Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Tank\s+eff\.\.\.\s+with\s+more\s+B\+\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Tank\s+eff\.\.\.\s+with\s+more\s+B\+\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] Tank eff... with more B+ (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <Jim.thom@telus.net>; Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:07:34 -0800; Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 23:39:19 EST From: TexasRF@aol.com Subject: Re: [Amps] water cooled 160m amp. Jim, if you look art the curves for any of these tubes you will notice that the plate voltage swing; /archives//html/Amps/2010-02/msg00400.html (9,769 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Tank eff... with more B+ (score: 1): Author: TexasRF@aol.com; Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:28:31 EST; Hi Jim, I will rephrase a bit. I used peak power in the efficiency numbers and should have used rms power. My bad. Assuming the plate current is 1A for both examples, low power would generate 2200w p; /archives//html/Amps/2010-02/msg00402.html (13,868 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Tank eff... with more B+ (score: 1): Author: TexasRF@aol.com; Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:37:19 EST; Oh, I left off one summary point: The tank efficiency does not increase with more B+. Due to the associated higher Q, the tank efficiency actually decreases. The tube efficiency does increase with mo; /archives//html/Amps/2010-02/msg00403.html (14,222 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]