Earl,
N0OQW:
"That is what I have. One 15kV 200pf door knob cap in series with the
shunt."
> ----------
> Plus one other component -- the 9:1 un-un.
I measured the transformer with the autek. It seems to be very low
insertion loss and doesn't get more than just warm after many minutes of 800
watts.
> "It seems to me that as long as I can get the tower to take power
> (resonate it) at the frequency of interest (1832), messing with the
> shunt, etc., is just alot of work. Rauch seems to feel that I'm
> splitting hairs."
> ----------
> The tower does not have to be resonant to take all of the power you give
> it. When you adjust the shunt feed, you are not resonating the tower,
> you are matching it to your feedline.
Good point.
> If you move the tap point down from the 450-ohm point to the 50-ohm
> point, you'll be able to get rid of the un-un and the required gamma
> capacity will be about 600 pF, three times what you're using now. Tom
> basically said to use the fewest number of components to reduce losses
> and that the greatest amount of capacity is the most efficient.
But, will it provide a better pattern or ERP? That's the issue. I am
certain I could figure out 50 different ways to get a match. Does it
improve my SNR? I figure I could easily spend a weekend up and down the
tower and drop a few bucks in components. I am investigating whether
anybody would "hear" any difference. I have a system that seems to work. I
could easily modify things and get them to the point where I can't go back
to as good as what I've got. I am nervous about messing with it. I will if
it makes the difference between a QSO or not.
At this point I am leaning towards Rauch's response--Splitting hairs...
Thanks for the input.
Ford-N0OQW
ford@cmgate.com
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/topband
Submissions: topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-topband@contesting.com
|