Date   

Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem

John Clark
 

I understand, Raymond. I really appreciate the help you, and everyone else, has provided already. I've got a lot of time in studying the diagram and checking what I can with a DMM. I don't expect anyone to put in the hours I have. I just thought if there was someone out there who knows more about the circuit than me they might be able to explain what I'm seeing before I tear into removing those boards.

John

To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 06:42:17 -0800
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem


























My time is very limited at the moment so I've avoided following your detailed description...


I'll try and see if I can confirm what you're saying re. circuit paths and voltage.


AFAIK, the 'scope is still operational so it should be easy to get an idea about timings. I'd expect them to be several 10's of off if there's a problem iin the integrator. OTOH, good values (few %) would be further support for the sw. pos. 9 circuit failure.


If the timings are sort of ok, even in positions where the voltage isn't understood, I would leave trying to understand that for later.


Still, I'll try and follow your description of the low-voltage findings.





Raymond























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: TDS520 problem

alfa beta
 

wow Siggi !
I'm going to check the beast with a varying DC on CH2 Will post the pics in the album

----- Original Message -----
From: Sigurður Ásgeirsson siggi@undo.com [TekScopes]
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] TDS520 problem



Hey Adri,

check this out:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e0dgVVgFcP2gGTa8Z8X4Z88gdzFuHal3OJlJbwn8spE/edit#gid=777902241.
This is a simulation of a stuck second-order bit on one of the ADC's two
outputs. Bears a likeness to your images - right?

So, given this, I'm pretty sure now that you have a stuck second-order bit,
the question is where.
The options are:

1. An open on one of the ADC's output channels.
This would manifest as a problem on every other sample, when you're
going at 250MS/s (the max sampling rate for one ADC).
2. A bad RAM chip.
This would manifest as a problem on every eight sample, probably
irrespective the sample rate, but for sure at 250MS/s.
3. A bad MUX.
Let's hope this is not the case, as I don't think these are easy to come
by.
4. A stuck bit somewhere else.
I can't think where there could be a stuck bit manifesting precisely
like this, so let's ignore that possibility :).

Note that varying the input offset and magnitude of the input will hange
the manifestation of the stuck bit, and hopefully you can repro the trouble
with DC.
I forget (or never knew) whether this scope will inject a DC offset to the
input channel when you adjust the trace position, but for sure it'll inject
a DC offset when you adjust the input offset in the vertical menu.

Siggi

On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 at 22:08 Sigurður Ásgeirsson <siggi@undo.com> wrote:

> The other possibility that'd fit the facts so far, is if there's a stuck
> bit on the ADC outputs, due e.g. to a broken trace or such. Did you do any
> repair in the vicinity of U700?
>
> Again, playing with DC inputs will help, as that'll narrow the options. A
> stuck line from the ADC should manifest in every other sample, and at lower
> speeds, it's possible that only half of the output lines are used
> (explaining why this doesn't hit at all settings, all the time on CH2).
>
> So, ET off, both channels on (to force interleaving off), sin(x)/x off,
> dots mode if available, 1M input impedance.
> Input DC on CH2 and vary voltage or offset to full scale positive and
> negative. If this reproduces the issue, take note of whether it affects the
> entire sample record, or a fraction. What's the distance between anomalous
> samples?
> Take note of whether and how the trace follows the input voltage.
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 18:48 Sigurður Ásgeirsson <siggi@undo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 at 15:11 'adri' tncdrn@gmail.com [TekScopes] <
>> TekScopes@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So you think it might be a defective memory IC
>>>
>> I don't see anything inconsistent with that hypothesis in your pictures.
>> Looking at the A10 schematic, it looks like there are eight distinct CS
>> lines, and the RAM is written four-byte (64 bit) wide.
>>
>> If you look closely at your captures, I think you'll see that on CH2,
>> every fourth sample is bad, for half of the total capture record.
>> When this hits on CH1, you should see every eight sample is bad, again
>> for a total of half the waveform record.
>>
>> To look at this closer, turn ET off, turn sin(x)/x off, if this scope has
>> a dots mode, turn that on (instead of vectors), and you should be able to
>> count pixels/samples.
>>
>> ... time passes ...
>>
>> Actually, looking closer at your pictures, I'm starting to wonder,
>> because it looks like the "noise" always hits at the top and bottom of the
>> signal. If this is a RAM chip, then that'd mean the same chip is getting
>> hit for the same portion of the signal each time, and I can't think why
>> that would happen.
>>
>> I think we should be able to distinguish RAM vs DAC/MUX failure by
>> playing with DC inputs to the scope - see below.
>>
>>> Do you know if the ICs are currently available ?
>>>
>> I'd be very surprised if they aren't - these are just 2K (or 8K) static
>> RAMs.
>>
>>> And what about raising one (or more) pin to re-create the problem and
>>> validate the hypotesis ?
>>>
>> You could do that, but there are 64 total pins to try :/.
>> Can you reproduce this problem with a DC signal, and do you have a second
>> (storage) scope to diagnose this?
>>
>> Try putting your signal gen on AUX (or CH1) and trigger on it there, then
>> look whether you get a messed-up waveform on screen with DC on the input.
>> From your pics it looks like you might have a stuck bit, so play with the
>> DC input. You can also ground the input and play with the input offset for
>> the same effect as inputting DC.
>>
>> Assuming you can provoke the problem with a DC signal (or offset) you
>> could narrow this down to a chip by looking at the data lines (there's 64)
>> and looking for the the bit that looks bad.
>>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem

John Clark
 

Thanks Raymond,
I believe I need a Time Mark Generator for that and, unfortunately, I'm flying blind there as I don't have one.

I'm still planning on disassembling and cleaning the cam switches but I want to make sure I check all possibilities when I'm in there so I don't have to go back in again after a cleaning and re-check. Obviously I'll check R1083 and R1084 but I don't think they're open...out of tolerance maybe, but not open. I'm just puzzled. One check indicates R1083/R1084 or Switch 9 are open yet another check indicates they're not.

John

To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 06:20:35 -0800
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem


























> However, even if it was out of its detent it would still get some amount of voltage from R1070, right?



Sure, anything between +50 V and +15 V.





Either R1083 or R1084 has effectively gone o/c. is my hunch


Definitely, since sw. pos. 9 and its circuit still is a strong candidate. The sudden and complete failure of the affected timings speaks for a broken R over a bad switch contact.





It may still be worthwhile to check whether the working tim/div settings are correct within a few %.. If they are, I wouldn't worry about the close-to-zero (wrong?) voltage you find even at those apparently working speeds.


After all, there might be a failure somewhere in the integrator that allows it to operate at all but the highest-ohmic settings. If most timings are ok, that possibility becomes very unlikely.





Raymond



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: 7000-series Ch2 invert switch on vertical plug-ins

Colin Herbert
 

Hi,

Generally speaking, the "distinct" movement I mentioned is 0.3 division
(where 1 division is ~1cm). It varies a bit from amplifier to amplifier.

Colin.



From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TekScopes@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 03 November 2015 17:32
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: 7000-series Ch2 invert switch on vertical plug-ins





A spot check on my 7904 with the ch2 input grounded shows:

7A26 No1 no movement
7A26 No2 about 0.1 division movement
7A24 about 0.1 division movement, maybe less

All of these use the Tektronix IC amplifiers rather than discrete
transistors as in the 7A18. How big is your 'distinct' movement?

Roger


Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem

 

My time is very limited at the moment so I've avoided following your detailed description...
I'll try and see if I can confirm what you're saying re. circuit paths and voltage.
AFAIK, the 'scope is still operational so it should be easy to get an idea about timings. I'd expect them to be several 10's of off if there's a problem iin the integrator. OTOH, good values (few %) would be further support for the sw. pos. 9 circuit failure.
If the timings are sort of ok, even in positions where the voltage isn't understood, I would leave trying to understand that for later.
Still, I'll try and follow your description of the low-voltage findings.

Raymond


Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem

John Clark
 

John,
Thanks for the help! That was my hunch, as well. However, if I set the time to .5uS (a problematic time setting) that opens switch #15, closes switch #14, closes switch #9, and opens switch #8. This feeds 50V through all the series resistors (R1083-R1088,) switch #9 and back through switch #14 to P5-5. Since I still get -.556VDC on P5-5
on that setting doesn't that mean switch #9 and R1083 and R1084 are not open
and not dirty enough to bring the .6VDC out of spec? If R1083, R1084,
and/or switch #9 were o/c I wouldn't get that voltage. Maybe I'm missing something...

John
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 06:04:28 -0800
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem


























Either R1083 or R1084 has effectively gone o/c. is my hunch





John



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: TDS520 problem

Siggi
 

Hey Adri,

check this out:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e0dgVVgFcP2gGTa8Z8X4Z88gdzFuHal3OJlJbwn8spE/edit#gid=777902241.
This is a simulation of a stuck second-order bit on one of the ADC's two
outputs. Bears a likeness to your images - right?

So, given this, I'm pretty sure now that you have a stuck second-order bit,
the question is where.
The options are:

1. An open on one of the ADC's output channels.
This would manifest as a problem on every other sample, when you're
going at 250MS/s (the max sampling rate for one ADC).
2. A bad RAM chip.
This would manifest as a problem on every eight sample, probably
irrespective the sample rate, but for sure at 250MS/s.
3. A bad MUX.
Let's hope this is not the case, as I don't think these are easy to come
by.
4. A stuck bit somewhere else.
I can't think where there could be a stuck bit manifesting precisely
like this, so let's ignore that possibility :).

Note that varying the input offset and magnitude of the input will hange
the manifestation of the stuck bit, and hopefully you can repro the trouble
with DC.
I forget (or never knew) whether this scope will inject a DC offset to the
input channel when you adjust the trace position, but for sure it'll inject
a DC offset when you adjust the input offset in the vertical menu.

Siggi

On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 at 22:08 Sigurður Ásgeirsson <siggi@undo.com> wrote:

The other possibility that'd fit the facts so far, is if there's a stuck
bit on the ADC outputs, due e.g. to a broken trace or such. Did you do any
repair in the vicinity of U700?

Again, playing with DC inputs will help, as that'll narrow the options. A
stuck line from the ADC should manifest in every other sample, and at lower
speeds, it's possible that only half of the output lines are used
(explaining why this doesn't hit at all settings, all the time on CH2).

So, ET off, both channels on (to force interleaving off), sin(x)/x off,
dots mode if available, 1M input impedance.
Input DC on CH2 and vary voltage or offset to full scale positive and
negative. If this reproduces the issue, take note of whether it affects the
entire sample record, or a fraction. What's the distance between anomalous
samples?
Take note of whether and how the trace follows the input voltage.

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 18:48 Sigurður Ásgeirsson <siggi@undo.com> wrote:

On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 at 15:11 'adri' tncdrn@gmail.com [TekScopes] <
TekScopes@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

So you think it might be a defective memory IC
I don't see anything inconsistent with that hypothesis in your pictures.
Looking at the A10 schematic, it looks like there are eight distinct CS
lines, and the RAM is written four-byte (64 bit) wide.

If you look closely at your captures, I think you'll see that on CH2,
every fourth sample is bad, for half of the total capture record.
When this hits on CH1, you should see every eight sample is bad, again
for a total of half the waveform record.

To look at this closer, turn ET off, turn sin(x)/x off, if this scope has
a dots mode, turn that on (instead of vectors), and you should be able to
count pixels/samples.

... time passes ...

