On 6 sep, 14:30, John Smith wrote:
On 9/6/2010 5:08 AM, Cecil Moore wrote:

...
The one I remember was about the Carolina Windom 4:1 voltage balun at
the feedpoint and the 1:1 choke-isolator 20' down the coax. The
original Windom was fed, Marconi style, against ground.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I have a "weird thing" about windoms ... I just don't trust an antenna
which "manipulates" RF on the feedline in "beneficial" ways and has a
religious cult following ... insane quirk of mine, really. lol *Now I
don't have the room ... moved again.

If the wife had her way, we would move to Montana next to a favorite
sister and brother ... there we would have the room! lol

Regards,
JS

Hello John,

When the feed line goes to a clean environment (for example a ground
provision far from the shack feed line radiation may not be a problem,
but it isn't my favorite. When the feed line goes directly to the
shack (and equipment), I don't want such an antenna.

When you are working NVIS on 75/80m, you don't want the vertical
component as this leads to radiation under low elevation, hence
stronger reception of ground based interference.

In case of DX, the vertical component may help you as this may result
in lower elevation of main lobe; over here we have much soil with
better then average conductivity. If I would like vertical
polarization, I prefer 100% of that, so no windom or OCF dipoles for
me.

Depending on the design, allowing vertically polarized radiation may
result in worse or better VSWR.

Regarding the color, many straight people wear it over here
(especially in summer days), so you can't judge on color only....

Regarding the balun/transformer, you need a very good one with OCF
dipoles as common mode voltage at feed point can be in the 300V range
with 100W input. just some pF stray capacitance in a transformer will
provoke feed line radiation.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJS
www.tetech.nl
without abc in the address, PM will reach me.

On 6 sep, 13:14, Wimpie wrote:
On 6 sep, 14:30, John Smith wrote:





On 9/6/2010 5:08 AM, Cecil Moore wrote:

...
The one I remember was about the Carolina Windom 4:1 voltage balun at
the feedpoint and the 1:1 choke-isolator 20' down the coax. The
original Windom was fed, Marconi style, against ground.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

I have a "weird thing" about windoms ... I just don't trust an antenna
which "manipulates" RF on the feedline in "beneficial" ways and has a
religious cult following ... insane quirk of mine, really. lol *Now I
don't have the room ... moved again.

If the wife had her way, we would move to Montana next to a favorite
sister and brother ... there we would have the room! lol

Regards,
JS

Hello John,

When the feed line goes to a clean environment (for example a ground
provision far from the shack feed line radiation may not be a problem,
but it isn't my favorite. *When the feed line goes directly to the
shack (and equipment), I don't want such an antenna.

When you are working NVIS on 75/80m, you don't want the vertical
component as this leads to radiation under low elevation, hence
stronger reception of ground based interference.

In case of DX, the vertical component may help you as this may result
in lower elevation of main lobe; over here we have much soil with
better then average conductivity. If I would like vertical
polarization, I prefer 100% of that, so no windom or OCF dipoles for
me.

Depending on the design, allowing vertically polarized radiation may
result in worse or better VSWR.

Regarding the color, many straight people wear it over here
(especially in summer days), so you can't judge on color only....

Regarding the balun/transformer, you need a very good one with OCF
dipoles as common mode voltage at feed point can be in the 300V range
with 100W input. just some pF *stray capacitance in a transformer will
provoke feed line radiation.

Best regards,

Wim
PA3DJSwww.tetech.nl
without abc in the address, PM will reach me.- Ocultar texto de la cita -

- Mostrar texto de la cita -

Hello boys, good day for you

Is it Carolina Windom a balanced load to justify the name "balun"? We
could think in a device to transform Z and another device to block
feed line current. What do you think about it?

Miguel

On 9/9/2010 7:26 AM, lu6etj wrote:

...
Hello boys, good day for you

Is it Carolina Windom a balanced load to justify the name "balun"? We
could think in a device to transform Z and another device to block
feed line current. What do you think about it?

Miguel

Yes, I see your point, and agree. I have never ran a windom or
experimented with it, so obviously, others are much more knowledgeable
with them. However, logic tells me they would be one easily justifiable
situation to use a voltage balun ... the CM currents being looked at
separately ... the balun must have a definite and pronounced effect on
pattern with this particular antenna.

Regards,
JS

On 9/9/2010 7:26 AM, lu6etj wrote:

Hello boys, good day for you

Is it Carolina Windom a balanced load to justify the name "balun"? We
could think in a device to transform Z and another device to block
feed line current. What do you think about it?

Miguel

Before beginning a discussion about what constitutes a balanced load and
what doesn't, how about answering these questions?

