Don, That was a good analysis. I'll add a little twist here. By adding a little carrier control, like a DX-60 driver, the whole situation changes allowing higher PEP output with lower unmodulated Plate dissipation of the RF linear amp tubes.. Of course now we're compromising AM to appease the linear, and making the receiving station's S-meter pump with the transmitters voice peak level.
Back to what you were saying about the 813, at 125 watts Pd CCS, and 125 watts ICAS Pd. Hold an 813 next to a 572B which is rated at 160 watts (ICAS?). To me the 813 is a beefier tube. Maybe the rating disparity has to do more with marketing than engineering where the 572B will have lower lifetime in service at higher ratings, or maybe they assume SSB where the tube only sees brief full power tune ups, and then SSB voice transmission. Regards, Jim Candela WD5JKO -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Donald Chester Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 2:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AMRadio] GG 813 Linear in GE Ham News >>>A pair of 813s in GG are only good for 150 watts carrier out on AM. Actually, that figure is optimistic. And p.e.p. has nothing to do with it. The limiting factor is plate dissipation of the tubes. A properly adjusted AM linear runs about 33% carrier efficiency if it is adjusted for modulation capability of 100% That means, with no modulation, about one third the DC input is converted to rf. The other two thirds of the input power is radiated as heat. So the maximum plate dissipation is twice the carrier output. Conversely, the maximum carrier output power is one-half the rated plate dissipation of the tubes. The 813 is rated by RCA at 125 watts plate dissipation. (I believe that is the ICAS rating; the CCS rating would be even less). So a pair of 813's has a total plate dissipation rating of 250 watts. Therefore, the maximum carrier output in AM linear service would be 125 watts, not 150. They would probably run at 150 watts, but if you maintained 100% modulation capability, they would run hot, and the tube life would be shortened. At the maximum rated output of 125 watts carrier, the DC input is 375 watts. Of that power, 125 watts is delivered as rf output, and the other 250 watts is radiated as heat from the plates of the tubes. Under modulation, the tubes will cool down a little. With a properly adjusted amplifier, the DC input will not change as modulation is applied. Theoretically, the plate meter will remain perfectly still. But as modulation is applied to the signal, the rf output increases because you now have carrier power plus sideband power. If the DC input remains the same, that extra power has to come from somewhere, so what happens is that less power is dissipated in the tubes and more power is delivered as output. But since in AM voice sevice, there are substantial periods without modulation, the amplifier must be designed to safely run for extended periods in the unmodulated carrier mode. You could increase the p.e.p. output of the tubes by increasing plate voltage. It would work with SSB because of the light duty cycle of a suppressed carrier signal. Depending on the peak-to-average ratio of the voice characteristic, you might be able to substantially increase the p.e.p. output without exceeding the plate dissipation rating of the tubes. But with AM, increasing the p.e.p. output necessarily means increasing the plate dissipation of the tubes, which are already running at max @ 125 watts output. In the AM mode, the transmitter would be capable of only 500 watts p.e.p. Don k4kyv ______________________________________________________________ AMRadio mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:[email protected] AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.8/114 - Release Date: 9/28/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.9/115 - Release Date: 9/29/2005
