On 18/03/15 05:00, Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>
amps-request@contesting.com wrote:
Many thanks for your engagement.
mechanical, non-RF side [...] another time.
Thank you. We'll get to that after we establish it is a viable
proposition RF-wise.
Basically, I think oil cooling of some sort would work.
Thank you, so do I, but quote sources or include logic please. I have
my own opinions also which I seek to convert to facts - as much as they
will stand up to scrutiny.
Low anode temp
would not be an issue for this tube,
Quote sources..
What is "dry" transformer oil?
Transformer Oil with traces of water removed with a desiccant
refrigerant filter/drier - a mechanical issue. For the purposes of RF
analysis we may call it "dry", ie no moisture in it, and that the oil
intrinsically is the dielectric, not some moisture-in-oil mixture that
would be a risky proposition in your auto engine, let alone in a 4KV RF
closed container.
What is the dielectric constant of that oil?
I do not know. I will ask the supplier and report back. A quick google
suggests ball-park relative permittivity of 2.0 to 2.5
This is a good question. A rhetorical question might be, What might the
effect be of raising the atmosphere around the tube relative
permittivity, from 1.0 to near 3.0 εr, and how might tube parameters be
effected?
There is likely a good reason this has not been attempted.
What do you mean by "close-housing..."?
I mean, to build some welded aluminium box/socket arrangement with O
ring seals and a lid (maybe polycarbonate) on it etc, and that the walls
of the box are quite close to the tube at many points - maybe only as
much 1cm apart. A mechanical issue for sure, but the boxes' effect on
the tube may be marked, or even dramatic, or even fatal - electrically
and RF-wise, so the box is relevant, electrically.
Many thanks again for the engagement.
Steve
ZL1BHD
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|