Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Relay\s+lightening\s+protection\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: "Wolfert, William R." <WWolfert@columbuspolice.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:20:59 -0500
Gentlemen I'm putting together a switchbox for a phased array. I had many spdt relays on hand so I'm using them. 2 relays per antenna will work fine. The array is an 8 circle (for 80m, hung off the t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00398.html (7,718 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: Kipton Moravec <kip@kdream.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:29:10 -0600
I can answer the diode question. It is generally good practice to put a diode across the relay because of the inductive spike when turning it off. I have seen the spike go 3-4X the input voltage. If
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00400.html (9,985 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:55:26 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
--Original Message-- Actually, the relay manufacturers (e.g. Tyco, P&B, etc.) recommend NOT using the diode across the coil, because it reduces relay life and changes actuation speed. Depending on wh
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00401.html (8,217 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: Kipton Moravec <kip@kdream.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:34:51 -0600
I had never heard of that before. The ULN2003 is a seven darlington switch and has the diode built in. Also MOSFETS usually have the diode built into the switch for the diode in parallel with the swi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00404.html (10,682 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:20:59 -0500
Yah, but...they also recommend the diode AND resistor/zenner/varistor/MOV/ reverse bias..., or some combination. IOW they too recommend the diode, just not the diode by itself. Nearly all DC relays a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00406.html (9,582 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:51:18 -0800
First question: Why do you want to put a diode across the relay coils? Are you driving the relays with something that is transient sensitive? If you're just driving them with a mechanical switch, etc
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00407.html (9,796 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 07:04:08 -0800
Neither had I, but several other relay manufacturers say the same thing, as do the reliability folks in aerospace. I'd venture that the ULN part was designed to match what folks were doing with discr
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00408.html (10,895 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: <donovanf@starpower.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:17:31 -0500 (EST)
This discussion of relay reliability and switching speed is irrelevant for a relays in a phased array that should never be hot switched. The spike suppression components don't need to be outdoors, th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00410.html (11,639 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: "Rex Lint" <rex@lint.mv.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:19:30 -0500
This reminds me of an incident when I worked at Sanders in Nashua NH. An EE thought he'd play a joke on me: "Here, hold the ends of this coax. I've got to measure the resistance... It's a little less
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00411.html (8,992 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:04:07 -0600
Across relay coils I recommend using a zener rated at at least 3 watts and preferable at more than that. Look for one with a high current surge rating. The reason being that lightning can sometimes i
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00413.html (9,857 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Hargrave" <w5ifp@gvtc.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:43:29 -0800
I told myself not to enter this endless discussion. However the above comment got my attention. I fully agree with the statement especially when it comes to engineering Car batteries. They are the m
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00414.html (8,998 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:11:08 -0500
Protection for "remotely located relays" (out at the antenna) In the case where the relays are remotely located (at the end of a long control cable) I use absolutely nothing. The cables were about 18
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00418.html (11,841 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 06:53:42 -0800
The reliability issues in the Tyco ap note aren't tied to whether the contacts are carrying current. Indeed. _______________________________________________ __________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00434.html (8,537 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: Kipton Moravec <kip@kdream.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:16:06 -0600
Carrying current IS the whole issue. If they were not carrying current then it does not matter how fast the contacts close or open. The goal of the applications note was to minimize the contact arcin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00435.html (9,935 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Dievendorff" <dieven@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 07:25:31 -0800
If you're not hot-switching does it change the answer to what the issue is? Dick, K6KR --Original Message-- From: towertalk-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00436.html (10,573 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 07:29:50 -0800
I think they're talking about the "control contacts", while the life issue is the "controlled relay". i.e. the residual flux making the relay sticky, etc. ____________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00438.html (9,539 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:02:33 -0800
Jim, Did you actually read the app. note? It very clearly indicates that the reliability issue is due to contact welding caused when high levels of DC current are interrupted in the normally open con
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00450.html (11,513 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: jimlux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:31:50 -0800
Indeed. I'm looking for a copy of another relay life apnote that talks about the contact life issue in lightly loaded situations (the RF array) where they address the close/open speed (and whether DC
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00457.html (11,765 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:27:19 -0800
Yes, I think that is good advice, Jim. Relays seem pretty simple and innocuous on the face of it, but when you dig into the details (as the Tyco app note demonstrates) you start to find out that ther
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00473.html (9,275 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] Relay lightening protection (score: 1)
Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 21:05:02 -0500
Answer at bottom. This thread has morphed into several distinct lines (hot switched and cold switched) with answers to one line easily confused with the other and none addressing the subject "relay l
/archives//html/Towertalk/2009-01/msg00476.html (10,676 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu