12 LED resistance circuit help

[John Fields]

I guess the restatement I made is not good enough. Should I start
another thread and offer a formal apology to the world for making such a
heinous mis-statement about current vs. dissipation?

---
Current VS dissipation isn't where you erred, you stated that
current-hogging was taking place in a series circuit, where currents
are everywhere the same and hogging _can't take place.
---

Maybe I could help
make amends by belittling others, nit-picking posts and posting a bunch
of OT crap?

---
That seems a little extreme. Usually all that's required is an "oops"
or an "aaarrghhh!" or a simple admission of error.
---

Lets see if we can't get on to the road to recovery now. Speaking of
good advice, why are you trying to get a poster to use non-rechargeable
alkaline batteries when he clearly expressed a preference for
rechargeable? Hey Fields, are you ever going to acknowledge/correct
your mistake in S.E.D about max collector current on the 2N4401?
sheez....

---
**** you, pinhead. Go to:

http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/2N/2N4401.pdf

and read the absolute maximum rating for collector current, then
report back with what you find along with a reference to the article,
OK?

 

[Anthony Fremont]

I neither said nor implied that it wasn't.

I guess I misunderstood you when you said:

"The actual value across each l.e.d. varies from device to device at any
current."

 

[Anthony Fremont]

---
Current VS dissipation isn't where you erred, you stated that
current-hogging was taking place in a series circuit, where currents
are everywhere the same and hogging _can't take place.
---

I know, that's why I said, "that I should have said power instead of
current". I was going to say "hogging the juice" but changed it to the
incorrect word of current (instead of power) and I really wish that I
had stuck with juice.

I would have, if you'd have just pointed out my mistake like dB did.
Instead, for some twisted reason, you try to set me up with a little
trick question.

---


---
**** you, pinhead. Go to:

http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/2N/2N4401.pdf

and read the absolute maximum rating for collector current, then
report back with what you find along with a reference to the article,
OK?

OK, Mr. "professional circuit designer", I already did that and that's
why I know you made a mistake. You incorrectly stated that the max
current was ".6mA", IOW 600uA. The correct number is 600mA or .6A, but
it is certainly not .6mA. I realize that's only three orders of
magnitude off, so perhaps that's close enough for you, but it's not for
me. Now awaiting your apology (for leaping to conclusions and then
cussing me out) and your admission of error.

I hope this link works:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group...n+author:fields&rnum=2&hl=en#07d336d4a9dce9b2

Now.......wasn't that allot more productive than just pointing out the
mistake? Not.

 

[John Fields]

I know, that's why I said, "that I should have said power instead of
current". I was going to say "hogging the juice" but changed it to the
incorrect word of current (instead of power) and I really wish that I
had stuck with juice.


I would have, if you'd have just pointed out my mistake like dB did.
Instead, for some twisted reason, you try to set me up with a little
trick question.


OK, Mr. "professional circuit designer", I already did that and that's
why I know you made a mistake. You incorrectly stated that the max
current was ".6mA", IOW 600uA. The correct number is 600mA or .6A, but
it is certainly not .6mA. I realize that's only three orders of
magnitude off, so perhaps that's close enough for you, but it's not for
me. Now awaiting your apology (for leaping to conclusions and then
cussing me out) and your admission of error.

I hope this link works:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group...n+author:fields&rnum=2&hl=en#07d336d4a9dce9b2

Now.......wasn't that allot more productive than just pointing out the
mistake? Not.

---
Sure, I made a trypo, which is clearly evident from the context of the
article. Big fucking deal.

You, on the other hand, are bobbing and weaving and ducking around
saying that what you meant by current hogging (a commonly accepted
technical term) was "power hogging", or some such other nonsense and
trying to excuse your error by saying that I'm in the same boat that
you're in, LOL.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

Sure, I made a trypo, which is clearly evident from the context of the

Clearly evident, are you trying to be funny? There is nothing "clearly
evident" about 0.6mA REALLY meaning 600mA.

article. Big fucking deal.

