|[AMRadio] GG 813 Linear in GE Ham News|
jcandela at prodigy.net
Fri Sep 30 07:49:53 EDT 2005
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
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.
Jim Candela WD5JKO
From: amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:amradio-bounces at mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Donald Chester
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 2:59 PM
To: amradio at mailman.qth.net
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
AMRadio mailing list
Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
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
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 20 Oct 2017.