←back to thread

235 points rbanffy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.229s | source
Show context
MenhirMike ◴[] No.40762400[source]
I'm kinda curious if CRT technology advanced to the point where a TV like that would've been possible at a better weight and price tag? I assume that CRT technology development stopped decades ago, but could we have e.g., replaced the heavy glass with some plastic-like material to save weight without compromising the picture? And are there any heavy components in the mechanism itself (Coils, Magnets?) that would have had alternatives?

I know it's just theorycrafting, but I do wonder what kind of CRT someone could've created if it wasn't for market economy forces.

replies(7): >>40762471 #>>40762611 #>>40762862 #>>40762908 #>>40763349 #>>40763829 #>>40764554 #
cesaref ◴[] No.40762471[source]
I imagine much of the weight is for the tube to be strong enough to hold the vacuum without shattering. As the screen area increases, you need stronger electron sources, and higher HT to get the electrons to the phosphor. I think small 14 inch trinitrons are already using 20-30kV so I imagine the power supply and associated HT stuff will be quite scary in these larger sets.

There are all sorts of complex magnet arrangements to tune the beam to stay in focus across the image area, i don't know how that will scale with size, but it's probably more of a complexity when assembling the sets to calibrate the tubes.

replies(1): >>40764081 #
refurb ◴[] No.40764081[source]
You’d be surprised how little glass is needed to be strong enough to withstand a near perfect vacuum.

I worked in a lab where we routinely held a few micro-torr of vacuum, which is about the limit for mechanical pumps. Cathode ray tubes are typically thousands or tens of thousands higher pressure.

We ran 1/4” wall thickness glass even in large flat stretches without issue.

I’m guessing the weight of large cathode ray tubes are more for durability than need for the vacuum inside.

replies(3): >>40764767 #>>40765450 #>>40765952 #
1. ssl-3 ◴[] No.40764767[source]
How much did the flat sections bend or deflect under vacuum?