12,796 bytes)
27. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:40:15 -0700; This is probably a situation where zener diode clamps would be better than MOVs. MOVs are cheap (why they use them in $4 plug strips), but in an application with something driving an inductor (e.g. a; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00293.html (14,899 bytes)
28. Re: [TowerTalk] STEPPIR QUESTION (score: 1): Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 20:26:36 -0700; More that the leakage current increases. Imagine a whole bunch of little tiny MOVs in parallel. When you get an event, the lowest voltage MOV turns on, and slightly dies in the process, becoming a hi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2009-07/msg00294.html (8,755 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 28
Page: [1] [2]