sags & swells

Status
Not open for further replies.
ptonsparky said:
The top graphic includes all the information of the bottom screen shot inside the shaded blue area. I compared the the two by dragging the cursors accross the screen both on the laptop and the 43B. The three points given are equal. 6, 13, 81 mv for the point I examined

I have to go to the feature itself to compare this screen (middle) with the other two. There is a time stamp difference of 8 seconds for each plot because the the laptop does not start recording the same time as the 43B. It must be manually started. I get one value of 17 mv. Don't know how that value is calculated.

May have to examine the headache causing data.
Why is there a 8S difference? It doesn't matter when they start as long as the clock times are sync'd. Event time is event time. Are the clocks sync'd?
 
080814-1309 EST

ptonsparky:

If the 43B outputs RS232 data from the 1 second samples as they occur, and the time stamp is part of the 1 second sample data, then there is no problem when it arrives at the computer other than the data received at the computer must occur soon enough that whatever data buffer exists at the 43B does not overflow.

I believe the 43B operates in a command response mode for data transfer. It does not just send data when it wants, rather the computer sends a command to the 43B asking the 43B to do something, which may be a request for the 43B to send the sample data. There are other types of commands.

The 8 second delay of data at the computer relative to the time of origin at the 43B would probably relate to when the computer requested data and how the computer processed the data. A time stamp at the computer should be the same as at the 43B.

.
 
ptonsparky said:
Been wondering about that 8 seconds all morning, my explanation just didn't sound right. Could it be the delay from the time the 43B does its calculations until the time it gets sent to the laptop and recorded? Don't know. The time stamp comes from the 43B
My PC's clock is one minute ahead of my 43B, started a S/S like I did above, created a event again. The events time is one minute ahead in the PC compared to the 43B. It doesn't use the 43B's clock. Go to the 43B time set page, double-click on your PC's time to check how far off they are.

I have a 9-PIN COMM Port cord also, so I tried that too. Same thing with the time and the difference in voltage was only .1V.
 
gar said:
080814-1309 EST

ptonsparky:

If the 43B outputs RS232 data from the 1 second samples as they occur, and the time stamp is part of the 1 second sample data, then there is no problem when it arrives at the computer other than the data received at the computer must occur soon enough that whatever data buffer exists at the 43B does not overflow.

I believe the 43B operates in a command response mode for data transfer. It does not just send data when it wants, rather the computer sends a command to the 43B asking the 43B to do something, which may be a request for the 43B to send the sample data. There are other types of commands.

The 8 second delay of data at the computer relative to the time of origin at the 43B would probably relate to when the computer requested data and how the computer processed the data. A time stamp at the computer should be the same as at the 43B.

.
There isn't any remote command to start the 43B from the PC, it's all done manually.
 
080814-1602 EST

wptski:

From
http://us.fluke.com/usen/products/P...(FlukeProducts)&category=PHASE1(FlukeProducts)
and
the Software Reference Manual

I conclude from
p 2.7, p3.36, 3.43, 3.45 3.47 (may be important to this discussion), and appendix C ---- not too much other than I believe for each item of information a collecting program has to query the 43B.

Since I do not have a 43B I can not experiment with it to see what makes sense.

Who did you work for, and do you have your own 43B?

.
 
gar said:
080814-1602 EST

wptski:

From
http://us.fluke.com/usen/products/P...(FlukeProducts)&category=PHASE1(FlukeProducts)
and
the Software Reference Manual

I conclude from
p 2.7, p3.36, 3.43, 3.45 3.47 (may be important to this discussion), and appendix C ---- not too much other than I believe for each item of information a collecting program has to query the 43B.

Since I do not have a 43B I can not experiment with it to see what makes sense.

Who did you work for, and do you have your own 43B?

.
If you don't start a S/S and try to start a log, you'll get a error stating no data available. There's no selection option in the software for any function that the 43B can do, so it's all manual start. It's more like a virtual meter.

I retired from Ford Motor Co. where is was a machine repairman and no electric/electronic work there. Yes, I have my own 43B. I'm a hobbyist/DIY'r but I was a electronics tech in the Navy many years ago.
 
ptonsparky said:
Looks like laptop & 43B were about 6 seconds apart as of today. Neither keep time very well.
I have several pieces of epuipment and if your logging, you must reset the time every few days if you want to be accurate.
 
080814-1843 EST

wptski:

Since you personally have a 43B you can give ptonsparky the best first hand information, or run a comparable test.

Did you work at either Sterling or Van Dyke? And if so on what machines? Pickup sales are so slow that I was told that about 1/2 the plant is on layoff at this time.

Do any of these names ring a bell? Fraser Anderson, Craig Becker, Jeff Trumble, Tom Ordorcich, and Bhim Rally. I am not sure of the spelling of Tom's last name.

