>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: measures <2@vc.net>
>To: Steve Thompson <rfamps@ic24.net>; AMPS <amps@contesting.com>
To: <amps@contesting.com>
>Date: 03 August 2000 16:12
>Subject: Re: [AMPS] Suppressors
>snip
>
>
>>>In this example, for suppressors which are sort of similar at LF, NiCr
>>>results in higher series resistance at frequencies up to 120MHz, and lower
>>>above that.
>>>
>>How about a quote from Wes' measurements to prove your point?
>
>
>Firstly, I'm not trying to prove any point - I'm just commenting on my
>analysis of the data.
>
>Secondly, I'm sorry for not being able to keep up with the speed of
>discussion.
>
? The good news is that it isn't all that esoteric.
>..........
>As I understand it, these are two devices which have similar physical
>characteristics - when we are looking at electrical characteristics, that's
>not necessarily a valid starting point. It would be as interesting to
>redesign one of them so that the low VHF characteristics were more similar,
>then look at what happened elsewhere.
>
The VHF Q of the copper-wire suppressor could be decreased by increasing
L-supp and R-supp. The gotcha is increased dissipation in R-supp at
29MHz.
>The most important characteristic by far is the Rs (sometimes referred to as
>ESR).
>
? Excellent point. The Parallel equivalent resistance of the anode
resonant circuit controls VHF gain. Decreased VHF Q translates as less
Rs which equals less VHF gain. This is what parasitic suppression is all
about.
cheers, Steve
- Rich..., 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.
end
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|