On Apr 6, 8:16 am, threeneurons <[email protected]> wrote: > But, I'd use the IN-13 over the IN-9. It uses less current. 4.5mA full > scale. The voltage drop across the tube levels off at 100V. The IN-9 > needs more current. I'm not sure how much, off hand, its listed in > lots of places. The IN-13 also has an auxillary cathode, which locks > the glow to one end (most of the time). When the tube gets worn, it > could drift to the middle too. The amount of glow length is > proportional to the current.
You're going to need around 11mA fsd for the IN-9 (once you've overcome the cathode poisoning they all come with to some extent). The nice things about IN-9 are that they're bright and come in two colours. Having said that, I'd agree with Mike and go IN-13 for this application because of the need to anchor the glow to the bottom of the tube. Spectrum analysers with columns that move around unpredictably and come unanchored from the origin sometimes are not really fit for purpose IMHO. Depending on how you drive the IN-9, you can accentuate or mitigate the glow instability, but it is difficult to eradicate even if you specially select tubes. However, the IN-13 is actually quite a dim display - the spectrum analyser won't be great in bright ambient light. Jon. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "neonixie-l" group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/neonixie-l?hl=en-GB.
