Re: Pushing the QCX (T1 question) #qcx
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Yes, protection circuits would have added cost and complexity. And it is hard to protect against every possible failure mode. In my opinion it wasn't necessary. During all my QCX development, I never managed to break any IC3, Q6 (the earlier MPS2907 0.6A version), or any of the BS170s. Not by mismatched load, nor open load, nor short-circuit, nor continuous duty-cycle. Not even by temporarily increasing the supply voltage to around 20V and getting 10W out. Not a failure on any of the six bands. Not with a detuned Class-E resonant circuit either. If I couldn't cause any failures while I was working on the development... I didn't see the need to unnecessarily increase the cost and complexity if it was so hard for me to break something.
73 Hans G0UPL
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018, 17:27 Alan de G1FXB via Groups.Io <email@example.com> wrote: