PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Benches > Peterae (Moderator: Peterae) > Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions
2024-11-26, 09:40:26
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18
Author Topic: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions  (Read 231483 times)
Topic Options img
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #275 on: 2016-12-17, 20:06:23 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-10, 15:39:34
Updated EL2009  FG output protection circuit:


Itsu

Ok, i completed this 2009 protection circuit for my FG.
I added 10uF tantalum caps at the + and - 16V lines to ground.

I was able to adjust (when powered off) the input impedance to give almost zero reflection by setting the parallel 100 Ohms pot to 9 Ohm (both sides the same).
I think this is kind of low, when powering on, i see many signals appear, which looks like oscillations to me.
Does there need to be a physical grounded barrier between the input and output?

Anyway, the buffer seems not to work as i do not see any output signal when applying ±16V and a 10Vpp sine/square wave signal.


According to the EL2009 data sheet, this should be the correct layout, see picture.

Removing the schottky diodes shows some signal, but less then the input, so i wonder of the above mentioned pin layout is the correct one.
The EL2009's get fairly warm to the touch after a while.

Itsu
 
« Last Edit: 2016-12-17, 21:18:58 by Itsu »
   
img  verpies
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #276 on: 2016-12-18, 06:11:21 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-17, 20:06:23
I was able to adjust (when powered off) the input impedance to give almost zero reflection by setting the parallel 100 Ohms pot to 9 Ohm (both sides the same).
I think this is kind of low,
It seems wrong

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-17, 20:06:23
Does there need to be a physical grounded barrier between the input and output?
No.

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-17, 20:06:23
Anyway, the buffer seems not to work as i do not see any output signal when applying ±16V and a 10Vpp sine/square wave signal.
Could you have accidentally swapped the ±16V supply voltages ?

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-17, 20:06:23
According to the EL2009 data sheet, this should be the correct layout, see picture.
If you have doubts, then:
With the EL2009 completely out of the circuit, measure the supply pins like you would measure diode's voltage drop with a multimeter. The larger drop indicates the correct polarity and the smaller drop indicates the wrong polarity. (mine has 1.95V and 0.76V, respectively).

Also, measure the voltage drop from the +V supply pin to the input pin, as well as from the +V supply pin to the output pin, when reverse biased (that is: with the negative meter lead connected to the +V supply pin in both cases).
The larger voltage drop indicates the output pin ( mine has 0.930V vs. 0.735V ) .  For the cause of this difference see the red path and the blue path on the attached schematic - the extra built-in blue resistors are responsible for the increased voltage drop.
Also the negative multimeter lead indicates the input pin, when the voltage drop measured between the input pin and the output pin, is larger (mine has 1.45V vs. 1.36V ).

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-17, 20:06:23
Removing the schottky diodes shows some signal, but less then the input, so i wonder of the above mentioned pin layout is the correct one.
The EL2009's get fairly warm to the touch after a while.
Without a load?
Does it draw around 25mA without a load and with the input grounded ?

P.S.
Thus buffer has an under unity voltage gain so you can expect the output voltage amplitude to be 90% of the input.  ...but the current gain is huge.
« Last Edit: 2016-12-18, 07:26:22 by verpies »
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #277 on: 2016-12-18, 10:47:37 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

Quote
Could you have accidentally swapped the ±16V supply voltages ?

Hmmm,  i checked it hundred times now, seems ok, unless the layout of the pins as shown above is wrong.


Quote
If you have doubts, then: .......

Ok, great, i will remove the both EL2009's and make some measurements.


Quote
Without a load?
Does it draw around 25mA without a load and with the input grounded ?

It draws about 800mA for the 2, so 400mA / EL2009,  input was set at 9 Ohm with the pots, no loads


Quote
P.S.
Thus buffer has an under unity voltage gain so you can expect the output voltage amplitude to be 90% of the input.  ...but the current gain is huge.

Ok, it seems one side has that when at sinus wave, when switching to square its all oscillations i see.
The other side seems to be dead, i found the 2 schottky diodes shorted causing the ± PS to blow its 1A input fuse.
These are 40V 2A diodes!! (SB240-E3/E4)

Anyway, work to do, thanks for the tips.

Itsu
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #278 on: 2016-12-18, 15:46:12 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
Meanwhile playing with Peters magic box.

I have hooked up the both outputs of this box to the little white noise PCB without the two Pics, so driving the IXDD604 MOSFET driver.
The 2 MOSFETs are running on 24V from a battery stack and are connected to the special coils.

When setting the frequency of the box to around 200KHz and a pulse width of 36.5ns and a delay between the pulses of about 220ns (including the default 11ns)
i get again the crackling.

Well its more a single crack which makes the double neo magnets jump and the scope shows a HV glitch on both drain signals.
The 24V battery current meter jumps to the 10A end of scale.

It does influence Peters box as it jumps between settings, like it goes into INC mode, or jumps through the selection lines.
Guess i have to close the back side.

Screenshot 1 shows the both MOSFET gate signals (delta 220ns).

Other 2 screenshots are from the MOSFET drains when crackling occures.


Itsu
   
img  Peterae
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #279 on: 2016-12-18, 19:37:45 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3960


Buy me some coffee
Hi Itsu


I found this signal generator quiet resistant to noise from the crackling, is the power supply separated from the signal generator and the fets with just the 0v line connected between both or are you using your dual channel psu?

the other thing during my tests i scoped across the driven coils not the fet source drain but you have to be careful about earths, my scope was battery driven from a laptop so totally isolated from the earth of the psu's, you would need to do it this way to see the big pulse appear across the coils.

Are you driving 2 bifilar coils or are both fets driving 1 coil, you will get cracks using a 2 coil bifilar but it gets a lot more interesting when driving 1 coil with both fets but beware that fets can start popping.
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #280 on: 2016-12-18, 19:51:01 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

Peter,

i have 3 power sources running this setup, your box (24V) and the white noise PCB (30V) from my dual PS (which has isolated outputs, also from ground) with the return lines connected.
Then 24V from 2 series batteries to the drains of the MOSFETs, again with the return connected to the other return lines.

I can scope across the driven coils, i use only my HV probe there, so no problem with earths that way.

I use both MOSFETs to each drive 1 coil, but i will try to drive 1 coil with both MOSFETs.
The IRFP460's can handle 500V and up till now i did not see a such high voltage.

Thanks, itsu
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #281 on: 2016-12-18, 21:11:27 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
Quote
If you have doubts, then:
With the EL2009 completely out of the circuit, measure the supply pins like you would measure diode's voltage drop with a multimeter. The larger drop indicates the correct polarity and the smaller drop indicates the wrong polarity. (mine has 1.95V and 0.76V, respectively).

Also, measure the voltage drop from the +V supply pin to the input pin, as well as from the +V supply pin to the output pin, when reverse biased (that is: with the negative meter lead connected to the +V supply pin in both cases).
The larger voltage drop indicates the output pin ( mine has 0.930V vs. 0.735V ) .  For the cause of this difference see the red path and the blue path on the attached schematic - the extra built-in blue resistors are responsible for the increased voltage drop.
Also the negative multimeter lead indicates the input pin, when the voltage drop measured between the input pin and the output pin, is larger (mine has 1.45V vs. 1.36V ).



Measurements done, i think the EL2009's are OK and also the layout pins as was marked earlier above.
I have drawn in the measured  values see picture below.

Using my Fluke 179 DMM in the Diode measurement setting, red dot = red lead,   black dot = black lead.

I have the back of the EL2009 (connected to pin 3 NC) screwed to the case which is at zero level, guess thats OK.


Itsu 
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #282 on: 2016-12-18, 21:51:42 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

By the way, here i envision how to use the protection box with the FG picture 1

And the inside of the now gutted box, so severall components need to be added, see picture 2.

Itsu
   
img  verpies
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #283 on: 2016-12-19, 02:37:59 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-18, 21:11:27
Measurements done, i think the EL2009's are OK and also the layout pins as was marked earlier above.
I have drawn in the measured  values see picture below.
Nice hand drawn depiction of measurements.
They seem fine except the in<->out pin measurements, because you have a 445mV difference there, while I have only a 9mV difference ( that's 49 times less! ).

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-18, 21:11:27
I have the back of the EL2009 (connected to pin 3 NC) screwed to the case which is at zero level, guess thats OK.
There can be manufacturing differences in the Tab & pin3 connections.  Make certain with your multimeter that there is indeed no conduction from the tab to any of the other pins.

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-18, 21:51:42
By the way, here i envision how to use the protection box with the FG picture 1
Looks well. I made 2 separate boxes (tubes really).

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-18, 21:51:42
And the inside of the now gutted box, so severall components need to be added, see picture 2.
There seem to be construction errors. The beads (or any chokes) should be before any caps (including feedthrough caps) and caps should be the last ones, like this: PS-->Bead-->Cap-->...-->Bead-->Cap-->EL2009
If beads (or chokes) are the last ones before the EL2009 then they will ring and the resulting HV from resonant rise will damage the Schottky diodes and possibly other stuff.  Also, to do their job well, ferrite beads need to be loose (not mechanically constrained nor squeezed).

P.S.
Please make higher resolution photos at different angles. 30º variance is enough.
« Last Edit: 2016-12-19, 03:12:14 by verpies »
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #284 on: 2016-12-19, 11:16:55 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

Quote
Nice hand drawn depiction of measurements.
They seem fine except the in<->out pin measurements, because you have a 445mV difference there, while I have only a 9mV difference ( that's 49 times less! ).


thanks,  so does that mean that there is something wrong?  Seems not as both EL2009's have the same.
Anyway, i have some more coming, so i could measure those too.


Quote
There can be manufacturing differences in the Tab & pin3 connections.  Make certain with your multimeter that there is indeed no conduction from the tab to any of the other pins.


yes, i did that, and no connection to the other pins was seen.
But i feel its kind of strange that only the center pins of the FG is fed into (and out of) the EL2009's, their grounds never make it to the EL2009's.

 
Quote
There seem to be construction errors. The beads (or any chokes) should be before any caps (including feedthrough caps) and caps should be the last ones, like this: PS-->Bead-->Cap-->...-->Bead-->Cap-->EL2009
If beads (or chokes) are the last ones before the EL2009 then they will ring and the resulting HV from resonant rise will damage the Schottky diodes and possibly other stuff.  Also, to do their job well, ferrite beads need to be loose (not mechanically constrained nor squeezed).


As the above inside box picture tries to show, the mentioned "bypass caps 100nF on power rails" are pointing to a connection between the beads and the EL2009 powerleads to ground, so your "PS-->Bead-->Cap-->...-->Bead-->Cap-->EL2009" was implemented.

I had chokes (1mH) right at the beginning after entering the box, but their 2.5 Ohm DC resistance caused a 2V or so voltage drop (due to the high current draw) so i removed them.

So it was planned like this for each ± supply:  "PS-->5nF feedthrough cap-->1mH choke-->10uF tantalum cap-->1nF feedthrough cap-->bead-->100nF bypass cap-->EL2009"

By the way, the beads taken of from some PCB's are having some kind of substance inside their holes which kind of sticks to the wire, i guess to prevent any noise.

I will take some highres pictures lateron.


Itsu
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #285 on: 2016-12-19, 22:16:29 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

I put the EL2009's back in again, but still without the schottky diodes.
Current pulled on both + and - supply is 120mA (±16V, input grounded, no load)

Seems 1 side is working allthough only 2.5Vpp out when 5Vpp in, but i still need to adjust the input impedance (set at 50 Ohm now).
Sine wave and triangular are steady, square wave signal blinks on / off, like its being protected against shorts.

The other side shows no output........perhaps also need the input inmpedance adjusted.


Some pictures shows the inside.
I have no chokes installed, so PS-->4nF feedthrough-->10uF tantalum-->1nF feedthroughs-->bead-->100nF cap-->EL2009

Itsu
   
img  lost_bro
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #286 on: 2016-12-20, 00:58:28 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 281
Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-19, 11:16:55
thanks,  so does that mean that there is something wrong?  Seems not as both EL2009's have the same.
Anyway, i have some more coming, so i could measure those too.


yes, i did that, and no connection to the other pins was seen.
But i feel its kind of strange that only the center pins of the FG is fed into (and out of) the EL2009's, their grounds never make it to the EL2009's.

 
As the above inside box picture tries to show, the mentioned "bypass caps 100nF on power rails" are pointing to a connection between the beads and the EL2009 powerleads to ground, so your "PS-->Bead-->Cap-->...-->Bead-->Cap-->EL2009" was implemented.

I had chokes (1mH) right at the beginning after entering the box, but their 2.5 Ohm DC resistance caused a 2V or so voltage drop (due to the high current draw) so i removed them.

So it was planned like this for each ± supply:  "PS-->5nF feedthrough cap-->1mH choke-->10uF tantalum cap-->1nF feedthrough cap-->bead-->100nF bypass cap-->EL2009"

By the way, the beads taken of from some PCB's are having some kind of substance inside their holes which kind of sticks to the wire, i guess to prevent any noise.

I will take some highres pictures lateron.


