jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:23 am

I noticed that I was only using 712MB RAM out of 1.23GB. So I opened the pc, unplugged it and put my antistatic wrist stap thingy on. I pulled out both peices 1x 1GB 1x 256MB and placed them back.

I hear a 2 second beeeep every 5 or so seconds. No life from the moniter or anything else.

AHH! I cry and turn it back on. Beeep  Sad

I try and take the 256 out. Beeeep !!!

I take the 1GB out and put 256 Back - Loads, slowly but loads  Sad

Ok weird I say...

I put the 1GB back ... Beeeep!

What is happening I have played musical chairs with my peices and swapped them around more than a footballs team formation!
I doubt this is static damage because I had my band on tightly and attached to the metal casing around the side with the computer disscontected psyically from the mains?!

Anyone come up with a magical key code !! Please!
 
Go3Team
Posts: 3156
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 1:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:26 am

Ditch the 1GB and purchase another. They do go bad.
Yay Pudding!
 
Thom@s
Posts: 11674
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 2:03 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:27 am

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Thread starter):
RAM Disaster!



Thom@s
"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12422
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:28 am

Are you sure your computer or it's motherboard can use that volume of RAM? Maybe you are using the wrong type or a mismatch of size or type of RAM? You should check your computer's or motherboards manual or go online as to them and check it out.
 
TedTAce
Posts: 9098
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:31 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:33 am

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Thread starter):
I noticed that I was only using 712MB RAM out of 1.23GB

The first thought I have is WTF?

But... How did you determine you were 'only' using 712?
This space intentionally left blank
 
jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:37 am

I have had it for couple of months and I have a 1Gb and a 256Mb

Thanks for the pic by the way  Smile Need cheering up

I saw the 712 or what ever RAM because my games were a little slower and I checked by right clicking on my computer
 
WSOY
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:40 am

What's your mainboard (motherboard)?
"Nukkuessa tulee nälkä" (Nipsu)
 
jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:45 am

Asus MX- ******

Its been fine for months until tonight

The RAM was from crucial. Am I likley to get a refund lol worth a try  Smile
 
WSOY
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:52 am

Well if you first noticed a sudden decrease in capacity, and then the death on your arms so to say, you may have a piece that's entitled to a warranty replacement.
"Nukkuessa tulee nälkä" (Nipsu)
 
jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:53 am

Yea! I'll try, after all what have I got to loose?

Famus last words  Smile
 
Thom@s
Posts: 11674
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2000 2:03 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 6:07 am

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Reply 9):
Yea! I'll try, after all what have I got to loose?

Famus last words

By who, someone about to be shot by the spelling and grammar police?  

Thom@s

[Edited 2007-05-08 23:07:57]
"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
 
jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 6:13 am

Oh! I am having a broadband problem I spoke to Virgin and were getting a new one Saturday. As long as we don't get charged for "lying" I did the Google spellcheck and it didn't register sorry!
 
FLYtoEGCC
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:56 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 12:36 pm

Quote:
So I opened the pc, unplugged it and put my antistatic wrist stap thingy on.

Sorry if this is slightly insulting your intelligence, but when you unplugged your computer you didn't then connect the anti-static strap to the case, did you? If so, it would have been useless because the case itself wouldn't have been earthed. In which case, when you pulled the sticks of RAM out, you could have static-damaged them even if there was nothing wrong with them previously. I normally connect my anti-static strap to something metal like a radiator, or the case itself but with the lead plugged into the wall socket with the switch off.

Does your motherboard have an on-board graphics display adaptor? From what you say, if you've got 1.23GB of RAM but the system is only showing 712MB, it sounds like you might have an on-board 512MB graphics adaptor and therefore the 712MB reading will be quite correct - this is effectively what remains after the system has "used" 512MB for the display adaptor. As an example, I have a laptop with 512MB RAM but an integrated 128MB display adaptor and when I look under system properties the amount of RAM is listed as 384MB. The same principle may well apply to your system.