Actually, looking closer at your pictures, I'm starting to wonder,
because it looks like the "noise" always hits at the top and bottom of the
signal. If this is a RAM chip, then that'd mean the same chip is getting
hit for the same portion of the signal each time, and I can't think why
that would happen.

I think we should be able to distinguish RAM vs DAC/MUX failure by
playing with DC inputs to the scope - see below.

Do you know if the ICs are currently available ?
I'd be very surprised if they aren't - these are just 2K (or 8K) static
RAMs.

And what about raising one (or more) pin to re-create the problem and
validate the hypotesis ?
You could do that, but there are 64 total pins to try :/.
Can you reproduce this problem with a DC signal, and do you have a second
(storage) scope to diagnose this?

Try putting your signal gen on AUX (or CH1) and trigger on it there, then
look whether you get a messed-up waveform on screen with DC on the input.
From your pics it looks like you might have a stuck bit, so play with the
DC input. You can also ground the input and play with the input offset for
the same effect as inputting DC.

Assuming you can provoke the problem with a DC signal (or offset) you
could narrow this down to a chip by looking at the data lines (there's 64)
and looking for the the bit that looks bad.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem

 

However, even if it was out of its detent it would still get some amount of voltage from R1070, right?
Sure, anything between +50 V and +15 V.

Either R1083 or R1084 has effectively gone o/c. is my hunch
Definitely, since sw. pos. 9 and its circuit still is a strong candidate. The sudden and complete failure of the affected timings speaks for a broken R over a bad switch contact.

It may still be worthwhile to check whether the working tim/div settings are correct within a few %.. If they are, I wouldn't worry about the close-to-zero (wrong?) voltage you find even at those apparently working speeds.
After all, there might be a failure somewhere in the integrator that allows it to operate at all but the highest-ohmic settings. If most timings are ok, that possibility becomes very unlikely.

Raymond


Re: 475 Time Base Setting Problem

John
 

Either R1083 or R1084 has effectively gone o/c. is my hunch

John


Re: Tek 2230 PSU

 

On 06 Nov 2015 03:57:32 -0800, you wrote:

Hi All,

I was hoping for some advice on the power supply of a 2230 I'm working on.

I received the unit with mains fuse blown. Checked and found shorted rectifiers in the main bridge. I also found C904 cracked and with evidence of arcing. I found many of the LV electrolytics on both sides of the PSU having very poor ESR so I replaced pretty well all the electrolytics.

I then powered the unit up; no fuse blowing. However, the 43V supply to the inverter was not existent and C925 not charging up to power the preregulator. I did some more checking and found Q908 shorted, R909 open and C944 shorted. The FET Q9070 isn't shorted but I've not checked that it actually works.

Further, measuring resistance across C925 gives only 25ohms (having lifted R907, CR920). Is this normal or is it likely U930 is cooked too?
I do not see how Q908 and R909 could be bad without Q9070 and U930
also being bad.

C944 being shorted is also a bit interesting and leaves me wondering how much else of this power supply I should be suspicious of.
I would be suspicious of everything except high value resistors at
this point.

At present, replacing the components I know to be bad and powering up doesn't seem to to be the best idea given I don't know the cause of the issue.

...

Any thoughts?
These power supplies tend to go big when they fail so I would plan on
testing every part and replacing every semiconductor and aluminum
electrolytic capacitor. There are modern replacements for every part
except the transformers.

If you have a suitable power supply, the inverter can be disconnected
from the preregulator and tested separately. The preregulator can be
tested using a 42.8 volt load.


I Need a 211

Martin Mehlhose
 

to complete the little 200 Family I need the Tek 211.





http://www.wellenkino.de/214/214-1.jpg


212-213-214-221 +222


greetings

Martin


Tek 2230 PSU

Thomas Drage
 

Hi All,


I was hoping for some advice on the power supply of a 2230 I'm working on.


I received the unit with mains fuse blown. Checked and found shorted rectifiers in the main bridge. I also found C904 cracked and with evidence of arcing. I found many of the LV electrolytics on both sides of the PSU having very poor ESR so I replaced pretty well all the electrolytics.


