Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am planning to build a suppressor-grid modulated AM transmitter.
In all the diagrams I have seen they use proper pentodes, i.e. tubes that have a real suppressor grid (e.g. 803). I have seen no diagram using beam power tubes (e.g. 813 or 814) which have beam forming plates instead of the suppressor grid . Before purchasing 803 tubes, I would like to be sure that 813s or 814s are really unsuitable for suppressor-grid modulation. My question is whether, with 813s or 814s, the plate current can be actually controlled by varying the beam forming plates voltage. Does anyone have experience on that issue? 73 Tony I0JX Rome, Italy |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Il 16/01/2011 19.19, Antonio Vernucci ha scritto:
I am planning to build a suppressor-grid modulated AM transmitter. In all the diagrams I have seen they use proper pentodes, i.e. tubes that have a real suppressor grid (e.g. 803). I have seen no diagram using beam power tubes (e.g. 813 or 814) which have beam forming plates instead of the suppressor grid . Before purchasing 803 tubes, I would like to be sure that 813s or 814s are really unsuitable for suppressor-grid modulation. My question is whether, with 813s or 814s, the plate current can be actually controlled by varying the beam forming plates voltage. Does anyone have experience on that issue? 73 Tony I0JX Rome, Italy Hello Tony, de Piero I5SPO. Quite a ( very ) long time ago, i've done an A.M. TX with a Geloso VFO and a class C RL12P35 Wehrmacht pentode, whose characteristics are similar to 1625 ( a.k.a. 807 with 12.6 v filament ), using a carbon mike and a step-up audio transformer. I believe that, using beam tetrodes, there's no way... :-( I know also 813 and 814 ( have 2 pcs ) and these, like 807, are useful for controlled carrier A.M. by modulating screen grid. Do not know 803, but if i remember well, are low power tubes. Used with suppressor modulation, their output will be one fourth of CW rated output, and efficiency is consequently low... :-( HTH, 73, Piero. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hello Tony, de Piero I5SPO.
Quite a ( very ) long time ago, i've done an A.M. TX with a Geloso VFO and a class C RL12P35 Wehrmacht pentode, whose characteristics are similar to 1625 ( a.k.a. 807 with 12.6 v filament ), using a carbon mike and a step-up audio transformer. I believe that, using beam tetrodes, there's no way... :-( I know also 813 and 814 ( have 2 pcs ) and these, like 807, are useful for controlled carrier A.M. by modulating screen grid. Do not know 803, but if i remember well, are low power tubes. Used with suppressor modulation, their output will be one fourth of CW rated output, and efficiency is consequently low... :-( HTH, 73, Piero. Hi Piero, the 803 is about the same as the 813, though it has a proper suppressor screen. Other differences are socket (5 pin vs. 7 pin) and maximum frequency (20 MHz against 30 MHz). What I need to know is if any one has ever tried to vary the 813 beam forming plate voltage, so as to verify whether the plate current can so be controlled. If so, I could avoid to purchase the 803s and use the 813s I already have. I know that with suppressor screen modulation output power is about one fourth, but efficiency will not be so low because, in absence of modulation, also the input power decreases (by somewhat less than one fourth). With a pair of 803s (or 813s I hope!) I should obtain about 200W of unmodulated carrier power, peaking at 800W under 100% modulation. I used to have a few RL12P35s, though I never actually used them. A Radio Rivista article by Dante I1DC describes a transmitter using the RL12P50 (a bigger brother of the RL12P35). But all those tubes are too small for well exploiting the potential advantages of suppressor screen modulation. As a matter of fact the advantage of not having to build a powerful modulator becomes more evident when the needed modulator would be real big! 73 Tony I0JX |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Antonio Vernucci" wrote in message
... Hello Tony, de Piero I5SPO. Quite a ( very ) long time ago, i've done an A.M. TX with a Geloso VFO and a class C RL12P35 Wehrmacht pentode, whose characteristics are similar to 1625 ( a.k.a. 807 with 12.6 v filament ), using a carbon mike and a step-up audio transformer. I believe that, using beam tetrodes, there's no way... :-( I know also 813 and 814 ( have 2 pcs ) and these, like 807, are useful for controlled carrier A.M. by modulating screen grid. Do not know 803, but if i remember well, are low power tubes. Used with suppressor modulation, their output will be one fourth of CW rated output, and efficiency is consequently low... :-( HTH, 73, Piero. Hi Piero, the 803 is about the same as the 813, though it has a proper suppressor screen. Other differences are socket (5 pin vs. 7 pin) and maximum frequency (20 MHz against 30 MHz). What I need to know is if any one has ever tried to vary the 813 beam forming plate voltage, so as to verify whether the plate current can so be controlled. If so, I could avoid to purchase the 803s and use the 813s I already have. I know that with suppressor screen modulation output power is about one fourth, but efficiency will not be so low because, in absence of modulation, also the input power decreases (by somewhat less than one fourth). With a pair of 803s (or 813s I hope!) I should obtain about 200W of unmodulated carrier power, peaking at 