Power supply fried, replaced it, computer won't start
.
it on and noticed immediately a burning "electrical fire" smell.
Turned the computer off (using Windows shutdown first from the login
screen), disconnected all peripherals and the power, opened the case.
Attached the power cord only, started it, everything worked (hard drives
were cycling, CPU fan going, motherboard lights on, etc.), but I noticed
the smell again. I did some sniffing and it was definitely coming from
the power supply. Then the computer just stopped.
I am not a "hardware guy" but I did some research on the web, consulted
with the friend who helped me build the computer, and it seemed pretty
open and shut. The 350 watt supply that came with the case ($35 for
case and supply) was to blame.
So went to CompUSA today and picked up
http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=283768 -
seemed to be a worthy "bang for the buck" 400-watt supply.
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/362/ is the instructions I
followed.
Before disconnecting the old PSU, I carefully labelled every connection,
showing what it was connected to, and the orientation on the drive or
board. (The PSU had a 20-pin connection to the motherboard, the ATX12V
comnnector, and my computer has two hard drives, a DVD drive, and a 3.5"
floppy.)
Plugged the computer in, turned on the PSU, and nothing. Ultimately, I
tried a known good power cord and the new cord that came with the PSU, a
known working outlet, several permutations, nothing. The voltage
selector is correct (115 volts) on the back of the PSU. When I apply
power, the CPU fan turns for about two seconds then stops (no harsh or
unusual noises - it was turning fine yesterday). The green light on the
motherboard stays lit. But no drive lights come on, and no sign of any
activity.
I don't have a multimeter. I'm not an electrician or electrical
engineer. I just want some suggestions on what might be wrong and how
to fix it. FWIW, the motherboard seems to show no abuse; the capacitors
all look shiny and intact.
My friend who built the PC for me is traveling, and I will ultimately
bring the computer to him and his extensive testbench if I can't figure
this out myself. But I'm really at my wit's end now and am hoping for a
few useful "try this" suggestions.
Rod Speed
That usually indicates that the motherboard has decided
there is a major problem, so it shuts down very quickly.
> (no harsh or unusual noises - it was turning fine yesterday).
> The green light on the motherboard stays lit.
That is just the +5VSB, standby voltage.
> But no drive lights come on, and no sign of any activity.
> I don't have a multimeter. I'm not an electrician or electrical
> engineer. I just want some suggestions on what might be wrong
Likely something got killed when the original power supply died.
> and how to fix it.
Unplug everything except the motherboard
and see if the cpu fan comes on and stays on.
If it does, plug the hard drive in and see if it will boot
with just the motherboard and hard drive connected etc.
> FWIW, the motherboard seems to show no abuse;
> the capacitors all look shiny and intact.
The tops should be flat.
Plato
>
> unusual noises - it was turning fine yesterday). The green light on the
> motherboard stays lit. But no drive lights come on, and no sign of any
> activity.
Dave C.
"." <d...@dot.not> wrote in message
news:dot-436AD8.1...@syrcnyrdrs-02-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw), often shortly after leaving
the factory
2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other components
with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power supplies kill
motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect that the
first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out with it. The second
one can't even power itself, apparently.
It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that often spending an
extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power supply can save a complete rebuild,
costing hundreds of bucks. -Dave
Lookout
If all you hook up to the power supply is the MOBO (no RAM or CPU) and
you can't even get to post (a beep, no beeps at all) then your problem
is probably (98%) a fried MOBO. Just hope it didn't go any further.
Penn...@derrymaine.gov
>Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
>
>1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw), often shortly after leaving
>the factory
>2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other components
>with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power supplies kill
>motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>
>Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect that the
>first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out with it. The second
>one can't even power itself, apparently.
>
>It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that often spending an
>extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power supply can save a complete rebuild,
>costing hundreds of bucks. -Dave
I knew better, I did, but I had a spare mother board; bought a case
and Power supply duo for $50 - the sheet metal of the case was so thin
just tightning the screws would strip it out.
It lasted about three weeks, or the first power fluctuation - Lost the
power supply and mother board.
Just agreeing with you, One should not scrimp on the power supply, buy
the best.
--
Board Dots
http://www.boredmuch.com/view.php?id=764
Plato
>
> If all you hook up to the power supply is the MOBO (no RAM or CPU) and
> you can't even get to post (a beep, no beeps at all) then your problem
> is probably (98%) a fried MOBO. Just hope it didn't go any further.
There are generally two things that cause a major smell when they burn
out:
1. Monitor
2. The Case Power Supply
The case power supply can, tho rare, also take out other parts in a
system when it goes bad or burns.
.
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Unplug everything except the motherboard
> and see if the cpu fan comes on and stays on.
>
> If it does, plug the hard drive in and see if it will boot
> with just the motherboard and hard drive connected etc.
Thanks to you and all who responded.
My original post asserted that I wasn't an engineer. True. But I
solved the problem with your advice above, thinking systematically like
an engineer. I disconnected the power supply and connected everything
one by one, and the computer is now fully functional. From a little
research I did, I think my issue was that I'd connected the 3.5" floppy
power incorrectly or partially.
I also appreciate everyone's point about not being cheap. In 15+ years
of heavy computer use, i've never had a PSU go bad on me. But given all
the heartache this burnout caused, I'll from now on spend the extra
money for an Antec or other name brand supply. If I'd lost something
really important and known that an extra $40-50 would have averted the
disaster, I'd have been kicking myself.
Rod Speed
> "Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Unplug everything except the motherboard
>> and see if the cpu fan comes on and stays on.
>> If it does, plug the hard drive in and see if it will boot
>> with just the motherboard and hard drive connected etc.
> Thanks to you and all who responded.
> My original post asserted that I wasn't an engineer. True. But I
> solved the problem with your advice above, thinking systematically
> like an engineer. I disconnected the power supply and connected
> everything one by one, and the computer is now fully functional.
> From a little research I did, I think my issue was that I'd connected
> the 3.5" floppy power incorrectly or partially.
Yeah, it isnt hard to get that on wrong.
> I also appreciate everyone's point about not being cheap. In 15+
> years of heavy computer use, i've never had a PSU go bad on me.
> But given all the heartache this burnout caused, I'll from now on spend
> the extra money for an Antec or other name brand supply. If I'd lost
> something really important and known that an extra $40-50 would have
> averted the disaster, I'd have been kicking myself.
You'd be a lot better off with full backups of everything that
matters, any power supply can die. Hard drives in spades.
JAD
"." <d...@dot.not> wrote in message
> In article <4leqslF...@individual.net>,
> "Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Unplug everything except the motherboard
>> and see if the cpu fan comes on and stays on.
>>
>> If it does, plug the hard drive in and see if it will boot
>> with just the motherboard and hard drive connected etc.
>
> Thanks to you and all who responded.
>
> My original post asserted that I wasn't an engineer. True. But I
> solved the problem with your advice above, thinking systematically like
> an engineer. I disconnected the power supply and connected everything
> one by one, and the computer is now fully functional. From a little
> research I did, I think my issue was that I'd connected the 3.5" floppy
> power incorrectly or partially.
>
AHHH the Ole floppy power connector woes...damn stupid
connector.......................
AFA PSUs go have a 6 year old codegen (touted the worst) still going
strong and a Antec that died in 3 months.
IOW its a crap shoot...
ProfGene
did was fry the power supply and after that was replace all worked well
but perhaps yours did damage to some of the other components, the mother
board or the other cards. Check all your connections from the cast to
the motherboard and from the drives to the mother board and from the
powr to the motherboard and to the drives. Make sure the RAM is seated
properly. There is no real guessing what happened It could have been a
power cord gone bad or a power surge.
ProfGene
Blinky the Shark
> I have had a powers supply smoke because the cord went bad but all it
> did was fry the power supply and after that was replace all worked well
> but perhaps yours did damage to some of the other components, the mother
> board or the other cards. Check all your connections from the cast to
> the motherboard and from the drives to the mother board and from the
> powr to the motherboard and to the drives. Make sure the RAM is seated
> properly. There is no real guessing what happened It could have been a
> power cord gone bad or a power surge
Isn't it more likely that (in your case, not the OP's) the PSU borked
and drew too much power for a split second, frying the AC cord -- than
the other way around?
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Mhzjunkie
> ProfGene wrote:
>
>> I have had a powers supply smoke because the cord went bad but all it
>> did was fry the power supply and after that was replace all worked
>> well but perhaps yours did damage to some of the other components,
>> the mother board or the other cards. Check all your connections from
>> the cast to the motherboard and from the drives to the mother board
>> and from the powr to the motherboard and to the drives. Make sure
>> the RAM is seated properly. There is no real guessing what happened
>> It could have been a power cord gone bad or a power surge
>
> Isn't it more likely that (in your case, not the OP's) the PSU borked
> and drew too much power for a split second, frying the AC cord -- than
> the other way around?
http://img81.imageshack.us/my.php?image=teslacoilsparks5fu4.jpg
--
Mhzjunkie
1 PRINT "Windows XP ERROR"
GOTO 1
END
Samue...@gmail.com
I would have to agree with Dave, After having a computer built for me
the power supply died on me about 1 year later. The burning smell and
everything that goes with it including entire computer shutting down .
After going to Store and buyng a new 400 Watt power supply, I asked how
a new power supply could fail in only 1 year. He replied it was
probably a cheap one if it was built in a retail store as some try to
cut corners and save money. I installed the new 60.00 power supply and
everthing worked fine...I was just lucky the MB or no other components
were fried.
David Matthew Wood
> Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
>
> 1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw), often shortly after leaving
> the factory
> 2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other components
> with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power supplies kill
> motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>
> Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect that the
> first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out with it. The second
> one can't even power itself, apparently.
>
> It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that often spending an
> extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power supply can save a complete rebuild,
> costing hundreds of bucks. -Dave
Actually, I'm sure the power supply he bought from the store is
perfectly fine. Don't forget about "power good"! If the power supply
doesn't see this, it will not stay on. That is how all ATX power
supplies are designed, and it is indeed built-in component protection.
If anything is shorting out (as could very well be the case here, since
his first power supply fried something), it will shut down a working
power supply.
Larry Crites
the power cord and unplug it. In the OP, the poster said that he used the
Windows shutdown, etc. PULL THE PLUG!
Larry
Behold Beware believe
"Plato" <|@|.|> wrote in message
news:44f2461f$0$505$bb4e...@newscene.com...
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Penn...@derrymaine.gov
Good link on the Power Good Signal
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/power/sup/funcPowerGood-c.html
and how "Some extremely el-cheapo power supplies may "fake" the Power
Good signal by just tying it to another +5 V line."
Rod Speed
>> Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
>> 1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw),
>> often shortly after leaving the factory
>> 2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other
>> components with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power
>> supplies kill motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>> Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect that
>> the first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out with it.
>> The second one can't even power itself, apparently.
>> It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that often
>> spending an extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power supply can
>> save a complete rebuild, costing hundreds of bucks. -Dave
> Actually, I'm sure the power supply he bought from the
> store is perfectly fine. Don't forget about "power good"!
> If the power supply doesn't see this, it will not stay on.
You've got that backwards, its PROVIDED by the
power supply, not observed by the power supply.
> That is how all ATX power supplies are designed,
Nope.
> and it is indeed built-in component protection. If anything is shorting
> out (as could very well be the case here, since his first power supply
> fried something), it will shut down a working power supply.
Different issue entirely to the power good line.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>
> >> Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
>
> >> 1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw),
> >> often shortly after leaving the factory
> >> 2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other
> >> components with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power
> >> supplies kill motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>
> >> Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect that
> >> the first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out with it.
> >> The second one can't even power itself, apparently.
>
> >> It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that often
> >> spending an extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power supply can
> >> save a complete rebuild, costing hundreds of bucks. -Dave
>
> > Actually, I'm sure the power supply he bought from the
> > store is perfectly fine. Don't forget about "power good"!
> > If the power supply doesn't see this, it will not stay on.
>
> You've got that backwards, its PROVIDED by the
> power supply, not observed by the power supply.
It works both ways. Yes, it is provided by the power supply, and yes,
it is there to prevent the motherboard from starting up before the power
supply stabilizes.
However, on some power supplies, if there is a power surge or any other
issue (which can be caused by a fried component on the motherboard),
"Power Good" will also shut down the power supply if it malfunctions.
David Matthew Wood
Penn...@DerryMaine.Gov wrote:
Yes, and while it doesn't directly have anything to do with Power Good,
such power supplies don't provide any protection either. If you try to
fire up a GOOD supply and it doesn't observe the correct loads (either
from not being properly connected or from something that is shorting),
it will shut down in order to prevent damage since it is bad for a power
supply to run without a load. Same goes with amps. If you power up an
amp and crank the volume without speakers attached, it will either a, go
into thermal shut down, or b, self-destruct.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>>> Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
>>>> 1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw),
>>>> often shortly after leaving the factory
>>>> 2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other
>>>> components with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power
>>>> supplies kill motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>>>> Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect
>>>> that the first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out
>>>> with it. The second one can't even power itself, apparently.
>>>> It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that
>>>> often spending an extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power
>>>> supply can save a complete rebuild, costing hundreds of bucks.
>>> Actually, I'm sure the power supply he bought from the
>>> store is perfectly fine. Don't forget about "power good"!
>>> If the power supply doesn't see this, it will not stay on.
>> You've got that backwards, its PROVIDED by the
>> power supply, not observed by the power supply.
> It works both ways.
Nope, its an output FROM the power supply, not an input TO the power supply.
> Yes, it is provided by the power supply, and yes, it is there to prevent
> the motherboard from starting up before the power supply stabilizes.
Nothing like what you originally said.
> However, on some power supplies, if there is a power
> surge or any other issue (which can be caused by a
> fried component on the motherboard), "Power Good"
> will also shut down the power supply if it malfunctions.
Nope, again, its an output FROM the power supply and the power
supply is supposed to drop the power good signal if something has
gone bad power wise, mainly so the motherboard can restart after
a glitch that has seen the power supply shut down and then start again.
The power supply doesnt even notice a fried component
on the motherboard unless that produces a higher than
allowed current on one of the rails it produces.
Rod Speed
> Penn...@DerryMaine.Gov wrote
>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>>> Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
>>>> 1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw), often shortly after
>>>> leaving the factory
>>>> 2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other
>>>> components
>>>> with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power supplies
>>>> kill motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>>>> Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect
>>>> that the first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out
>>>> with it. The second one can't even power itself, apparently.
>>>> It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that
>>>> often spending an extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power
>>>> supply can save a complete rebuild, costing hundreds of bucks.
>>> Actually, I'm sure the power supply he bought from the store is
>>> perfectly fine. Don't forget about "power good"! If the power
>>> supply doesn't see this, it will not stay on. That is how all ATX
>>> power supplies are designed, and it is indeed built-in component
>>> protection. If anything is shorting out (as could very well be the
>>> case here, since his first power supply fried something), it will
>>> shut down a working power supply.
>> Good link on the Power Good Signal
>> http://www.pcguide.com/ref/power/sup/funcPowerGood-c.html
>> and how "Some extremely el-cheapo power supplies may "fake"
>> the Power Good signal by just tying it to another +5 V line."
> Yes, and while it doesn't directly have anything to do with Power
> Good, such power supplies don't provide any protection either.
You dont know that on that ANY claim.
> If you try to fire up a GOOD supply and it doesn't observe the correct
> loads (either from not being properly connected or from something that
> is shorting), it will shut down in order to prevent damage
Yes. But that is true even with cheap power supplys too.
Where they mostly fail is shutting down properly when the power supply fails.
> since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
Oh bullshit.
> Same goes with amps.
Nope, completely different.
> If you power up an amp and crank the volume without speakers attached,
> it will either a, go into thermal shut down, or b, self-destruct.
Utterly mangled all over again.
DaveW
the problem that if the PSU fails it usually burns out the motherboard too.
High end PSU's usually do NOT do that; they include built in protection
circuits.
--
DaveW
----------------
"." <d...@dot.not> wrote in message
news:dot-436AD8.1...@syrcnyrdrs-02-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
What, that cheap POS power supplies don't shut down right away if
something is shorting? Well lets see. I have some sitting around that
will not power up at all because something in the machine shorted them
out. I have others sitting around that still power up and work just
fine after being shorted out, because they shut down right away before
damage was done.
>
> > If you try to fire up a GOOD supply and it doesn't observe the correct
> > loads (either from not being properly connected or from something that
> > is shorting), it will shut down in order to prevent damage
>
> Yes. But that is true even with cheap power supplys too.
>
> Where they mostly fail is shutting down properly when the power supply fails.
Shutting down before damage is done you mean. I've witnessed both.
A, something will short out and PS will smoke.
or
B, something will short out and PS will turn off. In which case, after
dealing with whatever caused the short, the power supply will come to
life and work just fine.
>
> > since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>
> Oh bullshit.
Oh really? Why don't you try it then. Force a cheap power supply on
and let it run for a while without a load. See what happens.
>
> > Same goes with amps.
>
> Nope, completely different.
>
> > If you power up an amp and crank the volume without speakers attached,
> > it will either a, go into thermal shut down, or b, self-destruct.
>
> Utterly mangled all over again.
Again...oh really? Take a high current amplifier, give it an audio
feed, disconnect anything that will create a load on the outputs, crank
the levels, and see what happens.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> > Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>
> >>>> Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
>
> >>>> 1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw),
> >>>> often shortly after leaving the factory
> >>>> 2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other
> >>>> components with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power
> >>>> supplies kill motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>
> >>>> Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect
> >>>> that the first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out
> >>>> with it. The second one can't even power itself, apparently.
>
> >>>> It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that
> >>>> often spending an extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power
> >>>> supply can save a complete rebuild, costing hundreds of bucks.
>
> >>> Actually, I'm sure the power supply he bought from the
> >>> store is perfectly fine. Don't forget about "power good"!
> >>> If the power supply doesn't see this, it will not stay on.
>
> >> You've got that backwards, its PROVIDED by the
> >> power supply, not observed by the power supply.
>
> > It works both ways.
>
> Nope, its an output FROM the power supply, not an input TO the power supply.
It doesn't matter. Some supplies monitor that load. I have quite a few
that will shut down if load on PG does not exist.
>
> > Yes, it is provided by the power supply, and yes, it is there to prevent
> > the motherboard from starting up before the power supply stabilizes.
>
> Nothing like what you originally said.
No, I'm half agreeing with you about what power good is there for.
>
> > However, on some power supplies, if there is a power
> > surge or any other issue (which can be caused by a
> > fried component on the motherboard), "Power Good"
> > will also shut down the power supply if it malfunctions.
>
> Nope, again, its an output FROM the power supply and the power
> supply is supposed to drop the power good signal if something has
> gone bad power wise, mainly so the motherboard can restart after
> a glitch that has seen the power supply shut down and then start again.
And some supplies shut down completely. I have a few sitting right here
that will do that.
>
> The power supply doesnt even notice a fried component
> on the motherboard unless that produces a higher than
> allowed current on one of the rails it produces.
And now we go back to the original post where the OP said that his new
power supply would not stay on - not because it was bad, but because
there was an issue with something it was powering up. As it turned out,
once he cleared up that issue, all was well.
Rod Speed
Nope, that they dont have ANY protection.
> Well lets see. I have some sitting around that will not power
> up at all because something in the machine shorted them out.
You dont know that that is the reason why they died.
> I have others sitting around that still power up and
> work just fine after being shorted out, because they
> shut down right away before damage was done.
Plenty of cheap power supplys do that fine.
>>> If you try to fire up a GOOD supply and it doesn't observe the
>>> correct loads (either from not being properly connected or from
>>> something that is shorting), it will shut down in order to prevent damage
>> Yes. But that is true even with cheap power supplys too.
>> Where they mostly fail is shutting down
>> properly when the power supply fails.
> Shutting down before damage is done you mean.
Yep.
> I've witnessed both.
Yes, so you claim that they dont have ANY protection is just plain wrong.
> A, something will short out and PS will smoke.
> or
> B, something will short out and PS will turn off. In which
> case, after dealing with whatever caused the short, the
> power supply will come to life and work just fine.