Some newer motherboards seem to require a fair old shove to get the RAM seated properly, the slots can be quite tight. It sounds plausible that you may have removed the RAM in good condition, put it back in and either static-damaged it or not seated it properly. Either way, you could try and get a replacement from Crucial - a reputable company like that shouldn't give you too many problems.
Come fly with me, let's fly, let's fly away...
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 1:22 pm

Quoting FLYtoEGCC (Reply 12):
Some newer motherboards seem to require a fair old shove to get the RAM seated properly, the slots can be quite tight. It sounds plausible that you may have removed the RAM in good condition, put it back in and either static-damaged it or not seated it properly. Either way, you could try and get a replacement from Crucial - a reputable company like that shouldn't give you too many problems.

It's actually fairly hard to statically damage the RAM --- I doubt you did that. The biggest problem is not properly installing the Rams (or doing something stupid like putting them in backwards. The Sockets are keyed, some of them have clips and some times the RAMS come down at an angle. I would say get a good light and look at the RAMS carefully to make sure they are in proper. If you can find someone who has pushed RAMS into the socket before use them as maybe you are just not using the right force/technique. Sometimes people who don't install RAMS too often don't do it properly, mostly because they are afraid of damaging the socket, or they think the RAM goes in a different way than it does.

You might want to first try installing the 1GB one and see if you can get that to work.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 1:22 pm

Quoting FLYtoEGCC (Reply 12):
Sorry if this is slightly insulting your intelligence, but when you unplugged your computer you didn't then connect the anti-static strap to the case, did you? If so, it would have been useless because the case itself wouldn't have been earthed. In which case, when you pulled the sticks of RAM out, you could have static-damaged them even if there was nothing wrong with them previously. I normally connect my anti-static strap to something metal like a radiator, or the case itself but with the lead plugged into the wall socket with the switch off.

You're making a mistake yourself if you're connecting the strap to something other than the reference potential of the device you're trying to protect.

The only thing relevant here is whether your body has the same potential as the computer and the RAM modules - it is almost completely irrelevant whether anything is actually in contact with earth.

Connecting the strap to a radiator and having the computer "floating" or connected to a different potential actually increases the risk of you frying the chips!
 
SJCRRPAX
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:29 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 1:28 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 14):
You're making a mistake yourself if you're connecting the strap to something other than the reference potential of the device you're trying to protect.

Klaus is correct. It is easy to be careless when you are working with other peoples money, but I have installed hundreds of RAM modules at work and I never use the strap, and I have never damaged a RAM. Don't tell my boss though.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 1:42 pm

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 15):
It is easy to be careless when you are working with other peoples money, but I have installed hundreds of RAM modules at work and I never use the strap, and I have never damaged a RAM. Don't tell my boss though.

I don't even own one and have never damaged anything.

But you need to be very much aware of the issue and very consistent in proper procedures, such as always making sure potential equalization is taken care of, even and especially when interrupting your work. Permanent awareness of the risks is a must, including good self-observation in even minor details while handling delicate electronics.
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 2:32 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 16):
I don't even own one and have never damaged anything.

Come on Klaus, your making it out for something its not....not your usual anal self.

Proper procedure is grounding yourself strap or not. anyways, its either a bad memory or combination on the mb or mb itself.

does it work fine with the old memory and is the old cpu/mb/os newer than win 98... if so, return the freekin bastard memory.

Also you may be able to download a program that will test each individual item, although i take them with a grain of salt...they generally will tell narrow down the issue nicely
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 2:43 pm

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 18):
Proper procedure is grounding yourself strap or not.

No. That is exactly wrong!

As with many other things, semi-knowledge is more dangerous than no knowledge at all!

Grounding yourself and then handling non-grounded equipment will significantly increase the risk of potential differences being equalized exactly when you're touching the device in question and when it can cause the greatest damage.

The objective is to minimize potential differences between yourself and the computer, regardless whether that common potential is equal to ground (preferred) or not (requiring additional caution, but normally not a problem).
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 3:06 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 16):
I don't even own one and have never damaged anything.

I am just hoping that Klaus is right on this!! That this computer works suggests he might be. Big grin And when was he wrong the last time? Big grin  Big grin
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 3:12 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 19):
The objective is to minimize potential differences between yourself and the computer

Klaus, dont even start on this one. your body can hold far greater charge than the memory ever can. I was actually agreeing with you at first but if you choose to take the direction that you are taking then you are just fighting for no other reason than to fight.
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 3:36 pm

First and only RAM rule, learned from experience.

DON'T MIX AND MATCH!

If and when I upgrade RAM, I get new chips from the same manufacturer and remove the old one. Avoids possible future hassles.
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 3:55 pm

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
DON'T MIX AND MATCH!

there are ways around this, but they are a biatch...so I completly agree with you on type and hell even size.
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 3:57 pm

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
DON'T MIX AND MATCH!

I have never had any OTHER problems lol

I'm running now on the orginal 2x 256 MB I lukily found in my draw.
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 4:02 pm

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Reply 24):
I have never had any OTHER problems lol

I could give you a list of issues... the problem is that if you had 100 machines all identical 30 will have issues while the other 70 will be fine with mixing.

Thats actually pretty close to the statistics with large operations, again ways around it but it still occurs.

Edited..I think im actually confirming your post.

[Edited 2007-05-09 09:03:20]
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
FLYtoEGCC
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:56 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 5:50 pm

You learn something new every day... cheers, Klaus!

(Although I'm yet to fry anything electronic the way I've been doing it... but fair point!  Smile )
Come fly with me, let's fly, let's fly away...
 
airbusA346
Posts: 7284
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:05 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 6:33 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 19):

I have been told just to touch the case. Simple really, no need to spend £6 on a strap.

Tom.
Tom Walker '086' First Officer of a A318/A319 for Air Lambert - Hours Flown: 17 hour 05 minutes (last updated 24/12/05).
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Crew
Posts: 11182
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 9:26 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 16):
I don't even own one and have never damaged anything.

Neither do I. I usually sit on my carpeted floor changing computer parts  Smile
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Wed May 09, 2007 9:48 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 20):
I am just hoping that Klaus is right on this!! That this computer works suggests he might be. And when was he wrong the last time?

I could tell you... but then I'd have to zap your memory if I did...!   

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 21):
Klaus, dont even start on this one. your body can hold far greater charge than the memory ever can.

You're confusing related but separate issues.

The amount of charge depends on both the relative potential level and the size of the body in question.

No potential difference - no relative charge.
More mass and surface on either or both sides - more charge.
More charge and better conductivity (sweaty hands, for instance) - more current on discharging.

The size of the charge influences the total amount of energy that would be discharged when the different bodies get into contact (you and the computer, you and the memory modules).

But any current flowing at all requires that there was a potential difference. Apart from really extreme cases, the absolute potential has little relevance as long as you keep any differences low.

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 21):
I was actually agreeing with you at first but if you choose to take the direction that you are taking then you are just fighting for no other reason than to fight.

I just think you made a mistake above and I'm trying to correct that. Hurt feelings can be repaired. Fried electronics belonging to readers of this forum can't be.

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
First and only RAM rule, learned from experience.

DON'T MIX AND MATCH!

If and when I upgrade RAM, I get new chips from the same manufacturer and remove the old one. Avoids possible future hassles.

That's the wrong place to look. I've got three separately bought and differently sized pairs of RAM modules in my PowerMac G5 and no problems whatsoever.

The actual issue is whether the modules are a) of decent quality at all and b) fit the requirements of the installation (access times etc.).

Get good modules with the proper specifications and you shouldn't have a problem.

Unfortunately, however, some motherboards may be more critical than others. And, of course, overclocking will inevitably increase the quality demands and lower the stability of the system.

In case of a PC you may need to check (and in rare cases even change) the RAM timing setup in the BIOS. But do not tamper with those settings unless you know what you're doing!

Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 27):
I have been told just to touch the case. Simple really, no need to spend £6 on a strap.

Exactly. Always make sure to equalize the potential before touching any sensitive parts. If the common potential can be grounded on top of that (by connecting the computer's ground to a reference ground after disconnecting the power plug), all the better.

But the issue is actually more complicated than the presumable catch-all "safety strap" tries to suggest; When used incorrectly, it will do more harm than good.

[Edited 2007-05-09 14:50:51]
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 12:04 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 28):
You're confusing related but separate issues.

First your confusing issues

In this case grounding yourself to the case is proper procedure and properly grounding the case is proper procedure. What you have been implying is that we introduce variables that can not be predicted, ie not properly grounding the case/rack etc and then implying that we never should ground ever.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 28):
The amount of charge depends on both the relative potential level and the size of the body in question.

Second, no s shirlock. That was never argued.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
As with many other things, semi-knowledge is more dangerous than no knowledge at all, you should never gound an aircraft before fueling!

