On May 29, 12:26*am, Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:09:04 -0700 (PDT), walt wrote:
Richard, I'm still trying to assimilate all the info you presented in
you post above. So please allow me to skate around a bit.

First, concerning plate resistance, Rp. This may be where we don't
understand each other. My position on Rp is that it is a non-
dissipative resistance, and can be measured by noting the change in Ip
with a change in ep with grid voltage held constant.

Hi Walt,

Thank you for the restrained answer. *Yes, we do not agree here.

To the matter of the conjugate basis. *Terman quite distinctly gives
us a real R that remains after the cancellation of reactances. *As a
hallmark of first principles, it is very clear and concise. *The
source R must match the load R for the source to deliver the maximum
available power. *By the same hallmark, this too is very explicit.
Terman calls this R (the remnant of conjugation) in the source: "the
resistance component of the generator impedance."

For you and others to say what the source is "not," that is not a
solution for what the source "is." *This is what I speak of when you
ask if your critics agree or disagree. *You stand with your critics
against the testimony of your data that stands with Terman.

The plate resistance can be described physically to suit any objection
that I have so far heard from the community. *It suits very few who
embrace thought experiments that have never warmed a bench nor
flickered a measurement instrument. *The collapse of rhetoric has
exposed the vacuum of counter argument.

However, I will say this, I appreciate your statement that my data
suits you fine.

Walt, your methods are first methods. *Your care for propriety exceeds
all bold statements that carelessly condemn you. *Your achievements
give you the status of not having to endure taunts and endless
bickering. *Your steadfast self examination and willingness to sit at
the bench is the rock of faith in what Hams aspire for in engineering.
As for your humanity, I find you a proud father and loving husband. *I
think of you in no other terms, even when my prose is dense or obtuse,
and my engineering demands are harsh and pointed.

If my allusions to Kabuki are obscure, it is through my upbringing
living in Japan as a tyke. *If I might balance that obscure reference
for one that is more to my tone here, I call you Sensei - a master of
learning and teaching.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Hi Richard,

I sincerely appreciate your kind words concerning my humanity, and I'm
proud to have you call me Sensei. I have always somehow doubted your
feelings for me as a person, but your words above have relieved that
feeling, Thank you.

As for our disagreement on image matching, I remember reading many
years ago in books concerning networks involving telephone circuits
that dealt only with resistive terminations. Those readings did
specify that with image resistances the resistances were the same in
both directions. Nothing was said in those books concerning reactance
in the circuitry. Apparently we have different editions of Terman.
Mine doesn't discuss R as the remnant of conjugation, so if only R is
considered in the image impedance I can concur with you on this issue.

I also want to be clear on my position concerning plate resistance Rp
as the source resistance of the RF power amplifier. My position is
that it is not. I do understand that Rp is a factor in determining the
value of RL that appears at the input of the tank circuit, but not the
source of power delivered at the output of the tank circuit. Rp is a
non-dissipative resistance, not a resisTOR with physical
characteristics. I consider the voltage-current ratio R appearing at
the output of the tank circuit to be the source resistance of the RF
power amplifier. If you do not agree with this position then I guess
we'll just have to agree to disagree, unless you can find some way to
change my mind.

I thank you again, Richard, for your kind words.

Walt

On Sat, 29 May 2010 09:43:21 -0700 (PDT), walt wrote:

Apparently we have different editions of Terman.
Mine doesn't discuss R as the remnant of conjugation, so if only R is
considered in the image impedance I can concur with you on this issue.

Hi Walt,

Go to the index and look up Thévenin. The material should be found in
two areas:
1. Circuits with Lumped Constants - Thévenin's Theorem - Impedance
Matching
2. Audio Voltage Amplifiers - Resistance-coupled Amplifiers

Rp is a
non-dissipative resistance, not a resisTOR with physical
characteristics. I consider the voltage-current ratio R appearing at
the output of the tank circuit to be the source resistance of the RF
power amplifier. If you do not agree with this position then I guess
we'll just have to agree to disagree, unless you can find some way to
change my mind.

I will use your own data.

On Thu, 27 May 2010 19:32:40 -0700 (PDT), walt wrote:

In this condition the DC plate voltage is 800 v and plate
current is 260 ma. DC input power is therefore 800 v ? 0.26 a = 208 w.

I will be concerned with nothing else outside of this specification as
this is a discussion of the "real" Tube, and a power supply which will
be considered as loss-less.

First. There is one current loop throughout the entire system.

Second. Unique to a tube path within that current loop, there are two
characteristic current types. These are the convection current WITHIN
the cathode-plate interval, and the induction current that completes
the loop from plate to cathode through conventional power supply
wiring.

Third. The induction current's mobile electrons move at a rate of
meters per minute; whereas the charge mobility is near light speed.

Fourth. The convection current's mobile electrons (a literal particle
stream in a vacuum) move at a rate of near light speed. The term
"near light speed," in this case, is limited by the plate potential of
800V and can be computed; whereas the charge mobility is near light
speed, but generally higher (and specifically higher for 800V) than
the electron speed.

Fifth. It takes work to move an electron initially at rest to near
light speed over the interval between the cathode and the plate with
nanoseconds transit times.

Sixth. The electron gains kinetic energy from the field between the
plate and cathode.

Seventh. The kinetic energy of the electron is converted into heat
upon striking the plate, the heat energy being equal to the power
supply energy expended in accelerating the electron.

I will forgo the math of how considerable the resistance, power, and
heat is. All can be found from the data quoted above. Clearly, the
plate resistance is real in every sense of the word. It is the
limiting factor of the current path hence it is the source resistance
in every sense of the word.

The seven points I enumerate are from material drawn from a single
source. I am sending you the full chapter treatment that speaks to
this topic alone from:
"Physical Electronics," Curtis L. Hemenway, Richard W. Henry, Martin
Caulton; John Wiley and Sons, 1962.

Others may ask for copies of this reference. Others may ask where the
heat comes from, a topic I would enjoy elaborating upon. It is a very
simple explanation that by using Walt's data above, can be rendered
into Watts/Temperature with only the difficulty of pressing calculator
keys. These values than can weighed against real and tested
observation at the bench of the same tube in operation.

I cannot imagine anything else meriting discussion.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark Inscribed thus:

The seven points I enumerate are from material drawn from a single
source. I am sending you the full chapter treatment that speaks to
this topic alone from:
"Physical Electronics," Curtis L. Hemenway, Richard W. Henry, Martin
Caulton; John Wiley and Sons, 1962.

Others may ask for copies of this reference. Others may ask where the
heat comes from, a topic I would enjoy elaborating upon. It is a very
simple explanation that by using Walt's data above, can be rendered
into Watts/Temperature with only the difficulty of pressing calculator
keys. These values than can weighed against real and tested
observation at the bench of the same tube in operation.

I cannot imagine anything else meriting discussion.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

I would appreciate a copy of the above reference, if you would be so
kind. In order for me to continue following an interesting discussion.
Thankyou.
73's

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

On May 29, 4:39*pm, Baron wrote:
Richard Clark Inscribed thus:



The seven points I enumerate are from material drawn from a single
source. *I am sending you the full chapter treatment that speaks to
this topic alone from:
"Physical Electronics," Curtis L. Hemenway, Richard W. Henry, Martin
Caulton; John Wiley and Sons, 1962.

Others may ask for copies of this reference. *Others may ask where the
heat comes from, a topic I would enjoy elaborating upon. *It is a very
simple explanation that by using Walt's data above, can be rendered
into Watts/Temperature with only the difficulty of pressing calculator
keys. *These values than can weighed against real and tested
observation at the bench of the same tube in operation.

I cannot imagine anything else meriting discussion.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

I would appreciate a copy of the above reference, if you would be so
kind. *In order for me to continue following an interesting discussion.
Thankyou.
73's

--
Best Regards:
* * * * * * * * * * *Baron.

Hi Richard,

Thank you for sending the copy of the paper you referenced. I've been
reviewing it this afternoon. Although I understand that induced
current results from a moving charge, I'm not as comfortable
discussing the Rp issue in terms of charges as I am with currents, so
I'm having a little difficulty in coming to grips with Rp while
reviewing the paper. Consequently, I need a little more time
assimilating the info before replying further in hope of resolving our
difference on the subject.

I'll be back with you as soon as I'm ready.

Walt

Walt

On Sat, 29 May 2010 16:58:52 -0700 (PDT), walt wrote:

I'll be back with you as soon as I'm ready.

Hi Walt,

Thank you for keeping in touch. Others have asked for copies and will
be reading in tandem with you. Perhaps questions about it, or where
the heat comes from will arrive in your pause.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Sat, 29 May 2010 11:21:58 -0700, Richard Clark
wrote:

On Sat, 29 May 2010 09:43:21 -0700 (PDT), walt wrote:

Apparently we have different editions of Terman.
Mine doesn't discuss R as the remnant of conjugation, so if only R is
considered in the image impedance I can concur with you on this issue.

Hi Walt,

Sniipped

The seven points I enumerate are from material drawn from a single
source. I am sending you the full chapter treatment that speaks to
this topic alone from:
"Physical Electronics," Curtis L. Hemenway, Richard W. Henry, Martin
Caulton; John Wiley and Sons, 1962.

Others may ask for copies of this reference. Others may ask where the
heat comes from, a topic I would enjoy elaborating upon. It is a very
simple explanation that by using Walt's data above, can be rendered
into Watts/Temperature with only the difficulty of pressing calculator
keys. These values than can weighed against real and tested
observation at the bench of the same tube in operation.

I cannot imagine anything else meriting discussion.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC


Richard
Please send me a copy also.
Thanks much.
Dave Foreman

On May 30, 12:32*am, Richard Clark wrote:
On Sat, 29 May 2010 16:58:52 -0700 (PDT), walt wrote:
I'll be back with you as soon as I'm ready.

Hi Walt,

Thank you for keeping in touch. *Others have asked for copies and will
be reading in tandem with you. *Perhaps questions about it, or where
the heat comes from will arrive in your pause.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

does it really matter what the mechanism of generating the heat is?
the fact that there is heat generated in the plate means there is
energy lost from the electrons, be it due to impinging on the plate
mechanically or due to the metal resistance it is still a loss of
energy. And since there is more heat when there is more plate current
we can model it as a real resistance. The only question is then, is
it linear or not. that should be a 'relatively' simple measurement,
and one that has likely been done by a researcher somewhere along the
line.

Baron Inscribed thus:

Richard Clark Inscribed thus:

The seven points I enumerate are from material drawn from a single
source. I am sending you the full chapter treatment that speaks to
this topic alone from:
"Physical Electronics," Curtis L. Hemenway, Richard W. Henry, Martin
Caulton; John Wiley and Sons, 1962.

Others may ask for copies of this reference. Others may ask where
the
heat comes from, a topic I would enjoy elaborating upon. It is a
very simple explanation that by using Walt's data above, can be
rendered into Watts/Temperature with only the difficulty of pressing
calculator
keys. These values than can weighed against real and tested
observation at the bench of the same tube in operation.

I cannot imagine anything else meriting discussion.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

I would appreciate a copy of the above reference, if you would be so
kind. In order for me to continue following an interesting
discussion. Thankyou.
73's


Copy received !
Thanks.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

Walt, W2DU wrote:
"Rp is a non-dissipative resistance, not a tesisTOR with physical
characteristics."

To nit pick a little, I think some dissipative resistance is found in
the output impedance of a Class C amplifier when you average over an RF
cycle.

Although rp (dynamic plate resistance) is defined as the change in plate
voltage divided by the change in plate current when an increment of
plate voltage produces an incremantal change in plate current, plate
resistance goes down as plate current goes up.

Rp can be very low but not zero when a tube biased beyond its cut-off is
pulsed on heavily duting the RF cycle. In saturated conduction the
voltage drop actoss the tube can be very low and any change in plate
voltage would result in insignificant change in plate current.

When a Class C amplifier is switched into heavy conduction by its grid,
its DC resistance is low and its power suppy may be low in resistance
too. During the conduction part of the RF cycle, the impedance looking
back into the amplifier`s putput is low also. During the switched-off
part of the amplifier`s cycle, the impedance looks like an open circuit.
Over an entire cycle, the tube`s output impedance has an average value.

A pi-network is an impedance transformation device which does not
completely isolate its input from its output, so a tube on its input has
its shunt impedance transformed to some value across its output. Its
resonance can linearize the signal.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB6WZI