Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Re: transformers

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Re: transformers
From: w8jitom@postoffice.worldnet.att.net (w8jitom@postoffice.worldnet.att.net)
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 18:12:30 +0000
> From:          Rich Measures <measures@vc.net>
To: <amps@contesting.com>
> Date:          Thu, 10 Jul 97 12:39:24 +0000

> >My question was"does the TL-922 use a series or parallel filament 
> >circuit?". You stated the only difference was the transformer 
> >"style".
> >.   
> - I measured the inrush current in each tube with a HP 1708 oscilloscope. 
>  Did you?  It matters not whether the filaments are fed in series with 
> 10v or in parallel with 5v.  What matters is the measured inrush current 
> in each filament.  The SB-220 is within Eimac specs.  The TL-922 is not.  

I take your response as indicating the filament circuits are indeed  
different. The TL-922 places the filaments in series, much as the 
filament surge prone All American Five radios used, where you could 
watch some tubes light up like a spotlight.

In a series system, ESR has half the limiting effect. Worse than 
that, the series connection results in poor voltage distribution 
during heating with the weakest tube dissipating the highest inrush 
power.

Your conclusion the difference doesn't matter is wrong, it makes a 
great deal of difference. Series connected  filaments in Christmas 
Tree lights are bad enough, with $150 tubes a series filament 
system is VERY poor engineering, inrush limited or not.

> BTW, Mr. Rauch, I'm still waiting for you to publish the letter that you 
> alleged restores Mr. Miklos to the position of "R+D Engineering Manager" 
> at Eimac's Salt Lake City facility---a position that their personnel 
> department said he did not hold during his employment.

Anyone wishing to see a copy of this letter, which proves Mr. 
Measures lives in his own world where he simply "invents things", is 
welcome to ask for a fax copy.

>. ..... As I 
> recall, you stated that Mr. Miklos was going to show up here In January.  

Mr. Miklos, the former director of R+D at Eimac-Varian in Salt Lake 
City, is active on internet now Rich. I have no control of his 
activity, but it is clear after he read a few of your poison pen 
posts he decided to stay far away from you. 

Scratch one very useful guy to all of us (except you) on this 
reflector.

For an example of why someone might avoid contributing, we need 
only look at the long drawn out SB-220 transformer nonsense. 
Anyone curious should look at the ARRL Handbook's section on 
transformers (page 6.45 of the 95 edition). It plainly states 
"Leakage inductance acts in exactly the same way as an equivalent 
amount of ORDINARY inductance in series with the circuit." There is 
NO current limiting in a transformer, other than conventional losses 
that behave EXACTLY like reactances and resistances in a conventional 
circuit. Core saturation is a function of applied VOLTAGE, not load 
current (unless the load is a rectified system that magnetizes the 
core, lowering inductance). 

While the Handbook isn't always correct, this information can 
also be found in Electronic Designer's Handbook and ITT's Reference 
Data for Radio Engineers. When three reference books agree, and 
one person is out on his own limb, it isn't hard to understand 
where the error is. 

I discussed the filament transformer issue at length many years 
ago with Ernie Smith, the chief engineer for one of Heath's and 
Zenith's main transformer vendors. There is NO special design of the 
220 transformer. It's not on the BOM's, it's not "hidden" in 
secret papers at the transformer company. It was never spec'ed, 
because all that is ever necessary is to build the transformer and 
other components out of high temperature materials and run them close 
to the design limit.  

The repetitious drawn out arguing about the 220 transformer, from a 
person who never had access to Heath engineering data or BOM's, just 
wastes everyone's time. 

So it "looks like" a neon sign transformer, which limits current by 
winding ESR and not magnetic shunts, to you. And you are welcome to  
think all transformers limit current by core thickness, even though 
they do not.

And it doesn't look like a welder transformer to you, which often 
DO have a magnetic shunts calibrated in amperes to vary the 
leakage impedance and adjust current. You are certainly entitled to 
your personal opinion on that also.

No matter how backwards you have things.
73, Tom W8JI 

--
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>