Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] KK5DR's ferrite loaded plate chokes.

To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] KK5DR's ferrite loaded plate chokes.
From: Manfred Mornhinweg <manfred@ludens.cl>
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:02:35 +0000
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Jim,

> Perhaps  type 43  material is the wrong stuff to be using  for a
> plate choke...esp considering the  typ plate load Z's involved ??

Yes. 43 material is an extremely bad choice for that application. This 
material's best application is actually for absorption purposes, when 
fighting RFI! It can also be used quite well in low impedance, broadband 
transformers, as long as you are aware of its characteristics, and 
design the transformers accordingly.

The basic material characteristic to keep in mind is this: Adding a 
ferrite core to a coil will drive up its inductance, but also make an 
equivalent resistance appear in parallel with it (caused by the loss in 
the core). Depending on the exact material, and the frequency, this 
resistance part can be anything from negligible to overwhelming! With 43 
material, the resistance added tends to be about as large as the 
inductive reactance added, at a frequency of just a few megahertz. In 
the upper HF range, 43 material actually adds more resistance than 
inductive reactance! That's why it's so good for absorbing RFI!

Note that despite this characteristic, you can still use 43 material 
quite well for boradband transformers covering the whole HF range. For 
example, if you make a bifiliar transformer that will be used to 
transform from 50 ohms down to 12.5 ohms, you can easily wind enough 
turns on a small toroid to get 1000uH of total inductance. On 160 
meters, that will give you a reactance of more than 10 kiloohm, and the 
parallel loss resistance will be even larger, so that this transformer 
will have next to no loss. And on 10 meters, the inductive reactance 
will have risen to almost 200 kiloohms, while the equivalent resistance 
might be as low as 10 kiloohms (don't take this too literally, I haven't 
checked the data sheet, I'm just giving estimated numbers out of my 
head). Note that using this transformer as an inductor would be 
absolutely terrible, because it would have a Q factor of only around 
0.05!  But in that transformer, the loss caused by the 10 kiloohm 
resistance in parallel with the 50 Ohm circuit impedance is totally 
negligible! That's why 43 ferrite does work well in broadband transformers.

The problem is that a plate choke is definitely not working at a low 
impedance. Regardless of what inductance the choke has, the equivalent 
parallel loss resistance introduced by any magnetic core must be high 
enough to cause negligible, or at least acceptable, loss at the high 
impedance and at the frequency used. Just calculating a ferrite cored 
plate choke to give enough inductance, and letting the loss care for 
itself, is a recipe for disaster.

To design a ferrite cored plate choke, you should start with a type of 
ferrite better suited for low loss operation at HF. Among the 
inexpensive, widely available ferrite types, this could be 61, but there 
are definitely better types than that. And then you have to design the 
whole thing, considering the AC flux density you will be putting through 
the ferrite, and the resulting loss. You also need to consider DC flux 
density, and make sure it won't saturate the ferrite, but this is 
usually not a problem in such chokes, because the AC flux density limit 
for acceptable loss is so low that the resulting DC flux density is 
child's play!

And for a given frequency, the AC flux density is essentially defined by 
turns number, and cross section of the core. A thicker core, or more 
turns, both result in lower AC flux density.

And then you have to decide whether it's even worth using a core! A 
simple solenoid core (ferrite cylinder), only causes a rather small 
increase in inductance, because at least half of the whole magnetic loop 
is still in the air! To really obtain a significant size reduction of 
the plate choke, you would need to use some sort of ferrite core that's 
closed, or perhaps has a small air gap (whether or not this is necessary 
depends on factors such as the permeability of the core).

A core made of low loss ferrite and having a size in the ballpark for a 
legal limit plate choke might need something like 300 turns. And on 43 
material, even more. So it's debatable whether it actually offers an 
advantage! Sure, it will have much higher inductance than an air cored 
plate choke, but by itself that's often not a real advantage, since the 
inductance of the choke can be easily absorbed in the impedance matching 
network.

A ferrite core in the plate choke might be an advantage, specifically 
BECAUSE of its loss, when such loss helps to eliminate self-oscillation 
at frequencies where the matching network completely decouples the 
antenna. But then, you can get much the same effect by placing a 
resistor across an air cored plate choke!

I think a designer of an amp should in any case consider using ferrite 
in the plate choke, and weigh its advantages and disadvantages. But I 
wouldn't be surprised at all if most cases would end up with an air 
cored choke being the most (cost)effective solution.

> Type  43....  1"  OD bead's,  slid over  393 Teflon coax makes for
> excellent Choke baluns. 

Only if you use enough of them to make the resulting loss resistance 
pretty high, relative to 50 ohms. About 20 of these cores should already 
be quite good. But try using just one or two, and see them melt the 
coax! If instead you use a lower loss material, you can get away with 
fewer beads.

 > The  1/2"  x 8"  long  type 43 rods  work
> great  for   Bifilar's.  But in both those cases, the Z is only
> 25-50 ohms.

Exactly. That low Z is the point. Such a rod wound with enough turns 
might end up with a loss resistance of a kiloohm or so, which causes 
negligible loss at that low circuit impedance.

Manfred.

========================
Visit my hobby homepage!
http://ludens.cl
========================
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

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