>Rich Measures wrote:
>>During the grate suppressor debate, I repeated asked Mr. Rauch to design
>>a copper-wire parasitic suppressor that equaled the performance of the
>>resistance-wire suppressor. I repeatedly asked Ian White and Wes to
>>design one. ......... So far, nothing.
>
>Not true, as DejaNews would show, but I'll bite again.
In the 260 plus kilo-word archive, which I did not fully read, I found
where I asked Messrs. Stewart, Rauch, Bertini and Coffman to design one,
however I could not find an instance of my asking you. If I never asked
you to design one, sorry for the error, Ian.
>
>The N7WS measured Rp and Lp values for Rich's suppressor at 100MHz are
>Rp = 103.2 ohms, Lp = 123.9nH. With ideal components, those are the R
>and L values you'd connect in parallel to EXACTLY reproduce the
>behaviour of Rich's suppressor at 100MHz.
103 ohms is the parallel-equivalent R (Rp) of Ls & Rs at 100MHz. What
are the actual values of Rs and Ls?
A suppressor that clearly outperforms the Handy-Measures R-wire
suppressor tested by Wes, looks like it could easily be designed using a
copper-wire Ls. For instance 200nH of Ls and 200 ohms of Rs would do it.
... However, there seems to be a sticky wicket. The C-reactance of a
3-500Z anode at. 29MHz is minus.1100 ohms. With an anode RF potential of
up to 2700V rms, we have 2700v/100-ohms = 2.4A rms of RF current through
the suppressor.
The power being dissipated in Rs at 29MHz is: _____________?
>
>But that simply begs two more questions:
>
>1. What about real-life components?
>2. What happens at other frequencies?
indeed, Ian - which is why I asked the question above. Until we go
through the necessary calculations to find P, commenting on the remainder
of your reply needs to QRX.
cheers
Rich---
R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K
--
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
|