Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
tom wrote in
t: On 5/4/2010 3:58 PM, Owen Duffy wrote: The technique presumably is to insert a (lossy) capacitive reactance in series with the feedpoint, and such that the reactance decreases with freqeuency, thus exacerbating the natural feedpoint impedance change. Owen I am curious about your statement. You say "insert a (lossy) capacitive reactance in series". Why would a braidless piece of coax inserted in a tube have significantly different loss than the intact coax of that length? I've made matches made that way for decades that ran at full or near full legal limit on 6m. I'm pretty sure that any significant loss would have shown up as dripping plastic. The matches when taken apart after years of use show no sign of heating. Tom, My use of "lossy" was to remind readers that capacitive reactance obtained by using such a transmission line element is a relatively lossy 'capacitor'. For example. an o/c stub of RG213 for a reactance of -10 ohms at 144MHz has a resistance of about 0.1 ohms, or a Q of about 100. That is not a huge loss, but quality capacitors achieve much higher Q than that. So, I don't know why one might use such a thing in a driven element, introducing say 0.2 ohms of resistance which consumes about 0.4% of the power if it was a R=50 feedpoint, when a similar reactance could be obtained by a slight shortening. The purpose is probably not for frequency compensation, it works the wrong way. Is the loss significant, not really in this case, and it won't melt the PE, but TL derived capacitors are relatively lower Q. Owen |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/4/2010 6:39 PM, Owen Duffy wrote:
Tom, My use of "lossy" was to remind readers that capacitive reactance obtained by using such a transmission line element is a relatively lossy 'capacitor'. For example. an o/c stub of RG213 for a reactance of -10 ohms at 144MHz has a resistance of about 0.1 ohms, or a Q of about 100. That is not a huge loss, but quality capacitors achieve much higher Q than that. So, I don't know why one might use such a thing in a driven element, introducing say 0.2 ohms of resistance which consumes about 0.4% of the power if it was a R=50 feedpoint, when a similar reactance could be obtained by a slight shortening. The purpose is probably not for frequency compensation, it works the wrong way. Is the loss significant, not really in this case, and it won't melt the PE, but TL derived capacitors are relatively lower Q. Owen I'll take the .4%. I'll take 4%. It's a bulletproof easy way to make a gamma match. I've never had one fail, and I've made quite a few. And you need to define where you think lossy starts, because nothing that we can afford to use isn't, and true room temperature superconductors still aren't available. tom K0TAR |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/4/2010 8:17 PM, tom wrote:
On 5/4/2010 6:39 PM, Owen Duffy wrote: Tom, My use of "lossy" was to remind readers that capacitive reactance obtained by using such a transmission line element is a relatively lossy 'capacitor'. For example. an o/c stub of RG213 for a reactance of -10 ohms at 144MHz has a resistance of about 0.1 ohms, or a Q of about 100. That is not a huge loss, but quality capacitors achieve much higher Q than that. So, I don't know why one might use such a thing in a driven element, introducing say 0.2 ohms of resistance which consumes about 0.4% of the power if it was a R=50 feedpoint, when a similar reactance could be obtained by a slight shortening. The purpose is probably not for frequency compensation, it works the wrong way. And I forgot to address this. Because .4% is meaningless and the change to a slightly less lossy feed method would contribute nothing useful for the effort. Because the effort with your method is that I would have to trim an element clip by clip instead of simply sliding things at the match. tom K0TAR |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/4/2010 6:39 PM, Owen Duffy wrote:
wrote in t: On 5/4/2010 3:58 PM, Owen Duffy wrote: The technique presumably is to insert a (lossy) capacitive reactance in series with the feedpoint, and such that the reactance decreases with freqeuency, thus exacerbating the natural feedpoint impedance change. Owen I am curious about your statement. You say "insert a (lossy) capacitive reactance in series". Why would a braidless piece of coax inserted in a tube have significantly different loss than the intact coax of that length? I've made matches made that way for decades that ran at full or near full legal limit on 6m. I'm pretty sure that any significant loss would have shown up as dripping plastic. The matches when taken apart after years of use show no sign of heating. Tom, My use of "lossy" was to remind readers that capacitive reactance obtained by using such a transmission line element is a relatively lossy 'capacitor'. For example. an o/c stub of RG213 for a reactance of -10 ohms at 144MHz has a resistance of about 0.1 ohms, or a Q of about 100. That is not a huge loss, but quality capacitors achieve much higher Q than that. So, I don't know why one might use such a thing in a driven element, introducing say 0.2 ohms of resistance which consumes about 0.4% of the power if it was a R=50 feedpoint, when a similar reactance could be obtained by a slight shortening. The purpose is probably not for frequency compensation, it works the wrong way. Is the loss significant, not really in this case, and it won't melt the PE, but TL derived capacitors are relatively lower Q. Owen Sorry, but I thought of another comment. ![]() Length for length, a 50 ohm feed yagi has already lost much more than ..4% when compared to a well designed yagi on the same boom in the 20 to 25 ohm range. I'm speaking of .6 to .8 lambda and up yagis. tom K0TAR |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4 mayo, 20:39, Owen Duffy wrote:
tom wrote .net: On 5/4/2010 3:58 PM, Owen Duffy wrote: The technique presumably is to insert a (lossy) capacitive reactance in series with the feedpoint, and such that the reactance decreases with freqeuency, thus exacerbating the natural feedpoint impedance change. Owen I am curious about your statement. *You say "insert a (lossy) capacitive reactance in series". *Why would a braidless piece of coax inserted in a tube have significantly different loss than the intact coax of that length? I've made matches made that way for decades that ran at full or near full legal limit on 6m. *I'm pretty sure that any significant loss would have shown up as dripping plastic. *The matches when taken apart after years of use show no sign of heating. Tom, My use of "lossy" was to remind readers that capacitive reactance obtained by using such a transmission line element is a relatively lossy 'capacitor'. For example. an o/c stub of RG213 for a reactance of -10 ohms at 144MHz has a resistance of about 0.1 ohms, or a Q of about 100. That is not a huge loss, but quality capacitors achieve much higher Q than that. So, I don't know why one might use such a thing in a driven element, introducing say 0.2 ohms of resistance which consumes about 0.4% of the power if it was a R=50 feedpoint, when a similar reactance could be obtained by a slight shortening. The purpose is probably not for frequency compensation, it works the wrong way. Is the loss significant, not really in this case, and it won't melt the PE, but TL derived capacitors are relatively lower Q. Owen- Ocultar texto de la cita - - Mostrar texto de la cita - Could it simply be a capacitive coupling method without any matching property ? |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
lu6etj wrote in
: Could it simply be a capacitive coupling method without any matching property ? That depends what you mean by "without any matching property". If the o/c stub is less than an electrical quarter wave (as it seems from the description, it must introduce some series capacitive reactance, and loss resistance, the longer it is, the higher the loss resistance. It is not at all obvious why they would do what you described (and for Tom's benefit, I am not talking about a gamma match). Owen |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 6 mayo, 19:20, Owen Duffy wrote:
lu6etj wrote : Could it simply be a capacitive coupling method without any matching property ? That depends what you mean by "without any matching property". If the o/c stub is less than an electrical quarter wave (as it seems from the description, it must introduce some series capacitive reactance, and loss resistance, the longer it is, the higher the loss resistance. It is not at all obvious why they would do what you described (and for Tom's benefit, I am not talking about a gamma match). Owen Hi Owen I mean "any matching property" in the sense that we give to a coupling condenser in electronic circuits. Another possibility could be that it was a method to trim the resonant frequency easily from the center of the structure without to cut the tube neither to make it telescopic making the element a little more longer. I don`t know, I hoped to obtain a correct answer looking for it in the Web. At worse, maybe that system never existed. I only remember sometimes heard speak about it in the eter or a mailing list :) Thank you very much for your helping Miguel LU6ETJ |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 8 mayo, 15:13, lu6etj wrote:
On 6 mayo, 19:20, Owen Duffy wrote: lu6etj wrote : Could it simply be a capacitive coupling method without any matching property ? That depends what you mean by "without any matching property". If the o/c stub is less than an electrical quarter wave (as it seems from the description, it must introduce some series capacitive reactance, and loss resistance, the longer it is, the higher the loss resistance. It is not at all obvious why they would do what you described (and for Tom's benefit, I am not talking about a gamma match). Owen Hi Owen I mean "any matching property" in the sense that we give to a coupling condenser in electronic circuits. Another possibility could be that it was a method to trim the resonant frequency easily from the center of the structure without to cut the tube neither to make it telescopic making the element a little more longer. I don`t know, I hoped to obtain a correct answer looking for it in the Web. At worse, maybe that system never existed. I only remember sometimes heard speak about it in the eter or a mailing list :) Thank you very much for your helping Miguel LU6ETJ Another speculation... Increasing dipole length radiation resistance increases. Could be a method devised to take advantage of that effect using the condenser to take the antenna to resonance again Will it compensate the increase in the radiation resistance the higher losses in coaxial condenser? Miguel |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
End-feeding dipoles | Antenna | |||
Feeding Inv Vee antenna | Antenna | |||
Feeding a doublet | Antenna | |||
old trunking system information MISC system info | Scanner | |||
Feeding a Dipole | General |