John Fields wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:28:39 +0100, Paul Burridge
wrote:


-- snip --
The only sensible way to do it AFAICS is to operate the MOSFET in
class C as a high speed switch and reconstruct the pulsed output into
a sine wave carrier by means of a suitable tuned circuit. I wouldn't
consider driving a MOSFET for RF use in any other way. The efficiency
should be pretty darned good, too.


---
That doesn't make any sense to me.

Unless things have changed pretty drastically from how they were when
I was doing RF, class "C" was pretty much relegated to FM, so that
when you hit PTT, you banged the hell out of the final and filtered
the hell out of the carrier, which went to maximum amplitude and
stayed there, and the information was put on the constant amplitude
carrier by varying its frequency (or phase).

AM and SSB finals were _always_ linear amps and, like John said, the
_amplitude_ of the carrier/sideband(s) followed the amplitude of the
modulating audio precisely.

Whether you use a MOSFET as a switch or as a resistive element
yielding a linearly varying output depends on how you tailor the
characteristics of the MOSFET to fit the application. After all,
there are lots of linear audio amps out there with MOSFET class A and
class B finals, aren't there? So why shouldn't there be linear MOSFET
RF amps as well?

Well, AM tube finals were often operated class C with the modulation
applied to the plate supply. This is harder to do with silicon because
the varying collector voltage modulates the collector-base capacitance
and causes weird phase shifts.

And there are linear MOSFET RF amps; they're necessary for single-sideband.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:42:53 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:


Well, AM tube finals were often operated class C with the modulation
applied to the plate supply.

---
Funny, I never considered plate modulation to be class C; that is if
we're talking about the same thing. What I'm thinking about is when
you key the transmitter on and it starts putting out a carrier at some
level, then you modulate the plate supply with audio so that at the
low peaks of the audio waveform the output of the TX is zero, but at
the output of the high peaks it's twice (?) what it was with no
modulation. Is that class C?

--
John Fields

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:01:37 -0500, John Fields wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:42:53 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:

Well, AM tube finals were often operated class C with the modulation
applied to the plate supply.

---
Funny, I never considered plate modulation to be class C; that is if
we're talking about the same thing. What I'm thinking about is when
you key the transmitter on and it starts putting out a carrier at some
level, then you modulate the plate supply with audio so that at the
low peaks of the audio waveform the output of the TX is zero, but at
the output of the high peaks it's twice (?) what it was with no
modulation. Is that class C?

It can be. Depends on the biasing. It *is* AM, however.

Class C just means that the conduction angle is less than 180 deg. I
recall seeing it specified as a certain amount less than 180 once,
but I don't recall how much. The idea is to give the output tank
enough kick to get it to swing.

So you amplify the carrier with class C and modulate the plate. I've
seen projects which do this with bipolars. One that comes to mind is
an old Radio Electronics article for a uWave ATV commo system using
gunplexers, but that can't be right since gunnplexers are modulated
at the gunnplexer. I think it was another ATV project. If I ever
find that old article I'll letcha know.
--
Best Regards,
Mike

John Fields wrote:
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:42:53 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:



Well, AM tube finals were often operated class C with the modulation
applied to the plate supply.


---
Funny, I never considered plate modulation to be class C; that is if
we're talking about the same thing. What I'm thinking about is when
you key the transmitter on and it starts putting out a carrier at some
level, then you modulate the plate supply with audio so that at the
low peaks of the audio waveform the output of the TX is zero, but at
the output of the high peaks it's twice (?) what it was with no
modulation. Is that class C?

In a tube setup the RF amplifier should be operating in class C and the
power audio amplifier should provide nice linear modulation to the RF
amp's plate supply. In fact* one needs to provide sufficient excitation
to the RF final, too, lest the thing go into a current limited mode on
the modulation peaks.

Presumably you could make a REALLY EFFICIENT setup with transistors by
operating the RF final in class E, but you get that pesky capacitance
problem back...

* So I understand, I'm just a tube wannabe.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:09:43 -0700, Tim Wescott wrote:

John Fields wrote:
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:42:53 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:

Well, AM tube finals were often operated class C with the modulation
applied to the plate supply.

---
Funny, I never considered plate modulation to be class C; that is if
we're talking about the same thing. What I'm thinking about is when
you key the transmitter on and it starts putting out a carrier at some
level, then you modulate the plate supply with audio so that at the
low peaks of the audio waveform the output of the TX is zero, but at
the output of the high peaks it's twice (?) what it was with no
modulation. Is that class C?

In a tube setup the RF amplifier should be operating in class C and the
power audio amplifier should provide nice linear modulation to the RF
amp's plate supply. In fact* one needs to provide sufficient excitation
to the RF final, too, lest the thing go into a current limited mode on
the modulation peaks.

Presumably you could make a REALLY EFFICIENT setup with transistors by
operating the RF final in class E, but you get that pesky capacitance
problem back...

* So I understand, I'm just a tube wannabe.

I don't know how well it works, but I saw a class E schem using a
section of line to take out the odd harmonics.
--
Best Regards,
Mike

"Tim Wescott" wrote in message
...
John Fields wrote:
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:42:53 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:

.................................................. ...........................
...........
Presumably you could make a REALLY EFFICIENT setup with transistors by
operating the RF final in class E, but you get that pesky capacitance
problem back...

You are only scratching the surface. Check out the Harris DX series of high
power AM transmitters. It will blow your mind away. Basically, the
instantanous RF output power is synthesized by turning on 0 to 64 fairly low
power (~KW) modules. I don't know what the sampling frequency is, but
probably 20 KHz.. All modules are driven by a square wave signal at the
carrier frequency. There is no modulator.

Tam


* So I understand, I'm just a tube wannabe.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Tam/WB2TT wrote:

You are only scratching the surface. Check out the Harris DX series of high
power AM transmitters. It will blow your mind away. Basically, the
instantanous RF output power is synthesized by turning on 0 to 64 fairly low
power (~KW) modules. I don't know what the sampling frequency is, but
probably 20 KHz.. All modules are driven by a square wave signal at the
carrier frequency. There is no modulator.

There is also a fractional stage - a 64 stage AM modulation would sound
quite nasty, so an analogue signal is added to make up.

There is also a 'spare stage' dthat can be switched in if one of the
stages fails.

Nice stuff, but the only really interesting thing IMO is the output
combiner. The rest is just 'how do we make this digital'.


Thomas

John Fields wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:42:53 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:


Well, AM tube finals were often operated class C with the modulation
applied to the plate supply.

---
Funny, I never considered plate modulation to be class C; that is if
we're talking about the same thing. What I'm thinking about is when
you key the transmitter on and it starts putting out a carrier at some
level, then you modulate the plate supply with audio so that at the
low peaks of the audio waveform the output of the TX is zero, but at
the output of the high peaks it's twice (?) what it was with no
modulation. Is that class C?

No, that's plate modulation. Class C is when the active element
conducts for less than 180 degrees of the cycle. A lot of times
when they plate modulate, they'll also apply the modulation to the
screen grid or even the control grid or previous stage. :-)

Cheers!
Rich

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:23:40 GMT, Rich Grise wrote:

No, that's plate modulation. Class C is when the active element
conducts for less than 180 degrees of the cycle. A lot of times
when they plate modulate, they'll also apply the modulation to the
screen grid or even the control grid or previous stage. :-)

Can't blame 'em! Given that the audio power level needs to be
commensurate with the transmitter's RF power output level, using final
plate modulation with a 500KW TX might be a more than a little
inefficient. :-)


--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:01:37 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:42:53 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:


Well, AM tube finals were often operated class C with the modulation
applied to the plate supply.

---
Funny, I never considered plate modulation to be class C; that is if
we're talking about the same thing. What I'm thinking about is when
you key the transmitter on and it starts putting out a carrier at some
level, then you modulate the plate supply with audio so that at the
low peaks of the audio waveform the output of the TX is zero, but at
the output of the high peaks it's twice (?) what it was with no
modulation. Is that class C?

As you presumably know, that's just 100% AM.

--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.