Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Chris:
You do not agree with any of his analysis? You do not think this is more of an isolation transformer than a balun? If not, how do you claim a "transmission line" quality/effect to it? And, you did notice an insertion loss from this "device", didn't you? John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... Be sure to print it out as it changes almost daily. Very strange, indeed. -- Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... A very interesting analysis of this design can be found at: http://www.w8ji.com/balun_single_core_41_analysis.htm ... for those who have not yet seen it. John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... In recent days on the QRP-L mailing list, the following remarks were made by Tom Rauch, W8JI regarding the design of 4:1 current baluns: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." and: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " I have devised and modeled a 4:1 current balun using two 1:1 baluns on a single core, and have tested a fully functional prototype. The design can be built without any core, if so desired. The full disclosure of this design with all theory, references, and test results can be obtained from my web page at: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~chris...k4to1Balun.pdf The design proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above statements to the contrary are, to put it mildly, gravely in error. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Tom is absolutely desparate to prove to the world that you cannot under
any circumstances make a 4:1 current balun on a single core. So, he tests the single core Guanella balun with the usual test for a current balun (short the outputs to gound one at a time and see if the input return loss changes) knowing fully well that the Guanella 4:1 current balun on a single core will only work with floating loads. He is now equally desparate to prove that since nobody but he understands transmission line transformers it is impossible for anyone else to understand or apply them. He also fails completely in understanding that the ferrite used in transmission line transformers is to improve the low frequency end by making the transmission line appear longer. He's truly amazing, and he is mad as hell. He claims that it is absolutely impossible to make a 4:1 current balun on a single core with a pair of 1:1 transformers (of any kind whatsoever), while the Guanelle 4:1 current balun has a pair of 1:1 transformers on a single core right in front of him. He also makes numerous other outrageous claims that defy all manner of electronics theory. Here are some of his more memorable quotes along with the URLs for the QRP-L archives so you can see that he is not taken out of context, contrary to what he says: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...12/020884.html This is a good one: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and the following: "It is physically impossible to build a transmission line current balun other than 1:1 on a single core when the windings have mutual coupling through the core." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021442.html as well as: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. You can find it in voltage maps of the balun." which is the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and additionally: "It is quite possible to build any reasonable ratio of conventional transformer (as long as it is the square of turns ratio) on a single core. It is quite impossible to build a current balun of any ratio other than 1:1 using multiple transmission line transformers on a single core unless flux leakage between transmission lines is terrible." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021408.html as well as: "It impossible to build anything but a 1:1 ratio current balun when multiple transmission line transformers are placed on a single core. The voltage map shows that, as does the basic electrical rule of current baluns that all currents in all windings must sum to zero under all load balance conditions." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021416.html There is no room for ambiguity here. As you can see, he is making unsubstantiated claims of "it is impossible" and "it is well established" that have no basis in fact. The problem here is really that I solved the problem of the single-core 4:1 current balun and he is mad as hell because in his world such a thing cannot possibly exist. So, he makes up additional new electronics theories to prove that everything you know is wrong. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... Chris: You do not agree with any of his analysis? You do not think this is more of an isolation transformer than a balun? If not, how do you claim a "transmission line" quality/effect to it? And, you did notice an insertion loss from this "device", didn't you? John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... Be sure to print it out as it changes almost daily. Very strange, indeed. -- Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... A very interesting analysis of this design can be found at: http://www.w8ji.com/balun_single_core_41_analysis.htm ... for those who have not yet seen it. John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... In recent days on the QRP-L mailing list, the following remarks were made by Tom Rauch, W8JI regarding the design of 4:1 current baluns: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." and: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " I have devised and modeled a 4:1 current balun using two 1:1 baluns on a single core, and have tested a fully functional prototype. The design can be built without any core, if so desired. The full disclosure of this design with all theory, references, and test results can be obtained from my web page at: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~chris...k4to1Balun.pdf The design proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above statements to the contrary are, to put it mildly, gravely in error. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 05:01:07 GMT, "Chris Trask"
wrote: He also fails completely in understanding that the ferrite used in transmission line transformers is to improve the low frequency end by making the transmission line appear longer. Hi Chris, Now, given that a "transmission line transformer," as distinct from a conventional transformer built using transmission lines, does not support flux in the ferrite; how is it that the ferrite makes the line appear longer? Second, if this were to occur (through the design of a "transmission line transformer" that was a voltage BalUn); what is the advantage of longer lines? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Now, given that a "transmission line transformer," as distinct from a conventional transformer built using transmission lines, does not support flux in the ferrite; how is it that the ferrite makes the line appear longer? The ferrite makes the line look longer by way of it's permeability, but that's obvious and I think I'm not understanding your question correctly. Dye and Granberg cover that in their Motorola application notes as well as in the section on TLTs in their book "Radio Frequency Transistors: Principles and Practical Applications." They briefly mention in the book that the coupling takes place in the magnetic material only at low frequencies. This effectively makes the line(s)look longer as you are no longer functioning as a TLT but instead as a flux-coupled transformer, and the line length is now a function of the physical length of the conductors and the permeability of the material. In practice a thumbnail approximation is generally: L' = L x sqrt(u) Second, if this were to occur (through the design of a "transmission line transformer" that was a voltage BalUn); what is the advantage of longer lines? It's a matter of what's practical. If you were to use very short lines along with a high permeability material such as Fair-Rite 73, you may encouter a region where the lines are too short to couple properly and the magnetic material is well above the ferroresonance frequency. And even when you do get into the flux-coupling môde, you still need to have sufficient line in order to obtain decent coupling at lower frequencies. So, you have to balance the two (line length and magnetic material) in order to obtain a wideband transformer that has consistent performance over the desired frequency range. I hope I've covered everything here adequately. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "Richard Clark" wrote in message news On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 05:01:07 GMT, "Chris Trask" wrote: He also fails completely in understanding that the ferrite used in transmission line transformers is to improve the low frequency end by making the transmission line appear longer. Hi Chris, Now, given that a "transmission line transformer," as distinct from a conventional transformer built using transmission lines, does not support flux in the ferrite; how is it that the ferrite makes the line appear longer? Second, if this were to occur (through the design of a "transmission line transformer" that was a voltage BalUn); what is the advantage of longer lines? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:05:18 GMT, "Chris Trask"
wrote: how is it that the ferrite makes the line appear longer? The ferrite makes the line look longer by way of it's permeability Hi Chris, Conventionally, this is not an asset of BalUns. In fact, employing permeability risks saturation, and saturation risks catastrophic failure. The paragraphs that followed (not quoted here) relate to the operation of a conventional transformer. Second, if this were to occur (through the design of a "transmission line transformer" that was a voltage BalUn); what is the advantage of longer lines? It's a matter of what's practical. Practical? This does not prove an advantage, it is a non-sequitur. If you were to use very short lines along with a high permeability material such as Fair-Rite 73, you may encouter a region where the lines are too short to couple properly and the magnetic material is well above the ferroresonance frequency. And even when you do get into the flux-coupling môde, you still need to have sufficient line in order to obtain decent coupling at lower frequencies. So, you have to balance the two (line length and magnetic material) in order to obtain a wideband transformer that has consistent performance over the desired frequency range. Most of this presumes a conventional transformer design. Your data supports the results encountered from a conventional transformer design. The risks of using a conventional transformer design are legion. I see nothing that suggests this novel design is superior to a Transmission Line Transformer (AKA Current BalUn). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Chris:
