>"That is why, out of the many thousands of amateurs who claim to be using
>"balanced feedline", there are few or none who can actually *prove* it. All
>the rest are really just expressing a hope or a wish which will almost never
>be granted."
Positively depressing, Ian. If we can achieve reasonable, albeit not perfect
line balance, does it really matter? Consider a wire dipole strung between two
tall trees and fed with open wire line straight down to a symmetrical, balanced
ATU (e.g., link-coupled) installed just above ground level. If thermocouple
ammeters placed on each line at the tuner 's output report equal current, then
it's reasonable to assume that line current is well balanced. But this also
assumes the line is located in the clear and not coupling to nearby objects.
My home QTH closely follows this description, although the link-coupled tuner
is replaced with a motorized, switched-symmetrical L type with CM choke at the
coaxial input.
Sure, that's a near ideal set-up and probably to your point, the typical
installation consists of a non-symmetrical tuner on the operating desktop,
feeding window line that meanders through the house, along walls, in the
attic, near metallic gutters, etc.
Although difficult to manage, one could place ammeters or shunted pilot lamps
at equal distances from the feed-point on the dipole itself, and observe
current. Some of the first experiments using this method were developed during
the 1920s and covered in QST. In the early literature, transposition blocks
spaced at regular intervals along the line were used with the intent to force
the line into balance. By the 1940s these devices seemed to have disappeared,
possibly because of the availability and easy installation of coaxial lines
after the war.
Paul, W9AC
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|