As a matter of fact, it is a BFD now. You wrongly cussed me out, now
you should apologize. Or do you think you are above that?

You, on the other hand, are bobbing and weaving and ducking around
saying that what you meant by current hogging (a commonly accepted
technical term) was "power hogging", or some such other nonsense and
trying to excuse your error by saying that I'm in the same boat that
you're in, LOL.

I admitted that current was the wrong word, WTF do you want me to do?
Do you really think that I don't know the difference between current and
power, or that the current thru all components in a series circuit is
the same? I really didn't expect the pedant police to jump all over it.
Next time I'll be more careful.

The simple fact remains that one LED WILL DISIPATE MORE POWER THAN THE
OTHER DUE TO DIFFERING Vf's. RIGHT??? THE END RESULT IS EXACTLY THE
SAME AS IF ONE DEVICE HOGGED MORE CURRENT, RIGHT??? I have admitted my
error numerous times now. Now, what is your problem?

I'm not saying that you're in the same boat as me, I am saying that you
make mistakes too. What I'd like to know is:

Would you rather have someone point it out nicely, or would you rather
them try to trip you up so that you can dig yourself in deeper? Let me
know so that I may properly appease you in the future.

BTW, I feel that a microcontroller would be a simpler, cheaper, more
reliable (iow better) solution to the problem of resetting the network
appliances on a regular basis. What do you think?

 

[John Fields]

Clearly evident, are you trying to be funny? There is nothing "clearly
evident" about 0.6mA REALLY meaning 600mA.

---
Well, had you noticed that earlier on in the article I referred to
being able to run a relay with a 100mA coil, and had you noticed that
that relay was in series with the collector-to-emitter junction of the
transistor, it should have been obvious that, in the absence of
current-hogging, that 100mA also had to pass through the transistor's
collector-to-emitter junction in order to cause the relay to function.
Also, I don't think there are any commonly available mechanical relays
with will operate with coil currents on the order of 60µA, so it
should have been more or less obvious that it was a trypo. Especially
when you consider that just removing the mu fixes everything.
---

As a matter of fact, it is a BFD now. You wrongly cussed me out, now
you should apologize. Or do you think you are above that?

---
What I think is that you're trying to mitigate your error by saying,
"See, everybody makes the same kinds of mistakes I do.", and there's
no reason for me to apologize to you for flaming you about that.
---

I admitted that current was the wrong word, WTF do you want me to do?

---
I dont care _what_ you do.
---

Do you really think that I don't know the difference between current and
power, or that the current thru all components in a series circuit is
the same?

---
You do now...
---

I really didn't expect the pedant police to jump all over it.

---
Shit happens...
---

Next time I'll be more careful.

---
Wrong. That's the same as saying that getting from point A to point B
via a road that doesn't exist is the same as getting from point A to
point B via road that does exist.
---

I have admitted my
error numerous times now. Now, what is your problem?

---
I have no problem.
---

I'm not saying that you're in the same boat as me, I am saying that you
make mistakes too. What I'd like to know is:

Would you rather have someone point it out nicely, or would you rather
them try to trip you up so that you can dig yourself in deeper? Let me
know so that I may properly appease you in the future.

---
Neither my appeasement nor your sarcasm is necessary. Besides, I
don't know why you're so offended by what you thought was a trick
question since, trick question or not, it certainly woke you up
quickly enough!
---

 

[John Fields]

---
Well, had you noticed that earlier on in the article I referred to
being able to run a relay with a 100mA coil, and had you noticed that
that relay was in series with the collector-to-emitter junction of the
transistor, it should have been obvious that, in the absence of
current-hogging, that 100mA also had to pass through the transistor's
collector-to-emitter junction in order to cause the relay to function.
Also, I don't think there are any commonly available mechanical relays
with will operate with coil currents on the order of 60µA, so it

