DC Adapter question

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi,
I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
works on the 110V supply here.

It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA

Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are usually
either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.

Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?

For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work? If
I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
point?

Thanks for any help,
Daniel
46 answers Last reply
More about adapter question
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
    >Hi,
    >I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    >point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    >works on the 110V supply here.
    >
    >It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA

    The 7.5 VDC may (and may not, but we don't know) be important, so
    you'd best stick with something very close to that.

    The 1500mA is a minimum. Which means that the unit you describe below
    as 1700mA is just fine. The only catch with the current is that if
    it says some specific voltage at a specific current, as the actual current
    drawn goes down the actual voltage delivered will go up. Hence you don't
    want to use something able to supply twice the required current simply
    because it will be so under loaded that the voltage will be significantly
    higher than what it would be with a full load.

    However, as noted, the voltage doesn't always make any real difference
    either! Lots of units are powered with "switching" power supplies, and
    the voltage chosen is merely a convenient one. "Convenient" may be the
    best deal they can get on purchasing bulk orders, or may be related to
    a size that is commonly available.

    One example that has been discussed in detail in this newsgroup is the
    power supply for Linksys WRT54G routers. They come with a 12 VDC 1A
    supply. The unit will work off a supply of less than 5 volts to more
    than 20 volts though. The actual power used stays about the same, so
    as the voltage goes down the current goes up. Using a 6 VDC supply
    it would be a good idea to have one rated at 2 Amps. An 18 VDC supply
    would probably do fine if rated at 750 mA.

    As Jeff Liebermann originally pointed out, with the WRT54G the upper
    voltage is probably limited by when the capacitors blow up (literally).

    >Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    >current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are usually
    >either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.

    The 1700 mA unit is perfect.

    >Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    >only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?
    >
    >For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work? If
    >I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    >point?

    The 1000 mA unit would almost certainly work. The question merely how
    long before it failed. Not if, just how long. At that difference in
    rated current, it might fail within minutes. It might take months.
    You'll have the 1700 mA one stuffed in a box on a shelf, just in case,
    long after the device it powers has been tossed into the trash.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 17:25:44 GMT, "Ann-Marie"
    <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

    >For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work? If
    >I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    >point?

    the AP will take what it needs, so the rating should be at least equal
    to what you had before.

    Was the UK supply only rated 220-240V on the input and not
    multi-voltage ?

    Getting a spare for the equivalent AP (or a whole AP) off ebay would
    be another approach.

    and don't use channels >11 :-)

    Phil
    --
    spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
    Come on down !
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Get the higher one, it will only draw the current it needs. Check that it's
    the regulated and not unregulated type and check the polarity is correct.

    --

    Kenny Cargill


    "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
    news:sMkpe.2181$jS1.892@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
    > Hi,
    > I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    > point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    > works on the 110V supply here.
    >
    > It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA
    >
    > Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    > current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are
    > usually either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.
    >
    > Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    > only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?
    >
    > For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work?
    > If I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    > point?
    >
    > Thanks for any help,
    > Daniel
    >
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    A power supply current rating is the maximum available current. Any
    equipment connected to it will draw no more current that the equipment
    rating. Your wireless access point/router will draw no more current than
    the rating of the wireless access point/router (which should be printed on
    the unit.)

    I suggest you check the Wireless access point/router label for the DC power
    consumption. The rating of the 220 VAC adapter you have has a rating that
    seems to me to be very high, much higher than the two 120 VAC adapters used
    by the two wireless access point/router units I own (12 VDC @ 300 MA and 12
    VDC @ 500 MA.) Your adapter supplies up to 11.5 Watts, as compared to 3.6
    Watts and 6 Watts for the two I have.

    One thing to consider is the flood of very inexpensive wireless access
    point/router units in stores like CompUSA and Office Depot. If you are
    willing to wait for a mail-in-rebate, the price can be as low as $8 US for a
    802.11g Motorola wireless access point/router (my $8 US Motorola is Model
    WR850G.) This price is less than half the price of a 7.5 VDC @ 1500 mA
    adapter; RadioShack, for example, charges $39.95 US for a 3 to 12 VDC @ 1000
    mA multi-voltage adapter, and $34.95 for a 40 Watt 120 ACV to 220 VAC
    transformer with US type AC plug and UK/European AC socket.)

    Phil Weldon

    "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
    news:sMkpe.2181$jS1.892@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
    > Hi,
    > I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    > point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    > works on the 110V supply here.
    >
    > It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA
    >
    > Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    > current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are
    > usually either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.
    >
    > Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    > only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?
    >
    > For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work?
    > If I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    > point?
    >
    > Thanks for any help,
    > Daniel
    >
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Sorry, I left out the POINT of checking the power requirement level on the
    wireless access point/router. You need only get an AC adapter with the
    correct voltage and sufficient current rating to meed the requirements on
    the label, and not the current rating on your 220 VAC adapter. A lower
    current adapter will be much easier to find, and much cheaper.

    Phil Weldon

    "Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
    news:Clnpe.676$eM6.299@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    >A power supply current rating is the maximum available current. Any
    >equipment connected to it will draw no more current that the equipment
    >rating. Your wireless access point/router ....
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 17:25:44 GMT, "Ann-Marie"
    <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

    >I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    >point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    >works on the 110V supply here.

    You could just get a 117VAC to 220VAC stepup transformer. You
    probably have other devices that run off 220VAC.
    http://www.starkelectronic.com/st500.htm

    >It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA

    It would also be helpful if you would disclose the maker and model
    number of your wireless access point and router. The problem is that
    the sticker label is NOT what the unit draws. The voltage is probably
    correct, but the current drain of the router may be considerably less
    than the current rating on the transformer. It would be easy enough
    to measure the current drain of the router with an amps-guesser and
    size the power supply accordingly.

    >Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    >current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are usually
    >either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.

    I don't like the universal adapters (the ones with a switch from zero
    volts to more than enough to blow up anything if you goof). I've
    confiscated those from customers before they blow up their laptops and
    electonic devices. Actually, the usual problem is not the voltage but
    the polarity of the connector. Getting it backwards is all too easy.
    About 3-4 times per year, someone drifts into my shop with a blown
    something and a universal replacement adapter. Not recommended unless
    you glue the switch and plug adapter in place.

    >Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    >only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?

    More current is always a safer bet. If it says 1500ma on the adapter,
    then 1500ma or larger will do just fine.

    >For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work?

    1000ma might work if the access point draws less power. The typical
    access point (no router or switch section) burns about 8 watts. At
    7.5VDC that's about 1000ma. However, without measuring the current
    drain, this is pure speculation on my part.

    Another problem is that if it actually does work at 1000ma, it might
    be running at near its maximum rating. That's a problem because the
    limit is set by iron core saturation which results in gross
    inefficiency, heating, and a small fire if left alone. This is
    another reason why underrated power supplies are a bad idea.

    >If
    >I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    >point?

    No. Only excessive voltage or reverse polarity can do any damage.
    The access point will draw only whatever it decides to draw in
    current. Having excess current capability will have no effect on how
    much the access point draws.

    >Thanks for any help,
    >Daniel

    Reminder... Since you're now in the colonies, kindly reset your
    firmware to US regulations and standards. If it's not possible, see
    if there is a replacement flash firmware from the unspecified
    manufactory web pile.


    --
    # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
    # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    # jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    # jeffl@cruzio.com AE6KS
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Hi,
    It's a D-link DSL-604+, it has built in modem, router, switch, WAP, so I
    guess thats why it takes quite a lot of power.

    I looked in the manual, and it says the power consumption is 12W max, which,
    I worked out to be 1.6A at 7.5V - would that be right?

    If I get this 1700mA adapter, and run it at 7.5V, is there a risk of fire or
    anything? or is that only if I got a lower rated one.


    "Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
    news:sdbca15oijmu56rmiop11qtc04l8fnaped@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 17:25:44 GMT, "Ann-Marie"
    > <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
    >
    >>I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    >>point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    >>works on the 110V supply here.
    >
    > You could just get a 117VAC to 220VAC stepup transformer. You
    > probably have other devices that run off 220VAC.
    > http://www.starkelectronic.com/st500.htm
    >
    >>It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA
    >
    > It would also be helpful if you would disclose the maker and model
    > number of your wireless access point and router. The problem is that
    > the sticker label is NOT what the unit draws. The voltage is probably
    > correct, but the current drain of the router may be considerably less
    > than the current rating on the transformer. It would be easy enough
    > to measure the current drain of the router with an amps-guesser and
    > size the power supply accordingly.
    >
    >>Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    >>current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are
    >>usually
    >>either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.
    >
    > I don't like the universal adapters (the ones with a switch from zero
    > volts to more than enough to blow up anything if you goof). I've
    > confiscated those from customers before they blow up their laptops and
    > electonic devices. Actually, the usual problem is not the voltage but
    > the polarity of the connector. Getting it backwards is all too easy.
    > About 3-4 times per year, someone drifts into my shop with a blown
    > something and a universal replacement adapter. Not recommended unless
    > you glue the switch and plug adapter in place.
    >
    >>Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    >>only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?
    >
    > More current is always a safer bet. If it says 1500ma on the adapter,
    > then 1500ma or larger will do just fine.
    >
    >>For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work?
    >
    > 1000ma might work if the access point draws less power. The typical
    > access point (no router or switch section) burns about 8 watts. At
    > 7.5VDC that's about 1000ma. However, without measuring the current
    > drain, this is pure speculation on my part.
    >
    > Another problem is that if it actually does work at 1000ma, it might
    > be running at near its maximum rating. That's a problem because the
    > limit is set by iron core saturation which results in gross
    > inefficiency, heating, and a small fire if left alone. This is
    > another reason why underrated power supplies are a bad idea.
    >
    >>If
    >>I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    >>point?
    >
    > No. Only excessive voltage or reverse polarity can do any damage.
    > The access point will draw only whatever it decides to draw in
    > current. Having excess current capability will have no effect on how
    > much the access point draws.
    >
    >>Thanks for any help,
    >>Daniel
    >
    > Reminder... Since you're now in the colonies, kindly reset your
    > firmware to US regulations and standards. If it's not possible, see
    > if there is a replacement flash firmware from the unspecified
    > manufactory web pile.
    >
    >
    > --
    > # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
    > # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    > # jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    > # jeffl@cruzio.com AE6KS
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Kenny" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
    news:d84v3a$4t2$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
    > Another solution is to get a 110V to 240V AC transformer, then you can use
    > your existing adapter.
    >
    > -- Yup,i'm with Kenny on that one,thats what i did,works great.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 00:12:09 GMT, "Ann-Marie"
    <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

    >It's a D-link DSL-604+, it has built in modem, router, switch, WAP, so I
    >guess thats why it takes quite a lot of power.

    True. The DLink DSL-604+ is not sold in the US. It does DMT ADSL so
    it will probably work with most US DSL ISP's. Check with your local
    DSL ISP to be sure.

    >I looked in the manual, and it says the power consumption is 12W max, which,
    >I worked out to be 1.6A at 7.5V - would that be right?

    That will save me the effort of looking up the specs. Yep, 1.6A is
    correct.
    12 watts / 7.5V = 1.6A

    >If I get this 1700mA adapter, and run it at 7.5V, is there a risk of fire or
    >anything? or is that only if I got a lower rated one.

    Nope. The rated current is where it will run forever without
    overheating difficulties. Only the lower current drain adapters will
    cause problems. However, just to be sure, check if the power adapter
    gets unusually warm when you first plug it in.


    --
    # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
    # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    # jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    # jeffl@cruzio.com AE6KS
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Kenny" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
    news:d84v3a$4t2$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
    | Another solution is to get a 110V to 240V AC transformer, then you can use
    | your existing adapter.


    Transformers are recipical devices so a US adaptor (240 to 110) can supply
    240 from 110 by reversing the connections just make sure you have a
    transformer and not a ballast reduction. In this case likely won't hurt
    anything it just won't work.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Ann-Marie wrote:

    > Hi,
    > I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    > point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    > works on the 110V supply here.
    >
    > It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA
    >
    > Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    > current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are usually
    > either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.
    >
    > Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    > only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?
    >
    > For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work? If
    > I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    > point?
    >
    > Thanks for any help,
    > Daniel
    >
    >
    A supply could be rated at 1000A and work no differntly than one
    rated at 1700mA.
    It is the *voltage* rating that one must be cautious about.
    Now, if there was a way you could measure the actual current drawn by
    the unit, i would expect that it would draw less than 1500mA - perhaps
    as low or lower than 1000mA.
    If that were true, then you could use the less expensive supply.
    However, in your case, it is wiser to use a supply rated at or more
    than 1500mA.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    > A supply could be rated at 1000A and work no differntly than
    >one rated at 1700mA.
    > It is the *voltage* rating that one must be cautious about.

    Almost, but not quite. If a DC supply is significantly under loaded,
    the voltage will rise. How much depends greatly on the design chosen.

    For that reason it is probably not a good idea to use a supply
    rated significantly higher than the original supply was rated
    for... *if* the voltage actually makes any difference at all.

    (But if, as is true with many wifi units, the onboard supply is
    actually a switching power supply, which is basically
    insensitive to input voltage, it simply won't make any
    difference at all.)

    > Now, if there was a way you could measure the actual current
    >drawn by the unit, i would expect that it would draw less than
    >1500mA - perhaps as low or lower than 1000mA.
    >
    > If that were true, then you could use the less expensive supply.

    Bad idea. The supply has to be able to provide current at
    *peak* usage. Trying to measure that can be very difficult, if
    not impossible for most people. With a wireless radio, for example,
    the peaks happen when the unit is transmitting and may be for very
    short bursts. If you simply measure the current while the unit
    is idle, what you measure is a totally misleading value.

    > However, in your case, it is wiser to use a supply rated at
    >or more than 1500mA.

    Ah, you got that one pegged.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >
    >> Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>> A supply could be rated at 1000A and work no differntly than
    >>>one rated at 1700mA.
    >>> It is the *voltage* rating that one must be cautious about.
    >> Almost, but not quite. If a DC supply is significantly under
    >> loaded,
    >> the voltage will rise.
    >
    >That's true if it's unregulated but the voltage change with a
    >regulated supply is negligible.

    That would depend on the regulation, but regardless... I've
    never seen a regulated wall wort.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

    > Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >
    >> A supply could be rated at 1000A and work no differntly than
    >>one rated at 1700mA.
    >> It is the *voltage* rating that one must be cautious about.
    >
    >
    > Almost, but not quite. If a DC supply is significantly under loaded,
    > the voltage will rise.

    That's true if it's unregulated but the voltage change with a regulated
    supply is negligible.

    > How much depends greatly on the design chosen.
    >
    > For that reason it is probably not a good idea to use a supply
    > rated significantly higher than the original supply was rated
    > for... *if* the voltage actually makes any difference at all.
    >
    > (But if, as is true with many wifi units, the onboard supply is
    > actually a switching power supply, which is basically
    > insensitive to input voltage, it simply won't make any
    > difference at all.)
    >
    >
    >> Now, if there was a way you could measure the actual current
    >>drawn by the unit, i would expect that it would draw less than
    >>1500mA - perhaps as low or lower than 1000mA.
    >>
    >> If that were true, then you could use the less expensive supply.
    >
    >
    > Bad idea. The supply has to be able to provide current at
    > *peak* usage. Trying to measure that can be very difficult, if
    > not impossible for most people. With a wireless radio, for example,
    > the peaks happen when the unit is transmitting and may be for very
    > short bursts. If you simply measure the current while the unit
    > is idle, what you measure is a totally misleading value.
    >
    >
    >> However, in your case, it is wiser to use a supply rated at
    >>or more than 1500mA.
    >
    >
    > Ah, you got that one pegged.
    >
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>>
    >>>That's true if it's unregulated but the voltage change with a
    >>>regulated supply is negligible.
    >> That would depend on the regulation,
    >
    >Not really. If the voltage significantly changes then it isn't
    >'regulated'. That's what the word means in this context.

    Yes *really*. "Regulation" is not specific enough. Some of
    regulators are better than others. Just saying "regulated"
    means zilch. And just saying the voltage changes means just
    about as much! How well regulated can be specified, and how
    much voltage changes can too.

    >> but regardless... I've
    >> never seen a regulated wall wort.
    >
    >There are lots of 'em, even in the traditional 'wall wort' form
    >factor. Even more common in the brick form factor.

    They are *rare* in the wall wort form, despite you knowing of an
    exception. The vast majority of wall worts that readers of this
    thread will ever see are *not* regulated.

    >A regulated wall wort in the power range being discussed would
    >likely be a switcher rather than linear.

    Typically that isn't done. The switcher is inside the
    equipment, and the wall wort amounts to little more than a
    transformer with a diode bridge, and might even have a
    capacitor.

    It's good engineering practice, as it allows a variety of
    "power supplies" to be used. Personally, I don't see why
    anyone specifies a DC power supply anyway! They should move
    the rectifier and capacitor the equipment, which allows the
    wall wort to be AC or DC, and if DC it can be any polarity.
    That's nice flexibility.

    >I don't feel like bringing the network down to put a meter to it
    >but I'd bet the 5V 2.5A wall wort to my D-link 614+ is a
    >switcher because I don't see any way a 12.5VA transformer could
    >fit in the 1.75x2.25x1 inch case, plus there's no weight to it,
    >and the model number, SMP-xxxxx, looks suspiciously like an
    >engineer's "Switch Mode Power" supply acronym.

    However, the fact that one such unit exists doesn't make it
    common, nor does it mean using it as a general example to
    describe the functionality of wall worts is a good idea.

    My point was that your comments were too narrowly focused on
    specific equipment that did not represent a broad enough view of
    what the OP, or others reading this thread via google searches
    next year, might be actually seeing.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    The router will draw the current that is correct. You need to match the
    voltage to within about 1 Volt. The rating of the adaptor is the maximum
    safe load it can handle. You can use the 1700 ma one, as long as the voltage
    is correct.

    If you were to read up on ohm's law and understand it, you would understand
    the answer to this.

    A simple explanation, is that your AC outlet in the average home (In North
    America) can supply 15 Amps at 120 Volts. Very few of your devices use more
    than 1 or 2 Amps. The only exceptions are the air conditioner, toaster,
    microwave oven, and the electric kettle, just to mention a few.

    --

    JANA
    _____


    "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
    news:sMkpe.2181$jS1.892@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
    Hi,
    I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    works on the 110V supply here.

    It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA

    Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are usually
    either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.

    Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?

    For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work? If
    I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    point?

    Thanks for any help,
    Daniel
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

    > David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >
    >>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> A supply could be rated at 1000A and work no differntly than
    >>>>one rated at 1700mA.
    >>>> It is the *voltage* rating that one must be cautious about.
    >>>
    >>>Almost, but not quite. If a DC supply is significantly under
    >>>loaded,
    >>>the voltage will rise.
    >>
    >>That's true if it's unregulated but the voltage change with a
    >>regulated supply is negligible.
    >
    >
    > That would depend on the regulation,

    Not really. If the voltage significantly changes then it isn't 'regulated'.
    That's what the word means in this context.

    > but regardless... I've
    > never seen a regulated wall wort.

    There are lots of 'em, even in the traditional 'wall wort' form factor.
    Even more common in the brick form factor.

    A regulated wall wort in the power range being discussed would likely be a
    switcher rather than linear.

    I don't feel like bringing the network down to put a meter to it but I'd
    bet the 5V 2.5A wall wort to my D-link 614+ is a switcher because I don't
    see any way a 12.5VA transformer could fit in the 1.75x2.25x1 inch case,
    plus there's no weight to it, and the model number, SMP-xxxxx, looks
    suspiciously like an engineer's "Switch Mode Power" supply acronym.
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    'JANA' wrote: "The router draw the current that is correct."

    Correct, given everything is working properly.

    'JANA' wrote: "If you were to read up on ohm's law and understand it, you
    would understand the answer to this."

    Well, no, Ohm's law is not sufficient; the circuits involved are AC
    circuits, involving inductance, capacitance, resistance, inrush current, and
    power factors.

    'JANA' wrote: "A simple explanation, is that your AC outlet in the average
    home (In North America) can supply 15 Amps at 120 Volts."

    Well no, most wall sockets in USA buildings, if to electrical construction
    codes are on circuits breakered at 20 Amperes.

    'JANA' wrote: "Very few of your devices use more than 1 or 2 Amps." and
    "Very few of your devices use more than 1 or 2 Amps. The only exceptions are
    the air conditioner, toaster, microwave oven, and the electric kettle, just
    to mention a few."

    Fuzzy; most devices DO use more than one or two Amperes. The list of
    exceptions to a '1 or 2 Amps' limit is MUCH longer than the list of the
    devices below that limit. Other than small and florescent lamps, small
    radios, and wall warts, what's left under '1 or 2 Amps'?

    There are a number of non obvious differences between UK electrical codes,
    practices, and specifications and USA codes, practices, and specifications.
    Some of them are not obvious.

    1. It's not just the household voltages that are different, the AC
    frequency is 50Hz rather than 60Hz.
    2. AC circuits in the walls are wired as a loop rather than a line or tree.
    3. AC power cords tend to have a fuse in the plug.
    4. Color codes for AC wiring are NOT Black/White/Green.
    5. AC contacts (plugs and sockets) tend to be much heavier duty.

    The above and other points need to be considered when moving UK devices to
    the USA.


    'JANA' wrote
    "JANA" <jana@ca.inter.net> wrote in message
    news:3gosgsFdjt5gU4@uni-berlin.de...
    > The router will draw the current that is correct. You need to match the
    > voltage to within about 1 Volt. The rating of the adaptor is the maximum
    > safe load it can handle. You can use the 1700 ma one, as long as the
    > voltage
    > is correct.
    >
    > If you were to read up on ohm's law and understand it, you would
    > understand
    > the answer to this.
    >
    > A simple explanation, is that your AC outlet in the average home (In North
    > America) can supply 15 Amps at 120 Volts. Very few of your devices use
    > more
    > than 1 or 2 Amps. The only exceptions are the air conditioner, toaster,
    > microwave oven, and the electric kettle, just to mention a few.
    >
    > --
    >
    > JANA
    > _____
    >
    >
    > "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
    > news:sMkpe.2181$jS1.892@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
    > Hi,
    > I just moved from the UK to the US. I brought my Wireless access
    > point/router with me, but I need to get a new DC adapter for it so that it
    > works on the 110V supply here.
    >
    > It says on my UK adapter that the output is: 7.5V DC 1500mA 11.25VA
    >
    > Every universal adapter I find that has 7.5 as an option, seems to have a
    > current rating of either below, or above the 1500mA I need. They are
    > usually
    > either about 1000mA, or 1700mA etc.
    >
    > Does anyone know if this is a required rating, or if it will automatically
    > only take the current required, as long as it's set to 7.5V ?
    >
    > For example, if I get the one with only 1000mA rating, will it not work?
    > If
    > I get the 1700mA one, will it be too much and blow the wireless access
    > point?
    >
    > Thanks for any help,
    > Daniel
    >
    >
    >
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
    news:sMkpe.2181$jS1.892@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com:

    > 7.5V DC 1500mA

    1) Get a DC adapter that is specifed to deliver:
    a) 7.5V DC.
    b) not less than 1500ma.

    2) Check the DC supply plug for correct fit in the socket

    3) Check the DC plug for compatible polarity.

    4) Ignore the technomasturbatory responses in this thread.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >> "Regulation" is not specific enough. Some of
    >> regulators are better than others. Just saying "regulated"
    >> means zilch. And just saying the voltage changes means just
    >> about as much! How well regulated can be specified, and how
    >> much voltage changes can too.
    >
    >Yes, it 'can be specified' but we're not talking about the Vcore
    >regulator to a processor. We're talking about a wall wort and
    >it's nonsense to contemplate an 'unregulated' regulated wall
    >wort.

    It's just good engineering.

    The rest of your article was mostly interesting opinion, but
    not significant either.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    > David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >
    >>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>
    >>>>That's true if it's unregulated but the voltage change with a
    >>>>regulated supply is negligible.
    >>>
    >>>That would depend on the regulation,
    >>
    >>Not really. If the voltage significantly changes then it isn't
    >>'regulated'. That's what the word means in this context.
    >
    >
    > Yes *really*.

    No, 'really'.

    > "Regulation" is not specific enough. Some of
    > regulators are better than others. Just saying "regulated"
    > means zilch. And just saying the voltage changes means just
    > about as much! How well regulated can be specified, and how
    > much voltage changes can too.

    Yes, it 'can be specified' but we're not talking about the Vcore regulator
    to a processor. We're talking about a wall wort and it's nonsense to
    contemplate an 'unregulated' regulated wall wort.

    We could also discuss how much ripple the unregulated wall wort is
    specified to put out at the specified current because there's the potential
    for a heck of a lot more variance in that than there is in the typical
    regulated wall wort.

    >>>but regardless... I've
    >>>never seen a regulated wall wort.
    >>
    >>There are lots of 'em, even in the traditional 'wall wort' form
    >>factor. Even more common in the brick form factor.
    >
    >
    > They are *rare* in the wall wort form, despite you knowing of an
    > exception. The vast majority of wall worts that readers of this
    > thread will ever see are *not* regulated.

    First you claimed you hadn't ever seen any, implying they don't exist, and
    now you want to argue 'percentages'.

    Perhaps I missed it but I don't recall it being said that the 'ac adapter'
    in question was even a 'wall wort'.

    Here's the package outline for Power Stream's selection in 15 watt wall
    wort switchers in both end and side mount plug, plus brick.

    http://www.powerstream.com/Zdraw.htm

    And the specs for them: http://www.powerstream.com/Zdraw.htm

    >>A regulated wall wort in the power range being discussed would
    >>likely be a switcher rather than linear.
    >
    >
    > Typically that isn't done. The switcher is inside the
    > equipment, and the wall wort amounts to little more than a
    > transformer with a diode bridge, and might even have a
    > capacitor.

    That's certainly one way to do it. It's also not unusual to put a small
    switcher in the wall wort because, as the power levels go up, it's plain
    cheaper than a transformer. It's also more efficient with less weight, less
    bulk, and less heat.

    > It's good engineering practice, as it allows a variety of
    > "power supplies" to be used.

    It may or may not be an advantage to allow a 'variety of power supplies'
    since a manufacturer usually knows what power supply they're providing.

    > Personally, I don't see why
    > anyone specifies a DC power supply anyway! They should move
    > the rectifier and capacitor the equipment, which allows the
    > wall wort to be AC or DC, and if DC it can be any polarity.
    > That's nice flexibility.

    And some do it that way too. One could also argue that if you're moving
    everything else into the unit then you might as well put the transformer in
    it too.

    It depends on what one is trying to accomplish and what the device is for.
    If it's 'portable', as one example, then moving as much as possible into
    the external adapter removes bulk and weight from the portable device and,
    again using the portable example, there's little reason to carry around the
    transformer, rectifier, filter, and regulator when it's running on batteries.

    A fixed device, like a router, doesn't have that particular consideration
    but there are others, such as case size and internal heat dissipation, but
    I'm not going to debate the wisdom of D-Link design engineers as I don't
    know what design criteria they were handed.

    >>I don't feel like bringing the network down to put a meter to it
    >>but I'd bet the 5V 2.5A wall wort to my D-link 614+ is a
    >>switcher because I don't see any way a 12.5VA transformer could
    >>fit in the 1.75x2.25x1 inch case, plus there's no weight to it,
    >>and the model number, SMP-xxxxx, looks suspiciously like an
    >>engineer's "Switch Mode Power" supply acronym.
    >
    >
    > However, the fact that one such unit exists doesn't make it
    > common,

    In the first place, I checked that particular unit because I just happen to
    have a D-Link (wireless/LAN) router and the device under question is, tada,
    a D-Link router, albeit a different model so one cannot assume it's the
    same. But it certainly shows that at least that one class of equipment, by
    the same manufacturer, employs a regulated wall wort.

    My D-Link 8 port switch uses a regulated adapter too, as do most notebooks
    in brick form, and I'm sure I could find more if I wandered outside the one
    room.

    Oh wait, the PDA is on a 5V 2A wall wort switcher (clearly labeled as such).

    > nor does it mean using it as a general example to
    > describe the functionality of wall worts is a good idea.
    >
    > My point was that your comments were too narrowly focused on
    > specific equipment

    Well pardon me for looking at a piece of equipment of the same type and
    manufacture as the one in question.

    > that did not represent a broad enough view of
    > what the OP, or others reading this thread via google searches
    > next year, might be actually seeing.

    You're arguing a straw man as no claim was made about 'how many' wall worts
    are regulated. Just that your absolute, 'they are all this way', statement
    that voltage will universally increase as load decreases is not true with a
    regulated power supply.

    And "others reading this thread via google searches next year" had better
    hear that regulated wall worts do, in fact, exist because replacing one
    with an unregulated wall wort isn't going to work worth spit.
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >> Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>> However, in your case, it is wiser to use a supply rated at
    >>>or more than 1500mA.
    >> Ah, you got that one pegged.
    >>
    > All unregulated "wall warts" have an excessively high output
    >voltage, even at full rated load.

    (I'm not sure if you said what you meant, or if that is an
    editing error.) The rated voltage s essentially what it will
    put out when the load pulls the rated current. That's pretty
    much by definition, and isn't "excessively high output voltage".

    > The device that had a particular wall wart packaged with it
    >must be designed to handle that excessive voltage with a good
    >headroom, so use of a higher current-rated wall wart will make
    >no practical difference.

    I'm assuming that previous paragraph must have been an editing
    error. If you mean that when the device is pulling less than
    full load, and therefore the voltage is higher than the stated
    voltage, the device must be designed to handle whatever that
    voltage is... yes, definitely. And in the case of most
    wireless units, which might have significant difference is
    current draw over very short periods of time, one of the reasons
    they use switching mode power supplies internally is to allow
    for a wide range of input voltage.

    In addition to handling the voltage swing from any given power
    source, it also allows them to buy whatever they can get the
    best deal on to ship as a power supply. It's very non-critical,
    and changing suppliers doesn't require any adaption of the device
    to match the new power supply.

    (One of the more hilarious examples of the above comes when
    someone gets a hold of an old USR Courier modem, sans power
    supply, and then posts a query to Usenet asking what kind of a
    power supply it requires. The answers list a confusing variety
    of voltages and current ratings! And the are *all* correct! USR
    has been shipping Courier modems for several years now, and
    they've used several significantly different power supplies.)

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Exactly how not to make a first post to a group; and got the cart before the
    horse too!

    Phil Weldon

    "McSpreader" <invalid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:Xns967090B758C3McP@194.168.222.121...
    >...
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >JANA wrote:
    >
    >> The router will draw the current that is correct. You need to
    >> match the voltage to within about 1 Volt. The rating of the
    >> adaptor is the maximum safe load it can handle. You can use
    >> the 1700 ma one, as long as the voltage is correct.
    >>
    >
    > Within *one* volt???
    > Garbage!
    > One is lucky to have an unregulated "wall wart" or wall
    >transformer that is *less* than 20 percent high!
    > Ten percent of that is due to typically high line voltage.

    Now I see what you were referring to in the other article, where
    you described it as "excessively high output voltage".

