Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Suppressors

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Suppressors
From: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 08:08:16 -0700
>
>I was a bit concerned to see Wes' data having a column of N/R for the copper
>suppressor, when there clearly was a resistor built in there. Calculating
>the missing values from L and Q gets a set of numbers consistent with the
>parallel values.
>
>I don't have time to go through thorough analysis, but it seems to me that
>the Q of the suppressor network is only one small part of the overall
>picture, and something of a distraction. I also think that it's unhelpful to
>focus in on it in isolation as a parallel network. The suppressor works in
>series from the anode to the tank circuit, so it's the series equivalent
>that's most useful in visualising what is going on.
>
>Comparing series impedance numbers for the W8JI/109 ohms and the NiCr60/100
>ohms from Wes' table;
>
>the copper version goes from .36 resistive + 7 inductive (112nH) at 10MHz to
>98 resistive + 78 inductive (62nH) at 200MHz.
>
>NiCr goes from .8 resistive + 6.7 inductive (106nH) at 10MHz to 79 resistive
>+ 44 inductive (35nH) at 200MHz.
>
100MHz is a more common freq. of osc.  

>You cannot look at the suppressor in isolation - you have to view the whole
>series effect between the anode and the tank circuit. 

Good point.  Unless C-tune has some VHF resonances, an amplifier probably 
won't oscillate.  Thanks to Mr. Rauch, we know that they have plenty of 
resonances.  

> The series inductance
>of the suppressor is going to be in series with the connecting leads between
>the anode and the tank circuit, which will probably be another 50-200nH,
>depending on layout - this will reduce, maybe even swamp, the effect of
>differences in inductance between the suppressors themselves.
>
>In this example, for suppressors which are sort of similar at LF, NiCr
>results in higher series resistance at frequencies up to 120MHz, and lower
>above that.
>
How about a quote from Wes' measurements to prove your point?  

>I reckon it's not as easy as it might appear to say whether higher or lower
>is better, but that's another story.
>
Lower VHF Q results in less VHF amplification at the VHF anode-resonance 
freq.  Lower VHF Q also results in reducing the amplitude of the ringing 
voltage that accompanies rapid current changes.  
 
later, Steve
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
>Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
>
>


-  Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.  
end


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>