Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:garyschafer@comcast.net: 654 ]

Total 654 documents matching your query.

201. Re: [Amps] IM distortion and such (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 22:01:35 -0500
Joe, That is exactly Rich's point. The degree of loading has no effect on VHF energy. 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists
/archives//html/Amps/2006-06/msg00646.html (10,326 bytes)

202. Re: [Amps] IM distortion and such (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 22:08:15 -0500
It will also reduce efficiency. 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
/archives//html/Amps/2006-06/msg00647.html (12,105 bytes)

203. Re: [Amps] IM distortion and such (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 22:46:29 -0500
Joe, I am only addressing your statement that "heavier loading may reduce VHF parasitics". 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://
/archives//html/Amps/2006-06/msg00649.html (10,559 bytes)

204. Re: [Amps] FW: Transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:19:42 -0500
Hi Lou You are missing the definition of PEP. It is the AVERAGE power at the crest of the modulation envelope over 1 RF cycle. Not the peak power. Peak power is not used for anything in these type p
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00468.html (9,923 bytes)

205. Re: [Amps] FW: Transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:39:37 -0500
Peter, You had it right the first time. PEP is the AVERAGE power at the crest of the modulation envelope. Not the peak power. 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ Amps mailin
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00470.html (9,271 bytes)

206. Re: [Amps] FW: Transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:58:21 -0500
Hi Peter, Ok I see what you are saying. But perhaps you should also add that one needs to then find the RMS value of that peak voltage (282 volts) to calculate the PEP as you did in your first post s
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00473.html (11,146 bytes)

207. Re: [Amps] transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:31:16 -0500
Don't forget that Bird specs their accuracy at +- 5% of FULL scale. So with a 2500 watt slug that is a +- 125 watt error at anywhere on the scale. Also are you reading the power with a dummy load or
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00480.html (12,246 bytes)

208. Re: [Amps] transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 10:16:36 -0500
How else would you measure SSB power if not PEP? 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00522.html (8,873 bytes)

209. Re: [Amps] transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:37:50 -0500
That's my question Mike. Rephrased; how would you rate the power output of an SSB transmitter? What units would you express the output power in? 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00553.html (9,921 bytes)

210. Re: [Amps] transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:20:32 -0500
What kind of watts? You would also have to designate a given time for the measurement. Watt seconds would be the result? You would also have to know the amount of compression and the frequency conte
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00556.html (13,155 bytes)

211. Re: [Amps] transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 09:59:07 -0500
So you are telling us that peak power, peak envelope power and average power all have the same meaning and are one and the same? 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ Amps ma
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00575.html (14,993 bytes)

212. Re: [Amps] Amps Digest, Vol 43, Issue 70 (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:33:21 -0500
SSB can only be less total power, which results in good PEP is the easiest and most complete way to express the output power of an SSB transmitter. The problem is that understanding what PEP is seems
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00578.html (8,278 bytes)

213. Re: [Amps] Fw: transformers (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 14:50:46 -0500
Just so no one gets confused; This is where we started from: Rephrased; how would you rate the power output of an SSB transmitter? What units would you express the output power in? Mike said: Negativ
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00587.html (9,787 bytes)

214. Re: [Amps] Grid fuses (was: Life and gain of 3-500Z) (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 08:32:35 -0500
We don't see wide spread use of electronic devices in place of circuit breakers in our home distribution panels even though they may be far superior to circuit breakers. We have to sometimes select
/archives//html/Amps/2006-07/msg00665.html (11,627 bytes)

215. Re: [Amps] Tuned Input - IMD and efficiency (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 21:44:50 -0500
100 pf is only enough capacitance for about 8 meters! Not even enough for 10 meter operation. The recommended amount is in the neighborhood of 13 pf / meter. On 80 meters that would be around 1040 pf
/archives//html/Amps/2006-08/msg00316.html (14,376 bytes)

216. Re: [Amps] Checking for IMD (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:27:48 -0500
The Collins 30L1 has such a meter in it. 73 Gary K4FMX _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
/archives//html/Amps/2006-08/msg00406.html (10,307 bytes)

217. Re: [Amps] Checking for IMD (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:40:21 -0500
Simplest is to talk into the mike and use a second receiver and flip to the opposite side band and compare levels. An attenuator of known calibration ahead of the second receiver will get you in the
/archives//html/Amps/2006-08/msg00407.html (10,104 bytes)

218. Re: [Amps] Checking for IMD (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 22:03:31 -0500
The problem with most of the cheaper spectrum analyzers is that they don't have enough resolution. For IM measurements you need a 200 or 300 HZ bandwidth filter and enough stability to sweep only a f
/archives//html/Amps/2006-08/msg00429.html (13,706 bytes)

219. Re: [Amps] Checking for IMD (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 14:10:36 -0400
We are looking for an easy method here. Swapping side bands does just that. 4.5 KHz doesn't get you out far enough to get all products for all voice frequencies either, but again we are looking for a
/archives//html/Amps/2006-08/msg00461.html (15,724 bytes)

220. Re: [Amps] Checking for IMD (score: 1)
Author: "Gary Schafer" <garyschafer@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:57:17 -0400
See below: To be a little more precise; the IM is the difference of the two frequencies PLUS the high frequency and MINUS the low frequency for 3rd order products. For 5th order it is 2 times the dif
/archives//html/Amps/2006-08/msg00463.html (14,806 bytes)

Current List: 201 - 220
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]
This search system is powered by Namazu