Moderators: Dave Moll, Andrew Davie, Steve Anderson
Steve Anderson wrote:Ah! Yes, That version of the drawing does have an error as you have noted. Version 6.3 has the correct values as noted in your green square. Whether this makes any difference, I'm not sure. It certainly could do so.
Steve A.
Harry Dalek wrote:Steve Anderson wrote:Ah! Yes, That version of the drawing does have an error as you have noted. Version 6.3 has the correct values as noted in your green square. Whether this makes any difference, I'm not sure. It certainly could do so.
Steve A.
I know i had a lot of trouble with R611 last time ,in the end we got it going as designed ,my mistake here was forgetting the first circuit is not the last correct version,so take note build the last version of the circuit
I should have results tomorrow .
Harry Dalek wrote:OK Andrew no problems i can understand later on as other posts push this and other projects back easier for people to find these ...
I was thinking the SSTV one in off topic i did should be in the SSTV section ,i think i did that before you put in a Classic SSTV topic on for us ...
Good idea on the schematics too ..for construction diaries it would be good have them all in a sub topic off say this just called Schematics saves searching for the updated working ones ...if its all in one place you can see the old and new versions ...i made the mistake of looking at my old project and following the steps i did then...not a problem but i forgot some changes were made some i recalled the resistor R611 to but till i read to that point in my past project it didn't click.
Andrew Davie wrote:
Rather than a sub-forum, I believe a better solution is a "sticky" thread that stays at the top. I have added one to this forum for you to put your schematics in. We can move schematics into similar threads - if you care to point to the ones which need moving, I will be happy to do that.
Edit: The point being, you now have a whole sub-forum exclusively for this build. You can create as many new subject-threads as you want - perhaps one for the deflection circuitry discussion, one for power supplies... whatever. Or, you can keep it all in one very long single post like it is now. Up to you.
Steve Anderson wrote:Well done Harry, far less problems with this one than the last.
If you let me know what you amended I'll have a look at updating the circuits. When I drew up the diagrams I was working 'blind', i.e. I hadn't built the circuits myself so I expected there would be some AOT required (Adjust On Test). All in all a great result.
Steve A.
Andrew Davie wrote:Big thumbs-up. Congratulations! It looks awesome. I'll have to send you my other tube to play with.
Harry Dalek wrote:Andrew Davie wrote:Big thumbs-up. Congratulations! It looks awesome. I'll have to send you my other tube to play with.
Thanks Andrew its better than i expected and there was sort of no in between getting it going first would only play one video ..due to my mistakes then every thing ..i am glad i didn't have to bother Steve to much on this one he can put hes feet up and watch
Yes i will have to buy that one off you some time if you want its nice to give them a life .
Harry Dalek wrote:...I am glad i didn't have to bother Steve to much on this one he can put hes feet up and watch.
Steve Anderson wrote:The circuits with a bit of adjustment should quite happily handle 120-lines at 50Hz, perhaps more. Some time-constants in the timebases will need changing, but that's about it really.
Steve A.
Return to The Tasmanian Devil VCR139....A for Andrew
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests