Miscellaneous desk
< October 30	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	November 1 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 31

Garage door opener fault.

I have a Craftsman garage door opener - probably about 5 years old - which has two lamp sockets built into the housing. Normally, the lights come on when you open or close the door and after a minute or two they turn off automatically. There is also a control panel at the back of the garage that has a button to turn the lights on or off.

A couple of days ago, I noticed that the lights had been on all night...pressing the button on the control panel has no effect, opening or closing the door and waiting has no effect - and if I completely unplug the unit and plug it back in again, the lights come on and stay on.

Additionally, I can hear a "click" when I push the "LIGHT" button on the control panel...so evidently some kind of relay/solenoid is clicking on and off again.

Any clues as to what might be going on? Hoping I can fix it myself. SteveBaker (talk) 01:58, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could be the timer broke. Could also be it's always in the "lights always on" mode, despite the click. If all else fails you can unplug those lights and put in a new set of lights with a motion detector and timer in there instead. Tricky to point those motion detectors so they pick up all motion, though, and if the lights are under covers you will need to remove those. If you can't get them to work where they are now, you can place the lights/motion detectors/timers elsewhere. Here's one with a sound detector too, which hopefully would hear the garage door opener: [1]. StuRat (talk)

I really want to fix it properly - we're in the process of selling the house and we want to be sure to get a near-perfect inspection on it. So clever work-arounds aren't much help. SteveBaker (talk) 15:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you remove and replace the current garage door lights with the sound activated bulbs, and leave the cover(s) on, they should be virtually undetectable unless the inspector takes the cover off to examine the bulbs. (Heck, you could even sell this as an improvement, as now it works as a theft deterrent for anyone who breaks into the garage.) StuRat (talk) 19:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Complete guess but is there some sort of pressure switch around the frame of the door, that is stuck in?--Ykraps (talk) 09:34, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't a pressure switch on this door - there is a laser+light-sensor to detect if there is something blocking the door - that must be working OK because the door opens and shuts OK - and refuses to shut if the laser is blocked. The door has two switches on the track that detect when the door is fully open and fully shut - and I suspect there is a current-limiter on the motor. But I don't see how these can be implicated because the door itself moves just fine. SteveBaker (talk) 15:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that those light circuits are switched by a triac which has fried (and in the "on" position, so to speak).

It's also possible that they're controlled by a conventional relay, whose contacts have managed to weld themselves together. —Steve Summit (talk) 10:19, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - that was my guess too - but (as I said), pressing the "LIGHT" button on the control panel produces an audible click from the motor unit - so I deduce that some relay is being toggled on and off by the button rather than a solid-state system like a triac. I *presume* that if the relay is stuck in the closed position then I wouldn't hear a click...but I'm not much of an expert on the failure modes of relays! Can a stuck-shut relay still click when you energize or de-energize it?

My first guess is to pull the motor unit apart, figure out what kind of relay it uses, order a replacement, and swap it out...but if there is some other common failure mode - or if the "click" means that the relay cannot be at fault - then that may be a waste of time & money!

Hence the question! SteveBaker (talk) 15:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can easily imagine that a stuck-shut relay could still make clicking sounds as it tries to operate. (There's a nontrivial mechanical linkage between the solenoid coil and the actual contacts, and various bits of the linkage could still be moving even if the contacts aren't.) —Steve Summit (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes the solder joints on the logic boards of garage door openers crack due to vibration. These cracks can be found with a 10x loupe. It's an easy and satisfying fix when true. Debouch (talk) 08:34, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does this type of object have a name?

Does the type of object on the left, on the corner of a building, have a name? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 05:50, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The closest thing I can think of is a external corner cornice sculpture, although this is unusual in that it goes from a square corner below to rounded above, while the cornice on the top of a column does the reverse ([2]), and this example of an external corner cornice is square to square: [3]. Also, a cornice typically extends linearly on both sides and either lacks sculpture entirely, or has it on the linear sections as well as the corners .

Gargoyles are more typical at the corners, but they are on the roof, and contain downspouts. StuRat (talk) 06:23, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would call it a corbel.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:28, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Royal Institute of British Architects seems to agree with you; their website has an image of a not dissimilar feature labelled "detail of a carved corbel in the form of a grotesque face". Alansplodge (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A cornice "generally any horizontal decorative molding" - not that
I don't think it is a gargoyle.
corbel - "jutting from a wall to carry a superincumbent weight" it isn't supporting weight, and I think that there is one only on one corner of the building and it is only decorative.

