Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
- TekScopes
- Messages
Search
Re: Repairing plated through holes.
stefan_trethan
I have seen photo instructions for multilayer repair work that
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
involved carefully removing the outer layer to gain access to the inner pad. It was pretty insane. Bodge wires for me any day. As for setting the eyelets, I set somewhat larger hollow rivets quite often to mount TO220 transistors. In production they have a press, but I just use a regular center punch and a hammer to flare out the end, then flatten it down with a hammer. This makes a flat head, not a rolled head, for which you need a hollow ground tool, but it is very easy to do. One thing you might want to keep in mind is solder needs a gap to penetrate. If you set the rivet very tight you will not get solder under the head, just around. For a short time those eyelets were used instead of vias, with no soldering, and I was told they were incredibly unreliable. I think I would just put the eyelet in and solder both sides, without setting it at all, or at most flare the end to 45 degree, to avoid that danger. ST On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 7:37 AM, Harvey White <madyn@...> wrote:
|
Re: Repairing plated through holes.
On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 20:33:52 -0700, you wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 08:17 pm, Mark Goldberg wrote:You could likely make one. You'd need something for an anvil, couldI see the eyelets on mouser are cheap. What im really wondering about is the staking tool and which one to get. easily be made from a 4mm or so rod, put a handle on it. The "hammer" part could be made from an automatic center punch with a different punch part. They're made to be removed. You'd want a design that curled the end of the rivet over. Note that eyelets work best if they are either solid copper, or tinned copper. I'm not sure that any other variety would even accept solder. Also, you may have to drill out the hole a bit if you are trying to get the same inside diameter. A third (and slightly fatal) problem is that I can't see any way to make this work on multi-layer boards. Double sided is the most. It could hold down lifting foil on a single sided board, also. A little lathe work (if you have one) and it might just come together. Harvey |
Re: S6 Sampling Head Bridge Cavity Question
Craig Sawyers
I see now that I have been stuck in an endless spiral of screw-ups of my own making. Fixing them hasHey - don't beat yourself up Dennis. The head might not be bust, there might still just be a duff connection. You didn't do something really stupid, like me when I plugged a harmonica connector one pin out on the power supply of my 577 curve tracer (unplugged originally to find a dead tant). Blew up most of the silicon in the thing. I've now got it pretty much sorted, other than one remaining problem with either the step generator or amplifier. Real nightmare to sort out. Rather fortunately every piece of silicon was easily available, and socketted - even the dual FETs, which are still made. Craig |
Re: Repairing plated through holes.
Actually, IPC-7711 does allow a repair of a two sided board or a
multi-layer board with no internal layer connections at the hole with a C or Z shaped wire as I have done. If you can get a copy, look at plated hole repair procedure 5.4. I have seen eyelets used but I do not know what the tooling was that was used. It looked expensive. Sorry, can't be of more help. Regards, Mark On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 8:33 PM, lop pol via Groups.Io < the_infinite_penguin@...> wrote: On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 08:17 pm, Mark Goldberg wrote:method. |
Re: Repairing plated through holes.
I would like to affordably put together the things needed to repair plated through holes.======================================================== My first position at Tektronix was in Plant 2 Test-Final. I received an authorization from my manager to repair an ECB with a damaged thru-hole. I used an eyelet from the company switch repair kit and simply soldered both sides without any use of an 'eyelet tool' to flare the end. It worked out fine and saved the ECB. For my own personal use I ordered eyelets of various sizes from Mouser to repair ECBs and rotary switches. Rolynn Tek Bvtn and Sunset 1966-1971 |
Re: Repairing plated through holes.
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 08:17 pm, Mark Goldberg wrote:
I see the eyelets on mouser are cheap. What im really wondering about is the staking tool and which one to get. |
Re: Repairing plated through holes.
Do a search for "eyelet plated through hole" and you will find eyelets
designed for that purpose. I do not know what kind of tooling they may or may not require. I have also used just a piece of wire bent through the hole and onto the pads on two sides, but that is not the "official" method. Regards, Mark On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 7:28 PM, lop pol via Groups.Io < the_infinite_penguin@...> wrote: I would like to affordably put together the things needed to repair plated |
Re: Tek 2236 repair, I don't believe it is the PS. Dented. Found a cut trace near U504. Thoughts?
The last time I responded here, my additional info got posted on its own. I'm not familiar with this interface, sorry. I don't know what I did wrong. I'll repost my last comment here in an attempt to keep things in one place, if that is even possible, then add my update.
Is there any evidence that the intensity control on the front panel was bashed? None. In fact those controls do seem to change the display with the beam finder pressed. The only button or knob which I've noticed feels like there might be any aging involved is the "¦¤ time position" knob on the CTM. That has a lot of play in the pots. For interested bystanders, I found the manual here I think the cut trace was done at the factory. Details for anyone interested: P252 of the manual says U504 and R525 are part of the A sweep generator and logic circuit. The cut trace going in to U504 goes to pin 12. That trace comes from the emitter of Q576 on one end, and a voltage divider R526 off of the -8.6 rail on the other. I have continuity to both. The cut part of trace goes to CR583, but that is run from U506A. So that is not the problem, unfortunately. The trouble-shooter p.290 suggests: Checking -2kV I have no idea how to test for -2kV without lighting myself up :/ It also suggests adjusting internal grid bias. I didn't try that yet. Check TP842 for z-axis ublanking pulse of 10-60V P-P I couldn't find that TP because I transcribed it incorrectly as TP482. I'll check that when I can. Maybe Saturday. Check R707 for the 12V P-P sweep sawtooth for possible problem with A sweep generator or logic fault I can't find R707 anywhere. I don't believe my revision has a R707. I'll try to just find the equivalent of that point from the diagrams. Check CRT H deflection pins for 40V P-P on each lead, if not, suspect H amp or Sweep switching if H deflection pins are OK then troubleshoot Z-axis and CRT circuits Not a lot of news there but I wanted to get back to you. Thanks!! UPDATE!!** I was getting some test readings when the unit started working. After a lot of tapping and looking around I found some connections without any solder on the side of the board with traces. The only connection which read open was on R751 but many were suspect. I soldered at least one end of 17 components. The list available if anyone might find it useful. I then got a trace without using the beam finder but the trace was only intermittently full width. I was still plagued by an intermittent open. If I pulled on the main circuit board under the CRT, in the vicinity of U130, then I consistently got a full width trace. More poking and hair pulling revealed that the inner H wire was not really connected to the CRT tube. After attaching that the unit seemed to work. Yeah! I don't know if it was a combination of things or if the beam finder allowed enough capacitive coupling to the H grids. Either way, any issues which might remain will be in a whole new ball park, so if this is a forum where mods close finished topics, it is ripe. I appreciate the input! Thanks. |
Re: What removes vinyl plasticizer stickyness on cabinets?
For a time the problem can be held in check by mopping up the leaching with powders. Corn starch, talc. It looks bad but can help prevent damaging clothing or cross contamination. Once it gets bad enough then I attempt to strip the coating but I agree with others here, no solvent seems appropriate. I wonder if that cleaner intended to remove the waterproofing goo from fibre optic cables might work. That goo is equally nasty.
|
Repairing plated through holes.
I would like to affordably put together the things needed to repair plated through holes. Anyone have any thoughts? I'm asking because I dont want to buy this more than once. My pocket has not much room for mistakes right now and i seem to do a lot better asking here before buying. Thanks guys
|
Re: let's bring this back to life Re: Tektronix 453 high voltage problem
well, that was overly optimistic - I'm back where I started - I replaced the caps, I tested the diodes (again) and I had HV and a trace for a bit, but the intensity and focus didn't work, so I dug around a bit, found a wiring error, fixed it, and I've got nothing. when it was "working", the drive transistor (Q930) drew about .25 to .3 amps from the 12V supply. After fixing it (so to speak), I don't have a trace, the -1950 volt bias is gone, and the current wanders around from 1/2 amp to about 1.8 amps (at which point I turn it off and let the transistor cool down). The transformer doesn't get hot, the caps don't get hot, and occasionally the neon lamps in the regulating circuit flash - so I'm going to put it aside for a while. If anyone wants to pick up from where I left off, drop me a note - if it was working they seem to sell for $200+, as a parts/not working scope it's got to be worth something, and I'd much rather get it to someone who will finish fixing it - I think it is otherwise working - I have gotten a valid trace and the controls seem to work
|
Re: Tektronix RAMS (Surplus) Store - Odd hours?
Not per se... It was just a case of curiosity, wondering if there were
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
some hidden reason. But.. Thanks, Dennis. I figured you'd be the one to make the best sense out of it. On 15-Jun-18 09:35, Dennis Tillman W7PF wrote:
Hi Bruce, --
--- Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR kyrrin (at) bluefeathertech dot com "Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati" (Red Green) |
Re: S6 Sampling Head Bridge Cavity Question
Hi Craig, Dave, and H?kan,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I failed to follow my own advice and RTFM before I took the sampling bridge cavity apart. I knew when I was debating to do this that I might be in over my head but all the previous things I tried up to this point convinced me that there was nothing unusual to a sampling head after all. So confidence gave way to cockiness when I should have stopped and read the manual to at least know what to expect. If I look back on my life it has been filled with similar behavior. There are two possible outcomes: 1) I admit that I broke it (whatever it was) and I have to face the consequences, or 2) I have an "Oh Shit" moment followed by a desperate scramble to first figure out what happened and then I start a desperate search for a solution. On balance I usually succeed when I am fortunate that option 2 is available to me. In the process of searching for a solution I learn a huge number of things that, until that moment, didn't seem very important to know. Many of those become very useful later on for avoiding the same problem twice. But there is a curious side effect of learning all the things which is to increase my overall confidence level. This makes it more likely that I will fail the next time to RTFM before I take the next thing apart. I see now that I have been stuck in an endless spiral of screw-ups of my own making. Fixing them has certainly kept me busy most of my life. But every once in a while I surprise myself by doing something really astounding (at least to me) and I think all this stuff I learned had a purpose. Dennis Tillman W7PF -----Original Message----------Original Message----- From: Dave Casey Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 12:17 AM The input (loop thru) signals J10 and J12 are 10k from another pin, "O". The output signals at 16k and a diode drop away from another pin ("J" ->- J15 or J16 ->- "M"). I feel like this should be measurable with an ohm meter to see when you're making good contact, but I'm not going to find out the hard way that it doesn't work that way. All the manual says is "The assembly female 3 mm coaxial connectors may be replaced by using a small wrench on the flat portion of the connector to remove and replace a connector from the assembly." (Page 5-1, second to last paragraph) Dave Casey -----Original Message----- -- Dennis Tillman W7PF TekScopes Moderator |
Re: Help needed with no trace no beamfinder on 465 (not b)
Thanks for your continued help Albert. I _might_ be able to cobble together a power supply in excess of 100V... but I am not understanding what that will tell me, possibly because I am unsure of your use for the term leakage in this context. Since TP1486 is in the secondary side of T1420 (correct?) how can anything I do with it eliminate T1420 as a fault? For instance if T1420's primary (inline with Q1418) is shorted or partially shorted? At least that 's the question that comes to my mind, since I don't understand the circuit. What if L1419 is shorted or partially shorted? And how does that eliminate (or indicate) the HV multiplier as the fault?
Let's see... you are suggesting that I might "drive the collector winding from an external source" by adding a negative voltage to TP1486 (which is connected to the T1420's secondary), is that correct? So if I had a +200VDC power supply I would connect the +200V positive terminal to ground and the negative terminal to TP1486? In the case I could obtain an power supply, where exactly would I measure the leakage current and what level would be the pass/fail amount? I assume you mean replace the fuse F1419 with an ammeter as I did before in order to measure Q1418's collector current? My only guess is... by adding voltage to the secondary, a working primary must likewise increase, thus increasing the collector current. So... if it does not increase Q1418's collector current then that suggests a problem with L1419 or T1420 (or C1419)? And if that is close to being correct as a strategy, then wouldn't slightly increasing the positive voltage at the fuse test it similarly? I say that assuming T1420's secondary is unlikely to have been damaged by anything I might have shorted in front of it... Oops... rereading your message I see:"Then you could see at which frequency it resonates and how it responds to increasing primary amplitude.", which I somehow missed in the above... Let me start over... Q1418's circuit drives the signal taken from Q1416 through T1420, multiplying it by whatever the turns ratio of T1420 is. You are suggesting I unplug Q1418 and replace it with a short? Then read the current through F1419? Not sure how we are to read a resonate frequency when we are not applying a sweep... Sorry, as you can see this is a bit over my head... |
Re: My 422
Hi Jeff-
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I have good news and will follow up later......I have mine running using TO-3 2n5881's only had little bits of time with all the other stuff going on.....I will post stuff and a run down when I get the pictures so I can add the links... some of the issues were prior folks errors in the scope itself. scope looking at itself.....hmmmm not sure if that would work ....give it a try! oh what about grounding issues? that could be a problem. I think I have a picture of the base form ...it is on the camera 3 hours away along with all the rest of the pictures.... interesting on Muntz..... Thanks ¸é±ð²Ô¨¦±ð PS are you near Teaneck , NJ? couple of old panel meters I would to be retrieved before they fgo to the land fill.... On 2018-06-15 11:53 AM, Jeff Urban wrote:
Hey Renee, I was just reading on sci.electronics.design about transistors degrading over time when they get alot of reverse Vbe. Actually they were talking about exceeding the rating or the transistor but how is that rating determined ? They obviously test it destructively and don't take 20 years to do it. So I think it possible that it could degrade even if the rating is not exceeded. Looking at the circuit, it might have quite a negative spike in the base drive. |
Re: Up to date capacitor list for Tek 2465A and 2465B scopes (2018)
Edit, the first sentence should read:I have updated the list to correct two errors in the last version, to accommodate Digikey change of part numbers, and to replace some Panasonic capacitors with equivalent or better Nichicon.
