Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+T\-200\s+vs\.\s+T\-300\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+T\-200\s+vs\.\s+T\-300\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Martin <hamradio@vr-web.de>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:10:20 +0100; For those who intend to build the FCP INV. L. with a T-200-2 (or an antenna tuner). Me and a few guys from our club wound different types of baluns and chokes on different material and measured them; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00356.html (8,078 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Mikael Larsmark <mike@sm3wmv.com>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 15:13:30 +0100; OK, but there is a huge amount of different materials in ferrites too. Which kind of material did you use? I've used -61 material in a lot of high power applications without any problems of them over; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00359.html (9,335 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Tod - ID <tod@k0to.us>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:25:21 -0700; A couple rules for toroidal inductors might be useful. To increase the reactance you increase the number of turns -- the inductance goes up approximately the square of the number of turns. To increas; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00363.html (8,060 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:49:31 -0500; Another important rule when winding CM chokes: On common-mode currents (the bad current), an inductance equal to 2*L is added in series with each of the two conductors. On differential mode currents; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00367.html (7,918 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:30:36 -0800; I don't agree with this generalization. I have built many legal limit transformers and baluns with ferrite, and have not had overheating problems. Of course it is necessary to use the correct type of; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00381.html (9,121 bytes)
6. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: "Tod - Idaho" <tod@k0to.us>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:31:32 -0700; You are correct Carl, I should have inserted the URL's. My excuse, and it is pretty flimsy, is that I was drafting the reply on my iPad2 which is a bit harder to go off and get links on than my lapto; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00382.html (8,435 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:39:50 -0500; For those building an isolation transformer for a 160M 5/16 FCP -- PLEASE READ! IMPORTANT! Martin has the right instincts, says it feels fishy for this. But it's worse than he thinks. And don't even; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00390.html (13,957 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:58:42 -0800; I'm trying to understand here what is magic about powdered iron. It is true you can't just use any random piece of ferrite. But if the T300A-2 were replaced with LOW PERMEABILITY ferrite having the s; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00392.html (9,259 bytes)
9. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 17:52:37 -0500; You may be right that Micrometals makes most of that stuff and sources Amidon. But these are the individual company product numbers and you have to use the company's own product numbers to order stuf; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00406.html (9,584 bytes)
10. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 21:55:53 -0500; That's all well and good, but the closer one gets to the factory, the larger the minimum. And it sure does get interesting if you just want to buy one or two. I don't really care what Amidon is. They; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00419.html (12,567 bytes)
11. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 22:05:36 -0500; Hi Rick, No magic. Just the right stuff, for the FCP, anyway. To your particulars, when Jerry Sevick measured various ferrites, he measured the lowest loss at mu=40. This was very low, as was the #2; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00420.html (15,200 bytes)
12. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 23:43:20 -0500; listed with a frequency range that covers 160 meters (in some lists #2 is 2-30). You can rest assured Jerry Sevick had the list below. In his 160 meter comparison with #2 material, he tested 1,3,15; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00425.html (19,796 bytes)
13. Re: Topband: T-200 vs. T-300 (score: 1): Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>; Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 18:41:25 -0500; Hi again, Carl Unfortunately, there are a few pages out there that I do not wish to be on, including some that say that everything has already been figured out, and there is nothing new that will eve; /archives//html/Topband/2011-12/msg00443.html (24,085 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]