The thing works, I mean the shunt match works.
what would be a good Q for just the coil? 300, 600, 900
Operating Q, what is the desired value? Whats your formula for that?
Q of the operating antenna, cannot be expressed as band width equation I
see so many others use. there is another quick easy formula that, may be a
function or derivative that has some relationship, but not the number we
really want. Not even sure if it would get every one in every situation in
the ball park.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com> wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> A gamma match is an arm extending out or up on the element from the
> "ground" point. It is named "gamma" because it looks like the capital Greek
> letter called "gamma". See
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Gamma<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma>
>
> A beta match is called a beta because it extends equally on each side of
> the neutral point, roughly looking like the Greek letter beta on it's side
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Beta <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta>
>
> A hairpin match is a hairpin shaped "stub inductor", generally balanced,
> but it could be unbalanced. It is called a hairpin because it looks like a
> hairpin, just like a "bobby pin" spread out a little.
>
> A shunt matching component can be used, either an inductor or capacitor,
> but this is typically called shunt matching because it is a shunt component
> across the feedpoint. It is not a hairpin unless it is in the form of a
> hairpin.
>
> Hairpins and shunt matching generally act like L networks, with the series
> reactance in the element (caused by adding or subtracting length to move
> the element away from resonance). Gamma and Beta matchs can do the same,
> use the adjustment in length away from resonance to act like a reactance,
> or the Gamma or Beta might contain a series internal component(s) so the
> element can be resonant.
>
> Q can mean many things. The style or construction of the component usually
> has little bearing on the operating Q of the system, unless you have a
> terrible matching system or component design.
>
> The Q people generally talk about in matching is almost always operating
> Q. Operating Q is generally the ratio of real parts of impedance to
> imaginary parts of impedance, or operating resistance compared to component
> reactances in simple systems. For example a simple parallel tank circuit
> with a reactance of 500 ohms in each component shunted by 5000 ohms has an
> operating Q or loaded Q of ten. The component Q might be 300, or 3 zillion,
> and not affect operating Q significantly.
>
> The Q of components is entirely different than operating Q of a system,
> and is the ratio of reactance to resistance in a component.
>
> Q can also be used to describe bandwidth, but if the component or system
> is more complex than a single resonant L, R, and C the Q defined by
> bandwidth might not be related at all to system operating Q as defined by
> losses.
>
> When I think about all of that, and your desire for a certain coil
> conductor type for a Q of 80 for a hairpin (that doesn't use a coil by
> definition of being a hairpin), none of it makes much sense to me. The Q of
> a very simple matching system would generally be discussed as a ratio of
> matching system reactance to resistance of the system at that matching
> point. The Q of a component in the matching system would generally be
> defined as the ratio of loss resistance to reactance of that component by
> itself.
>
> For example, a 200 ohm reactance capacitor of 0.05 ohms loss resistance in
> series with an antenna feedpoint of 50 j200 to cancel reactance and match
> the system would have a component Q of 4000 (200/.05) and an operating Q of
> 3.996 (200/50.05). If I put in a capacitor with a reactance of 200 ohms but
> a seres loss resistance of .5 ohms, capacitor Q would be 400. This would
> insigificantly change operating Q to 200/50.5 = 3.96.
>
> This all makes me think you have operating Q confused with component Q.
>
> Are you trying to solve some problem by reading stuff somewhere, and
> getting confused by it??? Maybe some misinformation or misunderstanding is
> making your project needlessly difficult for you to manage?
>
> 73,
> Tom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> MFJ and Texas Instrument used this type of calculation for antenna Q.
>>
>> The other attachment is what some other people are using with their
>> inverted using the K2AV balun and a Gamma match on bands other than 160M.
>> So I thought why not use the same gamma setup on 160M and not the FCP. So
>> from what you had said best I DO NOT GO THAT ROUTE.
>>
>> My antenna system morfed into just using my gamma big coil on 160M.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Jim GM <jim.gmforum@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Has any one used the MFJ-907 and do what I am trying to do on 160M as a
>>> hairpin match?
>>>
>>>> From what I have been reading, Q needs to be high but not sure how high
>>>>>
>>>> and what range. My 6 inch coil with remote tuner in line with the tap
>>> on
>>> 160m I am getting around a Q of 80. My 2 inch coil has a Q much lower
>>> than that I know cause the set up has a much larger band width on 160M.
>>>
>>> I have around 30 to 40mh of coil from the tap to ground with both coils.
>>> --
>>> Jim K9TF
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim K9TF
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2013.0.3408 / Virus Database: 3222/6673 - Release Date: 09/17/13
>>
>>
>
--
Jim K9TF
_________________
Topband Reflector
|