Return-Path: Received: (qmail 86692 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2004 20:45:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-mxscan01.plus.net) (212.159.14.235) by ptb-mailstore04.plus.net with SMTP; 22 Apr 2004 20:45:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 33852 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2004 20:45:50 -0000 X-Filtered-by: Plusnet (hmail v1.01) X-Spam-detection-level: 11 Received: from ptb-mxcore01.plus.net (212.159.14.215) by ptb-mxscan01.plus.net with SMTP; 22 Apr 2004 20:45:49 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1BGl4v-0008fi-1z for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 20:45:49 +0000 X-Fake-Domain: majordom Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1BGl4S-0007bF-Vy for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 21:45:20 +0100 Received: from [213.232.95.59] (helo=relay.salmark.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BGl4S-0007b6-FU for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 21:45:20 +0100 Received: from nibbel.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.240.41]) by relay.salmark.net with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BGl4L-00038h-C3 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 21:45:13 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nibbel.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id D142D4B718 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:44:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lepidus.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (lepidus.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.240.72]) by nibbel.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328AA4B4F6 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:44:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (webmail2.cc.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.242.4]) by lepidus.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B3D3801A3 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:44:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 129-167.240.81.adsl.skynet.be (129-167.240.81.adsl.skynet.be [81.240.167.129]) by webmail2.kuleuven.be (IMP) with HTTP for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:44:41 +0200 Message-ID: <1082666681.40882eb931593@webmail2.kuleuven.be> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:44:41 +0200 From: Rik Strobbe To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <001301c428a3$91696400$2102000a@ibm> In-Reply-To: <001301c428a3$91696400$2102000a@ibm> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2-cvs X-Originating-IP: 81.240.167.129 X-Virus-Scanned: by KULeuven Antivirus Cluster X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: RCVD_IN_SORBS=0.1 Subject: Re: LF: Questions about (G0MRF) 136kHz transmitter Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PN-SPAMFiltered: yes X-Spam-Rating: 1 Hi Dick, > First of all the FET's used. > The original design uses 2 times 34NB20 FET's Vds200V/Id 34A, Rds(on) > <0,075 Ohm > > I don't have them, but I can replace them by IRFP260N or IRFP360 > The figures for a IRF360 are: 400V/23A Rds 0.2Ohm > > I'll plan to run the stuff on 50Volt. > The IRF360 has an higher Vds but also a litle higher Rds, I wonder if > the Rds has an effect on the output power. Assume you run the FETs at 15A (and 50% duty cycle) then the "switched state" dissipation of the 34NB20 will be less than 8 Watt while the IRF360 will dissipate 23 Watt. But much more important is the "dynamical" dissipation : when the FET's are switched you have both rather high current and rather high voltage, thus rather high dissipation. The faster you can switch the FET's the lower the losses, both the ON/OFF times and the gate-source capasitance will affect this. > Second and more important question is about the output transformer. > I don't have the original 3C90 core, so I'm planning to use the core > of an old computer monitor for this. I'm using a "double-U' core from an old TV set, it doesn't get hot at 500 W output. > Did any of you do this before on the G0MRF's design, and if so I > would like to know if there was any difference in number of turns > used. > I guess the amount of power greatly depends on this output > transformer so that makes it to one of the important parts of the > project........ If you're running a few 100 W from a 50V power supply the output impedance of the PA is very low (few Ohm), so you will need only a few turns on the primary (FET) side. I'm using a variation of the G3YXM design, I believe it is pretty much the same as the G0MRF design. Primary winding is 2 x 3 windings, secondary (to LPF) has 25 windings with a lot of taps. By selecting the tap I can easily vary the output power from 50 W to 500 W. > Maybe the number of turns might also be dependend in some kind of way > to the type of FET's used. As far as I know : no 73, Rik ON7YD