800W under 100% modulation. I used to have a few RL12P35s, though I never actually used them. A Radio Rivista article by Dante I1DC describes a transmitter using the RL12P50 (a bigger brother of the RL12P35). But all those tubes are too small for well exploiting the potential advantages of suppressor screen modulation. As a matter of fact the advantage of not having to build a powerful modulator becomes more evident when the needed modulator would be real big! 73 Tony I0JX True pentodes are needed for suppressor grid modulation. The beam forming plates have much less of an effect on plate current and trying to use them for modulation will result in a highly nonlinear modulation waveform. Remember that emission current not going to the plate will instead go to the screen grid. The power dissipation of the screen grid is what seriously limits the use of suppressor modulation. If you already have the sockets for the 813, I would suggest the use of 4E27A/5-125B tubes. The 4E27/Heintz & Kaufman 257B has less plate dissipation, but it too might be suitable. Please let me know if you need datasheets for either of these tubes and for the 803. 73, Barry WA4VZQ wa4vzq(-at-)live(-dot-)com |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
True pentodes are needed for suppressor grid modulation. The beam forming
plates have much less of an effect on plate current and trying to use them for modulation will result in a highly nonlinear modulation waveform. Remember that emission current not going to the plate will instead go to the screen grid. The power dissipation of the screen grid is what seriously limits the use of suppressor modulation. If you already have the sockets for the 813, I would suggest the use of 4E27A/5-125B tubes. The 4E27/Heintz & Kaufman 257B has less plate dissipation, but it too might be suitable. Please let me know if you need datasheets for either of these tubes and for the 803. 73, Barry WA4VZQ wa4vzq(-at-)live(-dot-)com Hi Barry, thanks for the tips. However, looking at the tubes characteristics, the main advantage of the 4E27 w.r.t. the 803 is the possibility to work at much higher frequencies (apart form the socket, which can however be simply changed with no need to make extra holes on the chassis). For the rest, it has a lower plate dissipation (65W against 125W), different filament voltage and it costs more (38$ against 25$). I appreciate the screen grid dissipation problem but it is not clear to me why your statement "that emission current not going to the plate will instead go to the screen grid" would not equally apply if the tube has a proper suppressor grid instead of bram forming plates. Could you please clarify? 73 Tony I0JX |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Antonio Vernucci" wrote in message ... I am planning to build a suppressor-grid modulated AM transmitter. In all the diagrams I have seen they use proper pentodes, i.e. tubes that have a real suppressor grid (e.g. 803). I have seen no diagram using beam power tubes (e.g. 813 or 814) which have beam forming plates instead of the suppressor grid . Before purchasing 803 tubes, I would like to be sure that 813s or 814s are really unsuitable for suppressor-grid modulation. My question is whether, with 813s or 814s, the plate current can be actually controlled by varying the beam forming plates voltage. Does anyone have experience on that issue? This does not answer the question, but is offered as a bit of homebrew lore. After WWII, the 1625's were plentiful and cheap. Some Ham found that with certain brands of 1625's, the suppressor grid was not tied to the cathode inside the glass envelope. The two were tied together inside the tube base. So, after removing the base, the two elements could be separated from each other. The aim was, guess what? Suppressor-grid modulation! I can remember hearing some of these rigs on the air. I don't know just what percentage of modulation was possible, but I remember it being pretty weak. Good strong signal with very low modulation level. The aim had been to use what parts one had, and it surely was an inexpensive way to join the AM crowd! Old Chief Lynn, W7LTQ |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Antonio Vernucci" wrote in message
. .. True pentodes are needed for suppressor grid modulation. The beam forming plates have much less of an effect on plate current and trying to use them for modulation will result in a highly nonlinear modulation waveform. Remember that emission current not going to the plate will instead go to the screen grid. The power dissipation of the screen grid is what seriously limits the use of suppressor modulation. If you already have the sockets for the 813, I would suggest the use of 4E27A/5-125B tubes. The 4E27/Heintz & Kaufman 257B has less plate dissipation, but it too might be suitable. Please let me know if you need datasheets for either of these tubes and for the 803. 73, Barry WA4VZQ wa4vzq(-at-)live(-dot-)com Hi Barry, thanks for the tips. However, looking at the tubes characteristics, the main advantage of the 4E27 w.r.t. the 803 is the possibility to work at much higher frequencies (apart form the socket, which can however be simply changed with no need to make extra holes on the chassis). For the rest, it has a lower plate dissipation (65W against 125W), different filament voltage and it costs more (38$ against 25$). I appreciate the screen grid dissipation problem but it is not clear to me why your statement "that emission current not going to the plate will instead go to the screen grid" would not equally apply if the tube has a proper suppressor grid instead of bram forming plates. Could you please clarify? 73 Tony I0JX Actually I did _not_ do a good job of explaining this. In a pentode, the suppressor grid controls the ratio of the emission current going to the screen to that going to the plate. It also eliminates the problem of secondary emission. Beam forming plates are specifically designed to control secondary emission, but they have much less of an effect of controlling plate current. Rather than going into detail here, allow me to refer you to Karl Spangenberg's book, "Vacuum Tubes." This book is now available on several websites. Chapter 11 goes into great detail on how both pentodes and beam power tubes work and how they differ. I would also refer you to O. H Schade's classic paper, "Beam Power Tubes," which is also available on many of the same websites. Pete Millet's site is my favorite with many excellent technical books. http://www.pmillett.com One trick to reduce screen grid dissipation in suppressor modulated pentodes is to power the screen grid with a voltage dropping resistor from the plate supply rather than use an independent supply. While not available in power tubes, many receiving pentodes are designed such that the suppressor grid acts much like the grid in terms of its transconductance. The 6AS6 is probably the earliest example of such tubes. They make good mixers. 73, Barry WA4VZQ |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"coffelt2" wrote in message
... This does not answer the question, but is offered as a bit of homebrew lore. After WWII, the 1625's were plentiful and cheap. Some Ham found that with certain brands of 1625's, the suppressor grid was not tied to the cathode inside the glass envelope. The two were tied together inside the tube base. So, after removing the base, the two elements could be separated from each other. The aim was, guess what? Suppressor-grid modulation! I can remember hearing some of these rigs on the air. I don't know just what percentage of modulation was possible, but I remember it being pretty weak. Good strong signal with very low modulation level. The aim had been to use what parts one had, and it surely was an inexpensive way to join the AM crowd! Old Chief Lynn, W7LTQ In the 1957 ARRL Handbook, these particular tubes were also used in a cathode driven (grounded grid) amplifier. 73, Barry WA4VZQ |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Actually I did _not_ do a good job of explaining this. In a pentode, the
suppressor grid controls the ratio of the emission current going to the screen to that going to the plate. It also eliminates the problem of secondary emission. Beam forming plates are specifically designed to control secondary emission, but they have much less of an effect of controlling plate current. Rather than going into detail here, allow me to refer you to Karl Spangenberg's book, "Vacuum Tubes." This book is now available on several websites. Chapter 11 goes into great detail on how both pentodes and beam power tubes work and how they differ. I would also refer you to O. H Schade's classic paper, "Beam Power Tubes," which is also available on many of the same websites. Pete Millet's site is my favorite with many excellent technical books. http://www.pmillett.com One trick to reduce screen grid dissipation in suppressor modulated pentodes is to power the screen grid with a voltage dropping resistor from the plate supply rather than use an independent supply. While not available in power tubes, many receiving pentodes are designed such that the suppressor grid acts much like the grid in terms of its transconductance. The 6AS6 is probably the earliest example of such tubes. They make good mixers. 73, Barry WA4VZQ Thanks for your answer. A negative suppressor grid then tends to "isolate" the plate from the rest of the tube. So, the effect is similar to when, if the plate voltage of a power audio amplifier stage is removed by accident, the screen gets quickly destroyed due to excessive power dissipation. I shall then carefully check the screen dissipation in the suppressor-modulated transmitter I am planning to buld. Thanks and 73 Tony I0JX |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The aim was, guess what? Suppressor-grid modulation! I can remember
hearing some of these rigs on the air. I don't know just what percentage of modulation was possible, but I remember it being pretty weak. Good strong signal with very low modulation level. The aim had been to use what parts one had, and it surely was an inexpensive way to join the AM crowd! Old Chief Lynn, W7LTQ In the 1957 ARRL Handbook, these particular tubes were also used in a cathode driven (grounded grid) amplifier. 73, Barry WA4VZQ Yes, I was aware of the "modified 1625" but for linear amplifier usage. Now I know that they were also used for suppressor-grid modulated stages. But now a doubt come to my mind: the 1625 is a beam-power tube, not a pentode (actually it is an 807 with 12.6V filament). So, how could it work in suppressor-grid modulated stages? 73 Tony I0JX |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Lightning suppressor? | Antenna | |||
FA: POLYPHASER IS-SB75F 75 OHM SURGE SUPPRESSOR | Swap | |||
FA: POLYPHASER IS-SB75F 75 OHM SURGE SUPPRESSOR | Equipment | |||
Control-grid modulation for AM | Homebrew | |||
Control-grid modulation for AM | Homebrew |