Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id w39GQ9Zc022392 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 18:26:10 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1f5ZYX-0002ox-LW for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 17:22:09 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1f5ZYV-0002om-ME for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 17:22:07 +0100 Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1f5ZYS-0007Vg-Qu for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 17:22:06 +0100 Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id t67so20464803wmt.0 for ; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:22:04 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:message-id:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=sfL1LzA/c3GC1ClV9uHTHaS8WhUuo7dyZEbXszBJP7M=; b=EynY8Qi54oRsfAB2Qml6uTZ/JRn/I3GV9WjOCz9b7qflkrRA6jfmu7zFKF/Da3acTX GCGxGGOwcr12/ce55OVhjI0kkkGEbShpKq4bp29vXMiwBzTCLkzjx+268RcIb3LM4Yki 494uEiSkYnB3nGM4AfKRFKTDheGyQKc5Ruy4WeOIEAfJQLQu3sx5QOfLgW5Vw3rQJ1lz G6PzgDOhpTN0Q6jrcS5YK6KnqVTISolmXi/IH8818UTbK6NZyrYZVDOz2qLSaSuJMv1q jlzqzaBRo3L/1UJj+Yg6d6L5nIKbyy9t1Rytp3qlgbf8HLWSQ0W/XgsKF5NMHI9XX5Ll wv3Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:message-id:to:subject:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sfL1LzA/c3GC1ClV9uHTHaS8WhUuo7dyZEbXszBJP7M=; b=EYoyKpgvN9IE2tylJHDdz286pJD6mX9SE08Cm8UzYpAFPAvlhCuhR1Mkx0jozSHpil MhLLuZ+WmE3kaDcIdrOS4kd44u9jT2JsBat5wJ5FSn4ubAKwFurwQEsQa3yjV+FBUbT3 JrmuU1qnQaS8vQSZbRQIYpHXc9mBcGAqfdOn2F61zSSlx+b6f4xhEa0wvHTosyxsOxAD xY3Oair+n6SoV/Hm18yS4NKyE+ftsUfIoZg6UyHhvcB3GFyefezJa6o4nv/xz2uKwf0l gcLq4vLlct5smh8YG1dEeSx+c70z9Fzb1z/VBfa5zvgiIK0E7ZYFFdRHzpt6KwUzwWZv upbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tC1tXeJiQZ3Tz/hY442IotSa3XGl6BNFJmto1y0YzLHcBDxplIi C2UI9aVOlD+o6XpzDttjJKRQrA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+9YorgUh2Gr+pQEWmlH/IhThXpqpodEttsLUGR41qixINxxEBTqhetY0+hKi+pvTXsa2r44w== X-Received: by 10.80.202.202 with SMTP id f10mr22950113edi.157.1523290859634; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:20:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from OfficeWin7.lan (82-70-254-222.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.70.254.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j15sm515004edj.42.2018.04.09.09.20.58 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:20:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 17:20:57 +0100 From: Chris Wilson X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1647806154.20180409172057@gmail.com> To: N1BUG In-Reply-To: <1b882ae9-fede-3ec4-256e-9b068d3acf99@n1bug.com> References: <162a4797468-1db9-bdf2@webjas-vae168.srv.aolmail.net> <1UQROqZht1.1c1VdzC0S69@optiplex980-pc> <3a0c0669-018b-13a7-b56b-dd3f63fab464@n1bug.com> <197556217.20180409124931@gmail.com> <37574432-b72e-f2d1-0e85-af19dd970817@n1bug.com> <4D19B3707137430CBE04857FBA5C80B1@gnat> <1b882ae9-fede-3ec4-256e-9b068d3acf99@n1bug.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello again Paul What's the vertical board in the end of the case? If it's the multiplier I am not qualified to say what having in the same box as all that RF might be, but i would have some concerns. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (dead.fets[at]gmail.com) 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 7ab87d4d3ea1d9dcb73a78e83fe4d608 Subject: Re: LF: W1VD amp help - more waveforms Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=OFFERS_ETC,PRIORITY_NO_NAME 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 Hello again Paul What's the vertical board in the end of the case? If it's the multiplier I am not qualified to say what having in the same box as all that RF might be, but i would have some concerns. I would mount the driver board, shortened if necessary, vertically right by the FET mounting screws and shorten the gate wires. If Jay hasn't got a board I can send detailed photos of my boards that work OK, they aren't PCB's, as Jay had run out. My "Jay board" got ratty after a lot of fiddling and soldering and I wanted to remove surplus to my needs stuff, so I made my own. They are a special UK board with separately insulated squares on one side and full copper the other, you link the squares with solder tracks and drill point the ground plain where leads stick through that are not to be grounded. I can even send you a ready drill pointed board and the link photos. My output transformer is a bit tighter wound as the 180 odd strand speaker wire is malleable and winds quite tight. I didn't have any real problems soldering it. But I can't really say it's *THAT* much "better". I can send you some of that if you want? I can check what ceramic caps I used for the stack. RS Components or Farnell would have been the source, high ESR ones, quite expensive I remember thinking. I'd be tempted to apply full voltage and see what happens, I see a max of about 160V on the drain spikes at 55V input. What I have noticed is if the antenna is suspect current draw increases substantially as do the spikes on the drain waveforms. Into a dummy load the ringing is a *BIT* less than into the antenna, but not a *LOT* different. If the aerial is not perfectly resonant or to a lesser extent, the matching is wrong then the waveforms go to pot. Monday, April 9, 2018, 4:34:17 PM, you wrote: > Yep, voltage breakdown of the FETs was my worry. However I may be > making a false assumption. I assumed the voltage spikes in the > ringing would vary linearly with applied drain voltage? Perhaps that > isn't necessarily so? > With 13V on the drains the first spike here is 'about' 64V. > Efficiency seems fine. I wouldn't try to put an exact figure to it > what with measurement accuracy in three places (voltage, current, RF > power) but it 'appears' to be in the mid 90s. > Paul -- Best regards, Chris mailto:dead.fets@gmail.com