Mail Archive Search: <+from:G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk>

Results:

References: [ +from:G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk: 419 ]

Total 419 documents matching your query.

261. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 00:31:47 +0100; Not having the whole article to hand, I can't comment on that. No, just your interpretation, which is not the same as Wes's or almost everybody else's. Once again I think the answer is, no, just your; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00110.html (12,331 bytes)
262. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 07:19:31 +0100; As the words "series" and "trap" are normally used, that would imply that the suppressor is resonant - which it ain't. It's a resistor paralleled by an inductor, and the network analyser measurements; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00118.html (12,328 bytes)
263. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 07:47:40 +0100; No, I won't bite. There is absolutely no need to drag admittance into this discussion. The whole calculation can be done in terms of the equations for converting parallel Rp and Xp into the series eq; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00119.html (10,368 bytes)
264. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 16:03:58 +0100; 200 ohms, at ANY frequency, by definition - no calculation is required. (Hopefully we are both assuming idealized components here, ie no parasitic L or C in the resistor, and no parasitic R of C in t; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00125.html (11,038 bytes)
265. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 19:31:09 +0100; [brief snip] Yes, we agree on that. We agree on that, too. Carl, we'll have to stop agreeing like this! People will begin to talk. 73 from Ian G3SEK Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book' 'In Practice' column; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00129.html (11,730 bytes)
266. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 01:20:57 +0100; Not correct: when L and/or C and/or R are connected in parallel, there is NO automatic change into susceptance and conductance. These admittance parameters are only an alternative, optional route thr; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00134.html (13,913 bytes)
267. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:23:42 +0100; They don't have to be. The choice between working in impedance and admittance units is completely optional, and based solely on convenience. Easily - the effect is due to a small series lead inductan; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00142.html (12,146 bytes)
268. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 19:42:16 +0100; Because the coil has finite Q. If you take any measured Lp value from the table, convert to reactance at the measurement frequency, and multiply by the measured Q, there's the Rp value. The additiona; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00146.html (12,793 bytes)
269. [AMPS] Another arc question (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:58:34 +0100; Actually the suppressor appears in series with the stray inductance that is causing the VHF resonance, and it's that [combination] that appears in parallel across the valve/tube and its output capaci; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00153.html (10,992 bytes)
270. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:44:44 +0100; I think we'd better leave your higher-order IMD exactly as it is... 73 from Ian G3SEK -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: am; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00199.html (7,844 bytes)
271. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 19:29:19 +0100; A 100-ohm resistor can LOOK like 1K to the tube, because of the impedance-transforming properties of the inductances in the circuit. Pulling some example figures out of the air, consider a suppressor; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00235.html (9,931 bytes)
272. [AMPS] My try at unravelling the knotty VHF-Rp Enigma (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:41:21 +0100; Rp is the APPARENT parallel resistance of the whole network, as measured between the analyser terminals. In an idealized parallel R-L network (no other sources of losses, no stray inductances or capa; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00237.html (8,381 bytes)
273. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 14:02:00 +0100; Network theory says so, and it's true. There's more than one way to transform an impedance. This is impedance transformation using lumped reactances - essentially the same kind that takes place in yo; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00259.html (11,147 bytes)
274. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 14:47:09 +0100; Out of the air, like hell! You are in the business of selling and advising your customers on RF networks, Rich. Why should I have to spoon-feed you with basic network theory that you should already h; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00261.html (10,863 bytes)
275. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 18:24:28 +0100; Not quite sure which was the last one (my mail software shows list messages in subject relationship) so please nudge me if I seem to have ignored the wrong one! ...but it wasn't you who had imperious; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00268.html (9,736 bytes)
276. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 23:05:22 +0100; Sorry for my bad t6ping when copying results off the screen: 62.83 is correct. Sri, more bad trping - read "62.83" again. My typing still hasn't improved, but your method agrees with the correct answ; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00271.html (12,357 bytes)
277. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 07:58:59 +0100; Excuse the smiles from British readers... "I don't believe it!" is the catch-phrase of a highly successful TV sitcom called 'One Foot In The Grave'. It works on exactly the same principles. There's a; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00278.html (11,469 bytes)
278. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 19:53:36 +0100; I don't understand the relevance of that question; but the answer of course is "No". Let's try again with the line from Wes's tables that we were already discussing. Here is the whole line, copied-an; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00285.html (11,749 bytes)
279. [AMPS] Low IMD Tetrode Query (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 06:58:36 +0100; John, GW4FRX is the real expert! 73 from Ian G3SEK Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book' 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.demon.co.uk/g3sek -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.co; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00314.html (7,333 bytes)
280. [AMPS] Re: Parasitics (score: 1): Author: G3SEK@ifwtech.demon.co.uk (Ian White, G3SEK); Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 07:08:55 +0100; What the spec sheet lists is the load impedance that the tube needs to work into. That is not the same as the output impedance of the tube itself. WARNING: extensive tests have shown that this questi; /archives//html/Amps/1998-05/msg00342.html (9,650 bytes)

Current List: 261 - 280
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]