5 Apr
2012
5 Apr
'12
11:42 a.m.
On 5 Apr 2012 at 8:59, William Donzelli wrote:
Hmm.. If it is an 'urban legend' then its one that's spread through many
countries, UK, and European TVs all ahve some kind of implosion protection
too. And thais at a time when we didn't have ambulance-chasing lawyers,
The data books on CRTs from the 1960s (I have a few) make it very clear
tht you ahve to fit a separate implosion screen if you use CRTs without
implosion protection.
If the 'real' reason for the implosion screen was to protect the CRT from
the user, why was it dropepd when the CRTs had tension bands? Such
screens are just as easy to scratch.
And yes, CRTs can and do fractuer at the screen end. Not normall from
impact (as several people have sid, the neck breaks first) but because of
stresses in the glass. Not common, but presumably enough of a danger to
make it worth doing something about.
I guess ultimately what you do with your own CRT is up to you. If the
only risk was while you were doign the repari ,that woudl eb the end of
it. But IMHO it isn't. A modified CRT could fial at some point in the
future, and I'd rather not have an innocent bystander harmed.
-tony
I have wondered if the whole CRT safety glass
issue was the result of
some sort of nationwide scare - the real reasons are probably lost to
time. The stories of tubes imploding and sending shards of glass out
the front like a shotgun sound fantastic - but it seems that really
never happened (I should say "never"). Even with the big 12 inch radar
scope tubes from World War 2 with the glass in the face much thinner
than those in the late 1940s or 50s tubes - the necks were always the
weak part and took all the damage.
Good question. Our family 10" Philco (1948) had a sheet of glass in
front of the CRT, as did our 1953 large-screen RCA. I wonder if it
was more to protect the face of the CRT from being scratched by the
overzealous housekeeper.
Dig into an old RCA tube manual and I think it notes the CRTs without
special faceplate protection.