Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Some\s+thoughts\s+on\s+a\s+transistorized\s+legal\s+limitamplifier\.\.\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Some\s+thoughts\s+on\s+a\s+transistorized\s+legal\s+limitamplifier\.\.\.\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Amps] Some thoughts on a transistorized legal limitamplifier... (score: 1): Author: ToddRoberts2001@aol.com; Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 13:29:37 EDT; Start with the 1500 watt peak output amplifier described in the old APT application note, APT9701, which posits 25¢/watt for a Class C amplifier section with 70% efficiency at 27 MHz (ISM band,; /archives//html/Amps/2007-10/msg00170.html (7,305 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Some thoughts on a transistorized legal limitamplifier... (score: 1): Author: Steve Thompson <g8gsq@eltac.co.uk>; Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 19:46:41 +0100; I think you'd need a feedback system - polar or cartesian loop, for example. The AM/PM in the output stage will be severe, and probably beyond simple pre-correction in open loop. You can buy the who; /archives//html/Amps/2007-10/msg00171.html (7,810 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Some thoughts on a transistorized legal limitamplifier... (score: 1): Author: Radio WC6W <wc6w_amps@yahoo.com>; Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:40:23 -0700 (PDT); Combined replies to comments: you are going to use dissipate 150 watts in the heatsink vs 600? Hi Todd, Wellllll, to my limited understanding, Class E provides poor utilization of (expensive!) FET Dr; /archives//html/Amps/2007-10/msg00176.html (9,772 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]