Hi Bruce, A great many thanks for all the hints and tips you gave me.
Yes, I have actually started working my way through Wenzel's hints & tips pages after I posted the first message. I remembered that you pointed me there in a previous conversation we had. I find the schematic you attached in your last post very interesting - I happen to have a soft spot for discrete analog solutions that can still beat their integrated counterparts. However, I still tend to lean towards the "mini-circuits" type attenuator/Gain block idea. The reasons are all the reasons why everyone is leaning toward integrated solutions. (e.g. the integrated solutions might cost a bit more, but it uses a lot less board space; if a unit fails you simply replace it with another one, less components, etc, etc.) Nevertheless, I noted you use the word 'must' as in: if you must use the mini-circuits.... So I suspect there might be a down-side to using this kind of approach. Or is it just that the discrete solution works somewhat better? Do you mind elaborating a bit on this? Regards, Stephan Sandenbergh > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Dr Bruce Griffiths > Sent: 02 February 2007 05:46 AM > To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Stepping up the output of an OCXO > > Stephan > > Attached GIF file is the schematic for a common base amplifier with > about 12dB of gain into a 50 ohm load. > The amplifier will not saturate even if the load is open circuited. > Q102 temperature compensates Q103 which regulates the dc collector > current of the common base transistor. > Other transistor types with equivalent performance may be susbstituted. > The RF transformers are coupled to the amplifier with series capacitors > to avoid saturating the cores with dc current. > > Bruce _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list [email protected] https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