    Look at it this way... AC power in the US is "118 VAC", but that
    is a nominal voltage. It can be anything from 109 to 125 volts.

    So an unregulated power supply rated at 7.5 V might well interpret
    that as 7.5 V when the AC is 109 VAC. The output at 118 VAC would
    be 8.1 V. The output at 125 VAC would be 8.6 V.

    That's *15%* high just due to line voltage! Then, if they add
    on an extra 10% to avoid brownouts when the load hits momentary
    peaks of say 25% over the listed constant load rating...

    You've got a very good point about voltages!


    > Now, if the adaptor was a *regulated* unit, then the output
    >voltage can be within 1% of specification.

    And can be 20% high, or even more, with little or no load.

    "Regulated" is a very loosely defined term... :-)

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  25. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
    news:tJqpe.3295$_A5.1248@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
    > Hi,
    > It's a D-link DSL-604+, it has built in modem, router, switch, WAP, so I
    > guess thats why it takes quite a lot of power.
    >
    > I looked in the manual, and it says the power consumption is 12W max,
    > which, I worked out to be 1.6A at 7.5V - would that be right?
    >
    > If I get this 1700mA adapter, and run it at 7.5V, is there a risk of fire
    > or anything? or is that only if I got a lower rated one.
    >
    You must keep the voltages the same but you can go higher on the current,
    not lower. So if the device says 7.5V at 1500mA then you must get one with
    7.5V and at least 1500mA. The 1700mA one will be fine.

    If you use a plug pack with less than 1500mA then you risk burning out the
    supply and/or the device which could lead to a fire.

    Of course some laptops can use a range of voltages but that would be stated
    on the device.

    Dave
  26. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >
    >> David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Regulation" is not specific enough. Some of
    >>>>regulators are better than others. Just saying "regulated"
    >>>>means zilch. And just saying the voltage changes means just
    >>>>about as much! How well regulated can be specified, and how
    >>>>much voltage changes can too.
    >>>
    >>>Yes, it 'can be specified' but we're not talking about the Vcore
    >>>regulator to a processor. We're talking about a wall wort and
    >>>it's nonsense to contemplate an 'unregulated' regulated wall
    >>>wort.
    >> It's just good engineering.
    >
    >Speaking of 'unregulated' regulated wall worts isn't good
    >english, logic, engineering, or anything else, except maybe
    >humor.

    That was *your* term, silly as it is.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  27. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in
    news:fpOpe.1430$pa3.86@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

    > Exactly how not to make a first post to a group; and got the
    > cart before the horse too!
    >
    > Phil Weldon
    >
    > "McSpreader" <invalid@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:Xns967090B758C3McP@194.168.222.121...
    >>...
    >
    >

    You've not been following this thread have you?
  28. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

    > David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >
    >>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Regulation" is not specific enough. Some of
    >>>regulators are better than others. Just saying "regulated"
    >>>means zilch. And just saying the voltage changes means just
    >>>about as much! How well regulated can be specified, and how
    >>>much voltage changes can too.
    >>
    >>Yes, it 'can be specified' but we're not talking about the Vcore
    >>regulator to a processor. We're talking about a wall wort and
    >>it's nonsense to contemplate an 'unregulated' regulated wall
    >>wort.
    >
    >
    > It's just good engineering.

    Speaking of 'unregulated' regulated wall worts isn't good english, logic,
    engineering, or anything else, except maybe humor.

    >
    > The rest of your article was mostly interesting opinion, but
    > not significant either.
    >

    LOL. Listing specific wall wort switchers, including their rating, I happen
    to have in my possession and a manufacturer's site for the things, with
    full specifications and dimensions, is hardly "opinion."
  29. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >> David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>Speaking of 'unregulated' regulated wall worts isn't good
    >>>english, logic, engineering, or anything else, except maybe
    >>>humor.
    >> That was *your* term, silly as it is.
    >
    >It is an accurate 'silliness' of your contention that a
    >regulated supply may have significant voltage rise with a lower
    >load than it's 'rating' (your original, and correct, warning
    >about unregulated supplies that you clung to when I brought up
    >regulated wall worts).

    The term was yours, and it is silly (and all the other adjectives
    you used to describe it). Which is why *I* didn't use it.

    >But the whole point to "regulation" is to prevent precisely what
    >you argue can take place so it would have to be 'unregulated'
    >for your caution to be true, which would make it an
    >'unregulated' regulated wall wort, silly as it is.

    If you think so, you'd better take a closer look at real life
    regulators!

    Sometimes the whole point of a "regulator" is ripple reduction
    at 60 Hz and it's harmonics. Sometimes the whole point of a
    "regulator" is to provide regulation within a very minimal
    range.

    And sometimes "regulation" means within 20%, sometimes 10% and
    sometimes 0.1%.

    I suppose I could go on with a longer list of ambiguities, but
    those are all well known and should be enough to demonstrate
    that your statement about "regulation" just doesn't have a lot
    of meaning. The point is that not all regulated power supplies
    maintain the same voltage with no load, and that some regulated
    power supplies do not regulate well except within a specified
    load range. Regardless, your original statement tried to
    generalize something specific that generally may not be true.

    >I really have no idea why you decided to turn a simple matter of
    >regulated wall worts into a mash of mumbo jumbo. Say someone

    I'm sorry you don't understand the technical aspects, but that
    does suggest you perhaps shouldn't try to post technical
    answers.

    >wants to replace a dead 5V 2A SMP wall wort. What the hell do
    >you suggest they get?

    A live "5V 2A SMP wall wort".


    Whatever, this conversation is finished. You can have the last
    words. Just do try for something a little better than
    unregulated regulated power, eh?

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com
  30. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

    > Robert Baer <robertbaer@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >
    >> A supply could be rated at 1000A and work no differntly than
    >>one rated at 1700mA.
    >> It is the *voltage* rating that one must be cautious about.
    >
    >
    > Almost, but not quite. If a DC supply is significantly under loaded,
    > the voltage will rise. How much depends greatly on the design chosen.
    >
    > For that reason it is probably not a good idea to use a supply
    > rated significantly higher than the original supply was rated
    > for... *if* the voltage actually makes any difference at all.
    >
    > (But if, as is true with many wifi units, the onboard supply is
    > actually a switching power supply, which is basically
    > insensitive to input voltage, it simply won't make any
    > difference at all.)
    >
    >
    >> Now, if there was a way you could measure the actual current
    >>drawn by the unit, i would expect that it would draw less than
    >>1500mA - perhaps as low or lower than 1000mA.
    >>
    >> If that were true, then you could use the less expensive supply.
    >
    >
    > Bad idea. The supply has to be able to provide current at
    > *peak* usage. Trying to measure that can be very difficult, if
    > not impossible for most people. With a wireless radio, for example,
    > the peaks happen when the unit is transmitting and may be for very
    > short bursts. If you simply measure the current while the unit
    > is idle, what you measure is a totally misleading value.
    >
    >
    >> However, in your case, it is wiser to use a supply rated at
    >>or more than 1500mA.
    >
    >
    > Ah, you got that one pegged.
    >
    All unregulated "wall warts" have an excessively high output voltage,
    even at full rated load.
    The device that had a particular wall wart packaged with it must be
    designed to handle that excessive voltage with a good headroom, so use
    of a higher current-rated wall wart will make no practical difference.
  31. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Not Me wrote:

    > "Kenny" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
    > news:d84v3a$4t2$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
    > | Another solution is to get a 110V to 240V AC transformer, then you can use
    > | your existing adapter.
    >
    >
    > Transformers are recipical devices so a US adaptor (240 to 110) can supply
    > 240 from 110 by reversing the connections just make sure you have a
    > transformer and not a ballast reduction. In this case likely won't hurt
    > anything it just won't work.
    >
    >
    D A N G E R !
    Not all "US adaptors" are transformers.
    *WARNING*
  32. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    JANA wrote:

    > The router will draw the current that is correct. You need to match the
    > voltage to within about 1 Volt. The rating of the adaptor is the maximum
    > safe load it can handle. You can use the 1700 ma one, as long as the voltage
    > is correct.
    >

    Within *one* volt???
    Garbage!
    One is lucky to have an unregulated "wall wart" or wall transformer
    that is *less* than 20 percent high!
    Ten percent of that is due to typically high line voltage.