Maybe it is a grotesque? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 00:05, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They did say "generally", meaning "not always", and I did say "external corner cornice sculpture" not just "cornice". The examples I provided show some exceptions. As for grotesque, that's more a reference to the subject matter than to the architectural placement and purpose. StuRat (talk) 00:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a photo showing it in context to the whole building. It is not near the roof and note that the corresponding structure on the right corner doesn't have the face. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 00:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still going with "corbel". It actually supports the base of that round brick column (maybe a pilaster) that finishes in a pinnacle. Alansplodge (talk) 02:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I guess it is to support the weight of that column, but why does it have a face, whereas the others don't? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 02:25, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, is there a more specific name? A rain spout with a dragon is a gargoyle; a corbel with a grotesque face is a .... Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 02:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, that combo doesn't appear to be common enough to have a single word name. StuRat (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No single word, but I found "Corbel head" according to Illustrated Dictionary of British Churches. The same term is used by the Victoria & Albert Museum and RIBA. Alansplodge (talk) 12:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Corbel head" is the term! Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 16:07, 1 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Resolved

Ürümqi

Was the name Ürümqi already used before 1954 when the city was offically renamed or was it created for that occasion? Also, what was the Uyghur Arabic translitteration of its old name 迪化 (Tihwa/Dǐhuà)? Thanks. --151.41.184.149 (talk) 10:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how reliable this article is, but it says; "On Feb. 1st, 1954, Dihua reverted to its original name of Urumqi" but it had been Dihua since 1763. Alansplodge (talk) 17:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to do some digging to get some worthwhile sources, but The Heritage of Central Asia by Richard N. Frye mentions Urumqi [sic] on pp 25 and 236, and refers to it as a Turkic outpost after 840 AD. I am quite sure the word Ürümqi itself is Turkic, and that the name long predates Dǐhuà. As for an actual date, it would take me a bit of research. μηδείς (talk) 23:18, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talking about non Dependent territories, what is the country where his closest country is the farthest one?

Imagine we look at each country that is not a Dependent territory, on each country, we get the distance between itself and the closest country from him (now THIS country can be a Dependent territory as long its not his own) and call this value X.
What country would result in the biggest value of X?
201.79.62.177 (talk) 11:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It might very well be New Zealand (approximately 1000 km from New Caledonia). Tristan da Cunha is more isolated (2000 km from St Helena), but it's a British Overseas Territory, not an independent state. Tevildo (talk) 11:57, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Google agrees. --Jayron 32 18:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good query - missing out the "geographically" fills up the results with North Korea. Looking at the map, it would appear the value of the OP's X will either be the distance from the NZ mainland to Norfolk Island or from the Kermadec Islands to Minerva Reef. Is there a convenient tool to calculate these distances? Tevildo (talk) 19:04, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Google agrees" means it cites a single source which agrees. I did this search, which (as Tevildo says) mostly produces pages that talk about North Korea ("most isolated" in a different sense), but also links to this page which says that "New Zealand readily refers to itself as the most isolated country in the world. Although further research indicates this claim is slightly inaccurate – a number of small pacific islands can actually claim this title, nevertheless, New Zealand can certainly be recognised as being the most isolated country of any substantial size."

I'm not aware of a reliable source with a table of countries according to the distance to the nearest other country or territory. It'd be a tedious job to accurately compile one by anything less than a fully automated method. To break ties correctly you'd need to determine the distances more accurately than can be done by measuring them on a normal globe, but the distances are too great to be measured accurately enough on a flat map. So you'd have to do locate the nearest point in country A to territory B, and vice versa, and work out the distance by computation or by using software such as Google Maps. But correctly locating the nearest points for each pair of countries/territories is already non-trivial, especially when the country/territory may include many widely separated islands.

On the other hand, a fully automated method would require a database of coastline locations and a program to search it. --70.49.170.168 (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When I first saw this question I thought it was talking about the distance from the mother country to the colony. Now I see that it's talking about the distances between independent states or colonies of independent states. The distance from mother country to dependency can be very long (e.g. Norway to the Antarctic) but what about the greatest distance between two metropolitan provinces of the same country? I would guess Hawaii to the continental United States, if Hawaii is a state of the Union, which I believe it now is. 86.149.14.219 (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably Réunion, approximately 9000 km from continental France; Hawaii is only about 4000 km from the continental USA. Tevildo (talk) 20:29, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bit farther from Great Britain to Diego Garcia: [4] --Jayron 32 01:18, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Diego Garcia is a British Overseas Territory, whereas Réunion is a full-blown Overseas department of France. See File:EU OCT and OMR map en.png - Réunion has a blue star, Diego Garcia a yellow star. If BOT's count as "metropolitan provinces" (which I don't think they do), Pitcairn Island is further away from the UK and the Wallis and Futuna Islands are further away from France. Tevildo (talk) 09:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These last 3 mentioned are dependent territories. Nauru is 300 km from its nearest neighbour. How Far is New Zealand from Norfolk Is? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's 748 km from Norfolk Island to Cape Reinga, according to this site. I do not know how accurate the measurements on that site are, though. Tevildo (talk) 10:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In that case the distance between Adams Island, New Zealand and Macquarie Island, Tasmania (about 620 km) is shorter. - Lindert (talk) 13:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NZ still maintains the record then! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Planters peanut guy

Why is the planters peanut guy (mr. peanut) wearing a monocle? --Doeskmaesk (talk) 19:16, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Mr. Peanut. The basic character was designed in 1916 by one Antonio Gentile - the monocle and top hat were added by "a commercial artist" (according to Kraft Foods' own site) prior to its initial publication. The identity of that artist is disputed between Andrew S. Wallach and Frank P. Krize. Tevildo (talk) 20:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is that to imply that Mr Peanut has astigmatism in one eye? Does the top hat signify that Mr Peanut is a member of the bourgeoisie? --Doeskmaesk (talk) 22:58, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See monocle and top hat. (a) Not necessarily astigmatism, but some form of defective vision. (b) Yes. Tevildo (talk)

Probably for the same reason Charlie McCarthy wore a top hat and monacle - to make him look distinguished. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:56, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to explain why anyone would choose to wear a single lens, it would enable the wearer to see both up close and at a distance, without resorting to bifocals, which have their own problems. I normally wear only a single contact lens, despite being quite nearsighted in both eyes. This allows me to see up close and far away. One drawback is that depth perception isn't as good, although still better than if I was blind in one eye. Also I save money and time on putting in, taking out, and cleaning contacts. On some occasions, like when I go to a movie, I do put both lenses in, but then I am rather annoyed at not being able to read anything. StuRat (talk) 00:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is where reading glasses come in handy. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are too slow to deploy. For example, while eating at a restaurant I need to be able to read the menu and see the waitress, at the same time. Also, I have sensitive skin that can't take wearing glasses. (Back when I did wear them, I had deep ridges cut into my ears where they sat, with scabs on both.) StuRat (talk) 02:26, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your brain actually uses only one eye for most purposes, see ocular dominance. Alansplodge (talk) 02:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My contacts make my eyes unequal, so that in theory I have one reading eye and one distance eye. I have no loss of depth perception, but struggle with fine print. Recently I tried on the weakest reading glasses available, and found them too strong. —Tamfang (talk) 01:16, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All this discussion of vision is interesting, but as usual, Baseball Bugs got the question answered the first time: to make him look distinguished. Milkunderwood (talk) 21:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Soytenly! And hence also the cane and the spats. "Puttin' on the Ritz". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:28, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's a reason for making Mr. Peanut look distinguished. Peanuts had been colloquially known as Goober Peas; they are a legume rather than a true nut. It's marketing. How many people would buy a bag or can of "goober peas" to munch on? Milkunderwood (talk) 01:07, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you make a sauce for Chilean Seabass out of them ? StuRat (talk) 01:31, 2 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Have you ever considered a Pince-nez? Very distinguished looking, and won't bother your ears. Put different lenses in, for menus and waitresses. Milkunderwood (talk) 01:44, 2 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Or I could just hire a nearsighted Nez Perce to read the menu to me, as I ogle the waitress. StuRat (talk) 02:06, 2 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]