This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --=_NextPart_000_0017_01BF71C5.0A3B07C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Those of you that have
Craig -- This was written by Dick Erhorn / W4ETO for the 1995 Handbook, several years before N7WS/Wes' measurements of copper-wire vs resistance-wire suppressors. . My guess is that Dick never read
The other day I send message to this net that included: "In order to get a good effiency on 28 MHz why not lower the anode impedance by inserting an inductance beetween the anode and filter? I see an
The other day I send message to this net that included: "In order to get a good effiency on 28 MHz why not lower the anode impedance by inserting an inductance beetween the anode and filter? I see an
My guess is probably not better VHF stability. The mla-2500 has several hundred nH between the anodes and C1. However, on avg. they have plenty of parasites. The problem it that the extra long anode
I did not get any answer on my very last question from you pi/piL specialists. Is this not a better method to get rid of parasitics and at the same time get higher output on 10 meters with tubes like
The quick answer is no. It will move the VHF resonance, but a simple inductor does nothing to add extra damping at that frequency compared to HF. To do that, there has to be some loss mechanism in th
Ian, I don't disagree with you, but an inductor of significant size can affect the resonance enough to move it out of an area where the tube will not want to parasitically oscillate. I know this for
impedance beetween The fly in the ointment is that the significant inductor can act as a 1/4 wave line as well as a 3/4 (or 5/4) wave line. If the 1/4 wave resonance is below the grid-resonance, osc
Fair point - my original comment was too sweeping. Surely there always has to be a second resonance, somewhere above the operating frequency. Since the series inductance in the anode lead tunes it, i