Re: Testing a 2-01C Diode
My recollection is that all that usually happens to
such a diode, when you try to get more current from it
than it is capable of delivering, is it doesn't deliver
the current. The cathode is just too small to deliver
the flux of electrons necessary to get more than 1ma
of current.
-Chuck
n4buq wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I plan to test it per the suggestions. It is possible, though, that I might have damaged it feeding the 50-ohm terminated output of the 3310B directly to the tube tip as I expect that would have produced more than 1mA unbridled current from the generator. I did that before I read about the 1mA rating.
This poor probe, though, had multiple problems so the tube might have been bad when I got it. I mentioned that the spring connector was falling out of its slotted socket, but I also discovered that the cable's braid was not connected to the sleeve of the plug so the heater couldn't work. I can't tell if it was that way from the factory or whether someone did that intentionally (and I can't figure why anyone would want to do that). Connecting that let the heater start working but have not successfully gotten a signal through the tube.
|
Re: Testing a 2-01C Diode
I plan to test it per the suggestions. It is possible, though, that I might have damaged it feeding the 50-ohm terminated output of the 3310B directly to the tube tip as I expect that would have produced more than 1mA unbridled current from the generator. I did that before I read about the 1mA rating.
This poor probe, though, had multiple problems so the tube might have been bad when I got it. I mentioned that the spring connector was falling out of its slotted socket, but I also discovered that the cable's braid was not connected to the sleeve of the plug so the heater couldn't work. I can't tell if it was that way from the factory or whether someone did that intentionally (and I can't figure why anyone would want to do that). Connecting that let the heater start working but have not successfully gotten a signal through the tube.
If the tube still checks bad, then I'll be looking for a replacement tube.
Thanks again,
Barry - N4BUQ
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Harris" <cfharris@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2019 5:34:44 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Testing a 2-01C Diode
Well, it is a detector, not a rectifier. A very special
detector in that it works from about a milivolt through
a kilovolt.
-Chuck Harris
n4buq wrote:
That's the way I thought of it. It's just a diode and should act like one
if it's good. What gets me is the relatively tiny forward DC current
rating. For tube construction, that just seems odd - especially
considering it's rated at 1000V.
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
On 7/27/19 3:36 PM, Brian L. Stuart wrote: I have one data point that does provide a little hope. There's a friend
... That's fantastic, he's enlightened.
I'm not looking to "get hired", but is he looking for tech people to
work with?
It's been a while since I've caught up with him, but the last time
I talked to him, he wasn't. Being fiscally responsible with a long-term
perspective does mean less hiring and consulting. Of course, it
also means fewer layoffs down the road.
That figures. ;) Sounds like a good guy to know, though. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
At 2019-07-27 01:06 PM, Peter Gottlieb wrote:
Almost exactly what I have in
big lithium ion packs, although I don't have them hooked up at the
moment.?? I don't have a charger which could put out 5 kW of 28.8
volts to recharge them in 4 hours.
What is your source for big li-ion packs? I'd like to at least consider
them, as I likely will need to replace a total of about 6.5KAh worth of
6V deep-cycle FLA batteries in the next couple of years. Knowing the
risks associated with big li-ion batteries, however, I'm thinking they'll
go in a bunker a bit away from the house, rather than in the garage as
they are now.
Steve Hendrix
|
Using an HP11729C as a phase detector for evaluating phase noise - proper input levels
I am trying to understand how to use an HP11729C in its phase detector configuration to measure phase noise of several 10 MHz oscillators. One issue that has contradictory guidance in the HP11729 literature is the power level to use for the DUT input to the Microwave Test Signal input.
?
On page 21 of HP product note 11729B-1 (https://www.keysight.com/upload/cmc_upload/All/5952-8286E.pdf), it states that the CW microwave input level must be between 7 and 18 dBm. However, on page 15 of HP product note 11729C-2 (http://hpmemoryproject.org/an/pdf/pn11729C-2.pdf), it states the mixer inputs reach compression at 3 dBm. The operators manual (http://hparchive.com/Manuals/HP-11729C_ops_svc_11729_90017.pdf) does not mention any constraints on the power level of the DUT. This confusing guidance leads me to believe the 11729B and 11729C have different front-end hardware.
