 |
|
| Electronics Repair (sci.electronics.repair) Discussion of repairing electronic equipment. Topics include requests for assistance, where to obtain servicing information and parts, techniques for diagnosis and repair, and annecdotes about success, failures and problems. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What purpose does standby serve?
Hello,
I have become embroiled in a discussion with government representatives from many agencies about whether or not items such as TVs, VCRs, DVDs etc should be turned off to conserve electricity as opposed to leaving them turned on in standby mode. Can someone PLEASE tell me why standby mode is used? Why should such appliances be left in standby mode instead of turned off? If the appliance is turned off instead of being put into standby mode, will the appliance's life be shortened, by how much and why? I have seen sums on the energy savings if appliances are turned off instead of being placed in standby, but I suspect that there is more than this than meets the eye. Many, many thanks, Greg Brisbane Australia |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Greg" wrote in message om... Hello, I have become embroiled in a discussion with government representatives from many agencies about whether or not items such as TVs, VCRs, DVDs etc should be turned off to conserve electricity as opposed to leaving them turned on in standby mode. Can someone PLEASE tell me why standby mode is used? Why should such appliances be left in standby mode instead of turned off? Convenience. There's nothing more annoying as having to walk 3 feet over to the TV to switch it on (only to have it power up to *standby* so having to then go back and search for the remote anyway). So much easier to leave it in standby... If the appliance is turned off instead of being put into standby mode, will the appliance's life be shortened, by how much and why? I doubt it makes much of any real difference. Some people say leaving items in standby reduces the shock of the initial power on surge, others say the heat produced in standby reduces the life by an equal or greater amount. You'd be hard pressed to ever put any meaningful figures on it. I have seen sums on the energy savings if appliances are turned off instead of being placed in standby, but I suspect that there is more than this than meets the eye. You have to ask if all the items on standby make any significant difference compared to.. say.. all the wasted energy used heating empty rooms in factories, schools etc. - all of which goes to waste because most of those buildings have no insulation whatsoever. Things could certainly be done to reduce energy waste; but.. at the end of the day.. nobody can be bothered much. We enjoy our lifestyles too much to worry about things that won't directly affect us. Sad, but true. .... |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Harvey" writes:
"Greg" wrote in message om... Hello, I have become embroiled in a discussion with government representatives from many agencies about whether or not items such as TVs, VCRs, DVDs etc should be turned off to conserve electricity as opposed to leaving them turned on in standby mode. Can someone PLEASE tell me why standby mode is used? Why should such appliances be left in standby mode instead of turned off? Convenience. There's nothing more annoying as having to walk 3 feet over to the TV to switch it on (only to have it power up to *standby* so having to then go back and search for the remote anyway). So much easier to leave it in standby... If the appliance is turned off instead of being put into standby mode, will the appliance's life be shortened, by how much and why? I doubt it makes much of any real difference. Some people say leaving items in standby reduces the shock of the initial power on surge, others say the heat produced in standby reduces the life by an equal or greater amount. You'd be hard pressed to ever put any meaningful figures on it. I have seen sums on the energy savings if appliances are turned off instead of being placed in standby, but I suspect that there is more than this than meets the eye. You have to ask if all the items on standby make any significant difference compared to.. say.. all the wasted energy used heating empty rooms in factories, schools etc. - all of which goes to waste because most of those buildings have no insulation whatsoever. Things could certainly be done to reduce energy waste; but.. at the end of the day.. nobody can be bothered much. We enjoy our lifestyles too much to worry about things that won't directly affect us. Sad, but true. Well, maybe. But consider: Replacing how many 100 W incandescent lamps used 6 hours a day with 25 W equivalent brightness compact fluorescents will it take to same more energy than used by all those appliances in the house with standby modes? 10? 5? 2? 1?  --- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ Mirror: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/ Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/ +Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/sam/lasersam.htm | Mirror Sites: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/F_mirror.html Note: These links are hopefully temporary until we can sort out the excessive traffic on Repairfaq.org. Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is ignored unless my full name is included in the subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... "Harvey" writes: [..]] Well, maybe. But consider: Replacing how many 100 W incandescent lamps used 6 hours a day with 25 W equivalent brightness compact fluorescents will it take to same more energy than used by all those appliances in the house with standby modes? 10? 5? 2? 1? Ah, but how much extra energy went into the _manufacturing_ of these 'energy efficient lights compared to incandescent lamps? I've not seen any figures and I wouldn't really like to guess, but its got to be more; probably by a factor or two or three... |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... Well, maybe. But consider: Replacing how many 100 W incandescent lamps used 6 hours a day with 25 W equivalent brightness compact fluorescents will it take to same more energy than used by all those appliances in the house with standby modes? When my grandmother got her first color TV (all tube) I modified it so the tube heaters stayed on all the time. Never took the back off until we swapped it out for a new model many years later. -- N |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Harvey" writes:
"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... "Harvey" writes: [..]] Well, maybe. But consider: Replacing how many 100 W incandescent lamps used 6 hours a day with 25 W equivalent brightness compact fluorescents will it take to same more energy than used by all those appliances in the house with standby modes? 10? 5? 2? 1? Ah, but how much extra energy went into the _manufacturing_ of these 'energy efficient lights compared to incandescent lamps? I've not seen any figures and I wouldn't really like to guess, but its got to be more; probably by a factor or two or three... Yes, but how does it compare with the electrical energy cost over the life of the lamp (100 kW-h for a 100 W 1000 hour incandescent lamp)? --- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ Mirror: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/ Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/ +Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/sam/lasersam.htm | Mirror Sites: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/F_mirror.html Note: These links are hopefully temporary until we can sort out the excessive traffic on Repairfaq.org. Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is ignored unless my full name is included in the subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"NSM" writes:
"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... Well, maybe. But consider: Replacing how many 100 W incandescent lamps used 6 hours a day with 25 W equivalent brightness compact fluorescents will it take to same more energy than used by all those appliances in the house with standby modes? When my grandmother got her first color TV (all tube) I modified it so the tube heaters stayed on all the time. Never took the back off until we swapped it out for a new model many years later. Hmmmm. Cost of electricity to run heaters: Totally rough guess of 100 W over 10 years or about 8,000 kW-h. What did electricity cost back then? How did the cost of the electricity to keep the heaters lit continuously compare to the cost of a service call to replace a tube? --- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ Mirror: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/ Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/ +Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/sam/lasersam.htm | Mirror Sites: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/F_mirror.html Note: These links are hopefully temporary until we can sort out the excessive traffic on Repairfaq.org. Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is ignored unless my full name is included in the subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
NSM wrote: "Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... Well, maybe. But consider: Replacing how many 100 W incandescent lamps used 6 hours a day with 25 W equivalent brightness compact fluorescents will it take to same more energy than used by all those appliances in the house with standby modes? When my grandmother got her first color TV (all tube) I modified it so the tube heaters stayed on all the time. Never took the back off until we swapped it out for a new model many years later. Hi... Do both! Let's save a little of the world's resources for the next generations. Or at least as much as possible. As for those tube filaments, back in those good old days there were no concerns about non-renewable resources, hydro was virtually free, and we concerned ourselves not a whit about the environment. Still, one of the first sets I bought (Rca, I think) left the filaments on half voltage while the set was turned off. They called it "instant on". Yet there was a holiday switch on the back that shut it down completely. Take care. Ken |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... "Harvey" writes: "Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... "Harvey" writes: [..]] Well, maybe. But consider: Replacing how many 100 W incandescent lamps used 6 hours a day with 25 W equivalent brightness compact fluorescents will it take to same more energy than used by all those appliances in the house with standby modes? 10? 5? 2? 1? Ah, but how much extra energy went into the _manufacturing_ of these 'energy efficient lights compared to incandescent lamps? I've not seen any figures and I wouldn't really like to guess, but its got to be more; probably by a factor or two or three... Yes, but how does it compare with the electrical energy cost over the life of the lamp (100 kW-h for a 100 W 1000 hour incandescent lamp)? Really depends, if you buy the garbage LOA CFL's and they die after 3 weeks then it's not a very good investment. My entire house has been CFL for several years now aside from the diningroom chandelier and since I did the swap my electric bill dropped noticeably. For lights like porchlights and others that are on for extended periods of time it's silly to use an archaic incandescent lamp. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi!
Can someone PLEASE tell me why standby mode is used? There are a few reasons. 1. It allows for easy addition of a remote control circuit. By leaving the microcontroller and a sensor active, a remote is easily added to a design. 2. It removes the need for a separate memory device and a means to power it...at least until the power goes out! 3. Some designs use it for a quicker start-up time. 4. A device can be turned on from standby using a special "power up" command or timer event. WebTV boxes do this. Why should such appliances be left in standby mode instead of turned off? For the ones with volatile memories backed by the power line and a portion of the power supply, the answer is obvious...remove power entirely and the memory goes away. For others with remote controls the answer is also obvious...something has to be on and "watching" for remote power-on signals. For some devices there is no good reason and unplugging them won't harm a thing. I don't know if turn-on cycles without the "aid" of a standby supply are more stressful to the other electronics in a device or not. Given that most everything is turned off and started "cold" by the few parts that do remain on, I would have my doubts that standby modes could increase the life of a device. Devices with "hard" on-off switches are usually a little bit better protected than those which are always "on" or in standby. This does depend on the location of the switch though. If the appliance is turned off instead of being put into standby mode, will the appliance's life be shortened, by how much and why? I doubt that it would be. There are a lot of factors here. First, some devices will fail in standby because the wear on a small part of the device is constant. This can lead to dried up capacitors or other failed components. Starting any device is a stressful time on all the components involved. Things are starting up and stabilizing. Usually this doesn't affect the device's life significantly as you've got to turn on it on sometime! William |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... Hmmmm. Cost of electricity to run heaters: Totally rough guess of 100 W over 10 years or about 8,000 kW-h. What did electricity cost back then? About 3 cents per KWh. How did the cost of the electricity to keep the heaters lit continuously compare to the cost of a service call to replace a tube? I'd have been doing the replacing and the kine ran till the set died. They didn't all do that, for sure, I replaced my share for other people. That's how the old tube computers kept going too, keep the filaments alive. -- N |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ken Weitzel" wrote in message news:qPBMd.264150$8l.114388@pd7tw1no... Hi... Do both! Let's save a little of the world's resources for the next generations. Or at least as much as possible. As for those tube filaments, back in those good old days there were no concerns about non-renewable resources, hydro was virtually free, and we concerned ourselves not a whit about the environment. Wouldn't bother now, but we were 100% hydro back then. Might have saved the earth by cutting down on waste material for the sake of a few gallons of rain water. -- N |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
"NSM" wrote in message news:EPDMd.301$rB6.91@edtnps91... "Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... Hmmmm. Cost of electricity to run heaters: Totally rough guess of 100 W over 10 years or about 8,000 kW-h. What did electricity cost back then? About 3 cents per KWh. How did the cost of the electricity to keep the heaters lit continuously compare to the cost of a service call to replace a tube? I'd have been doing the replacing and the kine ran till the set died. They didn't all do that, for sure, I replaced my share for other people. That's how the old tube computers kept going too, keep the filaments alive. Doesn't keeping the filaments heated boil off emissive material from the cathode? I haven't had a ton of vacuum tube equipment but of 2 dozen or so bad tubes I've replaced, only *one* of them had an open filament. |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
NSM wrote: "Ken Weitzel" wrote in message news:qPBMd.264150$8l.114388@pd7tw1no... Hi... Do both! Let's save a little of the world's resources for the next generations. Or at least as much as possible. As for those tube filaments, back in those good old days there were no concerns about non-renewable resources, hydro was virtually free, and we concerned ourselves not a whit about the environment. Wouldn't bother now, but we were 100% hydro back then. Might have saved the earth by cutting down on waste material for the sake of a few gallons of rain water. Hi NSM... Ahh, if you're definition of hydro is electricity then you're surely right. But if hydro means "falling water generated" then I beg to disagree. Vast quantities of electricity was generated by burning coal. And that meant burning fuel for earth digging machines to uncover it. Burning fuel for gas powered conveyor belts to move it. More fuel for trucks to take it to the rail lines. Then coal burning smoking smelly dirty locomotives to move it around the country. Then more trucks, and on and on and on. Bad news. Now if each of those filaments was - say 5 watts? - and a dozen tubes minimum per set - then 60 watts per set 24/7. Imagine if we did that today Take care. Ken |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Standby mode, is to keep the computer sectons in the appliances active,
so that it can economicaly keep the setups. It also allows for the unit to be able to keep track of the time of day, and economicaly maintain the user parameters. In the standby mode, some devices use a separate standby supply, or have the main supply go to a low power output mode. Some appliances pull less than 1/2 a Watt in the standby mode. Some larger appliances are as high as 2 to 3 Watts in the standby mode. In the appliances that share the operation of the main power supply for both the standby and operation mode, tend to have their power supply last longer. This is because the supply is still internaly active, but there is very little load on it. It is also a known fact, that devices that are left running all the time, tend to have the components last longer. The sudden inrush of current, and the temperature variations are what reduces the lifespan of many electrical devices. For CRT type devices, the life span of the CRT is reduced if the CRT is left running with beam current. CRT's have a restricted life span, which is mainly determined from the beam current. On a TV set, if you want to leave it left on, you can turn down the brightness and contrast to minimum, and this would make it have a reduced cathold current. The reduced cathold current would increase the tube's lifespan. Since there is alway some cathold current when there is high voltage, this will only be an extension on its lifespan. The heater's rarely burn out in CRT's. If you use a device every day, or even a few times a week, leaving it in standby would allow for the unit to start up easier, and without the user re-entering in all his paramters. Using a chargeable battery to maintain the user parameters, would then have the need for the power to be maintained at times to keep the battery charged. Then after a time, these batteries would have to be replaced, and thus end up as an added physical polution to the environment. In the standby mode, most of these appliances pull the same, or less current than a wall clock. Infact, a VCR or TV set in standby generaly will not pull enough current to get the power consumption meter from the power company to even take a reading of the consumption. If you want to, get an AC bar to feed your devices. You will have to re-set it up every time you want to use it. Greg wrote: Hello, I have become embroiled in a discussion with government representatives from many agencies about whether or not items such as TVs, VCRs, DVDs etc should be turned off to conserve electricity as opposed to leaving them turned on in standby mode. Can someone PLEASE tell me why standby mode is used? Why should such appliances be left in standby mode instead of turned off? If the appliance is turned off instead of being put into standby mode, will the appliance's life be shortened, by how much and why? I have seen sums on the energy savings if appliances are turned off instead of being placed in standby, but I suspect that there is more than this than meets the eye. Many, many thanks, Greg Brisbane Australia |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Standby mode, is to keep the computer sectons in the appliances active,
so that it can economicaly keep the setups. It also allows for the unit to be able to keep track of the time of day, and economicaly maintain the user parameters. In the standby mode, some devices use a separate standby supply, or have the main supply go to a low power output mode. Some appliances pull less than 1/2 a Watt in the standby mode. Some larger appliances are as high as 2 to 3 Watts in the standby mode. In the appliances that share the operation of the main power supply for both the standby and operation mode, tend to have their power supply last longer. This is because the supply is still internaly active, but there is very little load on it. It is also a known fact, that devices that are left running all the time, tend to have the components last longer. The sudden inrush of current, and the temperature variations are what reduces the lifespan of many electrical devices. For CRT type devices, the life span of the CRT is reduced if the CRT is left running with beam current. CRT's have a restricted life span, which is mainly determined from the beam current. On a TV set, if you want to leave it left on, you can turn down the brightness and contrast to minimum, and this would make it have a reduced cathold current. The reduced cathold current would increase the tube's lifespan. Since there is alway some cathold current when there is high voltage, this will only be an extension on its lifespan. The heater's rarely burn out in CRT's. If you use a device every day, or even a few times a week, leaving it in standby would allow for the unit to start up easier, and without the user re-entering in all his paramters. Using a chargeable battery to maintain the user parameters, would then have the need for the power to be maintained at times to keep the battery charged. Then after a time, these batteries would have to be replaced, and thus end up as an added physical polution to the environment. In the standby mode, most of these appliances pull the same, or less current than a wall clock. Infact, a VCR or TV set in standby generaly will not pull enough current to get the power consumption meter from the power company to even take a reading of the consumption. If you want to, get an AC bar to feed your devices. You will have to re-set it up every time you want to use it. Greg wrote: Hello, I have become embroiled in a discussion with government representatives from many agencies about whether or not items such as TVs, VCRs, DVDs etc should be turned off to conserve electricity as opposed to leaving them turned on in standby mode. Can someone PLEASE tell me why standby mode is used? Why should such appliances be left in standby mode instead of turned off? If the appliance is turned off instead of being put into standby mode, will the appliance's life be shortened, by how much and why? I have seen sums on the energy savings if appliances are turned off instead of being placed in standby, but I suspect that there is more than this than meets the eye. Many, many thanks, Greg Brisbane Australia |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
William provided good answers. As for life expectancy, a
cold power up or from standby means the same components do a complete 100% power up. There is no stress reduction on power up from standby. AND that stress from powerup becomes (for all practical purposes) mythical once we apply more numbers. Standby tends to draw about 7 watts constantly waiting for you to make a decision. 7 watts is the difference between standby and a cold powerdown - see manufacturer datasheet for a more accurate number. If the discussion with that government representative did not provide that number, then you were both wasting time. Without numbers, then the discussion could only resort to wild speculation. Greg wrote: Hello, I have become embroiled in a discussion with government representatives from many agencies about whether or not items such as TVs, VCRs, DVDs etc should be turned off to conserve electricity as opposed to leaving them turned on in standby mode. Can someone PLEASE tell me why standby mode is used? Why should such appliances be left in standby mode instead of turned off? If the appliance is turned off instead of being put into standby mode, will the appliance's life be shortened, by how much and why? I have seen sums on the energy savings if appliances are turned off instead of being placed in standby, but I suspect that there is more than this than meets the eye. |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
In a system that consumes tens or hundreds of watts, then
1/2 watt for standby mode is the exact same thing as zero power to those components. Standby does not extend equipment life expectancy. Components suffer a 100% power increase whether from standby mode or from cold restart. It is nonsense to think that trivial current of standby mode will save a component. Moreso, please tell us what the current is through which parts so that parts last longer. What are the numbers? And good luck trying. As for time - computer maintains time of day in a circuit completely unrelated to standby power. That design dates back to the first IBM AT that had no standby option. Again, first learn circuits before posting how they work. Powering up from standby mode is no 'easier' on hardware than powering from cold restart. The power up is different, but just as 'stressful'. Stressful in quotes because the stress from power up is mostly mythical - often promoted by those who did not first learn how components work. "Jerry G." wrote: Standby mode, is to keep the computer sectons in the appliances active, so that it can economicaly keep the setups. It also allows for the unit to be able to keep track of the time of day, and economicaly maintain the user parameters. In the standby mode, some devices use a separate standby supply, or have the main supply go to a low power output mode. Some appliances pull less than 1/2 a Watt in the standby mode. Some larger appliances are as high as 2 to 3 Watts in the standby mode. In the appliances that share the operation of the main power supply for both the standby and operation mode, tend to have their power supply last longer. This is because the supply is still internaly active, but there is very little load on it. It is also a known fact, that devices that are left running all the time, tend to have the components last longer. The sudden inrush of current, and the temperature variations are what reduces the lifespan of many electrical devices. For CRT type devices, the life span of the CRT is reduced if the CRT is left running with beam current. CRT's have a restricted life span, which is mainly determined from the beam current. On a TV set, if you want to leave it left on, you can turn down the brightness and contrast to minimum, and this would make it have a reduced cathold current. The reduced cathold current would increase the tube's lifespan. Since there is alway some cathold current when there is high voltage, this will only be an extension on its lifespan. The heater's rarely burn out in CRT's. If you use a device every day, or even a few times a week, leaving it in standby would allow for the unit to start up easier, and without the user re-entering in all his paramters. Using a chargeable battery to maintain the user parameters, would then have the need for the power to be maintained at times to keep the battery charged. Then after a time, these batteries would have to be replaced, and thus end up as an added physical polution to the environment. In the standby mode, most of these appliances pull the same, or less current than a wall clock. Infact, a VCR or TV set in standby generaly will not pull enough current to get the power consumption meter from the power company to even take a reading of the consumption. If you want to, get an AC bar to feed your devices. You will have to re-set it up every time you want to use it. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 05:55:55 GMT, "James Sweet"
wrote: "NSM" wrote in message news:EPDMd.301$rB6.91@edtnps91... "Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... Hmmmm. Cost of electricity to run heaters: Totally rough guess of 100 W over 10 years or about 8,000 kW-h. What did electricity cost back then? About 3 cents per KWh. How did the cost of the electricity to keep the heaters lit continuously compare to the cost of a service call to replace a tube? I'd have been doing the replacing and the kine ran till the set died. They didn't all do that, for sure, I replaced my share for other people. That's how the old tube computers kept going too, keep the filaments alive. Doesn't keeping the filaments heated boil off emissive material from the cathode? I haven't had a ton of vacuum tube equipment but of 2 dozen or so bad tubes I've replaced, only *one* of them had an open filament. Most tube sets I came across had their standby reduce the current going through the filaments. |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 07:34:50 -0500, w_tom wrote:
As for time - computer maintains time of day in a circuit completely unrelated to standby power. That design dates back to the first IBM AT that had no standby option. Again, first learn circuits before posting how they work. But they did run on battery, which would need replaced (yes so do modern PCs, but the battery is so supplement the standby supply, should mains power fail, plus power more efficient memory technology than the ATs had). Plus they couldn't put themselves into standby mode like modern ATX systems. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
"w_tom" wrote in message ... In a system that consumes tens or hundreds of watts, then 1/2 watt for standby mode is the exact same thing as zero power to those components. Standby does not extend equipment life expectancy. Components suffer a 100% power increase whether from standby mode or from cold restart. It is nonsense to think that trivial current of standby mode will save a component. Moreso, please tell us what the current is through which parts so that parts last longer. What are the numbers? And good luck trying. As for time - computer maintains time of day in a circuit completely unrelated to standby power. That design dates back to the first IBM AT that had no standby option. Again, first learn circuits before posting how they work. Powering up from standby mode is no 'easier' on hardware than powering from cold restart. The power up is different, but just as 'stressful'. Stressful in quotes because the stress from power up is mostly mythical - often promoted by those who did not first learn how components work. It's no easier on components but it does allow software control of power, that's the whole reason for standby, to allow remote controls and software to control powering up and shutting down the device in question. Some items (Xbox for example) *do* use standby to maintain the system clock over long periods, as do VCR's and some other appliances but the main purpose remains software or logic control of device power. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
All,
Thank you all very much for your comments on this issue. There are government employees all over the world pondering this issue and the combined resources of people like you really does help little fish like me. This project that I am involved with will accelerate as the relationship between energy user and electricity supplier will continue to challenge customer perceptions of appliance ability in response to denials of damage libility from energy suppliers. Legislation just gets in the way, sometimes. Anyway, any more comments on this subject are cretainly welcome. Cheers, Greg |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is a very long shot I know, but there may be something else to be
said for leaving appliances in standby other than mere convenience. With regard to TVs (especially cheaper ones but I have seen this in a few ITT and Grundigs too!) where the mains switch is soldered directly to the mainboard, constant use of this switch, and the resulting movement, sometimes makes it work itself loose or the soldering to crack, and the set to become intermittent, leading to other problems. I have seen this many times on sets whose owners insist on powering down with the hard on-off instead of standby. Still, I doubt this is a major issue in the general scheme of things..... regards, Ben |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hello,
Therefore, it appears to me that when a person alleges that their VCR's or TV's power supply got "burnt out" due to a voltage surge, it would have made no difference if the appliance was already in standby mode? In other words, if an appliance is in standby mode and there is an under or overcurrent, the appliance's power supply will stand a chance of a "burn out"? (I sure wish I was an electrical engineer!) Greg |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message ... (Greg) writes: Hello, Therefore, it appears to me that when a person alleges that their VCR's or TV's power supply got "burnt out" due to a voltage surge, it would have made no difference if the appliance was already in standby mode? In other words, if an appliance is in standby mode and there is an under or overcurrent, the appliance's power supply will stand a chance of a "burn out"? (I sure wish I was an electrical engineer!) Greg Hard to say. Standby power supplies can be burnt out by a surge but may be more tolerant than the high power circuits used during normal operation. And probably 90% of the time when people assume something was burned out by a surge it actually had nothing to do with surges. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| OT Guns more Guns | Metalworking | |||
| standby mode consumption vs longevity | Electronics Repair | |||
| RCA TV CTC169 (BG5) F35750ST Wont come out of standby - Ticking sound when Power button is pressed | Electronics Repair | |||
| more info RCA TV CTC169(BG5) Wont come out of standby - Ticking sound when Power button is pressed | Electronics Repair | |||
| RCA TV CTC169(BG5) Wont come out of standby - Ticking sound when Power button is pressed | Electronics Repair | |||
Linear Mode
