In message <of3277ac5a.f5d1fae8-on85257537.008059cf-85257537.00817...@mck.us.ra y.com>, Joseph M Gwinn writes:
>> That's technically speaking not triax, that's double shield. Triax >> would have the conductors and one shield. > >No, I think that's twinax: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinax_cable>. > >Triax is a center plus two concentric shields: ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triaxial_cable>. Sorry, I fumbled what I wrote there. I would say wiki is wrong here, the usage I am used to is: coax: single conductor + shield twinax: twisted pair + shield triax: the wires + shield >> (Who once lost all ethernet interfaces, the access control system >> and a few minor computers when a moron first created and then cut >> a 600+ A ground loop). > >Was there a big bang? What was the source of the 600 amps? They replaced the separation transformer with a UPS, and they connected the two sides ground together at the UPS. Unfortunately the grounding on our secondary side was much better than the power companys grounding on the primary side, which was the entire point of having the the transformer in the first place. Yes, there were a significant bang and his two-hand wire-cutter was recategorized from "tool" to "industrial art". -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
