- #36
michael1978
- 434
- 19
Hi Merlin this book is fromMerlin3189 said:First, apologies to Baluncore for confusing him with Anorlunda.
Well done on all the simulation work. I really ought to try to learn to use this Spice stuff myself.
Second, I think I can now see the Colpitts configuration, with the crystal and 390pF & VC across it. If the 4.3uH is bundled in with the VC, there will be a setting where, at the crystal frequency the combination appears as a capacitor of the right value to get the unit+ loop gain. Quite how the inductor helps, I'm not sure yet.
What would be very helpful, would be someone with a copy of the ARRL "Experimental Methods in RF Design" which seems to be the source of this cct.
And since my interest has been piqued in the idea of emitter follower negative resistance, I'd be very pleased if anyone could point me to a detailed analysis of the emitter follower with a complex load, rather than a predominantly real one. Otherwise I guess I'll have to make a pathetic attempt at doing it myself and posting a thread to ask for people to sort it out.
You can take the book from library genesis.com only the book but the cd of book i don't know where to find.Merlin3189 said:First, apologies to Baluncore for confusing him with Anorlunda.
Well done on all the simulation work. I really ought to try to learn to use this Spice stuff myself.
Second, I think I can now see the Colpitts configuration, with the crystal and 390pF & VC across it. If the 4.3uH is bundled in with the VC, there will be a setting where, at the crystal frequency the combination appears as a capacitor of the right value to get the unit+ loop gain. Quite how the inductor helps, I'm not sure yet.
What would be very helpful, would be someone with a copy of the ARRL "Experimental Methods in RF Design" which seems to be the source of this cct.
And since my interest has been piqued in the idea of emitter follower negative resistance, I'd be very pleased if anyone could point me to a detailed analysis of the emitter follower with a complex load, rather than a predominantly real one. Otherwise I guess I'll have to make a pathetic attempt at doing it myself and posting a thread to ask for people to sort it out.