Hi Jim ,

Where did you locate a schematic of the DK7FC , E-probe ? I would like to have a look at it .

Thanks.

Best 73 ,

Charlie , W5COV

---- James Wagner <[email protected]> wrote:
> From just looking at the schematics, the PA0RDT design is much higher bandwidth (pushing 10MHz) than the DK7FC design. That places much higher demand on linearity in the presence of strong in-band signals. How that plays out in real life will depend on circumstances. For example, there is a 5KW (significantly higher ERP) AM station at 550KHz less than 10 miles from my QTH. I don't know that it would cause a problem, but I would be careful. There is also a low-power NDB at 225KHz about 15 miles from my QTH. This one should not cause a problem but both are probably in-band for both receivers.
>
> I do note that DK7FC design has limiting diodes at the input of the receiver. This MIGHT well cause a problem with strong-signal intermodulation. Again, it would depend on local circumstances.
>
> Jim Wagner
> KA7EHK CN84km
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Roger Lapthorn <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 5:43 AM
> Subject: [sub9khz] E-field probe performance
>
>
>  
> Several of the VLF grabbers are now using Stefan DK7FC's E-field probe (Tel
> Aviv, Ipswich, Iceland etc). I'm wondering if anyone has done a straight
> comparison against the PA0RDT design and measured which is better in terms
> of sensitivity and dynamic range?
>
> 73s
> Roger G3XBM
>
> --
> http://qss2.blogspot.com/
> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
> https://sites.google.com/site/sub9khz/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (4)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 1

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___