Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Is screen potential important?

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Is screen potential important?
From: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 08:27:46 -0700
>
>measures wrote:
>> 
>> >Rich says:
>> >
>> >>The basic problem is that there was no way to keep the screen bypass
>> >>capacitor adequately charged during voice modulation
>> >
>> >I don't understand. It appears to me that when there is a signal, there are
>> >screen volts.
>> 
>> Not until the screen bypass C becomes sufficiently charged.  Another
>> problem is keeping the screen bypass C from mostly discharging on soft
>> syllables.  The semi-obvious solution is to Not Allow the screen bypass C
>> to discharge as long as the amplifier is in operation.  This is where
>> Thornley seemingly derailed
>> 
>> > If it's a big signal, there's lots of screen volts, which you
>> >need because you wants lots of plate current. If it's a small signal, the
>> >peak plate current is less, so you don't need as many screen volts.
>> 
>> In order to achieve linear amplification, current gain must be constant
>> at All signal levels.  Screen potential has a large effect on current
>> gain.  At 33% of normal screen volts, an 8171 exhibits 1/4 of normal
>> current gain.
>> 
>> > So it
>> >appears that screen time constant should be short enough to follow the
>> >envelope of the signal - which in the original, it was.
>> >
>> The result will undoubtedly be varying gain.
>
>
>Seems to me that this beast will do just fine on 100% duty cycle modes:
>AM, FM and SSB-SSTV, SSB-RTTY, SSB-PSK, but query it's CW and speech-SSB
>performance?

CW would likely be ok. 

>What was it originally meant to do?

SSB-voice plus all the rest.   //  At the time when Thornley wrote the 
article, the 6AS7/6080, and 6336  low-Mu triodes were being produced.  
Such tubes were quite useful for building  regulated screen-supplies 
because they could operate at full-throttle entirely in Class AB1 - 
meaning that maximum current could be obtained with 0w of DC grid drive.  
. Perhaps Thornley was simply not well-read on what a designer could do 
with such devices?.   
>
cheers, Ian

-  Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.  
end


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>