On Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:39:15 +0100 Peter Chadwick
<Peter.Chadwick@gpsemi.com> writes:
>For some time, I was mistakenly thinking that the nichrome suppressor
>had no shunt resistors fitted, and thus I didn't understand why it was
>desirable to have a steadily increasing Q with frequency. I will stick
>my neck out and say that although a 'standard' suppressor will often
>work, a better result is likely to be obtained by designing the
>suppressor for the amplifier - not just a suppressor for 572Bs, 811As,
>3-500Zs or whatever, but taking into account the particular set of
>parasitic impedances in the plate and grid circuits in that amplifier.
>That suggests that changing things like tank tuning capacitors and
>switches when 'copying' someone else's design may lead to different
>parasitic suppressors being needed.
Agreed Peter. I have suggested that very thing here before.
Tom's suggestion to measure the feed-thru isolation as a pre-cursor to
the network design was a good one and simple enough to do. It would most
likely cut down on a lot of cut and try and smoke in such notoriously
unstable amps as the 3-1000Z, 4-1000A, etc. Knowing the likely
frequencies of the potential parasitics is a must for any "serious" amp
builder.
73...Carl KM1H
>It might be possible to design the parasitic suppressor from theory,
>using something like Eesof to model the real components and the
>layout.
>It's almost certainly quicker to use empiric methods.
>
>73
>
>Peter G3RZP
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
>Submissions: amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|