Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+setting\s+the\s+grid\s+adrift\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+setting\s+the\s+grid\s+adrift\s*$/: 36 ]

Total 36 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: Chris Howard <chris@yipyap.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:26:53 -0600; Now that's an interesting piece of information, (And I note that Will posted the same passage recently). I have to object slightly to your assertion that the grid "will" become positive. The paragra; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01086.html (9,912 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:26:21 -0400; Correct. In smaller low voltage tubes that are gas free, it will go negative. That's how contact bias works. In larger tubes, especially HV tubes, there is always some residual gas and positive ions; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01090.html (12,374 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:36:09 -0400; I wish someone would answer a question I put out a few days back on this. How can a grid, connected to ground mind you, have a positive potential? Where would the charge on any gird go when connected; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01093.html (12,410 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: Chris Howard <chris@yipyap.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:02:16 -0600; Yea! good for me. Have no fear! I didn't read "all protection circuits are bad", just some curmudgeonly skepticism. Well... the other issue of course is _COST_. If a reliable system is obtainable wit; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01097.html (12,136 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:20:10 +0200; There is neither high cost nor a sophisticated circuit necessary to protect tubes. The cost is always a fraction of the tubes value It is the only way. When the grid is under arc it is at anode poten; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01102.html (10,353 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:44:54 -0400; As long as it works the same. It is a recommended design standard that appears many places. Not a philosophy. Anyone who has taken basic physics or worked with electronics in any technical depth sho; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01106.html (11,715 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 15:08:55 -0400; Uhhhh Tom, your mis-quoting me again. I said the grid would not go over 0 Vdc if connected to ground. I also said it would stay negative or at 0 Vdc if those ions flying around in a gassy tube were h; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01109.html (14,391 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 15:48:28 -0400; Will, Early on you said contact bias and grid leak bias were the same, they are not. You also said when the grid was floated during a fuse or resistor blow, it would go negative. It does not in the; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01114.html (12,715 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:23:12 -0400; Tom, If I said those, things, go back and copy them verbatim, and post them on here. However, post the whole text I said, not just one small part of it. Matter of fact, I'll do it for you. Never did; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01116.html (32,112 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: Chris Howard <chris@yipyap.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 15:32:35 -0600; Because if 1000 hams make that same mod and they all think it was worth the effort then either 1) they are under mass dilusion, or 2) something about it worked. You could make the argument that the; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01125.html (9,256 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:06:56 +0200; It's the same as swapping switching diodes in transceivers to pin-diodes without checking/correcting their current. Thousands did. Every day another fool awakes, one just hast to find him... 73 Peter; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01127.html (8,720 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:28:44 -0400; See below; ** REPLY SEPARATOR ** See the post to this same text I made earlier about what I said in the past. All the quotes are there. Are you saying the grid in a 3-500Z could have a potential of +; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01129.html (17,025 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:06:01 +0200; Will, Again, electrode voltages of tubes are ALWAYS referenced to the cathode of a tube, not to ground. I hope you agree that a 3-500Z draws about 100mA grid-current under normal conditions. If you l; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01132.html (9,369 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 21:26:07 -0400; First, how do you know 1000 people did that mod? Second, millions of things are sold every year that do absolutely nothing. Look at the New Age things. Third, it can easily be demonstrated in contro; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01134.html (10,876 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: Chris Howard <chris@yipyap.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:01:01 -0600; Actually, Rich's number was 6000. See this post from yesterday: http://lists.contesting.com/_amps/2006-07/msg01034.html Sounds great! Bring on the data! ______________________________________________; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01137.html (9,593 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: Chris Howard <chris@yipyap.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:55:09 -0600; I read this over, and decided it need some explanation. I'm not making some kind of challenge... I am honestly happy that some kind of controlled test can lay the issue to rest. Chris _______________; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01140.html (8,709 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Will Matney" <craxd1@verizon.net>; Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:40:41 -0400; Peter, Yes there will be a difference like that from grid to cathode from being driven. However, in the case of an arc, we're talking about the power supply only involved in the arc (think DC only, y; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01142.html (14,343 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: Peter Chadwick <g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk>; Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 10:23:31 +0200 (CEST); stories would be different than what has been reported here.< I have a suspicion that results will depend on the particular tube. 73 Peter G3RZP _______________________________________________ Amps m; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01145.html (7,078 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 06:14:36 -0400; Will, I'm trying to get some idea what your experience is Will, since it certainly disarees with what I have seen and other people on this reflector with design experience has seen. I'm trying to ge; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01148.html (10,750 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] setting the grid adrift (score: 1): Author: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>; Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:10:15 -0400; Chris, In the manufacturing process, great effort is made to understand why and how things fail and what to do to prevent failure. When you have several thousands of something in the field you don't; /archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg01154.html (10,341 bytes)

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