Signed,
Klaus
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 12:35 am

ITS WORKING!!!

I don't know what happened but I tried it today and its working like normal ?!

Computers ay ? Who'd av em !

Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 27):
I usually sit on my carpeted floor changing computer parts

Yup join the club

I normally sit on a pillow though Big grin
 
ORFflyer
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:42 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 12:40 am

I work for a contractor that installs and maintains the IT networks on the ships of the US Military Sealift Command. (over 135 ships) We have over 45 technicians working on ships all over the world, and NEVER has any of them used a strap. We do have Static Dissapative Tile (SDT) on the floors of our lab, but unless they are in our lab, all they do is touch the case to "discharge" themselves. (mentioned by AirbusA346 earlier in the thread)

I'm not IT smart at all - just passing along what goes on here.  biggrin 
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 12:52 am

Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 31):
discharge" themselves

and the case is grounded therefore your grounded.


Edited, those tiles are gounded and your supposed to wear a shoe strap that grounds you to those tiles...just another tool to ground.

[Edited 2007-05-09 17:58:22]
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
ORFflyer
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:42 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 1:53 am

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 32):
those tiles are gounded and your supposed to wear a shoe strap that grounds you to those tiles...just another tool to ground.

According to the install manufacture, the shoe straps are not necessary. The grounding of the tiles is accomplished via a grid work of copper banding strips under the tile that is connected to the building's structural steel. Allegedly, simply standing on the tile is all you need....
 
David L
Posts: 8551
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 2:47 am

Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 31):
all they do is touch the case to "discharge" themselves. (mentioned by AirbusA346 earlier in the thread)

Honourably?

But, seriously, all I've ever done is equalise any potential difference by touching the chassis first and I've never... Nah, I'm not going to tempt fate.
 
WSOY
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 4:55 am

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Reply 30):
ITS WORKING!!!

I don't know what happened but I tried it today and its working like normal ?!

You've got a fluke part. It really needs to be replaced.

-------

On overview to ESD procedures can be found here

How and why does the charge build up on people? Check this one out as well.


Klaus, I don't think the mass matters at all, but the surface area and the conductivity of the charged parts. Parts with high conductivity can deliver their charge fast and cause more damage. When any charges build up they'll try to equalize through the dielectric material between them (even a vacuum does the job).
If you look at the basic diagram of the working of the capacitor you'll see that the mass of the plate area is insignificant.





The human body forms a capacitor against the "ground" and the energy that has become stored in that capacitor in "engineered environments" by triboelectric phenomena may discharge at an inconvenient time when dealing with static sensitive parts. If you supply enough charged ions in the air, the charge will eventually dissipate on itself. Moist air will do as well.
"Nukkuessa tulee nälkä" (Nipsu)
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 5:13 am

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 17):
Come on Klaus, your making it out for something its not....not your usual anal self.

Proper procedure is grounding yourself strap or not.



Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 29):
First your confusing issues

No, I'm not. If you're getting rude with others, at least be correct about the substance!

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 29):
In this case grounding yourself to the case is proper procedure and properly grounding the case is proper procedure. What you have been implying is that we introduce variables that can not be predicted, ie not properly grounding the case/rack etc and then implying that we never should ground ever.

What are you on about?

Only grounding yourself without taking care the serviced components are equalized to the same potential is outright reckless and increases your risk of damage.

On the other hand equalizing your potential with the one of the components in a controlled manner is generally safe since it removes the possibility of a discharge between you and the more sensitive parts.


Just vaguely remembering that you should ground yourself without being aware that that is only any good if the computer is at the same potential (grounded as well) is less than half of the story - and a perfect illustration how incomplete knowledge without an insight into the context can be dangerous.

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 29):
Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
As with many other things, semi-knowledge is more dangerous than no knowledge at all, you should never gound an aircraft before fueling!
Signed,
Klaus

Yay! Falsify quotes if all else has failed you!  crazy 

The same principles apply there as anywhere else, by the way - the potential difference is key. You may notice that airborne refueling doesn't require electrical grounding - only relative equalization of potential.

Ground potential only comes into it where an uncontrolled equalization of potential is a risk. As it would be with aircraft refueling, hence both the aircraft and the refueling truck needing to be equalized with ground potential.

Servicing a computer on a desk makes ground potential a secondary concern unless ground potential it is exposed in close proximity to the working area, making an uncontrolled discharge likely.


I wouldn't recommend doing that on a carpet, by the way, since many of those can lead to buildup of friction static.
 
jamesbaldwyn
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 12:04 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 5:39 am

Talk about a debate!!

Hot stuff Big grin

Quoting WSOY (Reply 35):
You've got a fluke part. It really needs to be replaced.

Story of my life Big grin

I am getting a new motherboard and processer etc so I will get new RAM too
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 5:53 am

Quoting WSOY (Reply 35):
You've got a fluke part. It really needs to be replaced.

Maybe... maybe not... in many cases corroded or mechanically defective sockets or secondary influences can cause such effects.

But I certainly would want to find out whether the module was in fact reliable for the duration. Memory-related defects are among the most destructive as they can indirectly lead to severe data loss (even corrupting the harddisk if you're unfortunate).

It is one of the reasons why I would never buy "bargain" RAM if it can be avoided.

Quoting WSOY (Reply 35):
Klaus, I don't think the mass matters at all, but the surface area and the conductivity of the charged parts.

Without recapitulating everything in detail I still think it does, even if for practical purposes in most real-life situations the surface area and the properties of the dielectric would probably be dominant.
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 7:16 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 36):
Yay! Falsify quotes if all else has failed you!

Yup, for humor purposes and to make a small point..

Quoting Klaus (Reply 36):
Only grounding yourself without taking care the serviced components are equalized to the same potential is outright reckless and increases your risk of damage.

Yup and I was agreeing with you initially, but when you jumped on me in a non professional manor initially without being completely thorough...well all bets are off.

My main point is there are four separate items in this scenario.

1, the person
2, the computer
3, the ram
4, earth ground

Assumptions are the ram has a zero charge (earth ground) out of the antistatic bag. The person has a charge greater than zero. The computer is at or near zero if it was plugged in or otherwise grounded.

If a person unplugs a computer and the computer is no longer grounded and the person builds up charge and then touches the metal case of the computer, the two become equal but above a zero charge. Now we introduce the zero charged memory and the second we touch the memory we could fry it do to the difference in charge but we will not damage the individual components within the computer.

Overall I dont always agree with you, but I do respect your intelligence. Both of us were saying the same thing yet different things at the same time. The difference was I was stating we need to zero out charge to earth ground to maintain a controlled predictable environment, while you were stating it is only necessary to equalize between two component.

Agreed?
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
WSOY
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Thu May 10, 2007 8:39 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
Quoting WSOY (Reply 35):
Klaus, I don't think the mass matters at all, but the surface area and the conductivity of the charged parts.

Without recapitulating everything in detail I still think it does

The textbooks don't seem to agree well with you, nevertheless. Feel free to produce a quote.

-------

Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
It is one of the reasons why I would never buy "bargain" RAM if it can be avoided.

I'm agreeing here. The "bottom of the barrel" will contain a large number of marginal parts.

----------

Quoting Klaus (Reply 38):
Maybe... maybe not... in many cases corroded or mechanically defective sockets or secondary influences can cause such effects.

I'm not seeing these at all. The connection area is normally gold over nickel.

-----------

One more thing about the earth strap: there should always be a resistance of about 1 megaohm in series with the lead. This in order to avoid electrocution through the wrist band and a piece of defective equipment.

[Edited 2007-05-10 13:58:24]
"Nukkuessa tulee nälkä" (Nipsu)
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Fri May 11, 2007 9:31 am

Since we kinda went off topic but not really.

Quoting FLYtoEGCC (Reply 12):
Sorry if this is slightly insulting your intelligence, but when you unplugged your computer you didn't then connect the anti-static strap to the case, did you? If so, it would have been useless because the case itself wouldn't have been earthed. In which case, when you pulled the sticks of RAM out, you could have static-damaged them even if there was nothing wrong with them previously. I normally connect my anti-static strap to something metal like a radiator, or the case itself but with the lead plugged into the wall socket with the switch off.

Does your motherboard have an on-board graphics display adaptor? From what you say, if you've got 1.23GB of RAM but the system is only showing 712MB, it sounds like you might have an on-board 512MB graphics adaptor and therefore the 712MB reading will be quite correct - this is effectively what remains after the system has "used" 512MB for the display adaptor. As an example, I have a laptop with 512MB RAM but an integrated 128MB display adaptor and when I look under system properties the amount of RAM is listed as 384MB. The same principle may well apply to your system.

