>The contents of the extiguisher are entirely immaterial.
>The extinguisher is just there to act as a propellant so
>that you can amuse yourself pushing burning cardboard
>boxes and/or burning wastebins around while awaiting the
>professionals. They bring huge hoses so they can make
>the burning stuff really fly :-)
And Water Can extinguishers are for chasing people around and soaking
them on hot days (or in the dead of winter).
And CO2 is used to chill beers, and spray at probies to watch them scream
like little girls. (or at the probies girlfriends to give them hard
nipples, insuring that they will never return, and we will all later
bitch, while drinking our chilled beers, that we can never get women to
hang out at the station).
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
Yes, I am interested in QIC-80 Tapes. Please tell me how many tapes you have in total. Please give me your phone number. I will be pleased to call you.
Thanks.
Vino
Vinod
>No, if there were too little (but there was enough oxygen and heat) it
>would flash off. Too little fuel is never a reason for something not
>to ignite, though it may prevent sustained burning.
Um, yeah, I believe that is what I said on the very first reply of mine.
It wouldn't catch fire, or not for more than a fraction of a second. The
concern on the original poster was clearly, would the oil catch fire and
cause a problem. My response was, no, chances are there is too little
fuel to create a sustained chemical reaction (ie: start a fire).
Flashing off, won't cause a fire. Chances are, you won't even notice it
did it (other than possibly smell the by products). And depending on the
amount of oil, and what exactly the oil is made of, it may never get the
chance to even flash off... it may "smoke off" instead. As the heat of
the fuser raises to the flash point, the oil becomes unstable and starts
to break down and oxidize. You wind up with smoke (incomplete
combustion), and all potential fuel may in fact oxidize before flashing,
leaving nothing to ultimately flash. (hence the idea, too little fuel, no
fire).
>Three things: chemical reaction is implicit in fuel+oxygen (and
>activation energy). Unless you get into esoteric things like
>substances that interfere with the reaction (like some CFCs can),
>because they change the activation energy.
No, it is four things. It USED to be considered three things... then fire
science got smarter, and realized that chemical reactions, although
implied in the oxidation process, are a VERY important process of the
fire. And attacking it is more common then people thought.
In fact, most normal people that fight a fire are probably in fact
attacking the chemical reaction. Dry Chemical extinguishers don't
actually smother a fire like many people assume, they inhibit
oxidation... ie: they break the chemical reaction. At least here in the
USA, Dry Chemical extinguishers are the most popular form of fire
extinguisher found in homes and offices (standard ABC are Dry Chem in the
USA).
Normal "civilian" ways of combating a kitchen fire:
Spray it with water: removes heat
Dry Chemical "ABC" extinguisher: stops chemical reaction
Towel over the fire: removes oxygen
Turn off the gas on the stove: removes fuel
>I know quite a bit about this actually, because my dad owned a fire
>extinguisher company.
Ahh... ok, had I known that, I might have been more specific in my use of
terms and explanations. I figured I was trying to make this a little more
"layman's". I myself have been a fire fighter for 13 years... so I hope I
know something about the nature of fire (if not, I've wasted an awful lot
of time in classes, and been darn lucky with all the fires I've gone up
against).
>The reason you use foam to combat a liquid fire
>is to smother it, because with an established fire, it's unlikely you
>can get enough water to cool it fast enough, without spreading the
>burning liquid around.
Exactly. (Sorry, I didn't explain the reason behind it, because I didn't
realize I was talking to someone that cared).
>The petrol in bucket of water trick works
>because the petrol layer is very thin and the water prevents it getting
>hot enough before the match goes out.
Except you forget about vaporization. Gasoline (petrol) vaporizes readily
at standard atmospheric pressure. If you wait for too long before tossing
that match into the bucket, you won't be igniting the fuel on the water,
you will be igniting the fuel vapors hovering over the water. The water
won't stop the heat of the match if the match is still 4 inches above the
surface. The vapors ignite... and you get a nice POP and flash as they
expand out of the top of the bucket. I wouldn't want to be standing over
it when that happens.
Depending on how much petrol you use, this could be fun to do... like I
said... you do it, I'll video tape. :-)
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
On Apr 14, 9:53, chris wrote:
> >That's a very poor test,
>
> Its not the most ideal, but I wanted to recommend something he could
try
> easily to give him a quick and dirty answer.
