Something Different

[Clockmeister]

I said wood wouldn't conduct as a grounding measure for a laptop case.
Likewise I said wood was not the conductor in the Geelong incident - both
are true, both are correct.

You said wood could be used to ground a wooden laptop and was the
conductor
at Geelong - both are false, both are incorrect.

So explain to me me how I made a fool of myself? The fact that wood
'sometimes' is a conductor is irrelevent in this thread.

A pre-school student would be able to understand that - why do you have so
much trouble?

Just let the ignorant old fool have it to shut him up, we all know he is
wrong.

 

[Mark Harriss]

Some terminal fuckwit pom claiming to be
just the puerile shit thats all it can ever manage.

Rod BABY!! dontcha remember me??

 

[Rod Speed]

I said wood wouldn't conduct as a grounding measure for a laptop case.

Liar, you said nothing of the sort in the quoting
you keep deleting and I keep restoring.

Likewise I said wood was not the conductor in the Geelong incident -

Irrelevant to whether dry wood does indeed conduct when the
voltage across it is high enough, just like with any insulator.

both are true, both are correct.

And both are irrelevant to the general statement you made.

You said wood could be used to ground a wooden laptop

No I didnt.

and was the conductor at Geelong

No I didnt.

- both are false, both are incorrect.

Pity I never made either statement.

So explain to me me how I made a fool of myself?

You clearly said

The fact that wood 'sometimes' is a
conductor is irrelevent in this thread.

Nope. I JUST commented on that stupid pig ignorant claim that

That is SOMETIMES true and sometimes it aint.

<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old
could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed wrote

Rod BABY!! dontcha remember me??

Corse I remember you.

 

[McGrath]

Liar, you said nothing of the sort in the quoting
you keep deleting and I keep restoring.

"Dry wood is an insulator - not a conductor. For the purpose of earthing -
which is where this started, wood has NO conducive conductive abilities."

So where did I get the above from? I keep deleting to save myself having to
scroll through 'reams of puerile shit' - not to hide the facts

Irrelevant to whether dry wood does indeed conduct when the
voltage across it is high enough, just like with any insulator.

Which has nothing to do with this thread - which was originally about the
earthing on a wooden laptop case and somehow spread to the Geelong deaths.

And both are irrelevant to the general statement you made.

"You'll find it was the water that was the conductor, not simply the wood."

So where did I get the above from? I made no general statements, I replied
to the thread. Maybe you should re-read what has been posted? You continue
to make general statements stating wood is a conductor if the voltage is
high enough. Well buddy, in the context of this thread *that* is irrelevant.

No I didnt.

Yes you did.

No I didnt.

Yes you did.

Pity I never made either statement.

Better re-read the thread.

You clearly said

Which was correct. 'More fool you'

Nope. I JUST commented on that stupid pig ignorant claim that


That is SOMETIMES true and sometimes it aint.

Pity that the thread was about the grounding of a laptop using a wood case.
In this instance wood is not a conductor.

<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old
could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

So why do you keep re-posting the stuff I cut? Bit hypocritical, isn't it.

 

[McGrath]

Just let the ignorant old fool have it to shut him up, we all know he is
wrong.

I should, but I've got a couple of days off and nothing better to do

 

[Clockmeister]

Liar, you said nothing of the sort in the quoting
you keep deleting and I keep restoring.


Irrelevant to whether dry wood does indeed conduct when the
voltage across it is high enough, just like with any insulator.

Prove it or shut up about it.

 

[Rod Speed]

"Dry wood is an insulator - not a conductor. For the
purpose of earthing - which is where this started,
wood has NO conducive conductive abilities."

AFTER the thread had clearly diverted to the more general
question of whether lightning can indeed be conducted by dry wood.

So where did I get the above from?

Its obvious from the quoting that you keep flagrantly
dishonestly deleting where that came from.

I keep deleting to save myself having to scroll through
'reams of puerile shit' - not to hide the facts

Lying, again.

Which has nothing to do with this thread

Wrong, as always. It has everything to do
with the claims made at the top of the quoting.

- which was originally about the earthing on a wooden laptop case

Originally is completely irrelevant. I chose to comment on
your stupid pig ignorant claims about wood and lightning.

and somehow spread to the Geelong deaths.

