Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 10:11 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Whip antennas with coils

In message , Roy Lewallen
writes
On 8/31/2010 3:09 PM, Richard Fry wrote:
On Aug 30, 5:52 pm, Roy wrote:

In my example, the antenna is not matched to the transmission line. Nor,
for that matter, is the transmitter matched to the transmission line. My
point is that power transfer doesn't depend on either of these points
being matched.


Roy:

My post showing very high input SWR at the base of an unloaded, base-
driven, 10 foot vertical on 3.8 MHz described an UNMATCHED system
resulting from its connection to transmission lines of typical
impedance values. It did not include matching networks, whether
located at the base of the vertical radiator, the output connector of
the transmitter, or wherever.

Then you posted, "Using your antenna as an example, suppose that a
transmitter with output Z of 50 ohms is connected to a tuner that
transforms its output impedance to 0.6 + j1250 ohms. ... The
transmitter will see 50 + j0 ohms, the antenna will see an impedance
of 0.6 + j1250 ohms, and full power will be transferred."

That configuration you posted is a MATCHED system, and its performance
does not disprove the accuracy of my post.

RF


So you're saying that the mismatch between the impedance of an antenna
and the transmission line connected to it doesn't inhibit power flow
when there's a matching network anywhere in the system. But it does
interfere with power flow when there's no matching network?

What if the antenna is 50 ohms and the transmission line is a half
wavelength of 600 ohms, for a 12:1 mismatch? There's no matching
network. The transmitter sees 50 ohms. The antenna sees 50 ohms. What
will interfere with the power flow?


In my simplistic world, this is how I understand things:

Provided the TX is followed by a tuner/matcher, which matches whatever
is attached to the tuner output to 50 ohms at the tuner input, the TX
will be happy.

The power loss in the feeder is essentially a function of its inherent
loss (when matched) per unit length, and the SWR on it.

The SWR is a function of the mismatch between the load on the antenna
end of the feeder, and the feeder characteristic impedance. The greater
the SWR and the longer the feeder, the higher will be the loss on the
feeder. 'Lossless' feeder have no loss, regardless of length and SWR.
However, with real-world feeders, the losses rise increasingly rapidly
with increasing SWR.

The impedance looking into the tuner end of the feeder is the impedance
of the load, transformed by length of the feeder, and is also modified
by the loss of the feeder.

The higher the feeder loss, the closer the impedance seen at the tuner
end will approach the characteristic impedance of the feeder. [Long
lengths of lossy feeder - maybe with a nominal termination on the far
end - can make good dummy loads at VHF and UHF.]
--
Ian
  #2   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 11:09 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,169
Default Whip antennas with coils

Ian Jackson wrote in
:

....
In my simplistic world, this is how I understand things:

Provided the TX is followed by a tuner/matcher, which matches whatever
is attached to the tuner output to 50 ohms at the tuner input, the TX
will be happy.


"Happey" eh!

The power loss in the feeder is essentially a function of its inherent
loss (when matched) per unit length, and the SWR on it.


Wrong.


The SWR is a function of the mismatch between the load on the antenna
end of the feeder, and the feeder characteristic impedance. The


Well, the SWR at the load end is a function of Zl and Zo (both complex
quantities)... but the 'notional' SWR varies along the line as accounted
for by the complex propagation coefficient, in most practical cases at
HF, SWR decreases smoothly from load to source.

greater the SWR and the longer the feeder, the higher will be the loss
on the feeder. 'Lossless' feeder have no loss, regardless of length
and SWR. However, with real-world feeders, the losses rise
increasingly rapidly with increasing SWR.


See your earlier misconception regarding loss being a simple function of
SWR.


The impedance looking into the tuner end of the feeder is the
impedance of the load, transformed by length of the feeder, and is
also modified by the loss of the feeder.


You got that right.


The higher the feeder loss, the closer the impedance seen at the tuner
end will approach the characteristic impedance of the feeder. [Long
lengths of lossy feeder - maybe with a nominal termination on the far
end - can make good dummy loads at VHF and UHF.]


Yes, but is it of practical application in a transmit scenario? If the
input impedance due to a severly mismatched load is at all close to Zo,
then you have lost most of the transmitter power in the line.

The "make a good dummy load" recipe doesn't address the power rating,
especially where most of the power is dissipated in a very short length
of cable.

Owen
  #3   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 11:24 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,169
Default Whip antennas with coils

Owen Duffy wrote in news:Xns9DE6CD1DCDA37nonenowhere@
61.9.134.55:

"Happey" eh!


How did that e get in there...

"Happy", a new dumbed down attribute of a transmitter. Everyone loves a
happy transmittter.

What happens if they are not happy? Well, everyone knows you will let the
smoke out of them (AKA reflected power is dissipated in the PA and kills
transmitters).

Yep, a simple world... even if wrong.

Owen
  #4   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 04:29 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Whip antennas with coils

In message , Owen Duffy
writes
Ian Jackson wrote in
:

...
In my simplistic world, this is how I understand things:

Provided the TX is followed by a tuner/matcher, which matches whatever
is attached to the tuner output to 50 ohms at the tuner input, the TX
will be happy.


"Happey" eh!


Your later correction is noted!

The power loss in the feeder is essentially a function of its inherent
loss (when matched) per unit length, and the SWR on it.


Wrong.

OK, the loss may not be uniform if the SWR is greater at the load end.
But when is the power loss* NOT a function of its matched loss per unit
length, and the SWR on it. [*Should I have said 'in dB'? ]

The SWR is a function of the mismatch between the load on the antenna
end of the feeder, and the feeder characteristic impedance. The


Well, the SWR at the load end is a function of Zl and Zo (both complex
quantities)... but the 'notional' SWR varies along the line as accounted
for by the complex propagation coefficient, in most practical cases at
HF, SWR decreases smoothly from load to source.

greater the SWR and the longer the feeder, the higher will be the loss
on the feeder. 'Lossless' feeder have no loss, regardless of length
and SWR. However, with real-world feeders, the losses rise
increasingly rapidly with increasing SWR.


See your earlier misconception regarding loss being a simple function of
SWR.

I didn't say 'simple'. I said 'essentially'.

The impedance looking into the tuner end of the feeder is the
impedance of the load, transformed by length of the feeder, and is
also modified by the loss of the feeder.


You got that right.

Yes, I know I did.

The higher the feeder loss, the closer the impedance seen at the tuner
end will approach the characteristic impedance of the feeder. [Long
lengths of lossy feeder - maybe with a nominal termination on the far
end - can make good dummy loads at VHF and UHF.]


Yes, but is it of practical application in a transmit scenario?


As a termination, I've used a fairly long piece of coax plus, for good
luck, a low-power termination hung on the end.

If the
input impedance due to a severly mismatched load is at all close to Zo,
then you have lost most of the transmitter power in the line.

Quite.

The "make a good dummy load" recipe doesn't address the power rating,
especially where most of the power is dissipated in a very short length
of cable.

Oh, indeed. But I have to confess that I've realised that I'm suddenly
unsure of where, on a long, lossy, feeder with a mismatched load, most
of the absolute power is actually lost. I'm assuming that it is at the
TX end, where the power is greatest - even though that's where the SWR
is best. Please advise!
--
Ian
  #5   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 05:20 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 572
Default Whip antennas with coils

On Sep 1, 10:29 am, Ian Jackson
wrote:
Oh, indeed. But I have to confess that I've realised that I'm suddenly
unsure of where, on a long, lossy, feeder with a mismatched load, most
of the absolute power is actually lost. I'm assuming that it is at the
TX end, where the power is greatest - even though that's where the SWR
is best. Please advise!


It seems logical that the highest I^2*R losses would be where the
standing-wave current is maximum and the highest dielectric losses
wold be where the the standing-wave voltage is maximum. As Owen is
fond of pointing out, the locations of those points are very
important. If a current maximum point exists at the load and a voltage
maximum point exists at the source, the losses at the load are
probably higher than the losses at the source on HF. If a voltage
maximum point exists at the load and a current maximum point exists at
the source, the losses at the load are probably lower than the losses
at the source on HF (assuming that losses due to SWR are mostly I^2*R
losses on HF).
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com


  #6   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 05:43 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,915
Default Whip antennas with coils

On 9/1/2010 9:20 AM, Cecil Moore wrote:

...
It seems logical that the highest I^2*R losses would be where the
standing-wave current is maximum and the highest dielectric losses
wold be where the the standing-wave voltage is maximum. As Owen is
fond of pointing out, the locations of those points are very
important. If a current maximum point exists at the load and a voltage
maximum point exists at the source, the losses at the load are
probably higher than the losses at the source on HF. If a voltage
maximum point exists at the load and a current maximum point exists at
the source, the losses at the load are probably lower than the losses
at the source on HF (assuming that losses due to SWR are mostly I^2*R
losses on HF).
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com


Uhhh, sorry to pose this question to you here but, doesn't a "tuner"
really just "shorten" and "lengthen" the feed line? I mean, not
physically, of course. But, it would seem to me that, this is exactly
what my xmitter and ant are "seeing."

Regards,
JS
  #7   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 07:35 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 572
Default Whip antennas with coils

On Sep 1, 11:43*am, John Smith wrote:
Uhhh, sorry to pose this question to you here but, doesn't a "tuner"
really just "shorten" and "lengthen" the feed line? *I mean, not
physically, of course. *But, it would seem to me that, this is exactly
what my xmitter and ant are "seeing."


If all the tuner did was shorten and lengthen the feedline, there
would be only one purely resistive low resistance available on the SWR
circle on the Smith Chart and it wouldn't be exactly 50 ohms. So a
tuner does one other thing - it transforms the non-50 ohm resistive
impedance to a 50 ohm resistive impedance. It is not only the
equivalent of shortening and lengthening the transmission line but
also performs an N:1 transformer function. Of course, it does that
seamlessly, i.e. it is not actually a two-step process.

When I vary the length of my ladder-line to obtain system resonance, I
have to be satisfied with purely resistive impedances between 35 ohms
and 85 ohms. I cannot achieve a perfect 50 ohms on all HF bands with
my matching method. That would require the addition of an actual N:1
transformer which is certainly possible but probably not worth the
effort. Since 35-85 ohms is perfectly acceptable to my SC-500 amp, I
don't need a high-power tuner. And since the SC-500 is spec'ed to
handle an SWR of 6:1, I doubt that an 35-85 ohm load makes it
"unhappy". If my SC-500 has ever been "unhappy", I failed to observe
that "unhappiness" but maybe I am just oblivious to such?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com
  #8   Report Post  
Old September 2nd 10, 02:20 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,915
Default Whip antennas with coils

On 9/1/2010 11:35 AM, Cecil Moore wrote:

...
When I vary the length of my ladder-line to obtain system resonance, I
have to be satisfied with purely resistive impedances between 35 ohms
and 85 ohms. I cannot achieve a perfect 50 ohms on all HF bands with
my matching method. That would require the addition of an actual N:1
transformer which is certainly possible but probably not worth the
effort. Since 35-85 ohms is perfectly acceptable to my SC-500 amp, I
don't need a high-power tuner. And since the SC-500 is spec'ed to
handle an SWR of 6:1, I doubt that an 35-85 ohm load makes it
"unhappy". If my SC-500 has ever been "unhappy", I failed to observe
that "unhappiness" but maybe I am just oblivious to such?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com


No, I got you. Soon as you stepped though the logic, the match became
quite clear as a "third leg" ... glad you have a "happy amp" ... but if
the amp goes overboard, escalates its' state of happiness and goes into
the "gay zone", DUMP IT at the nearest swap! stoopid grin

Regards,
JS
  #9   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 07:54 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Whip antennas with coils

In message
,
Cecil Moore writes
On Sep 1, 10:29 am, Ian Jackson
wrote:
Oh, indeed. But I have to confess that I've realised that I'm suddenly
unsure of where, on a long, lossy, feeder with a mismatched load, most
of the absolute power is actually lost. I'm assuming that it is at the
TX end, where the power is greatest - even though that's where the SWR
is best. Please advise!


It seems logical that the highest I^2*R losses would be where the
standing-wave current is maximum and the highest dielectric losses
wold be where the the standing-wave voltage is maximum. As Owen is
fond of pointing out, the locations of those points are very
important. If a current maximum point exists at the load and a voltage
maximum point exists at the source, the losses at the load are
probably higher than the losses at the source on HF. If a voltage
maximum point exists at the load and a current maximum point exists at
the source, the losses at the load are probably lower than the losses
at the source on HF (assuming that losses due to SWR are mostly I^2*R
losses on HF).
--

The SWR on a feeder will always be greatest at the load end. However,
because of the feeder losses, the power will also be lowest at the load
end.

So, although the power loss per unit length (in dB) due to SWR will
steadily increase as you approach the load end, because of the feeder
loss, there will be less absolute power (in watts) to lose as you
approach the load end.

The question is, at which end of the feeder is the most absolute power
lost per unit length?
--
Ian
  #10   Report Post  
Old September 1st 10, 08:19 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 572
Default Whip antennas with coils

On Sep 1, 1:54*pm, Ian Jackson
wrote:
The question is, at which end of the feeder is the most absolute power
lost per unit length?


I already explained that. On HF, maximum losses depend upon where the
current/voltage-nodes/loops are located on the transmission line. One
cannot answer the above question without knowing that information and
the answer is different depending upon the conditions.

Owen has previously proved that on HF, a higher SWR can result in
lower losses than a flat line when that high SWR is near a current
node and the feedline is less than a quarter wavelength long simply
because the average standing-wave current is *lower* than the flat
line current.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com


Reply
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
AM-loop versus whip antennas KaitoWRX911 Shortwave 4 August 25th 08 10:11 PM
Vertical Whip Antennas And Gain Question ? Robert11 Antenna 5 August 8th 07 10:42 PM
source for replacement whip antennas? Lisa Simpson Shortwave 7 April 16th 06 07:29 PM
Super-whippy whip antennas Paul Burridge Homebrew 52 August 7th 03 01:29 AM
Super-whippy whip antennas Paul Burridge Homebrew 0 August 1st 03 10:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017