 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering ElectronicsKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Electronics Forum / Basics / July 2009Reference direction of electrical current in teaching/books
Hello, Recently I ran into a book that teaches that current flows from the negative to the positive terminal (i.e. across a resistor). This implies electron flow and is opposed to all examples I've seen in other books. Perhaps someone knows of a resource that discusses this issue? I.e. which way is more correct to teach, how have the current symbolics developed, etc? Thanks >Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >which way is more correct to teach, how have the current symbolics >developed, etc? http://amasci.com/miscon/eleca.html#frkel  SignatureRich Webb Norfolk, VA > >Recently I ran into a book that teaches that current flows from the > >negative to the positive terminal (i.e. across a resistor). This > > http://amasci.com/miscon/eleca.html#frkel Is this really what the OP wanted? (Not being argumentative... but it doesn't really seem to be helpful information, though true). OP - Amazingly, I cannot find (in a quick Google) a lucid web explanation of the concept, but what you want to research is "passive sign convention". All the good references I could find are in printed books, nothing online seems to be worth reading. <http://books.google.com/books?id=5JI-KELPCpgC&lpg=PA39&ots=i- ZiBLSQLS&dq=passive%20sign%20convention&pg=PA39> >> >Recently I ran into a book that teaches that current flows from the >> >negative to the positive terminal (i.e. across a resistor). This [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Is this really what the OP wanted? (Not being argumentative... but it >doesn't really seem to be helpful information, though true). Well, he does tend to go around the barn and over the fence to get to the front door. ;-) SignatureRich Webb Norfolk, VA > >Recently I ran into a book that teaches that current flows from the > >negative to the positive terminal (i.e. across a resistor). This > > http://amasci.com/miscon/eleca.html#frkel Is this really what the OP wanted? (Not being argumentative... but it doesn't really seem to be helpful information, though true). OP - Amazingly, I cannot find (in a quick Google) a lucid web explanation of the concept, but what you want to research is "passive sign convention". All the good references I could find are in printed books, nothing online seems to be worth reading. <http://books.google.com/books?id=5JI-KELPCpgC&lpg=PA39&ots=i- ZiBLSQLS&dq=passive%20sign%20convention&pg=PA39> I think the OP would do well reading the material provided by Rich. It gave enough backround for the OP to answer his own question. Tom > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thanks Try Googling "Conventional current". Conventional current is taught as it is easier to understand - positive to negative. Flow of electrons is opposite to conventional current as they are repelled by the negative terminal and attracted by the positive. Kids cannot understand this.. SignatureBill Naylor www.electronworks.co.uk Electronic Kits for Education and Fun > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thanks http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Passive_sign_convention >> Hello, >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Passive_sign_convention From that page: Here are some basic ground rules: * All resistors are either positive or negative uniformly. Which means that if you consider one resistor to be positive (which is the common case) then all the resistors are positive. * At least one source is the opposite sign of the resistors. If only one is present then that is the one. * Always start by making your loop. This is insane gibberish. John > On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 06:53:57 -0700 (PDT), gearhead > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Yup, that's a pretty crappy article. You can't believe everything you read on wiki. George H. > On Jun 20, 12:38 pm, John Larkin >> >> This is insane gibberish. > > Yup, that's a pretty crappy article. You can't believe everything you > read on wiki. So, fix it! Cheers! Rich "eliben" > Recently I ran into a book that teaches that current flows from the > negative to the positive terminal (i.e. across a resistor). This [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > which way is more correct to teach, how have the current symbolics > developed, etc? ** Search on "conventional current flow": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current Lots more to be found. ..... Phil >Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Thanks The military and some tech schools (Heald, I think) start with electron flow, and later switch to conventional current. This confuses the hell out of the students, some of whom never get it right. Universities (physics, chemistry, engineering) always use conventional (pos to neg) flow math. John > The military and some tech schools (Heald, I think) start with > electron flow, and later switch to conventional current. This confuses > the hell out of the students, some of whom never get it right. > Universities (physics, chemistry, engineering) always use conventional > (pos to neg) flow math. Is it correct to say that there's absolutely no advantage of one way over the other and it's purely a matter of convention? Of course, it seems that the accepted symbols follow the pos to neg flow - for example the diode symbol makes it clear the conduction is from anode to cathode, and the arrows of transistors also follow conventional flow. Eli >> The military and some tech schools (Heald, I think) start with >> electron flow, and later switch to conventional current. This confuses [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Is it correct to say that there's absolutely no advantage of one way >over the other and it's purely a matter of convention? It might have been better to call electrons positive, but the convention pre-dates the discovery of electrons. So it's a convention we're stuck with. Things other than electrons can carry current too, like positive ions and proton beams. >Of course, it seems that the accepted symbols follow the pos to neg >flow - for example the diode symbol makes it clear the conduction is >from anode to cathode, and the arrows of transistors also follow >conventional flow. Ammeters and voltmeters too. John >> The military and some tech schools (Heald, I think) start with >> electron flow, and later switch to conventional current. This confuses [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Eli In 22 years of electronics, I have never met anyone who uses electron flow as the norm. Keep it conventional - positive to negative - and you will fit in with the crowd and not confuse the hell out of everyone (it looks like Phil agrees with me, which gives me a warm feeling too (!)) SignatureBill Naylor www.electronworks.co.uk Electronic Kits for Education and Fun EW > (it looks like Phil agrees with me, which gives me a warm feeling too (!)) Like wetting your pants? > EW > (it looks like Phil agrees with me, which gives me a warm feeling > too (!)) > > Like wetting your pants? !!!! Now that made me laugh! SignatureBill Naylor www.electronworks.co.uk Electronic Kits for Education and Fun On Jun 22, 8:04 am, "Electronworks.co.uk" <newsgro...@electronworks.co.uk> wrote: > > EW > (it looks like Phil agrees with me, which gives me a warm feeling > > too (!)) [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Bill Naylorwww.electronworks.co.uk > Electronic Kits for Education and Fun It's easy. Electrons are negative and are attracted to the positive. Understand that (as in electron tubes or semi conductors) and put it aside. Now; as a convention it was decided long ago that current flow within an electric circuit shall be shown as flowing from postive to negative. For example: Positive terminals on things such as batteries are often marked or shown in red. Negative terminals in various other colours, often black, green. blue etc. When working on a circuit one assumes electric current flows away from the positive part of any circuit towards something less positive or in other words negative to the starting point. > On Jun 22, 8:04 am, "Electronworks.co.uk" > <newsgro...@electronworks.co.uk> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > something less positive or in other words negative to the starting > point. I've never been able to figure out how the phosphor of a CRT decides which pixel to energize and emit a positron, when it doesn't even know what the deflection coils are doing yet? >:-> Cheers! Rich > On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:15:37 -0700 (PDT), eliben <eliben@gmail.com> >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > The military and some tech schools (Heald, I think) start with > electron flow, and later switch to conventional current. Not in the USAF, they didn't. We used electron flow from the start, and stuck with it. It's really the only way to understand how maagnetrons and klystrons and traveling wave tubes and backward wave oscillators and such actually work. >:-> Either way works equally well, just swap all of the plus and minus signs. ;-) Cheers! Rich >> On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:15:37 -0700 (PDT), eliben <eliben@gmail.com> >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >how maagnetrons and klystrons and traveling wave tubes and backward >wave oscillators and such actually work. >:-> I never learned that electrons are positive, and I didn't have any trouble understanding how tubes work. So, do you flip the sign on all the test equipment you use, or does the Air Force buy special backwards-reading meters and scopes? John > So, do you flip the sign on all the test equipment you use, or does > the Air Force buy special backwards-reading meters and scopes? Now you're just being snotty. Thanks, Rich >> So, do you flip the sign on all the test equipment you use, or does >> the Air Force buy special backwards-reading meters and scopes? > >Now you're just being snotty. No, seriously, if you believe that positive current is the direction that electrons move, how do you interpret the current reading of a Fluke DVM? Do you mentally flip the sign it displays? And do military schematics draw diodes the opposite way that everybody else does? What about the Right Hand Rule? John > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:38:30 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net> >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > that electrons move, how do you interpret the current reading of a > Fluke DVM? Do you mentally flip the sign it displays? Heavens, no! I'm astute enough to recognize that even though it's electrons that flow from negative to positive it's not a dramatic intuitive leap to realize that the results are functionally indistinguishable. > What about the Right Hand Rule? Sure! Works fine, for positive charge flow, or hole flow. Admittedly, for electron flow it's the Left-Hand Rule, but the effects are indistinguishable. The difference, I guess, is that the college boys are insulated from reality by the ivied halls of academia, and us techs do the actual work. >:-> Thanks, Rich >>> So, do you flip the sign on all the test equipment you use, or does >>> the Air Force buy special backwards-reading meters and scopes? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > What about the Right Hand Rule? Actually it's not necessary to flip anything and I think you know that John. They simply teach that electrons enter the negative terminal of a passive element. For diodes, electrons enter the "negative" side of a diode and so on... Current meters are interprted as the quantity of electrons flowing into the negative terminal of the meter. The positive charge view is an arbitrary convention that dates from the time of Ben Franklin. Negative charge flow is equally valid in every way although it is certainly less intuitive if you try to understand things from an energy point of view. Every engineering text I have clearly refers to the fact that positive charge flow is a convention. Some of the texts are quite old. Are you saying none of your books explain "conventional" current flow? >>>> So, do you flip the sign on all the test equipment you use, or does >>>> the Air Force buy special backwards-reading meters and scopes? [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >charge flow is a convention. Some of the texts are quite old. Are you >saying none of your books explain "conventional" current flow? All the physics and ee books that I have say that an electron has a negative charge, and that current flows from positive to negative. I've worked with a few military and Heald graduates who kept getting confused about current directions and diodes and transistors, so whatever they taught them wasn't helpful in the real world. John > I've worked with a few military and Heald graduates who kept getting > confused about current directions and diodes and transistors, so > whatever they taught them wasn't helpful in the real world. I can't imagine that it can be hard for some people to remember that conventional current flows from positive to negative, while the electrons flow from negative to positive to balance it out. ;-) I guess my point is, IT DOESN't MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE! As long as you're consistent. One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? The end the positive charge comes out of? Cheers! Rich > One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? > The end the positive charge comes out of? Positive charges don't come out of a battery ;) Electrons leave via the anode (marked with a "-") and enter via the cathode (marked with a "+"). >> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >> The end the positive charge comes out of? > >Positive charges don't come out of a battery ;) Not unless you connect the terminals with a liquid or a semiconductor or a photoconductor or an ionized gas. >Electrons leave via the anode (marked with a "-") and enter via the >cathode (marked with a "+"). A quick google search is about equally divided on the polarity of the anode. I like the voltage convention, where "anode" is always the more positive terminal. But it doesn't much matter. John >>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Not unless you connect the terminals with a liquid or a semiconductor >or a photoconductor or an ionized gas. --- Those aren't positive charges, they're just places where electrons ain't. The putatative "holes". --- >>Electrons leave via the anode (marked with a "-") and enter via the >>cathode (marked with a "+"). > >A quick google search is about equally divided on the polarity of the >anode. --- Which means what? --- >I like the voltage convention, where "anode" is always the more >positive terminal. But it doesn't much matter. --- Bottom line is it really does, but from your perspective you can't see that. JF >>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Those aren't positive charges, they're just places where electrons >ain't. The putatative "holes". A nucleus isn't a hole. It is full of real positive charges, known as "protons." Photoconductors do have holes; the protons don't move much. In ioninic liquids and ionized gasses, the positive charges - protons - do in fact move from the positive terminalo to the negative. >--- > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Bottom line is it really does, but from your perspective you can't see >that. It's sort of useless to have terms that change meaning many times a second. Using the "current" standard, when a battery is delivering current, its pos terminal is the cathode, but when it's being charged it's the anode. That can change 120 times a second. Even more fun is a PV diode, where the diode anode is the cathode when it's generating power. Which is why actual electrical engineers seldom use the words "anode" and "cathode" unless they are referring to a diode or a vacuum tube, and I've never heard an engineer switch the names of the diode ends when it operated in zener or PV mode. I always call the p-doped side of a diode "anode." Do you call the banded end of a diode "anode" when it's zenering but "cathode" when it's forward conducting? John >>>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >A nucleus isn't a hole. --- Who said it was? --- >It is full of real positive charges, known as "protons." --- Nope, it's full of protons _and_ neutrons, you patronizing a.s. --- >Photoconductors do have holes; the protons don't move much. --- The protons don't move at all unless the whole atom does. The electrons do, though, and when an electron jumps from a neutral atom to one which it finds more attractive, the space it leaves in its previous orbital creates a hole and makes the atom it left an electrically positive ion. --- >In ioninic liquids and ionized gasses, the positive charges - protons - do in >fact move from the positive terminalo to the negative. --- "Ioninic"??? "Terminalo"??? Surely you had too much alcohol in your system when you decided to post some more of your nonsense and didn't reealize that protons bound to the nucleus don't have the mobility you claim they do, or you're just stupid. Which is it? --- JF >>>>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >--- >Nope, it's full of protons _and_ neutrons, you patronizing a.s. Hydrogen? Hydrogen is a major charge carrier in lots of situations. Situations that keep you alive. >--- > >>Photoconductors do have holes; the protons don't move much. > >--- >The protons don't move at all unless the whole atom does. Not precisely true, since you're in one of your bitchy moods. The "whole atom" includes all the electrons, and a positive ion is missing some. A hydrogen ion *is* a naked proton. >The electrons do, though, and when an electron jumps from a neutral atom >to one which it finds more attractive, the space it leaves in its [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >nucleus don't have the mobility you claim they do, or you're just >stupid. I never claimed to be a typist. And just how much mobility do you think I documented, that you think they have less of? Maybe you need a drink. You're sure in a bad mood. John > The "whole atom" includes all the electrons, and a positive ion is > missing some. A hydrogen ion *is* a naked proton. And apparently the conductivity of ice is due to the motion of protons rather than electrons: http://skua.gps.caltech.edu/hermann/ice.htm From that page: "Proton conduction in ice and H-bonded materials is analogous to electron conduction in semiconductors." I wonder if you could make a transistor out of ice... SignatureGreg >> The "whole atom" includes all the electrons, and a positive ion is >> missing some. A hydrogen ion *is* a naked proton. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > "Proton conduction in ice and H-bonded materials is analogous to electron > conduction in semiconductors." Very cool. The protons (H nuclei) actually jump between molecules to carry charge. Water and ice are amazing things. Both are essentially black in the thermal IR, which can be handy. >I wonder if you could make a transistor out of ice... Now that's an interesting idea. Ice is a pretty good insulator, but I don't know if some doped ice allotrope can be a semiconductor. It wouldn't be real hard to try some cases. You could make a diode or a transistor by changing water or vapor impurities while freezing a layer onto a surface. John >> The "whole atom" includes all the electrons, and a positive ion is >> missing some. A hydrogen ion *is* a naked proton. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I wonder if you could make a transistor out of ice... It wouldn't have a very good temperature range... ;-) Rich >>>>>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>>>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >Hydrogen? Hydrogen is a major charge carrier in lots of situations. >Situations that keep you alive. --- Doing the "Larkin shuffle" again, huh? Above, you stated: "It is full of real positive charges, known as "protons."" Note that you used the plural, "charges", which shows that you weren't thinking about elemental hydrogen, "1H", the nucleus of which comprises a single proton, yet that's what you try to change the subject with. --- >>>Photoconductors do have holes; the protons don't move much. >> >>--- >>The protons don't move at all unless the whole atom does. > >Not precisely true, since you're in one of your bitchy moods. --- How typically Larkinese; just more sidestepping bullshit, since my state of being has nothing to do with the mobility of protons. --- >The "whole atom" includes all the electrons, and a positive ion is >missing some. A hydrogen ion *is* a naked proton. --- Because the apparent conclusion is true, then what went before must also be true? Again, typical Larkinese "logic". --- >>The electrons do, though, and when an electron jumps from a neutral atom >>to one which it finds more attractive, the space it leaves in its [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >I never claimed to be a typist. --- It's not about being a typist, it's about not being sloppy. --- >And just how much mobility do you think I documented, that you think they have less of? --- Think about it like this: Consider the nucleus of an atom to be like an airplane full of people and baggage, the people being protons and the baggage being neutrons. In addition, escorting the airplane is a formation of fighter jets, the electrons. The way you paint the picture is that the people and their baggage are free to leave the nucleus at any time, when what's really true is that they're sealed in the airplane and the fighters are the only ones free to break formation and leave the "atom" with a net positive charge. JF >>>>>>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>>>>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >a single proton, yet that's what you try to change the subject with. >--- "Protons" is also plural, so the sentence is consistent. <snip> >>>>>>>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>>>>>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >"Protons" is also plural, so the sentence is consistent. And this ain't alt.english.usage, either. JF attacks the English when he has no basis for evaluating substance. He's just in a bad mood. John >>>>>>>>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>>>>>>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >> >>"Protons" is also plural, so the sentence is consistent. --- Whatever you think that means. Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" is wrong. >And this ain't alt.english.usage, either. JF attacks the English when >he has no basis for evaluating substance. He's just in a bad mood. > >John JF >>>>>>>>>>> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >>>>>>>>>>> The end the positive charge comes out of? [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >--- >Whatever you think that means. It means that there is nothing wrong with the statement that you objected to. >Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" >is wrong. There *is* more than one hydrogen atom in the universe. >>And this ain't alt.english.usage, either. JF attacks the English when >>he has no basis for evaluating substance. He's just in a bad mood. >> >>John >JF >>Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" >>is wrong. > >There *is* more than one hydrogen atom in the universe. I actually own several of them. John > >>Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" > >>is wrong. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > John Water you talking about, John? ;-) SignatureYou can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense! >>>>Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" >>>>is wrong. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Water you talking about, John? ;-) Ouch. > >>>>Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" > >>>>is wrong. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ouch. Hydrogen doesn't give you much to work with, you know! ;-) SignatureYou can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense! >> >>>>Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" >> >>>>is wrong. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Hydrogen doesn't give you much to work with, you know! ;-) That's elemental. John >>>Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" >>>is wrong. >> >>There *is* more than one hydrogen atom in the universe. > >I actually own several of them. Nah, you're just borrowing them. Have another beer... >>>Elemental hydrogen has but a single proton in its nucleus, so "protons" >>>is wrong. >> >>There *is* more than one hydrogen atom in the universe. > > I actually own several of them. It's a moot point as to whether they own you ;-) Signature"Electricity is of two kinds, positive and negative. The difference is, I presume, that one comes a little more expensive, but is more durable; the other is a cheaper thing, but the moths get into it." (Stephen Leacock) > Those aren't positive charges, they're just places where electrons > ain't. The putatative "holes". Although in semiconductors, apparently, due to some quantum reason that I don't fully understand, the holes really do behave as though they were positively charged particles. The difference shows up in the Hall effect, where positive charges moving one way are *not* equivalent to negative charges moving the other way. The Hall voltage generated by a p-type semiconductor is what you expect from moving positive charges. If anyone can provide an intuitive explanation of that, I'd be most interested... SignatureGreg >> Those aren't positive charges, they're just places where electrons >> ain't. The putatative "holes". [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > If anyone can provide an intuitive explanation of that, > I'd be most interested... Since holes are actually nothing, they're not deflected by a magnetic field? ;-) Thanks, Rich > Since holes are actually nothing, they're not deflected by a magnetic > field? ;-) Obviously it's the electrons which are actually moving, hopping from hole to hole. But somehow, in a p-type semiconductor, they end up getting deflected in the *opposite* direction to what you would expect from their charge and direction of motion and the magnetic field direction. That's the part for which I've yet to see an explanation aimed at people who aren't steeped in quantum theory. SignatureGreg > One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? > The end the positive charge comes out of? No, the end it flows into (thus it's the opposite terminal whilst recharging) >> One thing that does confuse me - which end of a battery is tha anode? >> The end the positive charge comes out of? > > No, the end it flows into (thus it's the opposite terminal whilst recharging) So, in, say, a zinc-carbon cell, the carbon is the cathode and the zinc is the anode? ?:-/ Thanks, Rich > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > which way is more correct to teach, how have the current symbolics > developed, etc? By convention, a resistor's _current_ flows from positive to negative (note that a power supply 'pumps uphill', and forces current to flow from negative to positive). This is (or should be, at least) kept distinct from _electron_ flow, which is opposite of current. If some tidy-minded person wants to teach you that current flow and electron flow both go in the same direction, they do you a disservice by confusing the hell out of you and those around you when you go talk to the other 99.999% of humanity. Signaturehttp://www.wescottdesign.com > Recently I ran into a book that teaches that current flows from the > negative to the positive terminal (i.e. across a resistor). This [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > which way is more correct to teach, how have the current symbolics > developed, etc? College boys use positive charge flow - techies use electron flow. (electron flow is clearly right - consider the CRT! ;-) ) Just remember which system you're using, and be consistent - they're identical, but with all the signs swapped. :-) Hope This Helps! Rich >> Recently I ran into a book that teaches that current flows from the >> negative to the positive terminal (i.e. across a resistor). This [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >College boys use positive charge flow - techies use electron flow. Which is why the college boys make more money, and tell the techies what to do. John |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.