The measurements are being taken, and have been taken, at the same point since
the beginning of the antenna experiment. The ONLY difference is that the
variable cap is now mounted inside the steel panel as described in my previous
posts, instead of outside the panel, as described in previous posts. Same
length of wire each scenario.
I believe Tom W8JI called it when he stated that a change was likely when the
cap is enclosed in a metallic enclosure vs sitting on a 5 gal plastic jug.
The Henry amp seems to be OK with a little reactance so I'm going to
concentrate on my gamma cage and radial system while waiting for RF Parts to
deliver some necessary connectors. Once I get the PL259s installed I can
replace my temp RG 58 jumper with the good stuff and then hit it with the
Henry. Ive kept the power below 500w during the contest so as not to stress the
small coaxial cable.
73
Carl
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 22, 2014, at 8:42 AM, "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com> wrote:
>
> I suppose I missed that part while doing things around here but this is the
> only pertinent info I can find from him. Nowhere does it say he has a 1:1
> anywhere with the cap in the cabinet. Granted some of the posts are very
> confusing as to where things are being measured.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> The j11 ohms is the best I can get period. I was able to get j0 when the cap
> was outside of the steel enclosure with a better bandwidth. Maybe I should
> throw my $400 enclosure and find a fibergla$$ enclosure. But as others have
> indicated I should probably just live with it.
>
> The swr at my given freq as tuned with the variable cap is 1.3:1 or
> less...outside the enclosure the system had 1.0:1 swr readings and X=O over
> what appeared to be a broader bandwidth...even with 42 ohms at the feed point.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> So maybe you can explain where the 1.0 at the transmitter end with the cap in
> the box came from?
> Additionally the VSWR may/will change with added radials and ground moisture
> conditions.
>
> Im going out for several hours so no rush on the answers.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlie Cunningham"
> <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
> To: "'Carl'" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; "'Carl Braun'" <Carl.Braun@lairdtech.com>;
> "'160'" <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 11:03 AM
> Subject: RE: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
>
> Well, I agree with all that, Carl. But Carl Braun, was reading "dead-flat"
> 1:1 at the transmitter end of his cable. I believe he is done!! The antenna
> Q is what it is! As for "improving his 2:1 VSWR bandwidth" he could reduce
> his radial field and increase his ground losses to improve his 2:1 "BW" -
> but I believe that to be self-defeating!! I'm not "missing your point" - I
> just don't see what you'd change to improve on a "flat" line! Carl is well
> past the point of "diminishing returns"!
>
> The math doesn't "lie"!
>
> Charlie, K4OTV
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 10:41 AM
> To: Charlie Cunningham; 'Carl Braun'; '160'
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
> Charlie youre continually missing the point; ignore cable loss period.
>
> The only issue is what impedance does the amp see from lets say 1800 to 1900
>
> KHz? AND can the amp load into it without a problem at full power? This is a
>
> system issue, not just what is measured at the antenna and needs to be
> addressed that way.
>
> Put all that info into your program and post the results. Saying that a 1.3
> VSWR at reasonance at the antenna is sufficient is too simplistic. Compute
> the VSWR at the amp with whatever length of coax is actually used over the
> lower 100 KHz with a range of " at resonance" VSWR's.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlie Cunningham"
> <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
> To: "'Carl'" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; "'Carl Braun'"
> <Carl.Braun@lairdtech.com>; "'160'" <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:57 AM
> Subject: RE: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
>
> Well, Carl the looses in 70' or even 200' of LMR-400 are so low at 1.8 MHz,
> even at 2.0:1 or 3.0 :1, if he can match it at the transmitter end of the
> line, it really doesn't matter!
>
> Charlie, K4OTV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:46 AM
> To: Charlie Cunningham; 'Carl Braun'; '160'
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
> That 1.3 is only at ONE frequency Charlie, he is not crystal controlled.
> What is the 2:1 bandwidth at the amp?
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlie Cunningham"
> <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
> To: "'Carl'" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; "'Carl Braun'"
> <Carl.Braun@lairdtech.com>; "'160'" <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:23 AM
> Subject: RE: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
>
> I don't expect that ANY of those are valid concerns at 1.3:1 VSWR!!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 9:14 AM
> To: Charlie Cunningham; 'Carl Braun'; '160'
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
> Im not concerned by what is measured at the matching unit or a miniscule
> cable loss; just what is transformed back to the amp and its ability to load
>
> at full power without arcing, running out of or having too much fixed padder
>
> C during QSY's. Contests do not stay just in the narrow CW 50 KHz "window"
> and not having to use an external tuner is a big plus.
>
> Ive always modified my amps to work with my antennas on 160 and 80/75.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charlie Cunningham"
> <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
> To: "'ZR'" <zr@jeremy.mv.com>; "'Carl Braun'" <Carl.Braun@lairdtech.com>;
> "'160'" <topband@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 10:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
>
> Well, if I recall correctly, Carl, Carl said his feedline was about 70' of
> LMR-400, so even at 2 2:1 or 2.5:1 VSWR, the excess losses in 70' of LMR-400
> at 1.8 MHz are almost 0, so if he can match it OK at the transmitter end of
> the line- no real point in making heroic efforts to achieve a "perfect"
> match! He'd gain more by working on his radial field, and he really should
> do that before doing any more tuning because improving the radials WILL
> affect the antenna impedance.
>
> 73,
> Charlie, K4OTV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of ZR
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 10:11 PM
> To: Charlie Cunningham; 'Carl Braun'; '160'
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
> The only benefit of getting it better would be a bit more 2:1 VSWR bandwidth
> to keep the amp happy but even then there is sometimes a gotcha when tuning
> an antenna.
>
> Carl
> KM1H
>
>
>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
>
> Well, you can do all that, Carl
>
> But if your series variable capacitor is not maxed out (fully meshed) if you
> can increase the capacitance enough to get to j0, you would be at 45
> +j0 and on a 1.1:1 VSWR circle. No point int trying to do better than
> that!!
> Otherwise, just increase the series capacitance to bring that -j11 as
> close to j0 as possible and take that! You'd be so near perfect that there
> would be no real point in going further!
>
> Your time and efforts might be better spent working on your radial field!
>
> 73,
> Charlie, K4OTV
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> Braun
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 8:46 PM
> To: Charlie Cunningham; 'Tom W8JI'; '160'
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
> Thanks to all who replied
>
> Tom W8JI, your comments on the metallic panel and the static bleed choke
> make sense. I was so pleased with the FLAT SWR reading with the variable
> cap outside the panel but I guess I can live with the slight SWR. (Thanks
> Charlie K4OTV). I have a Nye Viking monster tuner but I hate to use it as
> my Henry amp seems to load strangely when I have it inline so I think I'll
> just live without it.
>
> Can I add some coax (coiled) to bring the X down on the -j11 reading? I did
> this with the old Telrex and brought the X right down and out of the pic.
> I'm sure Ill need much more than I would on 14MHz but I think I'd like to
> try anyway.
>
> I'm still going to drop the tower down and add two more gamma wires to
> create a cage and I still have the option of pulling the gamma wire(s) away
> from the tower another 8-10 inches to add a few more ohms to the equation.
>
> I'm having fun with the experiment.
>
> Right now I'm hearing the beginnings of the SSB contest with N7GP, WD5COV,
> W6YI with the big signals so far. XE is the only DX I've heard.
>
> Lots of stateside calling stateside
>
> Carl AG6X
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charlie Cunningham [mailto:charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 5:21 PM
> To: 'Tom W8JI'; Carl Braun; '160'
> Subject: RE: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
> Well, Carl
>
> I plotted your 45-j11 load on a Smith Chart (normalized to 50 ohms) and it's
> very near the origin on a 1.3:1 VSWR circle. Since you have a relatively
> short feedline of LMR-400, You should be able to just tune it out at the
> transmitter end of the line, and the LMR-400 line will be operating at such
> a very low SWR (around 1.3:1 that the excess loss from a 1.3:1 VSWR at 160
> is completely trivial and negligible! It may not be completely
> "intellectually satisfying to have -j11 of reactance at the load, but it
> should match easily and the antenna should work very well! Enjoy!
>
> Sounds like that Array solutions static bleed is not as high in impedance as
> we might wish! A large resistance might give you more satisfactory results!
>
> GL! Enjoy!
>
> 73,
> Charlie, K4OTV
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom W8JI
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 8:02 PM
> To: Carl Braun; '160'
> Subject: Re: Topband: Shunt feeding the Skyneedle - new developments
>
> Since then I've moved the variable capacitor inside the panel and mounted it
>
> to a ¾" think Plexiglas sheet mounted to the back plane with nylon bolts and
>
> washers. There is a 1" air gap between the Plexiglas and the backplane. I
> now have seen the 42+j0 ohms change to 45 - j11 ohms...that's the lowest
> reactance I can tune the capacitor for. Not really sure if its +j11 ohms or
> - j11 ohms but I assume if the reading was + j11 I could continue to tune
>
> it out with the capacitor but I cant.
>
> Does the capacitor not play well with a steel enclosure?>>>>
>
> Any enclosure will change things, especially a metallic enclosure. Just
> readjust the cap.
>
> <<<<The other strange situation I'm experiencing is when I connect my Array
> Solutions static bleed choke to the feed thru insulator at the outside of
> the panel to ground the resonant frequency jumps to 2.014 MHz at 25 +j0
> ohms...remove it entirely and I'm back to my 45 - j11 ohms.>>>
>
> The choke is completely unnecessary with a shunt feed tower. It won't help a
>
> thing, so leave it out.
>
> 73 Tom
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4335 / Virus Database: 3705/7115 - Release Date: 02/21/14
>
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4335 / Virus Database: 3705/7115 - Release Date: 02/21/14
>
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4335 / Virus Database: 3705/7116 - Release Date: 02/22/14
>
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4335 / Virus Database: 3705/7116 - Release Date: 02/22/14
>
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4335 / Virus Database: 3705/7116 - Release Date: 02/22/14
>
>
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|