73's de Edd
- Aug 21, 2015
- 3,730
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,730
Sir Theodore . . . . . . .
Can you hear me . . . . CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW ? . . .are you " IN" today ?
Believe me . . . those-es-es-es diodes are NOT being any of the 1N295 or 1N60 germanium family, so don't even think of them.
The best comparison diode made in that SMALL GLASS CASING, back in that design frame time was being marketed as the 1N 645-7 family, which were rated at about 225 ma.
The IN400X family totally took over from them . . . in later years.
Matter of fact, all of your 4 tested original diodes check out as GOOD silicon diodes with those Vf specs you gave.
With just one slightly up into the 892 mv range.
Test that 0.47 cap by connecting it in series with a 120V 7 watt christmas light bulb from AC line power, I'll just bet that it won't fully light up like a shorted one .
I will say that your PRINCIPAL problem is being those individual Ni Cad cells with massive time onset dendrite leakage build up inside of them and also possibly leakage of electrolyte, if you see external white powdery signs.
Course, you cant see the individual internal units, as you have a 5 pack of Ni Cad pancake cells composing each battery.
BTW can you also find an EIA code on the battery markings . . . that would let us know who actually made them.
61,188,130,167,40,183 and 1125 are being valid EIA code numbers of battery manufacturers, but my most suspect for that SPECIFIC configuration of casing is being Varta . . . . but I do not see their code.
Johnson themselves is being 222.
Thassssssit . . . .
73's de Edd
Can you hear me . . . . CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW ? . . .are you " IN" today ?
Believe me . . . those-es-es-es diodes are NOT being any of the 1N295 or 1N60 germanium family, so don't even think of them.
The best comparison diode made in that SMALL GLASS CASING, back in that design frame time was being marketed as the 1N 645-7 family, which were rated at about 225 ma.
The IN400X family totally took over from them . . . in later years.
Matter of fact, all of your 4 tested original diodes check out as GOOD silicon diodes with those Vf specs you gave.
With just one slightly up into the 892 mv range.
Test that 0.47 cap by connecting it in series with a 120V 7 watt christmas light bulb from AC line power, I'll just bet that it won't fully light up like a shorted one .
I will say that your PRINCIPAL problem is being those individual Ni Cad cells with massive time onset dendrite leakage build up inside of them and also possibly leakage of electrolyte, if you see external white powdery signs.
Course, you cant see the individual internal units, as you have a 5 pack of Ni Cad pancake cells composing each battery.
BTW can you also find an EIA code on the battery markings . . . that would let us know who actually made them.
61,188,130,167,40,183 and 1125 are being valid EIA code numbers of battery manufacturers, but my most suspect for that SPECIFIC configuration of casing is being Varta . . . . but I do not see their code.
Johnson themselves is being 222.
Thassssssit . . . .
73's de Edd
Last edited by a moderator: