>>experiement,
>>derived through proper DOE (Design Of Experiement) procedures, would
>>the
>>interested parties ante up?
>
>AMEN Arlen! Count me in.
I agree, Carl. I would be very interested in this. It would put to rest
all of the "religion" that all of us experience with regard to this
topic.
However, I agree as you do that it would be difficult to consistently
recreate an oscillatory condition w/o some work. DOEs typically need to
be controlled experiments with the correct variables picked to do the
proper analysis. If the wrong variables are picked, or the wrong limits
on the variables or the experiment is not properly controlled, you can
compile all the statistical data you want and it won't mean a thing.
Believe me - been there; done that.
So Arlen and Carl, what sort of DOE do we want to do? Keep it simple and
do a 2x2? Or should we make it more complex.
A simple 2X2 could consist of:
Variable One: Oscillation - Yes or No
Variable Two: Supressors - Rich's or Carl's
Then we could create a 2 x 2 matrix with these variable.
However, I would suspect that this isn't enough and we may have to go
larger like a 4x4 as we haven't even taken the gas arcs into account, let
alone any other modifications that are done to the amps.
Also, you would want to do this on multiple amplifiers. How many
repetitions are we going to have? 3? 4?
I am not being funny or sarcastic here. I am totally serious.
All this is needed for a successful DOE. I have texts and papers on this
subject if anyone needs info..........
>
>
>I do not think that a methodical approach will work very well...at least
>with the SB-220. I have tried numerous times over the past few years to
>recreate "events".
Well, then a true DOE probably won't work. It's gotta be done
methodically.
I guess trying to catch parasitic events is like trying to find Big Foot
or the Loch Ness Monster. Some people claim all sorts of stuff! :-)
>As has been previously pointed out, there is no guarantee that the series
>cap will work on every antenna combination. With a Bird dummy load there
>is no problem. With the average feedline to say a tribander being 100' or
>so the flat loss in the coax will flatten out the VSWR antenna response
>at VHF/UHF.
If the output Pi-network of the SB-220 has a low-pass response as most
output networks do, then what difference at VHF/UHF does the antenna make
anyhow? Do we really need some sort of a load? After, everyone talks
about how the output Pi-Net works as a filter to remove the harmonics, so
if it removes (or reflects - The S11 of the filter at the frequency of
the harmonic energy is high) harmonics, won't it also reflect VHF/UHF
energy? Why worry about how the HF load looks at VHF/UHF?
73,
Jon
KE9NA
-------------------------------------
Jon Ogden
KE9NA
http://www.qsl.net/ke9na
"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
--
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
|