Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
hi there everyone
I'm currently reading a book called "Code" by Charles Petzold which is essentially a history and overview of computer technology, quite entertainingly told. I've just read the section on telegraphs and relays and am confused by something he has written. He explains the basic principle of the telegraph, and goes on to show with some simple Ohm's Law calculations that you can't extend the length of telegraph wires indefinitely due to the loop resistance etc., hence the need for the invention of the relay. However, I am a bit puzzled by his summing-up quote for this chapter: "Regardless of the thickness of the wires and the high levels of voltage, telegraph wires simply couldn't be continued indefinitely". Now I would have thought the restriction was *exactly* due to the limitations on wire thickness and voltage (ie the practical problems with manufacturing telegraph cables and voltaic cells at that time). Or am I doing Mr.Petzold an injustice, when perhaps there was some other limiting factor ? I have read somewhere that there were problems with insulation for very long cables, is this perhaps something to do with it ? Any thoughts you may have are welcomed, best rgds griffph |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Griff" wrote However, I am a bit puzzled by his summing-up quote for this chapter: "Regardless of the thickness of the wires and the high levels of voltage, telegraph wires simply couldn't be continued indefinitely". Now I would have thought the restriction was *exactly* due to the limitations on wire thickness and voltage (ie the practical problems with manufacturing telegraph cables and voltaic cells at that time). Or am I doing Mr.Petzold an injustice, when perhaps there was some other limiting factor ? Probably due to the cumulative C and L of a long wire eventually shaping the waveform so that rise and fall profiles are smeared. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"KØHB" wrote in news:Tqslc.3830$Hs1.3291
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net: "Griff" wrote However, I am a bit puzzled by his summing-up quote for this chapter: "Regardless of the thickness of the wires and the high levels of voltage, telegraph wires simply couldn't be continued indefinitely". Now I would have thought the restriction was *exactly* due to the limitations on wire thickness and voltage (ie the practical problems with manufacturing telegraph cables and voltaic cells at that time). Or am I doing Mr.Petzold an injustice, when perhaps there was some other limiting factor ? Probably due to the cumulative C and L of a long wire eventually shaping the waveform so that rise and fall profiles are smeared. 73, de Hans, K0HB I beleive they used to add inductors to telegraph wires at intervals before they had repeaters. This seems counter-intuitive to me, as I would have thought the L was more of a problem than the C. Does anyone know the correct explanation? Alun, N3KIP |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Alun" wrote I beleive they used to add inductors to telegraph wires at intervals before they had repeaters. This seems counter-intuitive to me, as I would have thought the L was more of a problem than the C. Does anyone know the correct explanation? Makes perfect sense to me. A parallel L would cancel the distributed C. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|