Seems I cant get anywhere near this list without making an error, lol. |
Re: Up to date capacitor list for Tek 2465A and 2465B scopes (2018)
I am not a chemist.? Nor am I up to date on capacitor chemistry.? Its been 19 years since I reviewed electronic designs professionally.? Still, I am qualified to read and evaluate manufacturers specs.? I do not share this disdain for Panasonic, nor am I concerned about using electrolytic capacitors with higher than necessary Voltage ratings.? I am always careful about capacitance values since some of electrolytic capacitors are used for timing.? Still, in bypass applications I often use 2 times the OEM value or more.? My rationale is simple, it lowers the ESR (check the specs) and definitely lowers the ripple beyond that required by the OEM.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I understand that there is long lasting folklore that higher voltage ratings are bad somehow.? I fail to see how.? In the past the higher voltage rated caps would eventually lower (degrade?) their voltage ratings to match the circuit they were installed.? I don't think they do that nearly so much today but so what?? Why care if the voltage rating becomes less as long as it exceeds the applied voltage?? The only concern for us should be if ESR is low and stable throughout the capacitor life.? Todays higher voltage parts have less ESR than their lower voltage siblings and certainly less than the "older" parts with lower voltage ratings. ?To check this, I did some spec evaluation of the 330 mfd, 50 Volt capacitors I include in my updated list.? The 330 mfd, 50 Volt Nichicon?UHW1H331MPD I use is specified to have an ESR of 0.228 Ohms with no greater than 0.456 Ohms throughout its 10,000 hour service life at 105 degrees.? Its hard for me to see how that is not a great choice for anyone refreshing their scope.? BUT, the 25 volt version of that same capacitor (if it were available) has 0.29 Ohms with no greater than 0.58 Ohms.? Sadly, the 25 volt version of the Nichicon?UHW1H331MPD does not exist.? So I would use the Nichicon?UPW1E331MPD which has an ESR of 0.31 Ohms and a lifetime of only 5000 Hours.? A loss of 5000 hours life expectancy and an increase of nearly 50% in ESR.? Using a 160 mfd 25 volt Nichicon the ESR increases to 0.58 Ohm.? In fact, for the bypass service of the 2465B LVPS here are the choices and their ESR:? ? ? ? 1. 50 volt 330 mfd Nichicon UHW1H331MPD an ESR of 0.228 Ohms, lifetime of 10,000 hours.? ? ? ? 2. 25 volt 330 mfd Nichicon UPW1E331MPD? with an ESR of 0.31 Ohms, lifetime of 5000 hours.? ? ? ? 3. 25 volt 180 mfd Nichicon UPM1E181MPD6TD with an ESR of 0.58 Ohms, lifetime of 5000 hours.? ? ? ? 4. 50 volt 330 mfd Panasonic EEU-EB1H331 with an ESR of 0.34 Ohms, lifetime of 10000 hours.? ? ? ? 5. 25 volt 330 mfd Panasonic?EEU-EB1E331 with an ESR of 0.5 Ohms, lifetime of 10000 hours.? ? ? ? 6. 25 volt 180 mfd Panasonic EEU-FC1E181 with an ESR of 0.58 Ohms, lifetime of 2000 hours. So, using only manufacturer specs, and abide your rules I am stuck with less lifetime, higher ESR, and higher overall ripple.? My first choice is the Nichicon?UHW1H331MPD with Panasonic EEU-EB1H331 as a reasonable, long life backup.? Both of them giving better performance and better lifetime than OEM.? I understand that the old parts that we used prior to 2000 may of had different results.? A bag of those old parts would age and deteriorate much differently than todays parts.? I think this is obvious by the very fact that we are in the process of refreshing Tek scopes by replacing all those old caps.? I don't want to do what they did "back then".? I want to do what the specs say is the best choice today.? That is what I tried to do in my updated list.? I invite anyone to make other lists with other parts.? The more the merrier. ? As always, constructive help and advice is always welcome.? I am no expert but still far from a bumbling fool. On ?Friday?, ?June? ?15?, ?2018? ?07?:?29?:?29? ?AM? ?CDT, M Yachad <yachadm@...> wrote:
