Owen wrote:
On 17/10/10 22:42, Alejandro Lieber wrote:
Since I built my first 80meter/40meter 6aq5 + 6DQ6 transmitter with pi
output in 1972, when I want to vary the inductance of a coil in a
tunner, or loading coil in an antenna, I just short circuit some turns.
I see that this is the usual practice everywhere.

My question is why do we not just leave the turns open circuited instead
of short circuiting them.

It appears to me that in the short circuited turns, a very big current
must be circulating, adding heat losses and lowering the Q of the
circuit.



Only fairly basic AC circuit theory is needed to analyse the effect of
the shorted turns.

If you have a air cored solenoid inductor of n turns, and short m turns
at one end, you can treat that as two independent inductors of n-m and m
turns with some flux coupling factor k. The mutual inductance can be
calculated, and a T equivalent of Ln Lm-n Rn Rm-n M elements constructed
and solved. k of course depends on coil construction and n and m, a
value can be determined by measurement of the reactance of the
combination. (You might be surprised at how low k is.)

One could look at one of the standard equations for solenoid inductance
(e.g. Wheeler's) and get a feel for it. The ideal fully coupled multi
turn solenoid would have inductance proportional to Nturn^2.

Wheeler (for inches) is: L (uH) = r^2 * n^2 / (9 * r + 10 * l)
so there's the n^2 term on the top, but there's also the 10*length term
on the bottom.
For 2" diameter, 5 turns/inch, I calculated Wheeler L and for comparison
Length^2/6 (so that the number would be comparable at a length of around
12")

length turns Wheeler L uH/inch Length^2
2 10 3.45 1.7241 0.67
4 20 8.16 2.0408 2.67
6 30 13.04 2.1739 6.00
8 40 17.98 2.2472 10.67
10 50 22.94 2.2936 16.67
12 60 27.91 2.3256 24.00
14 70 32.89 2.3490 32.67
16 80 37.87 2.3669 42.67
18 90 42.86 2.3810 54.00
20 100 47.85 2.3923 66.67
22 110 52.84 2.4017 80.67
24 120 57.83 2.4096 96.00
26 130 62.83 2.4164 112.67
28 140 67.82 2.4221 130.67
30 150 72.82 2.4272 150.00


You can see that for this kind of coil, the coupling from turn to turn
must be pretty low.. The L looks closer to a linear function of length
than to the square of turns. If it were perfectly linear, it would be
as if there is NO turn to turn coupling, and is just a series
combination of single turn uncoupled inductors. If you look at the
uH/inch column you can see that once you get into the 10 inches long and
up range, it *is* almost completely linear.




Essentially, when the power lost in the shorted turns is low (due to the
combination of low k and low R), then the technique works fine.

We (hams) have some pretty inadequate word based explanations for some
of these kind of things when there are simple quantitative solutions at
hand.

An example is the traditional explanation of link coupling ratios. See
http://vk1od.net/tx/concept/lctr.htm for a quantitative explanation
using the same techniques as suggested above.

On Oct 18, 11:20*am, Jim Lux wrote:
You can see that for this kind of coil, the coupling from turn to turn
must be pretty low.

For an average air-core coil, the delay through the coil seems to be
in the ballpark of half of the coil wire stretched into a straight
line, i.e. the VF of the coil is about double what is the VF of the
straight wire used to wind the coil. The turn to turn coupling exists
but turn to far away turn coupling is very low.

This seems to be the most accurate inductance calculator that I have
seen and includes the characteristic impedance and axial propagation
factor.

http://hamwaves.com/antennas/inductance.html
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

On 10/18/10 6:23 PM, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Oct 18, 11:20 am, Jim wrote:
You can see that for this kind of coil, the coupling from turn to turn
must be pretty low.

For an average air-core coil, the delay through the coil seems to be
in the ballpark of half of the coil wire stretched into a straight
line, i.e. the VF of the coil is about double what is the VF of the
straight wire used to wind the coil. The turn to turn coupling exists
but turn to far away turn coupling is very low.

This seems to be the most accurate inductance calculator that I have
seen and includes the characteristic impedance and axial propagation
factor.


So to return to my real world example, an air core solenoid used as a
tuning coil for a bugcatcher antenna, would I be wanting to short the
unused portions of the coil, or leave them unshorted?

Seems that unshorted would be bad.

-73 de Mike N3LI -

Mike Coslo wrote:
On 10/18/10 6:23 PM, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Oct 18, 11:20 am, Jim wrote:
You can see that for this kind of coil, the coupling from turn to turn
must be pretty low.

For an average air-core coil, the delay through the coil seems to be
in the ballpark of half of the coil wire stretched into a straight
line, i.e. the VF of the coil is about double what is the VF of the
straight wire used to wind the coil. The turn to turn coupling exists
but turn to far away turn coupling is very low.

This seems to be the most accurate inductance calculator that I have
seen and includes the characteristic impedance and axial propagation
factor.


So to return to my real world example, an air core solenoid used as a
tuning coil for a bugcatcher antenna, would I be wanting to short the
unused portions of the coil, or leave them unshorted?

Seems that unshorted would be bad.


Given the relatively few turns on a typical bugcatcher, and the low
coupling of flux, the voltage rise would be negligible, and the fact
that you're not having a high voltage across the coil in the first place
(compared to turn spacing), I don't think it's an issue to leave the end
free.

Practical experience: On most tesla coils, the primary is a 10-20 turn
coil with turn to turn spacing of 1/4" to 1/2" or so and runs at a peak
voltage around 20kV. One adjusts the tapping point to adjust the
primary L to bring the system into resonance, and it usually winds up
being tapped about 70% of the way into the coil. Almost never do you
get arcing/corona from the free end of the coil, which is potentially at
as much as twice the voltage, and if it were in free space, you'd start
to see corona from the relatively small radius of curvature.

Mike Coslo wrote in news:i9n3jq$ds62$1
@tr22n12.aset.psu.edu:

....
So to return to my real world example, an air core solenoid used as a
tuning coil for a bugcatcher antenna, would I be wanting to short the
unused portions of the coil, or leave them unshorted?

Seems that unshorted would be bad.

I wrote some notes based on a simple model of an air cored single layer
solenoid, they are at
http://www.vk1od.net/tx/concept/TappedCoil/index.htm .

The model suggests that shorting the unused turns is a poorer solution
when the flux coupling factor is relatively high, and a very small number
of turns are shorted. Poorer both because of loss and the granularity of
L adjustment.

In that situation, the voltage induced in open unused turns is not very
high, whereas it can be extreme in cases where most of the turns are
unused.

So, a combination of methods may be optimimum, depending on the flux
coupling factor, voltage withstand, granularity of variation of L, etc.

Owen

On 10/20/10 2:04 PM, Owen Duffy wrote:
Mike wrote in news:i9n3jq$ds62$1
@tr22n12.aset.psu.edu:

...
So to return to my real world example, an air core solenoid used as a
tuning coil for a bugcatcher antenna, would I be wanting to short the
unused portions of the coil, or leave them unshorted?

Seems that unshorted would be bad.

I wrote some notes based on a simple model of an air cored single layer
solenoid, they are at
http://www.vk1od.net/tx/concept/TappedCoil/index.htm .

The model suggests that shorting the unused turns is a poorer solution
when the flux coupling factor is relatively high, and a very small number
of turns are shorted. Poorer both because of loss and the granularity of
L adjustment.

In that situation, the voltage induced in open unused turns is not very
high, whereas it can be extreme in cases where most of the turns are
unused.

So, a combination of methods may be optimimum, depending on the flux
coupling factor, voltage withstand, granularity of variation of L, etc.

After taking a good look at the loading coil, its apparent that there
isn't much choice. The bottom of the coil is attached to the lower mast,
and a four pronged plate that the tap wire is attached to at the same
junction. So unless no tap is used, some portion will be shorted/
bypassed or the like.

And given that GLA systems is no longer in business, my loading coil
just got a lot more valuable, so I'll have to experiment on a new coil.
I have the Acrylic top and bottom pieces, next will be getting the rods
and make the wire cheannels.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Oct 21, 8:32*am, Mike Coslo wrote:
After taking a good look at the loading coil, its apparent that there
isn't much choice. The bottom of the coil is attached to the lower mast,
and a four pronged plate that the tap wire is attached to at the same
junction. So unless no tap is used, some portion will be shorted/
bypassed or the like.

So which would be better (less lossy) for a 75m Texas Bugcatcher coil
used on 40m? Short out each turn individually or use one jumper to
short out all of the turns that need to be bypassed?
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

On 10/21/10 10:55 AM, Cecil Moore wrote:
On Oct 21, 8:32 am, Mike wrote:
After taking a good look at the loading coil, its apparent that there
isn't much choice. The bottom of the coil is attached to the lower mast,
and a four pronged plate that the tap wire is attached to at the same
junction. So unless no tap is used, some portion will be shorted/
bypassed or the like.

So which would be better (less lossy) for a 75m Texas Bugcatcher coil
used on 40m? Short out each turn individually or use one jumper to
short out all of the turns that need to be bypassed?


Kinda my original question.

Intuition tells me that ideally - in order of preference:

1. the entire unused portion of the coil should just disappear.

2. A shorting sleeve that renders the unused portion of that loading
coil as a fatter part of the mast.

3. What I have now, a #12 wire from the top of the bottom part of the
mast to the spot that I tuned the antenna. The bottom of the coil is
attached to the same point on the bottom mast.

1. is impossible without having separate replaceable tuning coils. Crazy
inconvenient.

2. This would be the world's fattest screwdriver antenna.

3. This becomes the question? Is this worth worrying about? And testing
would be interesting for each frequency to determine which ones benefit
from shorted/non shorted operation.

Which now leads me to ask, what would be a good way to set up such an
experiment? I guess if follows on that what exactly is the phenomenon
that I would be witnessing? A transformer effect in unshorted condition
certainly would be a problem even for my transmitting equipment?

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Owen Duffy wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in news:i9n3jq$ds62$1
@tr22n12.aset.psu.edu:

...
So to return to my real world example, an air core solenoid used as a
tuning coil for a bugcatcher antenna, would I be wanting to short the
unused portions of the coil, or leave them unshorted?

Seems that unshorted would be bad.

I wrote some notes based on a simple model of an air cored single layer
solenoid, they are at
http://www.vk1od.net/tx/concept/TappedCoil/index.htm .

I saw that yesterday and it looks good (a figure of the equivalent T
model would help)

The model suggests that shorting the unused turns is a poorer solution
when the flux coupling factor is relatively high, and a very small number
of turns are shorted. Poorer both because of loss and the granularity of
L adjustment.

In that situation, the voltage induced in open unused turns is not very
high, whereas it can be extreme in cases where most of the turns are
unused.


But in that situation, the voltage across the unshorted turns is likely
to be low, because you've got low reactance, right? So the net effect is
small.

Jim Lux wrote in
:

Owen Duffy wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in news:i9n3jq$ds62$1
....
The model suggests that shorting the unused turns is a poorer
solution when the flux coupling factor is relatively high, and a very
small number of turns are shorted. Poorer both because of loss and
the granularity of L adjustment.

In that situation, the voltage induced in open unused turns is not
very high, whereas it can be extreme in cases where most of the turns
are unused.


But in that situation, the voltage across the unshorted turns is
likely to be low, because you've got low reactance, right? So the net
effect is small.

Hi Jim,

It depends what you take as a reference. A rough estimate of the voltage
across the unused turns is the turns ratio (unused /used) time the flux
coupling factor, which in practical applications is likely to be in the
range 0.2 to 0.5.

If the application was a valve amp pi coupler, the voltage impressed
across the used turns could be a couple of thousand volts, and on a 10m
tap, the voltage across the unused turns could easily be 5 to 10 times
that.

In the case of a loading coil for a multiband whip, the current in the
used turns is probably similar from band to band, but the used turns are
lower for higher bands and so the flux cutting the unused turns is lower,
but there are more unused turns. In this application, insulation problems
are probably less severe than the PA with a bandswitch.

To my mind, the interesting thing is why shorting some turns is 'ok', and
then to understand that doesn't make it 'ok' in all scenarios. For
instance, someone taking a valve amp pi coupler and implementing it on a
single powdered iron core changes the situation significantly.

Re the Tee circuit, yes, but it takes a while to draw it up... not nearly
as quick as grinding a few numbers and creating a graph! I have a backlog
of hand drawing scanned into articles to redraw already.

Owen