Drake was 1960. Did you mean the L4-B or the transmitters with tubes?
I'm talking about modern amps built in the past 30 years.
In general, when dip and max smoke don't correspond, the final is not
properly neutralized.
But that was more of a problem tetrodes and pentodes, but generally not a
problem with triode tubes.
It certainly does not hurt to dip Ip.
It will not result in a different setting than peaking Pout.
It was never different on any of the 9 different tube amps I've owned in the
past 30 years.
Something like 30 years ago, I was still dipping Ip too.
However noticing that it always coincided with max smoke, I finally just
stopped checking Ip for a dip.
MUCH more important is to keep a close eye on Ig.
On all of my amps, I always marked the danger zone for Ig by drawing a red
line on the plastic meter front with a permanent marker (Sharpie or Eding).
73 - Rick, DJ0IP
(Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Carling
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 4:52 PM
To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
Some rigs yes. Some rigs no. It doesn't necessarily follow that something is
wrong with the equipment. If you want an example, try looking at a Drake
manual.
Best regards - Bry Carling
> On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:36 AM, "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de> wrote:
>
> Bry,
>
> Tuning the Plate control for max smoke results in dipping Ip, or at
> least within a few percentage points thereof.
> If it doesn't on your amp, there's something wrong with the amp.
>
> I will only stipulate that I have not run a class C amp for over 40
> years now.
> I'm speaking about an amp running AB1 or AB2 like all of our modern amps
do.
> Peak is just fine. Dip is not necessary.
>
> Of course we start with the load backed off where we know the Ig will
> not be excessive.
>
> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> bcarling@cfl.rr.com
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 2:35 PM
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
>
>
>
>
>> On 1 Mar 2014 at 23:14, Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP wrote:
>>
>> "Dip" was pre-watt meter days.
>> No need to dip anymore.
>>
>> Just tune for maximum smoke!
>
>
> Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP ALSO wrote:
>
>> this is always subject to the
> Ig not exceeding max specs.
>
> And yes of course Rick - that is precisely why we dip Ip first before
> everything else, and always watch for not exceeding maximum plate
> current rating as well as maximum Ig rating.
>
> My Centurion 442 wants to get back on the air... but it is waiting
> patiently to be dipped and peaked again when the rewound plate
> transformer arrives back home!
>
> YMMV - de AF4K, Bry
>
>> Precisely, running full drive power, you first tune the PLATE for max
>> smoke, then repeat the sequence of slowly advancing the LOAD and
>> peaking the PLATE for max smoke.
>> If you reach the point where increasing the LOAD and peaking the
>> plate brings no more increase in max smoke, but just an increase in
>> Ig, then you've gone too far. Back it off.
>>
>> The idea is to find the exact point where max smoke is reached with
>> min LOAD that can achieve it - and of course all of this is always
>> subject to the Ig not exceeding max specs.
>>
>> Piece of cake.
>>
>> The only thing I do different in practice is, I first tune for max
>> smoke with about 30w of drive, just to get everything in resonance,
>> then I proceed as described above.
>>
>> Dip? 40 years ago, maybe!
>>
>> 73 - Rick, DJ0IP
>> (Nr. Frankfurt am Main)
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bob
>> McGraw
>> - K4TAX
>> Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 10:00 PM
>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
>>
>> The only thing I ever "dip" is a little chew.
>>
>> 73
>> Bob, K4TAX
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Brian Carling" <bcarling@cfl.rr.com>
>> To: "Ed Purvis" <wa4njy@yahoo.com>; "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment"
>> <tentec@contesting.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 2:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
>>
>>
>>> Ed you must be talking about those XE stations tuning up on SSB on
>>> the low
>>
>>> end of 40m. They groan "hoooooo-la" while they dip the plate control !
>>> SOP
>>>
>>> Best regards - Bry Carling
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Feb 22, 2014, at 8:29 PM, Ed Purvis <wa4njy@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There are some on hi-fi sideband that I am not sure they are
>>>> talking or their stomach is making noise.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Steve Berg <wa9jml@frontier.com>
>>>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
>>>> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 8:12 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [TenTec] In praise of older technology
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As part of my collection, I have Drake 2B receiver and a Gonset
>>>> GSB100 phasing exciter. One night I wound up in a round table with
>>>> a bunch of HiFi SSB aficionados 0n 40 meters. These guys were
>>>> running advanced equalizers and high-end microphones. Then had the
>>>> latest Oriental Transceivers. They even had audio spectrum
>>>> analyzers to check out each others signals. So, I asked for an
>>>> evaluation, and they were quite complimentary. So, they asked what
>>>> I was running, and I told them a
>>>> 1957 vintage phasing exciter with a D104 mic. They were amazed!
>>>> Sure, it drifts, and it is hard to get it right on frequency by
>>>> zerobeating the receiver BFO with the carrier on the exciter. But
>>>> it is a lot of fun to use.
>>>>
>>>> Steve WA9JML
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TenTec mailing list
>>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TenTec mailing list
>>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TenTec mailing list
>>> TenTec@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TenTec mailing list
>> TenTec@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|