[AMPS] a sticky issue.

[measures]

>
>
>> failures or resistivity variations due to overheating. If an amplifier has
>> a proper layout and tube, any suppressor solution is applicable (mostly
>> because not strictly needed). If an amplifier hasn't a proper layout and
>> tube (parasitics are closer to amplified bands), everything is quite
>> critical and a practical suppressor may not exist at all.
>
>What Mauri says is true, Rich for some reason always overlooks 
>that point.
>
>The suppressor impedance required varies with layout, and can 
>range from no suppressor at all to a suppressor with very high 
>parallel impedance.
>
>Claiming one suppressor technique is a cure for all systems is silly.
>
No one has claimed this so far.  The Rp of a copper-wire suppressor can 
be made even lower than the Rp of a resistance-wire suppressor by 
increasing L-supp.  The trade-off is increased dissipation in R-supp.  
The bottom-line on resistance-wire suppressors is that they reduce the 
10m dissipative burden on R-supp. 

>For example, adding Rich's hairpin suppressor to the AL-80B 
>actually 

€  (key word)

>increases VHF anode system Q.
>
In Wes measurements, at 100MHz, Rp decreased from 166-ohms to 101-ohms 
with the resistance-wire suppressor.  

end

-  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