^^
Oops... 600

 

[Anthony Fremont]

---
Well, had you noticed that earlier on in the article I referred to
being able to run a relay with a 100mA coil, and had you noticed that
that relay was in series with the collector-to-emitter junction of the
transistor, it should have been obvious that, in the absence of
current-hogging, that 100mA also had to pass through the transistor's
collector-to-emitter junction in order to cause the relay to function.
Also, I don't think there are any commonly available mechanical relays
with will operate with coil currents on the order of 60µA, so it
should have been more or less obvious that it was a trypo. Especially
when you consider that just removing the mu fixes everything.

It was obvious to me for all the reasons you mention, that's why I went
and looked at the datasheet yesterday to see. However, it might not
have been obvious to the OP (and it likely wasn't) given his post and
his nym. I didn't feel the need to jump in and make a scene though. I
figured you'd catch it or someone else would. No biggy. Certainly not
like the sacrilege of misappropriating the word "current" in S.E.B, I
see.

I don't want an apology for pointing out my mistakes, I want one for
cussing me out after I pointed out your mistake. I admit my mistake yet
again, when will it be enough for you?

I guess that's only as long as I don't say "current" when I really mean
"power".

I think I knew it 25 or 30 years ago.

At least we can agree on something.

Your falacious analogy aside, the end result is a smoked part. The same
as when you put too much current thru it. I defy you to tell the
difference in a post-mortem exam.

Other than your inability to apologize for cussing someone out and
calling them names.

---
Neither my appeasement nor your sarcasm is necessary. Besides, I
don't know why you're so offended by what you thought was a trick
question since, trick question or not, it certainly woke you up
quickly enough!
---

Too bad you didn't "wake up" to your "trypo" until after cussing me out.

no

 

[John Fields]

It was obvious to me for all the reasons you mention, that's why I went
and looked at the datasheet yesterday to see. However, it might not
have been obvious to the OP (and it likely wasn't) given his post and
his nym.

---
Oh, so now you're an authority on the OP?

Whether it was obvious to him or not wouldn't have made a particle of
difference as long as he used a 2N4401, as was shown on the schematic.

What I think is interesting is that for all your whining about a typo
you had a chance to catch a much more serious _technical_ error, yet
you didn't.
---

I didn't feel the need to jump in and make a scene though.

---
You say that now, but earlier you felt that:

"Hey Fields, are you ever going to acknowledge/correct your mistake in
S.E.D about max collector current on the 2N4401?
sheez...."

was better than, say, "BTW, John, you stated in sed that the maximum
collector current for a 2N4401 is 0.6mA. I believe that should be
0.6A." ?

So, on top of everything else, you're either a liar or you have
selective memory lapse problems.
---

I figured you'd catch it or someone else would.

---
Someone else did. Non-confrontationally, BTW.
---

No biggy.

---
One would think...
---

Certainly not
like the sacrilege of misappropriating the word "current" in S.E.B, I
see.

---
It wasn't the word 'current', it was the phrase 'current hogging'.
---

I don't want an apology for pointing out my mistakes, I want one for
cussing me out after I pointed out your mistake.

---
Had you chosen to point it out in a civil manner I would have
acknowledged in kind but, since you chose not to, **** you.
And you'll get no apology. Don't like it, sue me.
---

I admit my mistake yet again, when will it be enough for you?

---
Your first admission was sufficient for me, but you seem to feel a
need to keep admitting it, ad nauseam, so the question really should
be: When will it be enough for _you_?
---

I guess that's only as long as I don't say "current" when I really mean
"power".

---
You misunderstand me. "I don't care what you do" means precisely
that. Make mistakes, don't make mistakes, it makes no difference to
me. Choosing to comment one way or the other is my prerogative and is
not based on caring about what you do, it's based on fixing the error.
---

I think I knew it 25 or 30 years ago.