1. What is "balance"?
2. What defines a "balanced" feedline?
3. What are the properties of a "balanced" load?
4. How can you tell when a line, load, or transmitter is "balanced"?
5. What's the big deal about being "balanced", anyway?

And finally,

How does a balun achieve "balance"?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On 9 sep, 15:48, Roy Lewallen wrote:
On 9/9/2010 7:26 AM, lu6etj wrote:



Hello boys, good day for you

Is it Carolina Windom a balanced load to justify the name "balun"? We
could think in a device to transform Z and another device to block
feed line current. What do you think about it?

Miguel

Before beginning a discussion about what constitutes a balanced load and
what doesn't, how about answering these questions?

1. What is "balance"?
2. What defines a "balanced" feedline?
3. What are the properties of a "balanced" load?
4. How can you tell when a line, load, or transmitter is "balanced"?
5. What's the big deal about being "balanced", anyway?

And finally,

How does a balun achieve "balance"?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Hello Roy

Why? that way we can end up having to define all words we use :). I
learnt a two terminal balanced circuit basically have the same
impedance respect to ground in its terminals, if Windom Carolina not
have it, well... we have missed the "bal" part of the equation :)

I recognize the other items are interesting to analize too but in
diferent sense that the proper use of the term "balun" towards I
pointed my little observation.

Years ago I have read your very good article "Baluns: What They Do
And How They Do lt" (until today I keep it safe in my computer for
reference) and I believe I understand where you point to with the
other good questions.

For John: Dear friend I could not translate well your post, may you
repeat in a little more Tarzan english for me?

Miguel

On 9/9/2010 6:50 PM, lu6etj wrote:

...
For John: Dear friend I could not translate well your post, may you
repeat in a little more Tarzan english for me?

Miguel

Miguel,

I can see why. I used some good old American satire-humor ... it is OK
my friend ...

Regards,
JS

On 9/9/2010 6:50 PM, lu6etj wrote:
On 9 sep, 15:48, Roy wrote:

Before beginning a discussion about what constitutes a balanced load and
what doesn't, how about answering these questions?

1. What is "balance"?
2. What defines a "balanced" feedline?
3. What are the properties of a "balanced" load?
4. How can you tell when a line, load, or transmitter is "balanced"?
5. What's the big deal about being "balanced", anyway?

And finally,

How does a balun achieve "balance"?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Hello Roy

Why? that way we can end up having to define all words we use :). I
learnt a two terminal balanced circuit basically have the same
impedance respect to ground in its terminals, if Windom Carolina not
have it, well... we have missed the "bal" part of the equation :)

I recognize the other items are interesting to analize too but in
diferent sense that the proper use of the term "balun" towards I
pointed my little observation.

Years ago I have read your very good article "Baluns: What They Do
And How They Do lt" (until today I keep it safe in my computer for
reference) and I believe I understand where you point to with the
other good questions.

For John: Dear friend I could not translate well your post, may you
repeat in a little more Tarzan english for me?

Miguel

Suppose you connect a transmission line to a perfectly symmetrical,
horizontal antenna. The antenna and feedline would be a "balanced
circuit" by your definition, since the two conductors of the
transmission line have equal impedances to ground. But the transmission
line will radiate.

Now connect one conductor of the transmission line to the center of your
rig's coaxial connector, and the other conductor to the rig's chassis.
(This is Fig. 2 of the article you mention, which by the way is
available at http://eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf.) Is it still
a "balanced circuit"? Why or why not?

Or suppose you take two signal generators which are perfectly coherent
(i.e., phase locked to run at exactly the same frequency) and exactly in
phase with each other. Each has a 50 ohm output impedance and each
produces exactly 1 volt RMS of RF when open circuited. Connect one of
these to each of the terminals of the feedline instead of connecting the
feedline to your transmitter.

Now,
-- The impedances to ground looking toward the antenna from the feedline
are the same for the two feedline terminals.
-- The impedances looking back toward the generators from the feedline
are the the same for the two feedline terminals.
-- The two feedline conductors have equal voltages and currents.
-- The circuit is surely balanced by your definition.

Yet the feedline will radiate. Change the generator phasing any other
angle except 180 degrees, and the feedline will radiate. Only when the
two generators are exactly out of phase will the line cease radiating. I
call that condition "balance" for the reasons explained in the article,
but it's quite different from your definition.

If we're to use your definition of "balance", we have to conclude that
balanced transmission lines radiate some times and some times they
don't. If the system is already "balanced" when the generators are zero
or, say, 90 degrees out of phase, would a balun do anything if connected
between the generators and transmission line?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

On 9/9/2010 7:26 AM, lu6etj wrote:

...
Hello boys, good day for you

Is it Carolina Windom a balanced load to justify the name "balun"? We
could think in a device to transform Z and another device to block
feed line current. What do you think about it?

Miguel

Tell 'em one thing "balance" means is if you have a funky antenna
depending on feedline currents/radiation/etc. you don't start chucking a
bunch of stuff in the feedline without expecting patterns to change ...

Regards,
JS

lu6etj wrote in
:

Hello boys, good day for you

Is it Carolina Windom a balanced load to justify the name "balun"? We
could think in a device to transform Z and another device to block
feed line current. What do you think about it?


Miguel,

Sometimes the language we use doesn't well describe the thing we are
thinking about, and this is a case.

We could well apply a meaning to balanced, that either the currents are
equal in magnitude but opposite in phase; or that the voltages wrt some
sensible accessible reference are equal in magnitude but opposite in
phase. One does not imply the other without constraining the load
characteristic.

When we speak of unbalanced, we commonly think of a configuration where
one side is 'grounded' and the other 'active'.

The problem is that many situations in antenna systems are not purely
either, they are not balanced by one or other of the meanings above, and
they are not unbalanced by the meaning above.

So, they need to be dealt with by the more general method of considering
that there are non-zero common mode and differential voltages and
currents.

It would be most unlikely that a Carolina Windown would be balanced, or
near to it, by any defintion. The antenna is born out of a quest to sell
the disadvantage of Windom feedline radiation as a positive feature.

The way I like to explain a balun is that it *facilitates* connection of
a not-balanced device to a balanced device. A practical balun does not,
of itself, eliminate (meaning make zero) common mode current or common
mode voltage... yet we commonly use absolute words to describe its
action.

To a certain extent, that is saying that they are not ideal or perfect
devices. Some of the rules we hams have made for baluns pretty much
assure mediocre performance. Like for example what I refer to as Rule
500, that the minimum choking impedance of a current balun is ten times
the differential characteristic impedance (commonly 50, hence Rule 500).

I know English is not your first language, but be wary of applying the
meaning of words absolutely.

Owen

On 12 sep, 20:17, Owen Duffy wrote:
lu6etj wrote :

Hello boys, good day for you

Is it Carolina Windom a balanced load to justify the name "balun"? We
could think in a device to transform Z and another device to block
feed line current. What do you think about it?

Miguel,

Sometimes the language we use doesn't well describe the thing we are
thinking about, and this is a case.

We could well apply a meaning to balanced, that either the currents are
equal in magnitude but opposite in phase; or that the voltages wrt some
sensible accessible reference are equal in magnitude but opposite in
phase. One does not imply the other without constraining the load
characteristic.

When we speak of unbalanced, we commonly think of a configuration where
one side is 'grounded' and the other 'active'.

The problem is that many situations in antenna systems are not purely
either, they are not balanced by one or other of the meanings above, and
they are not unbalanced by the meaning above.

So, they need to be dealt with by the more general method of considering
that there are non-zero common mode and differential voltages and
currents.

It would be most unlikely that a Carolina Windown would be balanced, or
near to it, by any defintion. The antenna is born out of a quest to sell
the disadvantage of Windom feedline radiation as a positive feature.

The way I like to explain a balun is that it *facilitates* connection of
a not-balanced device to a balanced device. A practical balun does not,
of itself, eliminate (meaning make zero) common mode current or common
mode voltage... yet we commonly use absolute words to describe its
action.

To a certain extent, that is saying that they are not ideal or perfect
devices. Some of the rules we hams have made for baluns pretty much
assure mediocre performance. Like for example what I refer to as Rule
500, that the minimum choking impedance of a current balun is ten times
the differential characteristic impedance (commonly 50, hence Rule 500).

I know English is not your first language, but be wary of applying the
meaning of words absolutely.

Owen

Hello Owen, it is a pleasure to meet you again.

Oh, yes, of course here we use our words with freedom too. I confess I
call "baluncitos" (little baluns) the little toroid transformers,
specially binocular ones, but in this newsgroup a lot of good people
is very strict with wording and precision of terms :) then I thought
it was no exaggeration from me ask whether it is correct use the term
"balun" when both sides are "un", hi hi.

However certainly many times in our hobby words are a true trap for
novice (and not so novices), then, why not to call things with more
proper name?, if a balun do not "baluning", well... call them "seudo-
balun" or another similar pointer to true behaviour (as our known
"pseudo-Brewster angle"). There is not a languages translation issue
here Owen, you and we, in english and spanish, missuse the same words
and concepts, the "thing" it is "globalized".
I am far of being a purist of the tongues, but you know, we hams have
misleading words, a majority of you are true experts in RF and it is
difficult you can become confussed. Anyway, is not something to worry
so much either, the mine It was a casual comment, blame to Roy by take
us to the hard theory

Greetings

Miguel