Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] ferrite in RF chokes for PAs

To: Angel Vilaseca <avilaseca@bluewin.ch>, amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] ferrite in RF chokes for PAs
From: Radio WC6W <wc6w_amps@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:25:34 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Hi Angel,
  Some info you may find of interest on this subject
may be seen on my webpage:

http://wc6w.50webs.com/wc6wamps/index.html?fr62.html

73 & Good morning,
  Marv WC6W

--- Angel Vilaseca <avilaseca@bluewin.ch> wrote:

> Another situation where excessive wire length can
> lead to unwanted 
> resonance effects (overheating) is the plate choke.
> If the plate choke was wound on a ferrite rod, or
> toroid, much less wire 
> length would be needed.
> 
> Why is this never seen in classical designs?
> 
> On the other hand, a cathode choke wound on a
> ferrite rod IS a 
> classical, but never a plate choke. Why?
> 
> And why is a ferrite rod always used for the cathode
> choke, but never a 
> toroid?
> 
> 73
> 
> Angel Vilaseca HB9SLV
> 
> 
> Manfred Mornhinweg a écrit :
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> >   
> >>> I didn't know they had so much variation with
> frequency
> >>>       
> >> All of this data has been in Fair-Rite's printed
> catalog for many 
> >> years, and that catalog has been on Fair-Rite's
> website as a pdf for
> >>  at least 5 years.
> >>     
> >
> > Could you give me an exact URL for some page that
> gives this information
> > for the 61 material? I couldn't find it, and after
> a few hours searching
> > I gave up. Living in a rural location, my internet
> connection is over
> > the cellphone network, with dismal performance, so
> it's not conducive to
> > efficient web browsing!
> >
> > Also, if you find some place that gives loss
> curves for ferrite
> > materials, that would be very useful too! I could
> find only very sparse
> > single-frequency information.
> >
> >
> > Carl,
> >
> >   
> >> Terms such a "should", "could", "most cost
> effective", do not give me
> >> a very warm feeling Manfred.
> >>     
> >
> > Maybe I misused those words. English is only my
> third language. When I
> > wrote "should be able to work at 1.5kW", I meant
> that when I set out to
> > design this circuit, one of the design goals was
> 1.5kW operation. Later,
> > when the system was ready, I could confirm through
> years of daily use
> > that actually the goal was met.
> >
> > And when I wrote "on a transmission line that
> could have high SWR", what
> > I meant is that this thing had to drive an open
> wire line connected to a
> > random antenna, with completely unknown impedance.
> No design can
> > be guaranteed to work over "any" impedance to be
> found in the real 
> > world, so here the goal was to be able to work
> with good performance at 
> > SWR levels up to 5:1 or so, and acceptable
> performance at somewhat 
> > higher SWR. In practice I have operated into
> antennas that show an SWR 
> > so high that the meter reading is
> undistinguishable from infinite. In 
> > those cases of course the efficiency must be
> lower, but still the 
> > transformer has not blown up despite that use. It
> does get warm though, 
> > with some extremely bad loads.
> >
> >   
> >> However if you can show 1.8 - 30 MHz performance
> statistics at the
> >> 1500W level they would go a long way to put a
> sense of engineering
> >> reality on the subject.
> >>     
> >
> > I have neither the instrumentation nor the time to
> do a scientifically
> > valid investigation of the transformer, so I'm
> sorry, I can't provide
> > precise data. I can only say that in practice the
> ferrite material has
> > worked very much better than powdered iron, and
> that theory and data
> > extracted from the relevant sheets beautifully
> explains why. So my
> > assertation is a relative one: Type 61 ferrite
> performs much
> > better than type 2 powdered iron, in this
> broadband high power
> > application, both in terms of loss and in choking
> performance, but I'm
> > not able to provide precise absolute data on
> transformers built with 
> > each of the two materials.
> >
> >   
> >> His book went thru a few revisions as he was
> faced with reality and
> >> not a lab test at low level RF.  At one point
> there were some rather
> >> heated on the air discussions that I partook of
> strictly as a
> >> listener.
> >>     
> >
> > That must have been interesting! Unfortunately, I
> rarely find anyone to
> > talk about technical things on the air. That's why
> I vent here! :-)
> > In any case, my ferrite balun has been used for
> several years, under
> > many different conditions, at legal limit power
> and all bands, and so
> > far has worked well.
> >
> >   
> >> My own experiments with a FT240-61 at 1200W was
> rather dismal with
> >> excessive heating that resulted in tuning drift
> as well as TVI.
> >>     
> >
> > The three symptoms all sound like you drove the
> ferrite to a much 
> > excessive flux density. What flux density did you
> use?
> >
> >   
> >> At that time I did not own a spectrum analyzer to
> look for non
> >> linearities nor a network analyzer. I now own
> both.
> >>     
> >
> > I'm still at that stage of not owning these
> instruments! And believe me,
> > I would love to get a spectrum analyzer! But it
> should work at least up
> > to UHF, it should have a dynamic range not under
> 90dB, and it should
> > not cost as much as a car. So far this has kept me
> without one.
> >
> >   
> >> I then tried T225-2A thru T400-2A powdered iron
> at various power
> >> levels from 500W to "well above" 1500W; the tests
> used from one to 
> >> three cores wrapped with Scotch #27 HV tape and
> #14, 12 and 10
> >> stranded Teflon wire. The result was several
> balun 4:1 kits for 500
> >> to 3500W that were sold for about 10 years thru a
> part time business 
> >> that I owned.
> >>     
> >
> > You must have used many turns to get enough
> inductance, and as a result 
> > there must have been reduced performance at the
> higher bands.
> >
> >   
> >> As expected they were not perfect due to winding
> capacity and trying
> >> for a 1.8 to 30 MHz compromise.
> >>     
> >
> > Exactly. On powdered iron cores you can make
> baluns that work well over 
> > a reduced range of bands, but 160 to 10 meters is
> asking too much from 
> > them. There have to be more severe compromises at
> both ends of the 
> > range, than if you used ferrite.
> 
=== message truncated ===



      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

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