Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] 3.5 kV 2A REGULATED Power Supply: Schematic ?

To: "Ian White, G3SEK" <g3sek@ifwtech.co.uk>," AMPS" <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] 3.5 kV 2A REGULATED Power Supply: Schematic ?
From: R.Measures <r@somis.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 05:25:37 -0800
List-post: <mailto:amps@contesting.com>

>R. Measures wrote:
>>
>>
>>>R. Measures wrote:
>>>>**  The grid does not and can not draw current when a competent
>>>>operator sets the grid potential just above the level where it can draw
>>>>grid-current with the max PEP drive that's available.
>>>
>>>That is only true if the grid input circuit is guaranteed to be able to
>>>soak up all possible levels of drive without allowing grid current...
>>
>>**  So you are essentially saying that if the grid terminating resistor
>>is blown away by the exciter, the grid driving potential could rise to a
>>higher level and grid-current could flow?  Although this seems possible
>>with exciters that do not have an SWR-foldback, I have not seen such,
>>Ian.  Have you?  Would not such a scenario require that the
>>grid-terminator be grossly undersized?
>>
>No, I didn't say any of that - you said all of it yourself.
>
**  A grid-terminator R either soaks up the power or it don't.  If it 
doesn't soak, it's croaked.  
-  If the grid-terminator is present and intact it presents the design 
impedance at the grid over the full range of input power.  If the grid 
draws current, a competent operator knows to either reduce the power-out 
limit on the exciter -  or to increase the DC grid bias potential and 
increase screen potential to restore the recommended ZSAC..  

>Likewise most of what followed bore no relation to what I actually said.

** What did you have in mind regarding the terminating R not being able 
to absorb power, Ian?
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>