Some newer motherboards seem to require a fair old shove to get the RAM seated properly, the slots can be quite tight. It sounds plausible that you may have removed the RAM in good condition, put it back in and either static-damaged it or not seated it properly. Either way, you could try and get a replacement from Crucial - a reputable company like that shouldn't give you too many problems.

I agree with everything as long as you ground the case as well by either touching it or not. And this is where Klaus was correct with differential

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Reply 30):
ITS WORKING!!!

Download a program that test the devices. Sometimes you can get this program from the manufacturers website.

Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 33):
shoe straps are not necessary

Unless your shoes are conductive, you will need a way to discharge your body. Granted more than likely everything in that room is grounded tables, chairs but to be 100% Anal, remain grounded at all times.

Quoting WSOY (Reply 40):
be a resistance

Personal safety is often forgotten.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 36):
The same principles apply there as anywhere else, by the way - the potential difference is key. You may notice that airborne refueling doesn't require electrical grounding - only relative equalization of potential.

Ground potential only comes into it where an uncontrolled equalization of potential is a risk. As it would be with aircraft refueling, hence both the aircraft and the refueling truck needing to be equalized with ground potential.

Absolutely agree Klaus with both statements.

And Finally, Klaus, I was in a pretty bad mood when I entered in this thread. I apologize for coming off as an ass. I could have rephrased my point of view early on with my last post and I'm sure that we would have quickly come to a mutual agreement.
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Fri May 11, 2007 6:08 pm

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 41):
And Finally, Klaus, I was in a pretty bad mood when I entered in this thread. I apologize for coming off as an ass. I could have rephrased my point of view early on with my last post and I'm sure that we would have quickly come to a mutual agreement.

Gladly accepted and any lingering offense erased.

Quoting WSOY (Reply 40):
The textbooks don't seem to agree well with you, nevertheless. Feel free to produce a quote.

Engineering textbooks almost always ignore effects which are normally too small to be noticed, such as the elasticity of a conductor relative to charge. Or the skin effect when the topic at hand is just about low-frequency signals.

Quoting WSOY (Reply 40):
One more thing about the earth strap: there should always be a resistance of about 1 megaohm in series with the lead. This in order to avoid electrocution through the wrist band and a piece of defective equipment.

I'm not so sure about the latter - when you're wearing a wrist strap on one arm and touching a defective device which isn't equalized to reference potential with the other hand, the discharge will run through that hand, through your heart and finally through the wrist strap to ground.

In that case you would have been better off not wearing the wrist strap in the first place!
Both for your sake and for the device,

A wrist strap is only a good idea when all other precautions are taken at the same time as well - if that's not the case it will only make matters worse.
 
WSOY
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Fri May 11, 2007 7:36 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 42):
Quoting WSOY (Reply 40):
The textbooks don't seem to agree well with you, nevertheless. Feel free to produce a quote.

Engineering textbooks almost always ignore effects which are normally too small to be noticed, such as the elasticity of a conductor relative to charge. Or the skin effect when the topic at hand is just about low-frequency signals.

I meant textbooks covering the theory of electrostatics. Let's briefly recall what you wrote:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 28):
You're confusing related but separate issues.

The amount of charge depends on both the relative potential level and the size of the body in question.

No potential difference - no relative charge.
More mass and surface on either or both sides - more charge.

That does not sound to me like a thing "too small to be noticed", does it? Why should there be any effect on mass vs charge at all, and, where is your quote? I'm just curious about this.

As I pointed out earlier, in the basic diagram of the working of the capacitor you could make the plates more massive, but the capacitance would stay just the same as it is determined by the area of and distance between the plates, and by the dielectric properties of the material between the plates. Therefore the charge would also remain the same.
"Nukkuessa tulee nälkä" (Nipsu)
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Sat May 12, 2007 2:28 am

Quoting WSOY (Reply 43):
That does not sound to me like a thing "too small to be noticed", does it? Why should there be any effect on mass vs charge at all, and, where is your quote? I'm just curious about this.



Quoting WSOY (Reply 43):
Therefore the charge would also remain the same.