    Now, if the adaptor was a *regulated* unit, then the output voltage
    can be within 1% of specification.
  33. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 07:15:46 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
    Davidson) wrote:

    >David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:

    >>Speaking of 'unregulated' regulated wall worts isn't good
    >>english, logic, engineering, or anything else, except maybe
    >>humor.

    >That was *your* term, silly as it is.

    Wheee... This is fun. Permit me to throw in a few details.

    1. A problem with undersized wall warts is ripple. The smaller
    current handling xformer power supplies will tend to have undesized
    filter capacitors. Running at full load, the 60 or 120Hz ripple
    voltage can really screw up a 3 terminal regulator found in most
    bottom of the line wireless hardware.

    A rough approximation is:
    C = I / (120 * V)
    where:
    C = Cazapitance in Farads
    I = Load current in Amps
    V = Peak to peak ripple current desired in volts.
    So, for this device, I would probably want less than 50mv of ripple at
    1.6A load. Pluging:
    C = 1.6 / (120 * .05) = 267uF
    I've found some of the "replacement" power supplies to have very small
    (47uf) cazapitors and sometimes with a very marginal voltage rating.

    2. The maximum rating of these wall warts is often based upon self
    heating. That's caused by the xformer cores saturating. It's also a
    great way to get some free voltage regulation if you don't care about
    efficiency. Before the xformer gets too hot, the input/output voltage
    curve will tend to flatten somewhat. Some manufacturers take
    advantage of this effect by intentionally using undersized xformers
    and hopeing that the whole mess doesn't burn down the customers house.
    It usually doesn't but it does eventually cook the cheapo phenolic
    circuit board, diodes, and cazapitor inside the wall wart.

    3. The Dlink DSL-604+ wireless ADSL modem has apparently been FCC
    type accepted. However, my attempts to use the FCCID search
    abomination to find it by model number was unsuccessful. Duz anyone
    have the FCCID number for the DSL-604+? With that, I could lookup the
    type of power supply they use and see if it requires regulation.

    4. DLink has been using high efficient switching mode power supplies
    for quiet a while. They draw no power with no load. They are
    smaller, lighter, far more efficient, offer regulated voltage output,
    and have short circuit protection. They also generate lots of RFI
    which drives the hams nuts. I couldn't find a photo of the DSL-604+
    wall wart sold in UK. If it's a switcher, it should probably be
    replaced with a switcher as the DSL-604+ may rely on the added voltage
    regulation of the power supply. Difficult to tell without a look
    inside.

    5. The voltage and current ratings are at "nominal" input voltage.
    For the US, that means 115VAC. Normal excursions are 105 to 125VAC
    input. For the 7.5VDC output, that's 6.8 to 8.2VDC. Neither extreme
    will cause a cheap 3 terminal 5VDC regulator with a 1.6VDC dropout
    voltage to stop working. LDO regulators are even less of a problem.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558
  34. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

    > David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >
    >>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Regulation" is not specific enough. Some of
    >>>>>regulators are better than others. Just saying "regulated"
    >>>>>means zilch. And just saying the voltage changes means just
    >>>>>about as much! How well regulated can be specified, and how
    >>>>>much voltage changes can too.
    >>>>
    >>>>Yes, it 'can be specified' but we're not talking about the Vcore
    >>>>regulator to a processor. We're talking about a wall wort and
    >>>>it's nonsense to contemplate an 'unregulated' regulated wall
    >>>>wort.
    >>>
    >>>It's just good engineering.
    >>
    >>Speaking of 'unregulated' regulated wall worts isn't good
    >>english, logic, engineering, or anything else, except maybe
    >>humor.
    >
    >
    > That was *your* term, silly as it is.
    >

    It is an accurate 'silliness' of your contention that a regulated supply
    may have significant voltage rise with a lower load than it's 'rating'
    (your original, and correct, warning about unregulated supplies that you
    clung to when I brought up regulated wall worts).

    But the whole point to "regulation" is to prevent precisely what you argue
    can take place so it would have to be 'unregulated' for your caution to be
    true, which would make it an 'unregulated' regulated wall wort, silly as it is.

    I really have no idea why you decided to turn a simple matter of regulated
    wall worts into a mash of mumbo jumbo. Say someone wants to replace a dead
    5V 2A SMP wall wort. What the hell do you suggest they get?
  35. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Ann-Marie" <annmarie.vazzano@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
    news:tJqpe.3295$_A5.1248@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com:

    > Hi,
    > It's a D-link DSL-604+, it has built in modem, router, switch,
    > WAP, so I guess thats why it takes quite a lot of power.
    >
    > I looked in the manual, and it says the power consumption is 12W
    > max, which, I worked out to be 1.6A at 7.5V - would that be right?

    The DSL-604+ is an excellent product, although it's now at 'end of
    life'. I have one and have installed many more - very reliable, and one
    of D-Link's better products.

    Like most 'all-in-one' devices, it is (was?) not sold in the US. But
    strangely, I have a copy of apparently US-specific firmware stored away
    in a safe place, b3t14usa. So it's a lot earlier than the current UK
    firmware, b3t41uk. Anyway, I digress...

    The DSL-604+ *is* sold in Canada and can be found on the D-Link CA
    website here:
    <http://www.dlink.ca/broadband/product.php?BID=5>
    It's currently distributed by Telus as part of their Home Networking
    service.

    Not only do I have a UK-spec model, but also a Canadian-spec model
    which I acquired from a customer who did what you have done - took his
    router with him. However, the firmware is Telus-specific and I'm unable
    to set it up for UK operation, and can't load the UK-spec firmware
    because it's a different hardware revision level. But I digress
    again...

    I have here in my hand a N. American spec external power supply for the
    DSL-604+ as supplied by D-Link CA. The details on the label say:
    Input: 120V AC 60Hz 20W
    Output: 7.5V DC 1.5A

    Suggestions:
    1. You could try D-Link CA and see if their spares dept (?) can ship
    one to you

    2. Let's do a swap. I'll send you mine if you send me yours. It's quite
    heavy (heavier than the UK equivalent) but I can ship it airmail small
    packet for around £6, and it'll be with you in say 3 days

    If you're interested, email me off list to arrange. Find my email
    address below. I'll also copy this to you by email (assuming the
    address in the header is valid) just in case you don't see this post.

    Notes:
    1. I'm sure the DSL-604+ will work just fine in the US with UK
    firmware, since it's set to autohandshake with the exchange / central
    office and will settle on the correct US comms standard (ANSI T1.413
    issue 2) rather than that used in the UK (ITU-T G.992.1).

    2. As someone else has said, don't use radio channels 12-13 as they are
    outside the frequency band allowed by the FCC.

    3. The DSL-604+ is/was one of the few such devices actually made by D-
    Link, or more specifically by their OEM/ODM division. This has now been
    spun off into a separate company, Alpha Networks

    4. If anyone knows the console password for the Telus-specific firmware
    for the DSL-604+ Rev B, please let me know. This is the password
    required to login either at the console port or via telnet. Hint: it's
    *not* admin/telus.