>
> >and the quantity is not what matters to the
> >chemicals partaking (or not) in the reaction :-) The local heat
> >capacity is.
>
> Wrong. You need sufficient fuel to oxygen mix. Too little fuel or too
> little o2, and it won't burn. My guess (and it was a guess, based on
what
> I know about fires), is the 3 in 1 oil that was on the fuser was too
low
> of a quantity to burn freely.
No, if there were too little (but there was enough oxygen and heat) it
would flash off. Too little fuel is never a reason for something not
to ignite, though it may prevent sustained burning.
> The heat capacity is but one factor in starting and sustaining a
fire.
> There are 4 parts needed for a fire: fuel, oxygen, heat, chemical
> reaction. Remove any one, the fire goes out.
Three things: chemical reaction is implicit in fuel+oxygen (and
activation energy). Unless you get into esoteric things like
substances that interfere with the reaction (like some CFCs can),
because they change the activation energy.
> >Pour half a cup of petrol (er, gasoline) into a bucket
> >of water, drop in a match, and watch the match go out...
>
> You do that... I'll video tape.
I know quite a bit about this actually, because my dad owned a fire
extinguisher company. The reason you use foam to combat a liquid fire
is to smother it, because with an established fire, it's unlikely you
can get enough water to cool it fast enough, without spreading the
burning liquid around. The petrol in bucket of water trick works
because the petrol layer is very thin and the water prevents it getting
hot enough before the match goes out.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
Another one:
Brian Toubman is selling a very nice, complete S-100 system.
The system is located in Connecticut.
Please contact him directly if you are interested in the system.
More details can be found at
http://vintage-computer.com/vcforum/viewtopic.php?t=915
I have nothing to do with this item or the seller. I am just passing this
on for the benefit of the list (and, obviously, the seller.)
Erik Klein
www.vintage-computer.comwww.vintage-computer.com/vcforum
The Vintage Computer Forum
Rosann (rosann1224(a)rcn.com) is looking to donate her Tandy 1000TX system
to a collector for the cost of postage.
Please contact her directly if you are interested in the system.
More details can be found at
http://vintage-computer.com/vcforum/viewtopic.php?t=911
I have nothing to do with this item or the seller. I am just passing this
on for the benefit of the list.
Erik Klein
www.vintage-computer.comwww.vintage-computer.com/vcforum
The Vintage Computer Forum
I noticed on a message board that in June of 2003 you posted that you had found an instruction manual for an IPC MCD-1040 7 disc changer. Do you happen to still have the manual, and did you ever get any responses for what kind of cables it used? I recently came upon one the units myself and was wondering the same thing.
Kris
Hi all,
I finally had some time to work on my "homebrew console" project.
It is not yet finished, but the progress is significant enough
to report to this group.
I completed the wiring of the new sleak design PDP-11/35 console,
and debugged the "firmware" of the Motorola M6802 microprocessor.
After the console seemed to work as I wanted it (...) [using the
built-in debug monitor], it was time to turn to the current SIMH
version (3.2-0). I ported my previous thoughts of version 2.10 to
this current release, and debugged a little more :-)
The progress so far:
1) set the switches to any address, press "LOAD ADRS".
result: the position of the switches appears on the ADDRESS LEDs.
2) set the switches [15:0] to any value, press "DEP".
result: - the data is stored in the (previously loaded) address.
- the data appears on the DATA LEDs.
3) press "EXAM"
result: - the address is shown on the ADDRESS LEDs,
- the data of this address is shown on the DATA LEDs.
4) when "EXAM" is pressed again after "EXAM"
result: the next address is shown (address and data)
5) when "DEP" is pressed again after "DEP"
result: the data is stored in the next address.
6) when "EXAM" and "DEP" are toggled following each other
result: the address is not incremented.
So, LOAD, EXAM, and DEP react as the REAL CONSOLE in combination
with the patched SIMH software ! More testing will be done.
I thought this progress was nice to mention here; the following items
on my list are:
- behaviour of CONT, HALT/ENABL, START (and S-STEP!)