Well, your design certainly started me thinking. So, I began winding... on a single core--of course... I am NOT claiming this is unique, but it works better than the design you presented, at least, ON my sw receiver... .... take a look at it he http://blake.prohosting.com/mailguy2/balun2.JPG Warmest regards, John "Chris Trask" wrote in message link.net... Tom is absolutely desparate to prove to the world that you cannot under any circumstances make a 4:1 current balun on a single core. So, he tests the single core Guanella balun with the usual test for a current balun (short the outputs to gound one at a time and see if the input return loss changes) knowing fully well that the Guanella 4:1 current balun on a single core will only work with floating loads. He is now equally desparate to prove that since nobody but he understands transmission line transformers it is impossible for anyone else to understand or apply them. He also fails completely in understanding that the ferrite used in transmission line transformers is to improve the low frequency end by making the transmission line appear longer. He's truly amazing, and he is mad as hell. He claims that it is absolutely impossible to make a 4:1 current balun on a single core with a pair of 1:1 transformers (of any kind whatsoever), while the Guanelle 4:1 current balun has a pair of 1:1 transformers on a single core right in front of him. He also makes numerous other outrageous claims that defy all manner of electronics theory. Here are some of his more memorable quotes along with the URLs for the QRP-L archives so you can see that he is not taken out of context, contrary to what he says: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...12/020884.html This is a good one: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and the following: "It is physically impossible to build a transmission line current balun other than 1:1 on a single core when the windings have mutual coupling through the core." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021442.html as well as: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. You can find it in voltage maps of the balun." which is the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and additionally: "It is quite possible to build any reasonable ratio of conventional transformer (as long as it is the square of turns ratio) on a single core. It is quite impossible to build a current balun of any ratio other than 1:1 using multiple transmission line transformers on a single core unless flux leakage between transmission lines is terrible." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021408.html as well as: "It impossible to build anything but a 1:1 ratio current balun when multiple transmission line transformers are placed on a single core. The voltage map shows that, as does the basic electrical rule of current baluns that all currents in all windings must sum to zero under all load balance conditions." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021416.html There is no room for ambiguity here. As you can see, he is making unsubstantiated claims of "it is impossible" and "it is well established" that have no basis in fact. The problem here is really that I solved the problem of the single-core 4:1 current balun and he is mad as hell because in his world such a thing cannot possibly exist. So, he makes up additional new electronics theories to prove that everything you know is wrong. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... Chris: You do not agree with any of his analysis? You do not think this is more of an isolation transformer than a balun? If not, how do you claim a "transmission line" quality/effect to it? And, you did notice an insertion loss from this "device", didn't you? John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... Be sure to print it out as it changes almost daily. Very strange, indeed. -- Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... A very interesting analysis of this design can be found at: http://www.w8ji.com/balun_single_core_41_analysis.htm ... for those who have not yet seen it. John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... In recent days on the QRP-L mailing list, the following remarks were made by Tom Rauch, W8JI regarding the design of 4:1 current baluns: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." and: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " I have devised and modeled a 4:1 current balun using two 1:1 baluns on a single core, and have tested a fully functional prototype. The design can be built without any core, if so desired. The full disclosure of this design with all theory, references, and test results can be obtained from my web page at: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~chris...k4to1Balun.pdf The design proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above statements to the contrary are, to put it mildly, gravely in error. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
John,
Yes, that's very nice. A pair of trifilar windings on a single core. That's a variation of a 1:1 transmission line balun that I found in a textbook. I've put the schematic and photo in a PDF file on my web page at: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~chris...M1to1Balun.PDF I'm qite certain that the two dots connecting the outer conductors to the shield box are in error as in the photo the outer insulating jacket is not broken. And those connections do not make sense, at least not immediately, as the voltages and currents at that point are dissimilar. Also, there should only be the one ground connection at the near end of the second cable. Seems to me that you could use this approach to make a nice, inexpensive and lightwieght balun with just two 4-foot pieces of coax. I would certainly like someone to try that and let us know how well it works. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... Chris: Well, your design certainly started me thinking. So, I began winding... on a single core--of course... I am NOT claiming this is unique, but it works better than the design you presented, at least, ON my sw receiver... ... take a look at it he http://blake.prohosting.com/mailguy2/balun2.JPG Warmest regards, John "Chris Trask" wrote in message link.net... Tom is absolutely desparate to prove to the world that you cannot under any circumstances make a 4:1 current balun on a single core. So, he tests the single core Guanella balun with the usual test for a current balun (short the outputs to gound one at a time and see if the input return loss changes) knowing fully well that the Guanella 4:1 current balun on a single core will only work with floating loads. He is now equally desparate to prove that since nobody but he understands transmission line transformers it is impossible for anyone else to understand or apply them. He also fails completely in understanding that the ferrite used in transmission line transformers is to improve the low frequency end by making the transmission line appear longer. He's truly amazing, and he is mad as hell. He claims that it is absolutely impossible to make a 4:1 current balun on a single core with a pair of 1:1 transformers (of any kind whatsoever), while the Guanelle 4:1 current balun has a pair of 1:1 transformers on a single core right in front of him. He also makes numerous other outrageous claims that defy all manner of electronics theory. Here are some of his more memorable quotes along with the URLs for the QRP-L archives so you can see that he is not taken out of context, contrary to what he says: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...12/020884.html This is a good one: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and the following: "It is physically impossible to build a transmission line current balun other than 1:1 on a single core when the windings have mutual coupling through the core." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021442.html as well as: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. You can find it in voltage maps of the balun." which is the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and additionally: "It is quite possible to build any reasonable ratio of conventional transformer (as long as it is the square of turns ratio) on a single core. It is quite impossible to build a current balun of any ratio other than 1:1 using multiple transmission line transformers on a single core unless flux leakage between transmission lines is terrible." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021408.html as well as: "It impossible to build anything but a 1:1 ratio current balun when multiple transmission line transformers are placed on a single core. The voltage map shows that, as does the basic electrical rule of current baluns that all currents in all windings must sum to zero under all load balance conditions." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021416.html There is no room for ambiguity here. As you can see, he is making unsubstantiated claims of "it is impossible" and "it is well established" that have no basis in fact. The problem here is really that I solved the problem of the single-core 4:1 current balun and he is mad as hell because in his world such a thing cannot possibly exist. So, he makes up additional new electronics theories to prove that everything you know is wrong. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... Chris: You do not agree with any of his analysis? You do not think this is more of an isolation transformer than a balun? If not, how do you claim a "transmission line" quality/effect to it? And, you did notice an insertion loss from this "device", didn't you? John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... Be sure to print it out as it changes almost daily. Very strange, indeed. -- Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... A very interesting analysis of this design can be found at: http://www.w8ji.com/balun_single_core_41_analysis.htm ... for those who have not yet seen it. John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... In recent days on the QRP-L mailing list, the following remarks were made by Tom Rauch, W8JI regarding the design of 4:1 current baluns: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." and: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " I have devised and modeled a 4:1 current balun using two 1:1 baluns on a single core, and have tested a fully functional prototype. The design can be built without any core, if so desired. The full disclosure of this design with all theory, references, and test results can be obtained from my web page at: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~chris...k4to1Balun.pdf The design proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above statements to the contrary are, to put it mildly, gravely in error. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Chris:
I see. It is interesting reading anyway, thanks. Warmest regards, John "Chris Trask" wrote in message link.net... Tom is absolutely desparate to prove to the world that you cannot under any circumstances make a 4:1 current balun on a single core. So, he tests the single core Guanella balun with the usual test for a current balun (short the outputs to gound one at a time and see if the input return loss changes) knowing fully well that the Guanella 4:1 current balun on a single core will only work with floating loads. He is now equally desparate to prove that since nobody but he understands transmission line transformers it is impossible for anyone else to understand or apply them. He also fails completely in understanding that the ferrite used in transmission line transformers is to improve the low frequency end by making the transmission line appear longer. He's truly amazing, and he is mad as hell. He claims that it is absolutely impossible to make a 4:1 current balun on a single core with a pair of 1:1 transformers (of any kind whatsoever), while the Guanelle 4:1 current balun has a pair of 1:1 transformers on a single core right in front of him. He also makes numerous other outrageous claims that defy all manner of electronics theory. Here are some of his more memorable quotes along with the URLs for the QRP-L archives so you can see that he is not taken out of context, contrary to what he says: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...12/020884.html This is a good one: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " which in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and the following: "It is physically impossible to build a transmission line current balun other than 1:1 on a single core when the windings have mutual coupling through the core." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021442.html as well as: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. You can find it in voltage maps of the balun." which is the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...21/021331.html and additionally: "It is quite possible to build any reasonable ratio of conventional transformer (as long as it is the square of turns ratio) on a single core. It is quite impossible to build a current balun of any ratio other than 1:1 using multiple transmission line transformers on a single core unless flux leakage between transmission lines is terrible." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021408.html as well as: "It impossible to build anything but a 1:1 ratio current balun when multiple transmission line transformers are placed on a single core. The voltage map shows that, as does the basic electrical rule of current baluns that all currents in all windings must sum to zero under all load balance conditions." which is in the archives at: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/qrp...22/021416.html There is no room for ambiguity here. As you can see, he is making unsubstantiated claims of "it is impossible" and "it is well established" that have no basis in fact. The problem here is really that I solved the problem of the single-core 4:1 current balun and he is mad as hell because in his world such a thing cannot possibly exist. So, he makes up additional new electronics theories to prove that everything you know is wrong. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... Chris: You do not agree with any of his analysis? You do not think this is more of an isolation transformer than a balun? If not, how do you claim a "transmission line" quality/effect to it? And, you did notice an insertion loss from this "device", didn't you? John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... Be sure to print it out as it changes almost daily. Very strange, indeed. -- Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "John Smith" wrote in message ... A very interesting analysis of this design can be found at: http://www.w8ji.com/balun_single_core_41_analysis.htm ... for those who have not yet seen it. John "Chris Trask" wrote in message ink.net... In recent days on the QRP-L mailing list, the following remarks were made by Tom Rauch, W8JI regarding the design of 4:1 current baluns: "...it is impossible to build a 4:1 ratio current balun that uses two 1:1 baluns on a single core." and: "It's well established any balun made up of series / parallel transmission lines requires different voltages from the start to finish of each transmission line. " I have devised and modeled a 4:1 current balun using two 1:1 baluns on a single core, and have tested a fully functional prototype. The design can be built without any core, if so desired. The full disclosure of this design with all theory, references, and test results can be obtained from my web page at: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~chris...k4to1Balun.pdf The design proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above statements to the contrary are, to put it mildly, gravely in error. Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Trask wrote:
Tom is absolutely desparate to prove to the world that you cannot under any circumstances make a 4:1 current balun on a single core. Personalities aside, 4:1 single core Guanella baluns are covered on pages 9-13 to 9-21 in "Transmission Line Transformers", by Jerry Sevick. -- 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! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, as well as elsewhere.
Chris ,----------------------. High Performance Mixers and / What's all this \ Amplifiers for RF Communications / extinct stuff, anyhow? / \ _______,--------------' Chris Trask / N7ZWY _ |/ Principal Engineer oo\ Sonoran Radio Research (__)\ _ P.O. Box 25240 \ \ .' `. Tempe, Arizona 85285-5240 \ \ / \ \ '" \ IEEE Senior Member #40274515 . ( ) \ '-| )__| :. \ Email: | | | | \ '. http://www.home.earthlink.net/~christrask c__; c__; '-..'.__ Graphics by Loek Frederiks "Cecil Moore" wrote in message ... Chris Trask wrote: Tom is absolutely desparate to prove to the world that you cannot under any circumstances make a 4:1 current balun on a single core. Personalities aside, 4:1 single core Guanella baluns are covered on pages 9-13 to 9-21 in "Transmission Line Transformers", by Jerry Sevick. -- 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! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Long/random-wire balun and grounding Q (longish) | Antenna | |||
FS: sma-to-bnc custom fit rubber covered antenna adapter | Equipment | |||
Current in loading coil, EZNEC - helix | Antenna | |||
Serious radiation questin | Antenna | |||
Smith Chart Quiz | Antenna |