I am using Nec Win Plus (NEC2) to view the SWR curve of my modeled
antenna. The actual antenna uses a 6:1 ratio balun. Is it incorrect
to just change the characteristic impedance of the line from 50 ohms to
300 ohms to see what effect a 6:1 balun would have on the SWR values? I
was just assuming that the line impedance was only really needed to
calcuate SWR - hopefully I am right.

Thanks,
Scott, WU2X

wrote:
I am using Nec Win Plus (NEC2) to view the SWR curve of my modeled
antenna. The actual antenna uses a 6:1 ratio balun. Is it incorrect
to just change the characteristic impedance of the line from 50 ohms to
300 ohms to see what effect a 6:1 balun would have on the SWR values? I
was just assuming that the line impedance was only really needed to
calcuate SWR - hopefully I am right.


Yes, but that assumes a perfect balun.

Changing the modeled line impedance to 300 ohms is correct if you really
have a 6:1 transformer. But you probably don't.

The impedance transformation of a typical 6:1 balun is around 6:1 when
the antenna impedance is near 50 ohms resistive. However, when it's not,
the transformation can be vastly different. And the balun is likely to
add substantial series and/or shunt reactance to boot. So there's no way
to know what impedance you'll really see looking into the transformer
unless you measure one when loaded with various impedances.

You should also know that a "voltage balun", which a 6:1 balun typically
is, produces equal currents in the dipole halves, and no current on the
feedline, only if the antenna is perfectly symmetrical. If the antenna
isn't symmetrical (e.g. if it's fed off center), the "balun" will force
common mode current to flow along the outside of the coax. This will
affect the feedpoint impedance as well. See
http://eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf for more information about
this.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

wrote:
I am using Nec Win Plus (NEC2) to view the SWR curve of my modeled
antenna. The actual antenna uses a 6:1 ratio balun. Is it incorrect
to just change the characteristic impedance of the line from 50 ohms to
300 ohms to see what effect a 6:1 balun would have on the SWR values? I
was just assuming that the line impedance was only really needed to
calcuate SWR - hopefully I am right.

Thanks,
Scott, WU2X

Hi Roy,

Yeah, I just started a thread a few days ago regarding current vs.
voltage baluns with respect to my OCF Dipole. I started to play with
around with modeling feedline radiation following the notes on Cebik's
page about it. Doesn't seem like its really possible to accurately
predict the SWR/bandwidth when you start trying to model feedline
radiation too.

Very carefully modeling the very simple OCF Dipole I have assuming no
feedline radiation yields a SWR curve over the HF band that is no-where
near my real world measured values. The NEC2 computed values are much
higher.

-Scott, WU2X





Roy Lewallen wrote:
Changing the modeled line impedance to 300 ohms is correct if you really
have a 6:1 transformer. But you probably don't.

The impedance transformation of a typical 6:1 balun is around 6:1 when
the antenna impedance is near 50 ohms resistive. However, when it's not,
the transformation can be vastly different. And the balun is likely to
add substantial series and/or shunt reactance to boot. So there's no way
to know what impedance you'll really see looking into the transformer
unless you measure one when loaded with various impedances.

You should also know that a "voltage balun", which a 6:1 balun typically
is, produces equal currents in the dipole halves, and no current on the
feedline, only if the antenna is perfectly symmetrical. If the antenna
isn't symmetrical (e.g. if it's fed off center), the "balun" will force
common mode current to flow along the outside of the coax. This will
affect the feedpoint impedance as well. See
http://eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf for more information about
this.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

wrote:
I am using Nec Win Plus (NEC2) to view the SWR curve of my modeled
antenna. The actual antenna uses a 6:1 ratio balun. Is it incorrect
to just change the characteristic impedance of the line from 50 ohms to
300 ohms to see what effect a 6:1 balun would have on the SWR values? I
was just assuming that the line impedance was only really needed to
calcuate SWR - hopefully I am right.

Thanks,
Scott, WU2X

wrote:
Hi Roy,

Yeah, I just started a thread a few days ago regarding current vs.
voltage baluns with respect to my OCF Dipole. I started to play with
around with modeling feedline radiation following the notes on Cebik's
page about it. Doesn't seem like its really possible to accurately
predict the SWR/bandwidth when you start trying to model feedline
radiation too.

Very carefully modeling the very simple OCF Dipole I have assuming no
feedline radiation yields a SWR curve over the HF band that is no-where
near my real world measured values. The NEC2 computed values are much
higher.

That's no surprise. Assumptions that the feedline won't radiate and that
the balun effects a 6:1 impedance transformation regardless of impedance
are both invalid. Garbage in, garbage out.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

All feedlines radiate and receive noise and signals. They can't help
it.

But on 99% of occasions the magnitude is small enough to be ignored.
If it works satisfactory then don't bother fixing it!

wrote in message
oups.com...
I am using Nec Win Plus (NEC2) to view the SWR curve of my modeled
antenna. The actual antenna uses a 6:1 ratio balun. Is it incorrect
to just change the characteristic impedance of the line from 50 ohms to
300 ohms to see what effect a 6:1 balun would have on the SWR values? I
was just assuming that the line impedance was only really needed to
calcuate SWR - hopefully I am right.

Thanks,
Scott, WU2X


Inside a W2AU balun (1:1) - in case you were curious.
http://www.the-s38-guy.com/Page_78x.html

w9gb

I actually had a Unadilla W2AU fail from that exact wire coming off
mine inside.
-Scott, WU2X


g. beat wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
I am using Nec Win Plus (NEC2) to view the SWR curve of my modeled
antenna. The actual antenna uses a 6:1 ratio balun. Is it incorrect
to just change the characteristic impedance of the line from 50 ohms to
300 ohms to see what effect a 6:1 balun would have on the SWR values? I
was just assuming that the line impedance was only really needed to
calcuate SWR - hopefully I am right.

Thanks,
Scott, WU2X


Inside a W2AU balun (1:1) - in case you were curious.
http://www.the-s38-guy.com/Page_78x.html

w9gb

g. beat wrote:

Inside a W2AU balun (1:1) - in case you were curious.
http://www.the-s38-guy.com/Page_78x.html

w9gb

wrote in message

I actually had a Unadilla W2AU fail from that exact wire coming off
mine inside.
- Scott, WU2X

... as they say " now you can rebuild him .. better faster, stronger than
before !
http://www.the-s38-guy.com/Page_83x.html

http://www.the-s38-guy.com/Page_81x.html
So when you see one in the junk pile OR at the $ 1 table at a hamfest - grab
it !
http://www.the-s38-guy.com/Page_76x.html

Greg, w9gb

I have rebuilt a W2AU balun for much the same reasons.

Like the referenced article, I removed the dual use of the electrical
connection for support of the dipole wires.

An addition, I changed the coax connector for an N-type for a water
resistant cable connection.

Having said that, I don't use it much, it is a "voltage balun" and
most of my applications are better suited to a "current balun".

Owen
--