On Sep 11, 2014, at 7:06 PM, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Well, they do say that the device is there to protect the fuse...
Actually my experience relating to thsoe expensive FF fuses used in
SMPSus ios that hte chopper transsitor will fial short-circuit, thus
ensurign the fuse is destroyed too?
That reminds me of an article, perhaps in the late 1960s, in QST by
John Troster, w6ISQ, author of all manner of joke articles. The title
was something along the lines of ?Murphy?s laws of electronics
Yes, I've come acorss that, or soemthing very like it.Another well-known
law is :
'Any wire cut to length is too short'
One of them: ?A transistor, protected by a fast acting
fuse, will
protect the fuse by blowing first?
My point is that this does not go far enough,. If you protect a transsito
with an expensive FF fuse, then not only will the transistor fail first,
it will do so i na wat to blow the fuse. It will not protect the fuse.
That owuld be contrary to Muprhy's Law...
Another one: ?A dropped tool will land where it does the most
expensive damage ? this is know as the Law of Selective Gravitation?.
(That came with a cartoon showing a hammer nudged off a shelf, on a
direct path to an expensive vacuum tube in an open chassis on the bench.
Along with
The part you acidnetally drip will be the most expensive and/or delicate
component in the unit. It will land in such a way as to maximise damage'
-tony