The cathode has been eaten away. It is now shorter than the other cathodes. The glow is about the same. I'll take photos tomorrow, the clock is at work.
On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 7:36:57 AM UTC-4, Dekatron42 wrote: > > When you say "the zero cathode on the tens of hours is noticeably smaller" > do you mean that the glow is smaller or that the pin is physically smaller? > > Can you take a photo of this "smaller" one and also of a normal one and > show the difference? > > /Martin > > On Saturday, 30 April 2016 13:20:26 UTC+2, Mike Mitchell wrote: >> >> I considered using polytrons when I started the development of my >> Dekatron-based clock (shown here: >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK276xZWyo4 ) >> I was under the mistaken impression that the position of the glow >> couldn't be seen from the top of the polytron tube. Now after over a year >> of operation the zero cathode on the tens of hours is noticeably smaller. I >> don't know how much longer it will last. I'm going to re-wire the tens of >> hours tube so that every other cathode is zero, the others one. I'm hoping >> that the reset-to-zero circuit will still work when driving five cathodes >> instead of only one, and that the glow will move to one random "zero" >> cathode instead of all five. I wouldn't have had to worry about this if I'd >> used a polytron. >> >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "neonixie-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/4bcdd148-01a0-4468-9cd8-e26fbdbb8988%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
