No way 44 foot long elements give - j17.7 reactance at 7.0 MHz.
Dave AB7E
On 2/28/2012 9:18 AM, Paul Christensen wrote:
> Gary,
>
> I imported the same model into 4Nec2 and scaled the frequency to 7.0 MHz.
> Feedpoint Z is 4.6-j17.7. Your Z values look quite extreme (also see notes
> below about feed Z for the 8JK).
>
> Using Zo=450-ohm line, two points result in minimum SWR(50) at the line
> input. The first occurs at 65 ft where SWR(50) is 7:1 and a total loss of
> 1.8 dB. The second point will occur a half-wave more at 130 ft. where
> SWR(50) is 5:1 and total loss is 3.0dB. VSWR is lower, but it's the result
> of additional loss due to SWR. So, loss is higher, but SWR is lower due to
> added loss.
>
> Me, I would add an L network at the feedpoint. First, look at transforming
> the low feedpoint Z to 450+j0. What L network values? A high-pass can be
> made with 800 pF C in series at the feed, followed by a shunt of 1 uH of L.
> L would be a small turn or hair-pin of wire. That combination results in a
> perfect match from 4.6-j17.7 into 450+j0. Total L network loss is only 0.23
> dB with reasonable component Q. Finally, let's see what 150 feet of loss is
> with the L in place. Well, SWR(450) is 1:1, and line loss is now only 0.1 dB
> but SWR(50) is 9:1 at the line input. So, a tuner must be used between the
> Tx and line input.
>
> How about a deliberate mismatch at the feedpoint to some intermediate Z value
> to allow for line length trimming? We can still use an L network, but now
> convert 4.6-j17.7 into 50+j0. That's 0.37 uH across the feed, followed by 700
> pF of series C. At 127 feet of line, SWR(50) is now 1.1:1 and line loss is
> respectable at 0.4 dB (+0.23 dB of network loss = 0.63 dB total) and -- no
> tuner required!
>
> FYI - Here's the comment section for the 4Nec2 file concerning the 8JK:
>
> "Originally designed by John Kraus, W8JK in about 1940, this antenna has some
> interesting properties. It by two closely spaced elements driven out of phase.
> Although the fields from the elements don in any direction, gain is
> nonetheless achieved because of lowering of the radiation resistance due to
> mutual
> coupling. And lower it is -- note the feedpoint impedance of only 4.74 - j19
> ohms. Compare this to a single
> element. The lower resistance results in heavier current, hence greater field
> strength, for a given power input. The
> difficulty is that system losses can quickly eat up the gain. Making this
> antenna from #12 copper wire (try it --
> and include wire loss) drops the gain about 0.65 dB, not too bad. But great
> attention must be paid to losses in
> matching networks. And losses rapidly increase in significance as the spacing
> is made closer than the 0.1
> wavelength of the example. When mounted low (0.25 wavelength for the
> example), W8JK-type antennas have a
> lower radiation angle than many other horizontal antennas due to the inherent
> lack of high-angle radiation. As an
> interesting exercise, save the pattern for later comparison. Then delete the
> second source, making the
> antenna into a Yagi. Note the increased gain. Even though the "takeoff angle"
> is higher, the Yagi gain is as good or
> better even at lower angles. In addition, the feedpoint impedance has
> increased to a much more manageable value. On
> the other hand, the W8JK will retain its performance over a much greater
> frequency range than the Yagi."
>
> Paul, W9AC
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Slagel
> To: Paul Christensen ; TowerTalk
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 10:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] balanced line loss on a mismatched antenna
>
>
> Thanks Paul,
>
> I've attached the Source Data output below. This, I believe, is showing
> me SWR and impedance at the feedpoint of each element. I'm not sure if EZNEC
> gives me a way to see the SWR at the single feedpoint that I'll use to feed
> these two feedpoints but I assume it will be equally as bad.
>
> I'm using the standard ARRL W8JK model that comes with the demo version of
> EZNEC in the ARRL antenna book. I modify that model to look like what I want
> to build and as long as I don't save it the software performs like the full
> version of EZNEC. I'm over my head with antenna modeling as soon as I move
> past modeling a dipole but I forge ahead and try and get as much useful
> information as I can from it.
>
> The question still is, if I get the antenna working properly how much loss
> will I see on the feedline. Thanks much for your help.
>
>
>
> EZNEC ARRL ver. 4.0
> 2/28/2012 7:53:59 AM
> --------------- SOURCE DATA ---------------
> Frequency = 7.05 MHz
> Source 1 Voltage = 397.6 V. at -89.63 deg.
> Current = 1 A. at 0.0 deg.
> Impedance = 2.597 - J 397.6 ohms
> Power = 2.597 watts
> SWR (50 ohm system)> 100 (75 ohm system)> 100
> Source 2 Voltage = 397.6 V. at 90.37 deg.
> Current = 1 A. at 180.0 deg.
> Impedance = 2.597 - J 397.6 ohms
> Power = 2.597 watts
> SWR (50 ohm system)> 100 (75 ohm system)> 100
> Total applied power = 5.193 watts
>
>
>
> Gary Slagel
> KT0A
>
>
>
>
> From: Paul Christensen<w9ac@arrl.net>
> To: Gary Slagel<gdslagel@yahoo.com>; TowerTalk<towertalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 4:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] balanced line loss on a mismatched antenna
>
>
> > "I think I can tune the antenna with the feedline and get it down to a
> more reasonable level, maybe 10 to 1, at the tuner end. Then the tuner will
> tune it to resonance so the xmttr can put its full load into.
> > Question is, since the swr is 10 to 1 at the radio end of the feedline
> but 100 to 1 at the antenna end of the feedline, am I going to see the 3.5 db
> loss from a 100 to 1 swr or the .5 dbi that a 10 to 1 swr would give me."
>
> Gary, you can vary the impedance at the input end of the line, but not
> the SWR. The SWR on the 450-ohm section will remain nearly constant over
> your 150 ft run, even with length trimming.
>
> In EZNEC, what is the Z of the antenna you're modeling at the operating
> frequency in an R+j format?
>
> Paul, W9AC
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|