Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Re\:$AMPS$\s+sb\-200\s+troubles\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Re\:$AMPS$\s+sb\-200\s+troubles\s*$/: 23 ]

Total 23 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: kb5vca@cei.net (steve thacker); Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 13:14:22 -0500; the rf safety choke is there for a definite safety reason--to blow from the dc supply gitting thru the plate blocking cap--check it--bet it shorted. new call w5set. 73 de KB5VCA Steve & Darlene -- FA; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00198.html (7,885 bytes)
2. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 09:01:14 -0700; When the DC blocker fails without a "safety choke" being present, the Load C itself acts as a protective spark gap, arcs, and shorts the HV to ground. - - Rich... R. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, ww; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00200.html (8,801 bytes)
3. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 17:16:47 +0100; A lot of the 'safety' chokes I've seen burn up if the blocking cap fails - they can't take the DC from a PSU capable of an amp or more. It does give you fair warning, but I'm not totally convinced ab; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00202.html (8,753 bytes)
4. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: johnf@futurenet.co.za (John Fielding); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 18:49:54 +0200; Not in my amplifiers! John ZS5JF -- To: <amps@contesting.com> -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.c; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00205.html (9,946 bytes)
5. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 13:05:25 -0400; If that is intended to be advice that the safety choke is not needed, it is very bad advice. Blocking capacitors don't always fail shorted, they can fail with leakage. Not only that, normal charging; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00207.html (8,727 bytes)
6. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: wlfuqu00@pop.uky.edu (William L. Fuqua III); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 13:19:11 -0400 (EDT); This is more than just a safety choke. With out it the small leakage current thru the Plate blocking capacitor would would charge up the output capacitor to full plate DC voltage on top of which will; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00208.html (9,202 bytes)
7. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: philk5pc@tyler.net (Phil Clements); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 12:20:18 -0500; from the shorted. When the plate blocking cap fails, this puts the HV across the antenna terminal. The purpose of the safety RF choke is to trip the primary CB's or fuses to remove the HV from there; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00209.html (9,036 bytes)
8. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 11:28:13 -0700; ? whereupon the Load C arcs to gnd - which puts the DC supply out of business. - - Rich... R. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.ht; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00210.html (9,459 bytes)
9. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: philk5pc@tyler.net (Phil Clements); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 14:58:15 -0500; The safety choke should be matched to the primary CB's or fuses to be robust enough to withstand the current fo the time it takes for the fuses to blow. ? whereupon the Load C arcs to gnd - which pu; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00214.html (9,991 bytes)
10. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 13:15:33 -0700; ? is this Fractenna-guy on the rec.radio.amateur.antenna Newsgroup? - - Rich... R. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissi; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00215.html (9,986 bytes)
11. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 13:15:35 -0700; fuses to With an ordinary Load C, this is not going to happen. - - Rich... R. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions:; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00216.html (9,714 bytes)
12. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: philk5pc@tyler.net (Phil Clements); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 17:57:44 -0500; I guess the load C's in my amps are in the extrordinary catagory. They are 1000 pf 5kv vacuum variables. No arcing with full HV applied, much less a smaller voltage from a leaky C/block. The safety; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00218.html (9,644 bytes)
13. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: measures@vcnet.com (Rich Measures); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 17:28:12 -0700; or enough ? A 5kV Load-C clearly belongs in a tetrode with handles amplifier. ? I have never seen a leaky C-block. When barium titanate dielectric starts to breakdown, a short is virtually certain w; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00219.html (10,262 bytes)
14. Fw: [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: philk5pc@tyler.net (Phil Clements); Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 21:46:00 -0500; -- 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.cont; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00224.html (10,606 bytes)
15. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: itr@nanoteq.co.za (Ian Roberts); Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 09:06:17 +0200; Anyone using a PA on an antenna without DC grounded driven element is certifiable. The antenna ground MUST be in parallel with the shack's mains earth. This lets one off the hook regarding the protec; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00228.html (10,506 bytes)
16. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: Peter_Chadwick@mitel.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 09:23:40 +0100; Certainly - no argument about what it SHOULD be! All too frequently, though, it isn't man enough for the job. 73 Peter G3RZP -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@co; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00232.html (8,818 bytes)
17. SV: [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: sm5ki@algonet.se (Hans Goldschmidt); Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:36:50 +0200; Why not use another plate choke instead of the tiny receiving type normally used? By the wy I saw in G3VA:s TECHNICALTOPICS SCRAPBOOK your eccellent idea from 1988 feeding the anode supply at the ant; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00234.html (9,325 bytes)
18. SV: [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: sm5ki@algonet.se (Hans Goldschmidt); Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:33:58 +0200; Why not use another plate choke instead of the tiny receiving type normally used? By the way I saw in G3VA:s TECHNICALTOPICS SCRAPBOOK your excellent idea from 1988 feeding the anode supply at the an; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00235.html (9,924 bytes)
19. SV: [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: sm5ki@algonet.se (Hans Goldschmidt); Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 12:09:15 +0200; Thank you! As the old greek said nothing new under the sun,hi! I think you did not get the whole message. So, here we go again: Yes Ian, but there is something very important connected to this: you g; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00236.html (10,318 bytes)
20. [AMPS] Re:(AMPS) sb-200 troubles (score: 1): Author: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:46:05 -0400; Then I am in that class. I can count the following here: 160 dipole at 310 feet above ground, 80 meter dipole at 160 feet AGL, force 12 ten, fifteen, and twenty meter yagi stacks with floating paras; /archives//html/Amps/1999-08/msg00239.html (13,431 bytes)

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