[Amps] More parasitic choke questions

[Carl]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger" <sub1 at rogerhalstead.com>
To: <amps at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 3:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Amps] More parasitic choke questions


>
>
> On 7/30/2010 10:21 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
>> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>>
>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:01:48 -0400, Roger<sub1 at rogerhalstead.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hmmm...That is not what I get out of the statement.  The job of the
>>> coil/inductor is to provide enough reactance at the frequency of the
>>> parasitic to "quench" it, yet not provide enough reactance at the
>>> fundamental that the resistor has to carry too much current.
>>>
>> REPLY:
>>
>> Remember, reactance is lossless. Reactance alone can not "quench"
>>
> As reactance is lossless that is just how it quenches. Quench does not
> mean to absorb, it means to put out, stop, or even prevent.  IOW it
> prevents the parasitic from getting started. Another way of phrasing the
> quenching, or preventing, is to say it "chokes off" the parasitic and
> prevents the oscillation. If the parasitic choke is designed and working
> properly It doesn't have to absorb anything as it prevents said parasite
> from taking life.
>
> Just go back to the one line of quoted text from the "Radio Handbook"
> 20th ed. "Just enough turns should be used to suppress the parasitic
> oscillation,
> and no more."
>
> Suppress may be a better term that quench, but it does not absorb, it
> prevents.
>
> 73
>
> Roger (K8RI)

Right on Roger, you get a gold star but I guess that Bill just cant absorb 
this....His mind is in quench mode............

Carl
KM1H