Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] MTBF - was Ameritron Amps

To: Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com>, mike kendall <ke6cvh@yahoo.com>,Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Subject: Re: [Amps] MTBF - was Ameritron Amps
From: Peter Chadwick <g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk>
Reply-to: g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:04:29 +0200 (CEST)
List-post: <mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Tom,
You've just provided 'Reliability 101'.
MTBF is a figure often bandied about, but without the correct assumptions, 
numbers and inputs to the equations, can be very misleading. For example, the 
MTBF of a tube amplifier with tubes changed on a time basis can be very 
different to the MTBF if tubes are run until they fail - unless you count tube 
change as a failure, in which case the MTBF is much lower. Back in the days of 
aircraft radios using tubes, one company at Heathrow paid the service techs on 
a piecework basis - they got so much per radio fixed. So the first thing they 
did when a radio arrived on the bench was to change every tube, whether it 
needed it or not. Thus those radios showed a horrendous MTBF on tubes....
Another complication with electrolytics is the 'memory' - use a 450 volt part 
long enough at 250, and putting 450 on it gets an enormous leakage until it's 
reformed at the higher voltage.
73
Peter G3RZP
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

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