Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Power\s+Supply\s+Diodes\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Power\s+Supply\s+Diodes\s*$/: 31 ]

Total 31 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@nis4u.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 01:30:28 +0000; Even though this subject has been covered at some depth in the past, I find myself at a loss for a solution to my latest predicament. A little background information may help keep the "help" on track; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00009.html (9,859 bytes)
2. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 19:38:42 -0700; Did you see the precaution against using so-called equalizer resistors in the post 1994 Handbooks? What value of R ans watt rating?. thanks Did you have a glitch resistor in series with the positive; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00011.html (11,065 bytes)
3. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: rakefet@rakefet.com (Vic Rosenthal); Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 19:43:10 -0800; My theory is that a transient on the AC line is the cause. It was spread unevenly across the diode string because of junction-capacitance differences. Paralleling each diode with a low-tolerance .001; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00012.html (8,456 bytes)
4. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@nis4u.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 05:42:11 +0000; Vic, Thanks for the observation. In my experience, I have never seen a "mysterious" rectifier diode failure. Each time, the trail of debris suggested turn-on transient or big-bang. I'll not rule out; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00017.html (9,185 bytes)
5. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: w7iuv@nis4u.com (Larry Molitor); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 05:29:11 +0000; Rich, I have seen precautions against using resistors and against NOT using resistors. I have also sen precautions both ways for shunt caps. I have seen no real proof of any of it. I have hard proof; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00018.html (10,224 bytes)
6. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: rakefet@rakefet.com (Vic Rosenthal); Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 22:00:00 -0800; That's why I suggested a transient. It doesn't look like a current-related problem. Did you have a mov in the primary or some kind of transient-absorbing circuitry across the secondary? Whether or no; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00021.html (8,900 bytes)
7. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 09:07:52 -0000; Like Larry, I've seen equalising resistors used and not used. If the diode is a controlled avalanche device, then sure you don't need them. If you don't have a controlled avalanche device and reasona; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00024.html (9,612 bytes)
8. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 05:10:27 -0700; The author provides a semi-explanation of the failure mechanism with equalizers. . We have the knowledge that currents are always equal in a series circuit. ? Doctors used to recommend eating marger; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00026.html (13,317 bytes)
9. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 05:10:29 -0700; 200 amperes cheers, Peter - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUES; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00027.html (9,995 bytes)
10. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:05:12 -0000; (snip) I don't know the repetitive peak current rating Are you sure that is the repetitive peak, Rich? The transient peak not exceeding so many milliseconds, yes, but repetitive peak? Sounds very hig; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00030.html (9,187 bytes)
11. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: phil@vaxxine.com (Phil T. (VA3UX)); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 09:12:17 -0500; Under the circumstances Larry, it appears that one or more of these diodes were destined for a short life anyhow. Their death likely resulted in a domino type death of the others. They obviously didn; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00031.html (11,110 bytes)
12. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: phil@vaxxine.com (Phil T. (VA3UX)); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 09:15:00 -0500; That's the half cycle (8.3 ms), non-repetitive rating Peter. Max continuous rating is 3 amps at some max operating temp. Phil -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@c; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00032.html (9,524 bytes)
13. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 14:26:31 -0000; Precisely, Phil. Could well be that the max repetitive peak was being exceeded. When you consider the minimal cost of these diodes, it's advice that's cheap to implement as well as being good. 73 Pet; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00034.html (9,472 bytes)
14. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: ko0u@os.com (Steve Harrison); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 14:24:29 +0000; The Motorola web data sheet shows 200 amperes for NON-repetitive peak current for the 1N5408; the 1N4007 is rated at 30 amperes. Neither data sheet gives a repetitive peak current rating. 73, Steve K; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00035.html (9,167 bytes)
15. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: ko0u@os.com (Steve Harrison); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 14:40:50 +0000; I gather that Larry has apparently not replaced the rectifiers as yet and operated the unit again. So perhaps something DID blow, taking out the diodes, which he will discover when he tries to fire i; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00036.html (10,853 bytes)
16. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 07:50:01 -0700; The 60Hz repetitive pk rating is 200a for 1n5408s. . The 6A version is rated at 400 repetitive amps. cheers, Peter. - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contest; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00037.html (9,338 bytes)
17. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 07:50:04 -0700; As I understand it, a rating of say 8.3mS indicates the period of the allowable repetitive peak. cheers - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00038.html (9,596 bytes)
18. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (measures); Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 07:50:08 -0700; What is the repetitive peak I rating? thanks - Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures. -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative re; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00039.html (9,163 bytes)
19. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: ko0u@os.com (Steve Harrison); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 18:38:49 +0000; Pardon me: here's the exact wording from the Motorola 1N5408 data sheet, both the present-day web page and from my old "Motorola Silicon Rectifier Manual", Series A, copyright 1980: "Average Rectifie; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00052.html (10,721 bytes)
20. [AMPS] Power Supply Diodes (score: 1): Author: phil@vaxxine.com (Phil T. (VA3UX)); Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 14:58:56 -0500; No pardoning required. The term "Irep" came from the last umteen issues of the ARRL Handbook. Since that's the book that alot of my initial learning was gleaned from, that's the term I remember most; /archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00056.html (9,498 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]