As far as I’m aware, from what Jim has told me. This is a perfectly working 
unit, it just needs a power supply.

At the moment I’ve no means of powering up the DVI, until I come up with a 
solution. YES i could you one of those in the wall, adapters. But me being me, 
I have to be difficult and go for a harder option. If all else fails, I buy a 
small ABS enclosure and house the step down in there, if fitting it inside 
isn’t an option.

Oh btw, according to the service manual the DVI requires about 60w. Some of the 
step down adapters I’ve seen are only 45w, so not any good. While I admit to 
knowing bugger all about the more in-depth side of power supplies. My common 
sense is telling me to buy a step down transformer with an output of 100w, to 
allow for a little wiggle room.



Sent from my iPad

> On 16 Feb 2020, at 11:13 am, B4 Me100 <b4me...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> With such a cheap transformer in the DVI the 50Hz should not really
> produce much of an impact, the output voltage might be down slightly but I
> doubt the internal transformer is that well tuned to 60Hz. I would be more
> worried about failure of parts due to their age, especially the caps.
> 
>> On 16/2/20, 10:57 AM, "M100 on behalf of Jonathan Yuen"
>> <m100-boun...@lists.bitchin100.com on behalf of jonathan.y...@slu.se>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Theoretically, transformers and motors made to run at 60Hz may overheat
>> at 50Hz.  I actually asked Steve Ciarcia's Circuit Cellar (who remembers
>> that?) about this and got a fairly good answer.  I had a Hammarlund Super
>> Pro receiver once upon a time (US Signal Corps surplus) with a
>> transformer that was good down to 25Hz and the power supply weighed a lot
>> becasue of the steel in the transformer.
>> 
>> In actual practice this has never happened to me, and I've migrated to
>> the 50Hz world from the US.  I even run a Sears table saw with its 60Hz
>> motor on 50Hz (OK, it turns a bit slower) and figured I would just buy a
>> new motor (maybe even 3 phase) when it burned out.  Hasn't happened yet.
>> 
>> Jonathan
> 
> 

Reply via email to