Use different size wire in electro clutch?
in [Design]
|
From: JosephKK on 24 Dec 2009 18:42 On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:17:14 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)notcoldmail.com> wrote: > > >James Sweet wrote: > >> Eeyore wrote: >> > DaveC wrote: >> >> The coil in an industrial electromagnetic clutch (connecting the >> >> flywheel to the drive mechanism) has gone open-circuit. So it is being >> >> rewound by a motor rewind shop. >> >> >> >> I was just informed that the original wire was about 12 ga. (maybe >> >> slightly larger; original was metric) but it was rewound using 10 ga. >> > >> > Why do Americans persist in using stupid AWG that no-one else in the >> > world uses except to entertain you ? >> > >> > Have you never heard of mm^2 ? >> > >> > Graham >> >> You paint with a wide brush. I'd be perfectly content to use metric, and >> end up using both systems regularly but it's not as if it's up to me >> what the whole country uses. > >The USA is 'supposed' to be metricated. hy you choose to be so backward never >fails to amaze me. Any given wire gauge covers a wide range of >cross-sectional areas. At least you know what you're getting with mm2. > >Graham Oh that is quite straightforward, the powers that be are aware that the clarity of metric units assists in thinking straight; and they don't want the proles to do that.
From: JosephKK on 24 Dec 2009 18:59 On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:03:10 +0100, Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour(a)ppllaanneett.nnll> wrote: >Jamie wrote: >> Eeyore wrote: >> >>> Ron wrote: >>> >>> >>>> of course as any fool knows it should be either SWG or thousanths of an >>>> inch ;) >>> >>> LOL ! Give me a thou over a 'mil' anyday. Only the Americans could confuse a >>> metric prefix with an old unit. >>> >>> Not to mention that if you use the word 'mil' in the UK it means a millimetre. >>> >> The way I see it, you're not able to comprehend the vast complexity of >> the intellectually enhanced American! >> >> Did that just about sum it up? >> >> >> >I will try to remove the bad taste with a swig of >Coffee/rooibos.............. >Nah, that failed. About the only thing that will cleanse something like that is RFNA. Rinse with minute amounts of ADMH (small amounts because it is rather toxic, plus it reacts violently with even trace amounts of RFNA).
From: JosephKK on 24 Dec 2009 19:08 On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:01:00 -0600, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:41:34 -0800, lurch ><lurch(a)yourangcousinitslibrary.org> wrote: > >>On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:32:12 -0600, John Fields >><jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:34:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" >>><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>John Fields wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:06:47 -0700, "bg" <bg(a)nospam.com> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >Metric is for people that have to count on their fingers ! >>>>> >>>>> I prefer base 21. >>>> >>>> >>>> Only because 42 is the second number in that base. :) >>> >>>--- >>>Nope, it's because I can use all my "digits" to count with. ;) >>> >>>JF >> >> metacarpals? > >--- >No, the distal phalanges of my fingers and toes, plus one other >appendage. ;) > >Interestingly, Indians from India count on their fingers using all of >their phalanges in sequence, like this: > > Proximal Phalange Intermediate Phalange Distal Phalange >--------------------------------+-----------------------+-------------- >Little Finger 1 2 3 >Ring Finger 4 5 6 >Middle Finger 7 8 9 >Index Finger 10 11 12 > >So, by using both hands, they can count up to 144 on their fingers. > > >JF And this lowly american can count to over 1000 using the digits of my hands.
From: John Fields on 25 Dec 2009 12:13 On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:08:56 -0800, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:01:00 -0600, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:41:34 -0800, lurch >><lurch(a)yourangcousinitslibrary.org> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:32:12 -0600, John Fields >>><jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:34:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" >>>><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>John Fields wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:06:47 -0700, "bg" <bg(a)nospam.com> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> >Metric is for people that have to count on their fingers ! >>>>>> >>>>>> I prefer base 21. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Only because 42 is the second number in that base. :) >>>> >>>>--- >>>>Nope, it's because I can use all my "digits" to count with. ;) >>>> >>>>JF >>> >>> metacarpals? >> >>--- >>No, the distal phalanges of my fingers and toes, plus one other >>appendage. ;) >> >>Interestingly, Indians from India count on their fingers using all of >>their phalanges in sequence, like this: >> >> Proximal Phalange Intermediate Phalange Distal Phalange >>--------------------------------+-----------------------+-------------- >>Little Finger 1 2 3 >>Ring Finger 4 5 6 >>Middle Finger 7 8 9 >>Index Finger 10 11 12 >> >>So, by using both hands, they can count up to 144 on their fingers. >> >> >>JF > >And this lowly american can count to over 1000 using the digits of my hands. --- (2^10) - 1 JF
From: Michael A. Terrell on 25 Dec 2009 13:18
Fred Abse wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:57:21 +0000, Eeyore wrote: > > > > > > > bg wrote: > > > >> Metric is for people that have to count on their fingers ! > > > > What an absurd comment. Do you have 12 fingers so you can count in inches to the > > foot ? > > > > Maybe some folks in the Appalachians, or the bayous ;-) Some of the Brits don't have 12 teeth left. More have 10. :) -- Offworld checks no longer accepted! |