Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!news.Brown.EDU!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!fs1.ee.ubc.ca!niallp
From: niallp@ee.ubc.ca (niall parker)
Subject: Re: Electrostatic Autopilots
Message-ID: <1993Mar5.195408.967@ee.ubc.ca>
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
References: <1n3hvnINNequ@gap.caltech.edu> <1993Mar4.031815.29240@ee.ubc.ca> <1993Mar5.064759.15138@netcom.com>
Distribution: world,local
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1993 19:54:08 GMT
Lines: 36

In article <1993Mar5.064759.15138@netcom.com> park@netcom.com (Bill Park) writes:
>In article <1993Mar4.031815.29240@ee.ubc.ca> niallp@ee.ubc.ca (niall
>parker) writes:
>
>> Has anyone considered using the ion sources from smoke detectors?
>> (usually americium I think). This could be a method for your average
>> experimenter to play with the system.
>
> ....
>
>A smoke detector is hazardous, radioactive waste.
>
> ....
>
>Not the kind of thing you would want the baby to pick up and swallow!
>
>And you wouldn't want your model airplane to crash someplace where
>children could find it and handle the ion sources.
>
>Bill Park
>=========
>-- 
>Grandpaw Bill's High Technology Consulting & Live Bait, Inc.

Agreed that handling of radioactive materials requires caution!

I was thinking more along the lines of what differences there were
between the polonium antistatic sensors used before and the smoke
detector sources (both which serve to ionize air).

Anyone know which polonium isotope was used ?

-- 
- - - - - - -
Niall Parker				niallp@ee.ubc.ca
UBC Electrical Engineering	    or	VE7HEX@VE7UBC.#VANC.BC.CAN.NOAM
