Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] SB200 questions

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] SB200 questions
From: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:27:02 -0800
>Hello,
>I just received a tubeless, cherry looking SB200 as a first amplifier and
>have a few questions:
>
>1. A friend told me I can run 811's in it with no mods. I've noticed the 811
>max plate voltage rating is only 1500v, while the SB200 plate supply is
>about 2400v. Is this a problem for the 811's on SSB?
>
The extra V is likely to burn holes in the anodes.  811As only have 65w 
diss.  

>2. Someone loaned me a pair of 572B's to check the amp out with. We noticed
>that my transistorized exciter had trouble tuning into the SB200, especially
>on 75 meters. I've sifted through the AMPs archives, and have read Rich's
>articles on the SB220 regarding input tuning and increasing the Q of the
>input networks. In his article he states that the Q of the input (PI)
>network is Zin/Xc = 50ohms/Xc. While intuitively this seams plausible (since
>infinite Xc would cause zero Q ie: 50ohm load), I wonder where this
>definition comes from. 

the Q definition is Eimac's.  It is not perfectly accurate but it is 
close enough.  The Q is actually a bit higher.  

>It's not obvious to me that Q is calculated this way
>for the PI network. Can someone point me towards a reference on that? 

A Q of c. 2 is what gives good results.  

> Also,
>for modeling purposes of the PI network and Q, I'd like to use Q=Fc/BW
>(center freq/bandwidth). In this case, what load impedance do I assign to
>the tube? (I know it changes throughout the drive cycle). Finally, since the
>SB200 has different tubes than the SB220, I assume that the PI networks
>would be different for the two. Has someone determined optimum values for
>the SB200 using 572B's?
>
Not that I know of.  C-in would be the same.  Xc = c. 25 - ohms.  L and 
C-out are determined experimentally during a full throttle test on each 
band.  .  Fixed values are substituted.  

>3. I want to buy a new pair of 572B's. From what I can gather, the
>Svetlana's may have a bit higher gain than the Taylors or Cetrons. That may
>make them more prone to VHF parasitics. Is this true? 

yes, however, Svetlanas are no longer available.  

>Are the Svetlanas
>recommended or should I stick with the Taylors? I've noticed that this amp
>has been modified and does have parasitic suppression circuitry in the plate
>connections. Please, I do not want to reopen the great parasitc debate etc.
>
I don't know.  
>
>4. Finally, Ive notice that one other possible mod has been made. An
>uninsulated silver looking wire has been installed in series with the
>filament choke. It is wrapped around two insulative standoffs near the
>filament choke and is about 2" long. What is this? Should it be there?
>
it is allegedly a neutralization scheme.  There is no way to neutralize a 
g-g amp.  

cheers. Dave

-  Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.  
end


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com


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