Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Remote Power Supply Connection
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:DCgXj.44704$JE4.15748@newsfe11.ams2...
> Iain Churches wrote
>>
>>> Also, transferring the filter caps to the amp would mean that both plug
>>> and socket would be live at the time of parting. I have seen it said
>>> that
>>> a diode in the amp solves this problem, but I wouldn't entrust my life
>>> to
>>> that solution.
>>
>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>
> Not safe enough to be legal here.
The argument agianst the use of the octal plug and socket
is the same as the argument against the use of the old-style
Bulgin plug and socket: it is possible with the aid of a tool
to touch the pins when the plug is partly removed but still
connected. Does not Patrick's solution prevent this? I
have seen a similar idea where a black plastic capacitor
clip has been fitted around the octal chassis socket.
> Innovation and safety don't mix well, but to his credit I don't think
> Patrick was trying to be inventive. He's done the best he can do under the
> circumstances, probably. I wasn't keen on the detail that the HT dies away
> within 10 secs IIRC. How long do electrocutions take? When is the most
> likely time a connection might be touched?
Agreed. One cannot assume common sense, and correct methods
and routines should be carefully documented in black and white.
>
>> A power diode, as an additional safety measure works
>> well.
>
> Additional?
Yes, in addition to the sensing loop, which switches a relay
to disconnect the DC from the chassis connector if either
end of the umbilical is removed.
> Works well? How well?
I have a power amps with 450VDC on a separate PSU.
I have on several occasions unscrewed the connector from
the amp end (which has diodes for the B+)
and put the probes of a voltmeter between the relative pins
and ground.
The psu has a touch proof chassis connector, though I
suppose one could poke a sewing needle into it. But once
again the DC is disconnected from the connector if the
umbilical is removed. There is no delay. The DC is
off before the connector collar is fully unscrewed.
A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen a
German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
for me.
Iain
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:DCgXj.44704$JE4.15748@newsfe11.ams2...
> Iain Churches wrote
>>
>>> Also, transferring the filter caps to the amp would mean that both plug
>>> and socket would be live at the time of parting. I have seen it said
>>> that
>>> a diode in the amp solves this problem, but I wouldn't entrust my life
>>> to
>>> that solution.
>>
>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>
> Not safe enough to be legal here.
The argument agianst the use of the octal plug and socket
is the same as the argument against the use of the old-style
Bulgin plug and socket: it is possible with the aid of a tool
to touch the pins when the plug is partly removed but still
connected. Does not Patrick's solution prevent this? I
have seen a similar idea where a black plastic capacitor
clip has been fitted around the octal chassis socket.
> Innovation and safety don't mix well, but to his credit I don't think
> Patrick was trying to be inventive. He's done the best he can do under the
> circumstances, probably. I wasn't keen on the detail that the HT dies away
> within 10 secs IIRC. How long do electrocutions take? When is the most
> likely time a connection might be touched?
Agreed. One cannot assume common sense, and correct methods
and routines should be carefully documented in black and white.
>
>> A power diode, as an additional safety measure works
>> well.
>
> Additional?
Yes, in addition to the sensing loop, which switches a relay
to disconnect the DC from the chassis connector if either
end of the umbilical is removed.
> Works well? How well?
I have a power amps with 450VDC on a separate PSU.
I have on several occasions unscrewed the connector from
the amp end (which has diodes for the B+)
and put the probes of a voltmeter between the relative pins
and ground.
The psu has a touch proof chassis connector, though I
suppose one could poke a sewing needle into it. But once
again the DC is disconnected from the connector if the
umbilical is removed. There is no delay. The DC is
off before the connector collar is fully unscrewed.
A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen a
German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
for me.
Iain
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
Iain wrote:
> A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen
> a
> German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
> umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
> He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
> for me.
Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
* w w w .borderpatrol . net /
They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be
interested to know which bits are CE marked.
Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the
manufacturer's statement of conformity? Can anyone challenge
the safety of equipment? Conformity appears to be self
regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers political
back-scratching.
For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be
foolhardy to devise a novel solution. But if you are
empowered to CE mark your produce, and can copy the
important principles of an established current design, and
confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you
have considered the issues properly and dealt with them
wisely, you may have an outside chance in court if someone
gets electrocuted.
My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative
mechanical fragility of the cable and connector assembly.
The amps and power supply are heavy enough so if one amp
fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the cable, it
could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector.
If the power supply were to fall, it would be Total
Carnage...I think the amps would get slapped against the
wall and the PS would go through the floor. I solved this
problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else might
not.
We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for
very large integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be
distant, but in the same case. They could have wheels and
pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are they made
of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good
idea.
Ian
Iain wrote:
> A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen
> a
> German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
> umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
> He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
> for me.
Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
* w w w .borderpatrol . net /
They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be
interested to know which bits are CE marked.
Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the
manufacturer's statement of conformity? Can anyone challenge
the safety of equipment? Conformity appears to be self
regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers political
back-scratching.
For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be
foolhardy to devise a novel solution. But if you are
empowered to CE mark your produce, and can copy the
important principles of an established current design, and
confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you
have considered the issues properly and dealt with them
wisely, you may have an outside chance in court if someone
gets electrocuted.
My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative
mechanical fragility of the cable and connector assembly.
The amps and power supply are heavy enough so if one amp
fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the cable, it
could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector.
If the power supply were to fall, it would be Total
Carnage...I think the amps would get slapped against the
wall and the PS would go through the floor. I solved this
problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else might
not.
We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for
very large integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be
distant, but in the same case. They could have wheels and
pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are they made
of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good
idea.
Ian
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
On May 20, 11:17 pm, "Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.h...@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
> Iain wrote:
> > A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen
> > a
> > German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
> > umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
> > He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
> > for me.
>
> Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
>
> * w w w .borderpatrol . net /
>
> They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
>
> Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be
> interested to know which bits are CE marked.
>
> Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the
> manufacturer's statement of conformity? Can anyone challenge
> the safety of equipment? Conformity appears to be self
> regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers political
> back-scratching.
>
> For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be
> foolhardy to devise a novel solution. But if you are
> empowered to CE mark your produce, and can copy the
> important principles of an established current design, and
> confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you
> have considered the issues properly and dealt with them
> wisely, you may have an outside chance in court if someone
> gets electrocuted.
>
> My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative
> mechanical fragility of the cable and connector assembly.
> The amps and power supply are heavy enough so if one amp
> fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the cable, it
> could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector.
> If the power supply were to fall, it would be Total
> Carnage...I think the amps would get slapped against the
> wall and the PS would go through the floor. I solved this
> problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else might
> not.
>
> We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for
> very large integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be
> distant, but in the same case. They could have wheels and
> pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are they made
> of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good
> idea.
>
> Ian
No connector should be "solid" at any end in this sort of
applications. Both ends should be suitably socketed against the sort
of eventuality you describe. Mil.Spec. connectors and some medical
connectors, machine-tool connectors and others are locking-types for
very good reasons - the consequences of a fall such as you describe
may be far less than an accidental unplugging - but that sort of
equipment has suitable strain-relief designs as well.
I would posit the umbilical should be male at the P/S, female at the
Amp. The strain-relief to the (presumably armored) cable should be
sufficient to carry the weight of either end, but, again, the
connector should come apart well before umbilical failure. And given a
proper design along the lines Patrick has described, DC voltages would
either drop within a few millesconds, or be entirely disconnected. The
days of the old Dynaco/Eico octal plugs at either end of the umbilical
to octal sockets at either component is simply nuts any more - 'cept
for Bret, of course.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
On May 20, 11:17 pm, "Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.h...@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
> Iain wrote:
> > A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen
> > a
> > German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
> > umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
> > He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
> > for me.
>
> Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
>
> * w w w .borderpatrol . net /
>
> They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
>
> Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be
> interested to know which bits are CE marked.
>
> Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the
> manufacturer's statement of conformity? Can anyone challenge
> the safety of equipment? Conformity appears to be self
> regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers political
> back-scratching.
>
> For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be
> foolhardy to devise a novel solution. But if you are
> empowered to CE mark your produce, and can copy the
> important principles of an established current design, and
> confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you
> have considered the issues properly and dealt with them
> wisely, you may have an outside chance in court if someone
> gets electrocuted.
>
> My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative
> mechanical fragility of the cable and connector assembly.
> The amps and power supply are heavy enough so if one amp
> fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the cable, it
> could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector.
> If the power supply were to fall, it would be Total
> Carnage...I think the amps would get slapped against the
> wall and the PS would go through the floor. I solved this
> problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else might
> not.
>
> We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for
> very large integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be
> distant, but in the same case. They could have wheels and
> pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are they made
> of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good
> idea.
>
> Ian
No connector should be "solid" at any end in this sort of
applications. Both ends should be suitably socketed against the sort
of eventuality you describe. Mil.Spec. connectors and some medical
connectors, machine-tool connectors and others are locking-types for
very good reasons - the consequences of a fall such as you describe
may be far less than an accidental unplugging - but that sort of
equipment has suitable strain-relief designs as well.
I would posit the umbilical should be male at the P/S, female at the
Amp. The strain-relief to the (presumably armored) cable should be
sufficient to carry the weight of either end, but, again, the
connector should come apart well before umbilical failure. And given a
proper design along the lines Patrick has described, DC voltages would
either drop within a few millesconds, or be entirely disconnected. The
days of the old Dynaco/Eico octal plugs at either end of the umbilical
to octal sockets at either component is simply nuts any more - 'cept
for Bret, of course.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
Peter Wieck wrote:
>
> On May 20, 11:17 pm, "Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.h...@blueyonder.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > Iain wrote:
> > > A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen
> > > a
> > > German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
> > > umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
> > > He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
> > > for me.
> >
> > Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
> >
> > * w w w .borderpatrol . net /
> >
> > They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
> >
> > Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be
> > interested to know which bits are CE marked.
> >
> > Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the
> > manufacturer's statement of conformity? Can anyone challenge
> > the safety of equipment? Conformity appears to be self
> > regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers political
> > back-scratching.
> >
> > For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be
> > foolhardy to devise a novel solution. But if you are
> > empowered to CE mark your produce, and can copy the
> > important principles of an established current design, and
> > confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you
> > have considered the issues properly and dealt with them
> > wisely, you may have an outside chance in court if someone
> > gets electrocuted.
> >
> > My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative
> > mechanical fragility of the cable and connector assembly.
> > The amps and power supply are heavy enough so if one amp
> > fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the cable, it
> > could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector.
> > If the power supply were to fall, it would be Total
> > Carnage...I think the amps would get slapped against the
> > wall and the PS would go through the floor. I solved this
> > problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else might
> > not.
> >
> > We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for
> > very large integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be
> > distant, but in the same case. They could have wheels and
> > pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are they made
> > of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good
> > idea.
> >
> > Ian
>
> No connector should be "solid" at any end in this sort of
> applications. Both ends should be suitably socketed against the sort
> of eventuality you describe. Mil.Spec. connectors and some medical
> connectors, machine-tool connectors and others are locking-types for
> very good reasons - the consequences of a fall such as you describe
> may be far less than an accidental unplugging - but that sort of
> equipment has suitable strain-relief designs as well.
There are not many plug and socket designs which can withstand sideways
forces of say 20 times the weight of an amp or PSU due to one or the
other
falling off a bench and being halted in the fall by a cable.
So the umbilicals MUST be longer than 1.2 metres, so that if an amp
chassis and psu
are both on a table or bench of say 750mm height then
a fall to the floor by either chassis doesn't wreck a cable or the
connector.
1.5M is a nice length, and if too long one loop tied up with
a loop of masking tape won't hurt.
But remote PSU should be REMOTE, so on the floor they go!
The turn on switch should be on the amp chassis and turn on
is achieved by the switch grounding one end of a relay coil requiring
12Vdc.
In the psu chassis the live end of the relay coil is connected to a 5VA
12Vdc auxiliary dc supply.
This supply also sends 12Vdc to the amp chassis to operate active
protection measures.
So there is NO access needed for the psu, and with its silicon diodes
its just like a gigantic plug pack, outa sight and outa mind.
No need to worry about it.
>
> I would posit the umbilical should be male at the P/S, female at the
> Amp.
Huh?, I always have a female chassis socket at th psu, and the cable is
hard wired into the
amp and has one male plug. Is that what you meant?
The strain-relief to the (presumably armored) cable should be
> sufficient to carry the weight of either end, but, again, the
> connector should come apart well before umbilical failure. And given a
> proper design along the lines Patrick has described, DC voltages would
> either drop within a few millesconds, or be entirely disconnected. The
> days of the old Dynaco/Eico octal plugs at either end of the umbilical
> to octal sockets at either component is simply nuts any more - 'cept
> for Bret, of course.
I think octal plugs and octal valve sockets are fine.
Very convenient actually.
If they are yanked straight, iti's good that they pull out easy.
I use an old tube base, solder up all the wires well, and drill out the
spigot
and place a 4mm threaded rod inside projecting back up where the wires
are.
This re-inforces the spigot which can often get broken off when someone
treads on plug.
120Kg audiophiles are like big dopey elephants sometimes.
I sometimes cut off the bakelight or plastic surround down to the botton
of the base level.
Then I get some PVC conduit and cut a 30mm length which fits snugly
around the
plug with its soldered wires. One ends up with a very rugged plug
costing almost nothing,
and one that can be easily replaced by cutting a damaged one off and
placing a new made one on.
Finally, I pour it some polyester resin to fill the plug to stop wire
movement
and bind it all together.
Its possible to also glue a second PVC tube over the final plug so this
tube projects
slightly further than the location spigot, tand thus it shrouds the
pins.
But I have never bothered because octal sockets made to allow a shroud
to push in
are not made afaik, and are too hard to diy.
I have 20mm plywood blocks around the octal sockets with a neat sliding
fit for the
plug. This prevents side ways foces on the cable from yanking the plug
over
and bending pins.
The beauty of the octal plug ans socket is that it IS designed for tube
amp voltages and currents
In one other amp I have here I have ONE psu chassis for two power amp
channels
which are on one chassis. I have three octal plugs and sockets and 3
mobile crane wire
cables twisted and bound together; extremely rugged cabling.
This set up was the first lot I did, and is for my own use only.
I have never had any troubles.
Come back in 200 years and the cables will be fine.
Patrick Turner.
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
Peter Wieck wrote:
>
> On May 20, 11:17 pm, "Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.h...@blueyonder.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > Iain wrote:
> > > A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen
> > > a
> > > German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
> > > umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
> > > He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
> > > for me.
> >
> > Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
> >
> > * w w w .borderpatrol . net /
> >
> > They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
> >
> > Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be
> > interested to know which bits are CE marked.
> >
> > Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the
> > manufacturer's statement of conformity? Can anyone challenge
> > the safety of equipment? Conformity appears to be self
> > regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers political
> > back-scratching.
> >
> > For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be
> > foolhardy to devise a novel solution. But if you are
> > empowered to CE mark your produce, and can copy the
> > important principles of an established current design, and
> > confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you
> > have considered the issues properly and dealt with them
> > wisely, you may have an outside chance in court if someone
> > gets electrocuted.
> >
> > My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative
> > mechanical fragility of the cable and connector assembly.
> > The amps and power supply are heavy enough so if one amp
> > fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the cable, it
> > could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector.
> > If the power supply were to fall, it would be Total
> > Carnage...I think the amps would get slapped against the
> > wall and the PS would go through the floor. I solved this
> > problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else might
> > not.
> >
> > We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for
> > very large integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be
> > distant, but in the same case. They could have wheels and
> > pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are they made
> > of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good
> > idea.
> >
> > Ian
>
> No connector should be "solid" at any end in this sort of
> applications. Both ends should be suitably socketed against the sort
> of eventuality you describe. Mil.Spec. connectors and some medical
> connectors, machine-tool connectors and others are locking-types for
> very good reasons - the consequences of a fall such as you describe
> may be far less than an accidental unplugging - but that sort of
> equipment has suitable strain-relief designs as well.
There are not many plug and socket designs which can withstand sideways
forces of say 20 times the weight of an amp or PSU due to one or the
other
falling off a bench and being halted in the fall by a cable.
So the umbilicals MUST be longer than 1.2 metres, so that if an amp
chassis and psu
are both on a table or bench of say 750mm height then
a fall to the floor by either chassis doesn't wreck a cable or the
connector.
1.5M is a nice length, and if too long one loop tied up with
a loop of masking tape won't hurt.
But remote PSU should be REMOTE, so on the floor they go!
The turn on switch should be on the amp chassis and turn on
is achieved by the switch grounding one end of a relay coil requiring
12Vdc.
In the psu chassis the live end of the relay coil is connected to a 5VA
12Vdc auxiliary dc supply.
This supply also sends 12Vdc to the amp chassis to operate active
protection measures.
So there is NO access needed for the psu, and with its silicon diodes
its just like a gigantic plug pack, outa sight and outa mind.
No need to worry about it.
>
> I would posit the umbilical should be male at the P/S, female at the
> Amp.
Huh?, I always have a female chassis socket at th psu, and the cable is
hard wired into the
amp and has one male plug. Is that what you meant?
The strain-relief to the (presumably armored) cable should be
> sufficient to carry the weight of either end, but, again, the
> connector should come apart well before umbilical failure. And given a
> proper design along the lines Patrick has described, DC voltages would
> either drop within a few millesconds, or be entirely disconnected. The
> days of the old Dynaco/Eico octal plugs at either end of the umbilical
> to octal sockets at either component is simply nuts any more - 'cept
> for Bret, of course.
I think octal plugs and octal valve sockets are fine.
Very convenient actually.
If they are yanked straight, iti's good that they pull out easy.
I use an old tube base, solder up all the wires well, and drill out the
spigot
and place a 4mm threaded rod inside projecting back up where the wires
are.
This re-inforces the spigot which can often get broken off when someone
treads on plug.
120Kg audiophiles are like big dopey elephants sometimes.
I sometimes cut off the bakelight or plastic surround down to the botton
of the base level.
Then I get some PVC conduit and cut a 30mm length which fits snugly
around the
plug with its soldered wires. One ends up with a very rugged plug
costing almost nothing,
and one that can be easily replaced by cutting a damaged one off and
placing a new made one on.
Finally, I pour it some polyester resin to fill the plug to stop wire
movement
and bind it all together.
Its possible to also glue a second PVC tube over the final plug so this
tube projects
slightly further than the location spigot, tand thus it shrouds the
pins.
But I have never bothered because octal sockets made to allow a shroud
to push in
are not made afaik, and are too hard to diy.
I have 20mm plywood blocks around the octal sockets with a neat sliding
fit for the
plug. This prevents side ways foces on the cable from yanking the plug
over
and bending pins.