Yep, and when that last is seen with a cheap power
supply, they must have had SOME protection.
>>> since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>> Oh bullshit.
> Oh really? Why don't you try it then.
Done that plenty of times thanks.
> Force a cheap power supply on and let it run
> for a while without a load. See what happens.
Nothing, thats what. It works fine when its used with a load.
>>> Same goes with amps.
>> Nope, completely different.
>>> If you power up an amp and crank the volume without speakers
>>> attached, it will either a, go into thermal shut down, or b, self-destruct.
>> Utterly mangled all over again.
> Again...oh really?
Fraid so.
> Take a high current amplifier, give it an audio feed,
> disconnect anything that will create a load on the
> outputs, crank the levels, and see what happens.
Nothing special with a properly designed amp.
Because it isnt hard to accidentially disconnect a speaker.
Rod Speed
>>> It works both ways.
> It doesn't matter.
Corse it does.
> Some supplies monitor that load.
The power good line isnt even a load.
> I have quite a few that will shut down if load on PG does not exist.
Fantasy. There are quite a few that will shut down if the
OUTPUT RAILS arent loaded, a different matter entirely.
>>> Yes, it is provided by the power supply, and yes,
>>> it is there to prevent the motherboard from starting
>>> up before the power supply stabilizes.
>> Nothing like what you originally said.
> No, I'm half agreeing with you about what power good is there for.
No you arent, you just said that some power
supplys monitor if that line is loaded. No they dont.
>>> However, on some power supplies, if there is a power
>>> surge or any other issue (which can be caused by a
>>> fried component on the motherboard), "Power Good"
>>> will also shut down the power supply if it malfunctions.
>> Nope, again, its an output FROM the power supply and the power
>> supply is supposed to drop the power good signal if something has
>> gone bad power wise, mainly so the motherboard can restart after
>> a glitch that has seen the power supply shut down and then start again.
> And some supplies shut down completely.
Different matter entirely.
Yes, some do need to be unplugged from the mains to reset themselves.
> I have a few sitting right here that will do that.
>> The power supply doesnt even notice a fried component
>> on the motherboard unless that produces a higher than
>> allowed current on one of the rails it produces.
> And now we go back to the original post where the OP said that his
> new power supply would not stay on - not because it was bad, but
> because there was an issue with something it was powering up.
Yes, but that had nothing to do with the power good line.
> As it turned out, once he cleared up that issue, all was well.
Yes, but thats irrelevant to YOUR claims about the power good line.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well lets see. I have some sitting around that will not power
> > up at all because something in the machine shorted them out.
>
> You dont know that that is the reason why they died.
And do you know this exactly? I've seen it happen firsthand.
>
> > I have others sitting around that still power up and
> > work just fine after being shorted out, because they
> > shut down right away before damage was done.
>
> Plenty of cheap power supplys do that fine.
Maybe, but not as likely as it would be if it weren't a power supply
where corners were cut in making it.
> >>> If you try to fire up a GOOD supply and it doesn't observe the
> >>> correct loads (either from not being properly connected or from
> >>> something that is shorting), it will shut down in order to prevent damage
>
> >> Yes. But that is true even with cheap power supplys too.
>
> >> Where they mostly fail is shutting down
> >> properly when the power supply fails.
>
> > Shutting down before damage is done you mean.
>
> Yep.
>
> > I've witnessed both.
>
> Yes, so you claim that they dont have ANY protection is just plain wrong.
I was replying to an article that mentioned how some skimp on PG and
just supply a normal 5v lead instead. If a power supply is built like
that, then it's very likely corners were cut in other areas too,
including the protection circuitry.
> >>> since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>
> >> Oh bullshit.
>
> > Oh really? Why don't you try it then.
>
> Done that plenty of times thanks.
Consider yourself lucky then.
> >>> Same goes with amps.
>
> >> Nope, completely different.
>
> >>> If you power up an amp and crank the volume without speakers
> >>> attached, it will either a, go into thermal shut down, or b,
> >>> self-destruct.
>
> >> Utterly mangled all over again.
>
> > Again...oh really?
>
> Fraid so.
>
> > Take a high current amplifier, give it an audio feed,
> > disconnect anything that will create a load on the
> > outputs, crank the levels, and see what happens.
>
> Nothing special with a properly designed amp.
All amps come with manuals that say to NEVER operate them without a
proper load. There are reasons for this.
>
> Because it isnt hard to accidentially disconnect a speaker.
Again, consider yourself lucky. Either you weren't running much power
through this thing, or you caught it in a short time - or you weren't
running the amp much beyond 20% of its capacity with a constant signal
running through it.
Rod Speed
>>> Well lets see. I have some sitting around that will not power
>>> up at all because something in the machine shorted them out.
>> You dont know that that is the reason why they died.
> And do you know this exactly?
I know that you cant be sure why they have failed.
> I've seen it happen firsthand.
Or assumed that they got killed by the machine shorting them out
when they may have died and killed what is powered from them.
That last isnt that uncommon with cheap power supplys.
>>> I have others sitting around that still power up and
>>> work just fine after being shorted out, because they
>>> shut down right away before damage was done.
>> Plenty of cheap power supplys do that fine.
> Maybe,
No maybe about it.
> but not as likely as it would be if it weren't a power
> supply where corners were cut in making it.
Wrong, there arent many so badly designed that they
dont shut down when one of the rails is shorted.
Plenty more fail and kill what is powered by the power supply.
>>>>> If you try to fire up a GOOD supply and it doesn't observe the
>>>>> correct loads (either from not being properly connected or from
>>>>> something that is shorting), it will shut down in order to
>>>>> prevent damage
>>>> Yes. But that is true even with cheap power supplys too.
>>>> Where they mostly fail is shutting down
>>>> properly when the power supply fails.
>>> Shutting down before damage is done you mean.
>> Yep.
>>> I've witnessed both.
>> Yes, so your claim that they dont have ANY protection is just plain wrong.
> I was replying to an article that mentioned how some
> skimp on PG and just supply a normal 5v lead instead.
Yes, but that isnt necessarily the end of the world
if the design ensures that that comes up last.
> If a power supply is built like that, then it's very likely corners
> were cut in other areas too, including the protection circuitry.
Not necessarily if the supply ensures that that 5V rail comes up last.
And you claimed that they dont have ANY protection. Even
the cheapest power supply have SOME protection even if
they dont necessarily adequately protect against the power
supply over voltaging some of the rails as it dies.
Essentially because that sort of independant protection against
any output rail going out of spec costs more to provide.
>>>>> since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>>>> Oh bullshit.
>>> Oh really? Why don't you try it then.
>> Done that plenty of times thanks.
> Consider yourself lucky then.
Nope, I know that wont kill a power supply.
>>>>> Same goes with amps.
>>>> Nope, completely different.
>>>>> If you power up an amp and crank the volume without speakers
>>>>> attached, it will either a, go into thermal shut down, or b,
>>>>> self-destruct.
>>>> Utterly mangled all over again.
>>> Again...oh really?
>> Fraid so.
>>> Take a high current amplifier, give it an audio feed,
>>> disconnect anything that will create a load on the
>>> outputs, crank the levels, and see what happens.
>> Nothing special with a properly designed amp.
> All amps come with manuals that say to NEVER operate
> them without a proper load. There are reasons for this.
Doesnt mean they will be killed by the accidental disconnection of a speaker.
>> Because it isnt hard to accidentially disconnect a speaker.
> Again, consider yourself lucky.
No thanks, I know that wont kill a properly designed amp.
> Either you weren't running much power through this thing,
> or you caught it in a short time - or you weren't running the
> amp much beyond 20% of its capacity with a constant signal
> running through it.
Easy to claim. I manage to fry the speakers
by over driving them and the amp was fine.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> > Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>
> >>> Well lets see. I have some sitting around that will not power
> >>> up at all because something in the machine shorted them out.
>
> >> You dont know that that is the reason why they died.
>
> > And do you know this exactly?
>
> I know that you cant be sure why they have failed.
>
> > I've seen it happen firsthand.
>
> Or assumed that they got killed by the machine shorting them out
> when they may have died and killed what is powered from them.
> That last isnt that uncommon with cheap power supplys.
Um.... no. Many years ago, I overestimated the space between the bottom
of a hard drive and the metal frame of the case. Turned machine on,
drive control board shorted and smoked. Because of this short, power
supply also smoked. How is that an assumption exactly?
And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power connector which turned
out to be shorted. Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half a
second, and turned itself off again. Short was cleared, power was fired
up again, and all was well.
>
> >>> I have others sitting around that still power up and
> >>> work just fine after being shorted out, because they
> >>> shut down right away before damage was done.
>
> >> Plenty of cheap power supplys do that fine.
>
> > Maybe,
>
> No maybe about it.
Plenty maybe about it, it all depends on design.
>
> > but not as likely as it would be if it weren't a power
> > supply where corners were cut in making it.
>
> Wrong, there arent many so badly designed that they
> dont shut down when one of the rails is shorted.
I had one smoke due to this.
>
> Plenty more fail and kill what is powered by the power supply.
Yes, and the better designed supplies shut down before this happens -
just as the better designs shut off in time to save themselves if they
are shorted.
> > I was replying to an article that mentioned how some
> > skimp on PG and just supply a normal 5v lead instead.
>
> Yes, but that isnt necessarily the end of the world
> if the design ensures that that comes up last.
>
> > If a power supply is built like that, then it's very likely corners
> > were cut in other areas too, including the protection circuitry.
>
> Not necessarily if the supply ensures that that 5V rail comes up last.
And not all of them do.
> And you claimed that they dont have ANY protection. Even
> the cheapest power supply have SOME protection even if
> they dont necessarily adequately protect against the power
> supply over voltaging some of the rails as it dies.
-sigh- protection as in protecting the power supply itself, which is
what I meant. In other words, its ability to shut itself down BEFORE
damage is done to the supply, which was the original case of this
thread. The OP's power supply died. He went to the store and bought
another one, and put it in his machine. He went to fire it up, it shut
down right afterwards. The OP then corrected a wiring problem, fired it
up again without changing any components, and all was good.
If I had wanted to go any further than that, I could have just said that
the fuse in your mains fuse box IS the protection - not against
equipment, but against fire... but perhaps I should have stated this
anyway.
>
> Essentially because that sort of independant protection against
> any output rail going out of spec costs more to provide.
yes..
>
> >>>>> since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>
> >>>> Oh bullshit.
>
> >>> Oh really? Why don't you try it then.
>
> >> Done that plenty of times thanks.
>
> > Consider yourself lucky then.
>
> Nope, I know that wont kill a power supply.
Then why do the manufacturers of these very supplies advise against this?
>
> >>>>> Same goes with amps.
>
> >>>> Nope, completely different.
>
> >>>>> If you power up an amp and crank the volume without speakers
> >>>>> attached, it will either a, go into thermal shut down, or b,
> >>>>> self-destruct.
>
> >>>> Utterly mangled all over again.
>
> >>> Again...oh really?
>
> >> Fraid so.
>
> >>> Take a high current amplifier, give it an audio feed,
> >>> disconnect anything that will create a load on the
> >>> outputs, crank the levels, and see what happens.
>
> >> Nothing special with a properly designed amp.
>
> > All amps come with manuals that say to NEVER operate
> > them without a proper load. There are reasons for this.
>
> Doesnt mean they will be killed by the accidental disconnection of a speaker.
Accidental disconnection of a speaker, which is usually caught shortly
afterwards since you're now not hearing sound out of this speaker. If
this condition were allowed to continue and you ran the amp at constant
high power, it will eventually kill the amp - if it doesn't trip the
protection circuits first!
> >> Because it isnt hard to accidentially disconnect a speaker.
>
> > Again, consider yourself lucky.
>
> No thanks, I know that wont kill a properly designed amp.
Well since you seem to know more than the people who made these amps,
all of whom say NEVER run an amp without a load...
>
> > Either you weren't running much power through this thing,
> > or you caught it in a short time - or you weren't running the
> > amp much beyond 20% of its capacity with a constant signal
> > running through it.
>
> Easy to claim. I manage to fry the speakers
> by over driving them and the amp was fine.
And while these speakers are being over driven, you are still driving
them and thus the amp is seeing a load! How long after completely
melting the speaker coils, have you run this amp exactly? How long have
you let it run under constant high power without a load? Do you
actually test this by turning the volume up higher and higher AFTER you
manage to blow the speakers?
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>>>> Well lets see. I have some sitting around that will not power
>>>>> up at all because something in the machine shorted them out.
>>>> You dont know that that is the reason why they died.
>>> And do you know this exactly?
>> I know that you cant be sure why they have failed.
>>> I've seen it happen firsthand.
>> Or assumed that they got killed by the machine shorting them
>> out when they may have died and killed what is powered from
>> them. That last isnt that uncommon with cheap power supplys.
> Um.... no.
We'll see...
> Many years ago, I overestimated the space between the
> bottom of a hard drive and the metal frame of the case.
> Turned machine on, drive control board shorted and
> smoked. Because of this short, power supply also
> smoked. How is that an assumption exactly?
That is just one example, you butcher.
> And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power
> connector which turned out to be shorted.
> Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half
> a second, and turned itself off again. Short was
> cleared, power was fired up again, and all was well.
Nothing at all unusual about, thats the way its sposed to work.
>>>>> I have others sitting around that still power up and
>>>>> work just fine after being shorted out, because they
>>>>> shut down right away before damage was done.
>>>> Plenty of cheap power supplys do that fine.
>>> Maybe,
>> No maybe about it.
> Plenty maybe about it, it all depends on design.
Nope, most cheap supplys handle that fine.
YOU claimed that they didnt have ANY protection.
That is clearly just plain wrong when they handle a shorted output fine.
>>> but not as likely as it would be if it weren't a power
>>> supply where corners were cut in making it.
>> Wrong, there arent many so badly designed that they
>> dont shut down when one of the rails is shorted.
> I had one smoke due to this.
The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'
No one ever claimed that no power supplys have ever failed
like that, what was being discussed was your stupid pig ignorant
claim that some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
>> Plenty more fail and kill what is powered by the power supply.
> Yes, and the better designed supplies shut down
> before this happens - just as the better designs shut
> off in time to save themselves if they are shorted.
Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> I was replying to an article that mentioned how some
>>> skimp on PG and just supply a normal 5v lead instead.
>> Yes, but that isnt necessarily the end of the world
>> if the design ensures that that comes up last.
>>> If a power supply is built like that, then it's very likely corners
>>> were cut in other areas too, including the protection circuitry.
>> Not necessarily if the supply ensures that that 5V rail comes up last.
> And not all of them do.
Bet you've never measure that.
>> And you claimed that they dont have ANY protection. Even
>> the cheapest power supply have SOME protection even if
>> they dont necessarily adequately protect against the power
>> supply over voltaging some of the rails as it dies.
> -sigh-
Heavy breathing aint gunna save your bacon.
> protection as in protecting the power
> supply itself, which is what I meant.
Still completely silly. If that was actually the case they wouldnt
last long as there are always some spikes on the mains.
> In other words, its ability to shut itself down BEFORE damage
> is done to the supply, which was the original case of this thread.
You made a general claim about el cheapo power supplys.
> The OP's power supply died. He went to the store and bought
> another one, and put it in his machine. He went to fire it up, it
> shut down right afterwards. The OP then corrected a wiring problem,
> fired it up again without changing any components, and all was good.
> If I had wanted to go any further than that, I could have just said that
> the fuse in your mains fuse box IS the protection - not against equipment,
> but against fire... but perhaps I should have stated this anyway.
Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
>> Essentially because that sort of independant protection against
>> any output rail going out of spec costs more to provide.
> yes..
>>>>>>> since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>>>>>> Oh bullshit.
>>>>> Oh really? Why don't you try it then.
>>>> Done that plenty of times thanks.
>>> Consider yourself lucky then.
>> Nope, I know that wont kill a power supply.
> Then why do the manufacturers of these
> very supplies advise against this?
They dont.
>>>>>>> Same goes with amps.
>>>>>> Nope, completely different.
>>>>>>> If you power up an amp and crank the volume without speakers
>>>>>>> attached, it will either a, go into thermal shut down, or b,
>>>>>>> self-destruct.
>>>>>> Utterly mangled all over again.
>>>>> Again...oh really?
>>>> Fraid so.
>>>>> Take a high current amplifier, give it an audio feed,
>>>>> disconnect anything that will create a load on the
>>>>> outputs, crank the levels, and see what happens.
>>>> Nothing special with a properly designed amp.
>>> All amps come with manuals that say to NEVER operate
>>> them without a proper load. There are reasons for this.
>> Doesnt mean they will be killed by the accidental disconnection of a speaker.
> Accidental disconnection of a speaker, which is usually caught shortly
> afterwards since you're now not hearing sound out of this speaker.
Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim of yours.
> If this condition were allowed to continue and you ran the
> amp at constant high power, it will eventually kill the amp
Not a fucking clue, as always.
> - if it doesn't trip the protection circuits first!
Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>>>> Because it isnt hard to accidentially disconnect a speaker.
>>> Again, consider yourself lucky.
>> No thanks, I know that wont kill a properly designed amp.
> Well since you seem to know more than the people who made
> these amps, all of whom say NEVER run an amp without a load...
Another pig ignorant lie.
>>> Either you weren't running much power through this thing,
>>> or you caught it in a short time - or you weren't running the
>>> amp much beyond 20% of its capacity with a constant signal
>>> running through it.
>> Easy to claim. I manage to fry the speakers
>> by over driving them and the amp was fine.
> And while these speakers are being over driven, you
> are still driving them and thus the amp is seeing a load!
Pity about after they had died!!!
> How long after completely melting the speaker
> coils, have you run this amp exactly?
Took a while to notice that one side had died.
> How long have you let it run under constant high power without
> a load? Do you actually test this by turning the volume up higher
> and higher AFTER you manage to blow the speakers?
Didnt need to, your claim is pig ignorant drivel. The reason the
speakers got fried was because the volume was WAY up.
John Doe
Path: newssvr13.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsswing.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,24hoursupport.helpdesk
Subject: Re: Power supply fried, replaced it, computer won't start
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:23:59 +1000
Lines: 226
Message-ID: <4lij0dF1ovqjU1 individual.net>
References: <dot-436AD8.19300027082006 syrcnyrdrs-02-ge0.nyroc.rr.com> <44f23d03$0$97231$892e7fe2 authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> <nodmwood78-CB3EDD.12194928082006 news.verizon.net> <qie6f29oafqujv7o6k2elu45rko5ih1hpj 4ax.com> <nodmwood78-C5DD04.16282428082006 news.verizon.net> <4lh3pcF1s56rU2 individual.net> <nodmwood78-8D901D.20103828082006 news.verizon.net> <4lhh7lF1t9loU1 individual.net> <nodmwood78-D5F490.22401828082006 news.verizon.net> <4lhro4F1tin5U1 individual.net> <nodmwood78-FAED1B.05244029082006 news.verizon.net>
X-Trace: individual.net rsGMi/yE+HVLmkBtVXP9XQ4uouqTHFdwhC76/9vA/lAwM1XkE=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:474076 24hoursupport.helpdesk:1406968
David Matthew Wood <nodmwood78 verizonspam.net> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com> wrote
>> David Matthew Wood <nodmwood78 verizonspam.net> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com> wrote
>>>> David Matthew Wood <nodmwood78 verizonspam.net> wrote
Rod Speed
John Doe <jd...@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
> Troll
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> >> Or assumed that they got killed by the machine shorting them
> >> out when they may have died and killed what is powered from
> >> them. That last isnt that uncommon with cheap power supplys.
>
> > Um.... no.
>
> We'll see...
>
> > Many years ago, I overestimated the space between the
> > bottom of a hard drive and the metal frame of the case.
> > Turned machine on, drive control board shorted and
> > smoked. Because of this short, power supply also
> > smoked. How is that an assumption exactly?
>
> That is just one example, you butcher.
An example, nonetheless. I can give you a few more if need be.
>
> > And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power
> > connector which turned out to be shorted.
> > Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half
> > a second, and turned itself off again. Short was
> > cleared, power was fired up again, and all was well.
>
> Nothing at all unusual about, thats the way its sposed to work.
And yet it isn't as reliable on poor cheap designs - some of which will
just blow.
> > Plenty maybe about it, it all depends on design.
>
> Nope, most cheap supplys handle that fine.
>
> YOU claimed that they didnt have ANY protection.
>
> That is clearly just plain wrong when they handle a shorted output fine.
The ones that handled shorted outputs were not the cheapest power
supplies either...
>
> >>> but not as likely as it would be if it weren't a power
> >>> supply where corners were cut in making it.
>
> >> Wrong, there arent many so badly designed that they
> >> dont shut down when one of the rails is shorted.
>
> > I had one smoke due to this.
>
> The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'
Whatever.
>
> No one ever claimed that no power supplys have ever failed
> like that, what was being discussed was your stupid pig ignorant
> claim that some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
And some don't, unless you count the protection that only serves to
prevent fires and does nothing to save the equipment.
> > Yes, and the better designed supplies shut down
> > before this happens - just as the better designs shut
> > off in time to save themselves if they are shorted.
>
> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
> some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
Protection against equipment damage is what I meant. I'm sorry I didn't
state that correctly.
> > protection as in protecting the power
> > supply itself, which is what I meant.
>
> Still completely silly. If that was actually the case they wouldnt
> last long as there are always some spikes on the mains.
No, because the spike on the mains is within tolerance.
Saying it's not, is like saying a fuse that is properly rated will blow
right away on an initial normal start up surge caused by heavy equipment
- which it should not.
>
> > In other words, its ability to shut itself down BEFORE damage
> > is done to the supply, which was the original case of this thread.
>
> You made a general claim about el cheapo power supplys.
Ok, I shall reword it next time.
> > The OP's power supply died. He went to the store and bought
> > another one, and put it in his machine. He went to fire it up, it
> > shut down right afterwards. The OP then corrected a wiring problem,
> > fired it up again without changing any components, and all was good.
> > If I had wanted to go any further than that, I could have just said that
> > the fuse in your mains fuse box IS the protection - not against equipment,
> > but against fire... but perhaps I should have stated this anyway.
>
> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
> some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
More childish insults ignored.
> > Then why do the manufacturers of these
> > very supplies advise against this?
>
> They dont.
Some do. It depends on the design. That is why in general (and for the
purpose of 24hoursupport.helpdesk), I say don't attempt it for a long
period of time without knowing the design.
> > Accidental disconnection of a speaker, which is usually caught shortly
> > afterwards since you're now not hearing sound out of this speaker.
>
> Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim of yours.
How is it irrelevant when the change of damage occurring is minimized if
this situation is caught early enough?
> > If this condition were allowed to continue and you ran the
> > amp at constant high power, it will eventually kill the amp
>
> Not a fucking clue, as always.
Even more childish insults ignored.
> > - if it doesn't trip the protection circuits first!
>
> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from attempting to run
it without a load - or in the case of a short!
> > How long after completely melting the speaker
> > coils, have you run this amp exactly?
>
> Took a while to notice that one side had died.
Lucky you didn't blow the output transformer.
>
> > How long have you let it run under constant high power without
> > a load? Do you actually test this by turning the volume up higher
> > and higher AFTER you manage to blow the speakers?
>
> Didnt need to, your claim is pig ignorant drivel. The reason the
> speakers got fried was because the volume was WAY up.
And once the speakers got fried, you continued to run it in this
condition for several minutes afterwards, running the amp at capacity?
Most people don't..
Rod Speed
>>>> Or assumed that they got killed by the machine shorting them
>>>> out when they may have died and killed what is powered from
>>>> them. That last isnt that uncommon with cheap power supplys.
>>> Um.... no.
>> We'll see...
>>> Many years ago, I overestimated the space between the
>>> bottom of a hard drive and the metal frame of the case.
>>> Turned machine on, drive control board shorted and
>>> smoked. Because of this short, power supply also
>>> smoked. How is that an assumption exactly?
>> That is just one example, you butcher.
> An example, nonetheless. I can give you a few more if need be.
Pity that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power
>>> connector which turned out to be shorted.
>>> Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half
>>> a second, and turned itself off again. Short was
>>> cleared, power was fired up again, and all was well.
>> Nothing at all unusual about, thats the way its sposed to work.
> And yet it isn't as reliable on poor cheap
> designs - some of which will just blow.
Fuck all in fact.
And that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> Plenty maybe about it, it all depends on design.
>> Nope, most cheap supplys handle that fine.
>> YOU claimed that they didnt have ANY protection.
>> That is clearly just plain wrong when they handle a shorted output fine.
> The ones that handled shorted outputs were
> not the cheapest power supplies either...
Plenty of the cheapest ones handle that fine.
>>>>> but not as likely as it would be if it weren't a power
>>>>> supply where corners were cut in making it.
>>>> Wrong, there arent many so badly designed that they
>>>> dont shut down when one of the rails is shorted.
>>> I had one smoke due to this.
>> The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'
> Whatever.
>> No one ever claimed that no power supplys have ever failed like
>> that, what was being discussed was your stupid pig ignorant
>> claim that some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
> And some don't, unless you count the protection that only
> serves to prevent fires and does nothing to save the equipment.
Pity that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> Yes, and the better designed supplies shut down
>>> before this happens - just as the better designs shut
>>> off in time to save themselves if they are shorted.
>> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
>> some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
> Protection against equipment damage is what I meant.
Pity that claim is STILL just plain wrong.
> I'm sorry I didn't state that correctly.
>>> protection as in protecting the power
>>> supply itself, which is what I meant.
>> Still completely silly. If that was actually the case they wouldnt
>> last long as there are always some spikes on the mains.
> No, because the spike on the mains is within tolerance.
Mindlessly silly.
> Saying it's not, is like saying a fuse that is properly
> rated will blow right away on an initial normal start up
> surge caused by heavy equipment - which it should not.
Nothing like in fact. To survive normal mains spikes,
THE SUPPLY MUST HAVE SOME PROTECTION.
>>> In other words, its ability to shut itself down BEFORE damage
>>> is done to the supply, which was the original case of this thread.
>> You made a general claim about el cheapo power supplys.
> Ok, I shall reword it next time.
Still just plain wrong in the latest version.
>>> The OP's power supply died. He went to the store and bought
>>> another one, and put it in his machine. He went to fire it up, it
>>> shut down right afterwards. The OP then corrected a wiring problem,
>>> fired it up again without changing any components, and all was good.
>>> If I had wanted to go any further than that, I could have just said
>>> that the fuse in your mains fuse box IS the protection - not
>>> against equipment, but against fire... but perhaps I should have
>>> stated this anyway.
>> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
>> some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
> More childish insults ignored.
You didnt ignore than, you commented on them, childishly.
>>> Then why do the manufacturers of these
>>> very supplies advise against this?
>> They dont.
> Some do.
No they dont.
> It depends on the design.
No it doesnt.
> That is why in general (and for the purpose of 24hoursupport.helpdesk),
> I say don't attempt it for a long period of time without knowing the design.
You have always been, and always will be completely and utterly irrelevant.
What you might or might not say in spades.
>>> Accidental disconnection of a speaker, which is usually caught shortly
>>> afterwards since you're now not hearing sound out of this speaker.
>> Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim of yours.
> How is it irrelevant when the change of damage occurring
> is minimized if this situation is caught early enough?
You never said anything about how long in the original.
You are now desperately attempting to bullshit your way out
of your predicament and are fooling absolutely no one at all.
>>> If this condition were allowed to continue and you ran the
>>> amp at constant high power, it will eventually kill the amp
>> Not a fucking clue, as always.
> Even more childish insults ignored.
You didnt ignore than, you commented on them, childishly.
>>> - if it doesn't trip the protection circuits first!
>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
There are no 'output transformers'
And any decent designed amp has that protection to prevent any
damage when the inevitable happens, the speakers get disconnected.
>>> How long after completely melting the speaker
>>> coils, have you run this amp exactly?
>> Took a while to notice that one side had died.
> Lucky you didn't blow the output transformer.
There are no 'output transformers'
>>> How long have you let it run under constant high power without
>>> a load? Do you actually test this by turning the volume up higher
>>> and higher AFTER you manage to blow the speakers?
>> Didnt need to, your claim is pig ignorant drivel. The reason the
>> speakers got fried was because the volume was WAY up.
> And once the speakers got fried, you continued to run it in this
> condition for several minutes afterwards, running the amp at capacity?
Yep.
> Most people don't..
Irrelevant to what proves your claim is just plain wrong.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Many years ago, I overestimated the space between the
> >>> bottom of a hard drive and the metal frame of the case.
> >>> Turned machine on, drive control board shorted and
> >>> smoked. Because of this short, power supply also
> >>> smoked. How is that an assumption exactly?
>
> >> That is just one example, you butcher.
>
> > An example, nonetheless. I can give you a few more if need be.
>
> Pity that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
Not against equipment damage, no. Or else this one would not have
sparked and let out smoke and would have continued to run after the
short was removed.
Here, I'll rephrase it, because this is what I meant in the first place:
Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate protection against damage
from shorts.
There. Done.
>
> >>> And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power
> >>> connector which turned out to be shorted.
> >>> Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half
> >>> a second, and turned itself off again. Short was
> >>> cleared, power was fired up again, and all was well.
>
> >> Nothing at all unusual about, thats the way its sposed to work.
>
> > And yet it isn't as reliable on poor cheap
> > designs - some of which will just blow.
>
> Fuck all in fact.
>
> And that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
No, but a couple of blowed cheap power supplies does.
> >> No one ever claimed that no power supplys have ever failed like
> >> that, what was being discussed was your stupid pig ignorant
> >> claim that some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
>
> > And some don't, unless you count the protection that only
> > serves to prevent fires and does nothing to save the equipment.
>
> Pity that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
Ok, then I rephrase it. See above.
> >>> Yes, and the better designed supplies shut down
> >>> before this happens - just as the better designs shut
> >>> off in time to save themselves if they are shorted.
>
> >> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
> >> some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
>
> > Protection against equipment damage is what I meant.
>
> Pity that claim is STILL just plain wrong.
A couple cheap blown power supplies later....
> > I'm sorry I didn't state that correctly.
>
> >>> protection as in protecting the power
> >>> supply itself, which is what I meant.
>
> >> Still completely silly. If that was actually the case they wouldnt
> >> last long as there are always some spikes on the mains.
>
> > No, because the spike on the mains is within tolerance.
>
> Mindlessly silly.
>
> > Saying it's not, is like saying a fuse that is properly
> > rated will blow right away on an initial normal start up
> > surge caused by heavy equipment - which it should not.
>
> Nothing like in fact. To survive normal mains spikes,
> THE SUPPLY MUST HAVE SOME PROTECTION.
The spikes are within tolerance. Does a power supply always get
constant stable power? No, it does not. Does it always give constant
stable power? No, it does not. Voltage always fluctuates, and so
therefore, the protection circuitry has to be designed so that it does
not trip under these conditions provided that they are within tolerance.
But what does this have to do with a short circuit killing a power
supply, or tripping protection circuitry? Absolutely nothing.
>
> >>> In other words, its ability to shut itself down BEFORE damage
> >>> is done to the supply, which was the original case of this thread.
>
> >> You made a general claim about el cheapo power supplys.
>
> > Ok, I shall reword it next time.
>
> Still just plain wrong in the latest version.
Ok, then I'll re-reword it. SOME cheap power supplies don't have
adequate protection against damage from shorts.
DONE!
> >>> Then why do the manufacturers of these
> >>> very supplies advise against this?
>
> >> They dont.
>
> > Some do.
>
> No they dont.
>
> > It depends on the design.
>
> No it doesnt.
Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power supplies to run WITHOUT a
load - and yet, some won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
> >>> Accidental disconnection of a speaker, which is usually caught shortly
> >>> afterwards since you're now not hearing sound out of this speaker.
>
> >> Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim of yours.
>
> > How is it irrelevant when the change of damage occurring
> > is minimized if this situation is caught early enough?
>
> You never said anything about how long in the original.
Well I don't know about you, but if a speaker isn't working, I tend to
notice it right away and correct the problem long before it has any
chance to do any damage.
> >>> - if it doesn't trip the protection circuits first!
>
> >> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>
> > Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
> > attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>
> There are no 'output transformers'
Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
>
> And any decent designed amp has that protection to prevent any
> damage when the inevitable happens, the speakers get disconnected.
And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the amp is now NOT
running without a proper load, which is the exact opposite of your claim
that you've been running your amps on high power with no speaker
attached.
>
> >>> How long have you let it run under constant high power without
> >>> a load? Do you actually test this by turning the volume up higher
> >>> and higher AFTER you manage to blow the speakers?
>
> >> Didnt need to, your claim is pig ignorant drivel. The reason the
> >> speakers got fried was because the volume was WAY up.
>
> > And once the speakers got fried, you continued to run it in this
> > condition for several minutes afterwards, running the amp at capacity?
>
> Yep.
You just said the amp had protection circuitry. Had this been working
properly, the amp would have gotten shut down anyway. How is this
running an amp without a load?
Rod Speed
>>>>> Many years ago, I overestimated the space between the
>>>>> bottom of a hard drive and the metal frame of the case.
>>>>> Turned machine on, drive control board shorted and
>>>>> smoked. Because of this short, power supply also
>>>>> smoked. How is that an assumption exactly?
>>>> That is just one example, you butcher.
>>> An example, nonetheless. I can give you a few more if need be.
>> Pity that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
> Not against equipment damage, no. Or else this one
> would not have sparked and let out smoke and would
> have continued to run after the short was removed.
> Here, I'll rephrase it, because this is what I meant in the first place:
> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
> protection against damage from shorts.
> There. Done.
Nothing like your original.
>>>>> And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power
>>>>> connector which turned out to be shorted.
>>>>> Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half
>>>>> a second, and turned itself off again. Short was
>>>>> cleared, power was fired up again, and all was well.
>>>> Nothing at all unusual about, thats the way its sposed to work.
>>> And yet it isn't as reliable on poor cheap
>>> designs - some of which will just blow.
>> Fuck all in fact.
>> And that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
> No, but a couple of blowed cheap power supplies does.
Nope, not with your original stupid claim.
>>>> No one ever claimed that no power supplys have ever failed like
>>>> that, what was being discussed was your stupid pig ignorant
>>>> claim that some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> And some don't, unless you count the protection that only
>>> serves to prevent fires and does nothing to save the equipment.
>> Pity that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
> Ok, then I rephrase it. See above.
Nothing like your original. If you had said what you
are now saying, I wouldnt have even commented.
>>>>> Yes, and the better designed supplies shut down
>>>>> before this happens - just as the better designs shut
>>>>> off in time to save themselves if they are shorted.
>>>> Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim that
>>>> some cheap supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> Protection against equipment damage is what I meant.
>> Pity that claim is STILL just plain wrong.
> A couple cheap blown power supplies later....
Still says nothing useful what so ever about the stupid claim
that some cheap power supplys not having ANY protection
against equipment damage. There aint a single one that is
that bad, even tho there are certainly some that cant handle
a shorted rail, and others that cant protect against equipment
damage when the power supply itself fails.
>>> I'm sorry I didn't state that correctly.
>>>>> protection as in protecting the power
>>>>> supply itself, which is what I meant.
>>>> Still completely silly. If that was actually the case they wouldnt
>>>> last long as there are always some spikes on the mains.
>>> No, because the spike on the mains is within tolerance.
>> Mindlessly silly.
>>> Saying it's not, is like saying a fuse that is properly
>>> rated will blow right away on an initial normal start up
>>> surge caused by heavy equipment - which it should not.
>> Nothing like in fact. To survive normal mains spikes,
>> THE SUPPLY MUST HAVE SOME PROTECTION.
> The spikes are within tolerance.
There is no such animal.
> Does a power supply always get constant stable power?
> No, it does not. Does it always give constant stable power?
> No, it does not. Voltage always fluctuates, and so therefore,
> the protection circuitry has to be designed so that it does not
> trip under these conditions provided that they are within tolerance.
And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
> But what does this have to do with a short circuit killing a power
> supply, or tripping protection circuitry? Absolutely nothing.
Yep, it was just another stupid claim you made.
>>>>> In other words, its ability to shut itself down BEFORE damage
>>>>> is done to the supply, which was the original case of this thread.
>>>> You made a general claim about el cheapo power supplys.
>>> Ok, I shall reword it next time.
>> Still just plain wrong in the latest version.
> Ok, then I'll re-reword it. SOME cheap power supplies don't
> have adequate protection against damage from shorts.
> DONE!
If you'd actually said that, no one would have commented on that.
>>>>> Then why do the manufacturers of these
>>>>> very supplies advise against this?
>>>> They dont.
>>> Some do.
>> No they dont.
>>> It depends on the design.
>> No it doesnt.
> Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power supplies to run WITHOUT
> a load - and yet, some won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
Basically because its cheaper to design it
so that it needs some load to start properly.
>>>>> Accidental disconnection of a speaker, which is usually caught shortly
>>>>> afterwards since you're now not hearing sound out of this speaker.
>>>> Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim of yours.
>>> How is it irrelevant when the change of damage occurring
>>> is minimized if this situation is caught early enough?
>> You never said anything about how long in the original.
> Well I don't know about you, but if a speaker
> isn't working, I tend to notice it right away
Depends on whether you're even there to notice it.
> and correct the problem long before
> it has any chance to do any damage.
You may not notice that one channel
has died if you arent relatively close to it.
>>>>> - if it doesn't trip the protection circuits first!
>>>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>>> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
>> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>> There are no 'output transformers'
> Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
You never restricted your original claim to tube amps.
And those care least about no speakers anyway.
>> And any decent designed amp has that protection to prevent any
>> damage when the inevitable happens, the speakers get disconnected.
> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the amp is now NOT
> running without a proper load, which is the exact opposite of your claim
> that you've been running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>>>>> How long have you let it run under constant high power without
>>>>> a load? Do you actually test this by turning the volume up higher
>>>>> and higher AFTER you manage to blow the speakers?
>>>> Didnt need to, your claim is pig ignorant drivel. The reason
>>>> the speakers got fried was because the volume was WAY up.
>>> And once the speakers got fried, you continued to run it in this condition
>>> for several minutes afterwards, running the amp at capacity?
>> Yep.
> You just said the amp had protection circuitry. Had this been
> working properly, the amp would have gotten shut down anyway.
There is more than one way protection against that can be done.
It doesnt necessarily involve shutting down the amp.
> How is this running an amp without a load?
Keep desperately digging, you'll be out in china any day now.
David Matthew Wood
> > would not have sparked and let out smoke and would
> > have continued to run after the short was removed.
>
> > Here, I'll rephrase it, because this is what I meant in the first place:
>
> > Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
> > protection against damage from shorts.
>
> > There. Done.
>
> Nothing like your original.
In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection. If
you had followed the thread which is what I had been doing, "protection
against damaged from shorts" would have been assumed, as it is all in
context.
>
> >>>>> And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power
> >>>>> connector which turned out to be shorted.
> >>>>> Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half
> >>>>> a second, and turned itself off again. Short was
> >>>>> cleared, power was fired up again, and all was well.
>
> >>>> Nothing at all unusual about, thats the way its sposed to work.
>
> >>> And yet it isn't as reliable on poor cheap
> >>> designs - some of which will just blow.
>
> >> Fuck all in fact.
>
> >> And that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
> >> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>
> > No, but a couple of blowed cheap power supplies does.
>
> Nope, not with your original stupid claim.
Equipment damage should have been assumed.
> > A couple cheap blown power supplies later....
>
> Still says nothing useful what so ever about the stupid claim
> that some cheap power supplys not having ANY protection
> against equipment damage. There aint a single one that is
> that bad, even tho there are certainly some that cant handle
> a shorted rail, and others that cant protect against equipment
> damage when the power supply itself fails.
Blown power supply due to short: equipment damage.
Something connected to supply that is destroyed by supply: equipment
damage.
If this protection isn't good enough to prevent damage, then I don't
really consider it protection. Case in point, power supply that smoked
when it was shorted.
Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
> > The spikes are within tolerance.
>
> There is no such animal.
You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then. The rest
of the world isn't so lucky.
> > Does a power supply always get constant stable power?
> > No, it does not. Does it always give constant stable power?
> > No, it does not. Voltage always fluctuates, and so therefore,
> > the protection circuitry has to be designed so that it does not
> > trip under these conditions provided that they are within tolerance.
>
> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this has
nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>
> > But what does this have to do with a short circuit killing a power
> > supply, or tripping protection circuitry? Absolutely nothing.
>
> Yep, it was just another stupid claim you made.
No, you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with, when
that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
> > Ok, then I'll re-reword it. SOME cheap power supplies don't
> > have adequate protection against damage from shorts.
>
> > DONE!
>
> If you'd actually said that, no one would have commented on that.
Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
> > Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power supplies to run WITHOUT
> > a load - and yet, some won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
>
> Basically because its cheaper to design it
> so that it needs some load to start properly.
How is it cheaper to add circuitry that senses whether or not there is a
load during start up?
> > and correct the problem long before
> > it has any chance to do any damage.
>
> You may not notice that one channel
> has died if you arent relatively close to it.
I notice it quite easily when my entire sound stage shifts, thank you.
> >>>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>
> >>> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
> >> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>
> >> There are no 'output transformers'
>
> > Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
>
> You never restricted your original claim to tube amps.
You never restricted your claim to solid state amps either.
> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
Again, very bad for the output transformers. But hey since you continue
to say you know better than the very people who designed the amps in the
first place, I don't really know what else to tell you.
> >> And any decent designed amp has that protection to prevent any
> >> damage when the inevitable happens, the speakers get disconnected.
>
> > And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the amp is now NOT
> > running without a proper load, which is the exact opposite of your claim
> > that you've been running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>
> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition is not
exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>
> > You just said the amp had protection circuitry. Had this been
> > working properly, the amp would have gotten shut down anyway.
>
> There is more than one way protection against that can be done.
>
> It doesnt necessarily involve shutting down the amp.
No, but it still involves shutting down components of an amp that can be
damaged by running with no load, which isn't what I call RUNNING an amp
without a load!
Rod Speed
>>> Not against equipment damage, no. Or else this one
>>> would not have sparked and let out smoke and would
>>> have continued to run after the short was removed.
>>> Here, I'll rephrase it, because this is what I meant in the first place:
Easy to claim now.
>>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
>>> protection against damage from shorts.
>>> There. Done.
>> Nothing like your original.
> In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
> If you had followed the thread which is what I had been doing, "protection
> against
> damaged from shorts" would have been assumed, as it is all in context.
Its just plain wrong even with just shorted outputs,
and those clearly wont the only thing being discussed
because you went on to stupidly claim that they dont
have any protection against running unloaded either.
>>>>>>> And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power
>>>>>>> connector which turned out to be shorted.
>>>>>>> Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half
>>>>>>> a second, and turned itself off again. Short was
>>>>>>> cleared, power was fired up again, and all was well.
>>>>>> Nothing at all unusual about, thats the way its sposed to work.
>>>>> And yet it isn't as reliable on poor cheap
>>>>> designs - some of which will just blow.
>>>> Fuck all in fact.
>>>> And that that proves nothing about your stupid claim that
>>>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> No, but a couple of blowed cheap power supplies does.
>> Nope, not with your original stupid claim.
> Equipment damage should have been assumed.
Only when you dont have a clue about the basics. You qualify.
>>> A couple cheap blown power supplies later....
>> Still says nothing useful what so ever about the stupid claim
>> that some cheap power supplys not having ANY protection
>> against equipment damage. There aint a single one that is
>> that bad, even tho there are certainly some that cant handle
>> a shorted rail, and others that cant protect against equipment
>> damage when the power supply itself fails.
> Blown power supply due to short: equipment damage.
Irrelevant to your original stupid claim that some
cheap supplys dont have ANY protection at all.
> Something connected to supply that is
> destroyed by supply: equipment damage.
Irrelevant to your original stupid claim that some
cheap supplys dont have ANY protection at all.
> If this protection isn't good enough to prevent
> damage, then I don't really consider it protection.
Pity about when its protecting against some other situation.
> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY protection.
> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
Lying now.
>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>> There is no such animal.
> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
> The rest of the world isn't so lucky.
Pathetic, really.
>>> Does a power supply always get constant stable power?
>>> No, it does not. Does it always give constant stable power?
>>> No, it does not. Voltage always fluctuates, and so therefore,
>>> the protection circuitry has to be designed so that it does not
>>> trip under these conditions provided that they are within tolerance.
>> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
>> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
> Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
> has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> But what does this have to do with a short circuit killing a power
>>> supply, or tripping protection circuitry? Absolutely nothing.
>> Yep, it was just another stupid claim you made.
> No,
Yep.
> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted outputs.
>>> Ok, then I'll re-reword it. SOME cheap power supplies don't
>>> have adequate protection against damage from shorts.
>>> DONE!
>> If you'd actually said that, no one would have commented on that.
> Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
Nope, not when you went on to make equally stupid claims about
them not having any protection against running unloaded either.
>>> Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power supplies to run WITHOUT
>>> a load - and yet, some won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
>> Basically because its cheaper to design it
>> so that it needs some load to start properly.
> How is it cheaper to add circuitry that senses
> whether or not there is a load during start up?
Never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.
>>> and correct the problem long before
>>> it has any chance to do any damage.
>> You may not notice that one channel
>> has died if you arent relatively close to it.
> I notice it quite easily when my entire sound stage shifts, thank you.
You may not notice that if you arent even in that room at the time.
>>>>>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>>>>> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
>>>> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>>>> There are no 'output transformers'
>>> Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
>> You never restricted your original claim to tube amps.
> You never restricted your claim to solid state amps either.
I never made any claim about amps, YOU did.
>> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
> Again, very bad for the output transformers.
Wrong, as always.
> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
Lying, again.
> I don't really know what else to tell you.
Yep, you clearly havent got a clue about the basics, you're DONE.
>>>> And any decent designed amp has that protection to prevent any
>>>> damage when the inevitable happens, the speakers get disconnected.
>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
>>> You just said the amp had protection circuitry. Had this been
>>> working properly, the amp would have gotten shut down anyway.
>> There is more than one way protection against that can be done.
>> It doesnt necessarily involve shutting down the amp.
> No, but it still involves shutting down components of
> an amp that can be damaged by running with no load,
> which isn't what I call RUNNING an amp without a load!
Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
> >>> protection against damage from shorts.
>
> >>> There. Done.
>
> >> Nothing like your original.
>
> > In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
>
> You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
Protection against equipment damage, no. That is what the thread was
about.
>
> > If you had followed the thread which is what I had been doing, "protection
> > against
> > damaged from shorts" would have been assumed, as it is all in context.
>
> Its just plain wrong even with just shorted outputs,
> and those clearly wont the only thing being discussed
> because you went on to stupidly claim that they dont
> have any protection against running unloaded either.
Because you said you were running it unloaded. Now if you're running it
unloaded and protection kicks in on it, that's not exactly continuing to
run it unloaded, now is it?
> > Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>
> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY protection.
Protection against damage, no it obviously did not. That is what the
thread was about.
>
> > Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
>
> Lying now.
Why did you remove the statement this was about?
>
> >>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>
> >> There is no such animal.
>
> > You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>
> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household a/c
outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
> >> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
> >> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
>
> > Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
> > has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>
> Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
Protection against shorts. Again, context of the thread.
> > you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
> > when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>
> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted outputs.
The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
> > Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
>
> Nope, not when you went on to make equally stupid claims about
> them not having any protection against running unloaded either.
You said you were continuing to run it unloaded. But you can't continue
to run it unloaded if protection kicks.
>
> >>> Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power supplies to run WITHOUT
> >>> a load - and yet, some won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
>
> >> Basically because its cheaper to design it
> >> so that it needs some load to start properly.
>
> > How is it cheaper to add circuitry that senses
> > whether or not there is a load during start up?
>
> Never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.
Ok then, I have two power supplies, both with hard wired power switches.
One of them will fire up without a load when I flip the switch. The
other one will not. Why is the latter cheaper?
>
> >>> and correct the problem long before
> >>> it has any chance to do any damage.
>
> >> You may not notice that one channel
> >> has died if you arent relatively close to it.
>
> > I notice it quite easily when my entire sound stage shifts, thank you.
>
> You may not notice that if you arent even in that room at the time.
I'm in the room when I turned it on, and that's when I would notice it.
>
> >>>>>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>
> >>>>> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
> >>>> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>
> >>>> There are no 'output transformers'
>
> >>> Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
>
> >> You never restricted your original claim to tube amps.
>
> > You never restricted your claim to solid state amps either.
>
> I never made any claim about amps, YOU did.
>
> >> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
>
> > Again, very bad for the output transformers.
>
> Wrong, as always.
So why do all amp manufacturers say to never run without a load?
>
> > But hey since you continue to say you know better than
> > the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>
> Lying, again.
How so? The very people who design them say it's not good to run them
without a load. You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
> >>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
> >>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
> >>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
> >>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>
> >> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>
> > Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
> > is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>
> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
Protection stops this from happening.
How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without a load, which is what you
said you were doing?
Rod Speed
>>>>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
>>>>> protection against damage from shorts.
>>>>> There. Done.
>>>> Nothing like your original.
>>> In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
>> You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
> Protection against equipment damage, no.
Still just plain wrong. They ALL have SOME
protection against equipment damage.
> That is what the thread was about.
>>> If you had followed the thread which is what I had
>>> been doing, "protection against damaged from shorts"
>>> would have been assumed, as it is all in context.
>> Its just plain wrong even with just shorted outputs,
>> and those clearly wont the only thing being discussed
>> because you went on to stupidly claim that they dont
>> have any protection against running unloaded either.
> Because you said you were running it unloaded.
Lying, again. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
before I ever said anything about what I was doing.
> Now if you're running it unloaded and protection kicks in on it,
It doesnt with PC power supplys, it either fails to
start because some wont start without a load, or
it runs fine unloaded if its happy to start unloaded.
> that's not exactly continuing to run it unloaded, now is it?
Irrelevant to what was being discussed.
>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY protection.
> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it has OTHER protection.
> That is what the thread was about.
Lying, again.
>>> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
>> Lying now.
> Why did you remove the statement this was about?
I didnt remove a thing, you pathological liar. YOU are
the only one that has deleted anything from these posts.
>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>>>> There is no such animal.
>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
> a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
>>>> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
>>>> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
>>> Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
>>> has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>> Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
> Protection against shorts. Again, context of the thread.
Again, pity YOU also raved on mindlessly about unloaded
too IN YOUR FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD.
>>> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
>>> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted outputs.
> The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
Pity you spewed your drivel about unloaded in your first post in this thread.
>>> Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
>> Nope, not when you went on to make equally stupid claims about
>> them not having any protection against running unloaded either.
> You said you were continuing to run it unloaded.
Only AFTER you made that stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded.
> But you can't continue to run it unloaded if protection kicks.
There isnt any protection that kicks in with an unloaded pc power supply.
Its either happy to start unloaded or it doesnt start at all unloaded.
>>>>> Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power
>>>>> supplies to run WITHOUT a load - and yet, some
>>>>> won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
>>>> Basically because its cheaper to design it
>>>> so that it needs some load to start properly.
>>> How is it cheaper to add circuitry that senses
>>> whether or not there is a load during start up?
>> Never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.
> Ok then, I have two power supplies, both with hard wired power
> switches. One of them will fire up without a load when I flip the
> switch. The other one will not. Why is the latter cheaper?
Because it costs more to design a power supply so it will start unloaded.
>>>>> and correct the problem long before
>>>>> it has any chance to do any damage.
>>>> You may not notice that one channel
>>>> has died if you arent relatively close to it.
>>> I notice it quite easily when my entire sound stage shifts, thank you.
>> You may not notice that if you arent even in that room at the time.
> I'm in the room when I turned it on, and that's when I would notice it.
And if it becomes unloaded after you've turned it on,
you may not be in the room when it becomes unloaded.
>>>>>>>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>>>>>>> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
>>>>>> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>>>>>> There are no 'output transformers'
>>>>> Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
>>>> You never restricted your original claim to tube amps.
>>> You never restricted your claim to solid state amps either.
>> I never made any claim about amps, YOU did.
>>>> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
>>> Again, very bad for the output transformers.
>> Wrong, as always.
> So why do all amp manufacturers say to never run without a load?
They dont.
>>> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
>>> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>> Lying, again.
> How so? The very people who design them
> say it's not good to run them without a load.
Plenty dont.
> You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
Lying, again. I JUST said that it doesnt necessarily kill
the amp, most obviously when its properly designed.
>>>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
>>>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
>>>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
>>>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>>>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>>> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
>>> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
>> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
> Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
> Protection stops this from happening.
> How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without
> a load, which is what you said you were doing?
I didnt say that I did it like that, liar.
Neal Eckhardt
wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 23:30:02 +0000, . Has Frothed:
>
>> My friend who built the PC for me is traveling, and I will ultimately
>> bring the computer to him and his extensive testbench if I can't figure
>> this out myself. But I'm really at my wit's end now and am hoping for a
>> few useful "try this" suggestions.
>
>Take everyone off the main board except video card if an add on and power
>it up. If not then the mobo may be phucked.
>
>--
>
>Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004
Why not take out the video card too. It can certainly cause this
problem. The MB will still power up without a video card, it just
beeps at you (a good thing in this case).
Neal
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> > Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> >>>>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
> >>>>> protection against damage from shorts.
>
> >>>>> There. Done.
>
> >>>> Nothing like your original.
>
> >>> In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
>
> >> You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
>
> > Protection against equipment damage, no.
>
> Still just plain wrong. They ALL have SOME
> protection against equipment damage.
Ok fine. But some isn't always good enough, in which case I don't
consider the equipment protected.
>
> > That is what the thread was about.
>
> >>> If you had followed the thread which is what I had
> >>> been doing, "protection against damaged from shorts"
> >>> would have been assumed, as it is all in context.
>
> >> Its just plain wrong even with just shorted outputs,
> >> and those clearly wont the only thing being discussed
> >> because you went on to stupidly claim that they dont
> >> have any protection against running unloaded either.
>
> > Because you said you were running it unloaded.
>
> Lying, again. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
> before I ever said anything about what I was doing.
Lying that you said you were running it unloaded?
let's look back a bit:
Me: since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
You: Oh bullshit.
me: really? Why don't you try it then.
You: Done that plenty of times thanks."
hmm..
>
> > Now if you're running it unloaded and protection kicks in on it,
>
> It doesnt with PC power supplys, it either fails to
> start because some wont start without a load, or
> it runs fine unloaded if its happy to start unloaded.
If it runs unloaded, it's not running fine at all. Quite unstable
actually.
>
> > that's not exactly continuing to run it unloaded, now is it?
>
> Irrelevant to what was being discussed.
Not if it is shut off in order to not run unloaded.
>
> >>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>
> >> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY
> >> protection.
>
> > Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>
> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted rail.
Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against equipment damage as
well - in this case, the supply itself.
>
> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it has OTHER protection.
Took out the mobo when this happened, actually. Not my idea of
protection.
>
> > That is what the thread was about.
>
> Lying, again.
OP said it didn't power up because a cable was not connected correctly.
>
> >>> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
>
> >> Lying now.
>
> > Why did you remove the statement this was about?
>
> I didnt remove a thing, you pathological liar. YOU are
> the only one that has deleted anything from these posts.
Oh crap.. lol my mistake! I took out your comment along with others in
order to keep the message short. Didn't mean to do that. Oops! ^_^
>
> >>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>
> >>>> There is no such animal.
>
> >>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>
> >> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>
> > So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
> > a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
>
> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
If the power supply handles it fine (which they all do to a degree),
then it has tolerance. It has to, since household current is not always
stable. Storms, big motors kicking on and off, etc.
Again, voltage regulation.
>
> >>>> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
> >>>> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
>
> >>> Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
> >>> has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>
> >> Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
> >> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>
> > Protection against shorts. Again, context of the thread.
>
> Again, pity YOU also raved on mindlessly about unloaded
> too IN YOUR FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD.
I have one running in this computer that will not stay on if there is
nothing connected to the 5v good power line.
>
> >>> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
> >>> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>
> >> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted outputs.
>
> > The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
>
> Pity you spewed your drivel about unloaded in your first post in this thread.
PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
>
> >>> Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
>
> >> Nope, not when you went on to make equally stupid claims about
> >> them not having any protection against running unloaded either.
>
> > You said you were continuing to run it unloaded.
>
> Only AFTER you made that stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded.
Doesn't matter. Obviously there is some protection against running it
unloaded - in which case I don't consider that actually running unloaded
at all.
>
> > But you can't continue to run it unloaded if protection kicks.
>
> There isnt any protection that kicks in with an unloaded pc power supply.
> Its either happy to start unloaded or it doesnt start at all unloaded.
If it doesn't start unloaded, then that's protection against running
non-stable, due to it being unloaded.
>
> >>>>> Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power
> >>>>> supplies to run WITHOUT a load - and yet, some
> >>>>> won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
>
> >>>> Basically because its cheaper to design it
> >>>> so that it needs some load to start properly.
>
> >>> How is it cheaper to add circuitry that senses
> >>> whether or not there is a load during start up?
>
> >> Never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.
>
> > Ok then, I have two power supplies, both with hard wired power
> > switches. One of them will fire up without a load when I flip the
> > switch. The other one will not. Why is the latter cheaper?
>
> Because it costs more to design a power supply so it will start unloaded.
>
> >>>>> and correct the problem long before
> >>>>> it has any chance to do any damage.
>
> >>>> You may not notice that one channel
> >>>> has died if you arent relatively close to it.
>
> >>> I notice it quite easily when my entire sound stage shifts, thank you.
>
> >> You may not notice that if you arent even in that room at the time.
>
> > I'm in the room when I turned it on, and that's when I would notice it.
>
> And if it becomes unloaded after you've turned it on,
> you may not be in the room when it becomes unloaded.
Which never happens in my house.
>
> >>>>>>>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>
> >>>>>>> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
> >>>>>> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>
> >>>>>> There are no 'output transformers'
>
> >>>>> Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
>
> >>>> You never restricted your original claim to tube amps.
>
> >>> You never restricted your claim to solid state amps either.
>
> >> I never made any claim about amps, YOU did.
>
> >>>> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
>
> >>> Again, very bad for the output transformers.
>
> >> Wrong, as always.
>
> > So why do all amp manufacturers say to never run without a load?
>
> They dont.
Plenty of them do - even for tube amps.
>
> >>> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
> >>> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>
> >> Lying, again.
>
> > How so? The very people who design them
> > say it's not good to run them without a load.
>
> Plenty dont.
More of them do.
>
> > You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
>
> Lying, again. I JUST said that it doesnt necessarily kill
> the amp, most obviously when its properly designed.
Properly designed as in protection against this condition. Again, not
the same as running without a load.
>
> >>>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
> >>>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
> >>>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
> >>>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>
> >>>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>
> >>> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
> >>> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>
> >> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
> >> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
>
> > Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
>
> > Protection stops this from happening.
>
> > How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without
> > a load, which is what you said you were doing?
>
> I didnt say that I did it like that, liar.
You said yours ran without a load and that continuing to run without one
(if a speaker becomes disconnected) wouldn't hurt it.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
>>>>>>> protection against damage from shorts.
>>>>>>> There. Done.
>>>>>> Nothing like your original.
>>>>> In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
>>>> You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
>>> Protection against equipment damage, no.
>> Still just plain wrong. They ALL have SOME
>> protection against equipment damage.
> Ok fine. But some isn't always good enough,
Again, nothing like your original.
> in which case I don't consider the equipment protected.
Again, nothing like your original.
>>> That is what the thread was about.
>>>>> If you had followed the thread which is what I had
>>>>> been doing, "protection against damaged from shorts"
>>>>> would have been assumed, as it is all in context.
>>>> Its just plain wrong even with just shorted outputs, and
>>>> those clearly werent the only thing being discussed
>>>> because you went on to stupidly claim that they dont
>>>> have any protection against running unloaded either.
>>> Because you said you were running it unloaded.
>> Lying, again. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
>> before I ever said anything about what I was doing.
> Lying that you said you were running it unloaded?
Lying about the BECAUSE. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
about running the power supply unloaded BEFORE I ever said a thing.
> let's look back a bit:
> Me: since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
> You: Oh bullshit.
> me: really? Why don't you try it then.
> You: Done that plenty of times thanks."
> hmm..
Humming aint gunna save your bacon, you clearly made that
stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded BEFORE
I said anything, so you are clearly lying with your BECAUSE.
>>> Now if you're running it unloaded and protection kicks in on it,
>> It doesnt with PC power supplys, it either fails to
>> start because some wont start without a load, or
>> it runs fine unloaded if its happy to start unloaded.
> If it runs unloaded, it's not running fine at all.
Wrong, as always.
> Quite unstable actually.
Wrong, as always.
>>> that's not exactly continuing to run it unloaded, now is it?
>> Irrelevant to what was being discussed.
> Not if it is shut off in order to not run unloaded.
Pity that if it does shut down ITS CLEARLY PROTECTED AGAINST
RUNNING THAT WAY, and if it doesnt shut down IT CANT DAMAGE
ANYTHING BECAUSE NOTHING IS CONNECTED TO IS.
>>>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY
>>>> protection.
>>> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
> And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted rail.
> Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against equipment damage
> as well - in this case, the supply itself.
Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it has OTHER protection.
> Took out the mobo when this happened, actually. Not my idea of protection.
Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>>> That is what the thread was about.
>> Lying, again.
> OP said it didn't power up because a cable was not connected correctly.
Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
No evidence that the OPs power supply damaged anything.
>>>>> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
>>>> Lying now.
>>> Why did you remove the statement this was about?
>> I didnt remove a thing, you pathological liar. YOU are
>> the only one that has deleted anything from these posts.
> Oh crap.. lol my mistake! I took out your comment along with others
> in order to keep the message short. Didn't mean to do that. Oops!
> ^_^
A Jap would at least have the decency to disembowel itself |-)
>>>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>>>>>> There is no such animal.
>>>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>>>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>>> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
>>> a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
>> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
> If the power supply handles it fine (which they
> all do to a degree), then it has tolerance.
Thats not what 'within tolerance' means.
> It has to, since household current is not always stable. Storms,
> big motors kicking on and off, etc. Again, voltage regulation.
THERE IS NO TOLERANCE TO BE WITHIN.
>>>>>> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
>>>>>> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
>>>>> Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
>>>>> has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>>>> Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
>>>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> Protection against shorts. Again, context of the thread.
>> Again, pity YOU also raved on mindlessly about unloaded
>> too IN YOUR FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD.
> I have one running in this computer that will not stay on
> if there is nothing connected to the 5v good power line.
No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will start up
fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
>>>>> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
>>>>> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>>>> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted outputs.
>>> The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
>> Pity you spewed your drivel about unloaded in your first post in this thread.
> PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will start up
fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
>>>>> Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
>>>> Nope, not when you went on to make equally stupid claims about
>>>> them not having any protection against running unloaded either.
>>> You said you were continuing to run it unloaded.
>> Only AFTER you made that stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded.
> Doesn't matter.
Corse it does.
> Obviously there is some protection against running it unloaded
Nope, it just doesnt start that way.
> - in which case I don't consider that actually running unloaded at all.
There is no PROTECTION, it just doesnt start unloaded.
>>> But you can't continue to run it unloaded if protection kicks.
>> There isnt any protection that kicks in with an unloaded pc power supply.
>> Its either happy to start unloaded or it doesnt start at all unloaded.
> If it doesn't start unloaded, then that's protection
> against running non-stable, due to it being unloaded.
Wrong, as always. There is no protection, it just doesnt start
unloaded because of how its designed, the design needs a load
to start because thats the cheapest way to design a switcher.
IT COST MORE TO DESIGN THE POWER SUPPLY TO START UNLOADED.
>>>>>>> Ok, so now you're saying is OK for ALL power
>>>>>>> supplies to run WITHOUT a load - and yet, some
>>>>>>> won't even power up without a load. Why is that?
>>>>>> Basically because its cheaper to design it
>>>>>> so that it needs some load to start properly.
>>>>> How is it cheaper to add circuitry that senses
>>>>> whether or not there is a load during start up?
>>>> Never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that.
>>> Ok then, I have two power supplies, both with hard wired power
>>> switches. One of them will fire up without a load when I flip the
>>> switch. The other one will not. Why is the latter cheaper?
>> Because it costs more to design a power supply so it will start unloaded.
>>>>>>> and correct the problem long before
>>>>>>> it has any chance to do any damage.
>>>>>> You may not notice that one channel
>>>>>> has died if you arent relatively close to it.
>>>>> I notice it quite easily when my entire sound stage shifts, thank you.
>>>> You may not notice that if you arent even in that room at the time.
>>> I'm in the room when I turned it on, and that's when I would notice it.
>> And if it becomes unloaded after you've turned it on,
>> you may not be in the room when it becomes unloaded.
> Which never happens in my house.
You and your house are completely and utterly irrelevant.
>>>>>>>>>> Funny that. They're there for a reason.
>>>>>>>>> Yes, to prevent damage to the output transformers from
>>>>>>>> attempting to run it without a load - or in the case of a short!
>>>>>>>> There are no 'output transformers'
>>>>>>> Then you're not using tube amps. Ok then.
>>>>>> You never restricted your original claim to tube amps.
>>>>> You never restricted your claim to solid state amps either.
>>>> I never made any claim about amps, YOU did.
>>>>>> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
>>>>> Again, very bad for the output transformers.
>>>> Wrong, as always.
>>> So why do all amp manufacturers say to never run without a load?
>> They dont.
> Plenty of them do - even for tube amps.
Wrong, as always. And you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
>>>>> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
>>>>> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>>>> Lying, again.
>>> How so? The very people who design them
>>> say it's not good to run them without a load.
>> Plenty dont.
> More of them do.
You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
>>> You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
>> Lying, again. I JUST said that it doesnt necessarily kill
>> the amp, most obviously when its properly designed.
> Properly designed as in protection against this condition.
> Again, not the same as running without a load.
Plenty of amps run fine without a load and without protection cutting in.
>>>>>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
>>>>>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
>>>>>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
>>>>>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>>>>>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>>>>> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
>>>>> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>>>> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
>>>> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
>>> Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
>>> Protection stops this from happening.
>>> How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without
>>> a load, which is what you said you were doing?
>> I didnt say that I did it like that, liar.
> You said yours ran without a load and that continuing to run
> without one (if a speaker becomes disconnected) wouldn't hurt it.
Yep, and I proved that the amp didnt give a damn when that happened.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> > Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> >>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> >>>>>>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
> >>>>>>> protection against damage from shorts.
>
> >>>>>>> There. Done.
>
> >>>>>> Nothing like your original.
>
> >>>>> In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
>
> >>>> You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
>
> >>> Protection against equipment damage, no.
>
> >> Still just plain wrong. They ALL have SOME
> >> protection against equipment damage.
>
> > Ok fine. But some isn't always good enough,
>
> Again, nothing like your original.
And?
>
> > in which case I don't consider the equipment protected.
>
> Again, nothing like your original.
I said this a couple of times actually.
>
> >>> That is what the thread was about.
>
> >>>>> If you had followed the thread which is what I had
> >>>>> been doing, "protection against damaged from shorts"
> >>>>> would have been assumed, as it is all in context.
>
> >>>> Its just plain wrong even with just shorted outputs, and
> >>>> those clearly werent the only thing being discussed
> >>>> because you went on to stupidly claim that they dont
> >>>> have any protection against running unloaded either.
>
> >>> Because you said you were running it unloaded.
>
> >> Lying, again. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
> >> before I ever said anything about what I was doing.
>
> > Lying that you said you were running it unloaded?
>
> Lying about the BECAUSE. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
> about running the power supply unloaded BEFORE I ever said a thing.
Nope.
>
> > let's look back a bit:
>
> > Me: since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>
> > You: Oh bullshit.
>
> > me: really? Why don't you try it then.
>
> > You: Done that plenty of times thanks."
>
> > hmm..
>
> Humming aint gunna save your bacon, you clearly made that
> stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded BEFORE
> I said anything, so you are clearly lying with your BECAUSE.
Nope.
>
> >>> Now if you're running it unloaded and protection kicks in on it,
>
> >> It doesnt with PC power supplys, it either fails to
> >> start because some wont start without a load, or
> >> it runs fine unloaded if its happy to start unloaded.
>
> > If it runs unloaded, it's not running fine at all.
>
> Wrong, as always.
Nope.
>
> > Quite unstable actually.
>
> Wrong, as always.
So now you're saying that power supplies are perfectly stable under NO
load......
nope.
>
> >>> that's not exactly continuing to run it unloaded, now is it?
>
> >> Irrelevant to what was being discussed.
>
> > Not if it is shut off in order to not run unloaded.
>
> Pity that if it does shut down ITS CLEARLY PROTECTED AGAINST
> RUNNING THAT WAY, and if it doesnt shut down IT CANT DAMAGE
> ANYTHING BECAUSE NOTHING IS CONNECTED TO IS.
How would it damage something that isn't connected to it? Where did
that come from?
>
> >>>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>
> >>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY
> >>>> protection.
>
> >>> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>
> >> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
>
> > And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted rail.
> > Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against equipment damage
> > as well - in this case, the supply itself.
>
> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
uh huh - and the better ones do.
>
> >> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it has OTHER protection.
>
> > Took out the mobo when this happened, actually. Not my idea of protection.
>
> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
uh huh - and again, the better ones do.
>
> >>> That is what the thread was about.
>
> >> Lying, again.
>
> > OP said it didn't power up because a cable was not connected correctly.
>
> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> No evidence that the OPs power supply damaged anything.
I never said the OP's power supply did damage anything! His old PS died
so he replaced it. The new one didn't power up - he had something
connection wrong. He fixed the connection and then his machine booted
up fine. Where did I say otherwise?
>
> >>>>> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
>
> >>>> Lying now.
>
> >>> Why did you remove the statement this was about?
>
> >> I didnt remove a thing, you pathological liar. YOU are
> >> the only one that has deleted anything from these posts.
>
> > Oh crap.. lol my mistake! I took out your comment along with others
> > in order to keep the message short. Didn't mean to do that. Oops!
> > ^_^
>
> A Jap would at least have the decency to disembowel itself |-)
Wow... at first I thought you just liked to troll in these groups to
argue and I wasn't going to stoop to your level, but damn.... you really
are an ass!
>
> >>>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>
> >>>>>> There is no such animal.
>
> >>>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>
> >>>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>
> >>> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
> >>> a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
>
> >> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
>
> > If the power supply handles it fine (which they
> > all do to a degree), then it has tolerance.
>
> Thats not what 'within tolerance' means.
>
> > It has to, since household current is not always stable. Storms,
> > big motors kicking on and off, etc. Again, voltage regulation.
>
> THERE IS NO TOLERANCE TO BE WITHIN.
It has to be designed to tolerate normal and unavoidable voltage
fluctuations. If the fluctuations are within a certain, threshold they
are within tolerance. If input voltage is outside this threshold, the
PS will shut down. If the input voltage remains within this threshold,
it is within tolerance. An AC supply is not perfectly 100% stable so
therefore, a PS has to be designed to tolerate this to a point.
>
> >>>>>> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
> >>>>>> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
>
> >>>>> Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
> >>>>> has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>
> >>>> Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
> >>>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>
> >>> Protection against shorts. Again, context of the thread.
>
> >> Again, pity YOU also raved on mindlessly about unloaded
> >> too IN YOUR FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD.
>
> > I have one running in this computer that will not stay on
> > if there is nothing connected to the 5v good power line.
>
> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will start up
> fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>
> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine and
stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected. Yet, I
have one in this machine that does not stay powered if the 5v Power Good
line is not connected.
>
> >>>>> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
> >>>>> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>
> >>>> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted outputs.
>
> >>> The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
>
> >> Pity you spewed your drivel about unloaded in your first post in this
> >> thread.
>
> > PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
>
> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will start up
> fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>
> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
Again....
You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine and
stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected. Yet, I
have one in this machine that does not stay powered if the 5v Power Good
line is not connected.
>
> >>>>> Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
>
> >>>> Nope, not when you went on to make equally stupid claims about
> >>>> them not having any protection against running unloaded either.
>
> >>> You said you were continuing to run it unloaded.
>
> >> Only AFTER you made that stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded.
>
> > Doesn't matter.
>
> Corse it does.
>
> > Obviously there is some protection against running it unloaded
>
> Nope, it just doesnt start that way.
>
> > - in which case I don't consider that actually running unloaded at all.
>
> There is no PROTECTION, it just doesnt start unloaded.
>
> >>> But you can't continue to run it unloaded if protection kicks.
>
> >> There isnt any protection that kicks in with an unloaded pc power supply.
> >> Its either happy to start unloaded or it doesnt start at all unloaded.
>
> > If it doesn't start unloaded, then that's protection
> > against running non-stable, due to it being unloaded.
>
> Wrong, as always. There is no protection, it just doesnt start
> unloaded because of how its designed, the design needs a load
> to start because thats the cheapest way to design a switcher.
>
> IT COST MORE TO DESIGN THE POWER SUPPLY TO START UNLOADED.
Even when power is switched on an off by a hard wired switch?
Even some AT supplies won't stay on without a load. The one I have that
will not stay on unless I at least have a hard drive or two connected to
it is an AT supply. Again, how is this cheaper?
And now you're saying none of them say this, which is wrong.
>
> >>>>> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
> >>>>> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>
> >>>> Lying, again.
>
> >>> How so? The very people who design them
> >>> say it's not good to run them without a load.
>
> >> Plenty dont.
>
> > More of them do.
>
> You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
You give me that same line even when I say some.
>
> >>> You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
>
> >> Lying, again. I JUST said that it doesnt necessarily kill
> >> the amp, most obviously when its properly designed.
>
> > Properly designed as in protection against this condition.
> > Again, not the same as running without a load.
>
> Plenty of amps run fine without a load and without protection cutting in.
Just as plenty of them don't.
> >>>>>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
> >>>>>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
> >>>>>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
> >>>>>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>
> >>>>>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>
> >>>>> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
> >>>>> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>
> >>>> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
> >>>> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
>
> >>> Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
>
> >>> Protection stops this from happening.
>
> >>> How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without
> >>> a load, which is what you said you were doing?
>
> >> I didnt say that I did it like that, liar.
>
> > You said yours ran without a load and that continuing to run
> > without one (if a speaker becomes disconnected) wouldn't hurt it.
>
> Yep, and I proved that the amp didnt give a damn when that happened.
As I can (and have in the past) proved that a lot of amps do give a damn
if this happens.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
>>>>>>>>> protection against damage from shorts.
>>>>>>>>> There. Done.
>>>>>>>> Nothing like your original.
>>>>>>> In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
>>>>>> You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
>>>>> Protection against equipment damage, no.
>>>> Still just plain wrong. They ALL have SOME
>>>> protection against equipment damage.
>>> Ok fine. But some isn't always good enough,
>> Again, nothing like your original.
> And?
So you are fooling absolutely no one with your desperate backpeddling.
>>> in which case I don't consider the equipment protected.
>> Again, nothing like your original.
> I said this a couple of times actually.
Not in your original you never did.
If you had said what you are saying now in your
original, I wouldnt have commented on your original.
I commented on your original because you mangled the story utterly.
And you are still mangling the story completely
with power supplys starting unloaded.
>>>>> That is what the thread was about.
>>>>>>> If you had followed the thread which is what I had
>>>>>>> been doing, "protection against damaged from shorts"
>>>>>>> would have been assumed, as it is all in context.
>>>>>> Its just plain wrong even with just shorted outputs, and
>>>>>> those clearly werent the only thing being discussed
>>>>>> because you went on to stupidly claim that they dont
>>>>>> have any protection against running unloaded either.
>>>>> Because you said you were running it unloaded.
>>>> Lying, again. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
>>>> before I ever said anything about what I was doing.
>>> Lying that you said you were running it unloaded?
>> Lying about the BECAUSE. You made that stupid pig ignorant claim
>> about running the power supply unloaded BEFORE I ever said a thing.
> Nope.
Yep.
http://groups.google.com/group/24hoursupport.helpdesk/msg/13f72b7e160b75fa
>>> let's look back a bit:
>>> Me: since it is bad for a power supply to run without a load.
>>> You: Oh bullshit.
>>> me: really? Why don't you try it then.
>>> You: Done that plenty of times thanks."
>>> hmm..
>> Humming aint gunna save your bacon, you clearly made that
>> stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded BEFORE
>> I said anything, so you are clearly lying with your BECAUSE.
> Nope.
Yep.
http://groups.google.com/group/24hoursupport.helpdesk/msg/13f72b7e160b75fa
>>>>> Now if you're running it unloaded and protection kicks in on it,
>>>> It doesnt with PC power supplys, it either fails to
>>>> start because some wont start without a load, or
>>>> it runs fine unloaded if its happy to start unloaded.
>>> If it runs unloaded, it's not running fine at all.
>> Wrong, as always.
> Nope.
Yep, some power supplys will run fine unloaded.
>>> Quite unstable actually.
>> Wrong, as always.
> So now you're saying that power supplies
> are perfectly stable under NO load......
Yep, some handle that fine.
> nope.
Fraid so.
>>>>> that's not exactly continuing to run it unloaded, now is it?
>>>> Irrelevant to what was being discussed.
>>> Not if it is shut off in order to not run unloaded.
>> Pity that if it does shut down ITS CLEARLY PROTECTED AGAINST
>> RUNNING THAT WAY, and if it doesnt shut down IT CANT DAMAGE
>> ANYTHING BECAUSE NOTHING IS CONNECTED TO IS.
> How would it damage something that isn't connected to it?
Precisely.
> Where did that come from?
Your stupid claim that it shuts down to protect anything when its unloaded.
>>>>>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>>>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY
>>>>>> protection.
>>>>> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>>>> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
>>> And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted
>>> rail. Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against equipment
>>> damage as well - in this case, the supply itself.
>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
>> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
> uh huh - and the better ones do.
No one ever said they didnt.
>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about
>>>> whether it has OTHER protection.
>>> Took out the mobo when this happened,
>>> actually. Not my idea of protection.
>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
>> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
> uh huh - and again, the better ones do.
No one ever said they didnt.
>>>>> That is what the thread was about.
>>>> Lying, again.
>>> OP said it didn't power up because a cable was not connected correctly.
>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>> No evidence that the OPs power supply damaged anything.
> I never said the OP's power supply did damage anything!
I never ever said you did.
> His old PS died so he replaced it. The new one didn't power up
> - he had something connection wrong. He fixed the connection
> and then his machine booted up fine. Where did I say otherwise?
You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
And you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that
its bad for power supplys to run unloaded.
>>>>>>> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to itself.
>>>>>> Lying now.
>>>>> Why did you remove the statement this was about?
>>>> I didnt remove a thing, you pathological liar. YOU are
>>>> the only one that has deleted anything from these posts.
>>> Oh crap.. lol my mistake! I took out your comment along with others
>>> in order to keep the message short. Didn't mean to do that. Oops!
>>> ^_^
>> A Jap would at least have the decency to disembowel itself |-)
> Wow... at first I thought you just liked to troll in these
> groups to argue and I wasn't going to stoop to your level,
Corse you never ever argue yourself, eh ?
> but damn.... you really are an ass!
That was a JOKE you stupid fuckwit. It even had a
smiley on the end for the terminally SOH challenged.
>>>>>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>>>>>>>> There is no such animal.
>>>>>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>>>>>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>>>>> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
>>>>> a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
>>>> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
>>> If the power supply handles it fine (which they
>>> all do to a degree), then it has tolerance.
>> Thats not what 'within tolerance' means.
>>> It has to, since household current is not always stable. Storms,
>>> big motors kicking on and off, etc. Again, voltage regulation.
>> THERE IS NO TOLERANCE TO BE WITHIN.
> It has to be designed to tolerate normal and unavoidable voltage fluctuations.
Duh. THERE IS STILL NOW SPECIFIED TOLERANCE.
> If the fluctuations are within a certain, threshold they are within tolerance.
THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
> If input voltage is outside this threshold, the PS will shut down.
Wrong again with spikes.
> If the input voltage remains within this threshold, it is within tolerance.
THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
> An AC supply is not perfectly 100% stable so therefore,
> a PS has to be designed to tolerate this to a point.
THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD WITH SPIKES.
>>>>>>>> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
>>>>>>>> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
>>>>>>> Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
>>>>>>> has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>>>>>> Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
>>>>>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>>>> Protection against shorts. Again, context of the thread.
>>>> Again, pity YOU also raved on mindlessly about unloaded
>>>> too IN YOUR FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD.
>>> I have one running in this computer that will not stay on
>>> if there is nothing connected to the 5v good power line.
>> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will
>> start up fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
>> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
> You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine
> and stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected.
No I didnt. You're lying, again.
> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
>>>>>>> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
>>>>>>> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>>>>>> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted outputs.
>>>>> The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
>>>> Pity you spewed your drivel about
>>>> unloaded in your first post in this thread.
>>> PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
>> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will
>> start up fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
>> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
> Again....
> You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine
> and stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected.
No I didnt. You're lying, again.
> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
>>>>>>> Again, in context with the thread, it should have been assumed.
>>>>>> Nope, not when you went on to make equally stupid claims about
>>>>>> them not having any protection against running unloaded either.
>>>>> You said you were continuing to run it unloaded.
>>>> Only AFTER you made that stupid pig ignorant claim about running unloaded.
>>> Doesn't matter.
>> Corse it does.
>>> Obviously there is some protection against running it unloaded
>> Nope, it just doesnt start that way.
>>> - in which case I don't consider that actually running unloaded at all.
>> There is no PROTECTION, it just doesnt start unloaded.
>>>>> But you can't continue to run it unloaded if protection kicks.
>>>> There isnt any protection that kicks in with an unloaded pc power
>>>> supply. Its either happy to start unloaded or it doesnt start at
>>>> all unloaded.
>>> If it doesn't start unloaded, then that's protection
>>> against running non-stable, due to it being unloaded.
>> Wrong, as always. There is no protection, it just doesnt start
>> unloaded because of how its designed, the design needs a load
>> to start because thats the cheapest way to design a switcher.
>> IT COST MORE TO DESIGN THE POWER SUPPLY TO START UNLOADED.
> Even when power is switched on an off by a hard wired switch?
Yep.
> Even some AT supplies won't stay on without a load.
YEP, BECAUSE IT COSTS MORE TO HAVE
THE POWER SUPPLY START UNLOADED.
> The one I have that will not stay on unless I at least have a hard drive
> or two connected to it is an AT supply. Again, how is this cheaper?
You clearly know nothing about how switchers of that size are designed.
Or anything else at all either.
>>>>>> Wrong, as always.
>>>> They dont.
No I'm not, you pathological liar.
> which is wrong.
Pity I never ever said that.
>>>>>>> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
>>>>>>> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>>>>>> Lying, again.
>>>>> How so? The very people who design them
>>>>> say it's not good to run them without a load.
>>>> Plenty dont.
>>> More of them do.
>> You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
> You give me that same line even when I say some.
Lying, again.
>>>>> You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
>>>> Lying, again. I JUST said that it doesnt necessarily kill
>>>> the amp, most obviously when its properly designed.
>>> Properly designed as in protection against this condition.
>>> Again, not the same as running without a load.
>> Plenty of amps run fine without a load and without protection
>> cutting in.
> Just as plenty of them don't.
Pity you previously claimed ALL.
>>>>>>>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
>>>>>>>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
>>>>>>>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
>>>>>>>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>>>>>>>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>>>>>> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
>>>>>>> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>>>>>> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
>>>>>> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
>>>>> Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
>>>>> Protection stops this from happening.
>>>>> How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without
>>>>> a load, which is what you said you were doing?
>>>> I didnt say that I did it like that, liar.
>>> You said yours ran without a load and that continuing to run
>>> without one (if a speaker becomes disconnected) wouldn't hurt it.
>> Yep, and I proved that the amp didnt give a damn when that happened.
> As I can (and have in the past) proved that a
> lot of amps do give a damn if this happens.
Pity you previously claimed ALL.
David Matthew Wood
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> > Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> >>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
> >>>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> >>>>>>>>> Some cheap power supplies don't have adequate
> >>>>>>>>> protection against damage from shorts.
>
> >>>>>>>>> There. Done.
>
> >>>>>>>> Nothing like your original.
>
> >>>>>>> In my original, I said cheap power supplies don't have protection.
>
> >>>>>> You actually said they dont have ANY protection.
>
> >>>>> Protection against equipment damage, no.
>
> >>>> Still just plain wrong. They ALL have SOME
> >>>> protection against equipment damage.
>
> >>> Ok fine. But some isn't always good enough,
>
> >> Again, nothing like your original.
>
> > And?
>
> So you are fooling absolutely no one with your desperate backpeddling.
>
> >>> in which case I don't consider the equipment protected.
>
> >> Again, nothing like your original.
>
> > I said this a couple of times actually.
>
> Not in your original you never did.
This is true. Dunno why you continue to rub that in though, since it's
been established already.
> >> Pity that if it does shut down ITS CLEARLY PROTECTED AGAINST
> >> RUNNING THAT WAY, and if it doesnt shut down IT CANT DAMAGE
> >> ANYTHING BECAUSE NOTHING IS CONNECTED TO IS.
>
> > How would it damage something that isn't connected to it?
>
> Precisely.
>
> > Where did that come from?
>
> Your stupid claim that it shuts down to protect anything when its unloaded.
Yes, in this case itself.
>
> >>>>>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>
> >>>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have ANY
> >>>>>> protection.
>
> >>>>> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>
> >>>> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
>
> >>> And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted
> >>> rail. Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against equipment
> >>> damage as well - in this case, the supply itself.
>
> >> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> >> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> >> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
> >> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>
> > uh huh - and the better ones do.
>
> No one ever said they didnt.
All ATX supplies are supposed to have this protection. Yet, I have seen
cheaper ones that don't.
>
> >>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about
> >>>> whether it has OTHER protection.
>
> >>> Took out the mobo when this happened,
> >>> actually. Not my idea of protection.
>
> >> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> >> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> >> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
> >> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>
> > uh huh - and again, the better ones do.
>
> No one ever said they didnt.
So clearly this was a cheaper design that failed to comply with spec.
>
> >>>>> That is what the thread was about.
>
> >>>> Lying, again.
>
> >>> OP said it didn't power up because a cable was not connected correctly.
>
> >> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> >> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> >> No evidence that the OPs power supply damaged anything.
>
> > I never said the OP's power supply did damage anything!
>
> I never ever said you did.
Then why did you even bring it up, saying that there was no evidence
that it DID damage something?
>
> > His old PS died so he replaced it. The new one didn't power up
> > - he had something connection wrong. He fixed the connection
> > and then his machine booted up fine. Where did I say otherwise?
>
> You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> And you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that
> its bad for power supplys to run unloaded.
Which is why there is protection to keep that from happening.
>
> >>>>>>> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory to
> >>>>>>> itself.
>
> >>>>>> Lying now.
>
> >>>>> Why did you remove the statement this was about?
>
> >>>> I didnt remove a thing, you pathological liar. YOU are
> >>>> the only one that has deleted anything from these posts.
>
> >>> Oh crap.. lol my mistake! I took out your comment along with others
> >>> in order to keep the message short. Didn't mean to do that. Oops!
> >>> ^_^
>
> >> A Jap would at least have the decency to disembowel itself |-)
>
> > Wow... at first I thought you just liked to troll in these
> > groups to argue and I wasn't going to stoop to your level,
>
> Corse you never ever argue yourself, eh ?
>
> > but damn.... you really are an ass!
>
> That was a JOKE you stupid fuckwit. It even had a
> smiley on the end for the terminally SOH challenged.
I didn't think it was at all funny. In fact, it comes across that you
are a raciest ass is what it does.
>
> >>>>>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>
> >>>>>>>> There is no such animal.
>
> >>>>>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>
> >>>>>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>
> >>>>> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
> >>>>> a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
>
> >>>> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
>
> >>> If the power supply handles it fine (which they
> >>> all do to a degree), then it has tolerance.
>
> >> Thats not what 'within tolerance' means.
>
> >>> It has to, since household current is not always stable. Storms,
> >>> big motors kicking on and off, etc. Again, voltage regulation.
>
> >> THERE IS NO TOLERANCE TO BE WITHIN.
>
> > It has to be designed to tolerate normal and unavoidable voltage
> > fluctuations.
>
> Duh. THERE IS STILL NOW SPECIFIED TOLERANCE.
I know there is NOW specified tolerance.
>
> > If the fluctuations are within a certain, threshold they are within
> > tolerance.
>
> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
But a threshold nonetheless.
>
> > If input voltage is outside this threshold, the PS will shut down.
>
> Wrong again with spikes.
Shutting down due to under voltage.
There should still be protection against damage from spikes though.
Cheaper supplies tend to not have as good protection however.
Either way, there is a specified range between 100 and 127 volts (or 200
and 240) in which the power supply should function as normal.
>
> > If the input voltage remains within this threshold, it is within tolerance.
>
> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
100-127
or
200-240 as per ATX spec.
>
> > An AC supply is not perfectly 100% stable so therefore,
> > a PS has to be designed to tolerate this to a point.
>
> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD WITH SPIKES.
again
100-127
or
200-240 as per ATX spec.
>
> >>>>>>>> And there has to be protection against mains spikes, otherwise
> >>>>>>>> no power supply thats used on the mains will last very long.
>
> >>>>>>> Yes, that is why we have voltage regulators. Again though, this
> >>>>>>> has nothing to do with the output of the supply being shorted.
>
> >>>>>> Has everything to do with your original stupid claim that
> >>>>>> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>
> >>>>> Protection against shorts. Again, context of the thread.
>
> >>>> Again, pity YOU also raved on mindlessly about unloaded
> >>>> too IN YOUR FIRST POST IN THIS THREAD.
>
> >>> I have one running in this computer that will not stay on
> >>> if there is nothing connected to the 5v good power line.
>
> >> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will
> >> start up fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>
> >> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
> >> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
>
> > You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine
> > and stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected.
>
> No I didnt. You're lying, again.
quite a while ago I said:
However, on some power supplies, if there is a power
surge or any other issue (which can be caused by a
fried component on the motherboard), "Power Good"
will also shut down the power supply if it malfunctions.
To which you said:
Nope
Well, I have running in this machine a power supply that will not remain
on if the Power Good line is not connected to anything. This counts as
"any other issue".
>
> > Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
> > powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>
> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
Me:
I have quite a few that will shut down if load on PG does not exist.
You:
Fantasy. There are quite a few that will shut down if the
OUTPUT RAILS arent loaded, a different matter entirely.
>
> >>>>>>> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
> >>>>>>> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>
> >>>>>> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted
> >>>>>> outputs.
>
> >>>>> The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
>
> >>>> Pity you spewed your drivel about
> >>>> unloaded in your first post in this thread.
>
> >>> PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
>
> >> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will
> >> start up fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>
> >> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
> >> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
>
> > Again....
> > You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine
> > and stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected.
>
> No I didnt. You're lying, again.
Yes, you did.
You said that what I was saying about some supplies not remaining
powered up if the Power Good line is not connected to anything was
"fantasy".
>
> > Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
> > powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>
> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
nope.
See? Even if I say "plenty" which is not "all", you still say they
don't. And yet, they do.
>
> >>>>>>> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
> >>>>>>> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>
> >>>>>> Lying, again.
>
> >>>>> How so? The very people who design them
> >>>>> say it's not good to run them without a load.
>
> >>>> Plenty dont.
>
> >>> More of them do.
>
> >> You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
>
> > You give me that same line even when I say some.
>
> Lying, again.
You just did.
>
> >>>>> You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
>
> >>>> Lying, again. I JUST said that it doesnt necessarily kill
> >>>> the amp, most obviously when its properly designed.
>
> >>> Properly designed as in protection against this condition.
> >>> Again, not the same as running without a load.
>
> >> Plenty of amps run fine without a load and without protection
> >> cutting in.
>
> > Just as plenty of them don't.
>
> Pity you previously claimed ALL.
Whether I say "All" or "plenty", you still say it's wrong. So why
bother.
>
> >>>>>>>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
> >>>>>>>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
> >>>>>>>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
> >>>>>>>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>
> >>>>>>>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective, stupid.
>
> >>>>>> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
> >>>>>>> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>
> >>>>>> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
> >>>>>> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
>
> >>>>> Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
>
> >>>>> Protection stops this from happening.
>
> >>>>> How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without
> >>>>> a load, which is what you said you were doing?
>
> >>>> I didnt say that I did it like that, liar.
>
> >>> You said yours ran without a load and that continuing to run
> >>> without one (if a speaker becomes disconnected) wouldn't hurt it.
>
> >> Yep, and I proved that the amp didnt give a damn when that happened.
>
> > As I can (and have in the past) proved that a
> > lot of amps do give a damn if this happens.
>
> Pity you previously claimed ALL.
Oh STFU.
Rod Speed
>>>>>>>>>>> There. Done.
>>>>>>>>>> Nothing like your original.
>>> And?
Because you keep attempting to claim that you only ever made
that comment in context and that is clearly a bare faced lie.
>>>> Pity that if it does shut down ITS CLEARLY PROTECTED AGAINST
>>>> RUNNING THAT WAY, and if it doesnt shut down IT CANT DAMAGE
>>>> ANYTHING BECAUSE NOTHING IS CONNECTED TO IS.
>>> How would it damage something that isn't connected to it?
>> Precisely.
>>> Where did that come from?
>> Your stupid claim that it shuts down to protect anything when its unloaded.
> Yes, in this case itself.
Still wrong, the supply doesnt need any protection when running unloaded,
it will either start fine unloaded and wont get damaged or it wont start.
In spit of your original claim that has always been just plain wrong.
>>>>>>>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>>>>>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have
>>>>>>>> ANY protection.
>>>>>>> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>>>>>> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
>>>>> And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted
>>>>> rail. Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against
>>>>> equipment damage as well - in this case, the supply itself.
>>>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>>>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>>>> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
>>>> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>>> uh huh - and the better ones do.
>> No one ever said they didnt.
> All ATX supplies are supposed to have this protection.
> Yet, I have seen cheaper ones that don't.
No news.
All ATX supplys are supposed to ensure that nothing powered
from them can be killed if the power supply dies for whatever
reason too, and there are plenty of examples of cheap supplys
that have dies and taken some of what is powered from them
with them when they die.
That is NOT the same as not having ANY protection.
>>>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about
>>>>>> whether it has OTHER protection.
>>>>> Took out the mobo when this happened,
>>>>> actually. Not my idea of protection.
>>>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>>>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>>>> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
>>>> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>>> uh huh - and again, the better ones do.
>> No one ever said they didnt.
> So clearly this was a cheaper design that failed to comply with spec.
Duh.
>>>>>>> That is what the thread was about.
>>>>>> Lying, again.
>>>>> OP said it didn't power up because a cable was not connected correctly.
>>>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>>>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>>>> No evidence that the OPs power supply damaged anything.
>>> I never said the OP's power supply did damage anything!
>> I never ever said you did.
> Then why did you even bring it up, saying that there
> was no evidence that it DID damage something?
Because you made that stupid pig ignorant claim that
some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
>>> His old PS died so he replaced it. The new one didn't power up
>>> - he had something connection wrong. He fixed the connection
>>> and then his machine booted up fine. Where did I say otherwise?
>> You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>> And you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that
>> its bad for power supplys to run unloaded.
> Which is why there is protection to keep that from happening.
No there isnt. They dont all start unloaded, in fact most dont
start unloaded BUT THAT IS NOT DUE TO PRETECTION
THATS BEEN ADDED TO STOP IT STARTING UNLOADED.
Its because its cheaper to design the supply that way.
>>>>>>>>> Either way, the statement you just now made is contradictory
>>>>>>>>> to itself.
>>>>>>>> Lying now.
>>>>>>> Why did you remove the statement this was about?
>>>>>> I didnt remove a thing, you pathological liar. YOU are
>>>>>> the only one that has deleted anything from these posts.
>>>>> Oh crap.. lol my mistake! I took out your comment along with
>>>>> others in order to keep the message short. Didn't mean to do
>>>>> that. Oops! ^_^
>>>> A Jap would at least have the decency to disembowel itself |-)
>>> Wow... at first I thought you just liked to troll in these
>>> groups to argue and I wasn't going to stoop to your level,
>> Corse you never ever argue yourself, eh ?
>>> but damn.... you really are an ass!
>> That was a JOKE you stupid fuckwit. It even had a
>> smiley on the end for the terminally SOH challenged.
> I didn't think it was at all funny.
You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not think is funny in spades.
> In fact, it comes across that you are a raciest ass is what it does.
It was a JOKE, you stupid fuckwit clown.
Dont laugh, see if I actually give a flying red fuck whether you do or not.
>>>>>>>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>>>>>>>>>> There is no such animal.
>>>>>>>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>>>>>>>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>>>>>>> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
>>>>>>> a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
>>>>>> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
>>>>> If the power supply handles it fine (which they
>>>>> all do to a degree), then it has tolerance.
>>>> Thats not what 'within tolerance' means.
>>>>> It has to, since household current is not always stable. Storms,
>>>>> big motors kicking on and off, etc. Again, voltage regulation.
>>>> THERE IS NO TOLERANCE TO BE WITHIN.
>>> It has to be designed to tolerate normal and unavoidable voltage
>>> fluctuations.
>> Duh. THERE IS STILL NOW SPECIFIED TOLERANCE.
> I know there is NOW specified tolerance.
No you dont.
>>> If the fluctuations are within a certain, threshold they are within
>>> tolerance.
>> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
> But a threshold nonetheless.
Nope.
>>> If input voltage is outside this threshold, the PS will shut down.
>> Wrong again with spikes.
> Shutting down due to under voltage.
They dont all do that either.
> There should still be protection against damage from spikes though.
> Cheaper supplies tend to not have as good protection however.
Duh.
> Either way, there is a specified range between 100 and 127 volts
> (or 200 and 240) in which the power supply should function as normal.
Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim you made, AGAIN.
>>> If the input voltage remains within this threshold, it is within tolerance.
>> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
> 100-127
> or
> 200-240 as per ATX spec.
That aint the SPIKES you were clearly discussing,
you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
>>> An AC supply is not perfectly 100% stable so therefore,
>>> a PS has to be designed to tolerate this to a point.
>> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD WITH SPIKES.
> again
> 100-127
> or
> 200-240 as per ATX spec.
That aint the SPIKES you were clearly discussing,
you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
Which is nothing like what you lied about me saying.
> Well, I have running in this machine a power supply that will not
> remain on if the Power Good line is not connected to anything.
> This counts as "any other issue".
Nothing like what you lied about me saying.
And you are STILL just plain wrong with that original claim
about the Power Good going down if something is fried on
the motherboard. The Power Good line is a signal FROM
THE POWER SUPPLY that its rails are all within spec.
>>> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
>>> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
> Me:
> I have quite a few that will shut down if load on PG does not exist.
> You:
> Fantasy. There are quite a few that will shut down if the
> OUTPUT RAILS arent loaded, a different matter entirely.
That claim about the power supply shutting
down if the PG line isnt loaded is pure fantasy.
And the ATX spec says NOTHING about that happening, let alone requiring that.
>>>>>>>>> you're the one who brought up voltage spikes to begin with,
>>>>>>>>> when that again has nothing to do with outputs being shorted.
>>>>>>>> Pity you never restricted your original stupid claim to shorted
>>>>>>>> outputs.
