Date   

Re: Simple Green

stefan_trethan
 

Section 3: COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Ingredient CAS Number Percent Range
Water 7732-18-5 > 84.8%*
Ethoxylated Alcohol 68439-46-3 < 5%*
Sodium Citrate 68-04-2 < 5%*
Tetrasodium N,N-bis(carboxymethyl)-L-glutamate 51981-21-6 < 1%*
Sodium Carbonate 497-19-8 < 1%*
Citric Acid 77-92-9 < 1%*
Isothiazolinone mixture 55965-84-9 < 0.2%*
Fragrance Proprietary Mixture < 1%*
Colorant Proprietary Mixture < 1%*
*specific percentages of composition are being withheld as a trade secret


I believe they changed the formula some time ago so your old bottle
may have held something more potent. Interesting story.

ST

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, big_sky_explorer@yahoo.com [TekScopes]
<TekScopes@yahoogroups.com> wrote:




I recall in the past comments regarding use of the cleaner product Simple Green to help in restoration of legacy test equipment. I myself has not used the product for this task but would like to add a bit of information regarding certain characteristics that I was surprised to discover.



A few years back I inherited a gallon jug of Simple Green. Not really having a planned application for it, I placed it in the basement storage room. A few months back I noticed that the container had apparently sprung a leak. Examining the bottom of the plastic jug, it appeared that the product had started to leak out through a small seam that is created where the halves of the manufacturing mold mate with each other.



As a quick “fix” until I could transfer the cleaner to another container, I placed it in the fiberglass sink in the laundry room. Over time a small portion of the cleaner leaked out from the jug and down the drain. I thought it was safe being there until I could take action in transferring the contents.



But I was wrong.



Today as I passed by the sink, I noticed a wet spot on the floor beneath the sink. It was Simple Green. The product had eaten through the metal drain trap beneath the sink. But it didn’t stop there. Lifting the jug out of the sink, I found that it had also started to delaminate the fiberglass layers in the sink bottom as well and had started significant corrosion of the metal drain. Closer inspection of the bottom of the plastic jug revealed that the product was actually dissolving the plastic of the container.



The Simple Green was immediately disposed of.



If one uses this product for cleaning sensitive test equipment, I would advise to use very weak concentrations and thoroughly wash the item off after use. I would hesitate to use it on various plated items unless the effects are well known as well as allowing it to come in contact with those items which may allow the solution to be absorbed or trapped within them.





Greg







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



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


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

Yahoo Groups Links



Re: Introduction, 2440 cal, 5400 illimination

 

On 02 Jun 2016 19:41:23 -0700, you wrote:

Thanks, I was able to find a 1k8 resistor and a 200R resistor and used that as an inaccurate "10:1" - Then again it doesn't really matter, I still had to adjust it :)
The attenuator needs to be stable but not necessarily accurate because
the input and output can be measured with a voltmeter with a higher
input voltage applied. Then output can be calculated based on the
measured input. Of course if your voltmeter can measure the low level
output directly, then even this is not needed.

Was able to get through attenuation calibration just fine with that, and now the measurement numbers are much closer to what the Fluke says throughout the whole range (within 1%, it had an error of almost 10% before at some parts of the scale). Keeper. Except likely I'll have to do it again when I get the new lithium battery.

Now for the channel delay calibration, I don't have a pulser or an arbitrary signal generator. What I do have: crystal oscillators. However they have around 10-20ns risetimes which might not be enough. I also found a 74F3037 quad NAND gate in my junkbox, and built a 10MHz crystal oscillator on a...ugh...breadboard with it. It switches pretty fast, alas, it rings madly (then again, PS noise is also part of the problem, decoupling caps helped a bit). I wonder what cal will do with the bad ringing, or will I have to build a carefully laid out PCB for it...
I did it with the "fast" TTL output from the sync output on my
function generator but even a 10 nanosecond transition time was plenty
fast and I think 20 nanoseconds will still work.

As it is, it's pretty horrid - I measure around 8ns rise with cursors without counting the ringing. With the 2440 as it is, it measured 42ns 10-90, 25ns 20-80, 5ns 30-70 due to ringing.

Maybe need to cut wire length even more...
The impedance mismatch at the coaxial T connection will distort the
edge also. BNC attenuators around the coaxial T help with this but
they are not really necessary.

I had to reread the instructions in the service manual. The 2440
makes the delay measurement automatically but my guess is that it uses
the same algorithm as the automatic delay measurement so the pulse
fidelity requirements are pretty loose assuming that both channels see
the same thing which you can test before doing the calibration step.


Simple Green

Greg Muir
 

I recall in the past comments regarding use of the cleaner product Simple Green to help in restoration of legacy test equipment. I myself has not used the product for this task but would like to add a bit of information regarding certain characteristics that I was surprised to discover.

A few years back I inherited a gallon jug of Simple Green. Not really having a planned application for it, I placed it in the basement storage room. A few months back I noticed that the container had apparently sprung a leak. Examining the bottom of the plastic jug, it appeared that the product had started to leak out through a small seam that is created where the halves of the manufacturing mold mate with each other.

As a quick “fix” until I could transfer the cleaner to another container, I placed it in the fiberglass sink in the laundry room. Over time a small portion of the cleaner leaked out from the jug and down the drain. I thought it was safe being there until I could take action in transferring the contents.

But I was wrong.

Today as I passed by the sink, I noticed a wet spot on the floor beneath the sink. It was Simple Green. The product had eaten through the metal drain trap beneath the sink. But it didn’t stop there. Lifting the jug out of the sink, I found that it had also started to delaminate the fiberglass layers in the sink bottom as well and had started significant corrosion of the metal drain. Closer inspection of the bottom of the plastic jug revealed that the product was actually dissolving the plastic of the container.

The Simple Green was immediately disposed of.

If one uses this product for cleaning sensitive test equipment, I would advise to use very weak concentrations and thoroughly wash the item off after use. I would hesitate to use it on various plated items unless the effects are well known as well as allowing it to come in contact with those items which may allow the solution to be absorbed or trapped within them.


Greg


Re: Introduction, 2440 cal, 5400 illimination

bc
 

No, this would probably be the worst prototype method of all (high speed assembly, low speed logic): Solderless Breadboard

Might have to deadbug it.


Re: Introduction, 2440 cal, 5400 illimination

 

Sometimes when you are trying to breadboard fast stuff it is better to do it dead bug style on a sheet of copper clad PC board. Is that what you did?

Regards

----- Original Message -----
From: laser92awd@yahoo.com [TekScopes]
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 10:41 PM
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: Introduction, 2440 cal, 5400 illimination



Thanks, I was able to find a 1k8 resistor and a 200R resistor and used that as an inaccurate "10:1" - Then again it doesn't really matter, I still had to adjust it :)
Was able to get through attenuation calibration just fine with that, and now the measurement numbers are much closer to what the Fluke says throughout the whole range (within 1%, it had an error of almost 10% before at some parts of the scale). Keeper. Except likely I'll have to do it again when I get the new lithium battery.

Now for the channel delay calibration, I don't have a pulser or an arbitrary signal generator. What I do have: crystal oscillators. However they have around 10-20ns risetimes which might not be enough. I also found a 74F3037 quad NAND gate in my junkbox, and built a 10MHz crystal oscillator on a...ugh...breadboard with it. It switches pretty fast, alas, it rings madly (then again, PS noise is also part of the problem, decoupling caps helped a bit). I wonder what cal will do with the bad ringing, or will I have to build a carefully laid out PCB for it...

As it is, it's pretty horrid - I measure around 8ns rise with cursors without counting the ringing. With the 2440 as it is, it measured 42ns 10-90, 25ns 20-80, 5ns 30-70 due to ringing.

Maybe need to cut wire length even more...


Re: Introduction, 2440 cal, 5400 illimination

bc
 

Thanks, I was able to find a 1k8 resistor and a 200R resistor and used that as an inaccurate "10:1" - Then again it doesn't really matter, I still had to adjust it :)
Was able to get through attenuation calibration just fine with that, and now the measurement numbers are much closer to what the Fluke says throughout the whole range (within 1%, it had an error of almost 10% before at some parts of the scale). Keeper. Except likely I'll have to do it again when I get the new lithium battery.

Now for the channel delay calibration, I don't have a pulser or an arbitrary signal generator. What I do have: crystal oscillators. However they have around 10-20ns risetimes which might not be enough. I also found a 74F3037 quad NAND gate in my junkbox, and built a 10MHz crystal oscillator on a...ugh...breadboard with it. It switches pretty fast, alas, it rings madly (then again, PS noise is also part of the problem, decoupling caps helped a bit). I wonder what cal will do with the bad ringing, or will I have to build a carefully laid out PCB for it...

As it is, it's pretty horrid - I measure around 8ns rise with cursors without counting the ringing. With the 2440 as it is, it measured 42ns 10-90, 25ns 20-80, 5ns 30-70 due to ringing.

Maybe need to cut wire length even more...


Re: 2440 CCD clock calibration without sg503

 

I remember playing with REPET in connection with the CCD calibration
procedure but not the results. It has been a while so I guess I need
to revisit it.

On 02 Jun 2016 12:57:54 -0700, you wrote:

Hi,

The problem with that is REPET doesn't work if any of the CCD sides are switched off. I tried it, it will only result in the sample dots being flashed on the screen. Switching them on and off is required to be able to align the various sides.

Szabolcs


Re: Tek TDS694C advice pls

 

David,
Thanks for getting into this much detail. Great help.

Raymond


Re: Tek TDS694C advice pls

 

David,
The TDS600 series oscilloscopes have no DPO functionality
Thanks for waking me up on this. It was my understanding that all digital 'scopes that are able to show some sort of analogy to the brightness modulation that an analog 'scope shows, depending on the relative frequency of a particular trace being drawn, were called DPO's. That appears not to be true: All DPO's also possess higher waveform update rates than standard DSO with their sample-digitise-process-display-sample ... cycle have.

The TDS694C's variable persistence mode using colours (as standard) still is a slow mode, leaving the 'scope blind for long periods between acquisitions.

The chips under discussion may only implement the edge triggering
> needed for equivalent time sampling or jitter reduction.
Only after your latest message did I realise it was this type of "equivalent time sampling or jitter correction" you were referring to.
You could well be right about this task for the other chip(s). I remember looking at edges with <= 200 ps rise time on my '694C. I must have used a 100 ps/div. horizontal setting for this and I can't remember seeing unexpected jitter on any channel. I guess I should have seen jitter of at least one minor division if jitter correction wouldn't have worked, correct? I can't remember seeing that. Glad you pointed me into that direction, though. I'll check when I'm back in the shack.

Raymond


Re: 465B No Beam Problem

Rob Overman
 

David and Group,
Thanks again! I ordered the caps thru HVStuff per your links. I have 3 Tek 465Bs so I plan on replacing the caps in all three scopes. I also ordered this HF diode for CR4021 in case that is bad:
http://hvstuff.com/5ma-20kv-high-voltage-diode-hv-rectifier-tesla-ham
Regards,
Rob

Sent from Yahoo Mail. Get the app

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


Re: 2440 CCD clock calibration without sg503

Szabolcs Szigeti
 

Hi,

The problem with that is REPET doesn't work if any of the CCD sides are switched off. I tried it, it will only result in the sample dots being flashed on the screen. Switching them on and off is required to be able to align the various sides.


Szabolcs


---In TekScopes@yahoogroups.com, <davidwhess@...> wrote : You would want to turn REPET on for this to fill in the aquisition
record. It defaults to off which always struck me as strange. The
display update rate will be slower than for the aliased case but at
least it will be stable.


Re: Tektronix 7D20 - need some help

 

I would never have guessed that. Do you think just vibration or
temperature cycling caused the wire to break?

On 02 Jun 2016 00:29:11 -0700, you wrote:

The problem with vertical positioning and lack of full signal traces on the screen of my 7D20 was tracked down to a bad inductor L480 on the +15V supply line to generate reference voltage for the 2 CCD amps on board A5. A wire on the inductor was loose and and a quick soldering job brought the 7D20 to full functional.

Dam


Re: Tek TDS694C advice pls

 

On 01 Jun 2016 15:29:14 -0700, you wrote:

David,
Does the DPO functionality work with logical and pulse triggering?
AFAI've checked, yes, it does. I take variable persistence as the setting for DPO functionality in this 'scope; it gives a colour-coded density graph ("heat" or "spectrum" and the like).
I had to go through the specifications and manual. The TDS600 series
oscilloscopes have no DPO functionality and are limited to slow
waveform acquisition rates because they use CCD samplers. All
oscilloscopes with DPO functionality have variable persistence but not
necessarily the reverse.

The TDS694C is a real-time only 'scope. It lacks equivalent time sampling.
The trigger jitter and "interpolated" sample rate specifications imply
that the analog trigger includes a time delay counter with 2
picosecond resolution (500 GS/sec) with a standard deviation of 8
picoseconds so about 40 picoseconds of peak-to-peak error which
matches very closely with the time measurement accuracy specification.

That is why I said equivalent time sampling or jitter correction. The
later can be found in other oscilloscopes operating in real time mode
like the 7D20, 468, some 22xx series, and I assume earlier TDS600
series DSOs. These oscilloscopes have the hardware to support
equivalent time sampling but use it for jitter correction when
operating in real time mode.

The importance of the above is that if that is what those bad trigger
chips supported, then the lack of jitter correction may not be
apparent except with the fastest waveforms and highest sample rates.
This may explain the behavior where the oscilloscope cannot
continuously update when triggering on a specific channel; it gets
stuck waiting for the time delay counter values from the trigger but I
do not know why it would not return an error condition if this
happens.

Any detailed diagnostic mode should be able to detect and report this
fault if it exists.

The complex triggering modes must be handled somewhere else.

I haven't got the 'scope in front of me but can confirm that with working chips in pos. 1 and 2 and broken chips in 3 and 4:

1. Logic triggering works on all channels (Ch4 trigger in Logic triggering was set to clock, so more like edge triggering in actual fact). Trigger level can be adjusted like a logic level. Remember that the lowest vertical sensitivity of the '694C is 1 V/div with 10 mV/div being the highest.

2. Pulse triggering with time works fine, as long as the chosen time is smaller than the dwelling time at the chosen level (obviously).

3. External triggering works.

4. ISTR that AC line triggering works to the effect that it takes the external triggering signal, IOW I had a steady image with AC Line triggering and offering the input signal (1 MHz) to the external input triggering input!!

But you could get Pulse & width triggering to work before the fix?
Yes, I (Raymond) could and still can. I haven't tried the mod as per EEVBlog and repeated in my previous message, i.e. put good chips in positions 1 and 3 and you'll have full functionality, with 2 and 4 empty. I'll try this ASAP.

Raymond


Re: Tek TDS694C advice pls

mosaicmerc
 

Ok, Axiom refunded my calibration fee, so I can open up the scope and do a thermal scan etc.
I'll do that later. Any tips on doing that btw?

thx
Ancel


Re: 2247A no intensity control for A, B, and RO

 

With an output voltage of 6.85 volts, the base of Q2703 being about 3
volts and emitter at 2.35 volt is consistent with the voltage divider.
I missed the significance of the connection between the output and the
voltage divider.

What is missing is the constant 5.5 milliamps which should be flowing
through R2717, Q2701, and Q2702. With an output of 6.85 volts, there
is no current back through R2708 and R2709 to hold the base of Q2705
at 10.7 volts so it falls. The output always needs to be
significantly above the 10.7 volts at the base of Q2705 for proper
operation.

The circuit is a transimpedance amplifier (current to voltage) with
the negative input current mirrored across R2708 and R2709 to produce
an output voltage.

Now I am thinking that Q2704 is shorted from collector to emitter and
the base is open. The -0.8 volts there is just the forward conduction
of CR2705 into R2710.

On 02 Jun 2016 11:04:01 -0700, you wrote:

Q2701 emitter measures 99.2 V, as you said. The Q2702 base is at 53.2 V and the Q2703 base is at 3 V. The Q2704 collector is at 2.35 V, so it is indeed cutoff. The three other xstors are all in forward active.

The Q2702 emitter should have a voltage around 74 V, which means the base should be at about 73.3 V (for the pnp to be ON). Obviously this is not happening. I should probably check C2706 and C2707, if not those 33K resistors (look fine visually).


Re: 2247A no intensity control for A, B, and RO

Anthony Aiello
 

Q2701 emitter measures 99.2 V, as you said. The Q2702 base is at 53.2 V and the Q2703 base is at 3 V. The Q2704 collector is at 2.35 V, so it is indeed cutoff. The three other xstors are all in forward active.

The Q2702 emitter should have a voltage around 74 V, which means the base should be at about 73.3 V (for the pnp to be ON). Obviously this is not happening. I should probably check C2706 and C2707, if not those 33K resistors (look fine visually).


Re: 465B No Beam Problem

 

On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:09:00 +0000 (UTC), you wrote:

David,
Thanks for the very informative response. Any ideas where I can get the HV caps (C4016, C4020, C4025, and C4026)?
Regards,
Rob 

Sent from Yahoo Mail. Get the app

The capacitance values do not have to be exact. Hmm, Mouser and
Digi-key have a pretty poor selection of high voltage capacitors now.

For the 0.068uF ones, these 0.01uF capacitors will work:

http://hvstuff.com/high-voltage-capacitors/ceramic/disc?capacitance=58

And for C4126:

http://hvstuff.com/6kv-1000pf-high-voltage-ceramic-disc-capacitor-y5p

I would also include replacements for DC restorer capacitors C4118 and
C4117.

Newark might be another source:

http://www.newark.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Search?catalogId=15003&;langId=-1&storeId=10194&categoryId=800000009502&showResults=true&aa=true&sf=783&pf=810000241,810005435,810014722,810020172,810051791,810054551,810060103,810064615,810193699


Re: OT: Fluke Help...

 

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Fluke_DMM https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Fluke_DMM/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbDUydmU2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzcxMTA2MjU2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA4MzI5MQRzZWMDaGRyBHNsawNocGgEc3RpbWUDMTQ2MDAxNTcyMA--
Dave M



---In TekScopes@yahoogroups.com, <Groups@...> wrote :

Hi All...

I have several pieces of Fluke equipment. I have tried to find a Fluke Group, with no avail. Can anyone point me to one?

Also note: I have several pieces of Tek gear as well and all of them still work perfectly.

Thanks for any help.

Mark


Re: IBM Tek475

 

Assuming the added parallel capacitor will fit into the space and
given the risk of damage, there is no reason not to just add it.

On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:42:32 +0100, you wrote:

Question: completely replace a PSU Al electrolytic, or simply graft a new
capacitor in parallel?

The background is....

Using a DVM and scope on all the supply rails showed they were better than I
expected: a DMM shows correct DC voltages and AC ripple voltages of 0mV. The
notable exception is the 105V/160V unstabilised rail and the 110V rail derived
from it. Those showed gross 100Hz ripple. Since the 50V unregulated was fine,
C1414 (1000uF 75V) must be fine, but C1412 (350uF 75V) must be faulty.

Given the only >75V caps I have are 10 off 2.2uF 350V, I rigged that 22uF across
C1412 and also between the 105V/160V rail and ground (i.e across C1412 and
C1414). Even with only 10% of the nominal capacitance, the ripple was all but
eliminated, and the scope looks like it will perform to spec (I can see a 1.2ns
risetime). A good result.

So, the question is what to do next.

Option 1) obviously the "proper way" is to replace C1412 - but that requires
awkward desoldering, removal of the trigger logic board, and somehow fabricating
a PCB for mounting the new capacitor. Awkward, with a chance of new damage.

Option 2) graft a new capacitor in parallel with C1412 (or simply across both
C1412 and C1414)

Is there any good reason not to choose option 2?

Thanks


Re: 2247A no intensity control for A, B, and RO

 

I think the differences in the schematics represent similar designs
used in different models; maybe the same printed circuit board was
used. The non-A versions lack Autosetup and so I assume they connect
the intensity controls directly to the Z-axis amplifier instead of
going through the processor.

Anyway, the exercise test you did rules out problems with the
potentiometers and input side of the processor.

If I am reading your marked up schematic correctly, there is a problem
between Q2707 and the output of the z-axis amplifier. If the base of
Q2704 is always at -0.8 volts, then Q2704 is cutoff and the output of
the amplifier output should be as high as it can go which it is not.
That leaves Q2701 and Q2702 which operate as a current source to pull
the output up which is apparently not happening; either the current
source is bad or the output is being pulled toward ground.

The voltage you measured at the emitter of Q2702 is wrong; it should
be about +74 volts as set by the 33k resistor divider through Q2702.

What is the voltage at the emitter of Q2701? It should be about 99.1
volts.

R2717 could be open.

On 02 Jun 2016 07:23:29 -0700, you wrote:

David,

Ran the exercise pots test and it functions just fine (as did all the other pots too). I was also a bit confused by the different schematic versions I came across. This one in the google doc link is from the back of the service manual under manual change information. My serial number is above B032000, so I figured this should apply.

48121 - 48140 of 176771