The beauty of the octal plug ans socket is that it IS designed for tube
amp voltages and currents
In one other amp I have here I have ONE psu chassis for two power amp
channels
which are on one chassis. I have three octal plugs and sockets and 3
mobile crane wire
cables twisted and bound together; extremely rugged cabling.
This set up was the first lot I did, and is for my own use only.
I have never had any troubles.
Come back in 200 years and the cables will be fine.
Patrick Turner.
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
On May 21, 12:20 pm, Patrick Turner <i...@turneraudio . com .au> wrote:
> > No connector should be "solid" at any end in this sort of
> > applications. Both ends should be suitably socketed against the sort
> > of eventuality you describe. Mil.Spec. connectors and some medical
> > connectors, machine-tool connectors and others are locking-types for
> > very good reasons - the consequences of a fall such as you describe
> > may be far less than an accidental unplugging - but that sort of
> > equipment has suitable strain-relief designs as well.
>
> There are not many plug and socket designs which can withstand sideways
> forces of say 20 times the weight of an amp or PSU due to one or the
> other
> falling off a bench and being halted in the fall by a cable.
> So the umbilicals MUST be longer than 1.2 metres, so that if an amp
> chassis and psu
> are both on a table or bench of say 750mm height then
> a fall to the floor by either chassis doesn't wreck a cable or the
> connector.
That is the point. And a fall is not the only potential for forcible,
sudden plug removal. There are tripping persons, running dogs (pun
intended), even small children who might get involved if
unsupervised.
> 1.5M is a nice length, and if too long one loop tied up with
> a loop of masking tape won't hurt.
No, it won't and I agree, a good length.
> But remote PSU should be REMOTE, so on the floor they go!
>
> The turn on switch should be on the amp chassis and turn on
> is achieved by the switch grounding one end of a relay coil requiring
> 12Vdc.
> In the psu chassis the live end of the relay coil is connected to a 5VA
> 12Vdc auxiliary dc supply.
> This supply also sends 12Vdc to the amp chassis to operate active
> protection measures.
>
> So there is NO access needed for the psu, and with its silicon diodes
> its just like a gigantic plug pack, outa sight and outa mind.
> No need to worry about it.
>
> > I would posit the umbilical should be male at the P/S, female at the
> > Amp.
> Huh?, I always have a female chassis socket at th psu, and the cable is
> hard wired into the
> amp and has one male plug. Is that what you meant?
Nossir. My *preference* would be that neither the amp nor the PSU are
hard-wired, but the umbilical is a separate entity plugged at both
ends with appropriate opposite receptacles at each box.
> The strain-relief to the (presumably armored) cable should be
>
> > sufficient to carry the weight of either end, but, again, the
> > connector should come apart well before umbilical failure. And given a
> > proper design along the lines Patrick has described, DC voltages would
> > either drop within a few millesconds, or be entirely disconnected. The
> > days of the old Dynaco/Eico octal plugs at either end of the umbilical
> > to octal sockets at either component is simply nuts any more - 'cept
> > for Bret, of course.
>
> I think octal plugs and octal valve sockets are fine.
And you take the appropriate measures to make sure that this is so.
Writing only for myself, and these days, I would not use them were I
in that position. And this for TWO (2) reasons: 1. Better means are
available that handle all the heroics, shields and set-backs as part
of the design. 2. I have not, will never, make a custom amp for
another person. Accordingly, expense is no object when I do things of
this nature, so spending $100 - $150 or so on the appropriate
connectors with strain-relief and freeloading from any of several
sources I have the appropriate Armor-Flex cable would be my choice.
Crane cables are excellent, especially the sort with the steel mesh
below the first layer of rubber insulation. They can get a bit fat,
but not really a big deal.
And we have all three potential threats in this household on a regular
basis -large, active dogs, sometimes clumsy people and small, very
curious, very active children. Hence my "placement" of tube equipment
in this house even if covered - high and out of reach.
> Very convenient actually.
> If they are yanked straight, iti's good that they pull out easy.
>
> I use an old tube base, solder up all the wires well, and drill out the
> spigot
> and place a 4mm threaded rod inside projecting back up where the wires
> are.
> This re-inforces the spigot which can often get broken off when someone
> treads on plug.
> 120Kg audiophiles are like big dopey elephants sometimes.
> I sometimes cut off the bakelight or plastic surround down to the botton
> of the base level.
> Then I get some PVC conduit and cut a 30mm length which fits snugly
> around the
> plug with its soldered wires. One ends up with a very rugged plug
> costing almost nothing,
> and one that can be easily replaced by cutting a damaged one off and
> placing a new made one on.
> Finally, I pour it some polyester resin to fill the plug to stop wire
> movement
> and bind it all together.
>
> Its possible to also glue a second PVC tube over the final plug so this
> tube projects
> slightly further than the location spigot, tand thus it shrouds the
> pins.
> But I have never bothered because octal sockets made to allow a shroud
> to push in
> are not made afaik, and are too hard to diy.
> I have 20mm plywood blocks around the octal sockets with a neat sliding
> fit for the
> plug. This prevents side ways foces on the cable from yanking the plug
> over
> and bending pins.
>
> The beauty of the octal plug ans socket is that it IS designed for tube
> amp voltages and currents
And heat. Don't forget the heat on those bases.
> In one other amp I have here I have ONE psu chassis for two power amp
> channels
> which are on one chassis. I have three octal plugs and sockets and 3
> mobile crane wire
> cables twisted and bound together; extremely rugged cabling.
> This set up was the first lot I did, and is for my own use only.
> I have never had any troubles.
>
> Come back in 200 years and the cables will be fine.
Very most likely. Just not in this house - for now, for the reasons
stated.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
On May 21, 12:20 pm, Patrick Turner <i...@turneraudio . com .au> wrote:
> > No connector should be "solid" at any end in this sort of
> > applications. Both ends should be suitably socketed against the sort
> > of eventuality you describe. Mil.Spec. connectors and some medical
> > connectors, machine-tool connectors and others are locking-types for
> > very good reasons - the consequences of a fall such as you describe
> > may be far less than an accidental unplugging - but that sort of
> > equipment has suitable strain-relief designs as well.
>
> There are not many plug and socket designs which can withstand sideways
> forces of say 20 times the weight of an amp or PSU due to one or the
> other
> falling off a bench and being halted in the fall by a cable.