.
 
gar said:
080814-1843 EST

wptski:

Since you personally have a 43B you can give ptonsparky the best first hand information, or run a comparable test.

Did you work at either Sterling or Van Dyke? And if so on what machines? Pickup sales are so slow that I was told that about 1/2 the plant is on layoff at this time.

Do any of these names ring a bell? Fraser Anderson, Craig Becker, Jeff Trumble, Tom Ordorcich, and Bhim Rally. I am not sure of the spelling of Tom's last name.

.
That's what I've been trying to do or help as best I can.

Yep, I worked at Sterling Gear&Axle. Gleason gear cutters, tool shapening and lapping machines(long gone). Bryant ID grinders, Cincinnati OD grinders, Gardner end grinders, Yoder seamless tube welding machine, Saginaw hard turning. Most of the machining is long gone now and some idled. They still cut the ring/pinion gears and lap them.

Just before I left, I cover four assembly loops that did the F-150 frontends and one component I never found out what it went into! I also cover the long/short axle machining that went into the F-150 frontend. The loops have numerous operations, maye fifty machines a piece.

Yeah, trucks sales are way down. They've had numerous temporary layoffs, extended shutdown(July) and a permanent layoff about a month ago.

Don't know any of them. I worked out on the floor(hourly). What do they do there? Or are they at the VanDyke Plant?? I was there for 14 months starting in 1980 after a layoff, got laidoff again and picked up at Sterling till 4/1/08 when I took the buyout.
 
080815-0615 EST

wptski:

I think you are being a big help.

It would be interesting if you ran some experiments in your yard. I would use the incoming water pipe as the reference, assuming it is copper, and then maybe a long extension cord for a flexible wire from the 43B signal input to a probe. The probe only needs to slightly penetrate the ground, and a 10" to 12" screwdriver will work.

The people I mentioned were process engineers or supervisors in the axle assembly areas. Craig Becker was the big boss (title may have been superintendent) over the main final assembly line and T-bird line at Sterling. I think that main line ran about 300 to 400 parts per hour. The T-bird line was about 100 to 120 parts per hour. Bhim Rally was a process engineer in axle assembly at Van Dyke, and Fraser Anderson was a supervisor of axle assembly. Later Fraser became plant manager of Livonia Transmission.

Since you were mostly in the machining areas you probably had less contact with the assembly areas. I think that Becker also had responsibility for the T-bird carrier machining line.

77 to 78 was when Ford switched from the Banjo to the Integral Carrier type axle. The high bay area of Sterling was for the banjo forming presses. Ford banjo type axles have had a lot of use in various types of race cars. The 1980 date you mentioned may indicate when you started at Ford and thus would be after the banjo was out of production. I believe at one time that Sterling production was in the 12,000 to 15,000 axles per day.

For those not familiar with axles here are just a couple references I quickly found:
http://www.automotivearticles.com/123/Suspension_Design_2.shtml
The following one has cutaways of both banjo and integral:
http://www.mustangii.org/decoder/axle/

.
 
gar said:
080815-0615 EST

wptski:

I think you are being a big help.

It would be interesting if you ran some experiments in your yard. I would use the incoming water pipe as the reference, assuming it is copper, and then maybe a long extension cord for a flexible wire from the 43B signal input to a probe. The probe only needs to slightly penetrate the ground, and a 10" to 12" screwdriver will work.

The people I mentioned were process engineers or supervisors in the axle assembly areas. Craig Becker was the big boss (title may have been superintendent) over the main final assembly line and T-bird line at Sterling. I think that main line ran about 300 to 400 parts per hour. The T-bird line was about 100 to 120 parts per hour. Bhim Rally was a process engineer in axle assembly at Van Dyke, and Fraser Anderson was a supervisor of axle assembly. Later Fraser became plant manager of Livonia Transmission.

Since you were mostly in the machining areas you probably had less contact with the assembly areas. I think that Becker also had responsibility for the T-bird carrier machining line.

77 to 78 was when Ford switched from the Banjo to the Integral Carrier type axle. The high bay area of Sterling was for the banjo forming presses. Ford banjo type axles have had a lot of use in various types of race cars. The 1980 date you mentioned may indicate when you started at Ford and thus would be after the banjo was out of production. I believe at one time that Sterling production was in the 12,000 to 15,000 axles per day.

For those not familiar with axles here are just a couple references I quickly found:
http://www.automotivearticles.com/123/Suspension_Design_2.shtml
The following one has cutaways of both banjo and integral:
http://www.mustangii.org/decoder/axle/

.
You mean measure from my cold water pipe to "like" a ground rod. I assume you mean at the point it enters my home? Hmm, that's a long way from my basement water meter!!:rolleyes: Whoops, it isn't copper, it's galvinized steel but it's still connected to neutral at the entry PB.


