EB63 update
 

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering bulletin and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear this up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.

Hello DR. Death:

R4 and D2 make up the Bias voltage and current that is feed to the
base's of RF Amplifier Transistors Q3 and Q4.

The resistance value of R4 will be a dead nuts on requirement. But may
not really need to be a exact value, within a certain range. R4
resistance value was probably called out 47 Ohms as this will work.

I would use 4 each, 2 watt resistors wired in a parallel/series way to
make a 8 watt resistor, as a 6 watt resistor is needed.

My simple diagram shows 4 each, 47 ohm resistor wired in a series
parallel method. This allows the resistor to have the same value as a
single resistor but 4 times the power rating.


++++++ ++++++
++++++ +++++ ++++++++
++++++ ++++++



http://www.communication-concepts.co...63300sharp.pdf

Jay in the Mojave



DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering bulletin and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear this up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.

DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering bulletin and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear this up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.


Hello DR. Death:

One other thing that could be done to get a feel for the Value of R4 is
look at the other Motorola Engineering Bulletins, and see what they use
for the resistor. 33 and 47 ohms looks like a good value.

One problem I see is that because this resistor needs to dissipate 5 to
6 watts, a lot of these resistors used are too small in there power
rating. Thetas why the 8 watt series/parallel circuit works so well. And
the 2 watt carbon Resistors can't be too expensive. See:

http://www.rfparts.com

You could have a 33 ohm and a 47 ohm resistors, and switch between them
to see what what works best.

And of course you could always measure the current of the two
transistors at .6 to .7 Volts applied at the Base and Emitter of the Q3
and Q4 Transistors. This with ohms law would tell the range of resistors
used for the bias supply for a pair MRF242 Transistors.

Jay in the Mojave

Correction:

" The resistance value of R4 will be a dead nuts on requirement."

This is incorrect.
The resistance value of R4 will NOT be a dead nuts on requirement.

Jay in the Mojave



Jay in the Mojave wrote:

Hello DR. Death:

R4 and D2 make up the Bias voltage and current that is feed to the
base's of RF Amplifier Transistors Q3 and Q4.

The resistance value of R4 will be a dead nuts on requirement. But may
not really need to be a exact value, within a certain range. R4
resistance value was probably called out 47 Ohms as this will work.

I would use 4 each, 2 watt resistors wired in a parallel/series way to
make a 8 watt resistor, as a 6 watt resistor is needed.

My simple diagram shows 4 each, 47 ohm resistor wired in a series
parallel method. This allows the resistor to have the same value as a
single resistor but 4 times the power rating.


++++++ ++++++
++++++ +++++ ++++++++
++++++ ++++++



http://www.communication-concepts.co...63300sharp.pdf

Jay in the Mojave



DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering
bulletin and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The
bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear
this up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.

"Jay in the Mojave" wrote in message
...
DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering bulletin
and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The
bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear this
up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.


Hello DR. Death:

One other thing that could be done to get a feel for the Value of R4 is
look at the other Motorola Engineering Bulletins, and see what they use
for the resistor. 33 and 47 ohms looks like a good value.

One problem I see is that because this resistor needs to dissipate 5 to 6
watts, a lot of these resistors used are too small in there power rating.
Thetas why the 8 watt series/parallel circuit works so well. And the 2
watt carbon Resistors can't be too expensive. See:

http://www.rfparts.com

You could have a 33 ohm and a 47 ohm resistors, and switch between them to
see what what works best.

And of course you could always measure the current of the two transistors
at .6 to .7 Volts applied at the Base and Emitter of the Q3 and Q4
Transistors. This with ohms law would tell the range of resistors used for
the bias supply for a pair MRF242 Transistors.

Jay in the Mojave

If you are really concerned you will want to use 5% or better resistors,
which, can be hard to find in large wattage for cheap. If you want to burn
a little money look into the dale power resistors which have an aluminum
outer heatsink covering. Since this covering is sinked to ground it will
also help with stray RF and may prevent some internal oscillations thus
keeping harmonics down a tad.

http://www.vishay.com/resistors-disc...wer-more-five/

Chad

"Jay in the Mojave" wrote in message
...
Hello DR. Death:

R4 and D2 make up the Bias voltage and current that is feed to the
base's of RF Amplifier Transistors Q3 and Q4.

The resistance value of R4 will be a dead nuts on requirement. But may
not really need to be a exact value, within a certain range. R4
resistance value was probably called out 47 Ohms as this will work.

I would use 4 each, 2 watt resistors wired in a parallel/series way to
make a 8 watt resistor, as a 6 watt resistor is needed.

My simple diagram shows 4 each, 47 ohm resistor wired in a series
parallel method. This allows the resistor to have the same value as a
single resistor but 4 times the power rating.


++++++ ++++++
++++++ +++++ ++++++++
++++++ ++++++



http://www.communication-concepts.co...63300sharp.pdf

Jay in the Mojave



DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering bulletin
and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The
bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear this
up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.


The bulletin uses a 1N4997 diode for D2 and a 33 ohm for R4. The
construction hints uses a MJE243 Transistor for D2 as they state the 1N4997
is no longer available and R4 as 82 ohms. The 63R resistor parts set has it
at 47 ohms. So the choice I think would be either the 47 or 82 ohm.
I was able to find a 1N4997 replacement NTE5800 and might try it with the 33
ohm as the MJE243 will be a bit harder to install as it goes between the PCB
and heat sink and has to have a spacer. Thanks for your input, if the 1N4997
doesn't work like expected I'll give the series parallel a try.

"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
...

"Jay in the Mojave" wrote in message
...
DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering bulletin
and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The
bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The
web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear
this
up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.


Hello DR. Death:

One other thing that could be done to get a feel for the Value of R4 is
look at the other Motorola Engineering Bulletins, and see what they use
for the resistor. 33 and 47 ohms looks like a good value.

One problem I see is that because this resistor needs to dissipate 5 to
6
watts, a lot of these resistors used are too small in there power
rating.
Thetas why the 8 watt series/parallel circuit works so well. And the 2
watt carbon Resistors can't be too expensive. See:

http://www.rfparts.com

You could have a 33 ohm and a 47 ohm resistors, and switch between them
to
see what what works best.

And of course you could always measure the current of the two
transistors
at .6 to .7 Volts applied at the Base and Emitter of the Q3 and Q4
Transistors. This with ohms law would tell the range of resistors used
for
the bias supply for a pair MRF242 Transistors.

Jay in the Mojave

If you are really concerned you will want to use 5% or better resistors,
which, can be hard to find in large wattage for cheap. If you want to
burn
a little money look into the dale power resistors which have an aluminum
outer heatsink covering. Since this covering is sinked to ground it will
also help with stray RF and may prevent some internal oscillations thus
keeping harmonics down a tad.

http://www.vishay.com/resistors-disc...wer-more-five/

Chad


That's an excellent suggestion :) A little more money sure won't break the
budget on this project. Thanks.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:37:04 -0500, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

snip
The bulletin uses a 1N4997 diode for D2 and a 33 ohm for R4. The
construction hints uses a MJE243 Transistor for D2 as they state the 1N4997
is no longer available and R4 as 82 ohms. The 63R resistor parts set has it
at 47 ohms. So the choice I think would be either the 47 or 82 ohm.


It looks like the resistors were chosen based on the characteristics
of the respective device, so keeping the match would probably be the
best choice. IOW, use the 82 ohm resistor with the MJE243 and the 33
ohm resistor with the 1N4997.


I was able to find a 1N4997 replacement NTE5800 and might try it with the 33
ohm as the MJE243 will be a bit harder to install as it goes between the PCB
and heat sink and has to have a spacer.


Avoid generic replacements. Unless it's reverse-referenced as the
original component, it may not be a drop-in replacement and is not
likely to have the same specifications as the original. Besides, using
the MJE243 is, IMPO, a better choice than the 1N4997 for a couple
reasons: First, as a diode it will have forward voltage drop (bias
regulation) similar to the emitter-base characteristics of the power
transistors (mainly because it -is- a power transistor); and second,
because it will have a better thermal connection with the heat-sink
providing bias regulation with improved thermal tracking. That is, of
course, assuming you are able to mount it physically close to the
power transistors. And when you mount it, use just a very thin film of
heat-sink grease -- avoid the "more-is-better" mentality.


Thanks for your input, if the 1N4997
doesn't work like expected I'll give the series parallel a try.


Using multiple resistors is an excellent idea. If the 33 ohm resistor
is used the power dissipated by the resistor will be slightly greater
than the 5 watt rating specified -- it would be much better to have a
resistor (or resistors) rated for 10 watts or more. Also, mount that
resistor (as well as the base resistors R5 and R6) slightly above the
board (1/8" to 1/4") or the heat will cook the board and the foil will
fall off. The extra wire also helps dissipate heat.

There was also the suggestion to use a Dale, but that's really just a
waste of money in this case -- the input impedance of the transistors
is so low that feedback from stray RF isn't going to be a problem.

Another issue: While looking at the schematic I was suprised to see
that there isn't a choke between the bias supply and the input
transformer -- there -really- needs to be one there! At the very
least, add a few beads on the wire from the center-tap of the input
transformer. A nice torroid or hash choke would be even better.

Anyway, while you are building this thing, keep in mind that it is a
very basic circuit (i.e, primitive, uninproved, bare-bones), so don't
expect much. And yes, it -will- need a filter.






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:37:04 -0500, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

snip
The bulletin uses a 1N4997 diode for D2 and a 33 ohm for R4. The
construction hints uses a MJE243 Transistor for D2 as they state the
1N4997
is no longer available and R4 as 82 ohms. The 63R resistor parts set has
it
at 47 ohms. So the choice I think would be either the 47 or 82 ohm.


It looks like the resistors were chosen based on the characteristics
of the respective device, so keeping the match would probably be the
best choice. IOW, use the 82 ohm resistor with the MJE243 and the 33
ohm resistor with the 1N4997.


I was able to find a 1N4997 replacement NTE5800 and might try it with the
33
ohm as the MJE243 will be a bit harder to install as it goes between the
PCB
and heat sink and has to have a spacer.


Avoid generic replacements. Unless it's reverse-referenced as the
original component, it may not be a drop-in replacement and is not
likely to have the same specifications as the original. Besides, using
the MJE243 is, IMPO, a better choice than the 1N4997 for a couple
reasons: First, as a diode it will have forward voltage drop (bias
regulation) similar to the emitter-base characteristics of the power
transistors (mainly because it -is- a power transistor); and second,
because it will have a better thermal connection with the heat-sink
providing bias regulation with improved thermal tracking. That is, of
course, assuming you are able to mount it physically close to the
power transistors. And when you mount it, use just a very thin film of
heat-sink grease -- avoid the "more-is-better" mentality.


The MJE243 mounts close to the power transistors. The hints say to use a
mica washer and coumpound. I was certainly a little concerned with using
replacement 1N4997.

Thanks for your input, if the 1N4997
doesn't work like expected I'll give the series parallel a try.


Using multiple resistors is an excellent idea. If the 33 ohm resistor
is used the power dissipated by the resistor will be slightly greater
than the 5 watt rating specified -- it would be much better to have a
resistor (or resistors) rated for 10 watts or more. Also, mount that
resistor (as well as the base resistors R5 and R6) slightly above the
board (1/8" to 1/4") or the heat will cook the board and the foil will
fall off. The extra wire also helps dissipate heat.

Glad you mentioned that. I would have mounted them against the board.

There was also the suggestion to use a Dale, but that's really just a
waste of money in this case -- the input impedance of the transistors
is so low that feedback from stray RF isn't going to be a problem.

Another issue: While looking at the schematic I was suprised to see
that there isn't a choke between the bias supply and the input
transformer -- there -really- needs to be one there! At the very
least, add a few beads on the wire from the center-tap of the input
transformer. A nice torroid or hash choke would be even better.

When I bought the transformer set it came with the beads and wire and the
hints tell where to put the choke.

Anyway, while you are building this thing, keep in mind that it is a
very basic circuit (i.e, primitive, uninproved, bare-bones), so don't
expect much. And yes, it -will- need a filter.

LOL, no doubt. I have a pretty good low pass in line filter that I will use.
Thanks for the info Frank.






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"DR. Death" wrote in message
...
"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
...

"Jay in the Mojave" wrote in message
...
DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering
bulletin
and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The
bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The
web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear
this
up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.


Hello DR. Death:

One other thing that could be done to get a feel for the Value of R4 is
look at the other Motorola Engineering Bulletins, and see what they use
for the resistor. 33 and 47 ohms looks like a good value.

One problem I see is that because this resistor needs to dissipate 5 to
6
watts, a lot of these resistors used are too small in there power
rating.
Thetas why the 8 watt series/parallel circuit works so well. And the 2
watt carbon Resistors can't be too expensive. See:

http://www.rfparts.com

You could have a 33 ohm and a 47 ohm resistors, and switch between them
to
see what what works best.

And of course you could always measure the current of the two
transistors
at .6 to .7 Volts applied at the Base and Emitter of the Q3 and Q4
Transistors. This with ohms law would tell the range of resistors used
for
the bias supply for a pair MRF242 Transistors.

Jay in the Mojave

If you are really concerned you will want to use 5% or better resistors,
which, can be hard to find in large wattage for cheap. If you want to
burn
a little money look into the dale power resistors which have an aluminum
outer heatsink covering. Since this covering is sinked to ground it will
also help with stray RF and may prevent some internal oscillations thus
keeping harmonics down a tad.

http://www.vishay.com/resistors-disc...wer-more-five/

Chad


That's an excellent suggestion :) A little more money sure won't break the
budget on this project. Thanks.



Frank said it would be a moot point to have RF rejection in this area, do
trust him more than me as he has WAY more RF knowledge than I do. I'm an
audio guy!

BTW what's the budget on the project? Just curious.

Chad

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:17:01 -0500, "Chad Wahls"
wrote in :

snip
Frank said it would be a moot point to have RF rejection in this area, do
trust him more than me as he has WAY more RF knowledge than I do......


Sorry, I wasn't trying to step on your toes. You probably didn't know
that the input impedance of these transistors is about 1 ohm (with a
little reactance), and I think you will agree that any pickup by this
resistor (or other relatively short wiring in the low-impedance part
of the circuit) isn't going to amount to squat. Regardless, any RF
that happens to land on the center-tap of the input transformer will
end up as common-mode signals that will be nulled at the output
transformer.

The most likely cause of self-oscillitory feedback will probably come
from the relay. Notice that one relay is used for both the input and
output (both at higher impedance than the amp block), and that the
armatures are long, parallel, and relatively close together. Scary!
Even Pride, the company that produced some of the worst CB amps ever,
had enough sense to use two seperate relays.







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
...

"DR. Death" wrote in message
...
"Chad Wahls" wrote in message
...

"Jay in the Mojave" wrote in message
...
DR. Death wrote:

I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering
bulletin
and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The
bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The
web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear
this
up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.


Hello DR. Death:

One other thing that could be done to get a feel for the Value of R4
is
look at the other Motorola Engineering Bulletins, and see what they
use
for the resistor. 33 and 47 ohms looks like a good value.

One problem I see is that because this resistor needs to dissipate 5
to
6
watts, a lot of these resistors used are too small in there power
rating.
Thetas why the 8 watt series/parallel circuit works so well. And the
2
watt carbon Resistors can't be too expensive. See:

http://www.rfparts.com

You could have a 33 ohm and a 47 ohm resistors, and switch between
them
to
see what what works best.

And of course you could always measure the current of the two
transistors
at .6 to .7 Volts applied at the Base and Emitter of the Q3 and Q4
Transistors. This with ohms law would tell the range of resistors
used
for
the bias supply for a pair MRF242 Transistors.

Jay in the Mojave

If you are really concerned you will want to use 5% or better
resistors,
which, can be hard to find in large wattage for cheap. If you want to
burn
a little money look into the dale power resistors which have an
aluminum
outer heatsink covering. Since this covering is sinked to ground it
will
also help with stray RF and may prevent some internal oscillations thus
keeping harmonics down a tad.

http://www.vishay.com/resistors-disc...wer-more-five/

Chad


That's an excellent suggestion :) A little more money sure won't break
the
budget on this project. Thanks.



Frank said it would be a moot point to have RF rejection in this area, do
trust him more than me as he has WAY more RF knowledge than I do. I'm an
audio guy!

BTW what's the budget on the project? Just curious.

Chad


I'm pretty sure I should be able to do this for $75 or less. I've had the
454s in a drawer for about 15 years. I have most of the switches, caps,
resistors, diodes and transistors. The heatsink was a freebie. I'll build my
own enclosure. SO239s robbed from old radios. Really the only things left to
buy is the relay, the resistor in question, and the transistor. So far I
only have $33 in it.

I'm sorry to say that EB63 is not my favorite design. It uses a "brute
force" method of biasing that is very inefficient and generates a ton
of heat. Just have a huge heat sink if you plan on running the bias
per design...

Professor
www.telstar-electronics.com


"DR. Death" wrote in message ...
I received the board today along with the Motorola engineering bulletin and
a list of construction hints and ran across my first problem. The bulletin
lists R4 as 33 ohms. The construction hints lists it as 82 ohms. The web
site resistor package lists it as 47 ohms. Hopefully they can clear this up
for me. I'll post the results when I get a reply.

"Brian Griffey" wrote in message
om...
I'm sorry to say that EB63 is not my favorite design. It uses a "brute
force" method of biasing that is very inefficient and generates a ton
of heat. Just have a huge heat sink if you plan on running the bias
per design...

Professor
www.telstar-electronics.com


I'm building this mostly for the learning experience as I have no formal
electronics training. I've repaired quite a few but never built one. Since I
have the pills and many of the parts I figure this would be an inexpensive
learning opportunity. If it works out I will feel more confident building a
more complicated design. The heat sink is off a scrapped Texas star 350. I
don't like their amps, but they have a pretty stout heat sink.

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:29:36 -0500, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Brian Griffey" wrote in message
. com...
I'm sorry to say that EB63 is not my favorite design. It uses a "brute
force" method of biasing that is very inefficient and generates a ton
of heat. Just have a huge heat sink if you plan on running the bias
per design...

Professor
www.telstar-electronics.com


I'm building this mostly for the learning experience as I have no formal
electronics training. I've repaired quite a few but never built one. Since I
have the pills and many of the parts I figure this would be an inexpensive
learning opportunity. If it works out I will feel more confident building a
more complicated design. The heat sink is off a scrapped Texas star 350. I
don't like their amps, but they have a pretty stout heat sink.



How deep do you want to get into this stuff?





----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:29:36 -0500, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

"Brian Griffey" wrote in message
. com...
I'm sorry to say that EB63 is not my favorite design. It uses a "brute
force" method of biasing that is very inefficient and generates a ton
of heat. Just have a huge heat sink if you plan on running the bias
per design...

Professor
www.telstar-electronics.com


I'm building this mostly for the learning experience as I have no formal
electronics training. I've repaired quite a few but never built one.
Since I
have the pills and many of the parts I figure this would be an
inexpensive
learning opportunity. If it works out I will feel more confident building
a
more complicated design. The heat sink is off a scrapped Texas star 350.
I
don't like their amps, but they have a pretty stout heat sink.



How deep do you want to get into this stuff?

I don't want to drown, but up to my neck would be fine.

"DR. Death" wrote:
I don't want to drown, but up to my neck would be fine.

Born again.

"Steveo" wrote in message
...
"DR. Death" wrote:
I don't want to drown, but up to my neck would be fine.

Born again.

My fear of wooden rulers and penguins suggests otherwise.

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:34:59 -0500, "DR. Death"
wrote in
:

snip
How deep do you want to get into this stuff?

I don't want to drown, but up to my neck would be fine.


Anybody else thinking about taking the plunge?







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"DR. Death" wrote:
"Steveo" wrote in message
...
"DR. Death" wrote:
I don't want to drown, but up to my neck would be fine.

Born again.

My fear of wooden rulers and penguins suggests otherwise.

When wuz the last time you had pussy around yore neck??