• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

hamilton rangemaster final rf stage efficiency

Dr_Johnnie_Fever

Inactive
Inactive User
looking for info on the output section of the hamiltons.

are they class "E", "C"?

anyone know the efficiency or the TPO applied to the load coil / whip for 100mW input?
 
I don't think the information will be forthcoming, but you can always ask. I was going to measure mine, but I wanted to put it into service quickly rather than wait and tinker with it... and it has been working very well ever since! Next spring when I take it off the air for maintenance I will hopefully have time to make some measurements. If successful, I will report on them here.
 
For perspective on this, the link below leads to calculations of field intensities for a transmitter with 100 mW of output power applied to a matched antenna system that is about as efficient as possible, while functionally meeting Part 15.219(b).

The field shown at 1 km is about as low as usefully can be received (with some noise) by a good AM receiver in an interference-free location.

The field shown at 94 meters would provide very good (rather noise-free) reception by most AM receivers, except where local interference was very high.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h85/rfry-100/Part15_AM100_mW_TPO.gif

//
 
I have one that I designed back in the late '70s. It put out a measured 94 mW. It has been off the air for awhile due to the need for some replacement components, but it would work again if repaired. That was way before rangemasters, talking houses, and whatever else... Pretty cool for the time!

The PA is a VMOS power FET, VMP22 in a Class E switching circuit modeled after one designed by Nathan O. Sokal of Design Automation.
 
It put out a measured 94 mW

so you were getting 94 percent efficiency?

if this is the case you may want to go over to part 15 us and donate a copy of your transmitter design to the part 15 us library.

i have a whole section over there of stuff i added to the library.
 
now if you could find the most efficient method to couple that 94mW to a 3 meter antenna. i am thinking whatever the impedance is that those transistors want to see going from that to the impedance of the 3 meter whip using an open air coil.

i have a transmitter that fits these spec's and was designed and built by Dr. Jack Gittings and although it is not certified i still keep it around because it was a great design.
 
Yes, it did put out 94 mW into 50 ohms for 100 mW input; an efficiency of 94%. And this is not at all unusual for that circuit. I have a scan of the original article, which appeared in EDN magazine, but would have to ask for copyright permission before I could post it. The article might be available from a good technical library if you have access to one. If there is interest, I will dig it up and give you the issue, volume, etc.

My design included a highly efficient output matching network also. I used large B&W miniductors for the impedance step-up. To prevent any radiation from the coils, they were mounted inside a large steel rack cabinet that was screwed shut tightly. You could draw a spark from the antenna terminal! I think the same is true for the Rangemaster. No one has ever proven it but some have suggested that the Rangemaster has a Class E PA also. In any case, it is a "class act" for a Part 15 AM transmitter!

One reason I don't post this information on Part 15 is that the board owner got all hot under the collar because I posted some links to enforcement actions. I think they are important to review, whether you are a licensed or unlicensed broadcaster, because they provide information about what the FCC considers acceptable (or not). But it's his board, and he didn't like it, so... Anyway, there are a number of professionals on this board in addition to the hobbyists, so it makes for lively discussions.

Part 15 operation has lots of possibilities and I, for one, am optimistic about the future.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom