PDA

View Full Version : Turner Audio website update.


Patrick Turner
September 15th 06, 03:54 PM
Hi all,

I have now included output transformer capacitance calculation method
in my pages dealing with PP OPT and SE OPT.
The transformer winding page has bobbin section details added and
instructions on how to use
polyurethane two pack varnish to be able to apply varnish as the winding
is done
and obtain good hard varnishing of the windings without using a vacuum
chamber and hot baking process.

The capacitance calculations don't change a great deal but anyone
winding OPT should want to know
what capacitance to expect BEFORE winding an OPT rather than find its a
bit much after winding one.

Capacitance in OPTs which are interleaved can be calculated using the
basis that
all the capacitances between the P winding and S sections which are at
0V potential
are transformed to a value at the anode connection depending on the
position of the C
along the P winding.
For example, a capacitance of 330pF between P and S at 1/2 way between
the B+
and anode will be transformed to be 1/2 x 1/2 x 330pF = 82.5pF because
the transformation is
at a factor of the impedance ratio which is the turn ratio squared.

The effect of the capacitances between P and S near the anode
connections will be the majority
of the C and the capacitances between P and S near the B+ where the
signal voltages are low
will be small when measured at the anode connection.

The shunt capacitance at the anode terminal is therefore NOT the
simple sum of all the P to S capacitances that exist in the OPT.

In the case of a PP amp where both tubes are working in class A which
covers
most of the music we hear, the C in at one anode is charged and
discharged
by each tube.
Where the same tubes were biased for class B the capacitance would
double because the one live tube
would see the capacitances of the undriven 1/2 of the OPT primary.

In an SE OPT of identical bobbin winding details to a PP type, but with
B+ at one end, the
C will be very close to double the C seen at one anode connection in the
case of the class A PP
OPT.

Knowing what the C is in each case isn't the end of the matter. This C
is the mass of total
shunt Cs taken as many simple summed quantities within the OPT without
regard for how it reacts
with the many amounts of leakage inductances between P and S which also
sum to give us
what we measure as leakage L which is usually reduced to an equivalent
single value of
inductance in series with the anode load.

The testing of my latest OPTs made for 50 watt amps using 845 confirm
the
method of calculations appear to be correct.
I would have to say its easier than trying to wade through the RDH4
pages on OPT capacitances
because the RDH4 is incomprehensible on this subject afaiac, and I have
never met anyone else who
understands OPT capacitance calcs as spelled out in RDH4.

A common mistake by would be experts when winding OPTs is to go for
close coupling.
So they interleave with say 7S and 6P sections, and then use only thin
insulation between P and S sections,
and then produce a tranny that gives -3dB at 15kHz even with triodes
because the
capacitance is so darn high. They may get low LL but having LL = 1mH for
a load
of 5k ohms results in a pole at 800kHz, but if the C = 0.005uF, then the
load = the
reactance of the C at 6.36kHz, and there will be massive extra
distortion above this F at high power levels
because the load has become predominantly C.
So we would prefer to see that in the case where RL was 5k, the C
shunting this load was 0.0005uF,
or 500pF max, and this is not so easy to achieve in a large OPT.
So we may find that we have to settle for C = 0.0015uF, or 1,500pF,
which will have RL = C reactance
at 21.2kHz.
A triode with Ra of say 1k would not suffer a huge phase shift driving a
5k load with 1,500pF of shunt C
because the response roll off and 45degree phase lag won't occur until
Ra in parallel with RL equals C reactance. This would be where the C
reactance = 1k//5k = 833 ohms,
or at 125kHz.

At low levels such C shunting does almost no harm to the signal but as F
rises above
20kHz the output will become much distorted before rolling off.
At 50kHz, 1,500pF is only 2.12k, and the amp cannot maintain a high
output
into the low value load without serious distortions.

In SET amps the shunt capacitance needs to be known and kept to a
minimum.
In my pages I recommend minimum insulation thicknesses of insulation of
more than 0.5mm
which will stop C from becoming too high nearly all cases.
Once you have 5P sections and 4S sections, increasing the insulation
from say 0.3mm
to 0.6mm will halve the C but have little effect on the leakage
inductance which becomes dominated by the
number of interleavings and not the closeness of coupling.
So if you design an OPT with plenty of room to spare on the bobbin,
think of increasing the PS insulation
and it may benefit the response more than adding another interleave.

Patrick Turner.

Patrick Turner
September 16th 06, 03:41 AM
Bret Ludwig wrote:

> >
> > A common mistake by would be experts when winding OPTs is to go for
> > close coupling.
> > So they interleave with say 7S and 6P sections, and then use only thin
> > insulation between P and S sections,
> > and then produce a tranny that gives -3dB at 15kHz even with triodes
> > because the
> > capacitance is so darn high. They may get low LL but having LL = 1mH for
> > a load
> > of 5k ohms results in a pole at 800kHz, but if the C = 0.005uF, then the
> > load = the
> > reactance of the C at 6.36kHz, and there will be massive extra
> > distortion above this F at high power levels
> > because the load has become predominantly C.
> > So we would prefer to see that in the case where RL was 5k, the C
> > shunting this load was 0.0005uF,
> > or 500pF max, and this is not so easy to achieve in a large OPT.
> > So we may find that we have to settle for C = 0.0015uF, or 1,500pF,
> > which will have RL = C reactance
> > at 21.2kHz.
>
> From: Patrick Turner - view profile
> Date: Wed, Dec 17 2003 8:09 am
> Email: Patrick Turner >
> Groups: rec.audio.tubes
> Not yet ratedRating:
> show options
> Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
> original | Report Abuse | Find messages by this author
>
> - Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
>
> Nothing40 wrote:
> > I would think that sourcing the metals would be the hardest part,aside
> > from designing a fairly usable tube, that's hopefully somewhat
> > consistant.
> > I wouldn't think you could just slap some metal bits into a vacuum,and
> > get a usable triode. Forming the metal plate(s),and the tiny grid wire
> > might be challenging,but atleast you guys seem to have the glass part
> > down.
> > There's a neat glass company here in Portland,I remember seeing a bit
> > on TV about thier shop,and different art pieces..Pretty cool looking
> > stuff!
> > I'd love to see some neat colored EL34's or something!
> > Maybe you could make tube "sleeves",maybe some sort of tube heatsink
> > sleeves..
> > I dunno. I think you should make some neat looking tubes! even if they
> > aren't the greatest sounding things ever,it would be cool to have a
> > small amp with tye-dye tubes glowing happily!
>
> >>:"The biggest problem with making tubes is the cathode technology.
> A recent article in Electronics World spelled out some of the history
> of the cathode, and its a great read, with some pertinent comments
> about directly hated cathodes and indirectly heated cathodes.
>
> But once you get the metal work done for grids and plate,
> and mica discs, the glass work is pretty easy.
> At transmitting stations, the large tubes used have water cooled anodes
>
> with circulating water and heat exchangers, and vacuum pumps going
> constantly
> to maintain the vacuum.
> One could do something similar at home,
> so that you had one big fat triode like an 833 or PL805,
> and there is no need for glass construction.
>
> But the cathode is the killer thing to get right.
> Men can wind grid coils, its not something strictly for the women,
> but tube making was a sit down trade, like sewing garments,
> and it attracted few men.
> If they made the tubes they used to make in much higher numbers,
> it'd all be done with robots, humans are a pest in factories.
> A tube woud be child's play for modern methods,
> if the demand was high to warrant the investment for the robots.
> But I digress from the handcrafted.....
>
> Once all the time has been spent jigging up to make the tubes, its
> REAL easy compared to making complex silicon chips.
> Making copies of known designs is easiest, and it explains why
> there are so few really new tubes on offer.
> The companies want the tubes they make to be retro compatible.
>
> It is easy to reproduce the exact dimensions of the metal and mica,
> but to make a KT88, about 300 separate processes are involved.
> Before the americans got involved with joint venture with the russians,
>
> the russian industry had some problems, with an easing away from
> all the steps required to make a good tube.
> David Manley had the EI company in yugo start making KT90
> for his amps, but he never tied up Ei in an exclusive contract,
> and EI started making for others and selling anyplace,
> and even Jadis started using KT90.
> Unless you make lots of tubes and sell them, there is little
> commercial reward, and to reproduce the 300 steps at home take some
> doing,
> and although each step may be easy, there are many pitfalls along the
> way
> because you have never done an apprenticeship at tube making.
> The time one takes to build one single KT88 and get as good as the MOV
> stuff
> would be enormous.
>
> But if you got the cathodes right, and used all metal tubes,
> and connected vac pumps, and water cooling,
> and used ceramic spacers for the electrode support structure,
> maybe you get a decent triode tube which can dissipate 200w,
> from which you would get a blameless 60 watts of power.
>
> The 13E1 I use has 2 indirectly heated cathodes within.
> The QE208 has three cathodes.
> Thus much lower supply voltages can be used, 400v, instead of
> 1,200v, and the current is higher, voltage is lower, so OPTs
> are easier, and Hammond sell some which are cheap,
> and which will suit an SE parafeed amp.
> So If I made my own output tubes, I would go on from
> where the tubes finished up in 1960's, and ignore most
> methods used prior to that time, which involved horrible high voltages,
>
> any tiny current flows.
> Would I try to make the kind of 300B made by Emmision Labs?
> No. They really look so superb though, and at hundreds of $$ each
> they would want to be.
> To compete with them would be a real challenge.
> If YOU try to make a batch of 100 x 300B, it would cost you
> far more, even allowing $2 per hr for your work. <<
>
> I am disappointed you don't put pictures up of this tube. And, have
> you received any good transformer wind sheets lately?

