Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #12756

Re: Cutting panels

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Don Y wrote:
> Hi Joerg,
> 
> On 7/26/2013 9:13 AM, Joerg wrote:
>> Don Y wrote:
> 
>>>>> The irrigation controller is located in the garage near the
>>>>> garage door as it's easy to get out through the wall to the
>>>>> valves (well, actually, the valves are distributed all around
>>>>> the yard -- front/back/sides -- but this is where I chose to
>>>>> bring them all through the wall since it is close to the
>>>>> rest of the "water" stuff (future flow meter, valve, master
>>>>> irrigation valve, softener, filtration, etc.) -- things that
>>>>> are handled by the "water" controller!  (i.e., a home may
>>>>> or may not have an irrigation system -- but *should* have
>>>>> "water"!)
>>>>
>>>> All in the same utility room here. If anything needs fixing everyone
>>>> knows where the stuff is.
>>>
>>> So, you terminate all your phone, irrigation, security (cameras/alarms),
>>> CATV, networking, multimedia, HVAC, etc. stuff in one location? ...
>>
>> Yes.
> 
> Then you have a boatload of cable coming *through* your house
> that could have been terminated "where used"? 


About 8-10 per category to different locations. All terminated in the
utility room.


>                                         ...  E.g., the
> landscape lighting controller is sited just inside the
> garage -- and only because she-who-must-be-obeyed doesn't like
> the transformers visible on the exterior of the house.  No need
> to run 4 #12's from the outside wall of the house to someplace
> "deep within".
> 

We took out much of the landscape lighting. Deer trampling it, et cetera.

>>>                                                              ... Your
>>> freezer is in one location; why locate the controls for it in another?
>>
>> The freezer has only internal controls but it is right next to the
>> utility panel, in the same room. After the first one died and much of
>> the food in it spoiled I thought about running a network high-temp alert
>> but so far haven't gotten around to it.
> 
> So, you would consider putting "smarts" *at* the freezer and
> sending *messages* to some "remote" location instead of running
> thermocouple leads to that remote location? 


A freezer is so big that some people may not be able to locate it in the
utility room. Or may want it closer to the kitchen.


>                                 ... But, putting local
> smarts at the irrigation controller and sending CONTROL and
> STATUS messages to that same remote location is out of the
> question?
> 

Irrigation needs to have a home run as well IMHO.


> I.e., this is how I have done everything, here.  Put the smarts
> where it is most convenient to interface them to the field
> wiring; then "talk" to them from "wherever".  Including from
> the supermarket!
> 
>>> Why run raw video to *a* central location when you can process it *at*
>>> the camera and ship what you need (in whatever format you need it) to
>>> wherever it needs to go (displays, recorders, etc.). ...
>>
>> Because re-routing stuff is a breeze when you have home runs. If you
>> don't then it could mean cracking out the hammer drill, making a mess,
>> dust, work, blisters.
> 
> I don't see how that is the case.  You have to run a cable from
> a camera to your central location.  Perhaps RS170 down a long
> length of coax?  How is that any more convenient than processing
> the video *at* the camera and shipping a data stream over CAT5
> to wherever you want it consumed?
> 

It is easier to have all the controllers in one place. Sure, you can
have a NTSC-to-IP converter box somewhere but SWMBO won't like it much.
And I like to keep it simple. Cable is simpler and cheaper than local
electronic conversion.


>>>                                                 ... Likewise, why
>>> have a dozen or more "heavy" (relatively speaking) wires running to
>>> irrigation valves *through* some portion of the house interior when
>>> you know all the valves will be located *outside*?
>>
>> Because central control is, to me, essential when it comes to such
>> things. Heavy? A normal solenoid doesn't even take 0.25A. I've used
>> doubled-up CAT5 for that because that only came in 1000ft drums.
> 
> But you are assuming central control has to be PHYSICALLY centralized.
> You don't run the wires from the pump for your swimming pool into
> that same room, do you?  Nor the temperature sensor for it *just*
> so all of the wires are in one central location!
> 

No, but I like the control of it centralized. So there is a control wire
going from the pool house to the utility room. Runs only a valve right
now, the rest is "future project when I get around to it".


> Rather, you put the pump and power that it requires where it makes
> sense FOR THE PUMP (you don't want to run pipe all around your property
> just so you can locate the pump somewhere "central").  You make the
> control *of* the pump (and pool temperature) available where *that*
> is convenient.  Perhaps out *by* the pool, in a veranda, etc.
> 
> Or, in my case, wherever I can send datagrams to my control
> system (i.e., damn near anywhere).
> 
>>> Just seems like concentrating too much stuff with no real gain.
>>> (unless you need to work on the phones *and* the irrigation
>>> system at the same time?).
>>
>> Example: Some day you want to control the irrigation from your phone or
>> via your LAN. With a central closet all you have to build is a board.
>> Without that it means the hammer drill, dust, noise, sweat ...
> 
> Thats what I am doing *now*.  Because the irrigation system can
> talk IP to the rest of the automation system I can command it
> from <wherever>.  My armchair in the living room.  While sitting
> on The Throne.  Or, while driving to the store.  I don't care
> that the wires that connect to the solenoid valves are terminated
> in a small box on the wall just inside the garage door; or in a
> central utility closet.  As long as I can talk to that box
> over IP, I can command it to do what I want, when/*as* I want.
> 

That works, of course. But I like the system simpler, without having to
translate everyhting to IP.


> (E.g., second generation of this will be wireless.  Put your
> controllers wherever you can get at power and forget about them.
> No need to string cable through the rafters, etc.)
> 
>>> Most of the time (by a wide margin), you're interacting with the
>>> user interface for these things.  E.g., changing the criteria
>>> that determines when the hot water heater is required to have
>>> "ample hot water" available.  *Not* rewiring the controls *into*
>>> the hot water heater!  You're comfortable with your hot water
>>> heater in one location and television in another... so why the
>>> desire to have the "controls" for them in the same place?
>>
>> Say you want to conserve energy. If you really want to push it and lower
>> the water heater temps a lot you may have to ramp it up and back down
>> about once a week. To prevent legionaires disease. Ideally this should
>> happen when hot water is likely not used but, say, one person in the
>> household is on revolving-time shifts at work. The peaker time thus has
>> to be changed a lot. If you have no central control this would be a real
>> pain.
> 
> I can do exactly that.  But, without "central WIRING"!  Send a
> datagram to the water heater telling it to alter its setpoint
> temperature to <X>.  Then, some time later, tell it to alter
> it to <Y>.  But, why should *I* have to tell it?  An *algorithm*
> can tell it these things based on "rules" and observations of
> the hot water usage patterns of the occupants of the building!
> 

Algorithms won't know about shift changes and things like that.


> But, this doesn't require the wires and controls all be centrally
> located.  Just that they "come together" in some virtual space
> at a point where <whatever> (i.e., me or "an algorithm") can
> access them.
> 

You can make in happen in virtual space but it requires boxes here and
there and cost a lot more.


