On 6/1/2010 8:10 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
>> We started this saying the baluns at balundesigns could be outdone. I've
>> >not seen the one true answer that makes me believe that yet.
>>
> One true answer? Gee, I've published measured data and showed exactly what
> I measured and how I measured it. Have you gotten that from any mfr of any
> balun or similar product?
>
>
I don't care about manufacturers. I'm just trying to decide what to make.
You also showed that 12-16 turns of #14 THHN on a single type 31 core
can have a much flatter response than the coax chokes, right?
You never showed that 10-12 turns of RG-400 wrapped normally with say 1"
coils on the same type 31 core, is worse than the turn count you gave
for #14 THHN. on the same core. At least not that I can tell?
If you did, then you've shown that bifilar is better, with a few more
turns. (for 3.5mhz-30mhz).
Even though we can agree the measurement technique by balundesigns might
be suspect, you have no data that their 10-12 turn small coax design is
bad, unless you're confident they're not using type 31 ferrite.
I want something with more voltage breakdown than the PVC on THHN. So I
have my two choices: bifilar #16 teflon awg and RG400, wound some number
of times around some number of cores.
You've not run your #14 THHN at 1500 watts for any period of time.
Anecdotal info seems to suggest eventually I might have a problem. Even
though it's fine for matched swr, what happens when you accidently drive
1500 watts into the wrong antenna?
I read your paper, and I think you're showing bifilar is superior to the
coax chokes you have, but it's unclear whether small diameter coax is as
bad as you suggest, with the same winding/core. If it is, then it's
obvious I should go bifilar.
Am I misunderstanding?
-kevin
-kevin
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|