amplifier output impedance measurement - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Tubes / Valves

Tubes / Valves All about our sweet vacuum tubes :) Threads about Musical Instrument Amps of all kinds should be in the Instruments & Amps forum

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31st January 2013, 12:20 PM   #11
DF96 is online now DF96  England
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
An important part of measurement is interpretation: what does the number mean? That usually requires some understanding of what the measurement means, as well as how to actually do it. In the case of output impedance knowing what it means and knowing how to measure it are virtually the same thing.

I suggest the OP does some Googling on Ohm's Law, potential dividers and the Maximum Power Transfer Theorem. He will then know what he is measuring and how to measure it. Without this there is little point in helping him to arrive at a meaningless number.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st January 2013, 07:12 PM   #12
Hi_Q is offline Hi_Q  England
diyAudio Member
 
Hi_Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
I made many moons ago a bridge circuit with a low value variable resistor in one leg. The unknown impedance is connected to the other leg. A signal of say 1kHz is applied to the bridge and earphones connected to the bridge centre arms. I'm sure you know the set-up, adjusting the variable resistor for a null in the headphones. The variable resistor had a pointer calibrated against known fixed values. Thus you could find the impedance of speakers or transformers at different frequencies if one wished to do so. Just another way of doing it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st January 2013, 07:51 PM   #13
Merlinb is offline Merlinb  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Merlinb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Lancashire
This is a traditional method, but it's only practical if the output resistance is at least an ohm or more.
Click the image to open in full size.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd February 2013, 05:21 AM   #14
midmoe is offline midmoe  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
hello, thanks for the good feedback. Am waiting on a sextet of 6550' s JJ's (slovakian)from tempe, az to complete the unit, right now only have 4 westinghouse straight sided ones (amp set up for 6 outputs) ... I'm going to check impedance next week with the formulae when the new tubes get here, hoping I can get it down below 200 ohms with more tubes and adding more local neg feedback in the output stage. It would be nice to have a quick and easy method to assess impedance with some sort of test jig....if impedance matching is maximum transfer of power to the load, wouldn't this result in maximum heating of the load? Perhaps an accurate thermocouple reading would be indicative of max power transfer, without all the attenant reworking of formulae calculations. Physically attaching a thermocouple to the resistance, allowing the temp to stabilize for a few minutes after each change of load, then proceed up or down in resistance from a starting guestimate...until a peak is found. If that would be the theoretical impedance, with the real world situation of back-emf and whatnot, it wouldn't be perfect, but perhaps as accurate as the formulae. The heat method seemed to be promising as I hooked up a 1K, 10 watt pot and ran it through the 100-300 range and that seemed to be max heat with a whitenoise input at 200 ohms just feeling it with my hand.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd February 2013, 05:32 AM   #15
midmoe is offline midmoe  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
oops, forgot to state that the amp in question is an output transformerless circlotron, which is why all my hub-bub about impedance questions... certainly not a standard topology....my first attempt to build one.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd February 2013, 04:02 PM   #16
cnpope is offline cnpope  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: College Station, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by midmoe View Post
hello, thanks for the good feedback. Am waiting on a sextet of 6550' s JJ's (slovakian)from tempe, az to complete the unit, right now only have 4 westinghouse straight sided ones (amp set up for 6 outputs) ... I'm going to check impedance next week with the formulae when the new tubes get here, hoping I can get it down below 200 ohms with more tubes and adding more local neg feedback in the output stage. It would be nice to have a quick and easy method to assess impedance with some sort of test jig....if impedance matching is maximum transfer of power to the load, wouldn't this result in maximum heating of the load? Perhaps an accurate thermocouple reading would be indicative of max power transfer, without all the attenant reworking of formulae calculations. Physically attaching a thermocouple to the resistance, allowing the temp to stabilize for a few minutes after each change of load, then proceed up or down in resistance from a starting guestimate...until a peak is found. If that would be the theoretical impedance, with the real world situation of back-emf and whatnot, it wouldn't be perfect, but perhaps as accurate as the formulae. The heat method seemed to be promising as I hooked up a 1K, 10 watt pot and ran it through the 100-300 range and that seemed to be max heat with a whitenoise input at 200 ohms just feeling it with my hand.
Well yes, maximum power would also imply maximum heating, so indeed you could in principle do something along the lines you are suggesting. It would probably not be very precise, and you would have to wait quite a long time after each adjustment of the variable resistor, for thermal equilibrium to be re-established. And in the time you were waiting for the temperature to settle down you could much more accurately, and quickly, determine the power by measuring the voltage and the current and multiplying them together!

For fun, I tried out a variant on merlinb's method with the transformer (which is, itself, essentially the same method jcx was talking about). Rather than connect the primary to the mains supply, I connected it to a signal generator. (Amongst other things, it has the advantage one can test the impedance at other frequencies, and not just at 60Hz or 50Hz.) Within experimental accuracy, it gave the same answer I was getting from the resistor plus paralleled resistor method. (About 0.8 ohms for the OTL I was trying it with.)

By the way, I don't think you said what test equipment you have. Presumably you have a meter (DVM?) that can measure AC voltage? Do you have a signal generator? I think it would be much better to do your measurements using that, rather than white noise. If you don't have a signal generator, I am guessing that you can probably find sinewave signal sources as mp3 files on the web somewhere.

Chris
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd February 2013, 05:21 PM   #17
midmoe is offline midmoe  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
yes, I am a little short on equipment, although I have a good audio oscillator, I'm waiting till next week to drag it out and use it for a precise freq sweep. My FET volt/ohmmeter is acting strange, so I need to get a new one, am using the old standby V/O from when I had the tv shop, which is fine for nearly all needs. Never really liked the DVMs as they aren't useful in hunting intermittents....so far, it's working great with an incompletly tubed output stage, once having gotten control of distortion in the driver stage...took an extra 12BH7 to deliver enough voltage to the grid rails....the heat method is more of an intellectual excersize than any serious measurement, unless I spend alot of money getting research grade thermocouple components and spend another whole month getting all that figured out...but as a ballpark estimator, I think I found a neat trick.....at least new to me..maybe someone has done this before? The front end I'm using is a modified grommmes 260A design...DC coupled all the way to the output stages...one problem I had to overcome was that it had too much gain...you could have plugged in a mag phono and done alright, but for a basic amp, too high, so I switched the 100K plate supply to the 12AU7 from+250 to the plate of the driven phase splitter,which has about 190 volts, plus delivers huge amounts of neg feedback to the stage...I will probably modify this later, doing a partial pull-up to the regular +250 and increase the resistor value back to the 12BH7 plate. That will be a later on tweak to equalize the gains in the phase splitter sides...right now, the grounded grid side has more gain in the other..which is opposite of normal...and I've been thinking it's possible to do a completely DC to DC amp all the way to the speakers....by running the driver stage with a neg supply to cathodes and grounding the normal B+....I'm running the 6550 grid rails at about -24 volts, so this seems doable. Haven't plotted it out yet..so it's kinda speculative...pretty cool idea though...definitely would have to put in fuses to the speakers along with some kind of infrasonics-limiter...
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2013, 08:33 PM   #18
midmoe is offline midmoe  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
hello all. would like to report on circlotron progress. I got my 6-6550s yesterday and found as the power in the output stage increased, up from four tubes to six, certain problems of instability cropped back up that I thought I had already addressed ....seems I had, but only with fewer watts to deal with. So I began going back over screen supplies and how they're worked out. I had simply tied them together and hooked them to respective plate rail with a single 120 ohm, so I hooked screens to respective plates with 150 ohmers, and tied the two sides together with a common screen rail,using 120 ohmers to the screen end of each 150 ohm, so as to give back and forth neg feedback. Tying the screens to the opposite bank as some diagrams showed proved undoable, causing large spurious voltage swings on bass notes. So, I was glad to figure out a way to re-introduce neg feedback into the screen ckt....as an early concept was, the more neg feedback, the lower the impedance. So, things were better, less large excursions, but as one problem is solved, others become more apparent... some intermodulation distortion was easily heard on certain musical passages, but not on others. From the beginning I had been suspicious of the idea of grounding the cathode rails with 1K ohmers, so I began to wonder if that was part or all of my problem...then I realized that the only "grounding" that needed to be done was from the last driver stage (12BH7) to the output stage cathodes...so I removed the 1Ks from chassis and ran them back to the cathodes of the driver...with has about +5 on the cathodes...first I hooked them up to their respective driver stages and got a huge howling when tentatively powered up. Quickly unplugging, I switched the 1Ks to connect to opposite driver cathodes and cautiously plugged in....unbelievable...my instability problem was gone, my intermodulation problem gone, and the neg feedback with this arrangement, lowered gain,(which was still too high anyway), down to a perfect level for a basic amp. My volume contol on the preamp sets nearly identically as with the mac hooked up...so I was pretty happy with the results, it now sounds like a "real" amp. I went ahead and put .47 mfd caps in series with the 1Ks, just to prevent any problems with the +5 volts on the cathode, and nothing changed. Now I was seemingly making real progress at making a practical OTL amp using conventional tubes, that doesn't require more than 6 output tubes per channel. I did re-wire my bose 901s to series, got the impedance up on both systems, seriesed those, now have 128 ohms of load. O course, this doesn't include the sub, so I took a 500 ohm gen replacement xfmr and hooked it up to the plates, using that to drive the sub. So as it stands now, I have a quasi-otl system, with the mains hooked up directly to cathode rails, the sub transformered off plate rails, (with appropriate low pass filter). I am hooked now on this OTL concept as it DOES sound better. Even just having a monoblock hooked up, the music has an intresting quality of seeming to materialize about a foot of so in front of the speakers.....the increased clarity of not being squeezed thru a xfmr. seems a real phenomenon..can't wait to build another for stereo. Now that most of the main parameters have been addressed, it shouldn't take another whole month to build. Now all I need is 7 more EV-300 18" per side to get the impedance of the subs up to 64 ohms, which should be a close enough impedance match to hook up in a customized crossover, everything running off the cathode rails, then the system will be full OTL.

Last edited by midmoe; 5th February 2013 at 08:37 PM. Reason: misspelling of apparent
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th February 2013, 06:00 PM   #19
midmoe is offline midmoe  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
have hooked up both subs in series (16 ohms) and used a low pass inductor in series with a 120 ohm resistor, giving a net resistance of 136 ohms and hooked this up to the plate rails...elimnating the 500 ohm transformer, getting to a pure OTL system. You would think that having the 120 ohm in series with the subs would kill output, put strangely, doesn't...I guess as the closer impedance matching somewhat compensates for power loss...anyway, the real intresting thing is that there appears to be some natural crossover qualities of the OTL....as I removed bass information from the plate rails, it seems to dissaapear in direct proportion from the cathode rails....I havent' verified this yet, but will attempt to do so shortly. This would mean, if a real effect, the boses can be alone on the cathodes with no high pass filter required, the selective loading on the plates with the low pass load seems to elimenate this need...leaving only the low pass inductor to funtion as a complete crossover. Even if the "natural crossover" effect doesn't pan out, removing the xfmr has vastly improved the bass detail. Only drawback now is that sub feed is at +170.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th February 2013, 02:21 AM   #20
midmoe is offline midmoe  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
today I worked to get more neg. feedback in the output stage. The diagrams I've seen usually have a 100K resistor between plates and grids, I hadn't tried that yet, waiting to get all the other basics done. Upon adding the 100Ks immediately the bias swung way too positive, beyond the range of correction with the 5K bias contol. Further trials hit upon a 2.2 meg being high enough to allow the controls to give the minus 16 neg bias. This seems to have stabilized the output even more, as now the bias control voltage range seems expanded....before there was a rather limited range of bias voltages between cutoff and saturation distortions...now the cutoff distortion seems to occur with more reverse bias than previous, and the foward bias distortion seems to have dissapeared at the previous voltage observed without the 2.2 meggers. I didn't leave in foward bias for long so as to protect the tubes, but the functional range of bias voltages seems to have increased, making the output stage much less subject to "under and over" distortion, the control setting is much less critical. I've read about the bias matching problem some bloggers have reported, to the extent of placing center-null meters on the front to keep an eye on that. With so many of those giant russian triodes in their amps, probably not a bad idea...but with 6 standard outputs, that problem doesn't exist. I zero the voltage at the cathodes in the morning, that evening it reads within a few tenths of zero. I will go back into the bias circut later with the goal of being able to lower the 2.2megs down toward the 100K shown online...will have to go back in an re-jigger the bias feed resistors, to compensate for more + coming in from the plates...will report on that tommorow. Another good thing is that the tubes run suprisingly cool...I can touch them and they're not overly hot. In fact, they run cooler than if they were in the macintosh 275. A friend is bringing down some sa-cds to see how they do. I don't have any sa-cds yet, but have noticed some cds have a "fringey" high end, I guess because of lower sampling standards....kinda like mp3s which I never go into. I still like vinys as the high end seems a little sweeter. Another thing I've noticed, running the preamp in mono mode, is a shrillnes in some cd's midrange, that isn't there when set back to stereo. On
dylan's "Modern Times" cd I noticed this more than others...at first I thought it was the amp. Upon flipping the preamp back to stereo, the harshness went away...his voice is getting pretty harsh anyway, so I,m happy to hear he's doing better again...haha...
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tone generator output Voltage for amplifier measurement? TheDIYer Equipment & Tools 2 28th June 2010 09:44 AM
Impedance curve measurement bobsinclar Multi-Way 5 16th November 2006 12:17 PM
High output impedance amplifier power 454Casull Solid State 6 13th February 2005 08:25 PM
Impedance measurement Doug Everything Else 2 9th August 2003 04:50 AM
Having a problem with impedance measurement. prash Multi-Way 29 17th December 2002 04:24 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:49 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2