[ARC5] Vibrator Power Supplies

[Bruce Long]

I think I read vibrators do poorly under heavy shock, vibration and acceleration.     

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 8:35 AM, Mike Morrow <kk5f at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> Scott wrote:
> 
>> My own suspicion--unsupported by any specific evidence--is that 
>> vibrators were thought to be unreliable. The fact that you can change 
>> one out in about 15 seconds seems not to have mattered.
> 
> I'd agree that reliability/component life issues mitigated against much vibrator use.
> 
> In the immediate post-WWII era we find:
> 
> The long-serving ADF receiver R-101/ARN-6 used a vibrator power supply.  A spare vibrator is held in a bracket under the top cover.
> 
> There is a military configuration of the A.R.C. Type 12 that incorporated a SCR-619 (BC-1335) FM set, all controlled through an A.R.C. C-37 control box..  The BC-1335 uses a vibrator power supply.
> 
> The pre-WWII RCA AVT-15 transmitter had an integral vibrator power supply that also served the AVR-15 or AVR-20 receiver.  Another similar system is the AVT-112 transmitter with AVR-20-A1 HF receiver and R-76/ARR-13 beacon band receiver...all three powered from the same pre-WWII AVA-126 vibrator power supply.
> 
> I'm sure that several other vibrator-powered sets could be identified.  The characteristic they all have in common is low HV power requirements.
> 
> If I leave the world of aircraft sets, I associate the term "vibrator" most strongly with the AN/GRC-3 series of tactical FM radios.  There's not a dynamotor anywhere in the system.
> 
> Mike / KK5F
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html