Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[Amps] Why Heathkit and others floated the grids

To: "Lon W. Cottingham" <k5jv@kingwoodcable.com>,"Amp Reflector" <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [Amps] Why Heathkit and others floated the grids
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 23:33:32 -0400
List-post: <mailto:amps@contesting.com>
>            One thread that I have taken from this bilious 
> discussion is
> that some of you do not realize that most of the 
> commercially built Amateur
> triode linear amplifiers throughout the 70's, 80's, and 
> 90's have floating
> grids, of one sort, or another.  It is time to pull the 
> heads out of the
> sand and realize this.

Being involved in the design process for Heath and others I 
can tell you exactly why Heath and others floated the grids.

They did so because Bill Orr placed huge amounts of pressure 
on manufacturers to include what he called "negative 
feedback".  If you look at his Handbooks, you'll find a 
circuit called a "super cathode driven amplifier".

The entire concept was seriously flawed, but engineers 
eventually caved in to his constant pressure. Bill put as 
much pressure on me as he could to continue using floating 
grids in the Heathkit and Ameritron lines. When I 
demonstrated the small capacitors from grid to ground 
increased distortion, made amplifiers less stable, and made 
them more susceptible to exciter, bias, and  input network 
damage....plans were made to drop the floating grids at 
Heath. An amplifier tentatively called the "Warrior II" was 
proposed and Heath had the prototypes I developed, but at 
that time Heath was not sure if it was going to stay in the 
Amateur market.

The idea for floating grids actually came from Collins. 
Collins had a VERY good idea in the 30S1. Since the tube was 
a tetrode with a zero control grid current rating, the 
system  worked very well. The screen was directly grounded 
providing an arc barrier and RF shield. The control grid was 
floated through small capacitors. Since the control grid 
NEVER had grid current  the cathode/grid voltage division 
was uniform. The instant the grid drew current the grid 
cathode impedance dropped like a rock. This immediately 
clamped the grid to the cathode, and the tube was instantly 
protected for excessive control  grid current. This system 
worked fine in a tetrode. It was a piece of engineering 
artwork!

The problem came in when Collins applied that system, one 
that worked in an AB1 tetrode, to AB2 triodes.  In an AB2 
amplifier the grid/cathode resistance goes all over the 
place. The small mica caps no longer form a capacitive 
divider that is linear with frequency and drive, and there 
is no screen to serve as RF isolation or as an arc barrier 
to protect the exciter and other cathode connected systems.

This unreliable feedback is why the 30L1 went through such a 
long series of stability mods, and why Collins wanted a long 
coaxial cable back to the exciter.

Unfortunately Orr copied that idea, renamed it, never really 
grasped the problems, and successfully managed to get 
several manufacturers to copy a system very easily proven to 
be bad news.

An example of stability issues was the SB-220 series.  I 
could apply certain load impedances at LF that would make 
the amp oscillate below the AM BC band. This was because the 
grid RF chokes would resonate with the parallel capacitors, 
and since the output network was a lowpass (pi) a suitable 
length of transmission line or LF load impedance would tune 
the anode to the same frequency! The only stability problem 
in the 220 I ever found was below the BC band, and it was 
caused by the floating grids parallel L/C combination.

This is the stability problem Rich tries to turn into a VHF 
problem by saying I saw SB-220's oscillate in lab tests. It 
was NOT  VHF, it was LF.

As for grid protection, Heath ate a lot of tubes in the 
SB230. The internal argument was that users only need watch 
grid current to have good tube life, and that a positive 
electronic grid overload shutoff was an unnecessary expense. 
When that proved incorrect plans were made to rework the 
SB-230 (including 160 meters) and add a protection system. 
There were actually several amps in the works at Heath when 
they pulled out of the market, including a solid state high 
power amp.

All of this is exactly what happen inside the manufacturing 
circle. The entire floating grid mess was created by a 
flawed design that was copied and forced down the throats of 
manufacturers. It only stopped at Heath after lab 
demonstrations proved it to be a very bad idea, but by then 
most companies using it (including Heath) were leaving the 
market.

People are free to do what they want and think what they 
want, but this is what actually took place inside the 
industry. There are many hundreds of testing and evaluation 
hours behind all of this, including statistical analysis of 
failures in the field. The data base was very large, and the 
goal was to reduce field problems and improve existing 
designs.

I can say with absolute certainty if a grid is floated the 
odds of exciter damage increase several times over a 
grounded grid, and the resistance does nothing at all to 
protect the most common types of tube damage.

73 Tom 


_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

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