Mail Archive Search: <+from:jono@enteract.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:jono@enteract.com: 615 ]

Total 615 documents matching your query.

81. [AMPS] Confused about 'circulating currents' (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 16:15:37 -0600; Well, Bob, no one has offered an explanation for this yet, so I'll take a shot at it! Basically, it stems from the fact that capacitors and inductors story energy. Capacitors store electrical field e; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00246.html (10,771 bytes)
82. [AMPS] Eimac care and feeding (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:21:01 -0600; Common practice in the industry, Rich. Many marketing/sales folks are former engineers. It generally pays better. It's not a conspiracy so that false information goes out to customers in order to hid; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00376.html (8,974 bytes)
83. [AMPS] Eimac care and feeding/poor service (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:23:38 -0600; I must agree with Carsten. When doing my 4-1000A amplfier, someone suggested I write Reid Brandon at Eimac to see if he had any app notes, etc. I wrote Reid an e-mail. Very promptly he returned mine; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00377.html (8,564 bytes)
84. [AMPS] RF Relays needed (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 23:41:59 -0600; Can anyone give me a source for some surplus RF relays. Here's basically what I need: * Frequency Range: Up to 450 MHz * Need 2 DPDTs or 4 SPDTs * Can be coaxial (SMA or BNC preferred) or board mount; /archives//html/Amps/1999-11/msg00378.html (7,345 bytes)
85. [AMPS] Another article. (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:46:47 -0600; Where's the Nichrome? 73, Jon KE9NA -- Jon Ogden KE9NA http://www.qsl.net/ke9na <-- CHECK IT OUT! It's been updated!!!!! "A life lived in fear is a life half lived." -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contest; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00003.html (7,218 bytes)
86. [AMPS] Re: (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:49:41 -0600; There is a pulser you can buy called the "Cricket" I believe. You'll find it advertised in QST. Better yet, you can build one from plans on AG6K's website: www.vcnet.com/measures Rich's circuit works; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00004.html (7,869 bytes)
87. [AMPS] Conjugate matching and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 09:22:13 -0500; Nope, not picking on me! It's a good discussion! First of all, I do agree with your statement. In reality your right, we match the tube for our desired power output. But is "desired" power output rea; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00010.html (11,138 bytes)
88. [AMPS] Reading Reflected and True (?) Power (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 09:35:33 -0500; Jim, Thanks for all your experiments. It is enlightening to see what happens. As to why your matched antenna with the tuner requires less drive power than the dummy load, I have no idea! I would thin; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00012.html (8,960 bytes)
89. R: [AMPS] Conjugate matching and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 09:40:39 -0500; Good points, Maurizio! Another case in a low signal level environment where you want to mismatch and amplifier is in a low noise amplifier configuration. Minimum noise figure and a conjugate match do; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00013.html (8,654 bytes)
90. [AMPS] Conjugate matching and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 10:40:36 -0500; You really can't tune for max efficiency. The efficiency part of the equation is taken into account in the design of the amplifier, particularly the tank circuit. You really can't "tune" for efficien; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00016.html (13,001 bytes)
91. R: [AMPS] Conjugate matching and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 10:43:48 -0500; Sure. So you have to pick a compromise between gain and stability. It's always that way in everything you do. Typically a critically damped system (one right on the verge of instabilit, destruction,; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00017.html (8,700 bytes)
92. [AMPS] Re: swr (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 13:27:44 -0500; No, that's not correct. That is the same as saying that SWR varies along the length of the cable. SWR is the ration of the forward and reflected voltage. This ratio is constant along the cable regard; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00020.html (8,588 bytes)
93. [AMPS] Conjugate matching and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 14:49:58 -0500; Which is the same as the best match. That is correct within the design of the network you have at hand. But it has nothing to do with whether or not you could have a better tank circuit. End of story; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00026.html (8,285 bytes)
94. [AMPS] Re: swr (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 15:40:23 -0500; No, that's not true. If the black box is 50 Ohms, the output of the PA is 50 Ohms, and if your SWR meter is 50 Ohms, then you see 1:1 VSWR. The impedance transformation effect of the cable only reall; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00028.html (11,046 bytes)
95. [AMPS] Re: swr (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Fri, 1 Oct 99 17:05:26 -0500; No, if your antenna impedance does not equal the impedance of your transmission line (ie: 50 Ohms for coax), you will never have a length of coax where your impedance equals 50 Ohms with no reactive; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00030.html (9,682 bytes)
96. [AMPS] Re: swr (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:24:36 -0500; This is correct. Once you change the characteristic impedance of the transmission line, you are no longer operating in a 50 Ohm system. See the problem here is that you have this set up: A 50 Ohm loa; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00076.html (9,172 bytes)
97. [AMPS] Re: swr (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:26:59 -0500; PICKY, PICKY, PICKY! Mea culpa. I was wrong O, GREAT MASTER and therefore all I said was incorrect. Sheesh! Gotta pick at something, huh. Of course, the Smitch Chart needs to be normalized to whateve; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00077.html (8,915 bytes)
98. [AMPS] Re: swr (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 21:56:13 -0500; Let me explain further what I was trying to say: One can use a length of transmission line that is some value other than your characteristic impedance (in this case 50 Ohms) and use that to transform; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00078.html (9,882 bytes)
99. [AMPS] Conjugate Matching (again) (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:00:08 -0500; Roger, doggone it, you are correct! I remember people (I think it was Dick Erhorn) telling me this once before. Yes, maximum efficiency is not the point of maximum power transfer. Every design has it; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00079.html (8,232 bytes)
100. [AMPS] Conjugate matching and amplifiers (score: 1): Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden); Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 22:03:25 -0500; That is true, Ian. Good point. Right you are again. 73, Jon KE9NA ps: How's Peter? -- Jon Ogden KE9NA http://www.qsl.net/ke9na <-- CHECK IT OUT! It's been updated!!!!! "A life lived in fear is a life; /archives//html/Amps/1999-10/msg00080.html (8,608 bytes)

Current List: 81 - 100
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]