Jos Okhuijsen wrote:
> Do i take it you have something against fuseble links?
Not really, just against Tefzel insulated wire as a fusible link verses what you
should use, or in an application where only a 25-cent fuse is needed. Tefzel
can explode violently.
> Yes, it will explode. So will fuses, circuit breakers, switches, anything
> if you feed sufficient current through them.
Just moments ago I fed several hundred amps across a 25A automotive blade fuse.
No fun! It faintly but audibly clicked; the translucent plastic is not even
discolored. How do I make it explode?
> No, fusable links do not replace circuits breakers, but can do a very good
> job in fire protection, especially in case of a crash.
Actually fusible links do replace CB's, in high-current apps due to relative
cost.
I don't understand the safety problem, if you're talking a wire-type fusible
link vs. a fuse or CB. Interesting, though, that auto mfrs are tending toward
battery terminal clamps which are also a fusible link. It would be possible,
though more likely in a metal airplane, where a shorted battery cable as
a result of a crash could start a fire not otherwise occurring. Such technology
hasn't reached production airplanes yet.
> There is no such thing as response time,
It's rather called the time/current curve, published for all circuit protection
devices, and it governs the design selection among fuses vs. fusible links, vs.
CB's. You could win a bet from many people by insisting they can't pop a 5A
breaker with 6 amps. They won't see a need to wait out the time it will
probably
take to do so.
Regards,
Fred F.
|