Bry Carling writes:
Lary - I was talking about the kind of set-up with the 6DE7 that produces a SMALL carrier of say 6 or 8 watts and then does 90 watts p.e.p. on the voice peaks.
Right - that is the question I addressed.
I may be nuts, but my empirical sense tells me that is far more impressive sounding in the receiver n the other end than the signal from the typical "novice rig" that runs 75 watts carrier input with Heising mod. OR even a plate modulated class C rig with 22.5 watts carrier input and 90 watts p.e.p.
I think by "impressive" you mean the ratio of power in the sidebands to unmodulated carrier power - if so, I'd agree.
The power is turned DOWN during the inefficient phase of the transmission in other words.
We need to be careful here, because this created a misunderstanding about a year ago. With efficiency modulation (be it a linear amplifier stage, or screen suppressor, or control-grid modulated amplifier) PLATE EFFICIENCY (RF power output/DC plate power input) is lowest when the instantateous output is lowest. Therefore, the lower the output of the unmodulated carrier, the lower the PLATE EFFICIENCY. If we think of efficiency in terms of power in the sidebands/total power consumed (integrated over time), your statement is correct.
WIth less and less quiescent signal the transmitter appraoches the efficiency level of a DSB rig.

Yes - in the limit, as the carrier level is reduced to zero, that's exactly what your left with: DSB w/o carrier. But the above comments on efficency still hold - plate efficiency in this case will be zero when no modulation is present, because there is no RF output, with finite DC plate power consumed. But, integrated over time, I believe less power will be consumed to convey the intelligence, so in this sense, "efficiency" is better.
73,
-Larry/NE1S ______________________________________________________________
AMRadio mailing list
List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
Partner Website: http://www.amfone.net
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
Post: mailto:[email protected]

Reply via email to