> So the umbilicals MUST be longer than 1.2 metres, so that if an amp
> chassis and psu
> are both on a table or bench of say 750mm height then
> a fall to the floor by either chassis doesn't wreck a cable or the
> connector.
That is the point. And a fall is not the only potential for forcible,
sudden plug removal. There are tripping persons, running dogs (pun
intended), even small children who might get involved if
unsupervised.
> 1.5M is a nice length, and if too long one loop tied up with
> a loop of masking tape won't hurt.
No, it won't and I agree, a good length.
> But remote PSU should be REMOTE, so on the floor they go!
>
> The turn on switch should be on the amp chassis and turn on
> is achieved by the switch grounding one end of a relay coil requiring
> 12Vdc.
> In the psu chassis the live end of the relay coil is connected to a 5VA
> 12Vdc auxiliary dc supply.
> This supply also sends 12Vdc to the amp chassis to operate active
> protection measures.
>
> So there is NO access needed for the psu, and with its silicon diodes
> its just like a gigantic plug pack, outa sight and outa mind.
> No need to worry about it.
>
> > I would posit the umbilical should be male at the P/S, female at the
> > Amp.
> Huh?, I always have a female chassis socket at th psu, and the cable is
> hard wired into the
> amp and has one male plug. Is that what you meant?
Nossir. My *preference* would be that neither the amp nor the PSU are
hard-wired, but the umbilical is a separate entity plugged at both
ends with appropriate opposite receptacles at each box.
> The strain-relief to the (presumably armored) cable should be
>
> > sufficient to carry the weight of either end, but, again, the
> > connector should come apart well before umbilical failure. And given a
> > proper design along the lines Patrick has described, DC voltages would
> > either drop within a few millesconds, or be entirely disconnected. The
> > days of the old Dynaco/Eico octal plugs at either end of the umbilical
> > to octal sockets at either component is simply nuts any more - 'cept
> > for Bret, of course.
>
> I think octal plugs and octal valve sockets are fine.
And you take the appropriate measures to make sure that this is so.
Writing only for myself, and these days, I would not use them were I
in that position. And this for TWO (2) reasons: 1. Better means are
available that handle all the heroics, shields and set-backs as part
of the design. 2. I have not, will never, make a custom amp for
another person. Accordingly, expense is no object when I do things of
this nature, so spending $100 - $150 or so on the appropriate
connectors with strain-relief and freeloading from any of several
sources I have the appropriate Armor-Flex cable would be my choice.
Crane cables are excellent, especially the sort with the steel mesh
below the first layer of rubber insulation. They can get a bit fat,
but not really a big deal.
And we have all three potential threats in this household on a regular
basis -large, active dogs, sometimes clumsy people and small, very
curious, very active children. Hence my "placement" of tube equipment
in this house even if covered - high and out of reach.
> Very convenient actually.
> If they are yanked straight, iti's good that they pull out easy.
>
> I use an old tube base, solder up all the wires well, and drill out the
> spigot
> and place a 4mm threaded rod inside projecting back up where the wires
> are.
> This re-inforces the spigot which can often get broken off when someone
> treads on plug.
> 120Kg audiophiles are like big dopey elephants sometimes.
> I sometimes cut off the bakelight or plastic surround down to the botton
> of the base level.
> Then I get some PVC conduit and cut a 30mm length which fits snugly
> around the
> plug with its soldered wires. One ends up with a very rugged plug
> costing almost nothing,
> and one that can be easily replaced by cutting a damaged one off and
> placing a new made one on.
> Finally, I pour it some polyester resin to fill the plug to stop wire
> movement
> and bind it all together.
>
> Its possible to also glue a second PVC tube over the final plug so this
> tube projects
> slightly further than the location spigot, tand thus it shrouds the
> pins.
> But I have never bothered because octal sockets made to allow a shroud
> to push in
> are not made afaik, and are too hard to diy.
> I have 20mm plywood blocks around the octal sockets with a neat sliding
> fit for the
> plug. This prevents side ways foces on the cable from yanking the plug
> over
> and bending pins.
>
> The beauty of the octal plug ans socket is that it IS designed for tube
> amp voltages and currents
And heat. Don't forget the heat on those bases.
> In one other amp I have here I have ONE psu chassis for two power amp
> channels
> which are on one chassis. I have three octal plugs and sockets and 3
> mobile crane wire
> cables twisted and bound together; extremely rugged cabling.
> This set up was the first lot I did, and is for my own use only.
> I have never had any troubles.
>
> Come back in 200 years and the cables will be fine.
Very most likely. Just not in this house - for now, for the reasons
stated.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:kvMYj.39035$EH5.37381@newsfe30.ams2...
> Iain wrote:
>
>> A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen a
>> German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
>> umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
>> He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
>> for me.
>
> Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
>
> * w w w .borderpatrol . net /
>
> They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
>
> Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be interested to
> know which bits are CE marked.
>
> Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the manufacturer's statement
> of conformity? Can anyone challenge the safety of equipment? Conformity
> appears to be self regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers
> political back-scratching.
>
> For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be foolhardy to
> devise a novel solution. But if you are empowered to CE mark your produce,
> and can copy the important principles of an established current design,
> and confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you have
> considered the issues properly and dealt with them wisely, you may have an
> outside chance in court if someone gets electrocuted.
>
> My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative mechanical fragility
> of the cable and connector assembly. The amps and power supply are heavy
> enough so if one amp fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the
> cable, it could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector. If
> the power supply were to fall, it would be Total Carnage...I think the
> amps would get slapped against the wall and the PS would go through the
> floor. I solved this problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else
> might not.
>
> We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for very large
> integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be distant, but in the same case.
> They could have wheels and pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are
> they made of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good idea.
>
> Ian
>
>
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:kvMYj.39035$EH5.37381@newsfe30.ams2...
> Iain wrote:
>
>> A lurker on this thread wrote to tell me that he has seen a
>> German built KT88 amp with a separate PSU and a DC
>> umbilical. Both units have the DKE and CE mark.
>> He has promised to try to find a link to the manufacturer
>> for me.
>
> Presumably this lot consider themselves kosher.
>
> * w w w .borderpatrol . net /
>
> They don't show cages, either, which seems risky to me.
>
> Have you seen how their PSUs connect to the amps? I'd be interested to
> know which bits are CE marked.