I then powered the unit up; no fuse blowing. However, the 43V supply to the inverter was not existent and C925 not charging up to power the preregulator. I did some more checking and found Q908 shorted, R909 open and C944 shorted. The FET Q9070 isn't shorted but I've not checked that it actually works.


Further, measuring resistance across C925 gives only 25ohms (having lifted R907, CR920). Is this normal or is it likely U930 is cooked too? C944 being shorted is also a bit interesting and leaves me wondering how much else of this power supply I should be suspicious of.

At present, replacing the components I know to be bad and powering up doesn't seem to to be the best idea given I don't know the cause of the issue.


http://members.iinet.net.au/~drage/other/2230PS.png http://members.iinet.net.au/~drage/other/2230PS.png <------ Schematic



http://members.iinet.net.au/~drage/other/2230PS.png

http://members.iinet.net.au/~drage/other/2230PS.png http://members.iinet.net.au/~drage/other/2230PS.png


View on members.iinet.net.au http://members.iinet.net.au/~drage/other/2230PS.png
Preview by Yahoo




Any thoughts?


Many thanks,


Thomas


Re: SG504

 

Worry not, the SG504 kit is still available. I've still got a good stock of
HSMS282R diodes which were quite hard to find, the rest of the parts are not
a problem until I run out of bare PCBs.

Cheers
David Partridge


Re: TDS350 VGA output

Jack2015
 

I have a TDS350,This is the pic of video output to my ASUS VW195S LCD monitor(1440x900)
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/TekScopes/photos/albums/1610774080/lightbox/978525687#zax/978525687

Jack


Re: SG504

 

On 05 Nov 2015 22:47:46 -0800, you wrote:

Can I use my 1.5Ghz DSA-815-TG to evaluate the condition of the signal at the SG504 in terms of its 'leveled' amplitude as its a pure sine wave? Hopefully it won't need to be 'serviced'.
No. As far as I can tell from the DSA-815-TG specifications, it could
have more than twice the amplitude flatness error of the SG504. A
sampling oscilloscope or sampling RF voltmeter could work though.

Or should I dive in and go after any electrolytics and tantalums that might be worth replacing?
I would only change solid tantalum capacitors if one or more have
shorted. I would at least consider changing any aluminum electrolytic
capacitors.


Re: SG504

Craig Sawyers <c.sawyers@...>
 

I hadn't realised that he had it on his site! So you are OK I'm sure.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TekScopes@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 06 November 2015 06:55
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] Re: SG504

Er...no..I just emailed him via his
site....http://www.perdrix.co.uk/SG504Head/





------------------------------------
Posted by: mosaicmerc@yahoo.com
------------------------------------


------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links


Re: SG504

mosaicmerc
 

Er...no..I just emailed him via his site....http://www.perdrix.co.uk/SG504Head/


Re: SG504

Craig Sawyers <c.sawyers@...>
 

You checked with Dave that his kit was still available first, right?

Craig

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TekScopes@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 06 November 2015 06:48
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: SG504

I'll ask Mr. partridge to sell me one of his kits for a leveling head and
get the Ebay unit. (i offered $140 for the Tm503 & the SG504 and the seller
accepted) Idk about the knob, perhaps I can repair it with JBweld
reconstruction and machine it down to fit.
Compared to the cost of some of these items, sometimes u have to take a
risk. Maybe someone on the group can guide me to a knob.

I can replace the PG506 precision voltage signals and have a good chance at
a time mark gen & bandwidth measurement with a (tunnel diode substitute
rise time) comparator at sub 100pS pulses, but that leveled sine wave HF
affair is serious engineering. All of this is toward the cal. for the 3 x
24xx scopes I have on hand.

Can I use my 1.5Ghz DSA-815-TG to evaluate the condition of the signal at
the SG504 in terms of its 'leveled' amplitude as its a pure sine wave?
Hopefully it won't need to be 'serviced'. Or should I dive in and go after
any electrolytics and tantalums that might be worth replacing?





