Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Tubes\,\s+transistors\,\s+and\s+\'abuse\'\s*$/: 26 ]

Total 26 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Catherine James <catherine.james@att.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 12:12:46 +0000 (UTC)
Did you miss where I said "When 'pick up the component in your hand' qualifies as 'abuse', you have an issue"? Again, the point is that they require extreme protection. Tubes don't. In my previous e
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00061.html (7,933 bytes)

2. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: MU 4CX250B <4cx250b@miamioh.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 07:14:45 -0600
Anti-static maps are always a good idea, when working with solid state devices. I buy mine on eBay, and prefer the ones made by the Velleman because they have a nice white surface. They are not expen
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00062.html (7,453 bytes)

3. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Walsh <w2co@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 08:14:36 -0600
Cathy, I have a tube with handles that actually heats the basement in the winter just idling! I wonder if there's any transistor that can do that? I know one thing, if I ever build a SS amp, it will
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00063.html (8,933 bytes)

4. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Manfred Mornhinweg <manfred@ludens.cl>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 15:10:04 +0000
It's fun to see you quarreling, once again, over the "are tubes or transistors better" question! I thought this had been about settled, back around 1960 so or... When you handle them, do you have an
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00064.html (13,673 bytes)

5. [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 10:58:16 -0700
It's fun to see you quarreling, once again, over the "are tubes or transistors better" question! I thought this had been about settled, back around 1960 so or... And in this regard I must have missed
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00065.html (9,846 bytes)

6. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: MU 4CX250B <4cx250b@miamioh.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 12:42:29 -0600
Ah, Wise move on your part, Manfred. I wouldn't wear it either! Your former boss needed higher level Technical Support! Jim Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ Amps ma
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00067.html (11,528 bytes)

7. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: MU 4CX250B <4cx250b@miamioh.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 12:52:00 -0600
Speaking of high resistance mats, an interesting property is that the resistance between any two points on the map is the same, no matter the distance between the points. In other words, it doesn't m
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00069.html (12,311 bytes)

8. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:20:00 +0000
-- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: Both tubes and transistors each have their own protection requirements. Treating a transistor like a tube or vice versa is asking for trouble. For one, t
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00071.html (9,112 bytes)

9. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:25:03 +0000
-- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: Manfred, Manfred, Manfred. Wrist straps and anti-static mats are always grounded through a high value resistor, one meg or more. You are safe. 73, Bill W
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00072.html (9,262 bytes)

10. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:33:54 +0000
-- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: A MOSFET should never be placed on a metal surface in the first place. Either keep it in it's original anti-static bag or on an anti-static mat. Nothing
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00073.html (9,274 bytes)

11. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Glen Zook via Amps <amps@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:45:23 +0000 (UTC)
It depends on the tube as to if it is going to be damaged by dropping on the floor.  Some tubes are very fragile while others can handle a whole lot of mishandling.  Glen, K9STH  Website: http://k9st
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00074.html (9,848 bytes)

12. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:48:27 +0000
-- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: The internal structure of a tube is very fragile, even if the glass or ceramic doesn't break. Even if the tube appears to work afterwards, something may
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00075.html (9,396 bytes)

13. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: donroden@hiwaay.net
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 14:49:07 -0500
Disagree. Don W4DNR Speaking of high resistance mats, an interesting property is that the resistance between any two points on the map is the same, no matter the distance between the points. In other
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00076.html (13,906 bytes)

14. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: "Doug Ronald" <doug@dougronald.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 13:04:15 -0700
I just tested the anti-static mat in front of me with an ohmmeter, and was amazed to see the resistance was not linear with distance. The mat was on an insulating surface, and with the probes as clos
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00077.html (15,720 bytes)

15. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:16:07 +0000
In Jim's post there were five assertions of fact, one opinion, one typo and a polite closing. Was Don disagreeing with some or all of them? Al AB2ZY ________________________________________ From: Amp
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00078.html (16,341 bytes)

16. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: Jim Garland <4cx250b@miamioh.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 14:17:04 -0600
Doug, I agree that those numbers sound low for an ESD mat, but I'm not surprised that the values of the two measurements were about the same. The thickness of the mat complicates the results when the
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00079.html (16,518 bytes)

17. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: "Jim W7RY" <jimw7ry@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 20:23:34 -0500
It's fun to see you quarreling, once again, over the "are tubes or transistors better" question! I thought this had been about settled, back around 1960 so or... When you handle them, do you have an
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00087.html (9,321 bytes)

18. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: donroden@hiwaay.net
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 07:40:25 -0500
Unless you have a perfect conductor under or part of your conductive mat, there will be differences as the mat is probed with a Fluke. Don W4DNR In Jim's post there were five assertions of fact, one
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00091.html (16,744 bytes)

19. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: MU 4CX250B <4cx250b@miamioh.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 10:50:32 -0600
You're partly right, Don, but only because a real mat always has some thickness and isn't always very large compared to the probe spacing. But even in that case, the difference in measurements isn't
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00095.html (19,876 bytes)

20. Re: [Amps] Tubes, transistors, and 'abuse' (score: 1)
Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2017 00:25:34 -0400
What if you didn't increase the width along with the length? IOW, We go from 1 CM^2 to 1CM by 1 Meter (10 Cm) would the same hold true. 1 Cm X 1CM is the same scale as 1 M X 1 M. It's the size that's
/archives//html/Amps/2017-04/msg00104.html (19,514 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu