Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27975 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 21:59:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 21:59:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 3110 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 21:54:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 21:54:17 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 1472iV-0005xD-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 21:48:39 +0000 Received: from gadolinium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.111]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 1472iU-0005x8-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 21:48:38 +0000 Received: from [213.122.230.124] (helo=default) by gadolinium.btinternet.com with smtp (Exim 3.03 #83) id 1472iL-00031G-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 21:48:32 +0000 Message-ID: <001501c066e0$1a140140$7ce67ad5@default> From: "Alan Melia" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Loops preamps and imps Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 20:07:40 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hi John, it looks as though your JFETs in the preamp were not running in a linear part of their characteristic. Devices of this vintage have a wide range of threshold voltages and really need to be checked or the drain resistor value tweaked. If the drain volts were only 1 volt then the operating conditions for the emitter follower are also a bit dodgy. It also occurs to me that Tony's preamp had a pair of diodes across the loop to protect the preamp from the TX RF. This seems like more trouble. I have not tried it but I would prefer to protect the preamp fets by shorting the loop out with a small relay. This could be remotely switched by cutting the power (assuming it is remotely powered up the coax) to the preamp on TX. I was involved many years ago in protecting submerged repeater amplifiers from over-voltage pulses with diodes. We uses a pair of diodes in series (in 'anti-parallel' with another series pair). The reason being that it is the change in capacity with voltage that generates the products, and this is an inverse square law. So 2 diodes in series reduce the capacity swing by four times. I must admit I have never been a fan of op-amps at frequencies above audio maybe I am still living in the world of the 741 !! ) I would think that an op-amp would need to have a transition frequency (unity gain-bandwidth product ) of at least 15MHz to be any good at 136kHz. This is probably OK now, but they also used to be terribly noisy (by RF standards). I am afraid I cynically say that modern engineers would rather use 15 op-amps where one transistor would probably do the job just as well (probably because they dont have to work out the biassing of an op-amp !). Most things will amplify....I've seen BC107s used at 2metres !! (they were not very good! but they worked) ...but has anyone any real experience (and measurements) showing op-amps have a better performance than a discrete transistor at 136kHz. (that should start the flames going) Cheers de Alan G3NYK Alan.Melia@btinternet.com