>
> Who has the right, I wonder, to have sight of the manufacturer's statement
> of conformity? Can anyone challenge the safety of equipment? Conformity
> appears to be self regulated, which to me means safety-in-numbers
> political back-scratching.
>
> For a small newcomer to the market, I maintain it would be foolhardy to
> devise a novel solution. But if you are empowered to CE mark your produce,
> and can copy the important principles of an established current design,
> and confidently produce a statement of conformity that shows you have
> considered the issues properly and dealt with them wisely, you may have an
> outside chance in court if someone gets electrocuted.
>
> My biggest concern with my own amps is the relative mechanical fragility
> of the cable and connector assembly. The amps and power supply are heavy
> enough so if one amp fell of a shelf with a foot or so of slack in the
> cable, it could rip a cable partly or completely out of its connector. If
> the power supply were to fall, it would be Total Carnage...I think the
> amps would get slapped against the wall and the PS would go through the
> floor. I solved this problem by putting it on the floor, but someone else
> might not.
>
> We should encourage a fashion, amongst rich audiophiles, for very large
> integrated amplifiers, allowing PSUs to be distant, but in the same case.
> They could have wheels and pull-out handles, like posh suitcases. What are
> they made of? If they make them in ally I might have just had a good idea.
>
> Ian
>
>
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:DCgXj.44704$JE4.15748@newsfe11.ams2...
> Iain Churches wrote
>>
>>> Also, transferring the filter caps to the amp would mean that both plug
>>> and socket would be live at the time of parting. I have seen it said
>>> that
>>> a diode in the amp solves this problem, but I wouldn't entrust my life
>>> to
>>> that solution.
>>
>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>
> Not safe enough to be legal here.
Ian. Can you shine any light on specific taboos or
requirements of EN 60065 ?
I can find nothing that relates to HVDC cables
between pieces of equipment.
Chapter and verse would be of great interest.
Best regards
Iain
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:DCgXj.44704$JE4.15748@newsfe11.ams2...
> Iain Churches wrote
>>
>>> Also, transferring the filter caps to the amp would mean that both plug
>>> and socket would be live at the time of parting. I have seen it said
>>> that
>>> a diode in the amp solves this problem, but I wouldn't entrust my life
>>> to
>>> that solution.
>>
>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>
> Not safe enough to be legal here.
Ian. Can you shine any light on specific taboos or
requirements of EN 60065 ?
I can find nothing that relates to HVDC cables
between pieces of equipment.
Chapter and verse would be of great interest.
Best regards
Iain
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
Iain Churches wrote
>>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if
>>> the
>>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round
>>> connector
>>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar
>>> or
>>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while
>>> the
>>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal
>>> plug
>>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>>
>> Not safe enough to be legal here.
>
>
> Ian. Can you shine any light on specific taboos or
> requirements of EN 60065 ?
Electrocution and safety, respectively, probably.
> I can find nothing that relates to HVDC cables
> between pieces of equipment.
Quite.
> Chapter and verse would be of great interest.
Might have been, but I don't think our penchant for
umbilical cords got much of a look-in. If you have the
document in front of you, can you say how HV equipment must
be powered? From the mains, IIRC. Using a cable and
connectors as defined therein.
Ian
Iain Churches wrote
>>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if
>>> the
>>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round
>>> connector
>>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar
>>> or
>>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while
>>> the
>>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal
>>> plug
>>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>>
>> Not safe enough to be legal here.
>
>
> Ian. Can you shine any light on specific taboos or
> requirements of EN 60065 ?
Electrocution and safety, respectively, probably.
> I can find nothing that relates to HVDC cables
> between pieces of equipment.
Quite.
> Chapter and verse would be of great interest.
Might have been, but I don't think our penchant for
umbilical cords got much of a look-in. If you have the
document in front of you, can you say how HV equipment must
be powered? From the mains, IIRC. Using a cable and
connectors as defined therein.
Ian
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TGgYj.60217$Nq2.57468@newsfe29.ams2...
> Iain Churches wrote
>
>>>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>>>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
>>>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
>>>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
>>>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
>>>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
>>>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>>>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>>>
>>> Not safe enough to be legal here.
>>
>>
>> Ian. Can you shine any light on specific taboos or
>> requirements of EN 60065 ?
>
> Electrocution and safety, respectively, probably.
>
>> I can find nothing that relates to HVDC cables
>> between pieces of equipment.
>
> Quite.
>
>> Chapter and verse would be of great interest.
>
> Might have been, but I don't think our penchant for umbilical cords got
> much of a look-in.
The problems arise from the careful differential made between
connectors approved for industrial/broadcast/studio/professional
audio and the restrictions as to their use in domestic applications.
> If you have the document in front of you, can you say
> how HV equipment must be powered? From the mains, IIRC. Using a cable and
> connectors as defined therein.
The LVD (Low Voltage Directive) 2006/95 refers to
DC between 50 and 1 500VDC
I wonder what they consider high voltage DC to be?
Iain
"Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TGgYj.60217$Nq2.57468@newsfe29.ams2...
> Iain Churches wrote
>
>>>> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
>>>> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
>>>> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
>>>> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
>>>> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
>>>> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
>>>> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
>>>> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>>>
>>> Not safe enough to be legal here.
>>
>>
>> Ian. Can you shine any light on specific taboos or
>> requirements of EN 60065 ?
>
> Electrocution and safety, respectively, probably.
>
>> I can find nothing that relates to HVDC cables
>> between pieces of equipment.
>
> Quite.
>
>> Chapter and verse would be of great interest.
>
> Might have been, but I don't think our penchant for umbilical cords got
> much of a look-in.
The problems arise from the careful differential made between
connectors approved for industrial/broadcast/studio/professional
audio and the restrictions as to their use in domestic applications.
> If you have the document in front of you, can you say
> how HV equipment must be powered? From the mains, IIRC. Using a cable and
> connectors as defined therein.
The LVD (Low Voltage Directive) 2006/95 refers to
DC between 50 and 1 500VDC
I wonder what they consider high voltage DC to be?
Iain
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:zX9Xj.1633$_03.491@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>
>
> "Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:crMWj.5272$1q4.981@newsfe23.ams2...
>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>>
>
>> Also, transferring the filter caps to the amp would mean that both plug
>> and socket would be live at the time of parting. I have seen it said that
>> a diode in the amp solves this problem, but I wouldn't entrust my life to
>> that solution.
>
> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>
> Common sense would dictate the fitting and removal of
> the DC umbilical only when the amplifier and PSU have
> bveen switched off for some time.
>
> A power diode, as an additional safety measure works
> well. These are well-proven techniques from rack-mounted
> broadcast equipment in the tube era. But it is also important
> to comply with modern safety standards.
>
> Iain
The simplest way of ensuring the maximum safety is to have a sensing pin
that switches the power on both sides and to make that pin shorter than the
power pins. For increased safety, you apply a short delay before pulling the
relays in , but drop than instantly if the safety loop is opened.
Keith
PS it is also nice to have the earth pin a little longer than the rest,
although with a tube amp it propbablt isn't really needed.
"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:zX9Xj.1633$_03.491@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>
>
> "Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.home@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:crMWj.5272$1q4.981@newsfe23.ams2...
>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>>
>
>> Also, transferring the filter caps to the amp would mean that both plug
>> and socket would be live at the time of parting. I have seen it said that
>> a diode in the amp solves this problem, but I wouldn't entrust my life to
>> that solution.
>
> You have to use a method (something like a sensing loop
> with a relay) to shut of the DC from the connectors if the
> cable is disconnected at either end. If a round connector
> is chosen, it must be one one with a deep screw collar or
> bayonet latch, so there is no access to the pins while the
> connector is still making contact. That is why an octal plug
> socket cannot be used, although Patrick seems to have
> found an innovative way to make that combination safe.
>
> Common sense would dictate the fitting and removal of
> the DC umbilical only when the amplifier and PSU have
> bveen switched off for some time.
>
> A power diode, as an additional safety measure works
> well. These are well-proven techniques from rack-mounted
> broadcast equipment in the tube era. But it is also important
> to comply with modern safety standards.
>
> Iain
The simplest way of ensuring the maximum safety is to have a sensing pin
that switches the power on both sides and to make that pin shorter than the
power pins. For increased safety, you apply a short delay before pulling the
relays in , but drop than instantly if the safety loop is opened.
Keith
PS it is also nice to have the earth pin a little longer than the rest,
although with a tube amp it propbablt isn't really needed.
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
> Fuck Brussels.
>
> Do it yourself and who will know?
>
> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
way
> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
**Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
more
sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
cm away"
That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
the signal chassis!
You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for AC.
Octal or 11-octal works fine for DC under 1 KV or so as proven by tens of
thousands of Collins, Drake, Heathkit and Yaesu ham transceivers as well as
vintage stereo.
--
Message posted using * w w w .talkaboutaudio . com /group/rec.audio.tubes/
More information at * w w w .talkaboutaudio . com /faq.html
"BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
> Fuck Brussels.
>
> Do it yourself and who will know?
>
> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
way
> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
**Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
more
sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
cm away"
That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
the signal chassis!
You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for AC.
Octal or 11-octal works fine for DC under 1 KV or so as proven by tens of
thousands of Collins, Drake, Heathkit and Yaesu ham transceivers as well as
vintage stereo.
--
Message posted using * w w w .talkaboutaudio . com /group/rec.audio.tubes/
More information at * w w w .talkaboutaudio . com /faq.html
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>> Fuck Brussels.
>>
>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>
>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
> way
>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>
> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
> more
> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
> cm away"
>
> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
> the signal chassis!
**Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to couple
the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
>
> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for AC.
**Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless you
are a fool, of course.
>
>
> Octal or 11-octal works fine for DC under 1 KV or so as proven by tens of
> thousands of Collins, Drake, Heathkit and Yaesu ham transceivers as well
> as
> vintage stereo.
**It's still a dumb idea.
Trevor Wilson
"BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>> Fuck Brussels.
>>
>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>
>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
> way
>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>
> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
> more
> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
> cm away"
>
> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
> the signal chassis!
**Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to couple
the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
>
> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for AC.
**Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless you
are a fool, of course.
>
>
> Octal or 11-octal works fine for DC under 1 KV or so as proven by tens of
> thousands of Collins, Drake, Heathkit and Yaesu ham transceivers as well
> as
> vintage stereo.
**It's still a dumb idea.
Trevor Wilson
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote in message
news:694fk9F30lh2sU1@mid.individual . net ...
>
> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
> news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>> Fuck Brussels.
>>>
>>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>>
>>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
>> way
>>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>>
>> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
>> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
>> more
>> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
>> cm away"
>>
>> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
>> the signal chassis!
>
> **Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
> off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to
> couple the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
Please elaborate. What kind of "disaster" ?
My own 50W amp now five years old, has been running
several hours per day without any problems. It meets my
objective for a very low level of hum and noise. To build
the same amplifier in a single chassis with the required
physical separation between critical components
would have required a footprint the size of a desktop.
>
>>
>> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
>> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for
>> AC.
>
> **Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless you
> are a fool, of course.
The idea, Trevor, is to build an audio chassis in which the
only AC is the signal. It is a very good solution if it can be
implemented in a safe way.
Iain
"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote in message
news:694fk9F30lh2sU1@mid.individual . net ...
>
> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
> news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>> Fuck Brussels.
>>>
>>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>>
>>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
>> way
>>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>>
>> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
>> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
>> more
>> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
>> cm away"
>>
>> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
>> the signal chassis!
>
> **Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
> off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to
> couple the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
Please elaborate. What kind of "disaster" ?
My own 50W amp now five years old, has been running
several hours per day without any problems. It meets my
objective for a very low level of hum and noise. To build
the same amplifier in a single chassis with the required
physical separation between critical components
would have required a footprint the size of a desktop.
>
>>
>> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
>> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for
>> AC.
>
> **Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless you
> are a fool, of course.
The idea, Trevor, is to build an audio chassis in which the
only AC is the signal. It is a very good solution if it can be
implemented in a safe way.
Iain
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:yy9Xj.1624$_03.705@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>
>
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote in message
> news:694fk9F30lh2sU1@mid.individual . net ...
>>
>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>> news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>>> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>>> Fuck Brussels.
>>>>
>>>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>>>
>>>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
>>> way
>>>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>>>
>>> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
>>> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
>>> more
>>> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
>>> cm away"
>>>
>>> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
>>> the signal chassis!
>>
>> **Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
>> off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to
>> couple the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
>
> Please elaborate. What kind of "disaster" ?
**Google: 'Welder'. Welders operate on DC current. It is for this reason
that commonly available relays have a maximum working Voltage of 27 VDC.
Much higher and the arc created can be self-sustaining. Damage can be
considerable.
> My own 50W amp now five years old, has been running
> several hours per day without any problems. It meets my
> objective for a very low level of hum and noise. To build
> the same amplifier in a single chassis with the required
> physical separation between critical components
> would have required a footprint the size of a desktop.
>>
>>>
>>> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
>>> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for
>>> AC.
>>
>> **Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless
>> you are a fool, of course.
>
> The idea, Trevor, is to build an audio chassis in which the
> only AC is the signal. It is a very good solution if it can be
> implemented in a safe way.
**Trying to use connectors for DC (with appreciable current and Voltage) is
dumb design. Much smarter to use AC.
Trevor Wilson
"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:yy9Xj.1624$_03.705@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>
>
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote in message
> news:694fk9F30lh2sU1@mid.individual . net ...
>>
>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>> news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>>> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>>> Fuck Brussels.
>>>>
>>>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>>>
>>>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
>>> way
>>>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>>>
>>> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
>>> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
>>> more
>>> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
>>> cm away"
>>>
>>> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
>>> the signal chassis!
>>
>> **Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
>> off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to
>> couple the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
>
> Please elaborate. What kind of "disaster" ?
**Google: 'Welder'. Welders operate on DC current. It is for this reason
that commonly available relays have a maximum working Voltage of 27 VDC.
Much higher and the arc created can be self-sustaining. Damage can be
considerable.
> My own 50W amp now five years old, has been running
> several hours per day without any problems. It meets my
> objective for a very low level of hum and noise. To build
> the same amplifier in a single chassis with the required
> physical separation between critical components
> would have required a footprint the size of a desktop.
>>
>>>
>>> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
>>> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for
>>> AC.
>>
>> **Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless
>> you are a fool, of course.
>
> The idea, Trevor, is to build an audio chassis in which the
> only AC is the signal. It is a very good solution if it can be
> implemented in a safe way.
**Trying to use connectors for DC (with appreciable current and Voltage) is
dumb design. Much smarter to use AC.
Trevor Wilson
Re: Remote Power Supply Connection
On Fri, 16 May 2008 20:40:33 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"
<trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote:
>
>"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
>news:yy9Xj.1624$_03.705@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>>
>>
>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote in message
>> news:694fk9F30lh2sU1@mid.individual . net ...
>>>
>>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>>> news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>>>> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>>>> Fuck Brussels.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>>>>
>>>>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
>>>> way
>>>>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>>>>
>>>> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
>>>> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
>>>> more
>>>> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
>>>> cm away"
>>>>
>>>> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
>>>> the signal chassis!
>>>
>>> **Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
>>> off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to
>>> couple the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
>>
>> Please elaborate. What kind of "disaster" ?
>
>**Google: 'Welder'. Welders operate on DC current. It is for this reason
>that commonly available relays have a maximum working Voltage of 27 VDC.
>Much higher and the arc created can be self-sustaining. Damage can be
>considerable.
>
>> My own 50W amp now five years old, has been running
>> several hours per day without any problems. It meets my
>> objective for a very low level of hum and noise. To build
>> the same amplifier in a single chassis with the required
>> physical separation between critical components
>> would have required a footprint the size of a desktop.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
>>>> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for
>>>> AC.
>>>
>>> **Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless
>>> you are a fool, of course.
>>
>> The idea, Trevor, is to build an audio chassis in which the
>> only AC is the signal. It is a very good solution if it can be
>> implemented in a safe way.
>
>**Trying to use connectors for DC (with appreciable current and Voltage) is
>dumb design. Much smarter to use AC.
Seems to me the 'disaster' is easily avoided by using the power switch
to turn the unit on and off instead of trying to do so by plugging and
unplugging the DC connector.
>
>Trevor Wilson
>
On Fri, 16 May 2008 20:40:33 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"
<trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote:
>
>"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
>news:yy9Xj.1624$_03.705@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>>
>>
>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio . com .au> wrote in message
>> news:694fk9F30lh2sU1@mid.individual . net ...
>>>
>>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>>> news:7a2f6434985dd93af0ad7ca24683b83c@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>>> "BretLudwig" <bratzirules@gmx.us> wrote in message
>>>> news:6889949c0f7376f69fcc9ea26ef19be9@localhost.talkaboutaudio . com ...
>>>>> Fuck Brussels.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do it yourself and who will know?
>>>>>
>>>>> Put simply the use of an outboard power supply chassis is the OPTIMUM
>>>> way
>>>>> to achieve the BEST possible performance.
>>>>
>>>> **Nonsense. Whilst an external power supply *may* have some advantages,
>>>> transferring large amounts of DC is a dumb thing to do. Using AC is far
>>>> more
>>>> sensible. Capacitors need to be placed close to output devices, not many
>>>> cm away"
>>>>
>>>> That defeats the purpose of having the PS outboard. You want the AC OFF
>>>> the signal chassis!
>>>
>>> **Shielding is cheap and simple. By all means, keep the power transformer
>>> off the signal chassis, but rectifying and smoothing, THEN trying to
>>> couple the result to the signal chassis is a recipe for disaster.
>>
>> Please elaborate. What kind of "disaster" ?
>
>**Google: 'Welder'. Welders operate on DC current. It is for this reason
>that commonly available relays have a maximum working Voltage of 27 VDC.
>Much higher and the arc created can be self-sustaining. Damage can be
>considerable.
>
>> My own 50W amp now five years old, has been running
>> several hours per day without any problems. It meets my
>> objective for a very low level of hum and noise. To build
>> the same amplifier in a single chassis with the required
>> physical separation between critical components
>> would have required a footprint the size of a desktop.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You want the primary filter caps on the PS chassis and some more on the
>>>> signal chassis, with a choke before them that sees only the ripple for
>>>> AC.
>>>
>>> **Nope. You *only* want to transfer AC between chassis. Not DC. Unless
>>> you are a fool, of course.
>>
>> The idea, Trevor, is to build an audio chassis in which the
>> only AC is the signal. It is a very good solution if it can be
>> implemented in a safe way.
>
>**Trying to use connectors for DC (with appreciable current and Voltage) is
>dumb design. Much smarter to use AC.
Seems to me the 'disaster' is easily avoided by using the power switch
to turn the unit on and off instead of trying to do so by plugging and
unplugging the DC connector.
>
>Trevor Wilson
>
