ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!

[PlayboyJoeShmoe]

Let me ask this...

Do you just "know" the cells were fresh, or did you test them using a Multimeter to see if they were all pretty similar?

Voltage doesn't tell the whole story either! Flash Amps is what I go by.

I don't have a lot of three cell lights. Only a "modded" Brinkmann Maxfire Rechargable with 3x123 and a Space Needle II. But I have LOTS of 2 cell lights, and have matched and numbered sets for this purpose.

I STILL believe that with REASONABLE precaution, we are safe enough using primary Liths.

[Chronos]

I don't own a multimeter and wouldn't know what to do with one if I did.

Yes, these were 2x123 matched sticks from Amondotech. It is frightening to anyone not an electrical engineer (read: consumer) that there may be so much variation cell-to-cell, not even batch-to-batch, that they are liable to vent potentially lethal gases and fire if used in a very expensive and assumed safe flashlight. Yes, I broke one of the sticks but it was from the same batch. I mark every other batch, and have only purchased two batches from Amondotech. This, the second batch, were kept in a clear plastic tackle box in a .30 cal ammo can in my closet. The other batch (I only have two left) is kept in an otter case in the same ammo can and solely use in my Gladius.

I know this is all conjecture, but it almost sounds like we need to purchase and learn to utililze multimeters if we are to enjoy the hobby of flashlights. Yikes. When I spend my money on cells, I expect they are sold with SOME level of QE testing and that they all fall within some safe parameters. No, every cell won't be perfect, but with such a powerful energy source they should not be released to the public unless they meet some minimum criteria...

I've got a few minutes so I'll try to load a few pics.

EDIT: Is reasonable safety to include us testing every cell or cell stick? If so someone needs to provide this information to the general public and perhaps include one with every high-dollar flashlight sale. I'm not dodging my responsibilities; rather, I believe I've acted in an adult and responsible manner. My issue is with what may be a general lack of QE and if it is our responsibility to police the industry.

[carrot]

It seems as if it would be prudent to own a ZTS nowadays, as to minimalize the risks... What do people think of the Mini-MBT? http://www.ztsinc.com/minimbt.html

[Chronos]

Here are a few pics:

The KL3 head:


Inside the top of the flashlight body:

The inside of the tailcap:

The inside of the bottom of the flashlight body(nearest the tailcap):

The tailcap where the rubber cap came off(can see where black gas evacuated):

The flashlight removed from the ziplock(no external clues as to damage):

The clouded lens of the Chop-modded 1st-gen KL3:

The rubber tailcap:

In the armrest compartment we inadvertently left a white milk bottle plastic top alongside the lights. One of the caps has several black specs of dust on the inside; I threw it out in case the dust was dangerous. I won't open that armrest again.

[Chronos]

It seems as if it would be prudent to own a ZTS nowadays, as to minimalize the risks... What do people think of the Mini-MBT? http://www.ztsinc.com/minimbt.html

Feedback would be appreciated! This is probably my next purchase alongside a set of protected rechargeable cells.

I can't imagine me taking one of these lights with me later this summer on the Appalachian trail. I'd need to take a ZTS tester along to determine the cells hadn't degraded in the heat of my backpack prior to installing them, potentially in an emergency situation... What if I leave the light in a side mesh pocket exposed to direct sunlight while I walk along the summit?

Bigger question: our troops are using multiple 123 lights in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have to believe the environment there is far more hostile, with high heat, lots of rough handling, and lack of time to test each cell prior to installing them in the field. What is the failure rate there? What is the potential impact of a failure in the field in a combat situation?

Sorry if I'm rambling. I guess I need to relax and let this one pass. It just bothers me that I did take precautions and didn't mix old-and-new cells. I used cells from the same order. I didn't leave it in direct sunlight. I didn't manhandle the light. I didn't leave the light on. Yet it could have fragged the interior of my car...

[NewBie]

Well, on McGizmo's note...

We have seen problems with cells.

Which brands have had issues?

We have seen one set of SureFires explode and with their internals. I have also had one, in a set of two do a minor vent, during testing. I may not have hit the optimal conditions to find the scenario to make it repeatable. This takes alot of time and Lithium cells don't grow on trees. These are internally, identical to Panasonic, Energizer, Browning, Streamlight cells- all of which are USA made and state so on the package.

We have seen a few BS cell failures on cpf. I've caused a very high percentage of them to fail, under a certain set of conditions and test scenario, trying to replicate the failures.

We have seen the Cyclops cells fail.

We have now seen AmondoTech Titanium cells fail.

I know there have been more brands which have shown failures, but I can't recall them all.

For anyone who'd like to find out a little more, especially some things you can do to reduce the likelyhood of a problem, I'd encourage them to read this thread:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/show...6&page=1&pp=40

Meanwhile, I'm still working on building test equipment to log information, to see what else we can glean out of things.

[cy]

L6 is one of the few lights I still run with primary lithium cells. will only use surefire cells measured with ZTS before inserting.

already had a close call, when clickie accidently came on in my backpack. L6 got almost too hot to hold. was lucky I discovered light was on. L6 was loaded with surefire cells that measured 100% w/ZTS.

took off clickie, switched to LOTC immediately. twisties tailcaps are almost impossible to accidently switch on.

if you go with a high quality surefire cell (reliable PTC), measure cells with ZTS (cells balanced), then switch to LOTC (hard to accidently leave on).

these actions reduces risk factors identified so far....

surefire cells are far from perfect, but at this point. I trust surefire cells more than others...

[Chronos]

I decided to disassemble the light. The cell at the top of the light (behind the LED head) is the one that ignited. The plastic wrapper on the 2x123 stick is melted and deformed, but the cells appear to be intact. The single cell is melted and appears to have exploded and ignited (pics below). I was able to carefully cleanse the M2 body and detonator; the residue washed out easily (some melted plastic remained behind but I was able to pursuade it to move on) so those parts can be salvaged. I don't know about the head; with the heat and fumes it must be ruined. The tailcap is shot too. So far I'm out a custom-modded Chop KL3 and a G&P tailcap. Grrrrr.

The cells, detritus, and tailcap are now secured in a ziplock baggie in my ammo can. If anyone wants to anaylze them please let me know (hint, hint Amondotech...)

Grrr.

[snowleopard]

I'm glad everybody is OK.

Have there been any similar incidents with AA or AAA lithium batteries?

--Walter

[Archangel]

AA and AAA lithium are a different chemistry than CR123A lithium, so they shouldn't be discussed in this thread. But yes, apparently there has been.

[NewBie]

Oh my.

*sigh*

Thats not just a simple vent, thats a cell exploding in an LED light. It is good that the flashlight contained the event, some of the problems with the SureFire 9P have actually ripped open the side of the aluminum body tube.

I'd thought it was just a gas release from your earlier description.

Does the head end still operate, so you could find out what the current draw is?

[nakahoshi]

Thats not just a simple vent, thats a cell exploding in an LED light.

This is just no good...

[Chronos]

Oh my.

*sigh*

Thats not just a simple vent, thats a cell exploding in an LED light. It is good that the flashlight contained the event, some of the problems with the SureFire 9P have actually ripped open the side of the aluminum body tube.

I'd thought it was just a gas release from your earlier description.

Does the head end still operate, so you could find out what the current draw is?

Later tonight I'll try to clean up the springs and see if it still works. I don't have much hope looking at the condition of the cell directly behind it... It looks like a lot of heat and gas were expelled. I'm hoping it is ok but I think it is finished. It worked fine on my L5 body setup (2x123) and I ran it many times on the 3x123 before too. I've never had a problem with it and it seems that it was well regulated on both 2x123 and 3x123 setups.

So I guess it really was a pipebomb, wasn't it? I'm glad the KL3 and M2 body are so well made, and the tailcap was structurally sound. It must have been quite an explosion, yet there is no smoke or damage in the compartment. Weird.

[NewBie]

Later tonight I'll try to clean up the springs and see if it still works. I don't have much hope looking at the condition of the cell directly behind it... It looks like a lot of heat and gas were expelled. I'm hoping it is ok but I think it is finished. It worked fine on my L5 body setup (2x123) and I ran it many times on the 3x123 before too. I've never had a problem with it and it seems that it was well regulated on both 2x123 and 3x123 setups.

So I guess it really was a pipebomb, wasn't it? I'm glad the KL3 and M2 body are so well made, and the tailcap was structurally sound. It must have been quite an explosion, yet there is no smoke or damage in the compartment. Weird.

Okay, if you would please PM me when you get the info, or not, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks!

[Chronos]

NewBie,

Will do.

I'm taking the family out for dinner. I'll try to clean it up tonight.

[McGizmo]

Oh my.

*sigh*

Thats not just a simple vent, thats a cell exploding in an LED light. It is good that the flashlight contained the event, some of the problems with the SureFire 9P have actually ripped open the side of the aluminum body tube.

I'd thought it was just a gas release from your earlier description.

Does the head end still operate, so you could find out what the current draw is?

Yes, from my understanding, this is an event in a LED light. Is the fact that the head is a modded KL3 and not an incandescent germane to this event? Do we have any way of determining this? I propose that I can stick three cells in a metal tube that is not a flashlight and complete the circuit and initiate an event. I believe you can stick some metal or other conductive object in the head such that it shorts across from the battery tube to the + pole of the forward battery and also induce an event if the cells do not have on board and effective safety devices to stop said event(consider a magnet used to bridge the gap in the battery chain for instance). This particular light has a cell extender that is in the ground path. If there is significant resistance in this path and the converter is constant current it will attempt to reach the designed output current by drawing even more power from the batteries. I don't know what the switch is about or if it can demand more power, again from the cells.

We all want to understand where the dangers and risk lie. Short of turning away from the CR123 batteries entirely, are there reasonably safe applications and considerations to make? The US is a society where law suits are brought if there is loss. The legal system supports and encourages this and it diminishes, to some extent, the loss to the individual. It also allows the individual to assume risk without financial responsibility to an extent. Legal recourse has already been mentioned in this thread I believe. Well if someone is knowingly at fault or derrilect in due diligence then perhaps there are grounds for legal recourse (might be tough suing an engineer in China though). When I first joined CPF, there were all kinds of mods and experiments and the bleeding edge was identified as just that; being at the edge where blood could and was drawn on occassion. Those of us engaged in activities with these lights understood and accepted the responsibility of our actions. None of us sought or considdered modder's or user's insurance.

Well the community has grown and now there are much more sophisticated offerings and combinations of components. A misapplication or combination can result in instant magic smoke and destroyed components.

My point here? Well just look at the subject line and consider a suit being brought against any of the players named in the component build. Did this group get together and design this light and suggest or state that it should be considered safe? Does this group have an easy out by stating that this combination of components was never evaluated or intended as a flashlight, per se?

I believe the author of this thread assumed a certain and real responsibility in building or compiling this light. Unfortunately, he may not have been aware of the extent of this responsibility or its down side. I doubt any of us are! The fault in components may be an inherently unsafe system or grouping or it could be due to a single bad battery. It could also be the contribution of a bad battery coupled with a system that will not support the use of a bad battery or a combination of precursors not yet identified.

None of us want to design, build or drive a Pinto with a faulty gas tank. Many of us do want to design, build and drive a reasonably safe car though! The Pinto with its faulty gas tank was identified and rectified. We're not there yet. Do we drive with additional caution and seek answers or do we walk? We have the freedom to make choices and the responsibility to live with the choices we make.

I have the inclination and desire to place the fault of recent and more prevelant events at the door of off shore manufacturers of these CR123 batteries. My inclination and desires are basd on suspicions and not fact. They may be supported by evidence but are not supported by understanding or scientific evaluation available to me. I don't want to pass any buck if it is in fact mine, though. IF the fault or unacceptable level of risk can be associated to batteries of unacceptable construction or design and IF these batteries are all manufactured off shore, what can be done about this? Drive the poor importer or supplier of these batteries out of business by not buying from them or more agressive legal tactics? They are just trying to earn an honest living and provide product and services in demand. Can pressure be brought on the battery industry itself to police itself and insure proper product in proper applications?

If I had an attorney and he (she) were to advise me, I suspect the first piece of advise would be to consider no longer building flashlights that were based on CR123 cells until the air clears on recent events. I am also certain that they would advise me to make no comment on a public forum, what so ever, in regards to safety and CR123 batteries. I would be very surprised if the absense of comment or information from battery manufactures as well as some of the real flashlight manufacturers isn't due to just such legal advise. I have no doubts that the legal industry would like nothing more than to represent any and all concerned parties at any and all levels of issues and concerns. If we end up inviting them to the party, I won't need one representing me, I am out.

Ironically, I think if these events get sensationalized effectively one could envision domestic supply to dry up specifically because of liability issues. What would be left to fill any demand? Possibly those at the root of the problem to start with? Want a conspiricy?

The recent events that have been reported are not overwhelming in number and yet there seem to be enough of them that to consider them isolated or not statistically significant would seem to be a very foolish. While it seems that some CPF members have decided they want no part of CR123 powered lights what so ever,there may be an equal number who are completely ignoring the fact that there seems to be a problem in some as yet to be defined or understood cases. It seems that prudence and possible need would dictate an increased level of caution and alertness for anyone using these lights. I think testing and matching cells prior to use is a great precaution but it doesn't make sense that this be necessary at some point when the problem is better understood and addressed by those in a position to do so. I just can't envision a 2 for 1 sale point of purchase display at Target for an inexpensive 2xCR123 light with accompaning $100 battery tester!

[JonSidneyB]

On the thought of abandoning primaries for litium ion. Don is right. An unsafe Li battery can be made.

When I was trying to get them made I had a batch of scary ones that was destroyed.

[Chronos]

Y

My point here? Well just look at the subject line and consider a suit being brought against any of the players named in the component build. Did this group get together and design this light and suggest or state that it should be considered safe? Does this group have an easy out by stating that this combination of components was never evaluated or intended as a flashlight, per se?

I believe the author of this thread assumed a certain and real responsibility in building or compiling this light. Unfortunately, he may not have been aware of the extent of this responsibility or its down side. I doubt any of us are! The fault in components may be an inherently unsafe system or grouping or it could be due to a single bad battery. It could also be the contribution of a bad battery coupled with a system that will not support the use of a bad battery or a combination of precursors not yet identified.

The author of this thread did assemble a 1x123 extender, a tailcap, and a modded KL3. Good points Don!

I mentioned a lawyer in my first post as I was MAD this light blew up in my car, with my family present, when there should be low, low risk. My issue has been the venting of noxious, potentially carcinogenic gases in a tightly enclosed space. Then I find out that one of the cells exploded. Think pipebomb.

To your point: did the detonator get built and sold as a standalone item? Or is it advertised as a cell extender for Surefire flashlights? Is the clicky tailcap advertised as a Surefire-compatible tailcap? Or is it an item created to sit by itself on a shelf. No, these were components designed and built to be added onto a specific brand of lights. That is what I did. I in no way hold any of the accountable. I know we could debate these points ad nauseum if we wanted. I'm not a lawyer and never wanted to be one. Heck, I tried a low-level series of mods and got bit. Bad.

I am responsible for assembling the light. I am responsible for putting it in the armrest of a rental car. I am responsible for purchasing the batteries. I'm attempting to point out that a catastrophic event occurred to me, in a situation that is far, far from what I'd consider to be the combat-type of conditions that the underlying light and cells were designed to support. A momentary flash of the light to determine it was working; storage in a safe, dark armrest. Then a sudden explosion, and the release of toxic gases.

Please do not think I'm interested in pursuing a lawsuit against anyone. This is now published on a public website. I wanted to post a warning that yes, a catastrophic event occurred, and I'd like to determine why.

As I stated in another thread a couple of weeks ago; I think that Don, Chop, MilkySpit et al are artisans. I'm awed and amazed at what they do. Yes, I assume some risk. When I add a new component to my Carrera do I hold Porsche responsible? No. However, if I do put a tankful of gas into my car and the complex fuel system is destroyed due to water in the gas in the station's tank or a mismeasurement of octane , then yes there may be an issue of liability. But again I am not interested in that; I think the CPF community may be interested in determining

a: What happened?
b: What is/are the causes?
c: What can we do to ensure we minimize the risks?

I think that stating the armrest got too hot for the cells is simply silly. If this is the case than we may have provided pipebombs to our troops overseas, as they operate in far hotter, more demanding environments. Remember this has happened to several off-the-shelf LED and incan lights... and to Surefire batteries too. Yikes.

To my mind, right now I think that the single cell was the culprit. I was likely undercharged from the factory, overheated when attempting to compensate for the charge mismatch, and ignited. Why did it overheat when the light was off? There was no perceptible power drain over the weekend. I've never had a misstep before with this same setup when running a KL5 or a 9v incan. Perhaps a component was not functioning properly. Perhaps the stars aligned just right and the right number of variables became constants and BANG. I'd just like to know, but doubt I will.

Again, not throwing stones here. Honest. Just like to see what the great minds here think caused it, and if I and others can do anything to prevent it (outside of sinking another $100 in a battery tester).

Thanks!

[InfidelCastro]

There's supposed to be a new specialized (for us) version of the ZTS coming out that will test lithiums better, so I'm holding out for that one.

[McGizmo]

Chronos,
No worries and no argument here. I am truly sorry this event happened to you and grateful that there was no apparent damage beyond that done to the light itself. If it was a pipe bomb, I am glad it was such a dud! I agree whole heartedly that WE would like difinitive answers to your questions of a,b & c.

It would really be great if someone in the battery industry could or would shed some light on these events. As it stands, we are relying heavily on Newbie to sort this out for us, best he can and that is a heavy responsibility for him!

My biased and probably jaundiced view is that domestic manufacturers will not shed light due to likely legal considerations and the company who made the 2xCR123 light that was reported about in the Canada Air event probably has no interest in comment and possibly less concern than I feel they should have.

In your analgy, it seems likely that it was the fuel supply that was bad but I am not sure that we can just give the fuel system itself a clean bill of health either! The fuel system can be host to a fuel filter that might have stopped the damage from happening in the first place. If contaminated fuel is a statictical possibility then a fuel filter as a preventative measure could well be prudent addition. Now if the fuel system does have a fuel filter but it fails to stop contaminated fuel from damaging the fuel system because it is inadequate or below accepted standards, who gets the finger?

EDIT: InfidelCastro, that is good news for those interested in and willing to go to the added safety precaution of testing their batteries. However I don't think that is a viable or appropriate solution for the general population who now have access to these lights and batteries!!

I am bothered that in both this case here as well as the experience with the HD45 that the owners report that the lights were turned off and the event came about after these lights were turned off. In both cases, it was the same brand of battery but I won't suggest that this is significant because I don't know that for any certainty beyond the obvious; they were the same brand. However, if these lights were in fact off, then was the event triggered while on and the cell or cells sustained some chemical reaction without current passing through them because of a closed circuit? Such a self perpetuating reaction has not been replicated or identified to my knowledge. Do we know that a battery tester will identify a battery capable of this activity as bad?

I think it is safe to state that most of us want good and safe batteries and we want to know the risks involved in using these cells. If as hobbiests we need to self determin the viability of individual cells prior to use then lets find this out and make it known!! If this is the case, I doubt we will continue to see inexpensive and readily available CR123's at least in the US! I don't think this is the case and I certainly hope it is not!!

[wptski]

There's supposed to be a new specialized (for us) version of the ZTS coming out that will test lithiums better, so I'm holding out for that one.

Where did you hear that?

[Haz]

Where did you hear that?

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...2&page=1&pp=30

Just a heads up. I am working with ZTS to make a "new" tester that is more geared to us flashlight nuts. This is a GREAT cause and I hope they do it. It would check ions, Lithium AAs, along with the regular stuff. I will keep everyone posted on this hopeful event.

[elgarak]

Chronos, soryy to hear that this happened. Hopefully everyone in yoru family is OK.

In order to try to reconstruct what has happened, I'm not entirely sure if I understand the sequence of events. From your original post, I gather the following:

1. You take the lights, check them, turn them off, and put them down in the car.

2. Drive to the beach, have fun there.

3. Get back to the car, find the KL3 dead, get the KL5 and leave for a walk. (Here is where I'm confused. Did it happen that way?)

4. Get back to the car. Drive to the beach house.

5. You find the remnants of the explosion.

Am I correct? You did not notice the explosion; it happened in your absence, right? No one else went to the car and might have handled the light, right?

[Chronos]

Chronos, soryy to hear that this happened. Hopefully everyone in yoru family is OK.

In order to try to reconstruct what has happened, I'm not entirely sure if I understand the sequence of events. From your original post, I gather the following:

1. You take the lights, check them, turn them off, and put them down in the car.

2. Drive to the beach, have fun there.

3. Get back to the car, find the KL3 dead, get the KL5 and leave for a walk. (Here is where I'm confused. Did it happen that way?)

4. Get back to the car. Drive to the beach house.

5. You find the remnants of the explosion.

Am I correct? You did not notice the explosion; it happened in your absence, right? No one else went to the car and might have handled the light, right?

elgarak,

That is pretty close.

3: At the beach having fun
4: Get back to the car and drive to town
5: Drive from town back to beach (sun has set); grab KL3 and find it dead so I take the L5 on the walk.
6: Get home and take lights inside; notice KL3 is damaged

No one else handled the light, that is correct. It was in a lined tray in the armrest alongside the L5. The car didn't go faster than 35mph, and was driven to/from my beachhouse to the beach to the town, etc. The first time I noted an issue was #5- the KL3 didn't light. I wasn't sure what could have happened but didn't have time to investigate until I got home later that evening.

[RAF_Groundcrew]

I think the tailcap might be a factor, it has some kind of strobe function?

If there is any circuitry in there, it is possible that a small current leakage has taken place and started the discharge process in the cells.

I recall that the switch on the C & D size maglites also has a habit of creating a current path when there should be none (I have had a couple of large maglites with leaking Alkaline cells, and only recently thought that a switch fault may be the cause).

Lithium cells do get hot when they discharge, sometimes unevenly - the 6 cells in my SF M6 seem to get warm/hot at different levels after heavy use, rather than equally warm, could be down to different internal resistances on the cells.

Without knowing the whole story, and being able to forensically recreate the incident, speculation may lead to several conclusions, but any component that has been modified from its original design or state of integrity should be treated with some small degree of extra care, just like the warnings about over discharging unprotected cells.

I know the warnings about not mixing new/old cells, and different brands are usually printed on battery powered items, but as a community that generally runs devices and their batteries right to the edge of the performance envelope, I'm sure we're all more aware than the aerage consumer of the dangers that can result from ignorance or carelesness.

[NewBie]

elgarak,

That is pretty close.

3: At the beach having fun
4: Get back to the car and drive to town
5: Drive from town back to beach (sun has set); grab KL3 and find it dead so I take the L5 on the walk.
6: Get home and take lights inside; notice KL3 is damaged

No one else handled the light, that is correct. It was in a lined tray in the armrest alongside the L5. The car didn't go faster than 35mph, and was driven to/from my beachhouse to the beach to the town, etc. The first time I noted an issue was #5- the KL3 didn't light. I wasn't sure what could have happened but didn't have time to investigate until I got home later that evening.

How much time was there between 1 and 5?

[Chronos]

Around 1: 12 noon to 5: 8 pm when I noticed the light was not working.

[elgarak]

I'm more interested in the time between 4 and 5. Could it be that the tailcap was set to ON after you found it dead, and the explosion occured while you were on the walk?

[unnerv]

I am bothered that in both this case here as well as the experience with the HD45 that the owners report that the lights were turned off and the event came about after these lights were turned off.

I think the tailcap might be a factor, it has some kind of strobe function?

If there is any circuitry in there, it is possible that a small current leakage has taken place and started the discharge process in the cells.

I am inclined to believe the tailcap is a factor also. I haven't been up on the HDS stuff but doesn't the HD45 have a small draw to power a circuit to monitor button presses like the ARC4?

If the G&P tailcap stobes, maybe that function had malfunctioned while put away, drawing power, and causing a drain issue. While I don't have any of their flashlight equipemnt, I have plenty of experience with their airsoft stuff, which is where they had their start. They have always produced knock off equipment for airsoft for when you couldn't afford the real thing. While their stuff was not bad, none of it was ever robust enough to consider using for real firearms. We tried once with a knock off of a hakko red dot scope on a .223. A real one was > $200 the G&P was <$100. Within about 50 shots the scope no longer functioned. While there is no direct corralation between the quality of scope and the tail cap, if I were to follow the trend and look for a point of failure in an otherwise high quality light, I would look 1st at the tail cap and then the battery.

[Gary]

We got an "OPEX" (OPerational EXperience, I think) bulletin on this a few months back. It seems that they've started a few fires at nuclear plants (for example, this one). The result being that a lot of plants have banned "non-rechargable lithium batteries" for use in flashlights.

-Gary