>>>>>>> The thread was talking about shorted outputs. Take it in context.
>>>>>> Pity you spewed your drivel about
>>>>>> unloaded in your first post in this thread.
>>>>> PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
>>>> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will start
>>>> up fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>>>> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
>>>> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
>>> Again....
>>> You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine
>>> and stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected.
>> No I didnt. You're lying, again.
> Yes, you did.
No I didnt.
> You said that what I was saying about some supplies not remaining powered
> up if the Power Good line is not connected to anything was "fantasy".
And it is. There are two parts to that lie of yours above.
>>> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
>>> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
> nope.
Yep.
>>>>> Doesn't matter.
>>>> Corse it does.
>> Yep.
>>>>>>>> Wrong, as always.
>>>>>> They dont.
>>> which is wrong.
Lying, as always.
> And yet, they do.
Pity I never ever said that.
>>>>>>>>> But hey since you continue to say you know better than
>>>>>>>>> the very people who designed the amps in the first place,
>>>>>>>> Lying, again.
>>>>>>> How so? The very people who design them
>>>>>>> say it's not good to run them without a load.
>>>>>> Plenty dont.
>>>>> More of them do.
>>>> You stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
>>> You give me that same line even when I say some.
>> Lying, again.
> You just did.
Lying, as always.
>>>>>>> You on the other hand are saying otherwise.
>>>>>> Lying, again. I JUST said that it doesnt necessarily kill
>>>>>> the amp, most obviously when its properly designed.
>>>>> Properly designed as in protection against this condition.
>>>>> Again, not the same as running without a load.
>>>> Plenty of amps run fine without a load and without protection
>>>> cutting in.
>>> Just as plenty of them don't.
>> Pity you previously claimed ALL.
> Whether I say "All" or "plenty", you still say it's wrong.
Lying, as always.
> So why bother.
So why lie ?
>>>>>>>>>>> And in better designs, the amp is shut down so that the
>>>>>>>>>>> amp is now NOT running without a proper load, which
>>>>>>>>>>> is the exact opposite of your claim that you've been
>>>>>>>>>>> running your amps on high power with no speaker attached.
>>>>>>>>>> No its not. It just means that the protection was effective,
>>>>>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>>> Effective protection shutting an amp down under this condition
>>>>>>>>> is not exactly you running an amp without a load, now is it?
>>>>>>>> Pity you only tried to run that line after your nose was rubbed
>>>>>>>> in the terminal stupidity of your original claim about amps.
>>>>>>> Amp is switched on and run at high power with no load.
>>>>>>> Protection stops this from happening.
>>>>>>> How is this CONTINUING to run said amp without
>>>>>>> a load, which is what you said you were doing?
>>>>>> I didnt say that I did it like that, liar.
>>>>> You said yours ran without a load and that continuing to run
>>>>> without one (if a speaker becomes disconnected) wouldn't hurt it.
>>>> Yep, and I proved that the amp didnt give a damn when that
>>>> happened.
>>> As I can (and have in the past) proved that a
>>> lot of amps do give a damn if this happens.
>> Pity you previously claimed ALL.
> Oh STFU.
FTRES
David Matthew Wood
<44f8ce4e$0$26775$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>,
"Rod Speed" <rod_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>> in which case I don't consider the equipment protected.
>
> >>>> Again, nothing like your original.
>
> >>> I said this a couple of times actually.
>
> >> Not in your original you never did.
>
> > This is true. Dunno why you continue to rub that
> > in though, since it's been established already.
>
> Because you keep attempting to claim that you only ever made
> that comment in context and that is clearly a bare faced lie.
In context of the original poster's problem.
>
> >>>> Pity that if it does shut down ITS CLEARLY PROTECTED AGAINST
> >>>> RUNNING THAT WAY, and if it doesnt shut down IT CANT DAMAGE
> >>>> ANYTHING BECAUSE NOTHING IS CONNECTED TO IS.
>
> >>> How would it damage something that isn't connected to it?
>
> >> Precisely.
>
> >>> Where did that come from?
>
> >> Your stupid claim that it shuts down to protect anything when its
> >> unloaded.
>
> > Yes, in this case itself.
>
> Still wrong, the supply doesnt need any protection when running unloaded,
> it will either start fine unloaded and wont get damaged or it wont start.
>
> In spit of your original claim that has always been just plain wrong.
My original claim is that some won't stay on if they don't see a load on
power good. I have one of them in this computer. If I take away power
good, it will shut off.
>
> >>>>>>>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>
> >>>>>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have
> >>>>>>>> ANY protection.
>
> >>>>>>> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>
> >>>>>> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
>
> >>>>> And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted
> >>>>> rail. Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against
> >>>>> equipment damage as well - in this case, the supply itself.
>
> >>>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> >>>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> >>>> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
> >>>> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>
> >>> uh huh - and the better ones do.
>
> >> No one ever said they didnt.
>
> > All ATX supplies are supposed to have this protection.
> > Yet, I have seen cheaper ones that don't.
>
> No news.
Which is what I meant by "don't have any protection". Again, in context
to the original post in this thread.
>
> All ATX supplys are supposed to ensure that nothing powered
> from them can be killed if the power supply dies for whatever
> reason too, and there are plenty of examples of cheap supplys
> that have dies and taken some of what is powered from them
> with them when they die.
>
> That is NOT the same as not having ANY protection.
Well they certainly don't have protection against shorted rails, which
they are all supposed to! Therefore, I don't consider this protection!
If it's not up to spec, it's not what I consider protection.
>
> >>>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about
> >>>>>> whether it has OTHER protection.
>
> >>>>> Took out the mobo when this happened,
> >>>>> actually. Not my idea of protection.
>
> >>>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> >>>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> >>>> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
> >>>> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>
> >>> uh huh - and again, the better ones do.
>
> >> No one ever said they didnt.
>
> > So clearly this was a cheaper design that failed to comply with spec.
>
> Duh.
>
> >>>>>>> That is what the thread was about.
>
> >>>>>> Lying, again.
>
> >>>>> OP said it didn't power up because a cable was not connected correctly.
>
> >>>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
> >>>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>
> >>>> No evidence that the OPs power supply damaged anything.
>
> >>> I never said the OP's power supply did damage anything!
>
> >> I never ever said you did.
>
> > Then why did you even bring it up, saying that there
> > was no evidence that it DID damage something?
>
> Because you made that stupid pig ignorant claim that
> some cheap power supplys dont have ANY protection.
If their protection isn't up to spec, I don't consider it protection.
> >> That was a JOKE you stupid fuckwit. It even had a
> >> smiley on the end for the terminally SOH challenged.
>
> > I didn't think it was at all funny.
>
> You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
> irrelevant. What you may or may not think is funny in spades.
Whether or not that was a joke is also irrelevant. Either way though,
it shows you're a raciest. That's too bad, really.
>
> > In fact, it comes across that you are a raciest ass is what it does.
>
> It was a JOKE, you stupid fuckwit clown.
A joke a raciest would make.
> Dont laugh, see if I actually give a flying red fuck whether you do or not.
DAMN! Someone's got something shoved up his ass, and it's not me.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> There is no such animal.
>
> >>>>>>>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power then.
>
> >>>>>>>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>
> >>>>>>> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a household
> >>>>>>> a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates at all?
>
> >>>>>> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
>
> >>>>> If the power supply handles it fine (which they
> >>>>> all do to a degree), then it has tolerance.
>
> >>>> Thats not what 'within tolerance' means.
>
> >>>>> It has to, since household current is not always stable. Storms,
> >>>>> big motors kicking on and off, etc. Again, voltage regulation.
>
> >>>> THERE IS NO TOLERANCE TO BE WITHIN.
>
> >>> It has to be designed to tolerate normal and unavoidable voltage
> >>> fluctuations.
>
> >> Duh. THERE IS STILL NOW SPECIFIED TOLERANCE.
>
> > I know there is NOW specified tolerance.
>
> No you dont.
You said "THERE IS STILL NOW SPECIFIED TOLERANCE". And yes, there is.
>
> >>> If the fluctuations are within a certain, threshold they are within
> >>> tolerance.
>
> >> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
>
> > But a threshold nonetheless.
>
> Nope.
So then you're saying that a power supply will fail to work if input
voltages changes just by a couple of volts? Glad I don't have any such
beast here.
> >>> If input voltage is outside this threshold, the PS will shut down.
>
> >> Wrong again with spikes.
>
> > Shutting down due to under voltage.
>
> They dont all do that either.
Then they're not up to ATX spec. What kind of protection is that?
> > There should still be protection against damage from spikes though.
> > Cheaper supplies tend to not have as good protection however.
>
> Duh.
>
> > Either way, there is a specified range between 100 and 127 volts
> > (or 200 and 240) in which the power supply should function as normal.
>
> Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim you made, AGAIN.
>
> >>> If the input voltage remains within this threshold, it is within
> >>> tolerance.
>
> >> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
>
> > 100-127
> > or
> > 200-240 as per ATX spec.
>
> That aint the SPIKES you were clearly discussing,
> you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
A spike can refer to any short period of overvoltage condition. If a
supply is rated for 110 and it gets a spike of 127, that is within
spec'ed tolerance and the supply is not supposed to have a problem with
this. 127 may not be a damaging spike, but it is still a spike
nonetheless.
> >>> An AC supply is not perfectly 100% stable so therefore,
> >>> a PS has to be designed to tolerate this to a point.
>
> >> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD WITH SPIKES.
>
> > again
> > 100-127
> > or
> > 200-240 as per ATX spec.
>
> That aint the SPIKES you were clearly discussing,
> you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
I wasn't discussing spikes! I only mentioned the word spike - which can
refer to any short period of overvoltage. A power supply is supposed to
handle this quite happily up to 127 - quite a bit above the juice you
are supposed to be getting from a power outlet.
You said that in several posts back. I have a power supply running in
this computer that will indeed shut down if I cut "power good"! PERIOD.
> >>> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
> >>> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>
> >> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
>
> > Me:
> > I have quite a few that will shut down if load on PG does not exist.
>
> > You:
> > Fantasy. There are quite a few that will shut down if the
> > OUTPUT RAILS arent loaded, a different matter entirely.
>
> That claim about the power supply shutting
> down if the PG line isnt loaded is pure fantasy.
I have one right here, running my computer. If I cut PG, it WILL turn
off!
> And the ATX spec says NOTHING about that happening, let alone requiring that.
But some still do. I have one!
> >>>>> PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
>
> >>>> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will start
> >>>> up fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>
> >>>> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
> >>>> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
>
> >>> Again....
> >>> You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine
> >>> and stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected.
>
> >> No I didnt. You're lying, again.
>
> > Yes, you did.
>
> No I didnt.
>
> > You said that what I was saying about some supplies not remaining powered
> > up if the Power Good line is not connected to anything was "fantasy".
>
> And it is. There are two parts to that lie of yours above.
First you say there is not a load on power good. Then you say it's
cheaper to design a supply that will not turn on if there is no load on
power good. THEN you say the lack of a load on power good does not turn
off a supply....now you're saying it does. MAKE UP YOUR MIND!
>
> >>> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
> >>> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>
> >> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
>
> > nope.
>
> Yep.
How? Yon contradicted your own statement about power good a couple of
times just a few lines above this one!
> >>>>>>> So why do all amp manufacturers say to never run without a load?
>
> >>>>>> They dont.
>
> >>>>> Plenty of them do - even for tube amps.
>
> >>>> Wrong, as always. And you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
>
> >>> And now you're saying none of them say this,
>
> >> No I'm not, you pathological liar.
>
> >>> which is wrong.
>
> >> Pity I never ever said that.
>
> > See? Even if I say "plenty" which is not "all", you still say they don't.
>
> Lying, as always.
>
> > And yet, they do.
>
> Pity I never ever said that.
You just did, by telling me I was wrong when I said plenty of them warn
you not to run an amp without a load!
bughunte...@gmail.com
. wrote:
> In article <4leqslF...@individual.net>,
> "Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Unplug everything except the motherboard
> > and see if the cpu fan comes on and stays on.
> >
> > If it does, plug the hard drive in and see if it will boot
> > with just the motherboard and hard drive connected etc.
>
> Thanks to you and all who responded.
>
> My original post asserted that I wasn't an engineer. True. But I
> solved the problem with your advice above, thinking systematically like
> an engineer. I disconnected the power supply and connected everything
> one by one, and the computer is now fully functional. From a little
> research I did, I think my issue was that I'd connected the 3.5" floppy
> power incorrectly or partially.
Missed a pin huh? :) From the sounds of it, it was probably not a hot
wire... Good thing, smoke a floppy drive otherwise. :)
> I also appreciate everyone's point about not being cheap. In 15+ years
> of heavy computer use, i've never had a PSU go bad on me. But given all
> the heartache this burnout caused, I'll from now on spend the extra
> money for an Antec or other name brand supply. If I'd lost something
> really important and known that an extra $40-50 would have averted the
> disaster, I'd have been kicking myself.
Do yourself a big favor, plan a disaster recovery situation now, while
you can. IE: Backups. :) Backup the data your concerned with. PSU unit
failures are a common thing, regardless of the name stamped on the PSU
unit. All PSU's will eventually fail, that's life. The idea is, your
data doesn't go down with the machine. :)
bughunte...@gmail.com
Dave C. wrote:
> Poor quality power supplies have two very nasty habits:
I've seen an Antec and a Seatronic (neither are considered, poor
quality) both die, and both took out the cpu/mainboard. You could still
boot the cpu on another board, but diagnostics with hotcpu test would
indicate bad l2 cache on the processor. You could verify this later by
failed windows installations.
> 1) They die early (that is GUARANTEED, btw), often shortly after leaving
> the factory
Really depends on several factors... Power line conditions to your
home, weather conditions outside your home, whether or not your home
has a good electrical ground to earth...
> 2) With no built-in component protection, they often take other components
> with them, when they die. In other words, cheap power supplies kill
A power surge strong enough is going to pass most/all PSU units and
toast other hardware.
> motherboards, hard drives, CPUs, RAM, etc.
>
> Your post is about TWO poor quality power supplies. I suspect that the
> first one died ungracefully, taking the motherboard out with it. The second
> one can't even power itself, apparently.
Nah....It really depends. I agree, he's being cheap, but.. :)
> It's your money, but people don't seem to understand that often spending an
> extra 40 bucks or so on a GOOD power supply can save a complete rebuild,
> costing hundreds of bucks. -Dave
Tell that to emachine. :) Best Tec strikes again should have been it's
selling logo.. hehe
The standby voltage on a bad best tec, will jump to 6+ volts, toasting
the poor mainboard. Emachine knew of this problem for several years. I
wonder how many emachine owners replaced a power supply, only to find
the board/cpu were bad too? heh.
bughunte...@gmail.com
Penn...@DerryMaine.Gov wrote:
> It lasted about three weeks, or the first power fluctuation - Lost the
> power supply and mother board.
And while your forking out the hard earned cash on a good PSU, get a
good UPS as well. What's the point of a nice PSU if you have dirty
power coming into it? :(
> Just agreeing with you, One should not scrimp on the power supply, buy
> the best.
And don't be a cheap bastard when it comes to protecting it, either.
Tripplite/APC are your friends, get a UPS, be a happy person. No power
flucuations. The nicer ones always run your box on an isolated circuit
actually fed by the battery. A true square wave is what you want to
shoot for.
bughunte...@gmail.com
David Matthew Wood wrote:
> Yes, and while it doesn't directly have anything to do with Power Good,
> such power supplies don't provide any protection either. If you try to
> fire up a GOOD supply and it doesn't observe the correct loads (either
> from not being properly connected or from something that is shorting),
> it will shut down in order to prevent damage since it is bad for a power
> supply to run without a load. Same goes with amps. If you power up an
Who told you such nonsense? A power supply isn't like an Amplifier,
well, it sort of is electronically, but running one without a load
isn't going to hurt it. Your not increasing voltage, your dropping it!
> amp and crank the volume without speakers attached, it will either a, go
> into thermal shut down, or b, self-destruct.
Not the same concept... And this mainly applies to radio equipment and
some poor quality amplifiers. It's the SWR I think that your talking
about. Firing up a cb radio for example with no antenna and
transmitting can damage the finals (transistors...)... but, for
receive, it doesn't hurt anything. Just don't key the mic. :)
bughunte...@gmail.com
David Matthew Wood wrote:
> What, that cheap POS power supplies don't shut down right away if
> something is shorting? Well lets see. I have some sitting around that
Some power supplies shut down when the voltage request goes too high;
IE: ground out condition, sure. Some do not, some will fight by
increasing available amps until something gives.. These power supplies
think your just requesting more power.
> will not power up at all because something in the machine shorted them
> out. I have others sitting around that still power up and work just
> fine after being shorted out, because they shut down right away before
> damage was done.
I suspect if you pop the case on a bad one and go probing, you'll find
a blown diode is causing the power supply to play dead.
> Shutting down before damage is done you mean. I've witnessed both.
Damage with electronics can happen the instant power is applied. No
circuit in the world can protect for every situation.
> A, something will short out and PS will smoke.
> or
> B, something will short out and PS will turn off. In which case, after
> dealing with whatever caused the short, the power supply will come to
> life and work just fine.
Or option C, the power supply has a safety diode, in the event
something is wired up reverse, the diode blows before anything else
does.
> Oh really? Why don't you try it then. Force a cheap power supply on
> and let it run for a while without a load. See what happens.
Not a damn thing is going to happen. Do you know why? Because the power
supply is a glorified step down transformer, ac/dc converter and
partial noise filter, nothing more, nothing less. No "load" damage to
speak of. If this nonsense were true, people plugging in nintendos,
ataris, etc, (coleco anyone?) would have torched their PSU a long time
ago. :)
Power supplies do not increase current, they do not have final output
transistors, they do not get signal reflection.. IE: a no load
condition is not going to hurt them in the least bit.
Want to run it for awhile with no load to see for yourself? (Btw, the
power supply has a cooling fan, so it's already got a load on power
up...) Take a paperclip, find the thin purple wire, short it against
one of the black wires (doesn't really matter which, they're all
ground, all goto the same place in the PSU too), and it'll power up and
remain on so long as the paperclip is in place.
You can even take voltage readings from the psu unit in this state,
without any worry that you risk harming the rest of the computer in the
event the psu is unstable.
> Again...oh really? Take a high current amplifier, give it an audio
> feed, disconnect anything that will create a load on the outputs, crank
> the levels, and see what happens.
This isn't the same. You get signal reflection, the load is necessary
to absorb most of it. A power supply doesn't have any signal
reflection, it's not amplifying anything. It's taking 120volts AC,
converting it to 12+, 5+, 7.5+, 12-, 5- volts dc current..
Your confusing a power supply with a radio transmitter..
bughunte...@gmail.com
David Matthew Wood wrote:
> Um.... no. Many years ago, I overestimated the space between the bottom
> of a hard drive and the metal frame of the case. Turned machine on,
> drive control board shorted and smoked. Because of this short, power
> supply also smoked. How is that an assumption exactly?
That doesn't mean the power supply had no protection, it means you
managed to short out the 12 volt and 5volt rails.. Very stupid on your
part.
> And again later, I unknowingly had a bad power connector which turned
> out to be shorted. Fired up the supply, it came on for not even half a
I suspect if you had shorted both rails as you did previously, said
power supply might have died a horrible death. It depends on it's
internal design, of course.
> second, and turned itself off again. Short was cleared, power was fired
> up again, and all was well.
Did you get an amp reading? If not, you can't be sure the power supply
was okay. You also can't be sure the initial short didn't cause some
components to become weak, and shorten the life of the power supply.
> I had one smoke due to this.
One rail, probably not, both rails to ground (which ehh, is what you
obviously did) might/can kill a power supply.
> Yes, and the better designed supplies shut down before this happens -
> just as the better designs shut off in time to save themselves if they
> are shorted.
Not always. :)
> Then why do the manufacturers of these very supplies advise against this?
