LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #24   Report Post  
Old August 14th 07, 05:53 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 644
Default measuring cable loss

On Aug 14, 8:45 am, Jim Lux wrote:
I am rather fond of the coupled-line hybrid idea: it can be built in
a way that everything stays ratiometric, so the coupling ratio is very
nearly constant over temperature, and of course the directionality
lets you observe things you can't just from monitoring voltage at a
point. It's possible to build one with low coupling without too much
trouble; -60dB coupling isn't out of the question, for sure. I'm
imagining a design I could make reliably with simple machine tools
that would work well for the OP's application: 100 watts at about
1GHz as I recall in the through line, and coupling on the order of
-60dB to get to about -10dBm coupled power and have negligible effect
on the through line. There's a free fields solver software package
that will accurately predict the coupling, and with the right design
and normal machine shop tolerances the coupling and impedance should
be accurate to a fraction of a dB and better than a percent,
respectively. Perhaps I can run some examples to see if I'm off-base
on that, but that's what my mental calculations tell me at the moment.


Actually, the exact coupling ratio probably isn't important in this
application, because it could be "calibrated out". Stability would be a
bigger concern, and it's certainly possible to design a coupler that is
very temperature stable by choosing the right dimensions so that things
change in the right ratios.


Bingo. It's that ratiometric thing that is a big plus for stability.
In a coupler made of all the same metal, or at least metals that have
nearly equal coefficients of expansion, the ratios stay the same, and
it's the dimensional ratios that establish the coupling and
impedances, not the absolute size. Actually, the change in length
does matter, but if you make the assembly a quarter wave long, the
d(coupling)/d(length) is zero at that point anyway. In any event, I
suppose the thermal coefficient of expansion of metals you'd be most
likely to use is small enough that you'd be fine with a shorter
coupler. There doesn't need to be anything terribly complex about the
geometry of the whole thing, either. It's probably safe to say that
changes in the dielectric constant of air due to air pressure and
humidity aren't going to be significant in this case. ;-)

Cheers,
Tom

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Measuring quarter wave cable length with HP 8405A Gary Schafer Antenna 8 May 5th 06 03:11 AM
Calculating Coaxial Cable Loss David Robbins Antenna 5 January 1st 04 01:07 AM
Antenna cable loss query AES/newspost Scanner 7 December 11th 03 10:55 PM
Antenna cable loss query AES/newspost Shortwave 7 December 11th 03 10:55 PM
Measuring small inductances using a return loss bridge aWn Homebrew 11 September 11th 03 03:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017