Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Balun question
Pierre,
If you don't remove that 'old' balun, then you don't have a 4:1 conversion anymore, but with 'both' baluns connected, it's more on the order of an 8:1 conversion. Is that 'bad'? That depends on the antenna's impedance and the feed line's impedance, but in general, I would think that it wouldn't exactly be the 'best' thing you could do. Removing the 'old' balun would probably be your 'best' bet. May make making connections a little more difficult (or at least 'different') but still the 'best' solution. Then again, before doing that "out with the old" thingy, try it and see what the results are with both baluns in-line. Results 'better' with or without the old balun still in line? Hmm, if I had to 'guess', I'd have to say removing the old balun would probably be your best bet. At the very least, it means a little less weight hanging on the antenna, one less 'point of loss' in the whole thing... - 'Doc (May not be the 'best' answer in the world, but it's sure a nice "CYA"... ain't it?) |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
4:1 balun question | Antenna | |||
Balun Question | Antenna | |||
Balun question... | Scanner | |||
4:1 balun question | Antenna |