---
Yes, well, if you don't use it you lose it.
---

---
Weak.
---


At least we can agree on something.


Your falacious analogy aside, the end result is a smoked part. The same
as when you put too much current thru it. I defy you to tell the
difference in a post-mortem exam.

---
You just can't let it go, can you?

Fact is, in a post-mortem exam the second LED would be very closely
examined and could yield some clues as to what happened to the toasted
LED. For instance, if the LED failed open and the second LED's Vf,
If, and light output were in spec once it was fired up again, then the
failure of the first LED could have been a wire bond failure or who
knows what else at a current substantially _below_ Ifmax.

Just for grins, why don't you work out the power dissipation of each
of two LEDs in series, one with Vfmin and the other with Vfmax with
nominal If going through both of them and see if that causes the high
Vf LED to dissipate more than its maximum rated power?
---

Other than your inability to apologize for cussing someone out and
calling them names.

---
On the contrary, I'm perfectly capable of apologizing when it's
warranted.
---

Too bad you didn't "wake up" to your "trypo" until after cussing me out.

---
Again, had you chosen to point it out in a civil manner I would have
acknowledged in kind but, since you chose not to, **** you.
---

no

---
HC4066, about 50 cents, cap about a dime, resistors about a nickle,
diodes about a nickle so, for a one off, that's about $0.70.

PCB, transistor, relay is a wash for either system.

A one off for a micro is gonna cost you the micro, a programmer, a
learning curve and programming and debugging time.

You figure it out.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

Didn't you have a pot in your design?

PCB, transistor, relay is a wash for either system.

Probably wouldn't need a transistor to drive the relay as long as
5V@25mA will do it. Why not a nice SSR instead?

A one off for a micro is gonna cost you the micro, a programmer, a
learning curve and programming and debugging time.

How come the full cost of a programmer and the micro's entire learning
curve gets factored in every time a micro is mentioned as a solution?
It's a one time cost, just like the rest of anyones test equipment or
education. I spent less than $75.00 on my programming hardware and the
dev tools were free from Microchip. My scope cost me more than $400
fifteen years ago and it was used then. Nobody worries about the
thousands of dollars needed for the rest of the stuff you need to
effectively tinker in electronics, just the $50 for the programmer like
it's some kind of major show-stopper. IME, debugging time for this
project would be virtually non-existent and the end result would be more
useful since it would have a much greater dynamic range on the time
constant.

You figure it out.

Your cost may be a little less assuming a PIC 12Fxxx (~1.20 single qty),
but a 4 bit micro would change that. Outside of the minor cost
difference, I still feel that the micro offers far more potential for a
better end result.

 

[Lord Garth]

How come the full cost of a programmer and the micro's entire learning
curve gets factored in every time a micro is mentioned as a solution?
It's a one time cost, just like the rest of anyones test equipment or
education. I spent less than $75.00 on my programming hardware and the
dev tools were free from Microchip. My scope cost me more than $400
fifteen years ago and it was used then. Nobody worries about the
thousands of dollars needed for the rest of the stuff you need to
effectively tinker in electronics, just the $50 for the programmer like
it's some kind of major show-stopper. IME, debugging time for this
project would be virtually non-existent and the end result would be more
useful since it would have a much greater dynamic range on the time
constant.

As was mentioned here long ago, and is still true, "Use a PIC" is much too
generic of a 'solution'. It doesn't teach much about electronic hardware
and of those that suggest a PIC as a solution, maybe one has followed
through
with schematics AND source code.

Look at the PIC question today, the OP asks why the software he DL doesn't
see the programmer he built. He links a page but we don't have a clue if he
etched a PCB of space wired the thing. He has not gotten back with any
updates. It's typical.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

As was mentioned here long ago, and is still true, "Use a PIC" is much too
generic of a 'solution'. It doesn't teach much about electronic hardware
and of those that suggest a PIC as a solution, maybe one has followed
through
with schematics AND source code.

I know that I have provided PIC code for more than one person on usenet.
Whenever I suggest using a PIC to someone, you can consider it a given
that I intend to help them with their code and circuitry if they choose
to try it.

Look at the PIC question today, the OP asks why the software he DL doesn't
see the programmer he built. He links a page but we don't have a clue if he
etched a PCB of space wired the thing. He has not gotten back with any
updates. It's typical.

Given the circuit he chose to build, I'm not surprised that it doesn't
work. I would agree that it's "typical" of a good many newbie posts
regardless of whether they're using a PIC. At any rate, his problem has
nothing to do with a PIC chip, yet.

 

[Lord Garth]

I know that I have provided PIC code for more than one person on usenet.
Whenever I suggest using a PIC to someone, you can consider it a given
that I intend to help them with their code and circuitry if they choose
to try it.


Given the circuit he chose to build, I'm not surprised that it doesn't
work. I would agree that it's "typical" of a good many newbie posts
regardless of whether they're using a PIC. At any rate, his problem has
nothing to do with a PIC chip, yet.

I'm not anti PIC, my burner handles many devices including PIC. I feel
that if it can replace between 6 to 10 ICs or if you need one of their
more advanced features like PIC with USB, then it's okay. I'd have to
admit that their Harvard architecture is odd compared to von Neumann
architecture. I understand the efficiency, it's reminiscent of AOS vs. RPN.

The versions and capabilities are many that one is easily overwhelmed by
the variety. That's one reason why I would like to see a Z-80 running a
TCP/IP stack. It would show that a '70's device still has uses.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

I wrote:

I'm not anti PIC, my burner handles many devices including PIC. I feel
that if it can replace between 6 to 10 ICs or if you need one of their

6 to 10? That sounds like you may be just a tad bit resistant to using
them. ;-)

more advanced features like PIC with USB, then it's okay. I'd have to
admit that their Harvard architecture is odd compared to von Neumann
architecture. I understand the efficiency, it's reminiscent of AOS

vs. RPN.

Coming from an assembly programming background (on Von Neumann stuff of
course), it was a bit strange to me at first too. PICs, however, are a
godsend for me. They let me build the kind of stuff that I always
wanted to do, without having to dedicate my life to hardware design.
I've also been able to get projects working that I could never have done
the "traditional" way.

The versions and capabilities are many that one is easily overwhelmed by
the variety. That's one reason why I would like to see a Z-80 running a
TCP/IP stack. It would show that a '70's device still has uses.

I believe the Rabbit might interest you then. I haven't played with
them, but AIUI they are very much like the Z-80 instruction set and they
come with a TCP/IP stack. They're too expensive for me though.

 

[Lord Garth]

6 to 10? That sounds like you may be just a tad bit resistant to using
them. ;-)

vs. RPN.

Coming from an assembly programming background (on Von Neumann stuff of
course), it was a bit strange to me at first too. PICs, however, are a
godsend for me. They let me build the kind of stuff that I always
wanted to do, without having to dedicate my life to hardware design.
I've also been able to get projects working that I could never have done
the "traditional" way.


I believe the Rabbit might interest you then. I haven't played with
them, but AIUI they are very much like the Z-80 instruction set and they
come with a TCP/IP stack. They're too expensive for me though.

I thought the Rabbit was too expensive as well. I have a similar product
I bought from Sparkofun, it was about $60. Under the RJ-45 is a 20MHz
processor. It outputs in parallel but I've not yet taken the time to work
with
it.

 

[John Fields]

<snipped a bunch more side-stepping and invective/ad-hominem crap>

[/QUOTE]

Didn't you have a pot in your design?[/QUOTE]

---
Yeah, but it was a nicety. For the cost-conscious, and if the period
isn't all that critical, 510k +/- 5% will be just fine.
---

Probably wouldn't need a transistor to drive the relay as long as
5V@25mA will do it. Why not a nice SSR instead?

---
Oh, I don't know... Maybe because that's not what the OP of the thread
in sed you referenced asked for?
---

How come the full cost of a programmer and the micro's entire learning
curve gets factored in every time a micro is mentioned as a solution?

---
Because if you haven't bought/built one and you haven't been through
the process, then you'll have to buy/build one and go through the
process if you want to play.
---

It's a one time cost, just like the rest of anyones test equipment or
education.

---
Yes, of course, but it's a one-time cost and an ongoing effort which
will will be unwarranted if the goal at hand is to build a one-off
widget with a total cost of, say, $10 or less.
---

I spent less than $75.00 on my programming hardware and the
dev tools were free from Microchip. My scope cost me more than $400
fifteen years ago and it was used then. Nobody worries about the
thousands of dollars needed for the rest of the stuff you need to
effectively tinker in electronics, just the $50 for the programmer like
it's some kind of major show-stopper.

---
The keyword there is 'tinker'. If that's _your_ bent, then fine.
Spend away. Understand however, that that's not _everyone's_ cup of
tea and that some folks only want a simple, inexpensive, easily
realizable solution for a problem peculiar to them. Asking them to
spend _anything_ on hardware which is going to gather dust after the
project is finished is, at best, stupid. As is asking them to spend
time learning how to use it, and to acquire the software skills
necessary to bring the "project" to completion.
---

IME, debugging time for this
project would be virtually non-existent and the end result would be more
useful since it would have a much greater dynamic range on the time
constant.

---
If you think the OP was wrong in asking for what he wanted, then why
don't you get your ass over to sed and tell him about it instead of
sitting here playing self - aggrandising games and kvetching about
every goddam thing under the sun?

Hint: He doesn't _want_ to be able to change the timing, he just
wants something that'll give him a contact closure, repeatedly, every
hour or so.
---

Your cost may be a little less assuming a PIC 12Fxxx (~1.20 single qty),
but a 4 bit micro would change that.

---
YAFI, LOL! Suggest away, and don't forget to include the cost of the
programmer and the dev tools, and the time required to learn how to
use them and to learn the instruction set.
---

Outside of the minor cost
difference, I still feel that the micro offers far more potential for a
better end result.

---
"Minor cost difference"? You're either trying to sneak some shit in
there or you can't do, or haven't done, the arithmetic, so I'll do it
for you: Since the transistor, the base resistor, the clamp diode,
the relay and the PCB are a wash, what's left is $1.20 for your
suggested PIC way VS about $0.63 for my way.

That comes to:


$1.20
-$0.63
------
$0.57

which is about 1/2 as expensive as your way. "Minor cost difference"?
I think not.


Hmmm... Where did I read this:

"BTW, I feel that a microcontroller would be a simpler, cheaper, more
reliable (iow better) solution to the problem of resetting the network
appliances on a regular basis. What do you think?"

1. Cheaper? I've just proven that it's not cheaper in onesies, and I
doubt that with that huge cost differential it could be made cheaper
in volume.

2. Simpler? Since the µC way would require a large investment in time
in order to climb the learning curve, that can hardly be considered a
simpler solution for a one-off.

3. More reliable? I don't have a good handle on the reliability of
either way, so if you have some numbers to back up your position, post
them.

4. What do I think? I think you're full of shit.

 

[John Fields]

Given the circuit he chose to build, I'm not surprised that it doesn't
work. I would agree that it's "typical" of a good many newbie posts
regardless of whether they're using a PIC. At any rate, his problem has
nothing to do with a PIC chip, yet.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

Only so far as what he posted. I thought he made his skill level fairly
clear.

Whether it was obvious to him or not wouldn't have made a particle of
difference as long as he used a 2N4401, as was shown on the schematic.

That's completely beside the point. Just like the fact that it wouldn't
have worked anyway.

What I think is interesting is that for all your whining about a typo
you had a chance to catch a much more serious _technical_ error, yet
you didn't.

And you think that is something to brag about? LMAO I'm not the one
touting myself as a "professional circuit designer". I'm in it for the
hobby and I've never pretended any different. Perhaps you should have
told the OP that your circuit was untested and unsimulated, because even
I made the mistake of figuring that you actually posted stuff that you
knew would work. I will certainly view your schematics from the proper
perspective from now on.

---
You say that now, but earlier you felt that:

"Hey Fields, are you ever going to acknowledge/correct your mistake in
S.E.D about max collector current on the 2N4401?
sheez...."

was better than, say, "BTW, John, you stated in sed that the maximum
collector current for a 2N4401 is 0.6mA. I believe that should be
0.6A." ?

First off the sheez part wasn't addressed to you. You might have
deduced that from the punctuation. Secondly I was being sarcastic, you
should have been able to tell that from the entire context of my post.
At any rate, you are the one setting the precident around here of
jumping down someones throat when you don't like the accuracy of their
posts. Or did you already forget about the photocell and resistor
fiasco in your unending love/hate relationship with Larry? BTW, I don't
think my comment was all that bad, certainly not an FU or anything like
that. I noticed that Mike pointed out your error and you didn't
respond. I thought you might like to know about it. It certainly
woke you up didn't it. :-D

At any rate, the sole reason that I even mentioned you was because you
had already made your attempt at setting me up. Given your typical
behavior lately, I knew what was coming next. I figured my way of
pointing out your mistake was just beating you to the punch. Obviously
I was correct, since you are now so pissed over it.

I certainly didn't cuss you out over it though.

So, on top of everything else, you're either a liar or you have
selective memory lapse problems.

Where did I lie?

That was his choice. Like you, I reserve the right to respond when and
how I want.

No need to sue, you are doing enough damage to your business and
reputation all by yourself.

You accused me of weaving and bobbing, so I figured that I hadn't been
plain enough for you.

---
You misunderstand me. "I don't care what you do" means precisely
that. Make mistakes, don't make mistakes, it makes no difference to

me. Choosing to comment one way or the other is my prerogative and is
not based on caring about what you do, it's based on fixing the error.

Then, why did my comment upset you? I was only prompting you to fix
your error. I didn't call you any names, or use an cuss words so why
did you find it so upsetting?

I think I can still tell the difference between current, power and
energy. I think you know that too or you'd be filling your posts with
links to all my past errors.

Not half as weak as someone that feels a need to dominate a basics
newsgroup just cuz they're an expert in the field.

---
You just can't let it go, can you?

Fact is, in a post-mortem exam the second LED would be very closely
examined and could yield some clues as to what happened to the toasted
LED. For instance, if the LED failed open and the second LED's Vf,
If, and light output were in spec once it was fired up again, then the
failure of the first LED could have been a wire bond failure or who
knows what else at a current substantially _below_ Ifmax.

Just for grins, why don't you work out the power dissipation of each
of two LEDs in series, one with Vfmin and the other with Vfmax with
nominal If going through both of them and see if that causes the high
Vf LED to dissipate more than its maximum rated power?

Perhaps if you acted a little more civil around here, I would be
inclined to be nicer to you. As it stands, you certainly are
demonstrating that you deserve far less courtesy than I've shown you.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

However you wish to see it John, though I didn't use any cuss words.

I'd go with jumpers on a micro. They're cheap and highly configurable.

An SSR doesn't qualify as a relay?

---
Because if you haven't bought/built one and you haven't been through
the process, then you'll have to buy/build one and go through the
process if you want to play.
---

The same goes for test equipment, soldering stuff etc.... It's just one
more tool that you need, nothing more. A good PIC programmer is less
than $100. Compared to the $150 I spent on my audio frequency generator
that I almost never use, it's a great investment.

But it would be worth buying a DMM, a soldering iron, solder, etching
stuff etc.....?

