Also, some are using the "SPG" term to denote the common neutral/ground connection at a service entrance panel. In these types of discussions, a picture is worth a thousand words. Paul, W9AC _______
I've noticed the same result and my primary ATU is a remote-controlled switchable "L." Also component Q and total output C makes a substantial difference with C-L-C "T" tuners when low Z termination
Using TLD, I first ran a simulation on 80m using LMR-400 and a 250 ohm load for a 5:1 VSWR. I ran the coax length from an electrical 1/4 wave through a 1/2 wave. Total loss at 1/4 wave of line: 0.34
Steve, Do you know if the plots were obtained with the roller inductor placed away from surrounding objects -- or placed within a metal cabinet? The Q looks pretty pathetic above 40m. Also, anyone kn
Steve, Sure makes one think about where and how the loss of Q is occurring. Unused turns can couple to the active portion of the coil, reducing Q. Another factor that comes to mind is the shorting ro
That's practical if the shack is located against an exterior wall. Open transmission line easily cross couples with Ethernet cabling and household SMPS devices. A balanced line easily keeps its bala
TLD software appears to satisfy that test. What's interesting under your test set of parameters is that power delivered to the load peaks when the complex Z at the load is opposite in reactance at th
Thanks Steve. That makes perfect sense. What's a mystery is why the loss attributed to SWR under that condition shows as a negative value in TLD, albeit a small amount. The inverse of loss is...well,
I see no issues keeping it like it is. It's an anomaly with short wavelength sections of line. More than anything, I think it helps as a learning tool. You can take all the printed reference materia
Steve, Perhaps it would be more accurate to state "I-squared-R loss attributed to SWR," rather than "Additional loss due to SWR?" The caveat that addresses the effect seen on short lines is still nee
Steve, I just ran the numbers referred to by Owen, only I used RG-58 instead of LMR-400: http://vk1od.net/transmissionline/VSWR/aldv.htm Since the QST author did not specify the coax type, the outcom
Dan, My vote is for the RF Industries RFA-4005 crimp set: http://www.rfcoaxconnectors.com/Downloads/Home/Tool_Crimpers.pdf Available for USD $99.00 from RFParts: http://www.rfparts.com/coax_accessor
But only if the secondary suppressors are single mode (fault current path to neutral), rather than devices that offer the popular "all three modes" of protection. If secondary protection is desired
Pete, Surge diversion to the ground conductor can raise the ground potential unequally between equipment. If the rise and fall of the ground potential is equal across interconnected equipment on a br
Yes, nearly all of them do -- even commercial grade products. For example, two years ago, I ran a pair of dedicated 20A branch circuits into the shack. Each branch was terminated into separate Levit
Pete, I would definitely install a whole-house SPD solution at the service entrance. Then, only consider single-mode SPD devices (e.g., SurgeX) on branch circuits. Right now, I'm only using a whole-
Jack, Although not optimum (through a slow discharge of surge current to neutral), cutting the L/G, and N/G MOVs and leaving only the L/N MOV in a pre-existing 3-mode SPD is certainly a possibility.
Another reason is to maintain radiation efficiency as the ground system degrades over time due to soil acidity. So, while it appears diminishing returns sets in around 60 radials, it's a lot more co
Steve, I can't either but I recently changed all of my station cabling to RG-400 inside and LMR400 outdoors. I'm using crimped PL-259 inside only; soldered PL-259 outdoors. My fears may be unfounded
These look like the "Holy Grail" of UHF connectors. After a bit of searching, RF Industries makes a comparable model, available for us folk on this side of the ocean: http://tinyurl.com/4zn9ayf Avai