[Amps] Designing the Cleanest Linear with RF Negative Feedback
Karl-Arne Markström
sm0aom at telia.com
Sat Dec 17 10:40:43 EST 2005
In principle I agree, and it works as advertised when you pick off the "IF"
at a sufficiently early point in the receiver so the IMD performance
of the stages before the audio output does not enter the picture.
The reason why I brought this up was that "in-band" IMD is a not a very widely used
receiver parameter. Usually it is specified for the line outputs of high-grade
HF receivers intended for high-speed modem signalling.
73/
Karl-Arne
SM0AOM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill L. Fuqua" <wlfuqu00 at uky.edu>
To: <sm0aom at telia.com>
Cc: <garyschafer at comcast.net>; <K1JJ at comcast.net>; <amps at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [Amps] Designing the Cleanest Linear with RF Negative Feedback
In theory and practice. This is how most "DSP IF" receivers work. The last IF is 10 or 12kHz from a product detector "mixer" and then to a DSP board which in this case is a PC.
Naturally you can't allow the Receiver to be overloaded and you have to use an attenuator or no real antenna input at all. AGC is no problem unless you have it set to a time constant less than 1/100 second (the difference between the two tones). Then signal levels are constant.
73
Bill wa4lav
-----Original Message-----
From: Karl-Arne Markström <sm0aom at telia.com>
To: <garyschafer at comcast.net>, "Tom Cathey" <K1JJ at comcast.net>, "Bill Fuqua" <wlfuqu00 at uky.edu>
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 12:11:15 +0100
Subject: Re: [Amps] Designing the Cleanest Linear with RF Negative Feedback
In theory, you can measure transmitter IMD at the receiver output,
but in the real world this also results in influences of the receiver in-band
IMD characteristics.
Only few HF receivers are specified for in-band IMD performance, and
those who are usually have a rating of - 50 dB or so. AGC characteristics
also have a profound influence on this performance.
This means that transmitter IMD performance better than about - 45 dB
relative to one tone begins to be masked by receiver in-band IMD.
73/
Karl-Arne
SM0AOM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Fuqua" <wlfuqu00 at uky.edu>
To: <garyschafer at comcast.net>; "Tom Cathey" <K1JJ at comcast.net>
Cc: <amps at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 12:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Amps] Designing the Cleanest Linear with RF Negative Feedback
>
> Better yet, if the two tones are only a hundred Hertz or so apart, you can
> take the audio output of the SSB receiver and put it into the sound card of
> your computer and do an FFT. You can use a number of off the internet
> freeware FFT programs. In fact if you use "Spectrum Lab" (see
> <www.qsl.net/dl4yhf> ) to generate the tones and display the received
> spectra at the same time. Naturally you have to have a separate receiver
> and transmitter to do this.
> The receiver must be in SSB mode and with 100 Hz difference in the two
> tones you should be able to display the two tones and their IMD products
> within the 2 or so kHz bandwidth of the receiver. Their relative amplitudes
> will be easy to observe and measure.
> No need for calibrated attenuators or S meter readings. Just don't
> over drive the receiver or sound card input.
>
> 73
> Bill wa4lav
>
>
> At 04:59 PM 12/16/2005 -0500, Gary Schafer wrote:
> >Hi Tom,
> >
> >You do have a spectrum analyzer in your shack! Your receiver.
> >Modulate the transmitter with 2 tones and tune across with your cw
> >filter on another receiver. Note the level of one of the tones on the S
> >meter. Then tune to the 3rd order product and note the level difference.
> >Same thing a spectrum analyzer does.
> >If you want to get real accurate put a step attenuator in front of the
> >receiver so you don't depend on S meter calibration.
> >Now you will have a base to work from.
> >
> >73
> >Gary K4FMX
> >
> >
> >Tom Cathey wrote:
> > > That's more valuable info, Marv - Tnx again!
> > >
> > > A few follow up questions:
> > >
> > > If I tap off the FT-1000D 10mW low level point, can I run a long ~ 20'
> > coax
> > > cable to the amplifier CA2XX module's input, or will this cause problems?
> > > This is for 75M only. Maybe there is a way to do this.
> > >
> > > I looked at the FT-1000D's circuit that puts out 10mW, just before it goes
> > > into the power amp board. I'm trying to figure if it's possibly as clean
> > > as -55db there. I don't have a spec analyzer. It uses all pnp
> > transistors -
> > > a 2SC2026 base driven, driving another 2CS2026 in emitter follower,
> > driving
> > > a 2CS1973 in emitter follower at 10mW out. There's much more stuff
> > involved,
> > > like the balanced modulator, etc. Is this enough info to make a guess
> > from
> > > your experience of what kind of IMD we are dealing with at this
> > point? This
> > > will have a big effect on what direction I take, of course. Or maybe I
> > > could sample it into a receiver and get an idea using the same relative
> > IMD
> > > procedures I use for a big amp.
> > >
> > > OK on the sample amplifier using a 6146 input running reduced voltages and
> > > 1W, low power for cleanliness. Guess NFB will not help there.
> > >
> > > Last question: Let's say I did put two 4CX-350's in cascade, so had
> > lots of
> > > gain to work with. What is the practical limit for conventional negative
> > > feedback? Is it a matter of running into instability, perhaps? And I
> > take
> > > it from your comments, that you would run feedback from the final to the
> > > predriver, [two stages at a time only] and then where would you run the
> > > second loop to cover the pre-pre driver 4CX-350 and the input 6146, for
> > > example?
> > >
> > > 73,
> > > Tom, K1JJ
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Hi Tom,
> > > That '5106 is probably for Cable TV use and likely cuts off around
> > 40 MHz
> > > (on the low end!).
> > >
> > > If I recall correctly, some of the general purpose units that go
> > down to
> > > a MHz use numbers from CA28XX group. They come in both single ended and
> > > push-pull versions.
> > >
> > > I've seen a few of the 350J's for sale on the web over the years. I
> > > don't believe the demand is very high for those as they have a 26V heater
> > > and as such can't be dropped into a 4CX250B socket. There is also the
> > > 4CX600J/JA/JB.
> > >
> > > The 6146 shown on the Hughes schematic is run deep into Class
> > A. Note the
> > > low screen & plate voltages. I bet the numbers were just fine running all
> > > of a watt output.
> > >
> > > For feed forward, an error amp with perhaps another 4CX350FJ would be
> > > necessary. It is not a difficult scheme to implement but, it would double
> > > the parts count for the project. If you read about the technique on the
> > > web, keep in mind that "they" are typically working with transistor amps
> > > that start with distortion numbers 20dB worse than tubes. Therefore, in
> > > this case, less correction power will be required, the output combiner
> > ratio
> > > will optimally be a bit higher, and power lost from the main amp will be
> > > lower.
> > >
> > > The subject line said you wanted "the Cleanest Linear". To avoid
> > > degrading the system, the driver should exhibit distortion specs at least
> > > 10dB better than the amplifier. Your FT-1K will still be useful for the
> > > receiver.
> > >
> > > 73 & Good morning,
> > > Marv WC6W
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Amps mailing list
> > > Amps at contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Amps mailing list
> >Amps at contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: 2005-12-16
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: 2005-12-16
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: 2005-12-16
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date: 2005-12-16
More information about the Amps
mailing list