Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+SB\-200\s+Problem\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+SB\-200\s+Problem\s*$/: 33 ]

Total 33 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: millscl+@pitt.edu (Chuck Mills); Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 19:24:56 -0500; Hi there. I have a problem with an Heathkit SB-200 that I'd like to throw at the list. I did a cursory search of the archives and did not find anything specific to my problem. Background: Heathkit SB; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00058.html (8,249 bytes)
2. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: 2@mail.vcnet.com (Richard); Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 17:52:30 -0800; ? Newer 572Bs reportedly have more gain than those produced in days of yore, More gain means more ability to regenerate/oscillate. My un-expert guess is that your new tubes had an intermittent VHF p; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00061.html (10,040 bytes)
3. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: W2CS@bellsouth.net (Gary J. Ferdinand); Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 21:09:24 -0500; Chuck, Were you feeding power to the amp when it pegged or did you just throw it into transmit position but without the exciter putting any power into it? This sounds like a classic amp-taking-off p; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00062.html (9,347 bytes)
4. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: millscl+@pitt.edu (Chuck Mills); Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 21:36:00 -0500; Yikes....lots of good info here. I replaced all of the blown components I could find (RF Choke, the 33ohm from lug to ground) and threw the antenna switch ... it still pegs and the 33 ohm resistor wi; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00063.html (10,378 bytes)
5. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: Shep1478@starband.net (Jim Sheppard); Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 21:55:16 -0500; Sorry to hear about the problem, but this is a great thread going here - I'm learning a lot! Jim - KT4FD --Original Message-- From: amps-admin@contesting.com [mailto:amps-admin@contesting.com]On Beha; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00064.html (11,143 bytes)
6. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: W6NQ <w6nq@rfparts.com> (W6NQ); Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 20:29:13 -0800; Hi Chuck: Previous comments have given you have a wealth of good info to explore. One thing not mentioned is the possibility that you might have a shorted or gassy tube at this time. Shorted tubes us; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00066.html (11,677 bytes)
7. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: 2@mail.vcnet.com (Richard); Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 23:14:45 -0800; could ? no RF input is needed when it makes its own. cheers, Chuck; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00069.html (10,957 bytes)
8. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: 2@mail.vcnet.com (Richard); Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 23:15:18 -0800; ? With no RF drive, the abrupt change in DC anode current from 0 to idling/ZSAC current rings the SB-200's anode-resonance at c. 100MHz. This DC change rings this resonant circuit producing a damped; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00070.html (9,868 bytes)
9. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: Peter.Chadwick@zarlink.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:49:54 -0000; I would be inclined to do the first sets of tests with a 50 ohm load on the output, and the transceiver connected to the input (transceiver in transmit, but delivering NO power). That way, the amp is; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00073.html (8,850 bytes)
10. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: millscl+@pitt.edu (Chuck Mills); Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 08:50:18 -0500; This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --msFE4F0949EF07F49707D47E4C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Both tubes light...I have an "old" s; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00079.html (17,261 bytes)
11. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: millscl+@pitt.edu (Chuck Mills); Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 08:52:36 -0500; This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --ms5B116DF33B6FA7A5854A87C4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit No problem on the second resistor; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00080.html (12,864 bytes)
12. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: W2CS@bellsouth.net (Gary J. Ferdinand); Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:31:59 -0500; Chuck, Frequently an amp will take off like that only with a particular combination of load and setting of plate/load capacitors. That it seems to happen with an arbitrary setting of the caps tells m; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00081.html (10,169 bytes)
13. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: 2@mail.vcnet.com (Richard); Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 06:53:35 -0800; way, that. ? the sticky wicket is that the c. 100MHz energy never sees the 50? load because the tank is a low-pass filter config. internal ? amen warm....... ? However, the loss of a couple of perce; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00084.html (9,104 bytes)
14. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: Peter.Chadwick@zarlink.com (Peter Chadwick); Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 15:05:46 -0000; I wouldn't say 'never', but it's certainly a much modified impedance. The filter effect won't be that much of course, since it's only two octaves up. The load could be useful in helping stability at; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00086.html (8,027 bytes)
15. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: k4ik@subich.com (Joe Subich, K4IK); Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 10:19:18 -0500; What brand of tubes do you have? Some brands (Svetlana) required much higher cut-off bias and were unreliable in certain amplifiers unless the bias circuit was modified to provide a higher voltage.; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00087.html (8,439 bytes)
16. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: 2@mail.vcnet.com (Richard); Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 07:31:46 -0800; ? True. The SB220 typically get squirrely on 40m. ? To see what's up, measure the resonance at the DC blocking cap. My guess is that it's c. 100MHz, +/- 20MHz. This will be the most likely place to; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00088.html (9,604 bytes)
17. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: 2@mail.vcnet.com (Richard); Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:04:26 -0800; ? What's the XL of the typical HF tank L at 100MHz? What is the XC of the typical HF Load-C at 100MHz? - R. L. Measures, a.k.a. Rich..., 805.386.3734,AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures. end; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00092.html (8,298 bytes)
18. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: kc5vdj@yahoo.com (Jim Bryant); Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 14:27:24 -0600; The TV-7 series of testers can test for gas and shorts. -- Settings for TV-7 (*)/U Test Set, Electron Tube. 1 row returned in 0.012971 Seconds. Tube: 572B -- Filament: 6.3 Settings: ER3-0000 Range: B; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00135.html (9,175 bytes)
19. [Amps] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: 2@mail.vcnet.com (Richard); Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:13:36 -0800; It takes c. 3kV to gas-check a 572B. - R. L. Measures, a.k.a. Rich..., 805.386.3734,AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures. end; /archives//html/Amps/2002-03/msg00145.html (7,383 bytes)
20. [AMPS] SB-200 Problem (score: 1): Author: martyt@pobox.com (Tippin, Martin); Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 08:52:43 -0600; My SB-200 won't load up on 10m at all anymore... Used to be I could get around 500 watts out but something has apparently changed. It also used to show a SWR of around 2:1 to my FT-920 exciter which; /archives//html/Amps/1999-03/msg00551.html (8,139 bytes)

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