Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dg02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 14711380000B3; Tue, 29 May 2012 17:28:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SZTvp-0005Ai-Oh for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 29 May 2012 22:26:21 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SZTvp-0005AZ-63 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 29 May 2012 22:26:21 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.100.212]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SZTvn-0003Ik-8Q for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 29 May 2012 22:26:20 +0100 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q4TLQH4L004799 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 23:26:17 +0200 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id q4TLQHjh027956 for ; Tue, 29 May 2012 23:26:17 +0200 Message-ID: <4FC53EA6.1060003@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 23:24:54 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?U3RlZmFuIFNjaMOkZmVy?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <8BE4322932454ABBAF36917E7F0B7293@uwePC> In-Reply-To: <8BE4322932454ABBAF36917E7F0B7293@uwePC> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Sorry Uwe, missed to answer in all the trouble... I didn't know that a JUMA TX is available for "500". Well, the version for 137 kHz is fine but i think 60W is not really enough for a ordinary LF amateur antenna. But on MF, 60W may be just right if one want to strictly stay below the limitation of 1W. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [129.206.100.212 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: ebba021850e0a5d4120636e52401e975 Subject: Re: LF: 475 kc Exiter Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070303050603040909050805" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE 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-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:435573824:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d410a4fc53f7b0d69 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070303050603040909050805 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by relay.uni-heidelberg.de id q4TLQH4L004799 Sorry Uwe, missed to answer in all the trouble... I didn't know that a JUMA TX is available for "500". Well, the version for 137 kHz is fine but i think 60W is not really=20 enough for a ordinary LF amateur antenna. But on MF, 60W may be just=20 right if one want to strictly stay below the limitation of 1W. Do you know how the PA is designed? I'm just experimenting with a class D PA for MF but am surprised about=20 the "problems". I.e. i thought it is easier to build. The output C of=20 the FETs cause a heavy oscillation when the FET is OFF. So actually i=20 would prefer a class E which does not have this problem. A class E would=20 be really no problem, regarding the design. But i intend to use it for=20 various experiments, also with /p antennas, just for playing arround.=20 Here, a class E is not recommended at all since it needs a very accurate=20 match to Z=3DR=3D50 Ohm. Otherwise the efficiency is decreasing=20 dramatically, up to blowing up the FET... 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 27.05.2012 09:39, schrieb Uwe Wensauer: > What do You think about the JUMA TX500 TransmitterI > In my eyes a small Rig with 60 Watt and built in Converter. > By the way, have a look at the filters in use =E2=80=93 easy to built a= n duplicate > Uwe, dk1kq --------------070303050603040909050805 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by relay.uni-heidelberg.de id q4TLQH4L004799 Sorry Uwe, missed to answer in all the trouble...

I didn't know that a JUMA TX is available for "500".

Well, the version for 137 kHz is fine but i think 60W is not really enough for a ordinary LF amateur antenna. But on MF, 60W may be just right if one want to strictly stay below the limitation of 1W.

Do you know how the PA is designed?

I'm just experimenting with a class D PA for MF but am surprised about the "problems". I.e. i thought it is easier to build. The output C of the FETs cause a heavy oscillation when the FET is OFF. So actually i would prefer a class E which does not have this problem. A class E would be really no problem, regarding the design. But i intend to use it for various experiments, also with /p antennas, just for playing arround. Here, a class E is not recommended at all since it needs a very accurate match to Z=3DR=3D50 Ohm. Otherwise the efficiency is decreasing dramatically, up to blowing up the FET...

73, Stefan/DK7FC

Am 27.05.2012 09:39, schrieb Uwe Wensauer:
What do You think about the JUMA TX500 TransmitterI
=C2=A0
In my eyes a=C2=A0 small Rig with 60 Watt and built in Converter.<= /div>
=C2=A0
By the way, have a look at the filters in use =E2=80=93 easy to bu= ilt an duplicate
=C2=A0
Uwe, dk1kq
--------------070303050603040909050805--