The AM Forum
October 10, 2024, 12:06:19 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 1614 substitution  (Read 11147 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
N2GHX Ken
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 44


« on: November 10, 2010, 02:32:10 PM »

What are you using to substitute 1614 mod tubes in Ranger I with no mods? Best results?
Logged
Bill, KD0HG
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2544

304-TH - Workin' it


« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2010, 02:45:36 PM »

Because of voltage ratings, you can use 6L6GC (not 6L6, 6L6G, 6L6GA or 6L6GB).
I used Russian 6550s in mine as well (the old coke-bottle 6550s won't fit)
1614s were a higher voltage version of the metal 6L6.

Good luck.
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2010, 02:52:10 PM »

I'm not sure there is any real difference in ratings.  I seem to recall that they are nothing more than metal 6L6s that passed certain more stringent QC standards than what was acceptable for the standard 6L6.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
N0WEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 783



« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2010, 02:53:58 PM »

I'm going to have the same concerns for spares for my Gates BC-1J since it uses 4 of them in the audio driver. I did find this little piece on the web...

http://www.tubecad.com/december2000/page19.html

"The difference between the 6L6 and the 1614 span two ratings systems: design-center to design-maximum and design-maximum to absolute maximum. If the tubes were really the same, the 1614's ratings should be 20% higher than the 6L6's. The power is only 10% higher, the plate voltage is 4% higher, but the screen dissipation is 40% higher. The ICAS ratings are quite a bit higher, except for the screen dissipation.

The 1614 is basically a selected 6L6 intended for class-C RF amplifier use. Its CCS and ICAS ratings are based around this type of usage, hence its different-than-expected ratings. In a sense, the difference between a 6L6 and a 1614 is in the ratings, not the tube itself."

There's a chart at the link with the various ratings.
   
   
      
Logged

Diesel boats and tube gear forever!
N0WEK
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 783



« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2010, 03:02:32 PM »

Also the data sheet on the 1614...

http://tubedata.tigahost.com/tubedata/sheets/049/1/1614.pdf
Logged

Diesel boats and tube gear forever!
W2XR
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 859



« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2010, 03:06:38 PM »

How about using NOS 5881s or current production Russian/Sovtek 5881s as substitutes?

I believe the pin-out is the same as the 6L6 family of tubes, and the 5881 was also nomenclatured as the 6L6WGB at one time.

Small-sized envelope, and a durable and rugged tube.

N0WEK; I think the Gates "Twin-Drive" audio driver circuit in the BC-1J used 5881s interchangeably with 1614s and 1622s in production.

73,

Bruce
Logged

Real transmitters are homebrewed with a ratchet wrench, and you have to stand up to tune them!

Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".
WA5VGO
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 159


« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2010, 05:25:51 PM »

I'm not sure there is any real difference in ratings.  I seem to recall that they are nothing more than metal 6L6s that passed certain more stringent QC standards than what was acceptable for the standard 6L6.

I totally agree. Every 1614 I have ever seen is clearly marked "6L6" around the base crimp.

Darrell, WA5VGO
Logged
WBear2GCR
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4142


Brrrr- it's cold in the shack! Fire up the BIG RIG


WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2010, 06:06:24 PM »



Otoh, I have heard that the 1614 can be run upside down in a liquid cooling bath... this may be urban legend, or not...

              _-_-bear
Logged

_-_- bear WB2GCR                   http://www.bearlabs.com
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10037



« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2010, 06:35:17 PM »



Otoh, I have heard that the 1614 can be run upside down in a liquid cooling bath... this may be urban legend, or not...

              _-_-bear

That will work with about any tube without a cap on top.  My very first modulator used for the audio driver a single 6AQ5 inverted into a glass of water.  Otherwise, after a few minutes it would heat up and the audio would become (more) distorted.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
KA1ZGC
Guest
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2010, 06:53:26 PM »

I forget, was the envelope tied to one of the pins in those?
Logged
Bill, KD0HG
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2544

304-TH - Workin' it


« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2010, 08:28:35 PM »

It's all about voltage ratings. The plate voltage in the Ranger I runs around 550, with solid state rectifiers a bit over 600 volts on the modulators and 6146.

