Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-24 Thread Craig House
There are no in-line search suppressors and I did not make it to the tower 
today to replace that equipment I'll find out more about it on Monday

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 24, 2015, at 14:45, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
>  wrote:
> 
> That's entirely possible as well, but I figured the injector would have shut 
> down fast enough to prevent that as well.
> 
>> On Apr 24, 2015 1:41 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:
>> Is it possible he has some surge protectors in the path and those are what 
>> got blown, not the radios?
>>  
>> From: Forrest Christian (List Account)
>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:36 PM
>> To: af
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question
>>  
>> I actually do a very fast, software defined, overcurrent shutdown in the 
>> product of interest here.  It's been a while since I worked on that code but 
>> it will shut down a short circuit in a few ms or so.
>> 
>> The software defined part allows some flexibility in the shutdown which is 
>> important in that I also have to not shut down for inrush currents.   The 
>> algorithm is such that if the overcurrent is small it shuts it down slower 
>> than a, large one.  Roughly, it trips once a certain amount of  excessive 
>> energy is seen.   I'm guessing in this case the amount of energy we let 
>> through is more than the windings on the magnetics can handle.  If I have 
>> time I'll grab a set of magnetics and see if I can characterize this.
>> 
>> I'm also surprised that the 100 series radios died as well as they should 
>> appear as a dead short to the injector and have no magnetics on those pins 
>> to blow up.
>> 
>>> On Apr 24, 2015 8:58 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:
>>> Forrest, please forgive me for even thinking this thought... but I wonder  
>>> how much current it takes to blow a phy transformer and how hard it would 
>>> be to have an over current shutdown.  I have done over current shutdowns 
>>> before and have used those over current passive devices that self heal.  
>>> Polyfuse I think is the name
>>>  
>>> Like you need more ideas...
>>>  
>>> From: Craig House
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:26 AM
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question
>>>  
>>> Thanks Forrest. It was a mix of 450 and 100 series.  They all appear to 
>>> have been damaged.  The only thing I get an Ethernet link light on is a 
>>> bh50 radio
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 24, 2015, at 05:06, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
>>>>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hmm.. I love (not) autocorrect on android... port, not portal...  But now 
>>>> I'm on a real computer and have a chance to re-read the original message, 
>>>> and think a bit... I think I need to change my final answer.
>>>> 
>>>> If these were 100 series radios I'd say "that seems rather odd that this 
>>>> would cause a failure".   BUT...  I'm assuming these are 450 radios.
>>>> 
>>>> With the 450, there's a ethernet transformer on each pair.  To DC, this is 
>>>> effectively a short.   Or since these are made with very thin wire you 
>>>> could probably more accurately call it a 'fuse'.   So if you take a pair 
>>>> and put say the + lead of a 24V power source on one wire in the pair, and 
>>>> the return (-) on the other pair, you'd find that the wire in the 
>>>> transformer would melt, and would probably do so very quickly.  This is 
>>>> *exactly* the wiring that the 320/430 radios used.  In addition, there is 
>>>> every possibility that the current being drawn before melting is smaller 
>>>> than the amount of current needed by a real 320 or 430 radio on power on.  
>>>>  So, when this got plugged in, there's a good chance that you melted the 
>>>> ethernet transformers.
>>>> 
>>>> The good news is if this is what has happened, it should be a fairly easy 
>>>> fix by almost any electronic repair shop which knows how to rework surface 
>>>> mount boards - just remove the magnetics and replace them.   
>>>> 
>>>> Unless of course there was another cause.
>>>> 
>>>> -forrest
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> Due to the odd wiring the 

Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-24 Thread Forrest Christian (List Account)
That's entirely possible as well, but I figured the injector would have
shut down fast enough to prevent that as well.
On Apr 24, 2015 1:41 PM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

>   Is it possible he has some surge protectors in the path and those are
> what got blown, not the radios?
>
>  *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) 
> *Sent:* Friday, April 24, 2015 2:36 PM
> *To:* af 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question
>
>
> I actually do a very fast, software defined, overcurrent shutdown in the
> product of interest here.  It's been a while since I worked on that code
> but it will shut down a short circuit in a few ms or so.
>
> The software defined part allows some flexibility in the shutdown which is
> important in that I also have to not shut down for inrush currents.   The
> algorithm is such that if the overcurrent is small it shuts it down slower
> than a, large one.  Roughly, it trips once a certain amount of  excessive
> energy is seen.   I'm guessing in this case the amount of energy we let
> through is more than the windings on the magnetics can handle.  If I have
> time I'll grab a set of magnetics and see if I can characterize this.
>
> I'm also surprised that the 100 series radios died as well as they should
> appear as a dead short to the injector and have no magnetics on those pins
> to blow up.
> On Apr 24, 2015 8:58 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:
>
>>   Forrest, please forgive me for even thinking this thought... but I
>> wonder  how much current it takes to blow a phy transformer and how hard it
>> would be to have an over current shutdown.  I have done over current
>> shutdowns before and have used those over current passive devices that self
>> heal.  Polyfuse I think is the name....
>>
>> Like you need more ideas...
>>
>>  *From:* Craig House 
>> *Sent:* Friday, April 24, 2015 5:26 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question
>>
>>  Thanks Forrest. It was a mix of 450 and 100 series.  They all appear to
>> have been damaged.  The only thing I get an Ethernet link light on is a
>> bh50 radio
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 24, 2015, at 05:06, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>   Hmm.. I love (not) autocorrect on android... port, not portal...  But
>> now I'm on a real computer and have a chance to re-read the original
>> message, and think a bit... I think I need to change my final answer.
>>
>> If these were 100 series radios I'd say "that seems rather odd that this
>> would cause a failure".   BUT...  I'm assuming these are 450 radios.
>>
>> With the 450, there's a ethernet transformer on each pair.  To DC, this
>> is effectively a short.   Or since these are made with very thin wire you
>> could probably more accurately call it a 'fuse'.   So if you take a pair
>> and put say the + lead of a 24V power source on one wire in the pair, and
>> the return (-) on the other pair, you'd find that the wire in the
>> transformer would melt, and would probably do so very quickly.  This is
>> *exactly* the wiring that the 320/430 radios used.  In addition, there is
>> every possibility that the current being drawn before melting is smaller
>> than the amount of current needed by a real 320 or 430 radio on power on.
>> So, when this got plugged in, there's a good chance that you melted the
>> ethernet transformers.
>>
>> The good news is if this is what has happened, it should be a fairly easy
>> fix by almost any electronic repair shop which knows how to rework surface
>> mount boards - just remove the magnetics and replace them.
>>
>> Unless of course there was another cause.
>>
>> -forrest
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Due to the odd wiring the radios probably shorted out the overcurrent
>>> protection in the injectors, turning off the portal and I'd not be
>>> surprised if the radios are just fine.   Especially if they were never
>>> plugged into an already on injector.
>>> So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were
>>> for the 320/430 radios.  Oops
>>>
>>> Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
>>> All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer
>>> appear to boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power
>>> supply or 48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered
>>> by a 24 V power supply how could that have damaged the radios?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>>  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
>> <http://facebook.com/packetflux>  <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
>>
>>


Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-24 Thread Ken Hohhof
Is it possible he has some surge protectors in the path and those are what got 
blown, not the radios?

From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:36 PM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

I actually do a very fast, software defined, overcurrent shutdown in the 
product of interest here.  It's been a while since I worked on that code but it 
will shut down a short circuit in a few ms or so.

The software defined part allows some flexibility in the shutdown which is 
important in that I also have to not shut down for inrush currents.   The 
algorithm is such that if the overcurrent is small it shuts it down slower than 
a, large one.  Roughly, it trips once a certain amount of  excessive energy is 
seen.   I'm guessing in this case the amount of energy we let through is more 
than the windings on the magnetics can handle.  If I have time I'll grab a set 
of magnetics and see if I can characterize this.

I'm also surprised that the 100 series radios died as well as they should 
appear as a dead short to the injector and have no magnetics on those pins to 
blow up.


On Apr 24, 2015 8:58 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

  Forrest, please forgive me for even thinking this thought... but I wonder  
how much current it takes to blow a phy transformer and how hard it would be to 
have an over current shutdown.  I have done over current shutdowns before and 
have used those over current passive devices that self heal.  Polyfuse I think 
is the name

  Like you need more ideas...

  From: Craig House 
  Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:26 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

  Thanks Forrest. It was a mix of 450 and 100 series.  They all appear to have 
been damaged.  The only thing I get an Ethernet link light on is a bh50 radio

  Sent from my iPhone

  On Apr 24, 2015, at 05:06, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
 wrote:


Hmm.. I love (not) autocorrect on android... port, not portal...  But now 
I'm on a real computer and have a chance to re-read the original message, and 
think a bit... I think I need to change my final answer.


If these were 100 series radios I'd say "that seems rather odd that this 
would cause a failure".   BUT...  I'm assuming these are 450 radios.


With the 450, there's a ethernet transformer on each pair.  To DC, this is 
effectively a short.   Or since these are made with very thin wire you could 
probably more accurately call it a 'fuse'.   So if you take a pair and put say 
the + lead of a 24V power source on one wire in the pair, and the return (-) on 
the other pair, you'd find that the wire in the transformer would melt, and 
would probably do so very quickly.  This is *exactly* the wiring that the 
320/430 radios used.  In addition, there is every possibility that the current 
being drawn before melting is smaller than the amount of current needed by a 
real 320 or 430 radio on power on.   So, when this got plugged in, there's a 
good chance that you melted the ethernet transformers.


The good news is if this is what has happened, it should be a fairly easy 
fix by almost any electronic repair shop which knows how to rework surface 
mount boards - just remove the magnetics and replace them.   


Unless of course there was another cause.


-forrest



On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
 wrote:

  Due to the odd wiring the radios probably shorted out the overcurrent 
protection in the injectors, turning off the portal and I'd not be surprised if 
the radios are just fine.   Especially if they were never plugged into an 
already on injector.  

  So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were 
for the 320/430 radios.  Oops 

  Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
  All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear 
to boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply or 
48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a 24 V 
power supply how could that have damaged the radios?

  Sent from my iPhone



-- 

  Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

  Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
  forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

 




Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-24 Thread Forrest Christian (List Account)
I actually do a very fast, software defined, overcurrent shutdown in the
product of interest here.  It's been a while since I worked on that code
but it will shut down a short circuit in a few ms or so.

The software defined part allows some flexibility in the shutdown which is
important in that I also have to not shut down for inrush currents.   The
algorithm is such that if the overcurrent is small it shuts it down slower
than a, large one.  Roughly, it trips once a certain amount of  excessive
energy is seen.   I'm guessing in this case the amount of energy we let
through is more than the windings on the magnetics can handle.  If I have
time I'll grab a set of magnetics and see if I can characterize this.

I'm also surprised that the 100 series radios died as well as they should
appear as a dead short to the injector and have no magnetics on those pins
to blow up.
 On Apr 24, 2015 8:58 AM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

>   Forrest, please forgive me for even thinking this thought... but I
> wonder  how much current it takes to blow a phy transformer and how hard it
> would be to have an over current shutdown.  I have done over current
> shutdowns before and have used those over current passive devices that self
> heal.  Polyfuse I think is the name
>
> Like you need more ideas...
>
>  *From:* Craig House 
> *Sent:* Friday, April 24, 2015 5:26 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question
>
>  Thanks Forrest. It was a mix of 450 and 100 series.  They all appear to
> have been damaged.  The only thing I get an Ethernet link light on is a
> bh50 radio
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 24, 2015, at 05:06, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>   Hmm.. I love (not) autocorrect on android... port, not portal...  But
> now I'm on a real computer and have a chance to re-read the original
> message, and think a bit... I think I need to change my final answer.
>
> If these were 100 series radios I'd say "that seems rather odd that this
> would cause a failure".   BUT...  I'm assuming these are 450 radios.
>
> With the 450, there's a ethernet transformer on each pair.  To DC, this is
> effectively a short.   Or since these are made with very thin wire you
> could probably more accurately call it a 'fuse'.   So if you take a pair
> and put say the + lead of a 24V power source on one wire in the pair, and
> the return (-) on the other pair, you'd find that the wire in the
> transformer would melt, and would probably do so very quickly.  This is
> *exactly* the wiring that the 320/430 radios used.  In addition, there is
> every possibility that the current being drawn before melting is smaller
> than the amount of current needed by a real 320 or 430 radio on power on.
> So, when this got plugged in, there's a good chance that you melted the
> ethernet transformers.
>
> The good news is if this is what has happened, it should be a fairly easy
> fix by almost any electronic repair shop which knows how to rework surface
> mount boards - just remove the magnetics and replace them.
>
> Unless of course there was another cause.
>
> -forrest
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> Due to the odd wiring the radios probably shorted out the overcurrent
>> protection in the injectors, turning off the portal and I'd not be
>> surprised if the radios are just fine.   Especially if they were never
>> plugged into an already on injector.
>> So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were
>> for the 320/430 radios.  Oops
>>
>> Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
>> All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear
>> to boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply
>> or 48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a
>> 24 V power supply how could that have damaged the radios?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
> <http://facebook.com/packetflux>  <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
>
>


Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-24 Thread Chuck McCown
Forrest, please forgive me for even thinking this thought... but I wonder  how 
much current it takes to blow a phy transformer and how hard it would be to 
have an over current shutdown.  I have done over current shutdowns before and 
have used those over current passive devices that self heal.  Polyfuse I think 
is the name

Like you need more ideas...

From: Craig House 
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:26 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

Thanks Forrest. It was a mix of 450 and 100 series.  They all appear to have 
been damaged.  The only thing I get an Ethernet link light on is a bh50 radio

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 24, 2015, at 05:06, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
 wrote:


  Hmm.. I love (not) autocorrect on android... port, not portal...  But now I'm 
on a real computer and have a chance to re-read the original message, and think 
a bit... I think I need to change my final answer.


  If these were 100 series radios I'd say "that seems rather odd that this 
would cause a failure".   BUT...  I'm assuming these are 450 radios.


  With the 450, there's a ethernet transformer on each pair.  To DC, this is 
effectively a short.   Or since these are made with very thin wire you could 
probably more accurately call it a 'fuse'.   So if you take a pair and put say 
the + lead of a 24V power source on one wire in the pair, and the return (-) on 
the other pair, you'd find that the wire in the transformer would melt, and 
would probably do so very quickly.  This is *exactly* the wiring that the 
320/430 radios used.  In addition, there is every possibility that the current 
being drawn before melting is smaller than the amount of current needed by a 
real 320 or 430 radio on power on.   So, when this got plugged in, there's a 
good chance that you melted the ethernet transformers.


  The good news is if this is what has happened, it should be a fairly easy fix 
by almost any electronic repair shop which knows how to rework surface mount 
boards - just remove the magnetics and replace them.   


  Unless of course there was another cause.


  -forrest



  On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
 wrote:

Due to the odd wiring the radios probably shorted out the overcurrent 
protection in the injectors, turning off the portal and I'd not be surprised if 
the radios are just fine.   Especially if they were never plugged into an 
already on injector.  

So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were for 
the 320/430 radios.  Oops 

Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear 
to boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply or 
48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a 24 V 
power supply how could that have damaged the radios?

Sent from my iPhone



  -- 

Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

   




Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-24 Thread Craig House
Thanks Forrest. It was a mix of 450 and 100 series.  They all appear to have 
been damaged.  The only thing I get an Ethernet link light on is a bh50 radio

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 24, 2015, at 05:06, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hmm.. I love (not) autocorrect on android... port, not portal...  But now I'm 
> on a real computer and have a chance to re-read the original message, and 
> think a bit... I think I need to change my final answer.
> 
> If these were 100 series radios I'd say "that seems rather odd that this 
> would cause a failure".   BUT...  I'm assuming these are 450 radios.
> 
> With the 450, there's a ethernet transformer on each pair.  To DC, this is 
> effectively a short.   Or since these are made with very thin wire you could 
> probably more accurately call it a 'fuse'.   So if you take a pair and put 
> say the + lead of a 24V power source on one wire in the pair, and the return 
> (-) on the other pair, you'd find that the wire in the transformer would 
> melt, and would probably do so very quickly.  This is *exactly* the wiring 
> that the 320/430 radios used.  In addition, there is every possibility that 
> the current being drawn before melting is smaller than the amount of current 
> needed by a real 320 or 430 radio on power on.   So, when this got plugged 
> in, there's a good chance that you melted the ethernet transformers.
> 
> The good news is if this is what has happened, it should be a fairly easy fix 
> by almost any electronic repair shop which knows how to rework surface mount 
> boards - just remove the magnetics and replace them.   
> 
> Unless of course there was another cause.
> 
> -forrest
> 
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) 
>>  wrote:
>> Due to the odd wiring the radios probably shorted out the overcurrent 
>> protection in the injectors, turning off the portal and I'd not be surprised 
>> if the radios are just fine.   Especially if they were never plugged into an 
>> already on injector. 
>> 
>> So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were for 
>> the 320/430 radios.  Oops
>> 
>> Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
>> All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear to 
>> boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply or 
>> 48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a 24 V 
>> power supply how could that have damaged the radios?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
> 


Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-24 Thread Forrest Christian (List Account)
Hmm.. I love (not) autocorrect on android... port, not portal...  But now
I'm on a real computer and have a chance to re-read the original message,
and think a bit... I think I need to change my final answer.

If these were 100 series radios I'd say "that seems rather odd that this
would cause a failure".   BUT...  I'm assuming these are 450 radios.

With the 450, there's a ethernet transformer on each pair.  To DC, this is
effectively a short.   Or since these are made with very thin wire you
could probably more accurately call it a 'fuse'.   So if you take a pair
and put say the + lead of a 24V power source on one wire in the pair, and
the return (-) on the other pair, you'd find that the wire in the
transformer would melt, and would probably do so very quickly.  This is
*exactly* the wiring that the 320/430 radios used.  In addition, there is
every possibility that the current being drawn before melting is smaller
than the amount of current needed by a real 320 or 430 radio on power on.
So, when this got plugged in, there's a good chance that you melted the
ethernet transformers.

The good news is if this is what has happened, it should be a fairly easy
fix by almost any electronic repair shop which knows how to rework surface
mount boards - just remove the magnetics and replace them.

Unless of course there was another cause.

-forrest


On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> Due to the odd wiring the radios probably shorted out the overcurrent
> protection in the injectors, turning off the portal and I'd not be
> surprised if the radios are just fine.   Especially if they were never
> plugged into an already on injector.
> So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were for
> the 320/430 radios.  Oops
>
> Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
> All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear
> to boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply
> or 48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a
> 24 V power supply how could that have damaged the radios?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>



-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  



Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-23 Thread Forrest Christian (List Account)
Due to the odd wiring the radios probably shorted out the overcurrent
protection in the injectors, turning off the portal and I'd not be
surprised if the radios are just fine.   Especially if they were never
plugged into an already on injector.
So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were for
the 320/430 radios.  Oops
Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear
to boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply
or 48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a
24 V power supply how could that have damaged the radios?

Sent from my iPhone


Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-23 Thread George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)
I'm not the one to ask on this, but I'd think if you put the wrong power 
polarity (or the screwy twisted pair power) into a 100 or 450 radio, my 
thinking is the ethernet/PoE transformer in the radios might be damaged. 
But again, this probably should've been seen as a short or over-current 
by the SyncInjector and the port power should've tripped, possibly 
saving the radios. But you never know until you check them out.


Good luck. I hope it wasn't a total loss.

On 4/23/2015 8:56 PM, Craig House wrote:

I haven't taken them off the tower yet.  Brand new tower.  AP's havent been 
even used yet.  I am taking them down tomorrow and checking them out.  But the 
LED on the power supply stays on. I did try that today.  I just dont know if 
they radios actually power up and have bad ethernet ports or if they are 
completely dead.  Either way its a 200' climb to replace radios that have never 
even been in use and likely never will be.  Oh well I guess it is supposed to 
be a nice day.  I would rather be at 200' than anywhere else anyway..

Craig

- Original Message -
From: "George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 8:11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

The 320 and 430 have that crazy +/-/+/- PoE pinout scheme. So that's
what the 320/430 SyncInjector puts out. If you had PMP100 or 450 radios
plugged into that, I would think the overcurrent protection in the
injector would've kicked in, but who knows.

If you try to power them up with a regular AC/DC Canopy PoE, does the
power LED light up on them? I'm betting not and they'll have to be repaired.

On 4/23/2015 8:03 PM, Craig House wrote:

So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were for the 
320/430 radios.  Oops
Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear to 
boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply or 48 
V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a 24 V power 
supply how could that have damaged the radios?

Sent from my iPhone




Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-23 Thread Craig House
I haven't taken them off the tower yet.  Brand new tower.  AP's havent been 
even used yet.  I am taking them down tomorrow and checking them out.  But the 
LED on the power supply stays on. I did try that today.  I just dont know if 
they radios actually power up and have bad ethernet ports or if they are 
completely dead.  Either way its a 200' climb to replace radios that have never 
even been in use and likely never will be.  Oh well I guess it is supposed to 
be a nice day.  I would rather be at 200' than anywhere else anyway..

Craig 

- Original Message -
From: "George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 8:11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

The 320 and 430 have that crazy +/-/+/- PoE pinout scheme. So that's 
what the 320/430 SyncInjector puts out. If you had PMP100 or 450 radios 
plugged into that, I would think the overcurrent protection in the 
injector would've kicked in, but who knows.

If you try to power them up with a regular AC/DC Canopy PoE, does the 
power LED light up on them? I'm betting not and they'll have to be repaired.

On 4/23/2015 8:03 PM, Craig House wrote:
> So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were for 
> the 320/430 radios.  Oops
> Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
> All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear to 
> boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply or 
> 48 V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a 24 V 
> power supply how could that have damaged the radios?
>
> Sent from my iPhone


Re: [AFMUG] Packet flux question

2015-04-23 Thread George Skorup (Cyber Broadcasting)
The 320 and 430 have that crazy +/-/+/- PoE pinout scheme. So that's 
what the 320/430 SyncInjector puts out. If you had PMP100 or 450 radios 
plugged into that, I would think the overcurrent protection in the 
injector would've kicked in, but who knows.


If you try to power them up with a regular AC/DC Canopy PoE, does the 
power LED light up on them? I'm betting not and they'll have to be repaired.


On 4/23/2015 8:03 PM, Craig House wrote:

So we accidentally put sync injectors on to a din rail today that were for the 
320/430 radios.  Oops
Both of the injectors were powered by a 24 V 10 amp power supply
All of the radios that were plugged into those injectors no longer appear to 
boot up which wouldn't surprise me if there had been a 56 V power supply or 48 
V power supply powering them.  However since they were powered by a 24 V power 
supply how could that have damaged the radios?

Sent from my iPhone