Its probably easier to make a KT88 than a 13Ei because of glass work
considerations.
And a pair of KT90 will do what a 13Ei will do.
But placing lots of KT88 type of cathodes in the one big bottle so it runs at
500V with indirectly heated cathodes instead of 1,100V with tungsten cathodes
is a good idea;
the 13Ei sounds good to me, and I don't even know how much better it'd be with

local CFB instead of plain old SEUL.

But take a look at KR Audio triodes; I think they are better than Emission
Labs.
the 845 they make has a 100W Pda rating and sells here for aud $375 each.

The KR tubes have a special oxide coated cathodes which need only 1A at 10V
to provide emission, better than the usual 10V x 3.3A, or 33 watts of cathode
heating which is typical for
tube of this Pda and size, including 13E1 and QE208.

Patrick Turner.

Patrick Turner
September 18th 06, 12:52 PM
Bret Ludwig wrote:

> Patrick Turner wrote:
> <<snip>>
>
> > And a pair of KT90 will do what a 13Ei will do.
> > But placing lots of KT88 type of cathodes in the one big bottle so it runs at
> > 500V with indirectly heated cathodes instead of 1,100V with tungsten cathodes
> > is a good idea;
> > the 13Ei sounds good to me, and I don't even know how much better it'd be with
> >
> > local CFB instead of plain old SEUL.
> >
> > But take a look at KR Audio triodes; I think they are better than Emission
> > Labs.
> > the 845 they make has a 100W Pda rating and sells here for aud $375 each.
> >
> > The KR tubes have a special oxide coated cathodes which need only 1A at 10V
> > to provide emission, better than the usual 10V x 3.3A, or 33 watts of cathode
> > heating which is typical for
> > tube of this Pda and size, including 13E1 and QE208.
>
> I only buy tubes at hamfests. When KR Labs tubes show up there I will
> show some interest in them.
>
> I was really wanting to see a photo of this QE208. Is it like a 829B
> derivative, of which Amperex made many?

I have no idea what 829B look like.

I see you don't like spending any money.

Patrick Turner.

Sander deWaal
September 18th 06, 07:43 PM
Patrick Turner > said:

>Hi all,
>
>I have now included output transformer capacitance calculation method
>in my pages dealing with PP OPT and SE OPT.

<snip>

Let me use this opportunity to thank you for all the effort you put
into your site, and to have the courage and kindness to share this all
with us.

Most usefeul resource, thanks again!

--
"Due knot trussed yore spell chequer two fined awl miss steaks."

Andre Jute
September 19th 06, 12:41 AM
Sander deWaal wrote:
> Patrick Turner > said:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I have now included output transformer capacitance calculation method
> >in my pages dealing with PP OPT and SE OPT.
>
> <snip>
>
> Let me use this opportunity to thank you for all the effort you put
> into your site, and to have the courage and kindness to share this all
> with us.
>
> Most usefeul resource, thanks again!

Hear, hear!

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

Eeyore
September 19th 06, 12:55 AM
Andre Jute wrote:

> Hear, hear!

Lick, lick !

Andre Jute
September 19th 06, 01:20 AM
Eeyore wrote:
> Andre Jute wrote:
>
> > Hear, hear!
>
> Lick, lick !

Not at all, Poopie. Just gracious good manners to applaud when Sander
thanks Patrick for all the work he puts into his site to share what he
knows with the tube community. Don't worry if you don't understand the
concept "good manners" -- it's for other people.

Andre Jute
Zero tolerance for the enemies of society

PS We can all see what the subtext is here. However, before you offer
to lick Patrick, my dear Poopie, you might consider that his reaction
to a homosexual advance is likely to be violent. And, I might add,
muscularly effective; after all, he cycles 200 klicks a week.

Iain Churches
September 19th 06, 06:27 AM
"Sander deWaal" > wrote in message
...
> Patrick Turner > said:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I have now included output transformer capacitance calculation method
>>in my pages dealing with PP OPT and SE OPT.
>
> <snip>
>
> Let me use this opportunity to thank you for all the effort you put
> into your site, and to have the courage and kindness to share this all
> with us.
>
> Most usefeul resource, thanks again!
>


Agreed. This site has gained an excellent reputation. Patrick should
add a counter to see how popular it has become.
Iain

Patrick Turner
September 19th 06, 10:07 AM
Sander deWaal wrote:

> Patrick Turner > said:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I have now included output transformer capacitance calculation method
> >in my pages dealing with PP OPT and SE OPT.
>
> <snip>
>
> Let me use this opportunity to thank you for all the effort you put
> into your site, and to have the courage and kindness to share this all
> with us.
>
> Most usefeul resource, thanks again!

Thanks Sander.

I have just wound a few chokes for use in an SET 845 based amp
and will have the oppportunity to share the test results and confirmation
of the calculations used in the design for dc carrying chokes.

Setting the gap on any choke or OPT has to one of the things about
tube craft that would drive some ppl barmy because the theory and calcs
seem so intimidating, until enough real world examples are mentioned
and a simple test for best performance is spelled out.

Patrick Turner.

>
>
> --
> "Due knot trussed yore spell chequer two fined awl miss steaks."