- ADDRESS and DATA LEDs update automatically when SIMH runs a PDP-11 OS.
- shoot a short .mpg to show an "idle pattern" of the console when it
is not connected, running in "stand-alone mode".
Check www.pdp-11.nl and click the link [homebrew 'PDP-11'] at the left.
NOTE: I built this console with my PDP-11/35 as example. PDP-11's are
my focus of collecting ... The protocol used between the "front-end" and
the SIMH software is simple. I do not see any reason why you cannot hook
up a PDP-8 console or even any other blinkenlight console (e.g. HP-1000).
I real console (from eBay, I do not support the thought of stripping a
fine real machine just for the console ...!) could also be connected, it
is just a matter of wiring the switches and the toggles.
If there is sufficient interest, I *might* think of designing a lay-out
of a single board that contains the CPU and the I/O. Depends on how many
of you have interest in this project to keep the cost low. If somebody
works where he/she has easy access to a PC lay-out program and etch option
(double-sided PCB, with metalisation through the holes), I will gladly
assist and provide answers for any related question.
kind regards,
- Henk, PA8PDP
My problem is that I don't have a lot to trade. I do have an old
Western Union Baudot (I think 5 bit) teletype machine that I think I'm
going to get rid of, but it was mostly for use by deaf people who
used it to communicate over the telephone and doesn't interface
(as far as I know) to a computer.
I have only recently been seriously considering locating an 11/40 and
associated peripherals, now that I have a place where I could set it up and
work on it. I recently moved from the city back to the country and I built a
30' by 60' building / shop behind my house. Inside I closed off a portion
that is climate controlled, which is a good place to house an 11/40.
What kind of condition is your spare LA36 in? I suppose I could start my
collection with an LA36 and continue searching for an 11/40 to go with it! :-)
Ashley
-----Original Message-----
From: Jay West <jwest(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Apr 14, 2004 11:29 AM
To: Ashley Carder <wacarder(a)usit.net>,
"General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: PDP 11/40, VT50 or VT52, LA36
I have a spare LA36 (maybe an LA120, but I think it's an LA36) located in
St. Louis I'd trade off.
Jay
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ashley Carder" <wacarder(a)usit.net>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:19 AM
Subject: PDP 11/40, VT50 or VT52, LA36
> Does anyone on this list have any of the following
> items that they would be interested in getting rid of:
>
> PDP 11/40 with rack and RK05 drive(s)
> VT50 or VT52 DecScope
> LA36 Decwriter
> RK05 pack with RSTS/E
>
> I would like to attempt to reconstruct the computer
> that my friends and I used in college from 1975-80.
> Our former professor who was also director of the
> computer center and is now retired has indicated that
> he might offer some assistance in reconstructing the
> environment if we can find a PDP 11/40. Our college
> junked their 11/40 in 1989 or shortly thereafter. The
> new generation of computer people there "cleaned up"
> old junk and threw away anything that was left from
> the 11/40 that we knew and loved.
>
> We have created a pretty faithful replica using Bob
> Supnik's emulator and have it available via TELNET
> on the internet. Several of us had complete prints
> from the late 70s of all the source programs on the
> system. It was running RSTS/E with Basic Plus. It took
> a while to find someone with a soft copy of the
> Basic Plus version of ADVENTure, but I was able to get
> a copy from someone who was in Project Delta and
> have loaded that to our RK05 disk image for our
> simulated 11/40.
>
> We would like to get our hands on the real hardware
> so we can feel the heat and hear the fans whirring
> once again!
>
> Thanks for any and all help that anyone can provide!
>
> Ashley
>
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
I'm interested in the 11/40 Unibus stuff. I just joined the list and I started
another thread with this same title. Do you know if anyone's actually seen
the stuff in this lot? I'm wondering what kind of condition it's in.
Ashley
-----Original Message-----
From: John Allain <allain(a)panix.com>
Sent: Apr 14, 2004 11:25 AM
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: truckload of PDP stuff
I'm more of a Qbus guy, and this looks to be all Unibus.
(Though I do have 2 Unibussers)
Someone on the list has contacted me stating his
intent to be the winning bidder. Perhaps he (BCC'ed herein)
should make his name public so people can sub-bid to him
for individual machines in the lot.
John A.
