Why the 4:1 or 9:1 baluns?
People keep saying that they use 4:1 or 9:1 baluns.
Often I can see no reason for this (such as when simply feeding a dipole with coax, or on the output of an ATU). I'm obviously missing the point. Why the impedance transformation? Ian. -- |
"Ian Jackson" wrote People keep saying that they use 4:1 or 9:1 baluns. Often I can see no reason for this (such as when simply feeding a dipole with coax, or on the output of an ATU). I'm obviously missing the point. Why the impedance transformation? ===================================== Nearly always there IS no point to be missed. Reasoning seldom enters an argument. Which of the infinite number of impedance ratios on one antenna are to be favoured? Personally, I have never used a balun except of the choke variety which can be used between indeterminate impedances of any ratio to serve a recognisable purpose. But the right to free speech must be held. ---- Reg, G4FGQ |
Ian Jackson wrote:
People keep saying that they use 4:1 or 9:1 baluns. Often I can see no reason for this (such as when simply feeding a dipole with coax, or on the output of an ATU). I'm obviously missing the point. Why the impedance transformation? Ian. The feedpoint impedance of a dipole varies with frequency from a low value of about 50 ohms to a high value of about 8000 ohms. In between, it can look like 1000(+/-)j1000 ohms. Baluns with a high transforming ratio try to take the impedance lower so, for instance, with a 4:1 balun, the above values would ideally go from 50 ohms to 12.5 ohms, 8000 ohms to 2000 ohms, and from 1000+j1000 ohms to 250+j250 ohms. You can see that the second set of values have a smaller absolute range than the first set, thus making them an easier match for the tuner. That's the simplified version. There are disadvantages to using baluns with a high transforming ratio. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
In message , Cecil Moore
writes Ian Jackson wrote: People keep saying that they use 4:1 or 9:1 baluns. Often I can see no reason for this (such as when simply feeding a dipole with coax, or on the output of an ATU). I'm obviously missing the point. Why the impedance transformation? Ian. The feedpoint impedance of a dipole varies with frequency from a low value of about 50 ohms to a high value of about 8000 ohms. In between, it can look like 1000(+/-)j1000 ohms. Baluns with a high transforming ratio try to take the impedance lower so, for instance, with a 4:1 balun, the above values would ideally go from 50 ohms to 12.5 ohms, 8000 ohms to 2000 ohms, and from 1000+j1000 ohms to 250+j250 ohms. You can see that the second set of values have a smaller absolute range than the first set, thus making them an easier match for the tuner. That's the simplified version. There are disadvantages to using baluns with a high transforming ratio. But how good is the efficiency when the balun/transformer is working between completely the wrong impedances (which will be most of the time)? My understanding (and limited experience) is that most of your power simply heats up the ferrite. Ian. -- |
Ian Jackson wrote:
But how good is the efficiency when the balun/transformer is working between completely the wrong impedances (which will be most of the time)? My understanding (and limited experience) is that most of your power simply heats up the ferrite. Sorry, I don't know the answer. I operate my W2DU choke into close to a pure resistance that varies between 28 ohms and 90 ohms. I once measured the temperature of a #2 iron-core 4:1 commercial voltage balun and got no appreciable temperature rise under varying conditions but I don't know what conclusion can be drawn. How to operate your all-HF-band dipole with a purely resistive load of 28-90 ohms is described on my web page below. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp/notuner.htm ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
But how good is the efficiency when the balun/transformer is working
between completely the wrong impedances (which will be most of the time)? My understanding (and limited experience) is that most of your power simply heats up the ferrite. Ian. ============================== Ian, both your understanding and experience of how a balun works are limited. But don't be disheartened - you are in good company! ;o) They are not simple transformers. The windings are in fact transmission lines consisting of a pair of wires running in parallel, either coaxial or balanced-twin - it doesn't matter which although balanced-twin is slightly more efficient and physically more easy to construct. Their full name is "Transmission Line Transformers". They have a wider bandwidth and a higher HF response than ordinary primary-and-secondary HF transformers. This is because the normal capacitance between turns and between windings is incorporated in the transmission lines instead of being directly in shunt with winding inductance. They are inherently very low loss devices because there's only short lengths of high-conductivity copper involved. In theory, there is no loss in the ferrite core because the currents in the transmission line wires flow, adjacent to each other, in oposite directions and the flux cancels out in the core. But cancellation is never completely perfect and HF-quality ferrite core material should be used. However, LF grade materials found in the junk box often work quite satisfactorily. Cancellation is better with coaxial lines than with balanced twin but this is hardly a matter of importance. Ferrite rods require more turns to achieve the same inductance than rings at the low frequency end. The ordinary inductance of the windings considered as single wires, in conjunction with the nominated terminating resistances, sets the low frequency response of a balun transformer in the usual way. The high frequency end of the range is limited by the physical length of the line winding. Line length should be small in relation to the wavelength along the line. Upper frequency response and ratio begin to fall off when line length exceeds about 1/8 or 1/10 of a wavelength at its own velocity. Not free space velocity. This allows a frequency range of 1.8 to 30 MHz on a core of ordinary proportions with permeability in the range 200 to 400. ------------------------ The performance and behaviour of an X-to-Y ohm balun, as with ordinary transformers, goes haywire if it is not operated between its designed-for resistances. Or at least resistances in the right ball-park. Hence the futility at HF of using one between a multi-band antenna and any sort of transmission line or tuner. The range of impedances to be covered is even greater than those listed by our good friend Cecil. A choke balun, a single short length of transmission line wound on a ring or rod, is a different kettle of fish. Its range of impedances is unlimited. ---- Reg, G4FGQ |
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 15:06:59 +0000, Ian Jackson
wrote: But how good is the efficiency when the balun/transformer is working between completely the wrong impedances (which will be most of the time)? My understanding (and limited experience) is that most of your power simply heats up the ferrite. Hi Ian, In a current BalUn it is the Common Mode current that is absorbed by the BalUn as a choke (one purpose of two purposes to use it). The current BalUn is designed to add R rather than X to the Common Mode path (although, any additional X that comes down the pike is not shrugged off). Thus the product of that current and that resistance is heat. However, if you have a sufficient R, it snubs the I before you get to many Watts. A string of 20 beads can present upwards to 1000 Ohms resistance, but I wouldn't try to dissipate more than 20W throughout. Now, as to efficiency. I presume the load is a nominal 50 Ohms, and that it is paralleled by that choke's 1000 Ohms. If we were in a condition where that same 1000 Ohms were dissipating 20W then it follows that the load is dissipating 400W. This is about the time when some Hams begin to tear their hair and fulminate at the BalUn (which is doing its job faithfully) rather than asking themselves the question: "why is my antenna system trying to pump that current down the transmission line?" If they solved that question, then they would have more power available for their intended load. Others who would have reflected on that question naturally, they would have shrugged their shoulders and figure chasing that last 5% efficiency exceeded the small price they paid for the BalUn - which was working quite well. Now, consider if that BalUn were to suddenly vanish. The same current which formerly saw 1000 Ohms, would see none. We can all work out the equivalent resistance of 0 Ohms paralleled to the intended load of 50 Ohms to observe where the power would eventually go. This is so extreme as to be absurd (or at least rare). Such a radical possibility necessarily presumes a rather disastrous implication in the state of the antenna's design - or damage. However, none of this actually answers your question about "wrong impedances," but it does respond to the worst efficiency you could expect. By and large, when you are in the middle-to-near fringes of the BalUn's operational range, efficiencies are exceptionally high (95% to 99+%). Whatever power that is lost to improper matching occurs in far greater abundance elsewhere. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Ian Jackson wrote:
But how good is the efficiency when the balun/transformer is working between completely the wrong impedances (which will be most of the time)? I use a 4:1 balun under such conditions. I use it simply to make my autotuner happy (which makes bandhopping easier). I have run extensive tests with the balun in and out on the HF bands and have yet to find anyone on the other end who could tell a difference. My understanding (and limited experience) is that most of your power simply heats up the ferrite. My KW rated balun does get warm, even at 50 watts on some bands. Of course tuners can also eat up considerable power on large mismatches. If you want (or need) a simple antenna system to work on all bands then you will likely have to absorb some loss no matter how you do it to get there. And the reason many don't have a big problem with this is even if you do lose *half* you power, that's still not a real big difference on the S meter at the other end... |
"Cecil Moore" wrote Reg Edwards wrote: A choke balun, a single short length of transmission line wound on a ring or rod, is a different kettle of fish. Its range of impedances is unlimited. The more I think about it, the more it seems likely that a common-mode wave travels down the outside of the braid until it encounters the choke impedance and is reflected, at least partially. That would create common-mode standing waves. When the weather clears up, I think I will see if the common-mode current goes through a maximum and minimum up and down the coax. -- ================================== Cec, its obvious even to a citizens bander that when the common-mode current and volts encounters the choke, or anything else, it is reflected. There's no need to risk your neck to detect it. You won't prove anything anyway. Your particular antenna might not suffer from noticeable common-mode effects. And you can't deliberately inject a test signal at any place because it would upset circuit conditions. Furthermore, the choke does NOT do what the old-wives say it does, ie., stop radiation from the line and prevent noise pick-up. It might even make matters worse. The choke merely shifts the volts and amps standing waves to other places along the line. Have I upset the apple cart again? ---- Reg. |
Reg Edwards wrote:
Cec, its obvious even to a citizens bander that when the common-mode current and volts encounters the choke, or anything else, it is reflected. There's no need to risk your neck to detect it. Judging from some of the assertions on the subject, some people consider common-mode current to be a series circuit problem, not a distributed network problem. You won't prove anything anyway. Your particular antenna might not suffer from noticeable common-mode effects. And you can't deliberately inject a test signal at any place because it would upset circuit conditions. I'm running a G5RV right now. All I have to do to gin-up common-mode currents on at least one of the eight HF bands is to remove the choke at the coax to ladder-line junction. Furthermore, the choke does NOT do what the old-wives say it does, ie., stop radiation from the line and prevent noise pick-up. It might even make matters worse. The choke merely shifts the volts and amps standing waves to other places along the line. I use a choke to reduce common-mode problems in the shack and it does that apparently by causing reflection of common-mode waves back toward the antenna which, as you say, wouldn't decrease feedline radiation between the choke and the antenna. Have I upset the apple cart again? Where does the common-mode power go? :-) If differential reflected power can be almost 100% delivered to the antenna by matching, how about common-mode power? What happens to the common-mode reflected power when it gets back to the antenna? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Cecil Moore wrote:
Furthermore, the choke does NOT do what the old-wives say it does, ie., stop radiation from the line and prevent noise pick-up. It might even make matters worse. The choke merely shifts the volts and amps standing waves to other places along the line. I use a choke to reduce common-mode problems in the shack and it does that apparently by causing reflection of common-mode waves back toward the antenna which, as you say, wouldn't decrease feedline radiation between the choke and the antenna. It isn't really helpful to think of it as "reflecting common-mode waves back". It is simply Ohm's law: a high series impedance reduces the amount of current that will flow. Forcing a current minimum at one location on the feedline (usually right at the end of the coax) will change the current and voltage distribution not only on the feedline, but also on the antenna proper. The whole antenna-feedline system readjusts itself to take account of the fact that the choke impedance is there. This readjustment will also change the feedpoint impedance, so it's actually true that a balun will change the SWR of the antenna - it has become a different system that no longer involves the feedline. Reg is right to say that the choke shifts the common-mode voltage and current standing waves to other places along the feedline. Depending on the location of the 'victim' equipment (TV etc) relative to those standing waves, the change can sometimes make RFI problems worse. Even so, a choke balun right at the end of the coax is almost always the right place to start. If it doesn't help, it may *still* make sense to leave it there, and try a second choke somewhere else as well. A clip-on RF current probe can work wonders in showing you what really is happening. -- 73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB) http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek |
Ian White, G3SEK wrote:
It isn't really helpful to think of it as "reflecting common-mode waves back". It is simply Ohm's law: a high series impedance reduces the amount of current that will flow. True for a bench circuit. Not necessarily true for a distributed network. In fact, a choke that makes the outside braid of a transmission look like an open circuit (best case), makes it look like a short circuit 1/4WL back from that point. If the choke is placed at an existing current minimum point, it will have little effect. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Reg Edwards wrote:
. . . Furthermore, the choke does NOT do what the old-wives say it does, ie., stop radiation from the line and prevent noise pick-up. It might even make matters worse. The choke merely shifts the volts and amps standing waves to other places along the line. Have I upset the apple cart again? Once again I proudly don the mantle of a Reg's Old Wife. A common-mode choke, aka "choke balun" or "current balun" can have the effect Reg mentions, but that's not the only possibility. Depending on the lengths of the antenna and transmission line and the placement of the choke, it can reduce the common mode current to a much lower value everywhere on the line. This is done by the same mechanism as an insulator reduces the current induced on a guy wire -- by making a formerly resonant line non-resonant. In stubborn cases, two (or perhaps very seldom, more) chokes placed about a quarter wave apart are required to get a low value of common mode current everywhere on the line. The general principles are easily illustrated by modeling(*). In practice, the actual path along the feedline from antenna to ground isn't well known so can't be modeled well, and some experimentation might be necessary. (*) Anyone having an EZNEC program, including the demo, can look in the manual index under "Coaxial Cable, Modeling" for information. To simulate a choke balun, insert a resistive or inductive load in the wire which represents the outside of the coax. 500 - 1000 ohms is a reasonable value to use. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:52:59 -0800, Roy Lewallen
wrote: Once again I proudly don the mantle of a Reg's Old Wife. Oh my gawd! Do I detect Kurt Sturba here. GG Danny |
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... Sorry, I don't know the answer. I operate my W2DU choke into close to a pure resistance that varies between 28 ohms and 90 ohms. Cecil - I stopped using baluns for dipoles when my neighbor's TV reception was getting killed every time I went on 10 meters. I took out my W2AU balun, and no more problem. Whenever I need to match higher or lower antenna impedances now, I use a 1/4-wave length of the appropriate coax line to get close to the antenna impedance. Works great, seems impervious to the weather, and have never found the unbalanced feedline to balanced antenna (dipoles & full wave loops/quads) was a problem that feeding the coax away from the antenna in a perpendicular fashion wouldn't solve. Also, two parallel RG-59 coax lines feed grounded verticals nicely, and a tuner or the amp pi network can easily do the load match. ak |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com