To: | Andy Talbot <[email protected]> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: LF: TXing 2200m WSPR |
From: | Chris Wilson <[email protected]> |
Date: | Sun, 24 Dec 2017 23:03:51 +0000 |
Cc: | [email protected] |
Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:message-id:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/70mi0nwiLWuT6MoWmAp0KH7zhhxa2Jy02Kh2qDt5ic=; b=TNAXqYlLvpkblsmLTiGYCmgC0uovfIldEQFXH3Ro+46uDd2wRC7kCpMMoo791bp4mP 7gdXymI+mU3g4qO283RklhQAfn5hkGGaUxzytPqcJByLCntJpy32QOWWmRE3dBQVdBKV A8UFSzHqEX8mpR5SmrjMQ5ILwoBO9P7ZYNy/iGpUuvxezs07PsTJV0c79tMqyuZa5+JM 4bXkyja+ONkdnkUbpUQnx5YBxaYKH6N4ZbNw9UfFZc5ivFKJzhxP9k+5cKAtw6n1Cd3w IWVQsc1d0bz4xaLxDnESKqECYOy5Qlpr9ugMR89McMrTfXBZvoYFTcGE9M58ZSvk726F 2x8w== |
In-reply-to: | <CAA8k23RMPWcJBhnE0qK+b=sP7kQpPCBO3t8LgKHTij-4xtud-g@mail.gmail.com> |
References: | <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <103A2C60B87B4930A99ED33442E477AF@StevePC> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CANA3B6WiCbKZmP_hA-gyunrx-NVT=mHyT9Sq6Fgu7fE-yx3QQA@mail.gmail.com> <CAA8k23Qb+-82S0WySY4bXY7+bZOnKorHtdG-qOXkafUBs873=Q@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAA8k23TnyE0NUGA9XQsmDhOxn81dqNTC3pQh2H7VfEoQHH=mXw@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAA8k23RMPWcJBhnE0qK+b=sP7kQpPCBO3t8LgKHTij-4xtud-g@mail.gmail.com> |
Reply-to: | [email protected] |
Sender: | [email protected] |
Hello Andy, Is there any point in Paul putting his dummy load on the end of his 75 odd meters of feeder co-ax outside? And then on the secondary of his matching transformer when tapped one to one? In case the co-ax is iffy or the impedance matching transfomer's doing something odd? Sunday, December 24, 2017, 10:42:16 PM, you wrote: > Well ... Using exactly the values in the filter circuit diagram, > 50R transforms through the filter to 48.5 - j2.86 (Ret Loss = 30dB, > VSWR = 1.07) [Using GM3SEK's original Netcalc prog.] > So that's pretty conclusive the ideal filter values will not be > upsetting things at the fundamental frequency. > According to Google, the T106-2 has a stated Al value of 13.5nH > /turn^2 so 72 turns does indeed give 70uH. So IF your core is correct, the > filter should be OK. > It's a bit difficult from now on, at a distance, to try to work out what is > happening. > Anyone else, any suggestions ? > BTW ... > Peak to peak of a { symetrical }square wave needs to be multiplied > by 4/pi to get the peak-to-peak of the fundamental component. So > the amploitude you see will be lower by about 1.3 times for teh same > fundamental power component. > Andy G4JNT -- Best regards, Chris mailto:[email protected] |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: LF: TXing 2200m WSPR, Andy Talbot |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: LF: TXing 2200m WSPR, N1BUG |
Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: TXing 2200m WSPR, Andy Talbot |
Next by Thread: | Re: LF: TXing 2200m WSPR, Andy Talbot |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |