On 24/12/2017 00:51, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
news
On 23/12/2017 09:13, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
news On 22/12/2017 20:16, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
news On 22/12/2017 18:07, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
news On 22/12/2017 01:24, Rod Speed wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 21 December 2017 17:34:30 UTC, Terry CaseyÂ* wrote:
In article 11d4a51f-9e27-4915-a5bf-53dd39799856
@googlegroups.com, tabbypurr says...
On Thursday, 21 December 2017 11:18:44 UTC, The Other Mike
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:11:25 -0800 (PST), tabbypurr wrote:

wattage ratings to avoid permanent damage from
over-heating.

Some power resistors are only specified for claimed
power
dissipation at minus 100C!

Care to point to a datasheet that shows that?

http://www.resistorsonline.com/wire-wound-resistor.html


But the table on that page is clearly headed "Rating at 70°C"!

There are 3 derating lines shown. How do you make sense of them?

For temps over 70C.

I have to admit I initially thought tabbypurr was a prat to not
understand the 3 lines, then I had a closer look and I can see
his point.

Not on his silly claim that they only have their rated power at
-100C he doesnt.Â* The table clearly shows they have that at 70C.

The claim you replied to was "There are 3 derating lines shown.
How do you make sense of them?"

Thats what they are for, temps other than 70C

I might interpret the second line down on the graph to be
potential increased rating at lower temperatures based on the
70C rating, but the 3rd graph has me stumped apart from the
graph ending at 250C. I then note 250C is the "Derate to Zero"
spec. Why then do the first 2 indicate a zero rating at 300C?

Yes, that graph is a mess, but thats a separate issue to his
original silly claim.

The only silly claim I saw was "For temps over 70C".

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

I simply knew you had posted above your paygrade and would resort to
abuse.

Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself,
eh you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist ?

As usual, when you're too stupid and misunderstand a simple graph,

Dont need to on when pointing out how stupid the original claim was.

reams of your **** flushed where it belongs

Quite, the original claim was "Thats what they are for, temps other
than 70C".

The original claim was that you only get the rated power dissipation at
-100C

That is a bare faced pig ignorant lie

The only lie is you were replying to "There are 3 derating lines shown.
How do you make sense of them?" with "Thats what they are for, temps
other than 70C".

You seem to be in denial, once more.