>>>>> Media gets served from a set of processors in a closet
>>>>> off the kitchen (since I need rotating media, there, and
>>>>> places like "in the ceiling" or "in the garage" would not
>>>>> be appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> Over here media gets played where the media gear is, from the living
>>>> room. But you don't have to watch the movie there, it gets transmitted
>>>> over coax back to the utility closet and then into the main
>>>> distribution. Of course with an iso amp so things won't pipe out of the
>>>> antenna.
>>>
>>> The RG6 (and "CAT1" -- even though it's really CAT5) here are for
>>> "future owners" who will resort to more conventional media/comms
>>> systems.  I.e., I only use three of the RG6 feeds (one from the cable
>>> company, one from rooftop TV antenna, and one from "FM" antenna
>>> hidden up in the ceiling) and *none* of the RG6 "drops".  The feeds
>>> run into the closet where the signal is peeled off and rebroadcast
>>> "over IP" (radio programs, TV shows, etc.).
>>>
>>> My goal is to distribute *everything* "over IP".  I've done this
>>> for audio, already (though I haven't been able to find an affordable
>>> AM/FM radio "box").  I expect video to be a bit more taxing
>>> (designing a good codec with the same sorts of capabilities as the
>>> audio system).  I'm currently in the market for a good dual FXS/FXO
>>> interface (prefering a standalone ATA-style device instead of something
>>> that relies on some obsolescent "board" interface)
>>
>> That is quite futursitic but it sounds expensive to transfer everything
>> to IP.
> 
> Think about it:  you need some field interface to all these sensors
> and controls/actuators.  I.e., a single chip microprocessor.  And,
> a way of talking with that MCU to exchange status and command
> messages -- some sort of serial communication protocol (e.g. ethernet).
> 
> Instead of putting ALL the I/O's on a single processor and having that
> processor "do everything", put the I/O's on *several* processors
> and distribute the responsibilities among them.  Then, let them
> all talk to <something> -- including each other! -- to get
> directions as to *what* they should be doing.
> 
> Now, instead of running all that field wiring to a central location,
> all you need to do is run it to a "convenient point".  Or, a *set* of
> convenient points!
> 
> I.e., terminate the irrigation valves *here*; the landscape lighting
> *there*; the garage door opener somewhere *else*; etc.  Then, just
> bring their "communication interfaces" to a "central" point -- even
> if that point varies over time!  ("Now I am in the living room
> wanting to control something; oops!  I've walked into the kitchen
> and still want to control that thing!")
> 
> Given that you can (conceivably) do the communications wirelessly
> (I see lots of downside risk in that approach which is why I haven't
> gone that route, initially), you could put little black boxes all
> over the place and never have to worry about pulling cables "inside".
> 

But what do all those little black boxes cost in terms of money and
install effort? We try to keep it simple in our house. Also, I do not
want to rely on one system for all. If your LAN goes down you are
screwed. It could cause plants to die.


> [Early on, I had considered designing the irrigation controller as
> a bunch of "one valve" controllers scattered, physically, around
> the property.  So, instead of running cable to their solenoids
> from a controller, I would run power+data to their *controllers*
> which were located adjacent to each individual valve!  But, the
> idea of having 16 little PCB's *buried* around the yard just
> felt "wrong"...  OTOH, I think when someone comes up with an
> economical, rugged "moisture sensor" suitable for below grade
> use, there will be a market for lots of "smart valves" that sit
> on the water distribution line and service one or two plants
> individually with "local" control!  "Made in China"]
> 

We are far, far away from that kind of automation. Most of the industry
is plain dumb when it comes to that. Except for a select few companies
but those serve higher-end markets.


>>> But, in both cases, the "media" is sourced from the lower 18" of this
>>> "closet".  I have a dual OTA DTV receiver (media pump) so I can
>>> source two OTA broadcasts simultaneously (route one to a live
>>> display and the other to a DVR; or both to live displays; or both
>>> to DVRs, etc.).  I need to purchase a second one since I think
>>> you need to be able to access 4 "programs" concurrently in a house
>>> of 4 people (sad!  but, easy to see two being watched simultaneously
>>> and possibly recording another for later viewing: "Dad, Betsy won't
>>> let me record my TV show cuz she's recording some stupid sitcom
>>> that she's already seen!").
>>>
>>> "Consuming" the media happens wherever you have a suitable "player".
>>> E.g., you can listen to a telephone call on a "network speaker"
>>> or (eventually) route it through whatever you are using to listen
>>> to a television program, etc.  Of course, you can record it just
>>> as easily.  Want to pull weeds while listening to the TV news?
>>> Just pop a BT earpiece in your ear...
>>
>> You just brought up a perfect argument for a centralized wiring closet
>> :-)
> 
> No.  All you need in that closet is the media server and however
> many pipes it needs to push enough media into your network!


Until the network goes down one day, that is.


> Here, I collocated the main processors (which include those that
> actually serve up the media), network switch/router and UPS in
> that location.  But, the rest of the bits of kit (irrigation,
> security, etc.) are scattered around wherever it makes most sense
> for them.  E.g., the processors that monitor the video feeds are
> located up in the eaves, adjacent to their individual cameras.
> 
> If the doorbell rings, I can "see" who is at the door without
> getting up from my office chair. ...


