Hey Joe,
Yes, I was guilty of jumping in without reading the whole thread. The matching
technique you describe sounds similar to something I used to broadband a UHF
dipole about 10 years ago. In my case, we used a series resonant tank circuit
in
series with the dipole feed to effectively fold the ends of the impedance locus
on the smith chart across each other. This tightened the impedance locus into
a smaller VSWR circle and allowed us to meet our bandwidth spec. There is
an article in the latest issue of QEX by Grant Bingeman, KM5KG that describes
a similar technique.
73 de Mike, W4EF................
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Reisert" <jreisert@jlc.net>
To: "Mike" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; <W8JI@contesting.com>; <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 6:41 AM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Re: Force12
> Mike,
>
> This discussion is mixing apples and oranges so let's try to get the record
> straight and sort it out.
>
> The Force 12 feedline approach using 100 feet (the length is not critical
> or magical) of transmission line to feed an antenna is simply adding a loss
> in the line that improves the VSWR seen by the transceiver. The longer the
> line, the better the VSWR at the transmitter, but the greater the loss of RF!
>
> What has been mistakenly thrown in to this discussion is the "Transmission
> Line Resonator" concept. It was first written up by Frank Witt, AI1H, in
> the ARRL Compendium, Volume 4, pp 30-37. In Frank's article, he showed how
> to broadband an 80-meter dipole.
>
> It was quite an involved article and uses resonant (half and one
> wavelength) sections of transmission lines augmented with other
> transmission lines of different impedances. What it does is create a double
> humped VSWR response such that the lowest VSWR is obtained not at the
> center frequency where the dipole is resonant but instead separated out
> like a Chebyshev response. In other words, a dipole resonant at say 3.65
> MHz fed with his transmission line transformer has it's lowest VSWR at 3.5
> and 3.8 MHz with a slightly higher VSWR at 3.65 MHz.
>
> Dave Leeson, W6NL, later popularized this technique on 80-meter dipoles to
> broadband them with a somewhat simpler approach using the same concept
> proposed by AI1H. In Dave's basic form, you feed a dipole with a half
> wavelength of 50 Ohm coax FOLLOWED by a quarter wavelength of 70 Ohm coax.
> Note that the 70 Ohm coax is AFTER the resonant transformer of 50 Ohm
> transmission line.The double frequency low VSWR match is attained again at
> 3.5 and 3.8 MHz.
>
> I have used this technique on my two 80 meter dipoles for a few years now
> and it works great since I mainly only operate 80/75 meters near 3.5 and
> 3.8 MHz. At 3.5 and 3.8 MHz, my VSWR is approximately 1.2:1 but at 3.65 MHz
> my VSWR is higher (perhaps 1.5:1). Above 3.8 MHz, the VSWR sky rockets!
> This is considerably broader than a straight dipole which would be closer
> to 2 or 3:1 at 3.5 and 3.8 MHz when tuned to 3.65 MHz.
>
> Note that this transmission line transformer is a ONE BAND approach. Hence,
> it is not the kind of matching system to use on a tri-band Yagi.
>
> I hope this finally clarifies all the mis-information that has been on
> Tower-Talk for the last few weeks.
>
> 73,
>
> Joe, W1JR
>
>
> At 06:11 PM 10/10/01 -0700, Mike wrote:
>
> >Hey Tom,
> >
> >I don't think it is absolutely true that line loss is the only mechanism that
> >can increase system bandwidth. If the reactance change of the mismatched
> >line happens to work in opposition the reactance change of the load, then
> >then a lossless cable could in principle increase system bandwidth. This
> >certainly works when a series resonant circuit of proper loaded Q is placed
> >in front of a load with with an opposing reactance change versus frequency.
> >Unfortuntately, the direction and or rate of the reactance change is usually
> >wrong, so this technique only works in specific cases.
> >
> >73 de Mike, W4EF.......
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Tom Rauch" <w8ji@akorn.net>
> >To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 5:17 PM
> >Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Re: Force12
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > Some years ago, Dave Leeson, now W6NL posted the
> > > > explanation here on Tower Talk. The length of line creates a
> > > > double tuned transformer which per theory does, in fact,
> > > > increase the "system" bandwidth. It is NOT added loss, it is
> > > > a form of matching transformer.
> > >
> > > Perhaps you misunderstood what was said, because that is clearly
> > > not correct.
> > >
> > > The only mechanism that increases bandwidth is loss in the line.
> > > Nothing else.
> > > 73, Tom W8JI
> > > W8JI@contesting.com
> > >
> > > List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
> > > Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
> > > supporting towers up to 100 feet for under
> > $1500!! http://www.anwireless.com
> > >
> > > -----
> > > FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> > > Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> > > Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > > Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
> >Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
> >supporting towers up to 100 feet for under $1500!! http://www.anwireless.com
> >
> >-----
> >FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> >Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> >Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> >Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>
List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
supporting towers up to 100 feet for under $1500!! http://www.anwireless.com
-----
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
|