Its clear that lightning was being discussed in the
quoting you keep flagrantly dishonestly deleting.

"You'll find it was the water that was
the conductor, not simply the wood."

And that is just plain wrong with dry wood and lightning.

So where did I get the above from?

Plucked it from your arse basically.

I made no general statements, I replied to the thread.

What you replied to was the general statement, stupid.

Maybe you should re-read what has been posted?

No need.

You continue to make general statements stating
wood is a conductor if the voltage is high enough.

I wasnt the first one to say, that, MC was.

Well buddy, in the context of this thread *that* is irrelevant.

Wrong, as always. Hariss made that general
claim which is clearly just plain wrong.

Yes you did.

No I didnt. You cant quote the post where I said that, because I didnt.

Yes you did.

No I didnt, I never ever mentioned Geelong at all.

Bazil/Bryan did.
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.electronics/msg/6d0b1228eef7cd77

Better re-read the thread.

No need, someone else said both of those.

Which was correct.

Nope, just plain wrong when stated as baldly as that.

Pity that the thread was about the grounding
of a laptop using a wood case.

Pity the thread had diverged to a more
general claim about wood and lightning

You get to like that or lump it.

In this instance wood is not a conductor.

Pity it can be with lightning.

So why do you keep re-posting the stuff I cut?

Because you are flagrantly dishonestly deleting it and claiming
that the thread had not diverged to discussing lightning and
wood when that is clearly exactly what had happened.

Bit hypocritical, isn't it.

More of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.

 

[John]

I recently saw that Bunnings has some adhesive backed veneers for about $15 a sheet
(about 450mm x 900mm) teak, jarrah, tasmanian oak, etc.

But this isn't some el cheapo sheet. What they do is strip
your pc or laptop and put it into a custom made housing
which has wood on the outside

 

[Mark Harriss]

Clockmeister wrote:

Prove it or shut up about it.

From the Wikipedia definition for dielectric breakdown:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_strength

"The maximum electric field strength that it can withstand intrinsically
without breaking down, i.e., without experiencing failure of its
insulating properties."


IOW when it's insulating properties fail it becomes a CONDUCTOR.


From the Werner PDF file on fibreglass ladders for the electrical
industry, some tests on the CONDUCTIVITY of wood and fibreglass
ladders:
http://www.wernerladder.com/catalog/files/rc81.pdf

2. DC leakage current(in uA) as related to conditioning for 10"
electrode spacing, 80% relative humidity conditioned at 22° C.

Applied Voltage
Time Wood Fiberglass Wood Fiberglass
As Received 90 KV 90 KV 7.0 1.0
24 hours 50 KV 90 KV 48.0 1.4
48 hours 50 KV 90 KV 67.0 1.9
72 hours 50 KV 90 KV 120.0 2.4


As you can see at 50KV wood begins to CONDUCT, now what part of this
concept don't you understand?. Are you aware that lightning is higher
in voltage than 50KV?.

 

[Damien McBain]

Mark Harriss committed to the eternal aether...:

Clockmeister wrote:




From the Wikipedia definition for dielectric breakdown:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_strength

"The maximum electric field strength that it can withstand intrinsically
without breaking down, i.e., without experiencing failure of its
insulating properties."


IOW when it's insulating properties fail it becomes a CONDUCTOR.


From the Werner PDF file on fibreglass ladders for the electrical
industry, some tests on the CONDUCTIVITY of wood and fibreglass
ladders:
http://www.wernerladder.com/catalog/files/rc81.pdf

2. DC leakage current(in uA) as related to conditioning for 10"
electrode spacing, 80% relative humidity conditioned at 22° C.

Applied Voltage
Time Wood Fiberglass Wood Fiberglass
As Received 90 KV 90 KV 7.0 1.0
24 hours 50 KV 90 KV 48.0 1.4
48 hours 50 KV 90 KV 67.0 1.9
72 hours 50 KV 90 KV 120.0 2.4


As you can see at 50KV wood begins to CONDUCT, now what part of this
concept don't you understand?. Are you aware that lightning is higher
in voltage than 50KV?.

The voltage in a laptop computer isn't

 

[Rod Speed]

Mark Harriss committed to the eternal aether...:


The voltage in a laptop computer isn't

Pity what was being discussed was lightning, fuckwit.

