Current Switch

Does it still work?

The link URL is "http://pbt-s%20-%20crompton%20instruments/"

I suspect the rest of us all get something like this:

D.C. Low Voltage Monitor Relays PBT/S -24/240 -12/24, DC Millivolts DIN-rail mounted

Introduction

These units monitor a voltage of 50, 75 or 150 mV, e.g. from a standard current shunt, and operates one of two relays if the voltage goes above or below set levels. Front panel controls allow selection of:

�� under- and over-voltage trip levels Umax, Umin

�� nominal rated voltage of 50, 75 or 100 mV (Uin)

�� time delay before a trip triggers a relay response.

LEDs indicate power on and trip status. Two changeover, volt-free relays are fitted.

Two types are available - a 12/24 unit powered from 12-24V D.C and a 24/240 unit powered from 24V-240V A.C or D.C.

These instructions contain important safety information. Please read them thoroughly before commissioning, operating or maintenance of the

Just I downloaded now & posting a part of that PDF for your info. www.energy.te.com, www.crompton-instruments.com

JohnDG, did you finally succeed in getting the PDF file? If not, PM me your mail ID, I will send you the file. It is a very nice/good product/design.

The point is that your link did not work. I copied the text of your link onto my post, then added the correct target URL so that it opened the .pdf (rather than giving an error message, of which I showed a screen-shot). If you examine the targets of our two links you will see the difference.

I suspect that the link in your post works on your machine (and only on your machine) because it is pointing at a copy of the .pdf which you have already downloaded onto your HDD. If you can, try your link on another PC.

What rubbish. I don't question your right to have your opinion. You are most welcome, RAMConsult.

This is an engineering site, not a political science site. While as engineers we may differ on how an answer is derived, we tend to be bound by the same set of rules while we seek those answers.

Opinions are fine when there is a dearth of hard facts to point to a clear answer, but uninformed random responses that show little hard engineering content do little to further CR4's reputation as a reliable source of information. We should also remember that all of our postings here are indelibly captured on the web for all the world to see, and I for one, want to do my best to properly support the folks who provide this forum.

Just my opinion, and you are certainly entitled to yours. Pontification over, time for tea.