Brainstorming Paramount upgrades

johnsonad · 6506

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline johnsonad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1670
on: May 11, 2011, 03:38:10 PM
I’m running out of potential areas to upgrade my Paramount’s and would like to bounce a few thoughts off the forum.  These have been brought up a few times in the archives and from the limited posting seem to make improvements but that is all subjective right!

There are three areas I would like to brainstorm over to include film caps and inductors in the power supply, a DC heater supply for the 5670 driver and a shunting switch or relay for the output transformer to prevent magnetization on start up.

First off, I’m a hobbyist with limited skills in development of circuits and the implementation of them.  Now that that’s out of the way :)

1.   Film caps and inductors in the power supply:
The CRC supply currently used could be changed to a CLC.  Myself and a few others have replaced the 270 Ohm resistor with the Triad C-7X choke with good results.  On my amps the choke is mounted behind the PS transformer.  There is no additional noise that I can here with 100 dB speakers.  This is a decent location but as Paul has stated before, it was originally designed to go where the present OPT is when it was configured as the Paradox before becoming the Paramount.  Using a choke the capacitance could be lowered from the present 135uF. We would either need a new PS board or wire it all point to point.  I for one would be willing to put in money on a small run of new boards.  The film caps present a problem of size (both physical and capacitance) and DC rating.  A quick look in the usual places shows Mundorf makes a cap with PC standoffs up to 47uF at 600v DC.  They have screw type up to 200uF but rated at 550v DC.  DIY HiFi Supply has caps with radial leads up to 70uF rated at 630v.  There are more out there but these were a few I could find quickly.  Unfortunately my computer OS does not support running the PSUD utility so I’m unable to model an ideal supply (nor am I any good at this!).  Maybe Paul, Doc, Ed could weigh in on suggesting values to use here?  Physical size is the biggest problem.  The caps in the LEAST will poke out from the bottom.  I for one wouldn’t be opposed to make a new deeper base or adding a second base that the first could slip into probably with the same wood to match the top.

2.  DC heater supply for the 5670:
I for one love the soft start upgrade and the 5670 tube.  Though this may make a negligible improvement, in theory a quite DC supply should improve this stage.  Paul wrote that the PT-4 puts out 1.2 amps at 6.3v, plenty enough for a supply.  Is it worth the effort in doing so?  Location of the circuit seems to be the biggest problem.  One could move the OPT topside making room for a wider PS board (this is my plan with a TFA-2004 Jr.).  You could also use a second smaller board on standoffs below the new PS boards though it would make sense to keep all of the PS components on one board.  Practically you could move the Parafeed choke topside too and orient it like the Paradox opening up even more room below. 

3.  Though not a big problem, it would be nice to get rid of the magnetization of the OPT on start up.  As Xavier put it, this clears up after one record side.  Paul has commented on shunting the OPT until the circuit is fully powered up.  Not sure how to do this.  Could use a relay or a switch it would seem.  Either way there would be full voltage on it and this could be dangerous considering the limited benefit.  Thoughts?

Again this is an effort in brainstorming and potentially design. We all love our Paramount’s and like most things in this hobby we tweak it until perfected (at least in our own minds!).   These may not be practical given the limited space but all of these upgrades have potential for benefit.

Aaron

(edited for brain farts ;)
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 07:23:21 PM by johnsonad »

Aaron Johnson


Offline Paul Joppa

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 5784
Reply #1 on: May 11, 2011, 06:53:26 PM
My thought was always to put film caps on a larger PSU board. CDE and AVX among others make such caps, readily available from Mouser, DigiKey, etc. If you dig into the data sheets, you see a significant tradeoff of lifetime vs. voltage rating, and it's different for Mylar vs. polypropylene. Mylar is more space-efficient, and might serve for the voltage doubler caps, keeping the polypropylene for the last caps, closest to the audio. I have not done the work to look at good choices of cap sizing - I'd prefer to get better filtering with the PSU choke, and not give up more capacitance than necessary. Making a good tradeoff here is a complicated subject.

For iron layout, I am strongly opposed to anything on the topside that has exposed terminals - they are at lethal voltages and should be kept out of reach!  Enclosed transformers and chokes with wires exiting directly down through a hole are generally acceptable, though the UL would probably not approve them. Note that the upgrade iron, both transformer and plate choke, could be built this way - but you'd have to talk to Mike about that.

Putting the PSU choke topside in back, as johnsonad has done, is a little risky - the high voltage is not directly exposed, but the easily damaged winding and bobbin are not protected by a steel bell end. It would certainly not be acceptable to the Underwriter's Lab. From a performance perspective it seems to work well.

You are talking about a DC heater supply, not a cathode supply, by the way.  :^)  The 6.3v winding could be rectified and run through a chip regulator.

In theory this could power some time delay relays to delay the B+ and to short the output transformer until things have stabilized. However, I did try this a couple years ago, and the surge when the B+ came on caused all the relays to drop out and the timers to re-start. We didn't at the time have the leisure to figure out exactly what went wrong and how to fix it, so I'll just say there's a bunch of engineering yet to be done on that. I still think it's a good idea, and I'll continue to work on it. Incidentally, another relay could then be used to clear the soft start so that the 20 minute wait time before re-starting would not be necessary.

I have a few other things in mind, too untested to talk about yet.

Paul Joppa


Offline johnsonad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1670
Reply #2 on: May 11, 2011, 09:08:01 PM
Thanks Paul for getting the conversation started!

Hmmm, anyone want to take a shot at designing a new PS :)  There are some EE's here and others with experience, please chime in.

For the PS I take it lots of capacitance and increased fitration would be helpful?  I took a look through the film cap sections of Digikey and Mouser looking at caps rated from 600v DC up to 1kV DC.  The most economical which are board mountable and sized well fit into the MKP type.  Not sure if these are good for tube based power supplies but here are a few ranging from 60uF to 160uF via links and in no order:

http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=495-4154-ND
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=495-4394-ND
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=BC2624-ND
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=495-3941-ND


Aaron Johnson


Offline johnsonad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1670
Reply #3 on: May 13, 2011, 06:45:29 PM
Please correct me if I have a lack of fundamental understanding on this.

Could you use the Rubli delay circuit instead of a relay set up to answer #3? 


http://nervenet.info/HT_delay/

Looking back through other posts it seems that you have quite a lot of irons in the fire over the Paramount PS and there is a potential for a much larger revision in future versions of the amp.  The following thread is one that I

Aaron Johnson


Offline Paul Joppa

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 5784
Reply #4 on: May 13, 2011, 08:49:40 PM
The Rubli switches DC, not AC (signal). There is already a place on the board for a 240v switch to turn on and off the high voltage - it has a jumper across it in the stock amp.

I have not yet designed what I would like as a practical power supply. The PSUD program from Duncan allows you to simulate performance including transients as the power is turned on, and there are often threads on the DIY Tube asylum on using it.

The PC mount to the power transformer is a major pain if you have to get the board off, so we will eventually put the PSU board on standoffs. Haven't chosen a good approach yet.

Paul Joppa


Offline johnsonad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1670
Reply #5 on: May 14, 2011, 08:43:23 PM
Hmmm, reading through more old posts, always dangerous :)

As I'll have the stock Paramount PC's and the BH-7's not being used, could they be put to use in the power supply meaning would they be rated for it AC wise?  There isn't a lot out there on the BH-7.  Not a lot of choices for high Henry low amp PS chokes as far as I can see. 

BTW, is there any way to run PSUD on a modern OS?  I haven't touched an NT or lower machine in a decade.  Is there anything else out there that works as well?

Aaron Johnson


Offline Paul Joppa

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 5784
Reply #6 on: May 15, 2011, 06:36:04 AM
PSUD2 runs fine on Windows XP and Windows 7. The various plate chokes can handle power supply duties, but they are rated for the 300B - 70mA maximum. If you are using 2A3s, there is enough current margin to power the driver stage, but that is not the case for a 300B version.

Paul Joppa


Offline johnsonad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1670
Reply #7 on: May 15, 2011, 10:16:19 AM
Thanks Paul! I'm running Windows 7 on a laptop and will give it a try. Can you please let us know the inductance and DC resistance of the BH-7 and PC-2 to run in the sim?

Aaron Johnson


Offline Paul Joppa

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 5784
Reply #8 on: May 15, 2011, 10:52:41 AM
PC-2 is 330 ohms and 24 henries (the inductance is on the circuit diagram). You'll have to get the BH-7 specs from Mike.

Paul Joppa


Offline johnsonad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1670
Reply #9 on: May 17, 2011, 03:17:09 PM
Thanks Paul, got PSUD II to work, it was operator error....  Now that it's up and running, it hits me that there is a lot more involved in designing a quality PS than swapping components.  Maybe I should enjoy what I have and wait until the professionals release something different.  I need to learn the goals in PS design before going any further and at what points to measure them. 

« Last Edit: May 17, 2011, 08:03:55 PM by johnsonad »

Aaron Johnson


Offline trioid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
    • Posts: 29
Reply #10 on: July 14, 2011, 09:59:33 AM
For a really simple & cheap PS upgrade, would an appropriate size cap across the final two electrolytics (gnd to +460V) work with e.g., a 630V Solen film cap? That is, is 630 V enough for any turn on funnies (if there are any). Sorry if this is a stewpid question.

Jim



Offline Paul Joppa

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 5784
Reply #11 on: July 14, 2011, 04:01:20 PM
For a really simple & cheap PS upgrade, would an appropriate size cap across the final two electrolytics (gnd to +460V) work with e.g., a 630V Solen film cap? That is, is 630 V enough for any turn on funnies (if there are any). Sorry if this is a stewpid question.

Jim
Yes, a 600v rating or greater will be fine.

Paul Joppa


Offline trioid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
    • Posts: 29
Reply #12 on: July 15, 2011, 03:37:05 AM
Thanks! Will see if 'every little bit helps'

Cheers,
jim



Offline trioid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
    • Posts: 29
Reply #13 on: July 18, 2011, 04:20:35 AM
Answer - Yes, it does help.



Offline Brillo

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 98
Reply #14 on: July 18, 2011, 08:33:14 AM
What capacitance value did you use? 

Chris