Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Re: 8877 failures; thoriated tungsten vs. indirectly

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Re: 8877 failures; thoriated tungsten vs. indirectly
From: km1h@juno.com (km1h @ juno.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 17:57:12 EST
On Tue, 18 Nov 97 12:14:38 -0800 Rich Measures <measures@vc.net> writes:

>The 8877 I selected for opening this morning appears to be an example 
>of 
>the problem Mr. Erhorn described.  There was only 2 uA of leakage at 
>9kV. 
> I removed the anode cooler.   As expected, there were no gold 
>blisters 
>on the grid.  The cathode coating was pristine.  The fatal 
>cathode/grid 
>short was pretty obviously caused by a manufacturing defect.  .  .    
>In 
>the good old days when 2 amateur radio operators named Eitel and 
>McCullough owned Eimac, this tube would have been replaced even though 
>it 
>was out of warranty. 


That would appear to be a prime candidate for your Web page photo
collection Rich....it would at least be a change....

73   Carl   KM1H


 .  . 
>- .  Bigger is not always better.  -
>
>Rich---
>
>
>
>
>R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K   
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
>Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
>Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>

--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
Search:                   http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>