Our dogs will tell me :-)


>                          ... Or, from the living room couch.
> Or, meal prep in the kitchen.  Just as easily as I can watch
> a movie, etc.
> 
> [Note I have't yet designed the video subsystem as there's a fair
> bit of BFM there!]
> 
>>> If you mean "user interface", in that case, it's wherever you want
>>> it to be.  I.e., I can alter the heat/cooling while I am working on
>>> one of the cars out in the garage (even though the garage currently
>>> has no HVAC capabilities).  Or, while pulling weeds in the back yard.
>>> Or, while driving home from the Dentist.  I've even got a very long
>>> range *cordless* phone so I can wander the neighborhood and still
>>> be "in touch" with the house (I don't use cell phones).
>>>
>>> That was the whole point of this -- to tie the controls to the
>>> *user* instead of "a spot on a wall" or "a panel in the garage".
>>> And, to then let the definition of "user" evolve (e.g., autonomous
>>> agents).
>>
>> To me the wiring closet is what makes this easy. I have no ambitions to
>> peel off signals and such (well, with minor exceptions) but if I ever
>> needed to then our home-run structure would make this as easy as it gets.
> 
> If you can afford the space, great!  I would *love* to have a closet
> (or *room*!) to set aside for automation.  Stash all the network
> printers in there, the various servers I use for work, etc.  Instead
> of being relegated to the lower 18" of this silly closet.  But,
> moving *just* to get a "server room" seems a bit presumptuous!  :>
> 

How many square-feet is your house? Our utility room is maybe 6ft by 8ft
or something like that.


>>>>> Here, garage is a death sentence for all things electronic.  Even
>>>>> with our insulated door it still gets pretty warm in there!
>>>>> (before the new door, it would easily hit 140)
>>>>
>>>> Then the electronics isn't designed right. After all, garage door
>>>> openers are full of electronics and they have to live in the nastiest
>>>> area of a garage, under the ceiling. The cars also have to reside in
>>>> the
>>>> garage and nowadays they are chockfull of elecrtronic gizmos, most of
>>>> them highly unnecessary.
>>>
>>> You know industrial grade components cost more than commercial
>>> grade.  Why *pay* for something designed to be able to tolerate
>>> the heat (and North Dakota cold!) of the garage when it doesn't
>>> *have* to sit out there?  Do you think your PC will fare well in
>>> the garage -- while IN USE?
>>
>> A good one does. Here in the office it was 91F yesterday and the main PC
>> was running heavy duty SPICE simulations.
> 
> 90 degrees isn't particularly taxing.  It's probably almost that in
> my office (poor ventilation and several servers running at once).
> I think google's "cold aisle" is claimed to be 80F.
> 
> But, Ma & Pa Consumer probably would be annoyed if they had to
> replace the "media store" on their multimedia server every year
> because it couldn't handle the 140 degrees in the garage
> ("How do we recover all the stuff we had on the drive before it
> died?  We had videos of our 50th wedding anniversary with the
> grandkids...")
> 

If the garage is 140F on a regular basis you have a problem. Your cars
won't like that for very long. I'd fix that (ventilation etc.).


>>> You want to be able to down-spec as many components as possible
>>> to keep things affordable (I'm already in the multiple kilobucks
>>> ballpark, here -- for just the electronics!).  If you have
>>> to specify multiterabyte solid state disks (to store media!)
>>> rated for industrial temperature extremes instead of off-the-shelf
>>> *commercial* magnetic disks of similar capacity there's a huge
>>> cost penalty.  And, longer down-times when you can't just walk
>>> to your local discount store and buy a replacement!
>>
>> I rather buy less in toys and not down-spec.
> 
> If you want to be able to control "everything", there is a certain
> "price of admission".  :<
> 

Or use the home-run structuce, then admission costs only four drums of
cables and some connectors and such.


