View Single Post
Old 13th Oct 2019, 9:32 pm   #14
Synchrodyne
Nonode
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Papamoa Beach, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
Posts: 2,944
Default Re: Why Both EAA91 and EB91?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synchrodyne View Post
As a starting point, what were probably the final Philips datasheet issues for these valves were dated respectively 1999 June 12 for the EAA91 and 1999 June 14 for the EB91.
Are you sure those aren't the dates that Frank Philipse (a private person unrelated to the company), compiled those sheets?
I think that thy are Philips’ own dates. I have attached the said datasheets, also that for the EB41.

In the usual Philips way, each page has its own data. I have taken the issue (or really reissue) date to be that of the final page.

The actual data in the EAA91 case dates from 1954, as does the limited data provided for the EB91. The “refer to the EAA91” statement also dates from 1954 June 06, so a reasonable inference is that by mid-1954, if not earlier, Philips viewed the EAA91 as being the parent type and the EB91 as a derivative. That aligns with the presentation in the 1954 Pocket Book. The EB41 data dates from 1952.


Cheers,
Attached Files
File Type: pdf EAA91 Philips 19990612.pdf (157.5 KB, 76 views)
File Type: pdf EB91 Philips 19990614.pdf (21.2 KB, 75 views)
File Type: pdf EB41 Philips 19990614.pdf (37.0 KB, 76 views)
Synchrodyne is offline