 

[Clockmeister]

Clockmeister wrote:




From the Wikipedia definition for dielectric breakdown:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric_strength

"The maximum electric field strength that it can withstand intrinsically
without breaking down, i.e., without experiencing failure of its
insulating properties."


IOW when it's insulating properties fail it becomes a CONDUCTOR.


From the Werner PDF file on fibreglass ladders for the electrical
industry, some tests on the CONDUCTIVITY of wood and fibreglass
ladders:
http://www.wernerladder.com/catalog/files/rc81.pdf

2. DC leakage current(in uA) as related to conditioning for 10" electrode
spacing, 80% relative humidity conditioned at 22° C.

Applied Voltage
Time Wood Fiberglass Wood Fiberglass
As Received 90 KV 90 KV 7.0 1.0
24 hours 50 KV 90 KV 48.0 1.4
48 hours 50 KV 90 KV 67.0 1.9
72 hours 50 KV 90 KV 120.0 2.4


As you can see at 50KV wood begins to CONDUCT, now what part of this
concept don't you understand?. Are you aware that lightning is higher
in voltage than 50KV?.

I *know* wood or any insulator conducts if the voltage is high enough, I
wanted to see the evidence from that lazy bullshit artist Rod.

And 50KV is pretty low, really.

 

[Clockmeister]

Pity what was being discussed was lightning, fuckwit.

You're a parody of yourself.

 

[Mark Harriss]

I *know* wood or any insulator conducts if the voltage is high enough, I
wanted to see the evidence from that lazy bullshit artist Rod.

And 50KV is pretty low, really.

I once made the mistake of trying to use once inch dia. black rubber
tubing to insulate some conductors with 47KV on them: after a few
seconds it begans to smoke heavily and start to pop: I assume the
rubber had carbon black added to colour it. The stuff was more of a
resistor than an insulator at those voltages.

Apparently hot glass is conductive from the sodium ions in it as well
: heat some up till it's red and then microwave it to see a lightshow.

 

[Damien McBain]

Rod Speed committed to the eternal aether...:

Pity what was being discussed was lightning, fuckwit.

Take a look at the OP, it's clearly about a timber laptop case

 

[Colin ®]

Someone posted ----

Those figures show that wood exposed to 80% humidity at 22C for a period of
72 hours is more conductive than the same wood after only 24 hours.

The wood is absorbing moisture so it conducts better - the fibreglass does
also but not to the same extent.

The conclusion is that the water in the wood is doing the conducting.

Now, whose argument does that support, if anyones ?

 

[Damien McBain]

Mark Harriss committed to the eternal aether...:

I once made the mistake of trying to use once inch dia. black rubber
tubing to insulate some conductors with 47KV on them: after a few
seconds it begans to smoke heavily and start to pop: I assume the
rubber had carbon black added to colour it. The stuff was more of a
resistor than an insulator at those voltages.

Apparently hot glass is conductive from the sodium ions in it as well
: heat some up till it's red and then microwave it to see a lightshow.

Maybe the wires got hot and burnt the rubber?

 

[Mark Harriss]

Mark Harriss committed to the eternal aether...:




Maybe the wires got hot and burnt the rubber?

The wires were attached to the ends of the 60cm length of rubber tube
which was used to space the wires out as they were not rated for HV.
The voltage was able to breakdown the 1000V rated insulation and cause
enough flow across the rubber to make it start crackling and popping
with lots of smoke.

 

[Mark Harriss]

Someone posted ----




Those figures show that wood exposed to 80% humidity at 22C for a period of
72 hours is more conductive than the same wood after only 24 hours.

The wood is absorbing moisture so it conducts better - the fibreglass does
also but not to the same extent.

The conclusion is that the water in the wood is doing the conducting.

Now, whose argument does that support, if anyones ?

Ok then, does fibreglass resin absorb water?? as it's also increasing in
conductivity. I would go for a breakdown mechanism in the material
first. If you want the figure for wet timber then go to that URL as it's
figure are on the same page.

Also note that at 50KV and 120uA translates to 6 watts of heating in a
20 cm length of wood, this would tend to slowly drive off moisture.