TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 168, Issue 1

To: tentec@contesting.com, Rick@DJ0IP.de, denton@oregontrail.net
Subject: Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 168, Issue 1
From: Edward McCann via TenTec <tentec@contesting.com>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 09:03:54 -0800
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Denton- 

Concur fully with your observation that Voltage Balun does not CMC suppression.

My question trying to ask if the early TenTec tuners used a Voltage Balun (as 
did most the early Heathkit, Dentron, etc. tuners of the day) to provide 
balanced output, OR did TenTec supply in its 229A series a Current Balun, with 
its better CMC suppression characteristics.

The question could have been phrased using more concise use of the English 
language.

Rick DJ0IP,  advises re the 229A that:

" In this case the 4:1 [in the 229A tuner] may be a voltage balun.  Its only 
job is the impedance transformation."

When the thing gets here (just purchased on 2nd hand market, and not yet 
arrived at this QTH) I guess I'll just open it up an look. 

Rick's comments are spot on with regard to the world of Baluns in general. 

But thank you both.

Ed McCann
AG6CX

Sent from my iPhone



Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 1, 2016, at 12:05 AM, tentec-request@contesting.com wrote:
> 
> Was it a Voltage Balun as was the early craze, or current and suitable for 
> decent CMC suppression?

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [TenTec] TenTec Digest, Vol 168, Issue 1, Edward McCann via TenTec <=