According to the RCA HB3 data sheet for the 1614 dated 12/1946, the tube is called a "Transmitting beam power amplifier". In ICAS AB1 modulator service like the Ranger's, the 1614s max plate voltage rating is 550 volts for 50 watts of audio outpoot.

In the same RCA HB-3 dated 11/1954..6L6 and 6L6G, the max rated plate voltage in AB1 is 360 volts. Max power out at 360 volts is 26.5 watts, nowhere near enough to plate mod a 6146. OTOH, the 6L6-GC is rated for a max of 500 plate volts, it's a completely different animal than its predecessors.

The Johnson engineers selected the proper tube by the book for the Ranger I modulator.

In the Ranger II they switched to a 7027 modulator tube, a 'super' 6L6 variant which had a maximum Ep or 600 volts.

A pair of 7027s would make a great replacement for 1614s, too. The pinout is similar to the 1614/6L6.
Logged
ke7trp
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3654



« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2010, 08:48:41 PM »

I have used:

Metal 1614
Metal 6l6
Glass 6l6
glass 6l6gc

All with about the same results.  They will all work just fine. 

For more audio power, Try some 8417s but you must change the bias a bit.  I had a pair running 150 % mod,  Later removed them and put the rig back to stock. I got worried the iron would fry.

C
Logged
W2PFY
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13291



« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2010, 09:22:33 PM »

I used the Sovtek KT88/ 6550's and they worked great without any mods whatever in a Johnson Ranger. The pin out is the same. I got 150 percent pos peaks too. The rig as far as the power supply is concerned was solid stated and the audio driver transformer was removed in favor of a phase splitter.

The only thing dumb that I did twice was put my hand on operating 1614 tubes and the envelopes were at plate potential due to a carbon path.
Logged

The secrecy of my job prevents me from knowing what I am doing.
Rob K2CU
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 346


« Reply #13 on: November 11, 2010, 07:38:57 AM »

It was interesting to compare the data sheets, 6L6, 1614, 6L6GB, 6L6GC, 807, AND 6146.

Seems that tuvbes listed for RF Amp service would have heater to cathode ratings included. note worthy is that the 1614 had the highest rating. perhaps they were selected for seom special RF amp service that needed the higher cathode to heater rating. Perhaps cathode wobulation. hi
Logged
KE6DF
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 784


WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2010, 10:21:22 AM »

From time to time I've seen adapters that have a socket and a plate cap and take a 6bg6 and convert it into a 6L6.

From a cost perspective, 6bg6's seem to be lowest of all the 6L6 equivalents. Plus they will take a higher plate voltage like an 807 (due to the plate cap).

The adapters might make the combination too tall for a Ranger -- don't know about that.
Logged

WBear2GCR
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4142


Brrrr- it's cold in the shack! Fire up the BIG RIG


WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 11, 2010, 11:31:45 AM »



Otoh, I have heard that the 1614 can be run upside down in a liquid cooling bath... this may be urban legend, or not...

              _-_-bear

That will work with about any tube without a cap on top.  My very first modulator used for the audio driver a single 6AQ5 inverted into a glass of water.  Otherwise, after a few minutes it would heat up and the audio would become (more) distorted.

Don, the idea is/was that the metal was a fairly efficient thermal conductor, the glass not so much... and the temp differential on two sides of a glass envelope will cause cracking... but I don't remember if the metal tubes had an inner glass envelope with the metal outer or not. But anyhow that is what I heard or read, put it in liquid cooling and let it rip...  Wink

                      _-_-bear
Logged

_-_- bear WB2GCR                   http://www.bearlabs.com
W2PFY
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13291



« Reply #16 on: November 11, 2010, 11:34:57 AM »

Quote
6bg6 and convert it into a 6L6.

There are two versions of the 6BG6, the newer ones had more scrot. The metal tubes have a glass liner inside. I wonder how the plates differed from metal to glass. Me thinks the metal ones had to be different for work at RF.
Logged

The secrecy of my job prevents me from knowing what I am doing.
Opcom
Patrick J. / KD5OEI
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8290



WWW
« Reply #17 on: November 11, 2010, 04:32:07 PM »

The 6L6 and 1614 have pin 1 connected to the outer metal. It is amusing if the designer of the amp or whatever has used it as a tie point.
The 1614 is rated for full input to 80MHz.
Logged

Radio Candelstein
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone © 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.057 seconds with 19 queries.