Do you have a url for a psu manufacturer who advises against running
them with no load? (note this isn't actually possible, the psu itself
places a load on some of it's own components, so really it is under
load the entire time..)
> high power, it will eventually kill the amp - if it doesn't trip the
> protection circuits first!
An amp isn't the same as a psu in your computer. Your amp is taking a
small electrical signal and boosting it, possibly cleaning it up, and
sending it on thru. Your power supply isn't boosting anything, it's
reducing and converting, and if it's a really good one, doing some
fairly nice square wave filtering.
> Well since you seem to know more than the people who made these amps,
> all of whom say NEVER run an amp without a load...
A linear amplifier, shouldn't be run without a load, you will hurt it,
The SWR will blow the finals.. A stereo amplifier isn't the same idea.
I had big amps in the 80s when I was growing up, big stereo amps, from
the old school stereo systems. Didn't hurt them a bit to fire it up
with no speakers attached. I've got two peaveys here that don't mind
either. :)
> And while these speakers are being over driven, you are still driving
> them and thus the amp is seeing a load! How long after completely
> melting the speaker coils, have you run this amp exactly? How long have
> you let it run under constant high power without a load? Do you
> actually test this by turning the volume up higher and higher AFTER you
> manage to blow the speakers?
You do realize, unless you have a load on the amp, nothing is using any
amplified signal right? Your not transmitting via an antenna, Your
amplifyer isn't actually having to work unless/until a speaker is
connected, regardless of your volume setting.
I've blown several sets of car speakers using car amps, household amps,
etc etc etc, left one running all night when I passed out once. :) I
awoke to burned up speakers, but the amp was perfectly fine, connected
new speakers, walla, tunes blaring again.
A stereo amplifier isn't the same as a radio amplifier, such as a
linear for ham/cb rig. The reason those will blow is due to the SWR,
it's a signal reflection from the finals, Without a load (dummy load or
antenna) the RF energy comes back to the finals, toasting them in the
process. A car/home/house/guitar amp doesn't work like this.
bughunte...@gmail.com
Rod Speed wrote:
> There are no 'output transformers'
Output transistors :) They do the real work inside the amp.. hehe.
> There are no 'output transformers'
Maybe he's talking about the little coil that sorta looks like a small
transformer? :)
(it's only purpose is to keep the signal cleaner.. heh)
You know, if the guy was talking about an amplifier for a radio
transmitter, he'd be right in the sense it shouldn't be run without a
load, but an audio amplifier doesn't generate RF....
bughunte...@gmail.com
Rod Speed wrote:
> Basically because its cheaper to design it
> so that it needs some load to start properly.
Aye.. It is cheaper. It saves them a few capacitors... Hence the need
for a load; You'd think they'd settle for the cooling fan.. but ah
well.
> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
Tube amps are extremely forgiving as compared to the transistorized
brothers.
Tube amps is a really bad example for claiming no load kills them. They
are hard to kill... very hard. He was better off trying to claim
transistorized amps would die without a load.. It was more belivable.
bughunte...@gmail.com
Plato wrote:
> Lookout wrote:
> >
> > If all you hook up to the power supply is the MOBO (no RAM or CPU) and
> > you can't even get to post (a beep, no beeps at all) then your problem
> > is probably (98%) a fried MOBO. Just hope it didn't go any further.
>
> There are generally two things that cause a major smell when they burn
> out:
>
> 1. Monitor
> 2. The Case Power Supply
You forgot two.. off the top of my head. A lightning striked NIC card
and modem, god awful smell. :)
Rod Speed
>>>>>>> David Matthew Wood <nodmw...@verizonspam.net> wrote
>>>>>>> in which case I don't consider the equipment protected.
>>>>>> Again, nothing like your original.
>>>>> I said this a couple of times actually.
>>>> Not in your original you never did.
>>> This is true. Dunno why you continue to rub that
>>> in though, since it's been established already.
>> Because you keep attempting to claim that you only ever made
>> that comment in context and that is clearly a bare faced lie.
> In context of the original poster's problem.
Still a lie. The OP's problem had nothing to do with the Power Good line, or
running a power supply unloaded either. In spades with your drivel about amps.
No matter how desperately you attempt to bullshit
now, you're fooling absolutely no one at all.
>>>>>> Pity that if it does shut down ITS CLEARLY PROTECTED AGAINST
>>>>>> RUNNING THAT WAY, and if it doesnt shut down IT CANT DAMAGE
>>>>>> ANYTHING BECAUSE NOTHING IS CONNECTED TO IS.
>>>>> How would it damage something that isn't connected to it?
>>>> Precisely.
>>>>> Where did that come from?
>>>> Your stupid claim that it shuts down to protect anything when its unloaded.
>>> Yes, in this case itself.
>> Still wrong, the supply doesnt need any protection when running unloaded,
>> it will either start fine unloaded and wont get damaged or it wont start.
>> In spit of your original claim that has always been just plain wrong.
> My original claim is that some won't stay
> on if they don't see a load on power good.
Lying, again. You never ever said anything like that originally.
Here it is again.
>>>>>>>> Yes, and while it doesn't directly have anything to do
>>>>>>>> with Power Good, such power supplies don't provide
>>>>>>>> any protection either. If you try to fire up a GOOD
>>>>>>>> supply and it doesn't observe the correct loads (either
>>>>>>>> from not being properly connected or from something
>>>>>>>> that is shorting), it will shut down in order to prevent
>>>>>>>> damage since it is bad for a power supply to run
>>>>>>>> without a load. Same goes with amps. If you power
>>>>>>>> up an amp and crank the volume without speakers attached,
>>>>>>>> it will either a, gointo thermal shut down, or b, self-destruct.
> I have one of them in this computer. If I take away power good, it will shut
> off.
Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim that good power
supplys shut down if they detect that they are unloaded,
to protect themselves against being used like that.
It wont do them any harm even if they can start unloaded,
and most cant, because its cheaper to design them like that.
>>>>>>>>>>> Case in point, power supply that smoked when it was shorted.
>>>>>>>>>> Says nothing useful what so ever about whether it didnt have
>>>>>>>>>> ANY protection.
>>>>>>>>> Protection against damage, no it obviously did not.
>>>>>>>> It just didnt have protection AGAINST A SHORTED RAIL.
>>>>>>> And therefore didn't have equipment protection against a shorted
>>>>>>> rail. Yes. Well, I also consider this protection against
>>>>>>> equipment damage as well - in this case, the supply itself.
>>>>>> Pity you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed that SOME CHEAP
>>>>>> POWER SUPPLYS DONT HAVE ANY PROTECTION.
>>>>>> ALL THAT SHOWS IS THAT THOSE DONT HAVE
>>>>>> PROTECTION AGAINST A SHORTED OUTPUT.
>>>>> uh huh - and the better ones do.
>>>> No one ever said they didnt.
>>> All ATX supplies are supposed to have this protection.
>>> Yet, I have seen cheaper ones that don't.
>> No news.
> Which is what I meant by "don't have any protection".
Lying as always.
> Again, in context to the original post in this thread.
Your stupid pig ignorant claim about good power supplys
purportedly shutting down when they are started unloaded
because they need to do that to avoid any damage to
themselves if they run unloaded is completely irrelevant to
the OP's context. He didnt even attempt to use it like that.
AND IF IT ISNT PLUGGED INTO THE MOTHERBOARD,
IT CANT EVEN START, BECAUSE IT DOESNT EVEN SEE
THE START SIGNAL FROM THE MOTHERBOARD ANYWAY.
>> All ATX supplys are supposed to ensure that nothing powered
>> from them can be killed if the power supply dies for whatever
>> reason too, and there are plenty of examples of cheap supplys
>> that have dies and taken some of what is powered from them
>> with them when they die.
>> That is NOT the same as not having ANY protection.
> Well they certainly don't have protection against
> shorted rails, which they are all supposed to!
No news. No one has ever said they all do.
> Therefore, I don't consider this protection!
Separate matter entirely to not providing ANY protection.
> If it's not up to spec, it's not what I consider protection.
Separate matter entirely to not providing ANY protection.
>> Duh.
>>>>>>>> Lying, again.
Separate matter entirely to not providing ANY protection.
>>>> That was a JOKE you stupid fuckwit. It even had a
>>>> smiley on the end for the terminally SOH challenged.
>>> I didn't think it was at all funny.
>> You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
>> irrelevant. What you may or may not think is funny in spades.
> Whether or not that was a joke is also irrelevant.
Nope.
> Either way though, it shows you're a raciest.
Nope. It isnt being a racist to say that negroids
tend to have curly hair and black skins either.
Or that asians tend to have black straight hair and inverted eyelids.
It isnt being a racist to tell irish jokes either.
> That's too bad, really.
Pathetic, really.
>>> In fact, it comes across that you are a raciest ass is what it does.
>> It was a JOKE, you stupid fuckwit clown.
> A joke a raciest would make.
Not a fucking clue, as always.
>> Dont laugh, see if I actually give a flying red fuck whether you do or not.
> DAMN! Someone's got something shoved up his ass,
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, child.
I dont even have an ass, tho I do have an arse.
> and it's not me.
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, child.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The spikes are within tolerance.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no such animal.
>>>>>>>>>>> You must have some reallllyyyyy cleeeaaaaaaaannnnn power
>>>>>>>>>>> then.
>>>>>>>>>> Nope, I'm just saying that there is no TOLERANCE to be within.
>>>>>>>>> So you're basically saying that the voltage you get from a
>>>>>>>>> household a/c outlet is a CONSTANT 120, and NEVER fluctuates
>>>>>>>>> at all?
>>>>>>>> Nope, THAT THERE IS NO TOLERANCE SPECIFIED WITH SPIKES.
>>>>>>> If the power supply handles it fine (which they
>>>>>>> all do to a degree), then it has tolerance.
>>>>>> Thats not what 'within tolerance' means.
>>>>>>> It has to, since household current is not always stable. Storms,
>>>>>>> big motors kicking on and off, etc. Again, voltage regulation.
>>>>>> THERE IS NO TOLERANCE TO BE WITHIN.
>>>>> It has to be designed to tolerate normal and unavoidable voltage
>>>>> fluctuations.
>>>> Duh. THERE IS STILL NOW SPECIFIED TOLERANCE.
>>> I know there is NOW specified tolerance.
>> No you dont.
> You said "THERE IS STILL NOW SPECIFIED TOLERANCE".
That was obviously a typo, fuckwit.
> And yes, there is.
No there isnt WITH THE SPIKES BEING DISCUSSED.
>>>>> If the fluctuations are within a certain,
>>>>> threshold they are within tolerance.
>>>> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
>>> But a threshold nonetheless.
>> Nope.
> So then you're saying that a power supply will fail to
> work if input voltages changes just by a couple of volts?
Nope, I AM SAYING THAT THERE IS NOT SPECIFIED TOLERANCE
OR THRESHOLD WITH THE SPIKES BEING DISCUSSED.
> Glad I don't have any such beast here.
You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly
irrelevant. What you may or may not be glad about in spades.
>>>>> If input voltage is outside this threshold, the PS will shut down.
>>>> Wrong again with spikes.
>>> Shutting down due to under voltage.
>> They dont all do that either.
> Then they're not up to ATX spec.
Duh.
> What kind of protection is that?
They still have SOME protection. Otherwise they wouldnt last long
in the real world with real world mains with the spikes seen on those.
>>> There should still be protection against damage from spikes though.
>>> Cheaper supplies tend to not have as good protection however.
>> Duh.
>>> Either way, there is a specified range between 100 and 127 volts
>>> (or 200 and 240) in which the power supply should function as normal.
>> Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim you made, AGAIN.
>>>>> If the input voltage remains within this threshold, it is within
>>>>> tolerance.
>>>> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD.
>>> 100-127
>>> or
>>> 200-240 as per ATX spec.
>> That aint the SPIKES you were clearly discussing,
>> you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
> A spike can refer to any short period of overvoltage condition.
Wrong again. That's a surge. And there are
STILL no specified thresholds with surges either.
> If a supply is rated for 110 and it gets a spike of 127, that is within
> spec'ed
> tolerance and the supply is not supposed to have a problem with this. 127
> may not be a damaging spike, but it is still a spike nonetheless.
Pity the specs just specify what STATIC voltages
the supply has to operate at, NOT WHAT SPIKES
OR SURGES IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE.
>>>>> An AC supply is not perfectly 100% stable so therefore,
>>>>> a PS has to be designed to tolerate this to a point.
>>>> THERE IS NO SPECIFIED THRESHOLD WITH SPIKES.
>>> again
>>> 100-127
>>> or
>>> 200-240 as per ATX spec.
>> That aint the SPIKES you were clearly discussing,
>> you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
> I wasn't discussing spikes!
Lying, as always. Its still there in the first
bit of this sub thread still being quoted.
> I only mentioned the word spike - which
> can refer to any short period of overvoltage.
Wrong again. We have separate words for spikes and surges for a reason.
AND THE ATX SPEC IS SILENT ON ANY THRESHOLD FOR SPIKES
AND SURGES THAT THE SUPPLY HAS TO BE ABLE TO HANDLE.
> A power supply is supposed to handle this quite happily up to 127 - quite
> a bit above the juice you are supposed to be getting from a power outlet.
Thats the STATIC voltage that the supply has to be able to hande,
NOT WHAT CAN BE SEEN WITH SPIKES AND SURGES.
You are NOW lying about what I said then.
> I have a power supply running in this computer that
> will indeed shut down if I cut "power good"! PERIOD.
Easy to claim. I dont believe it, you are clearly a pathological liar.
>>>>> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
>>>>> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>>>> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
>>> Me:
>>> I have quite a few that will shut down if load on PG does not exist.
>>> You:
>>> Fantasy. There are quite a few that will shut down if the
>>> OUTPUT RAILS arent loaded, a different matter entirely.
>> That claim about the power supply shutting
>> down if the PG line isnt loaded is pure fantasy.
> I have one right here, running my computer.
> If I cut PG, it WILL turn off!
Easy to claim. I dont believe it, you are clearly a pathological liar.
>> And the ATX spec says NOTHING about
>> that happening, let alone requiring that.
> But some still do. I have one!
Easy to claim. I dont believe it, you are clearly a pathological liar.
And completely irrelevant to the OP's problem ANYWAY.
>>>>>>> PG, yes. I have such a beast running in this machine.
>>>>>> No surprises there, its more common than power supplys that will start
>>>>>> up fine unloaded. BECAUSE ITS CHEAPER TO DESIGN THEM LIKE THAT.
>>>>>> Doesnt say anything useful ABOUT ANYTHING GETTING DAMAGED
>>>>>> IN THAT CONFIG. THE SUPPLY JUST FAILS TO START.
>>>>> Again....
>>>>> You said in an earlier post that ALL power supplies start up fine
>>>>> and stay running without the 5v Power Good line being connected.
>>>> No I didnt. You're lying, again.
>>> Yes, you did.
>> No I didnt.
>>> You said that what I was saying about some supplies not remaining
>>> powered up if the Power Good line is not connected to anything was
>>> "fantasy".
>> And it is. There are two parts to that lie of yours above.
> First you say there is not a load on power good.
Lying again. I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like
that.
There is ALWAYS a load on ANY connected signal line.
> Then you say it's cheaper to design a supply that
> will not turn on if there is no load on power good.
Lying again. I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like
that.
What I ACTUALLY said is that its cheaper to design a supply that needs
a load ON SOME OF THE RAILS IT PROVIDES, before it will start.
The Power Good line IS NOT A RAIL, ITS A SIGNAL.
> THEN you say the lack of a load on power good does
> not turn off a supply....now you're saying it does.
Lying again. I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like
that.
> MAKE UP YOUR MIND!
I HAVENT CHANGED ANYTHING I SAID ON THAT.
>>>>> Yet, I have one in this machine that does not stay
>>>>> powered if the 5v Power Good line is not connected.
>>>> Irrelevant to anything I ever said.
>>> nope.
>> Yep.
> How?
See above.
> Yon contradicted your own statement about power
> good a couple of times just a few lines above this one!
Lying, as always. You cant even manage
to comprehend what I have actually said.
>>>>>>>>> So why do all amp manufacturers say to never run without a load?
>>>>>>>> They dont.
>>>>>>> Plenty of them do - even for tube amps.
>>>>>> Wrong, as always. And you stupidly pig ignorantly claimed ALL.
>>>>> And now you're saying none of them say this,
>>>> No I'm not, you pathological liar.
>>>>> which is wrong.
>>>> Pity I never ever said that.
>>> See? Even if I say "plenty" which is not "all", you still say they don't.
>> Lying, as always.
>>> And yet, they do.
>> Pity I never ever said that.
> You just did, by telling me I was wrong when I said
> plenty of them warn you not to run an amp without a load!
Lying again. I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like
that.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Basically because its cheaper to design it
>> so that it needs some load to start properly.
> Aye.. It is cheaper. It saves them a few capacitors...
There's more involved than a few capacitors.
> Hence the need for a load; You'd think they'd
> settle for the cooling fan.. but ah well.
There isnt really a lot of point designing to start with no load
because if its not plugged in, there is no power on signal either.
>> And those care least about no speakers anyway.
> Tube amps are extremely forgiving as compared to the transistorized brothers.
Yep, he hasnt actually got a clue about amps, or power supplys either.
> Tube amps is a really bad example for claiming
> no load kills them. They are hard to kill... very hard.
And they dont get killed running with no load.
> He was better off trying to claim transistorized amps
> would die without a load.. It was more belivable.
Yeah, he appeared to paint himself into a corner with the
stupid claim about transformers and hasnt got the balls to
admit that stupidity, or he doesnt actually have a clue about
amps except that he does realise that tube amps exist.
Penn...@derrymaine.gov
>
>Penn...@DerryMaine.Gov wrote:
>
>> It lasted about three weeks, or the first power fluctuation - Lost the
>> power supply and mother board.
>And while your forking out the hard earned cash on a good PSU, get a
>good UPS as well. What's the point of a nice PSU if you have dirty
>power coming into it? :(
Well, I left out the good part...
I had it connected to a backup-UPS 600 (on it's third set of
batteries). And one reason I bought such a cheap setup is I was
counting on the UPS to protect the darn thing.
When the fluctuation hit the UPS scream'd and the PC died never to
start again, it was at that point I figured the UPS system was no
longer working :)
I still use the UPS, but as an extension cord, the red power light is
now flashing every few seconds, might loose that ability soon.
--
http://www.eglobe1.com/index.php/2006/09/02/unbelievable-pictures/
do_not_...@my-deja.com
bughunte...@gmail.com wrote:
> Some power supplies shut down when the voltage request goes too high;
What's a "voltage request"?
> IE: ground out condition, sure.
Isn't that a current request?
bughunte...@gmail.com
do_not_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> bughunte...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Some power supplies shut down when the voltage request goes too high;
>
> What's a "voltage request"?
Shrug, I likely misworded what I meant, sorry...
> > IE: ground out condition, sure.
>
> Isn't that a current request?
Yes, but with that condition, the resistance level goes thru the roof;
You basically turn the power supply's connections into a heating
element. :(
ma...@london.com
bughunte...@gmail.com wrote:
> do_not_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > Some power supplies shut down when the voltage request goes too high;
> >
> > What's a "voltage request"?
>
> Shrug, I likely misworded what I meant, sorry...
>
> > > IE: ground out condition, sure.
> >
> > Isn't that a current request?
>
> Yes, but with that condition, the resistance level goes thru the roof;
Millions and millions of ohms?
> You basically turn the power supply's connections into a heating
> element. :(
How hot does a PC power connector with megaohms of resistance get?
Kadaitcha Man
news:1157251823.8...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com
> do_not_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> bughunte...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Some power supplies shut down when the voltage request goes too
>>> high;
>>
>> What's a "voltage request"?
>
> Shrug, I likely misworded what I meant, sorry...
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH! Real meaning: "I had no idea what the fuck I meant then
and I still have no idea what the fuck I meant."
--
Casanovas, Lotharios, adulterers, skirt-chasers, debauchers,
letches, lechers and womanisers beware; Rhonda Lea Kirk
is Mrs Kadaitcha Man.
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006