>>> [OK, so maybe *you* will have to DRIVE!  :> ]
>>>
>>> The bits of kit that I locate "in ceilings", etc. are designed
>>> to handle the environments they are in.  But, nothing more.
>>> If it ever climbs to 100C inside my ceiling, the $15 board I've
>>> got tucked up there is going to be the *least* of my worries!
>>> ("Don, why is there *steam* coming out of the ceiling?")
>>
>> "Don, why is there a fire engine in our driveway?" :-)
> 
> Yeah, I am already imagining what things will be like when
> manufacturers start selling products with these sorts of
> capabilities.  And, users start downloading apps of dubious
> quality to *run* their automation...
> 
> "Why is my hot water heater set at 190F?"
> "Why is all the meat in the freezer thawed?"
> "Who left the garage door open?"
> "Ack!  The roses are sitting in 6 inches of standing water!"
> "How did Bob, next door, manage to see me in the shower?"
> 

"... and why does the virus scanner say found Stux-sumpthin'?"

> etc.
> 
>>>>> I keep debating running "air" into the store room in the
>>>>> garage and moving the doorway to open into the interior of
>>>>> the house (instead of into the garage).  That's a fairly
>>>>> large space that would be a great home for the freezer
>>>>> (currently in the garage!), my larger printers, plotter,
>>>>> etc.  But...  <shrug>
>>>>
>>>> Freezer in the garage? That is tough on its compressor.
>>>
>>> Yup.  But, we don't have much of an option in that regard.
>>> Insulated garage door makes a big difference (and, the fact
>>> that the compressor hugs the floor and not the ceiling).
>>> House is very "open".  Translation:  not many places to *hide*
>>> things!  :<
>>
>> Then you need the super-expensive art deco sub-zero fridge freezer
>> combo :-)
> 
> No, the fridge/freezer/WIRING CLOSET combo!  Complete with the optional
> shoe storage accessory!!  :-/
> 
>>> And, I'd *kill* for a basement!
>>
>> Oh, same here. We are on a slope so the one downstairs room is mostly
> 
> So, a "walk out 'basement'" (even if it isn't really a basement
> per se)?
>

Yep.


> It's just insane that they *don't* build below grade here (AZ).
> Especially considering the heat in Summer.  Cooling load would be
> absolutely non-existent!
> 

Builders are either not smart or plain don't care about energy.


> But, I guess you could make the same argument for "up north"
> with respect to "heating load" in winter.
> 
> Bottom line:  they don't do it because it's cheaper NOT to!
> 
>> cool. Into the hillside we have said utility closet and also a small
>> wine storage. But it's nothing compared to the basement we had in
>> Germany.
> 
> In New England, Midwest, Colorado, etc. I always had a basement.
> Something you simply took for granted.  NOT having one really
> changes how you deal with "storage".
> 
> E.g., I would store my archives in the basement, previously.
> Cool, dry, dark... out-of-the-way.   Here, they have to hide
> under a bed, etc.
> 

Well, it's also a nice trigger not to store so much. People have too
much these days.


>>>>> I have another friend with a small rack in his *bedroom*!
>>>>> Dunno what the appeal of that is supposed to be...  <frown>
>>>>
>>>> Strange. It's usually considered uncool to show so much nerdiness. It
>>>> turns off potential girlfriends. Unless he is already married :-)
>>>
>>> <shrug>  I think, in his case, he's more interested in the
>>> functionality than the appearance. ...
>>
>> A bachelor, I suppose.
> 
> Actually, he is.  Though I suspect he would like to change that.
> "At least on the weekends..."  ;-)
> 

Then he should start getting rid of things like "a small rack in his
bedroom" :-)


>>> Early in my career, I worried almost exclusively about how well
>>> things *worked* without regard for what they looked like (I have
>>> many prototypes fabricated "on a wooden plank" or "in a wooden
>>> enclosure").  I think its only after you get that skill-set
>>> perfected that you turn your attention to other "niceties"
>>> like appearance, user constraints, etc.
>>
>> It's usually after you get married when that transformation happens :-)
> 
> I've heard that when you are young(er), you want possessions;
> when older, "experiences".
> 

And often just pain relief. Like I right now, horrible toothache. Of
course, per Murphy that set in on a Friday night.


> <shrug>
> 
> In my case, I just want "less hassles".  I.e., I want products to
> work as advertised (ideally, as *expected*!) and not break down
> regularly (I suspect I can't go more than two weeks without
> having to fix *something*... toilet, car, computer, TV, etc.)
> 

Same here.


> Maybe hermits/minimalists have the right idea?  :-/
> 

In some aspects they do.


>>> Mine stands about 5 ft tall and I've located a workstation atop
>>> it that I use while standing (usually for things like starting a
>>> backup, etc.)
>>
>> Wow! You have this many books that you must catalog them in a 5ft card
>> cabinet? We (or rather my wife) have ordered them by topic/genre and
>> then selected a location for each throughout the house.
> 
> No.  The card catalog actually holds audio cassettes.  :>
> The drawers are *almost* the correct size for 25 cassettes
> per drawer -- with a little slop on the side to make it
> easy to remove them individually.
> 
> I've been "on a campaign" to discard books -- despite my fondness
> for them.  They just take up too much space!  E.g., when I moved
> here, I had 80 "Xerox paper" boxes full of (fiction) paperbacks.
> And that doesn't count reference books, text books, technical
> literature, magazines, etc.  I.e., almost two *tons* of paperbacks!
> 
> I've since given most of those away -- cherrypicking two boxes worth
> as "must keeps".  And, recently turned to the text books and other
> references.  Similarly, looking for electronic copies of the many
> technical articles that I have squirreled away and scanning those
> that I can't find on-line.
> 
> The idea of an eReader turns my stomach.  But, I will concede
> this if it gives me a way to shed a few tons of paper!  :-(
> 

Same here, but I don't want to pay twice for the books I already own. So
I don't have any e-readers (yet). And I certainly won't buy one with
vendor lock.

[...]


>>>> But one needs a remote, nowadays. Having to get out of a chair to
>>>> changes stations is so 1950's, and one could pull a muscle :-)
>>>
>>> Sure.  I just don't restrict the "remote" to something as conventional
>>> and DEDICATED as "The TV Remote" (or DVD or VCR or STEREO or CATV
>>> or...).  I.e., where is the HVAC remote?  Or, irrigation controller
>>> remote?  Or, garage door opener (FOR INHOME USE) remote?  Why have
>>> all these numerous little *specialized* boxes when they are all just
>>> *instances* of the same sort of "user interface"!  Why have to keep
>>> track of them and maintain them?  ("Oh, crap!  I left the remote
>>> for the irrigation controller in the dining room...")
>>
>> We only use remotes where it makes sense. TV, radio, VCR/DVD combo,
>> garage door openers. In the winter also for Christmas lights. That's
>> pretty much it. I suppose one can pool all that into a smart phone app
>> but since we don't have smart phones that won't work.
> 
> I conceded the (wall mounted) control panels to her so she has a
> place to go to "do things" (interact with the automation:  change
> the temperature in the house, alter the watering criteria for the
> yard, check the outdoor temperature/humidity/rainfall, etc.)
> 
> The other things will be controlled by speech and/or a *worn* (lapel)
> "gesture panel".  I figure it is something that "you'll get used to"
> over time.  Just like it took time to get used to NOT having to get
> up to change TV channels; not having to press the clutch to shift;
> etc.
> 

I still have to press a clutch. Sometimes the old things are simply better.

[...]

> 
>>> This year, they replaced the gas *mains* in the neighborhood.  Again,
>>> without digging up the streets.  (This was actually REALLY amazing!)
>>> When you look at the "solutions" they've employed, it gives you a
>>> better understanding of where the cost issues are in these problem
>>> domains.  Things that you might not have considered, otherwise.  Or,
>>> may have *mis*diagnosed in your ignorance.
>>
>> I do this kind of thinking all the time, comes with my job. The EE stuff
>> is only to solve a problem from a different world. Aerospace,
>> industrial, medical, whatever. Got to wear many hats as a consultant.
> 
> Yup.  And, if you are like me, you seek out *new* application
> domains instead of sitting in a single "comfort spot" year after
> year.  I.e., "always learning", experiencing new things, etc.
> 

Those are the out-of-the-blue proposals I sometimes write.

[...]

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 02:47 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> - 2013-07-21 08:05 -0500
    Re: Cutting panels Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2013-07-21 10:38 -0400
      Re: Cutting panels "Carl Ijames" <carl.ijames@nonono.verizon.net> - 2013-07-21 12:36 -0400
        Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 09:48 -0700
          Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:29 -0700
            Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 14:10 -0700
              Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:23 -0700
          Re: Cutting panels Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 21:04 +0000
            Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 15:07 -0700
              Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 16:35 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 17:11 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:27 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-23 21:50 -0500
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:24 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-24 09:09 +0000
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-24 16:02 -0700
          Re: Cutting panels hamilton <hamilton@nothere.com> - 2013-07-21 16:52 -0600
            Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 17:13 -0700
        Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 12:35 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels amdx <nojunk@knology.net> - 2013-07-21 09:54 -0500
    Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 09:32 -0700
      Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:36 -0700
        Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 14:04 -0700
    Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:14 -0700
      Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 13:26 -0700
        Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-21 14:06 -0700
          Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 16:08 -0700
            Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Rich Webb <webb.ra@example.net> - 2013-07-21 19:42 -0400
              Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:45 -0700
            Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-22 07:51 +0000
            Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-07-23 05:57 -0700
              Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 14:46 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Lancaster <don@tinaja.com> - 2013-07-23 16:41 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-07-23 17:21 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-24 09:26 +0000
                Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 12:11 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-25 16:04 -0400
                Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 13:03 -0700
          Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 13:40 +0000
            Re: Cutting panels [solved?] Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-23 07:38 -0700
      Re: Cutting panels [solved?]/summary Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-29 15:18 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels andrews@sdf.lonestar.org - 2013-07-21 12:45 -0700
    Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 19:17 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-21 19:45 -0400
    Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 17:07 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels Peter Bennett <peterbb@somewhere.invalid> - 2013-07-21 16:57 -0700
    Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 20:58 -0700
      Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-21 21:02 -0700
      Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-22 09:20 -0700
        Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 12:15 -0700
          Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-22 16:17 -0700
            Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 18:52 -0700
              Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 14:00 +0000
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 15:13 -0700
              Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-23 07:09 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Charlie E. <edmondson@ieee.org> - 2013-07-23 10:03 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:59 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 15:54 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-24 13:09 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-24 15:51 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-26 09:13 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-26 11:35 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-26 12:06 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-26 19:44 +0000
                Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-26 22:21 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-27 08:12 +0000
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-26 13:42 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-26 18:50 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-26 22:49 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-27 00:53 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-27 10:16 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-26 23:52 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-27 17:36 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-28 09:22 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-28 12:31 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-07-28 13:48 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-28 14:20 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-28 16:35 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-28 17:39 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-28 19:38 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-29 11:15 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-29 16:30 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-29 17:38 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-29 21:45 -0700
                Re: Cutting panels Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-07-30 12:20 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2013-07-21 21:38 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-22 00:39 -0500
    Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 01:39 -0700
      Re: Cutting panels Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-22 19:09 -0500
        Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 20:10 -0700
          Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 14:07 +0000
  Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-22 18:33 +0100
    Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-22 13:44 -0400
    Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-22 19:00 -0700
      Re: Cutting panels Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> - 2013-07-23 10:09 +0000
      Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 11:45 +0100
        Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 13:46 +0100
          Re: Cutting panels 0bama <0B@nocontrast.org> - 2013-07-23 13:06 +0000
            Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 22:19 +0100
              Re: Cutting panels 0bama <0B@nocontrast.org> - 2013-07-24 08:05 +0000
        Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-23 10:07 -0400
          Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 01:26 -0700
    Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 14:18 +0000
      Re: Cutting panels Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2013-07-23 11:38 -0400
        Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-23 22:32 +0100
          Re: Cutting panels Frank Miles <fpm@u.washington.edu> - 2013-07-23 21:37 +0000
      Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:16 -0700
        Re: Cutting panels Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2013-07-24 10:37 +0100
          Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-25 01:27 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels Gonadicus <gonadicus@no_spam.com> - 2013-07-23 12:46 +0800
  Re: Cutting panels sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2013-07-23 04:58 -0700
    Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 16:13 -0700
  Re: Cutting panels Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2013-07-23 13:25 +0000
    Re: Cutting panels Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-07-23 21:42 -0700

csiph-web