Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Philco 37-620 electrolytics
#1

The electrolytics, nos. 60 and 62, on the Rider schematic for Model 37-620 look backwards to me.

http://www.nostalgiaair.org/PagesByModel...013212.pdf

And opposite to those [nos. 66 and 69] on the schematic for the 37-640

http://www.nostalgiaair.org/PagesByModel...013216.pdf

Which is right?  Or possibly both??  Or does it matter???
#2

The schematic for the 37-620 electrolytics 60 & 62 are wrong. The schematic for model 37-640 electrolytics 66 & 69 are correct but cap# 66A is wrong. The negative should go to the PT center tap and the positive to chassis ground!

Ron

Bendix 0626.      RCA 8BX5.   RCA T64
Philco 41-250.    Philco49-500
GE 201.             Philco 39-25
Motorola 61X13. Philco 46-42        Crosley 52TQ
Philco 37-116.    Philco 70
AK 35                Philco 46-350
Philco 620B.       Zenith Transoceanic B-600
Philco 60B.         Majestic 50
Philco 52-944.    AK 84
#3

I don't know that I see anything "wrong" with the two different designs. One uses a cap to filter the negative leg of the power. One cost a little more but so does the set.

When my pals were reading comic books
I was down in the basement in my dad's
workshop. Perusing his Sam's Photofoacts
Vol 1-50 admiring the old set and trying to
figure out what all those squiggly meant.
Circa 1966
Now I think I've got!

Terry
#4

Neither schematic identifies filter capacitor polarity using "+ or -"..

However the "draftsman" uses the symbol of a bar inside of a cup, a symbol intended not only to represent a liquid filled electrolytic but also its polarity, the bar is the "+" and the cup is "-". The wrong schematic has the symbols upside down (connection), not only a polarity error but the electrolyte will run out Icon_lol

Pliny the younger
“nihil novum nihil varium nihil quod non semel spectasse sufficiat”
#5

To be honest I don't look at the outside edges or whether it's cupped or not to determine the polarity. They all look like non polarized jobs and I just figure it out.

When my pals were reading comic books
I was down in the basement in my dad's
workshop. Perusing his Sam's Photofoacts
Vol 1-50 admiring the old set and trying to
figure out what all those squiggly meant.
Circa 1966
Now I think I've got!

Terry
#6

I can't tell you how many times I have come across this capacitor symbol being incorrectly illustrated in this manner and like Terry, I just find the appropriate ground points and move on but this is the first time that I have seen this pointed out where the misuse of this symbol is also a causing serious secondary violation of the most basic fundamental in physics.
Will have to keep an eye on this moving forward. Thanks Chas, made my day Icon_lol
#7

It's such a simple thing to put a plus in the correct place then there's no question to debate.

Great comment on the electrolyte leak, Chas. Good Monday morning pick-me-up.
#8

It has been so long ago that I serviced a chassis and turned it over to have some of the electrolyte actually run out of the condensers... Yeech...

There was only the smallest standardization of symbols used in schematics. Often a radio brand could be recognized by seeing just a portion of the schematic. RCA had some quirks in early battery sets in using a diagrammatic, then using fillets on lines followed by tube elements numbered within a circle. Tuning condensers often indicating the rotor.

The practice of introducing new symbols as electronics evolved has become more common. Ideally, a "device" schematic should follow a flow of some sort.

For "our" radios signal left to right, impedance high at top and low at bottom of active devices and support (power) feeds under active devices, power sources some lower left some in the lower middle most in lower right.

All that is often confusing when trying to follow signal paths in a diagrammatic, that, is the pictorial of the schematic represented by actual component placement.

In a very recent post in ARF was of a convoluted PA and power supply. More like a corn maze...

https://www.antiqueradios.com/forums/vie...6&t=432631

Pliny the younger
“nihil novum nihil varium nihil quod non semel spectasse sufficiat”




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
[-]
Recent Posts
Rare zenith 6s137 restore
All of these restorations are two projects. The chassis and the cabinet. You're done with the chassis. I would keep ...RodB — 01:29 PM
PT-6 antenna connections
Thanks. The transformer tested per your numbers. Checked the wiring and it appears to be good. I’ll move on to checking ...bridkarl — 12:37 PM
GE Model P-975F
There are 2 of these on ePay and several pics on Radiomuseum.  Although the front looks like a very popular Hong Kong ra...MrFixr55 — 09:26 AM
Rare zenith 6s137 restore
Hi Fred, I get things to work, but what you, Russ, RadioSvit and many others on the Phorum do with cabinet and chassis...MrFixr55 — 09:02 AM
PT-6 antenna connections
Hi Bridcarl +1 on the others.  Pin 6 of the 7C6 is the AVC Diode so it is appropriate that that pin 4 of the coil con...MrFixr55 — 07:30 AM
462ron
Joseph, this is beyond awesome. A lot of thought and engineering went into this and you hit a home run! Now I must save ...462ron — 07:27 AM
Cannot Adjust an IF Transformer’s cores
Outstanding work indeed. I wish I could come up with solutions like this.slford310 — 11:16 PM
Cannot Adjust an IF Transformer’s cores
The abilities of our 'Phorum Pholks" never ceases to amaze me! Fantastic fabrication, Joseph! I'm waiting now for...GarySP — 08:27 PM
PT-6 antenna connections
Thanks. I never realized that was a notch noted in the schematic as described. I’ll recheck my wiring.bridkarl — 08:13 PM
Cannot Adjust an IF Transformer’s cores
Thank you! I was quite new to the Phorum when I started this post, so I feel like it might be advantageous to publish a ...jrblasde — 08:07 PM

[-]
Who's Online
There are currently 3142 online users. [Complete List]
» 1 Member(s) | 3141 Guest(s)
Avatar

>