Randy Kramer wrote:

> g wrote:
>  
>
>> to determine power requirements, check labels on back of equipment for voltage 
>>
>> and amps ratings. multiply volts x amps = va load to determine require ups. 
>>
>>   
>
>
> That works, but it is "conservative". 
> I may have a special case in that I am mostly concerned with riding
> through very short outages -- 1 second to say 1 minute.  I have a 300 VA
> Conext UPS (I got it from Staples for about $10 after a $20 rebate,
> IIRC).  I'm running 3 computers on it (main boxes only, not the monitor)
> and am surviving the short outages I occasionally get.  Some day I'll
> pull the plug and time how long the three computers stay up. 
> I just looked at a 200 Watt computer power supply from my junkbox -- the
> label says it uses 5 amps at 115 volts (575 volt amps (VA)).  It is
> probably not a modern switching power supply, which I assume would have
> a lower power requirement, but, the three computers I mention above have
> power supplies of 300, 230, and 200 watts (IIRC), so presumably the
> labels will add up to at least a "requirement" of 730 volt amps.  Since
> I am running those three on a UPS rated at 300 VA, there is some
> conservatism in the calculations.
>
> PS: The Conext has an indicator light to indicate if the plugged in load
> is beyond the rating of the UPS (even while the UPS is running off the
> mains) -- it is not on, and I've never seen it on.
>
> regards,
> Randy Kramer
>
>  
>
>
>  
>
I don't know whether this is right, but I have on this ring main 4 
computers, off hand I think they are mainly averaging  300w power supply 
each, which means when all 4 are on I have to protect  1200w , but most 
of the time I would say 2 computers run on more or less continuously, 
which suggest I need something less than 1200w, but , it would be sods 
law that the one time all 4 are running I'm not around to turn a few off 
when it matters. So I guess the only sure thing is to have overkill 
built in.

I'm beginning to count the thunerstorms cost, I suspect one of my modems 
has been cooked. It's not disfunctional but already by substitiution I 
have assertained it has become seriously damaged.
My ISP allows at best 4kbyte/sec download speed(yes I know it's awful)
and upon first connection to download file at best I'm getting 1.5kbyte, 
within 1.5 minutes that has dropped to just 25bytes/second, which is 
useless, question is , is it the modem or my ISP, at first all pointed 
towards ISP, then as I say by substitution with a new modem I'm back to 
sustained 3.5/4.0kbytes/second.I should imagine there has been a voltage 
surge on the telephone line caused by the storm, and it has damaged some 
of the chip circuitry.Not enough to kill it, but enough to damage the 
chip or some other component.
I'm still being cut off an average of 20minutes

So you see I'm already �30 / $48 down the pan.On the otherhand it might 
of been a whole lot worse.Any one of those mobo's might of been fried, a 
processor blown.or indeed a powersupply crisped. I'm thinking the risks 
justfy some eliment of expenditure here, but I haven't made up my mind what. 

In England the risks are not high all the time , but they come once in a 
while and can do serious damage, and often when you least expect it.




PS 16.40hrs

Now here is a funny thing.
That malfunctioning modem mentioned above, well , I connected it  back 
into the computer where the substitute modem came from , and would you 
adam and eve it , it's downloading at 4.0/4.5kbytes/second.

Why should merely swapping them over right a malfunction ?

John

-- 
John Richard Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Reply via email to