Ok....well that pretty much explains it all! My Palstar BT1500A is looking
more attractive all the time.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] OT: SWR & Coax
> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 21:32 -0700, Denton wrote:
>> I am using a 230 ft horizontal loop up about 30 ft fed with 600 ohm
>> ladder line.
>> I have a revamped johnson matchbox, a TT 238A tuner and am currently
>> a Palstar BT1500A balanced L antenna tuner.
>> All 3 had about the same field strength from 80 thru 30 meters. From 20
>> meters thru 10 meters The Palstar and TT has about the same field
>> readings with the matchbox showing less rf field strength.
>> Both the Palstar and 238A are far easier to tune (lower Q I assume) than
>> The matchbox and Palstar show the best balance with the 238A with its
>> internal 4 to 1 balun showing a bit of feeder imbalance especially on 10
>> I used a field strength meter almost directly underneath one leg of my
>> to determining readings for field strength and used the same meter taking
>> readings equidistant...about an inch or so...on either side of the
>> to determine balance criteria.
>> I suspect the 4 to 1 balun in the 238A tuner simply isn't up to snuff as
>> as balance is concerned...and I would suspect it's efficiency on anything
>> above barefoot power.
>> I haven't made much sense about the matchbox not having much field
>> readings on the higher feqs...any guesses? too small coil wire size
> Probably more a case for the matchbox of too much tuning capacitance
> demanding it run with a high loaded Q on the higher frequencies. It
> always has the differential caps across the coil plus the tuning
> variable. The differential caps make it very handy at setting the
> impedance ratio, but also limit its matching range. A high loaded Q
> means lots of circulating current in the tuned circuit and so lots more
> loss from that circulating current and makes the tuning more critical.
> E.g. harder to get to the match.
> 73, Jerry, K0CQ
> TenTec mailing list
TenTec mailing list