(>) Gerard wrote:
(>>) Jon wrote
>> Obviously my circuit is not unconditionally stable. Perhaps some of
>> the thermal noise from the tube got this oscillation going.
>>
>> So parasitics can be silent killers and happen without the amp being
>> keyed or having signal pumped through it. Also it matters not wether
>> an amp is biased into cutoff. Having the tube in the active region sure
>> helps, but it is not necessary, IMHO. Being in cutoff does not
>> guarantee stability. Otherwise, my resistor would not have gone *POOF*.
>>
>Your amp was not in cutoff. Unless you call 50 mA plate current
>'cutoff'. When this event happened your amp was biased in the 'active
>region'. What are you trying to proof?
>
>> So if that wasn't a parasite that happened....What was it? Perhaps
>> with your exceeding great knowledge and experience you can elmer me here.
>>..........
>> Jon
>> KE9NA
>>
>I thought the whole idea of using Rich's suppressor is to stop
>parasitics from happening in the first place.
I have never claimed that our suppressors stop parasitics. . In Wes'
suppressor tests, Rich's suppressor exhibited around a 40% improvement
(decrease) in parallel equivalent resistance (Rp) at 100MHz compared to a
conventional suppressor. I have claimed that a decrease in VHF-Rp
results in a decrease in VHF gain at the anode-resonance.
>...........
cheers
Rich...
R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|