Chuck ¡°If you need some evidence to back my assertions, grab any old bag of electrolytic capacitors that have been sitting on the shelf for years, and measure the capacitance. They will all measure at the nominal value... after years of being operated at the extremely low voltage of 0V. ¡° Not sure if you¡¯re trying to be funny, or if you¡¯re serious. If you¡¯re serious, I think your comparison is irrelevant. Unless a capacitor is in a working environment, coping with heating and cooling cycles, you cannot compare it to a shelf model, no matter what voltage. And statistically, throwing a single bag of old undocumented caps into the ring here, is irrelevant. ¡°I have just such a bag of nichicons from a project where I overbought the caps. This was back in the 1970's. They all still read 2200uf +/- 10%.¡± In the best case, it just goes to prove that Nichicon is still the right choice, today. ¡°But, alas, what you say is not true. It once was, back when electrolytic capacitors used rather caustic electrolytes that ate away the aluminum oxide dielectric layer, but that hasn't been the case for about 30 years.¡± On the contrary, the low-ESR capacitors of today DO contain corrosive electrolyte. Do I need to expound on the A5¡¯s damage? Read up on Chemicon¡¯s recent hard lessons on their KYx KZx and LXx series, with the problems, and subsequent requirement to reformulate the highly corrosive electrolyte. We only get to know about these problems, LONG AFTER the caps have been installed in the customer¡¯s machine, and he has paid for them. So why not anticipate the problem, and plan for it? Therefore, there is enough empirical evidence to support the postulation that the issue STILL exists today. And I simply do NOT see this as a problem. We can choose to ignore it, or we can choose to plan our BoM, with the knowledge that a poor choice may bite us in the future. My way to deal with this exact issue, is to suit the capacitor voltage rating to the actual circuit voltage. Is that such a difficult decision to make? To me, it¡¯s simply preempting the possible problems which corrosive electrolytes cause. It¡¯s a free world. I choose the path of caution and reliability ¨C I have customers to answer to, and my hard-won reputation to uphold. A man who¡¯s rebuilding his own scope can throw whatever he wants in there ¨C the only one he needs to answer to, is himself. And in that case, to him, this discussion is irrelevant. ¡°Just like it was fine when you specified 330uf 50V caps to replace both the 250uf 20V and the 180uf 40V caps in the power supply.¡± You¡¯re right ¨C in my PDF, I did say that. I did not pay sufficient attention during my proofreading to differentiate. However, after that PDF was published, there was a lot of positive feedback on this forum, pointing out the errors and suggesting the changes which should be made. All of those changes are included in my ebay repair kit, which has sold nearly 200 units, the vast majority of them not on ebay. ¡°This isn't audio gear where you have to worry about how the end user might "feel" about your choice. You can use valid technical reasons.¡± I¡¯ve been around much too long to give much thrift to what people ¡°feel¡± about my conservative way of life, much less to audiophools who chase after every new bottle of snake oil. My principle is ¡°First reliability, then sound¡±. Why? If the machine doesn¡¯t work, then what worth are all the salesman¡¯s promises on the superior sound which it is supposed to it deliver? G-d bless you all for your input ¨C it¡¯s what keeps this forum alive and each of us learning more as we go along. Menahem |
Re: let's bring this back to life Re: Tektronix 453 high voltage problem
replacing the ceramic caps seems to have fixe it - the orange ones that your very nice picture
C940, 945, 946, and 952, 966 - I used .01 3KV ceramics - two in parallel, except for C945/946 which are two .015 in parallel so I just paralleled 3 of the blue caps. when I can figure out how to upload an image in association with this post, I'll post a picture |
Re: Up to date capacitor list for Tek 2465A and 2465B scopes (2018)
I have updated the list to correct two errors in the last version, to accommodate Digikey change of part numbers, and to replace some Panasonic capacitors with equivalent or better Panasonic.? It is posted in the files section with the title " 2465B capacitor refresh list Updated June 2018.xlsx".? I hope it helps others to quickly find usable parts.? Take note that in some cases I use parts with significantly higher voltage ratings and/or capacitance values than OEM.? I believe this is acceptable and may be preferred in the cases where it is done.? I encourage those with other priorities to post their "better" list(s).? I also invite constructive comments or identification of errors in the list (I hope the error list is null, lol).
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On ?Friday?, ?June? ?15?, ?2018? ?08?:?13?:?28? ?AM? ?CDT, Chuck Harris <cfharris@...> wrote:
You didn't listen to what I said about the electrolyte. Isopropyl alcohol does tremendous "corrosion" to a styrofoam cup, but nothing to a piece of aluminum. The corrosive, to copper, electrolyte in 105C capacitors makes a mess out of copper, but does nothing to aluminum and aluminum oxide.? An electrolyte can be corrosive to one material, and totally benign to another. Years ago, the electrolyte ate the aluminum oxide dielectric layer.? This is why a capacitor from that era needed to be reformed periodically if you wanted it to meet its nominal specifications.? Today, capacitor plate material is precision anodized in bulk form, wound up into a capacitor, and given a highly electrically conductive electrolyte (low ESR) that does not corrode the aluminum oxide dielectric deposited during the anodize process. You may have heard about the counterfeit electrolyte that appeared in many electronic devices, notably computers, in the late 90's.? This was a case of an electrolyte being used that was not as noncorrosive as was necessary. When you operate a modern electrolytic capacitor on lower than its nominal voltage rating, it is not harmed, and it does not change in any way. Ever wonder why today's capacitors are so much smaller for the same C x V product than were the capacitors originally installed in the scopes?? The reason is the better processioning of the aluminum plate material allows far fewer errors in dielectric thickness, and the greatly improved non corrosive to aluminum oxide electrolyte allows the manufacturer to use a lower voltage safety factor than before. Today's 25V capacitor is yesterdays 50V capacitor. If the electrolyte was as corrosive as you imagine, my bags of NOS capacitors would have all eaten away their aluminum oxide dielectric and all be short circuit.? They are not.? They are as good as the day they were made.? Electrolytic capacitors from 40-50 years ago would be long gone in similar circumstances. You are limiting your choices based on imagined problems. -Chuck Harris OBTW, Nichicon of 1975 is a far different company from Nichicon of 2018.? Dare we compare Tektronix of 1965 to the Tektronix of today?? Neither company has any of the original founders, nor their instincts for quality, involved today. M Yachad wrote: Chuck... |
Re: Help needed with no trace no beamfinder on 465 (not b)
Hi Keith,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I'm sorry I couldn't quickly guide you to the fault location. Personally I can spend many many hours in finding a fault, and that as far as possible without desoldering components. But I also have the intention to use the equipment, though that often means to have still more equipment to test other Tek equipment... You probably don't have the equipment to further test the transformer and secondary circuits. Now that Q1418 can be unplugged it becomes possible (without desoldering) to drive the collector winding from an external source. Then you could see at which frequency it resonates and how it responds to increasing primary amplitude. One thing you could perhaps do. The HV test point showed just -70 V or so. So if something starts to leak at that secondary side, then it's likely beginning already at a rather low voltage. You could use any DC supply which can deliver say 100 V or preferably larger (arbitrary large doesn't harm) and apply the negative side to that HV test point, in series with a current limiting resistor. Now you can check the leakage current -- the only load should be formed by the focus circuit of about 30 M. If this doen't indicate leakage then the suspects are reduced to multiplier unit and transformer. Albert On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 01:45 pm, Keith Ostertag wrote:
|
to navigate to use esc to dismiss