Disclaimer, I dont have time to really think this through so please, please correct and or clarify my points

Almost the same basic idea, but think of two water hoses. A big one and a small one and two buckets a big one and a small one but the same vertical hight.

Two basic factors, pressure and flow(volume), if all things being equal, the pressure will be the same between the two hoses but the amount being pushed through is far greater. In this particular somewhat inaccurate comparison, voltage is the pressure, while capacitance is the volume.

On the bucket, both hold a difference capacity but the pressure on the sides at the respective distance from bottom will be the same. But if you take two buckets of the same volume but now with different hights, the bottom of the taller one will have a higher pressure (change in voltage) and that can lead to the container being destroyed (if all things are equal). Think of two dams, it doesnt matter the size of the lake behind it, but the pressure against the damn itself and that is mostly dictated by the depth not the volume of the lake.
if a particular circuit can handle a 24v difference between and - then as long as long as the voltage is changed simultaniously or as close to it as possible the difference of 24 remains the same therefore to the individual componant, no change has occured. What klaus is saying I think, is that it doesnt matter if you continue to raise as long as the the opposite side is raised at the same time. Think of those buckets or dams. It doesnt matter if you raise the volume as long as the volume is not changing vertical hight (you will maintain the difference in voltage).



Now we enter into grounding with what is stated above, grounding maintains that said difference as a reference point be it the earth, an airplane, the space station, mars..

[Edited 2007-05-11 19:30:45]
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Mon May 14, 2007 4:06 am

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 44):
What klaus is saying I think, is that it doesnt matter if you continue to raise as long as the the opposite side is raised at the same time.

Pretty much, yeah. But I think the remaining disagreement is not about that aspect.

It's more about the question whether the size of a water tank within the installation has an influence on relative pressures when an imbalance is being introduced.

And without researching this through to the end, I'm pretty sure it does.

Although in engineering theory water is usually assumed to be incompressible, it actually can be compressed, albeit to a much smaller degree than any gas can be (hence the gas component in many shock absorbers / oscillation dampers - it contributes most of the "spring" effect required for proper operation).

In a similar way a conductor such as copper is usually thought of as being inelastic towards electricity, but that is a simplification as well. The electron gas within the conductor should still exhibit a residual compressibility, which should translate into some influence on the charge a body can hold (especially if it's much less than an ideal conductor).

This is still mostly conjecture based on memory, and any physicist is welcome to comment.
 
RichPhitzwell
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:19 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Mon May 14, 2007 7:05 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 45):
It's more about the question whether the size of a water tank within the installation has an influence on relative pressures when an imbalance is being introduced.

I believe you are correct, when initially filling a dam, they monitor closely to insure the rise in water level is not too drastic or the damn could fail. Same could be said about water pipes, if running water and a sudden stop occurs a water hammer will occur which could damage pipes, solder joints, etc. Basically the same as rapidly changing voltage difference between the negative and positive side.

This could turn out to be a fun conversation.
Nonav.com kinda like Whiners except the lights are on and the pimps been paid
 
WSOY
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Mon May 14, 2007 9:00 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 45):
This is still mostly conjecture based on memory, and any physicist is welcome to comment.

Does this also apply to the "the capacitor's mass effects its charge" bit as well? Could a brief look on the theory before you set off writing from memory perhaps save everyone's time?
"Nukkuessa tulee nälkä" (Nipsu)
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: RAM Disaster!

Mon May 14, 2007 9:08 pm

Quoting WSOY (Reply 47):
Does this also apply to the "the capacitor's mass effects its charge" bit as well?

Yes.

With a good conductor as electrode material the effect would be extremely small relative to the surface effects and the one of the dielectric, but it should be there.

Not large enough to come even close to the manufacturing variations of real-world capacitors (especially as those keep the masses involved as small as possible), but the physical basics would suggest the effect should still exist.
 
WSOY
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:24 pm

RE: RAM Disaster!

Mon May 14, 2007 9:17 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 48):
but the physical basics would suggest the effect should still exist.

Yes, thank you but I was asking if that was your personal memorized physics, or the one in general use, since you've not yet been able to produce the quotation from a standard physics source.
"Nukkuessa tulee nälkä" (Nipsu)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DIRECTFLT, PanzerPowner, petertenthije and 6 guests