    5. I know a great deal about the DSL-604+ - but not the console
    password for the Telus-specific firmware. Anyone?

    Hope this helps

    --

    Richard Perkin
    To email me, change the AT in the address below
    richard.perkinATmyrealbox.com

    It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it
    is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's.
    It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs.
    -- Oxford University Press, Edpress News
  36. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

    > David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >
    >>Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>
    >>>David Maynard <nospam@private.net> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Speaking of 'unregulated' regulated wall worts isn't good
    >>>>english, logic, engineering, or anything else, except maybe
    >>>>humor.
    >>>
    >>>That was *your* term, silly as it is.
    >>
    >>It is an accurate 'silliness' of your contention that a
    >>regulated supply may have significant voltage rise with a lower
    >>load than it's 'rating' (your original, and correct, warning
    >>about unregulated supplies that you clung to when I brought up
    >>regulated wall worts).
    >
    >
    > The term was yours, and it is silly (and all the other adjectives
    > you used to describe it). Which is why *I* didn't use it.
    >
    >
    >>But the whole point to "regulation" is to prevent precisely what
    >>you argue can take place so it would have to be 'unregulated'
    >>for your caution to be true, which would make it an
    >>'unregulated' regulated wall wort, silly as it is.
    >
    >
    > If you think so, you'd better take a closer look at real life
    > regulators!
    >
    > Sometimes the whole point of a "regulator" is ripple reduction
    > at 60 Hz and it's harmonics. Sometimes the whole point of a
    > "regulator" is to provide regulation within a very minimal
    > range.
    >
    > And sometimes "regulation" means within 20%, sometimes 10% and
    > sometimes 0.1%.

    Funny you mention "real life" and then wander off into a fantasy land of
    speculation.

    The fact of the "real life" matter is that none of your "sometimes"
    speculations apply to SMP wall worts.


    > I suppose I could go on with a longer list of ambiguities, but
    > those are all well known and should be enough to demonstrate
    > that your statement about "regulation" just doesn't have a lot
    > of meaning. The point is that not all regulated power supplies
    > maintain the same voltage with no load, and that some regulated
    > power supplies do not regulate well except within a specified
    > load range. Regardless, your original statement tried to
    > generalize something specific that generally may not be true.

    That is what I meant by your mash of mumbo jumbo. One can 'speculate'
    anything but the real world case is that a regulated wall wort will have
    none of the characteristics you ponder as 'possible'.


    >>I really have no idea why you decided to turn a simple matter of
    >>regulated wall worts into a mash of mumbo jumbo. Say someone
    >
    >
    > I'm sorry you don't understand the technical aspects, but that
    > does suggest you perhaps shouldn't try to post technical
    > answers.

    Oh I understand them just fine and design them too. The difference is I
    don't try to obfuscate the practical matters with theoretical 'anything
    could be' speculations.

    >>wants to replace a dead 5V 2A SMP wall wort. What the hell do
    >>you suggest they get?
    >
    >
    > A live "5V 2A SMP wall wort".

    Wouldn't you be terrified it could be one of those unsuitable
    'possibilities' of inferior regulation you just ranted about?


    > Whatever, this conversation is finished. You can have the last
    > words. Just do try for something a little better than
    > unregulated regulated power, eh?
    >

    No need as it's appropriately silly as it stands.
  37. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 15:27:10 -0500, David Maynard <nospam@private.net>
    wrote:

    >I don't feel like bringing the network down to put a meter to it but I'd
    >bet the 5V 2.5A wall wort to my D-link 614+ is a switcher because I don't
    >see any way a 12.5VA transformer could fit in the 1.75x2.25x1 inch case,
    >plus there's no weight to it, and the model number, SMP-xxxxx, looks
    >suspiciously like an engineer's "Switch Mode Power" supply acronym.

    I just happen to have a DLink DI-614+ here. DLink uses several
    sources of power supplies. This one is a:
    Fairway Electronics LTD
    Model: WN10A-050U
    Input: 100-240VAC 1.0A Max 50-60Hz
    Output: +5.0VDC 2.5A
    With such a wide input voltage range, it has to be a switcher.
    http://www.ncs-fairway.com/catalog/page10.pdf
    Note that the 5VDC output is regulated (to 5%).

    I dunno about the 70% efficiency. Seems a bit low.
    Interesting that the sticker says 2.5A while the data sheet says 2.0A
    output. Oh-oh.


    --
    # Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
    # 831.336.2558 voice http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    # jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    # jeffl@cruzio.com AE6KS
  38. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Jeff Liebermann wrote:

    > On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 15:27:10 -0500, David Maynard <nospam@private.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I don't feel like bringing the network down to put a meter to it but I'd
    >>bet the 5V 2.5A wall wort to my D-link 614+ is a switcher because I don't
    >>see any way a 12.5VA transformer could fit in the 1.75x2.25x1 inch case,
    >>plus there's no weight to it, and the model number, SMP-xxxxx, looks
    >>suspiciously like an engineer's "Switch Mode Power" supply acronym.
    >
    >
    > I just happen to have a DLink DI-614+ here. DLink uses several
    > sources of power supplies. This one is a:
    > Fairway Electronics LTD
    > Model: WN10A-050U
    > Input: 100-240VAC 1.0A Max 50-60Hz
    > Output: +5.0VDC 2.5A
    > With such a wide input voltage range, it has to be a switcher.

    Thanks. Knew it had to be unless someone had invented featherweight iron ;)

    > http://www.ncs-fairway.com/catalog/page10.pdf

    Oh, I wish that was the one that came with mine. Mine has the plug on the
    end, which means it sticks almost 3 inches out the wall, if you plugged it
    into a wall outlet.

    > Note that the 5VDC output is regulated (to 5%).

    That's the tolerance. They don't seem to mention load/line regulation %.

    >
    > I dunno about the 70% efficiency. Seems a bit low.
    > Interesting that the sticker says 2.5A while the data sheet says 2.0A
    > output. Oh-oh.

    Look at the second 5 volt job 5 lines down: 2.5A 12.5W
  39. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:18:00 -0500, David Maynard <nospam@private.net>
    wrote:

    >> http://www.ncs-fairway.com/catalog/page10.pdf
    >
    >Oh, I wish that was the one that came with mine. Mine has the plug on the
    >end, which means it sticks almost 3 inches out the wall, if you plugged it
    >into a wall outlet.

    Most of mine are plugged into power strips where such a compact
    arrangement is benificial. However, there are ways to deal all manner
    of wall warts.
    http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/slides/wall-wart-01.html

    >> Interesting that the sticker says 2.5A while the data sheet says 2.0A
    >> output. Oh-oh.
    >
    >Look at the second 5 volt job 5 lines down: 2.5A 12.5W

    Oops. I didn't notice the "U" suffix. Thanks.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558
  40. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    But wait! Couldn't the transformer be very light if it were ferrite and
    worked at a much higher frequency than 60 Hz? Oh, never mind.

    Phil Weldon

    "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
    news:11akiepd54san25@corp.supernews.com...
    > Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 15:27:10 -0500, David Maynard <nospam@private.net>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I don't feel like bringing the network down to put a meter to it but I'd
    >>>bet the 5V 2.5A wall wort to my D-link 614+ is a switcher because I don't
    >>>see any way a 12.5VA transformer could fit in the 1.75x2.25x1 inch case,
    >>>plus there's no weight to it, and the model number, SMP-xxxxx, looks
    >>>suspiciously like an engineer's "Switch Mode Power" supply acronym.
    >>
    >>
    >> I just happen to have a DLink DI-614+ here. DLink uses several
    >> sources of power supplies. This one is a:
    >> Fairway Electronics LTD
    >> Model: WN10A-050U
    >> Input: 100-240VAC 1.0A Max 50-60Hz
    >> Output: +5.0VDC 2.5A
    >> With such a wide input voltage range, it has to be a switcher.
    >
    > Thanks. Knew it had to be unless someone had invented featherweight iron
    > ;)
    >
    >> http://www.ncs-fairway.com/catalog/page10.pdf
    >
    > Oh, I wish that was the one that came with mine. Mine has the plug on the
    > end, which means it sticks almost 3 inches out the wall, if you plugged it
    > into a wall outlet.
    >
    >> Note that the 5VDC output is regulated (to 5%).
    >
    > That's the tolerance. They don't seem to mention load/line regulation %.
    >
    >>
    >> I dunno about the 70% efficiency. Seems a bit low. Interesting that the
    >> sticker says 2.5A while the data sheet says 2.0A
    >> output. Oh-oh.
    >
    > Look at the second 5 volt job 5 lines down: 2.5A 12.5W
    >
    >
  41. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Phil Weldon wrote:

    > But wait! Couldn't the transformer be very light if it were ferrite and
    > worked at a much higher frequency than 60 Hz? Oh, never mind.

    Hehe. Sure. That's how a switcher does it.


    >
    > Phil Weldon
    >
    > "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
    > news:11akiepd54san25@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    >>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 15:27:10 -0500, David Maynard <nospam@private.net>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>I don't feel like bringing the network down to put a meter to it but I'd
    >>>>bet the 5V 2.5A wall wort to my D-link 614+ is a switcher because I don't
    >>>>see any way a 12.5VA transformer could fit in the 1.75x2.25x1 inch case,
    >>>>plus there's no weight to it, and the model number, SMP-xxxxx, looks
    >>>>suspiciously like an engineer's "Switch Mode Power" supply acronym.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>I just happen to have a DLink DI-614+ here. DLink uses several
    >>>sources of power supplies. This one is a:
    >>> Fairway Electronics LTD
    >>> Model: WN10A-050U
    >>> Input: 100-240VAC 1.0A Max 50-60Hz
    >>> Output: +5.0VDC 2.5A
    >>>With such a wide input voltage range, it has to be a switcher.
    >>
    >>Thanks. Knew it had to be unless someone had invented featherweight iron
    >>;)
    >>
    >>
    >>> http://www.ncs-fairway.com/catalog/page10.pdf
    >>
    >>Oh, I wish that was the one that came with mine. Mine has the plug on the
    >>end, which means it sticks almost 3 inches out the wall, if you plugged it
    >>into a wall outlet.
    >>
    >>
    >>>Note that the 5VDC output is regulated (to 5%).
    >>
    >>That's the tolerance. They don't seem to mention load/line regulation %.
    >>
    >>
    >>>I dunno about the 70% efficiency. Seems a bit low. Interesting that the
    >>>sticker says 2.5A while the data sheet says 2.0A
    >>>output. Oh-oh.
    >>
    >>Look at the second 5 volt job 5 lines down: 2.5A 12.5W
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    >
  42. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Jeff Liebermann wrote:

    > On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:18:00 -0500, David Maynard <nospam@private.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>> http://www.ncs-fairway.com/catalog/page10.pdf
    >>
    >>Oh, I wish that was the one that came with mine. Mine has the plug on the
    >>end, which means it sticks almost 3 inches out the wall, if you plugged it
    >>into a wall outlet.
    >
    >
    > Most of mine are plugged into power strips where such a compact
    > arrangement is benificial. However, there are ways to deal all manner
    > of wall warts.
    > http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/slides/wall-wart-01.html

    LOL.

    Now HOW did you get a picture of my power strip?

    >
    >
    >>>Interesting that the sticker says 2.5A while the data sheet says 2.0A
    >>>output. Oh-oh.
    >>
    >>Look at the second 5 volt job 5 lines down: 2.5A 12.5W
    >
    >
    > Oops. I didn't notice the "U" suffix. Thanks.
    >
    >
  43. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:57:58 -0700, in alt.internet.wireless , Jeff
    Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:

    >Most of mine are plugged into power strips where such a compact
    >arrangement is benificial. However, there are ways to deal all manner
    >of wall warts.
    > http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/slides/wall-wart-01.html

    do you not find that the adaptors in the middle get kinda hot? I can
    practically cook toast on the power strip under my desk at work.
    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>

    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  44. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:48:37 +0100, Mark McIntyre
    <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote:

    >On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:57:58 -0700, in alt.internet.wireless , Jeff
    >Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
    >
    >>Most of mine are plugged into power strips where such a compact
    >>arrangement is benificial. However, there are ways to deal all manner
    >>of wall warts.
    >> http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/slides/wall-wart-01.html

    >do you not find that the adaptors in the middle get kinda hot? I can
    >practically cook toast on the power strip under my desk at work.

    Nope. I just checked with my wiz-bang new optical IR thermometer. My
    pile of 8 wall warts is running quite cool. I added two switcher wall
    warts to the top of the brown octopus connectors. Highest temperature
    was 83F (ambient is 71F). Most of the wall warts in the photo are not
    running. They go to my HP scanner, PCR-1000 receiver, Belkin KVM
    switch, Kyocera PDA phone, Radio Shock RC electric car charger, and
    other devices that are usually turned off. The ones running my
    BEFW11S4 and Efficient 5260 DSL modem are always on, but run quite
    cold. I suspect that if I turned everything on, it might get a bit
    warm. I could measure the dissipation and calculate the heat rise
    (based on black body radiation and surface area), but I'm lazy today.

    I've had wall warts that ran very hot. Hot enough to burn my fingers
    when I touched them. The nice thing about the hot ones is that they
    don't last very long. I have a fair collection of replacements and
    connectors. A substantial number of my operating wall warts are
    replacement.

    Incidentally, my photo of the octpus connectors plus power strip made
    the rounds on an electrical safety mailing list. The result was some
    really interesting email from electricians suggesting I was derranged,
    isane, dangerous, unsafe, and in violation of several NEC code
    sections. Absolutely nobody thought it was a good idea. Oh well.

    The problem with the arrangement in the photo is that I have to glue
    the brown octopus connectors to the power strip, or it will tend to
    fall over. Xformers can only be installed in pairs. It works, but
    isn't the greatest. Currently, I'm using several of those overpriced
    flat two row power strips that are made to handle wall warts. The
    density is about the same but the plugs are much easier to deal with.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
    Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558
  45. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Jeff Liebermann wrote:

    > The problem with the arrangement in the photo is that I have to glue
    > the brown octopus connectors to the power strip, or it will tend to
    > fall over. Xformers can only be installed in pairs. It works, but
    > isn't the greatest. Currently, I'm using several of those overpriced
    > flat two row power strips that are made to handle wall warts. The
    > density is about the same but the plugs are much easier to deal with.

    Here's an easy way to do it:

    http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?T1=121+2570

    I have used a "power control center" on every computer I've built.

    http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?T1=112+0143&dept=&search=&child=

    With the little cords shown above they are very useful devices for
    turning the power on only to the devices in use. They claim "surge
    suppession", but I would not even consider them for that; the built in
    circuit breaker might prevent a severe overload from tripping the mains
    breaker. They make a good base to set the monitor on. :-)

    --
    Virg Wall
  46. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.computer,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Thanks for the URL. Have you ever seen a 3-prong AC adapter that attaches
    permanently (serrated contacts on the female end) to a USA 3-prong AC power
    plug and has a 'flip-up' ground pin. I've used it on 120 VAC power plugs
    for temporary lighting, but no longer know of a source. Any ideas? The URL
    you posted is quite useful, but does not seem to have that type of adapter.

    Phil Weldon

    "VWWall" <vwall@DEADearthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:olKqe.2741$NX4.1279@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > Jeff Liebermann wrote:
    >
    >> The problem with the arrangement in the photo is that I have to glue
    >> the brown octopus connectors to the power strip, or it will tend to
    >> fall over. Xformers can only be installed in pairs. It works, but
    >> isn't the greatest. Currently, I'm using several of those overpriced
    >> flat two row power strips that are made to handle wall warts. The
    >> density is about the same but the plugs are much easier to deal with.
    >
    > Here's an easy way to do it:
    >
    > http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?T1=121+2570
    >
    > I have used a "power control center" on every computer I've built.
    >
    > http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?T1=112+0143&dept=&search=&child=
    >
    > With the little cords shown above they are very useful devices for turning
    > the power on only to the devices in use. They claim "surge suppession",
    > but I would not even consider them for that; the built in circuit breaker
    > might prevent a severe overload from tripping the mains breaker. They
    > make a good base to set the monitor on. :-)
    >
    > --
    > Virg Wall
Ask a new question

Read More

Wireless Access Overclocking