Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 18, 10:32*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:44:05 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE wrote: I was considering using a TV type 4:1 balun on 2 meters. Does anyone know how much power these can handle? I remember a guy doing this when I was a teenager(long ago) but I think the baluns were built a little stouter back then than they are now. May I suggest using a coaxial cable 4:1 balun instead of ferrite core type. *A 1/2 wave electrical length of coax cable, some soldering, and you're done. *For just 2 meters, the bandwidth is just fine and the loss is no more than that of the coax cable. *For low power, small diameter RG-174 type coax is fine. *I use 4:1 coax baluns for matching 300 ohm folded dipole antennas: http://users.belgacom.net/hamradio/schemas/14balun.gif The common TV balun has two xfomers inside, which are sometimes combined on a single core. *See schematics at: http://members.tripod.com/rclindia/trans.html http://www.electronics-tutorials.com/basics/baluns.htm However, if size is an issue, I guess the coax balun is a bit large. For just 2 meters, the ferrite core is not necessary. *Just find a block of PTFE (Teflon) or plastic, and drill it to resemble the TV balun core, use 2 PTFE toroid cores (if you can find them), or simulate a torroid with a stack of nylon washers. *Then wind the 2 pairs of 2 wires through the holes and bring out the connections. -- Jeff Liebermann * * 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558 I was rummaging through my mobil junk er toolbox and came across an old package of air core TV baluns. These date back to the day when TVs were usually fed with twin lead. Tuesday I may be able to get to some test equipment to check out the losses on those. Gee getting to spend a 3day weekend on the road is such fun. Jimmie |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 18, 10:32*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:44:05 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE wrote: I was considering using a TV type 4:1 balun on 2 meters. Does anyone know how much power these can handle? I remember a guy doing this when I was a teenager(long ago) but I think the baluns were built a little stouter back then than they are now. May I suggest using a coaxial cable 4:1 balun instead of ferrite core type. *A 1/2 wave electrical length of coax cable, some soldering, and you're done. *For just 2 meters, the bandwidth is just fine and the loss is no more than that of the coax cable. *For low power, small diameter RG-174 type coax is fine. *I use 4:1 coax baluns for matching 300 ohm folded dipole antennas: http://users.belgacom.net/hamradio/schemas/14balun.gif The common TV balun has two xfomers inside, which are sometimes combined on a single core. *See schematics at: http://members.tripod.com/rclindia/trans.html http://www.electronics-tutorials.com/basics/baluns.htm However, if size is an issue, I guess the coax balun is a bit large. For just 2 meters, the ferrite core is not necessary. *Just find a block of PTFE (Teflon) or plastic, and drill it to resemble the TV balun core, use 2 PTFE toroid cores (if you can find them), or simulate a torroid with a stack of nylon washers. *Then wind the 2 pairs of 2 wires through the holes and bring out the connections. -- Jeff Liebermann * * 150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558 Jeff, Apparently TV matching transformers used to be air core and their use was quite common on 6 and 2 meter antennas.I knew the ones built into the old tuners were but I hadnt thought the old line transformers also being air core.They were per some of the locals on 2m repeater. If they aare the ones I am thinking of(big fat ones) I have a few at home. Jimmie |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:10:07 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
wrote: Jeff, Apparently TV matching transformers used to be air core and their use was quite common on 6 and 2 meter antennas. Not on any 2m or 6m antenna I've seen or build. Most of what I've seen used T-match, hair-pin match, gamma match, or something similar. For the vertical collinears, I used a tapped coil. If I wanted lots of bandwidth, perhaps a ferrite core might be useful, but for single VHF band antennas, it's a lossy waste. I knew the ones built into the old tuners were but I hadnt thought the old line transformers also being air core. The over-simplified idea behind the ferrite (or powdered iron for HF) cores is to increase the inductance of the windings so the xformer works at lower frequencies. At VHF and UHF frequencies, the core mostly disappears and you're relying totally on the coupling between the bifilar windings. They were per some of the locals on 2m repeater. If they aare the ones I am thinking of(big fat ones) I have a few at home. Jimmie -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:43:27 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: The over-simplified idea behind the ferrite (or powdered iron for HF) cores is to increase the inductance of the windings so the xformer works at lower frequencies. At VHF and UHF frequencies, the core mostly disappears and you're relying totally on the coupling between the bifilar windings. Actually that is not the mechanism at all, simplified or complexified. Ferrite compounds for BalUn application principally add resistance to the common mode path and have (as a design goal) absolutely no magnetic influence whatever. The increase of inductance is haphazard at best, and some ferrite compounds actually increase the capacitive reactance. As such, ferrites are not principally employed in building inductors. Further, iron cores don't serve much purpose for choking which is the principle requirement for BalUn input to output isolation. If you want to build an iron core, magnetic linkage transformer (AKA audio or power transformer), this is a very different beast from a BalUn, and a miserable replacement. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:43:27 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote: The over-simplified idea behind the ferrite (or powdered iron for HF) cores is to increase the inductance of the windings so the xformer works at lower frequencies. At VHF and UHF frequencies, the core mostly disappears and you're relying totally on the coupling between the bifilar windings. Actually that is not the mechanism at all, simplified or complexified. Ferrite compounds for BalUn application principally add resistance to the common mode path and have (as a design goal) absolutely no magnetic influence whatever. The increase of inductance is haphazard at best, and some ferrite compounds actually increase the capacitive reactance. As such, ferrites are not principally employed in building inductors. Further, iron cores don't serve much purpose for choking which is the principle requirement for BalUn input to output isolation. If you want to build an iron core, magnetic linkage transformer (AKA audio or power transformer), this is a very different beast from a BalUn, and a miserable replacement. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC When designing any transformer, be it audio, power, or RF, you usually want to accomplish three things: 1. Maximize the winding impedance. 2. Minimize the leakage impedance. This is another way of saying you want to maximize the coupling between the windings. 3. Realize an acceptably low loss. At low frequencies, most cores primarily provide inductance, so most literature dealing with transformers speaks of "inductance" rather than "impedance" when discussing the basic goals. But low frequency transformers could be made and would function just fine using resistive core materials if they were available. The third goal can be achieved with resistive materials as long as the first and second goals are accomplished well enough. That is, if the winding impedance is high enough, the magnetizing current will be low, so I^2*R loss will be low. And if coupling is good, increasing the current in one winding won't appreciably increase the core flux and incur extra loss. But at RF, as Richard says, many ferrite cores are more resistive than inductive. Not all are -- there are high frequency ferrites that remain inductive at very high frequencies. However, for the HF range and above, the best choice is usually "low frequency" ferrites which are primarily resistive in that frequency range. They're best for two reasons -- first, they provide much more impedance per turn squared than high frequency ferrites, making the first two goals much easier to achieve; and second, there are no resonance effects. An inductive winding will resonate with stray capacitance at some frequency. The impedance drops above that frequency, limiting the upper range of the transformer. The winding and leakage inductances can also resonate with external capacitance and cause ringing in some applications. A properly designed transformer using an essentially resistive core can operate very well over several decades of frequency. For most RF applications, it's not hard to design a transformer or balun that will have well under 1 dB of loss, which is negligible again in most applications. But if high power is involved, even a fraction of a dB might represent several or may watts of power, resulting in intolerable core heating. In those applications, lower loss, i.e., more inductive and less resistive, cores have to be used, often resulting in more difficult design and/or reduced performance in other respects. Resistive ferrites are also often good choices for RF chokes for the same reasons that they make good transformers. High-Q inductors and tuned transformers are a different critter, though. For those applications you want to use very low loss, that is, inductive and not resistive, core materials. This often leads to confusion, since ferrite manufacturers have traditionally specified a "recommended" frequency range for various materials which refers to the best range for these applications. The best material for an RF transformer is usually one with a "recommended" (for high-Q inductor applications) frequency range well below the transformer operating frequency. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jimmie,
I have tried and used these tv baluns so I could run 300-ohm cable to my antenna. BUT I only ran about 5 watts. I used one on both ends of a 100-ft run of 300-ohm cable ( so as to reduce losses) . (And I used it on 10 meters, not 2 meters) I later wound my own impedence-matching 4-to-1 baluns to handle a full 100 watts. You're on the right track of having fun with transmission lines, impedence matching, and antenna building - keep it up. W4PMJ - hal "JIMMIE" wrote in message ... I was considering using a TV type 4:1 balun on 2 meters. Does anyone know how much power these can handle? I remember a guy doing this when I was a teenager(long ago) but I think the baluns were built a little stouter back then than they are now. Jimmie |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
SWL Newbies : The Magnetic Long-Wire Antenna Balun - A Balun It Ain't | Shortwave | |||
9 to 1 balun | Antenna | |||
Balun 4:1 | Antenna | |||
SWL Balun | Antenna | |||
Horizontal loop - balun or no balun ? | Antenna |