Ignoramus27088 wrote...

Got myself some capacitors for $10 apiece.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7603382621
The specs are 22 kV, 1 uF, discharge capacitor. See
http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/cap.jpg

The seller was wrong in describing them as 22 VOLT capacitors.
They are 22 KILO volt capacitors. (the seller is Fermilab).
They are similar to this one:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7598631638
but have twice more capacitance.

Anyway, here is my question. I have a 9 kV DC power supply. (a
Franceformer). How can I safely test these caps before selling
them. At 22 kV, they can store about as much energy as a .22 bullet,
according to my calculations.

It would be less at 9 kV, but still, obviously, very deadly.

So. What is a safe way to charge them, verify that they hold the
charge, and then DIScharge them at 9 kV.

Ignoramus, I strongly protest your post. Here is an interesting
conversation that you started, with 32 posts so far, according
to the Google usenet archive, of which you have made 14, or 44%
of the posts. Yet you marked all your posts "do not archive" -
which means they will be removed from Google Groups in 6 days,
thereby severely damaging the stored thread. With this kind of
callous action on your part, one wonders why others should even
take part in the already-broken, soon-to-be-bogus conversation.
What the h____ are you doing here?


--
Thanks,
- Win

On 30 Mar 2006 19:01:34 -0800, Winfield Hill
Gave us:

Ignoramus, I strongly protest your post.

Are you a mexican illegal immigrant, protestor too?

Here is an interesting
conversation that you started, with 32 posts so far, according
to the Google usenet archive, of which you have made 14, or 44%
of the posts. Yet you marked all your posts "do not archive" -
which means they will be removed from Google Groups in 6 days,
thereby severely damaging the stored thread.

I can't believe that you wasted so much of your time doing a
statistical analysis on a technical thread which you haven't even
posted any contributory response to. You are the antipathy of what it
is to be "smart".

With this kind of
callous action on your part, one wonders why others should even
take part in the already-broken, soon-to-be-bogus conversation.
What the h____ are you doing here?

You're an idiot. Enough of ALL of the responses provided are
archived, and would actually make reading the question for a given
response easier than scrolling back up through the thread chain.
What the **** are you doing mouthing off? You COULD actually try
posting on topic, contributory material.

On 30 Mar 2006 19:01:34 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:
Ignoramus, I strongly protest your post. Here is an interesting
conversation that you started, with 32 posts so far, according
to the Google usenet archive, of which you have made 14, or 44%
of the posts. Yet you marked all your posts "do not archive" -

News flash: the person doing the writing gets to decide how, or if, his
work is distributed and stored. Demanding that he do it differently is
no different than the people who ask a question and demand an email
response. (equally stupid and arrogant, is the point I'm making).

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 16:11:36 +0000, Dave Hinz wrote:

On 30 Mar 2006 19:01:34 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:
Ignoramus, I strongly protest your post. Here is an interesting
conversation that you started, with 32 posts so far, according
to the Google usenet archive, of which you have made 14, or 44%
of the posts. Yet you marked all your posts "do not archive" -

News flash: the person doing the writing gets to decide how, or if, his
work is distributed and stored. Demanding that he do it differently is
no different than the people who ask a question and demand an email
response. (equally stupid and arrogant, is the point I'm making).

Maybe Ignoramus is within his rights.

But Win has a very good point. In any event, if Ignoramus alienates Win
and just a few other knowledgeable regulars here, his (Ignoramus's)
experience will be badly degraded.

So he may want to think seriously about Win's protest.

--Mac

Mac wrote:

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 16:11:36 +0000, Dave Hinz wrote:

On 30 Mar 2006 19:01:34 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:
Ignoramus, I strongly protest your post. Here is an interesting
conversation that you started, with 32 posts so far, according
to the Google usenet archive, of which you have made 14, or 44%
of the posts. Yet you marked all your posts "do not archive" -

News flash: the person doing the writing gets to decide how, or if, his
work is distributed and stored. Demanding that he do it differently is
no different than the people who ask a question and demand an email
response. (equally stupid and arrogant, is the point I'm making).

Maybe Ignoramus is within his rights.

But Win has a very good point. In any event, if Ignoramus alienates Win
and just a few other knowledgeable regulars here, his (Ignoramus's)
experience will be badly degraded.

So he may want to think seriously about Win's protest.

--Mac


Just think if those Win and those other people got fed up and had
Goggle remove all of their archived posts? Then the archives would be
nearly useless. All that would remain would be newbies asking
incomplete questions, flames, and idiotic remarks.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 15:57:14 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
Gave us:

Mac wrote:

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 16:11:36 +0000, Dave Hinz wrote:

On 30 Mar 2006 19:01:34 -0800, Winfield Hill wrote:
Ignoramus, I strongly protest your post. Here is an interesting
conversation that you started, with 32 posts so far, according
to the Google usenet archive, of which you have made 14, or 44%
of the posts. Yet you marked all your posts "do not archive" -

News flash: the person doing the writing gets to decide how, or if, his
work is distributed and stored. Demanding that he do it differently is
no different than the people who ask a question and demand an email
response. (equally stupid and arrogant, is the point I'm making).

Maybe Ignoramus is within his rights.

But Win has a very good point. In any event, if Ignoramus alienates Win
and just a few other knowledgeable regulars here, his (Ignoramus's)
experience will be badly degraded.

So he may want to think seriously about Win's protest.

--Mac


Just think if those Win and those other people got fed up and had
Goggle remove all of their archived posts? Then the archives would be
nearly useless. All that would remain would be newbies asking
incomplete questions, flames, and idiotic remarks.

There was a time when they archived regardless of the flag setting.

With all the money google has, one would think that they would have
several hundreds of terabytes of archival data online and available.
One would think they would have other service providers using their
servers as the master archive.

That is still no excuse for a poorly planned web interface to
Usenet.