------------------------------------
Posted by: mosaicmerc@yahoo.com
------------------------------------


------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links


Re: SG504

mosaicmerc
 

I'll ask Mr. partridge to sell me one of his kits for a leveling head and get the Ebay unit. (i offered $140 for the Tm503 & the SG504 and the seller accepted)
Idk about the knob, perhaps I can repair it with JBweld reconstruction and machine it down to fit.
Compared to the cost of some of these items, sometimes u have to take a risk. Maybe someone on the group can guide me to a knob.

I can replace the PG506 precision voltage signals and have a good chance at a time mark gen & bandwidth measurement with a (tunnel diode substitute rise time) comparator at sub 100pS pulses, but that leveled sine wave HF affair is serious engineering. All of this is toward the cal. for the 3 x 24xx scopes I have on hand.

Can I use my 1.5Ghz DSA-815-TG to evaluate the condition of the signal at the SG504 in terms of its 'leveled' amplitude as its a pure sine wave? Hopefully it won't need to be 'serviced'. Or should I dive in and go after any electrolytics and tantalums that might be worth replacing?


Re: SG504

Craig Sawyers <c.sawyers@...>
 

I'm sure these get separated from the levelling head, because unlike earlier
Tek levelled generators (which had the head on a captive lead) the 504's was
detachable. So in a liquidation sale, the bone headed liquidators take
leads of any kind whatever, put them in a plastic bin and sell them as
"assorted leads, 1 lot" - so the levelling heads end up in there.

Which is why the vast majority of 504's don't have a levelling head.

David Partridge (who is on this list) I recall worked hard to design an
electrical, functional replica of the Tek levelling head to overcome
precisely this problem.

You do get lucky at these liquidation sales though. I bought my 7S12/S6/S52
combo for UKP80 at one (I'd gone for business reasons for something else
entirely, and couldn't resist). Works perfectly and gets used frequently.

Craig

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TekScopes@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 06 November 2015 05:09
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] SG504

No. You will get no output without the leveling head.
The seller can't even claim it is working without having the head to try it!
Also, if it is the Frequency Knob that is broken (which is what it looks
like) it will be virtually impossible to find a replacement. Those kinds of
knobs were only used on very few Tek products.
Dennis Tillman W7PF

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TekScopes@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 8:49 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [TekScopes] SG504

Hi his this usable without the remote leveling head for cal purposes?
TEKTRONIX TM503 SG504 PROGRAMMABLE LEVELED SINE WAVE GENERATOR Working!free
ship
http://www.ebay.com/itm/TEKTRONIX-TM503-SG504-PROGRAMMABLE-LEVELED-SINE-WAVE
-GENERATOR-Working-free-ship-/131645152281?hash=item1ea6a99c19:g:eSoAAOSwQTV
V-ODy


http://www.ebay.com/itm/TEKTRONIX-TM503-SG504-PROGRAMMABLE-LEVELED-SINE-WAVE
-GENERATOR-Working-free-ship-/131645152281?hash=item1ea6a99c19:g:eSoAAOSwQTV
V-ODy

TEKTRONIX TM503 SG504 PROGRAMMABLE LEVEL...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/TEKTRONIX-TM503-SG504-PROGRAMMABLE-LEVELED-SINE-WAVE
-GENERATOR-Working-free-ship-/131645152281?hash=item1ea6a99c19:g:eSoAAOSwQTV
V-ODy TEKTRONIX TM503 SG504 PROGRAMMABLE LEVELED SINE WAVE GENERATOR
Working!free ship in Business & Industrial, Electrical & Tes...

------------------------------------
Posted by: mosaicmerc@yahoo.com
------------------------------------




------------------------------------
Posted by: "Dennis Tillman" <dennis@ridesoft.com>
------------------------------------


------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

67681 - 67700 of 188004