Itsu

Good day Itsu

Just wanted to say I really like the F.G. isolation box you made.  Great job!
It's something that every experimenter should have on his bench.  Maybe when you get the chance you could post a BOM for the complete build.

Thanks in advance

Happy Holidays

take care, peace
lost_bro
   
img  verpies
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #287 on: 2016-12-20, 02:31:06 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-19, 22:16:29
Current pulled on both + and - supply is 120mA (±16V, input grounded, no load)
Take a look at the "IS: Supply Current" in the datasheet.

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-19, 22:16:29
I have no chokes installed, so PS-->4nF feedthrough-->10uF tantalum-->1nF feedthroughs-->bead-->100nF cap-->EL2009
It seems fine.  A bead acts like a small choke.

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-19, 11:16:55
But i feel its kind of strange that only the center pins of the FG is fed into (and out of) the EL2009's, their grounds never make it to the EL2009's.
You have good instincts.
The EL2009 treats ½ of the supply voltage between +V and -V as the virtual ground level at 0V.
So to apply the virtual 0V to the input pin you should form a ½ voltage divider out of two equal resistors connected between the +V pin and -V pin. 
If the ±16V supply voltages are well balanced then their common terminal also forms the 0V.

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-19, 22:16:29
The other side shows no output........perhaps also need the input impedance adjusted.
That asymmetry is worrisome.  If both channels are built identically then they should work the same way.  Something must be broken.

Quote from: Itsu on 2016-12-19, 22:16:29
Seems 1 side is working allthough only 2.5Vpp out when 5Vpp in, but i still need to adjust the input impedance (set at 50 Ohm now).
If you scope the input signal at the input pin of the EL2009, what levels do you get with your various input terminations?
What output levels do you get when you apply a ±5V signal to the input pin of the EL2009, without any input termination (no pot/resistor to ground)?

Please put at least a 1kΩ load on the output of the EL2009 when you do the output measurements.
« Last Edit: 2016-12-20, 09:47:43 by verpies »
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #288 on: 2016-12-20, 09:41:46 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
Quote from: lost_bro on 2016-12-20, 00:58:28
Good day Itsu

Just wanted to say I really like the F.G. isolation box you made.  Great job!
It's something that every experimenter should have on his bench.  Maybe when you get the chance you could post a BOM for the complete build.

Thanks in advance

Happy Holidays

take care, peace
lost_bro

Thanks Lost_bro, but all credits go to verpies, its his idea and design, again here i am only replicating   :)

When it is working to my liking i will put up all the info allthough all what is needed is already available above.

Happy Holidays too  O0

itsu
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #289 on: 2016-12-20, 09:56:39 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

Quote
Take a look at the "IS: Supply Current" in the datasheet.

Parameter   Description        VIN  Load  Temp  Min Typ  Max  Test Level  Units
IS               Supply Current   0      ∞     25°C  30   45   65            I        mA


Well, the 120mA was to both EL2009s, so 60mA each is within those specs.


Quote
You have good instincts.
The EL2009 treats ½ of the supply voltage between +V and -V as the virtual ground level at 0V.
So to apply the virtual 0V to the input pin you should form a ½ voltage divider out of two equal resistors connected between the +V pin and -V pin. 
If the ±16V supply voltages are well balanced then their common forms the 0V, too.

Right, that explains, i did isolate now the back of the EL2009's and the pin 3 from ground, just in case.


Quote
That asymmetry is worrisome.  If both channels are built identically then they should work the same way.  Something must be broken.

yes, my idea too, allthough they measure the same (diode measurement).
I will concentrate on the working side and try to adjust the input impedance using that time domain measurement and copy the value to the other side.


Quote
If you scope the input signal at the input pin of the EL2009, what levels do you get with your various input terminations?
What output levels do you get when you apply a ±5V signal to the input pin of the EL2009, without any input termination (no pot/resistor to ground)?

Please put at least a 1kΩ load on the output of the EL2009 when you do the output measurements.


I will do those measurements lateron today,  thanks.


Itsu
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #290 on: 2016-12-20, 21:00:21 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
I realized that this thread is not the correct one to use for this EL2009 protection box circuit so i opened a new topic here:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3388.msg58939;topicseen#msg58939

Thanks,  itsu

« Last Edit: 2016-12-20, 22:08:43 by Itsu »
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #291 on: 2017-01-03, 18:14:25 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

Meanwhile i still work on Peters crackling system.

I have closed the back of the controller by screwing on a single sided PCB which was extended beyond the box to have room for some external mounted MOSFETs, see picture.

The MOSFETs (Cree C3M0065090 900V) and drivers (IXDN614PI  14A) should be able to withstand great abuse.

I drive the drivers on 20V via 2 LM350 3A regulators from a 24V source.

Still waiting for some SMA connectors which will come this week hopefully.


Regards Itsu
   
img  Peterae
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #292 on: 2017-01-03, 21:52:13 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3960


Buy me some coffee
Looking forward to see what sort of results you get  O0
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #293 on: 2017-01-11, 21:25:01 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
I got a nasty flu which knocked me out for a week. That reminds me to DO take that flu cocktail shot they offer every end of year.


Anyway, some first tests with 3x 24v supplies (one for Peters box, one for the MOSFET drivers and LM350's (20V) and one for the MOSFET drains (2x 12V batteries)
shows no crackling, with or without magnets.

Setting of Peters box still at the proven crackling position (width 32ns, phase 220ns), so i have to do some adjustments there and / or increase the drains voltage.

Screenshot is from the both MOSFETs gate signals

Itsu
« Last Edit: 2017-01-11, 22:04:31 by Itsu »
   
img  evolvingape
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #294 on: 2017-01-11, 21:45:26 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2502
Everyman decries immorality
Quote from: Itsu on 2017-01-11, 21:25:01
I got a nasty flu which knocked me out for a week. That reminds me to DO take that flu cocktail shot they offer every end of year.

I consider the many injections I have received over the years to be detrimental to my health.

One time, a few years into soldiering they dosed me up right before Christmas leave. I got the flu xmas eve went to bed, got up January 2nd to go back to work. 23 hours a day in bed with Fever, completely saturated sheets.. dripping wet. I nearly died, I don't do any shots anymore and have not for 10 years and my health has improved year on year.

We all make choices, only some of us know that, sometimes.

:)


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
img  verpies
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #295 on: 2017-01-12, 05:55:55 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: evolvingape on 2017-01-11, 21:45:26
I consider the many injections I have received over the years to be detrimental to my health.
I do, too.

As far as flu goes, I read somewhere that the ear canal is a reservoir for the virus during the initial stage of infection.  The immune system cannot reach the virus there (unlike the nasal cavity where mucus is weaponized in response to the virus).  The virus mutates in the ear canal and launches repeated attacks from there to the nasal cavity and the respiratory track, until a working mutation is found.

At the very onset of the infection, it is enough to disinfect the ear canal with any antiseptic (H2O2 is my choice) to throw a monkey wrench into this mechanism.  I had only one flu in 14 years and that was when I was on the road and did not disinfected it early enough.
   
img  Itsu
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #296 on: 2017-01-12, 10:08:30 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159

Thanks for your comments guys, i know there is a lot of controversy about taking the flu shots (any shots for that matter) and the same seems to be true
for the H2O2 antiseptic for cleaning your ears (google).

The mean problem with the latter i think is to know when the ear canal is infected and thus when to disinfect.

Itsu
   
img  Chet K
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #297 on: 2017-01-12, 17:55:07 »
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4045
itsu glad your feeling better

If I may ?


I was unaware of Verpies knowledge in this area and would like more info ,it would seem a good plan for the virus and convenient arrangement
to launch attacks from .

can these guys be viewed in a home microscope ?
my grandkids suffer from endless ear infections and head colds ,really horrible for them.
makes me wonder if the cold virus can hide there too ?

perhaps a slide sample would show this virus under a scope ?

would be a big aid in the war on Virus and a big drop in antibiotics for the kids if alternative treatment protocol could be worked out ?

Note
will remove this post shortly
   
img  verpies
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #298 on: 2017-01-12, 19:05:50 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: Chet K on 2017-01-12, 17:55:07
makes me wonder if the cold virus can hide there too ?
Most certainly

Quote from: Chet K on 2017-01-12, 17:55:07
can these guys be viewed in a home microscope ?
No way!

Take a look at the scale of this virus photo...and the flu & cold virii are even smaller (and immune to antibiotics)
   
img  verpies
Re: Controller No5 With Protection - Looking for Explosions « Reply #299 on: 2017-01-12, 19:20:18 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Another curiosity about the human ear canal is that it is immune to ear mites.  Did you ever wonder why your cat gets them and you don't ?
This is because the human ear wax contains a natural pesticide (that's what gives it its bitter taste) - the cat doesn't have it.

Unfortunately it is harmless to virii.
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 09:40:26