Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps]  200-ohm tank and "un-un" in HF amp design

To: Jim Thomson <jim.thom@telus.net>, amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps]  200-ohm tank and "un-un" in HF amp design
From: peter chadwick <g8on@fsmail.net>
Reply-to: g8on@fsmail.net
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 14:36:33 +0200
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
Jim,

ITU-R Rec. SM.329-12. Although this is a recommendation, through a somewhat 
complex route, it is called for in the International Radio Regulations, which 
are considered to be a treaty in international law. The FCC have sort of 
implemented it with their 43dB, although the requirement is for suppression of 
unwanted emissions in the amateur service to be 43dB + 10log P, without needing 
to be greater than 50dB for stations operating below 30MHz and not needing to 
be greater than 70dB for stations operating above 30 MHz. 

In Europe, the requirements are slightly different and are in ERC/REC 74-01. 


========================================
 Message Received: Oct 24 2013, 12:51 PM
 From: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
 To: amps@contesting.com
 Cc: 
 Subject: [Amps]  200-ohm tank and "un-un" in HF amp design
 
 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 19:26:50 +0200
 From: peter chadwick <g8on@fsmail.net>
 To: Jim Thomson <jim.thom@telus.net>, amps@contesting.com
 Subject: Re: [Amps] ?200-ohm tank and "un-un" in HF amp design
 
 
 ##  I checked..and cant find any reference to  minimum  harmonic suppression  
requirements anywhere......so far. 
 If you manage to find out..... pse let me know.   
 
 Jim  VE7RF
 
 
 
 
 Jim,
 
 The regulations state in level in the feedline. However, I could ask one of my 
friends at Industry Canada what they think.....
 
 73
 
 Peter G3RZP
 
 
 ========================================
 Message Received: Oct 22 2013, 03:06 PM
 From: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>
 To: amps@contesting.com
 Cc: 
 Subject: [Amps] ?200-ohm tank and "un-un" in HF amp design
  
 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 10:32:27 +0200
 From: peter chadwick <g8on@fsmail.net>
 To: amps@contesting.com
 Subject: Re: [Amps] ?200-ohm tank and "un-un" in HF amp design?
  
 >The touted higher harmonic suppression of a PI-L is mainly a myth.....a plane 
 >jane PI  is more than ample for harmonic suppression.<
  
 As a Class AB stage has a second harmonic component of plate current only 6dB 
down on the fundamental, what sort of Q do you run in the pi network to get the 
extra 37dB of suppression needed to meet the FCC regulations or the extra 44dB 
needed elsewhere?
  
 73
  
 Peter G3RZP
  
 ##  ameritron uses a simple PI net on 40-10m on their bigger amps...and it 
easily meets the 44 db down FCC requirements.  Ameritron uses a PI-L  on 
160+80m..but that?s so a smaller load cap can be used. 
 My ants all exhibit sky high swr on their harmonics..including the 3rd...so 
whats the problem ?   Me,  I could care less  about harmonic suppression  since 
the amp kills most of it..and  the ants kill the rest.   My  F12  40m yagi 
barely resonates just a bit below the
 12m band...and not at all on 15m.     Optibeam uses linear decoupling stubs on 
their 40m yagis  so they wont resonate on  15m.      I enter a  Q of 8-10 on  
the GM3SEK  spreadsheet  for all my hb amps.  30-36 db of 2nd harmonic 
suppression 
 is plenty  imo..... from any amp.   With 1 kw out....and  36 db down.... that 
means   1/4 watt on the 2nd harmonic.   .25 watt  into a sky high swr isnt 
gonna  bother anybody anytime soon.  
  
  
 Jim   VE7RF  
 _______________________________________________
 Amps mailing list
 Amps@contesting.com
 http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>