Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+narrowband\s+filters\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Re\:\s+narrowband\s+filters\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 17:47:27 -0500; whatever. Where it started was me asking about narrower filters to suppress IN band interference (CW and SSB on Field Day). We are already working with 100 w to good dipoles at roughly 400' from each; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00169.html (8,433 bytes)
2. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist (N6RK)" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 18:00:44 -0700; I'm looking 100 kHz is less than 1% BW on 20 meters. If you can manage an unloaded Q of (quite difficult, but doable), you will lose about 1 dB per resonator. Let's say this filter covers 14000 to 14; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00171.html (9,002 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 18:28:27 -0700; I think there are some nifty online java calculators that do multisection filter synthesis, which is very handy for getting a feel for what's doable and what's not. googling for java and filter synth; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00172.html (11,227 bytes)
4. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 21:55:49 -0500; The latter is more like what I had in mind. For most CW contests, one would be pretty happy with the center of the filter at 14025. The lowest frequency of interest on SSB is 14150, and perhaps you d; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00177.html (9,440 bytes)
5. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 23:05:43 -0700; Its interesting to see how antenna spacing plays into this Jim. I just ran a couple test cases in EZNEC using two 20 meter 1/2 wave horizontal dipoles at 40ft above average ground. The antennas were; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00186.html (11,352 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>; Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 08:52:42 -0700; At 11:05 PM 7/5/2004 -0700, Michael Tope wrote: Its interesting to see how antenna spacing plays into this Jim. I just ran a couple test cases in EZNEC using two 20 meter 1/2 wave horizontal dipoles; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00188.html (10,612 bytes)
7. Fw: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "on4kj" <on4kj@skynet.be>; Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 22:41:03 +0200; interest the contest. more any _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00204.html (13,094 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 02:55:55 -0700; We have a big water tank at our Field Day site, Jos. We were thinking it might make a good 20 meter cavity. Of course, I don't know if the U.S. Forest Service would appreciate it if we drained out al; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00239.html (14,822 bytes)
9. [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Lau, Zack, W1VT" <w1vt@arrl.org>; Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 11:53:06 -0400; I published two narrowband filter designs. The 40M filter is 29kHz wide two resonator filter with 6 dB loss. The coils are wound on 2.4" PVC pipe and enclosed in custom aluminum boxes. I'd say this w; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00495.html (7,828 bytes)
10. RE: [TowerTalk] Re: narrowband filters (score: 1): Author: "Lau, Zack, W1VT" <w1vt@arrl.org>; Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 09:18:58 -0400; Someone asked whether the filters I designed will handle 200 watts. No they won't--the losses are too high. However, if someone wants to tackle some new territory in filter design--may I suggest coup; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-07/msg00611.html (8,131 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]