To: <amps@contesting.com>
>> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:03:31 -0500
>> From: Jon Ogden <jono@webspun.com>
>> Subject: Re: [AMPS] Amplifier Experiments!
>> To: w8ji.tom@mcione.com, amps@contesting.com
>
>Hi Jon,
>
>> Hmm...read again, Tom. I think my failure WAS a parasitic of some sort.
>> To make a 3 watt, 1 Ohm metal film resistor fail, one would need several
>> amps of current. To make a parallel combination of a one ohm 3 watt and
>> a one ohm 2 watt fail, one would need far more current than is probably
>> available. And it happened again yesterday. More on that in another
>> note.
>
>The saturated current of a 4-1000A is roughly 16 amperes. If the
>"parasitic" drove the screen and control grids to 1000 volts positive,
>and the anode was held at a few thousand volts, you'd only have about
>16 amperes of filament emission.
How does he know that the peak current needed to blow the resistors was
16A?
>
>Now think about an "oscillator" circuit. In order to have that much
>voltage, feedback voltage would have to be nearly 100% of anode
>voltage. If feedback was 100%, the tube would oscillate all the time.
>
>It's a nice "theory", but knowing how oscillators, amplifiers,
>and tubes works should cause one to toss the "parasitic" theory right
>out the window.
>
However, Mr. Rauch, when standard AC circuit analysis indicated that your
statement about virtually no VHF current flowing in a VHF suppressor
inductor was somewhat less than accurate, you tossed AC theory right out
the window.
Rich...
R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures
--
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
|