I started at Sterling on 11/13/72. I left out many machines like all the presses we had for the banjo rearends. The T-Bird assembl line went in where all driveshaft, weld yoke, slip yoke, U-joint, etc. machining operations were. Actually the T-Bird was shut down years ago, sat idle and then was being retooled for something else. Sure you don't mean the Mustang line?? I spent about 18 years in that area but got shifted out to some newly assigned areas. That's was only the first of several shifts of manpower trying to make things work. My supervisors at one time could have been my ex-partner. Now, he/her was a shoe salesperson, meat packing supervisor, etc. I mention those jobs because it's the actual truth. Not one supervisor left that came from maintainence, all under production!

I probably know Craig Becker by his face and not by name. I remember going to a little party in plant for another guy in the Mustang crib. He pointed out somebody named Craig as a supervisor, maybe that was him?

Just looked up Craig Becker in a 1990 yearbook. Old picture but I don't remember him at all!
 
Last edited:
I went from a outside water faucet and then used the ground on a nearby receptacle to a rod down about 2' which measured the same first with a Fluke 87V. I noticed a change in the reading, my basement dehumidifier cycled ON, so I shut if OFF. I then connected the 43B, started the dehumidifier again, cycled my furnace blower for 15 seconds. The following is the capture. Cursor #2 is at the blower fan cycle point. I didn't bother to drag my PC outside because I didn't have any problems with any differences. The 43B's cursor peak reading was 611mv also.

Ground_SS_1.jpg
 
080815-1501 EST

bill:

I will use your first name for a while until another one shows up.

I had responded to your morning post and hit the wrong key and lost it. The keys X C and V should not be adjacent. Maybe Z C and B should have been the keys for editing.

Yes an outside water faucet should be a good conductor back to earth for a reference so long as no significant current is flowing in the pipe, and I do not mean water. The resistivity of water in our area is so high in comparison to steel that the water has no effect.

Following measurements are with a Fluke 27.

From where my water line enters the basement, my reference point, to one rear outside faucet I read 0.3 MV. From the reference to the main panel is 1.3 MV. To the outside meter box 3.4 MV. Outside between two water faucets it is 1.0 MV. This is probably partially a result of the inherent 1 turn loop that exists when doing the measurement.

In my backyard I have an 8' ground rod connected to nothing for experiments about 70 feet to the rear of my house. I have seen 50 to 125 MV today.

At my transformer pole I have a 2" rigid conduit going into the ground. This is on the order of 60 MV today. But a screwdriver in the ground close by is about 125 MV. No good explanation. But I do need to put a low pass filter on the meter input and also maybe look at it with a scope.

In the current very dry soil my screwdriver probe may not be giving good results. However, if one is concerned with human or animal shock problems, then voltage near the surface is important vs feet down in the earth.

In your plots I did not see any appreciable min and max values relative to the mean.

.
 
I forgot to point out that it appears that the less the load, the higher the reading. You can see that I had 177mv before my dehumidifier cycled ON.

So what have we proven? The OP measured a much high voltage.

Where are you going to get a low pass filter from? I assume your looking for a something like the 1kHz low pass filters in some of the Fluke's like the 289/87V? I looked for something like that but couldn't find anything made for a scope use.
 
080815-1901 EST

bill:

Lost my post again. This time because of a Microsoft auto update.

Build your own low pass filter, see:
http://www.ece.ndsu.nodak.edu/~glower/ECE_Labs/ECE311/Lab08.pdf

With the values shown and a 1 M input to the scope, then at DC and low frequencies the output will be about 10% down.

I not quite sure what voltage you were measuring. Assume that the humidifier was 120 V, then there may have been other loads on the neutral that were canceled in part by the humidifier neutral load.



.
 
gar said:
080815-1901 EST

bill:

Lost my post again. This time because of a Microsoft auto update.

Build your own low pass filter, see:
http://www.ece.ndsu.nodak.edu/~glower/ECE_Labs/ECE311/Lab08.pdf

With the values shown and a 1 M input to the scope, then at DC and low frequencies the output will be about 10% down.

I not quite sure what voltage you were measuring. Assume that the humidifier was 120 V, then there may have been other loads on the neutral that were canceled in part by the humidifier neutral load.
.
Nothing sold made for a scope, hey? I wonder how the 87V's low pass filter would have affected my readings?? I'll have to try that tomorrow.

Yes, as a matter of fact. The other phase has a majority of the constant loads like two refrigerators, etc. The dehumidifier is a good sized unit, draws about 6A.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top