?
To get some idea what is the correct power level, I ran a test varying the input power to the Microwave Test Signal input of the HP11729C. I connected a Reference Oscillator through a directional coupler and attenuation pad to a swept-input SA (SSA3032X) and set the input power to 10.85 dBm. I then reattached it (Reference Oscillator->directional coupler->attenuation pad) to the Microwave Test Signal input of the HP11729C. I connected the coupler port of the directional coupler to a Rigol DS1104Z. Figure 1 shows the resultant signal shape displayed on the oscilliscope.
?
It is obvious that some of the power of the signal at 10.85 dBm (specifically, some of the higher harmonics of the 10MHz input) is reflecting back through the directional coupler and corrupting the signal going into the coupler port.
?
I then set the input power to 2.86 dBm and connected it to the Microwave Test Signal input. The result is shown in Figure 2
?
The oscillator trace of the input signal is nice and clean, indicating that very little (if any) reflected power is corrupting the coupler port output.
?
This suggests to me that the DUT input to the HP11729C should be kept below 3 dBm. However, I am interested in hearing from others who have used the HP11729C (John Miles?) if this is the correct strategy.
|
Re: Testing a 2-01C Diode
Well, it is a detector, not a rectifier. A very special
detector in that it works from about a milivolt through
a kilovolt.
-Chuck Harris
n4buq wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
That's the way I thought of it. It's just a diode and should act like one if it's good. What gets me is the relatively tiny forward DC current rating. For tube construction, that just seems odd - especially considering it's rated at 1000V.
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
|
Re: Testing a 2-01C Diode
I've checked the connections a best as I can and I'm not seeing anything wrong with it - albeit that the tip capacitance gets in the way of making a continuity check.
I have tried testing it in the probe and not getting results, whereas the same test with the EA53 probe (the one that works properly in the meter) does work (e.g. it provides a DC voltage to the tip of the stereo jack when the heater is energized and the signal generator is across the probe tip and ground).
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Albert via Groups.Io" <bob91343@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2019 1:26:56 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Testing a 2-01C Diode
With my 410B I routinely measure the output of my TL922 through the HF range
at something over 200 V rms but the current through the diode is limited by
its load.? The input signal is coupled via a 2 pF capacitor I think which is
just the tube fixture.
It's a half wave rectifier and the meter reads the capacitor charge.? So if
you don't change the circuit it should be able to be tested.? But recheck
the assembly of the probe from the tip to the tube to make sure there is
coupling.? And verify that there is a dc path.
Bob
On Saturday, July 27, 2019, 10:37:59 AM PDT, Chuck Harris
<cfharris@...> wrote:
Well, it is just a diode.
Take a 9V battery, a resistor as a load, and your DVM,
and try the battery this way, and then that way, and if the
current isn't there in one direction, but is in the other
direction, it is probably good.
The specs are available on the web, so you should be able to
pick your load resistor to match the typical current as specified
in the data sheet.
Or, you could? put it on a curve tracer...
-Chuck
n4buq wrote:
Still working on the recently-acquired 11036A which isn't working.? I've
checked the probe wiring and don't see anything amiss.? When it powers up,
the tube gets hot so the heater is evidently working; however, I get no
signals back to the meter.
Since I have another probe (this one uses the EA53), I tried that with the
meter and it works fine so the problem has to be somewhere in the probe
and I'm beginning to wonder if it isn't the tube but am curious as to how
that might be considering the heater works (which, I presume, is the
primary failure point with these).
Before I go spending money on a rather expensive tube, is there simple way
I can test this one out of the probe?? If I supply heater voltage (via an
auxiliary power supply), can I place the diode across the signal source
and expect to see half-wave rectification?? If I do this, should
precautions be made to limit the current through the tube and, if so, how
much current is safe?? Unless I'm misreading/misunderstanding the specs,
the tube is only rated at 1mA DC which seems quite small but, again, I
might be misunderstanding that rating.
BTW, I'm supplying the AC signal with an HP 3310B function generator.
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
|
Re: Testing a 2-01C Diode
That's the way I thought of it. It's just a diode and should act like one if it's good. What gets me is the relatively tiny forward DC current rating. For tube construction, that just seems odd - especially considering it's rated at 1000V.
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Harris" <cfharris@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2019 12:37:55 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Testing a 2-01C Diode
Well, it is just a diode.
Take a 9V battery, a resistor as a load, and your DVM,
and try the battery this way, and then that way, and if the
current isn't there in one direction, but is in the other
direction, it is probably good.
The specs are available on the web, so you should be able to
pick your load resistor to match the typical current as specified
in the data sheet.
Or, you could put it on a curve tracer...
-Chuck
n4buq wrote:
Still working on the recently-acquired 11036A which isn't working. I've
checked the probe wiring and don't see anything amiss. When it powers up,
the tube gets hot so the heater is evidently working; however, I get no
signals back to the meter.
Since I have another probe (this one uses the EA53), I tried that with the
meter and it works fine so the problem has to be somewhere in the probe
and I'm beginning to wonder if it isn't the tube but am curious as to how
that might be considering the heater works (which, I presume, is the
primary failure point with these).
Before I go spending money on a rather expensive tube, is there simple way
I can test this one out of the probe? If I supply heater voltage (via an
auxiliary power supply), can I place the diode across the signal source
and expect to see half-wave rectification? If I do this, should
precautions be made to limit the current through the tube and, if so, how
much current is safe? Unless I'm misreading/misunderstanding the specs,
the tube is only rated at 1mA DC which seems quite small but, again, I
might be misunderstanding that rating.
BTW, I'm supplying the AC signal with an HP 3310B function generator.
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
|
Re: Question Regarding the AC Probe Diode for an HP 410C
Interesting, Greg. Yes, I'd noticed that parallel resistor but didn't know it was not on all schematics.
In that article, the claim is made that all 410Cs (really, all 11036As) came with an EA53 but I don't think that's true. While it would possible to retrofit a 2-01C probe from a 410B, that's not the case here. The base (which houses the 2-01C) is wired and molded into one piece so I don't see how that could have been done with this one and it came that way. If that was indeed the case, then someone did some very clever retrofitting.
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Muir via Groups.Io" <big_sky_explorer@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2019 2:07:27 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] Question Regarding the AC Probe Diode for an HP 410C
Barry,
Sorry to bother you again but just came across this webpage describing the
history behind the use of two different tubes in the 410 probes.? Can't
vouch to it's validity but it sounds logical.
Greg
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
On Saturday, July 27, 2019, 2:10:06 PM EDT, Dave McGuire <mcguire@...> wrote:
>> On 7/27/19 2:00 PM, Brian L. Stuart wrote:
>> I have one data point that does provide a little hope. There's a friend
>> ...
>
> That's fantastic, he's enlightened.
>
> I'm not looking to "get hired", but is he looking for tech people to
> work with?
It's been a while since I've caught up with him, but the last time
I talked to him, he wasn't. Being fiscally responsible with a long-term
perspective does mean less hiring and consulting. Of course, it
also means fewer layoffs down the road.
BLS
|
Re: Question Regarding the AC Probe Diode for an HP 410C
Barry,
Sorry to bother you again but just came across this webpage describing the history behind the use of two different tubes in the 410 probes.? Can't vouch to it's validity but it sounds logical.
Greg
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
Yep, I have often thought that economies and governments need more negative feedback in general.?
Sorry to extend the off-topic discussion.
Jim Ford?
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: Peter Gottlieb <hpnpilot@...> Date: 7/27/19 7:33 AM (GMT-08:00) Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
It is my opinion that this short term, what-can-you-do-for-me-this-quarter mentality is neither good for the company nor society in general.? Positive feedback without control almost always ends in disaster. On 7/27/2019 10:07 AM, Oz-in-DFW wrote: > > There's also the fact that they live under the tyranny of the financial > quarter and get any long term thinking beat mercilessly out of them. > _._,_._,_ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >
|
Re: Question Regarding the AC Probe Diode for an HP 410C
Barry,
?
Interesting observation regarding the different filament voltages of the EA53 & 2-01C diodes.
?
