I just opened up an 7189a based Japanese tube amp (a Tiesco). Unless
I'm really mistaken, every single resistor in the thing is wirewound.
They all look like air core coils dipped in some kind of bluish
plasticy coating. My guess is that this would be extremely costly and
difficult to design around due to the inductance of the all wire
windings. Is that inductance too small to matter? Is there any other
kind of resistor that looks like a hollow tube? Or is this really as
wierd as it seems to me?
Interesting... Could you actually see the wire shapes under the
coating? I do recall metal film resistors where the resistive coating
was deposited on a cylindrical shape.
An X-ray or cutting one apart is one way to find out... :-)
apa wrote:
> I just opened up an 7189a based Japanese tube amp (a Tiesco). Unless
> I'm really mistaken, every single resistor in the thing is wirewound.
> They all look like air core coils dipped in some kind of bluish
> plasticy coating. My guess is that this would be extremely costly and
> difficult to design around due to the inductance of the all wire
> windings. Is that inductance too small to matter? Is there any other
> kind of resistor that looks like a hollow tube? Or is this really as
> wierd as it seems to me?
>
Could be wirewound. Those resistors are expensive but not out of reach.
They can also be machine wound. One of the key advantages of wirewound
resistors is precise ohm values with little variance. In the hands of a
good designer it can lead to a less noise and better performance in a
number of areas.
apa <tacoma57@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I just opened up an 7189a based Japanese tube amp (a Tiesco). Unless
>I'm really mistaken, every single resistor in the thing is wirewound.
>They all look like air core coils dipped in some kind of bluish
>plasticy coating. My guess is that this would be extremely costly and
>difficult to design around due to the inductance of the all wire
>windings. Is that inductance too small to matter? Is there any other
>kind of resistor that looks like a hollow tube? Or is this really as
>wierd as it seems to me?
No, these things were common in the sixties in Japan, and the Russians
still use the technology today. They are ceramic tubes that
have been sputtered with metal foil or carbon, then coated with a
glaze.
You can do wirewounds like this too, but not everything built that
way was a wirewound.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
That's gotta be it. A hollow cylindrical metal film makes much more
sense - didn't know they existed. I thought I saw evidence of windings,
but it was probably just wrinkles in the coating.
Andy Eng wrote:
> Interesting... Could you actually see the wire shapes under the
> coating? I do recall metal film resistors where the resistive coating
> was deposited on a cylindrical shape.
>
> An X-ray or cutting one apart is one way to find out... :-)
> That's gotta be it. A hollow cylindrical metal film makes much more
> sense - didn't know they existed. I thought I saw evidence of windings,
> but it was probably just wrinkles in the coating.
It might be a spiral cut applied to the coating to increase the overall
resistance and/or trim it. The extra inductance was considered
negligible at audio frequencies.
This was done with an abrasive wheel and it usually cut a shallow groove
into the surface of ceramic tube as well.
--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
I'm wondering if it's obviously hollow, how good the lead attach is
(picturing a spot welded lead bond versus an end cap with a greather
bonding surface). Prolly a good thing this is a pro recording gear
(I'm assuming) and not live sound gear that goes bouncing down the
road... :-)
> They seem pretty solid. There's a thicker ring at each end
and I
> assume there some extra material under there to make the
lead
> connection tougher.
Back in the days of tubes, Lafayette (I worked for their
Detroit store) sold a number of made-in-Japan (unusual for
the day) amps with these kinds of resistors.
My recollection is that they were certainly no worse
resistors than the carbon comps in Layfayette's
corresponding made-in-USA amps.
Thinking back, I seem to recall that our service people
reported near-zero failure rates for the *odd* resistors in
this pacific rim product.
I believe that the thick ring at each end is just the lead
wire wrapped around the ceramic tube a number of times.
Perhaps they roll it before wrapping, these days.
> Thinking back, I seem to recall that our service people
> reported near-zero failure rates for the *odd* resistors in
> this pacific rim product.
....thinking about how resistors fail...
Resistor failure is almost always secondary to another component failure, or
a bad design, right? Just wondering if these odd resistors were more
tolerant of excess power or something.
John O wrote:
>> Thinking back, I seem to recall that our service people
>> reported near-zero failure rates for the *odd* resistors
in
>> this pacific rim product.
> ...thinking about how resistors fail...
> Resistor failure is almost always secondary to another
component
> failure, or a bad design, right?
IME resistors can fail on their own.
>Just wondering if these odd
> resistors were more tolerant of excess power or something.
I think they were larger and therefore probably capable of
handling more power.
John O <johno@!noSPAM!heathkit.com> wrote:
>> Thinking back, I seem to recall that our service people
>> reported near-zero failure rates for the *odd* resistors in
>> this pacific rim product.
>
>...thinking about how resistors fail...
>
>Resistor failure is almost always secondary to another component failure, or
>a bad design, right? Just wondering if these odd resistors were more
>tolerant of excess power or something.
Today resistor failure is almost always secondary. But back in the seventies,
carbon comp resistors failed all the time, often from thermal damage. They
would develop tiny cracks from heating and cooling, and suddenly the value
would start to rise.
Film resistors don't do this quite so easily. Which may be the reason that
the Japanese went to those goofy film resistors while folks in the west were
still using carbon comps.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
On 26 May 2005 22:06:43 -0400, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>Today resistor failure is almost always secondary. But back in the seventies,
>carbon comp resistors failed all the time, often from thermal damage. They
>would develop tiny cracks from heating and cooling, and suddenly the value
>would start to rise.
>
>Film resistors don't do this quite so easily. Which may be the reason that
>the Japanese went to those goofy film resistors while folks in the west were
>still using carbon comps.
And even the carbon films have weird failure modes. I've seen plenty
of well-under-wattage-rating failures in high-ish voltage locations,
maybe 70-to-100 volt range. Replacing with higher wattage (1/2 watt
is usually enough; sheesh!) gives enough voltage rating.
Or am I misinterpreting the situ?
Thanks,
Chris Hornbeck
"Well, you could always ask Kevin Aylward for his opinion"
-I'm not really
> Today resistor failure is almost always secondary. But back in the
seventies,
> carbon comp resistors failed all the time, often from thermal damage.
They
> would develop tiny cracks from heating and cooling, and suddenly the value
> would start to rise.
Ya know what, you reflashed a memory. I used to work on old Heathkit ham
gear, transceivers like SB-101, linears, and such. Those CC resistors *did*
fail, especially in the power supplies and near the finals. You could see
the cracks, and bust them apart while poking around on an initial
inspection.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.