---
The keyword there is 'tinker'. If that's _your_ bent, then fine.
Spend away. Understand however, that that's not _everyone's_ cup of
tea and that some folks only want a simple, inexpensive, easily
realizable solution for a problem peculiar to them. Asking them to

Well, I guess that I see PIC chips like you see 74xx's

spend _anything_ on hardware which is going to gather dust after the
project is finished is, at best, stupid. As is asking them to spend
time learning how to use it, and to acquire the software skills
necessary to bring the "project" to completion.

Burning yet another straw man, you really are a fire bug. I don't
recall asking anyone to spend money on equipement to be used once. As I
"self agrandised" before, if I was adamently suggesting a PIC to
someone, I'd be offering some help to go with it. You can make of that
what you wish.

---
If you think the OP was wrong in asking for what he wanted, then why
don't you get your ass over to sed and tell him about it instead of
sitting here playing self - aggrandising games and kvetching about
every goddam thing under the sun?

Er um, because I don't want to. You really ought to stop trying to
control things around here. Ordering people around on usenet is not
likely to win you many friends.

Hint: He doesn't _want_ to be able to change the timing, he just
wants something that'll give him a contact closure, repeatedly, every
hour or so.

Programmers and dev tools don't count. We've already covered this.
They are in the same category as all other dev tools and electronics
equipment you own.

---
"Minor cost difference"? You're either trying to sneak some shit in
there or you can't do, or haven't done, the arithmetic, so I'll do it
for you: Since the transistor, the base resistor, the clamp diode,
the relay and the PCB are a wash, what's left is $1.20 for your
suggested PIC way VS about $0.63 for my way.

That comes to:


$1.20
-$0.63
------
$0.57

which is about 1/2 as expensive as your way. "Minor cost difference"?
I think not.

It's certainly not half as expensive when you factor in a board and the
rest of the common parts. The difference quickly shrinks to ~10% or
less, now doesn't it? It's really not very attractive watching an
engineer play games with numbers like he's doing Enron's books.

Hmmm... Where did I read this:

"BTW, I feel that a microcontroller would be a simpler, cheaper, more
reliable (iow better) solution to the problem of resetting the network
appliances on a regular basis. What do you think?"

1. Cheaper? I've just proven that it's not cheaper in onesies, and I
doubt that with that huge cost differential it could be made cheaper
in volume.

Admittedly for one off, it's pretty hard to be cheaper using an 8-bit
micro. A 4-bit proc would do the job, and it would be cheaper. BTW,
your quoted prices were a bit low as shown on Digikey, so things aren't
as bad as you wish to make it seem. Of course your price was 70 cents
yesterday and now it's only 63 cents, so why am I not surprised?
According to Digikey, the fairchild 4060 is 77 cents in single qty, the
ST part is 55 cents each.

2. Simpler? Since the µC way would require a large investment in time
in order to climb the learning curve, that can hardly be considered a
simpler solution for a one-off.

What about the electronics learing curve? It's only about 1000 times
larger, be for real. That's the same old tired mantra formerly sung by
"professional tube circuit designers" when whining about having to learn
yucky old transistor theory.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

Odd how that is hard to tell now that you've snipped away the context.
Hmm. :-/

If you must know, we were talking about another thread. The OP of that
thread built a cheesy programmer circuit and substituted the one and
only IC that it contains with a different number _and_ family.
Therefore, it's really not too surprising that he can't get it to work.

The second sentence (as delineated by a capital letter and a period)
refers to the other thread. The OP posted no useful information in his
post. It was, therefore, typical of many newbie posts in that it went
something like, "I built xxxx and it doesn't work, why?" You know.

The final sentence points out that the OP didn't have a PIC problem yet,
just a programmer problem since it couldn't be detected by the
programming software. This was, in fact, going to be the least of his
problems since he'd need some way to put his new PIC chips into LVP mode
before being able to program them.