I wanted to note a couple of things I saw while doing a short investigation of this matter.? First, looking at the probe itself there seems to be no changes internally that would affect the filament voltage of the tube.? But looking at a couple of 410C schematics there might be a hidden adjustment for the voltage difference.
?
Looking at both an earlier manual (00410-90005 at ) and a little later manual (00410-9007 at ) I noticed that there is a 100 ohm resistor placed across the filament supply line at the panel jack.? I¡¯m wondering if HP is utilizing the current limiting of the 6 volt transformer winding to load it down a bit and lower the voltage by impressing a heaver load with the addition of the resistor in parallel with the tube filament.? This could also be affected by different filament currents between the two tubes allowing the 5V tube to drop the voltage to a lower level than the 6V one (anyone have the filament specs on these two tubes?).?
?
Have you measured the voltage at the panel jack for the probe both with the probes connected containing different tubes and without them?
?
Also, with regards to testing your 2-01C, could it possibly be gassy?? I have seen other tubes looking rather happy with glowing filaments while they have lost their vacuum ¨C but only for a reasonably short time.
?
Greg
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 08:58 PM, n4buq wrote:
I have two HP 410C meters. The probe (HP 11036A) in my first one uses the EA53 which is designed for a 6.3VAC filament. The probe for my newest one has the 2-01C which is designed for a 5.0VAC filament.
I know that the 410B (I have two of those as well) has an adjustment for the filament voltage so it can use either tube; however, the 410C doesn't have that adjustment.
I always thought that all the 11036A probes were compatible with all 410Cs but perhaps not. Were some 410Cs made for a 2-01C and others for the EA53? If so, is it possible this is tied to a serial number prefix and the EA53 probes are only to be used with certain prefixes and the 2-01C used for the other prefixes? All the schematics I've found show 6.0VAC as the heater voltage supply so it seems odd to me that the 2-01C was used at that voltage but maybe so?
Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
Embedded Windows versions tend to have longer life cycles, even according to Microsoft!
But the issue remains.? ?Pity they also use obscure hardware drivers etc, after all, other than 16bit code, you can run most legacy programs on the current OS versions without trouble.
73.
Dave G0WBX
|
Re: Low cost, OSSW/OSHW AR488 GPIB-USB adapter
It's a standard 24 pin Centronics connector. I bought a bunch of male IDC connectors, but neglected to get any female :-(
For a minimal build you need an Uno or Nano, a piece of ribbon cable and one or more male 24 pin IDC Centronics plugs.
for more details take a look at this thread:
This might also be of interest:
Have Fun!
Reg
|
Re: Testing a 2-01C Diode
With my 410B I routinely measure the output of my TL922 through the HF range at something over 200 V rms but the current through the diode is limited by its load.? The input signal is coupled via a 2 pF capacitor I think which is just the tube fixture.
It's a half wave rectifier and the meter reads the capacitor charge.? So if you don't change the circuit it should be able to be tested.? But recheck the assembly of the probe from the tip to the tube to make sure there is coupling.? And verify that there is a dc path.
Bob
On Saturday, July 27, 2019, 10:37:59 AM PDT, Chuck Harris <cfharris@...> wrote:
Well, it is just a diode.
Take a 9V battery, a resistor as a load, and your DVM,
and try the battery this way, and then that way, and if the
current isn't there in one direction, but is in the other
direction, it is probably good.
The specs are available on the web, so you should be able to
pick your load resistor to match the typical current as specified
in the data sheet.
Or, you could? put it on a curve tracer...
-Chuck
n4buq wrote:
> Still working on the recently-acquired 11036A which isn't working.? I've checked the probe wiring and don't see anything amiss.? When it powers up, the tube gets hot so the heater is evidently working; however, I get no signals back to the meter.
>
> Since I have another probe (this one uses the EA53), I tried that with the meter and it works fine so the problem has to be somewhere in the probe and I'm beginning to wonder if it isn't the tube but am curious as to how that might be considering the heater works (which, I presume, is the primary failure point with these).
>
> Before I go spending money on a rather expensive tube, is there simple way I can test this one out of the probe?? If I supply heater voltage (via an auxiliary power supply), can I place the diode across the signal source and expect to see half-wave rectification?? If I do this, should precautions be made to limit the current through the tube and, if so, how much current is safe?? Unless I'm misreading/misunderstanding the specs, the tube is only rated at 1mA DC which seems quite small but, again, I might be misunderstanding that rating.
>
> BTW, I'm supplying the AC signal with an HP 3310B function generator.
>
> Thanks,
> Barry - N4BUQ
>
>
>
>
>
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
On 7/27/19 2:00 PM, Brian L. Stuart wrote: I have one data point that does provide a little hope. There's a friend
of mine who has done well a few times in the startup game. However,
in his most recent venture, he had a really bad experience with the
VC types who where following the "burn bright and fast to get the
attention of an IPO or and acquisition" philosophy. As expected, it
fell flat. But he was able to get the IP and even the name returned
to him, and has restarted in a smaller form that allows him to focus
on customers the way he always wanted. And he's made it quite
clear that he has no interest in taking VC funding again. So his
customers can count on staying the priority. That's fantastic, he's enlightened. I'm not looking to "get hired", but is he looking for tech people to work with? Alas, the fact that this is remarkable because it's so rare is itself
depressing. Very. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
On 7/27/19 1:44 PM, Stephen Hanselman wrote: And we all have to say a special thank you to Carly for the abrupt left turn in HP¡¯s operating philosophy. But she was so highly qualified to run a tech company, with her degree in history! -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
Left turn? More like a 180.
Peter
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jul 27, 2019, at 1:44 PM, Stephen Hanselman <kc4sw.io@...> wrote:
And we all have to say a special thank you to Carly for the abrupt left turn in HP¡¯s operating philosophy.
Regards,
Stephen Hanselman
Datagate Systems, LLC
On Jul 27, 2019, at 12:16, Dave McGuire <mcguire@...> wrote:
On 7/27/19 10:33 AM, Peter Gottlieb wrote:
It is my opinion that this short term,
what-can-you-do-for-me-this-quarter mentality is neither good for the
company nor society in general. Positive feedback without control
almost always ends in disaster. About fifteen years ago I had a very interesting, long conversation
with a newly-hired co-worker who happened to have a degree in economics.
I'd been through a few corporate startup/IPO cycles at that point, and
I told him about how I thought this huge shift toward not seeing past
the end of the current quarter dramatically encourages destructive
behavior, as does the whole "end goal" of the IPO...after which a
corporation has but one customer to please and care about: the body of
stockholders. The behaviors encouraged by these attitutes are not
conducive to the long-term survival of the company, and almost always
result in the company screwing over its real customers and being viewed
as "evil" by anyone with a functioning brain.
He essentially nodded and said, "yes, of course." He explained that
this is textbook economics, and people who pursue a degree in economics
are taught this in their first year.
We as a society must stamp out this behavior, but it won't happen
until the whole thing just self-destructs. Some argue that we're seeing
the beginning of that now, and I can't really disagree.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
|
Re: What would you do if you had some test equipment with Serial No: 0000001?
On Saturday, July 27, 2019, 1:17:00 PM EDT, Dave McGuire <mcguire@...> wrote:
> I told him about how I thought this huge shift toward not seeing past
> the end of the current quarter dramatically encourages destructive
> behavior, as does the whole "end goal" of the IPO...after which a
> corporation has but one customer to please and care about: the body of
> stockholders. The behaviors encouraged by these attitutes are not
> conducive to the long-term survival of the company, and almost always
> ...
> We as a society must stamp out this behavior, but it won't happen
> until the whole thing just self-destructs. Some argue that we're seeing
> the beginning of that now, and I can't really disagree.
I have one data point that does provide a little hope. There's a friend
of mine who has done well a few times in the startup game. However,
in his most recent venture, he had a really bad experience with the
VC types who where following the "burn bright and fast to get the
attention of an IPO or and acquisition" philosophy. As expected, it
fell flat. But he was able to get the IP and even the name returned
to him, and has restarted in a smaller form that allows him to focus
on customers the way he always wanted. And he's made it quite
clear that he has no interest in taking VC funding again. So his
customers can count on staying the priority.
Alas, the fact that this is remarkable because it's so rare is itself
depressing.
BLS
|
Dave McGuire
