Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] lightning arrester suggesstions

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] lightning arrester suggesstions
From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Reply-to: jim@audiosystemsgroup.com
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:31:42 -0800
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On 12/15/2025 7:18 PM, J. Hunt via TowerTalk wrote:
A Bias Tee device inserts /  removes a DC signal from a feedline.  This Bias Tee device 
also creates an impedance bump (seen by an IFR oscilloscope) = signal loss.  Hence, I do not 
use them, use a separate control cable as needed.

Some of those losses exist only in the mind of those looking at TDRs, and/or only working at UHF. More than ten years ago, I made about twenty cables for a DXpedition using an RG8-size coax manufactured by Commscope designed for use at VHF/UHF with loss specs like LMR400. Solid #10 copper center, dense tinned copper braid and robust Al foil. It came to me around 2003 from a distressed sail to a friend who bought half of a truck-load of it after a dot-com bankruptcy. Over the years, I probably bought more than a dozen 1,000 ft spools of it, passing some along to friends. The non-plenum version is Commscope 3227, the plenum version was something like 2726K (I'm 84, and memory fades). I bought mostly the plenum version, which is TFE to meet fire codes, and those DXpedition cables were the plenum version.

To test the cables, I spliced 13 of them, each with Amphenol 83-1SP connectors, with Amphenol barrels, and measured the loss by substitution using HP gear, at spot frequencies in log increments from about 500 kHz t0 200 MHz. The loss of that 1,300 ft transmission line at 200 MHz was slightly less than the mfr's spec. That's for 28 83-!SPs and Amphenol 14 barrels. ("By substitution" is an old-school method in which you connect generator and voltmeter directly, record the loss, then repeat with the DUT added. It's what we did before we had gear with greater precision than a well-calibrated VNA.

This sort of loss is VERY strongly dependent on the operating frequency, and can, indeed, be quite significant at high VHF and UHF. Most serious ham antennas are for HF, where such losses are far lower. Please don't offer VHF/UHF advice to folks working HF. The nature of transmission lines makes them two very different worlds.

Because I live in a dense redwood forest, with antennas having to shoot through several hundred feet of trees and their foliage, operating at UHF and high VHF is masturbation. The highest frequency I take seriously is 6M. The lowest is 160M. The 300 ft runs from shack to the top of my tallest tower are all 7/8-in.

Good engineering is NOT dancing on the head of a pin, using worst case analysis that doesn't apply to the problem at hand. It's not using the product that has the greatest advertising budget, or "is the industry standard." Or that has the budget to pay the high cost of UL testing. It is using solid scientific principles to solve specific problems. The former results in $150 hammers (it used to be $80 hammers). The latter is how we can do stuff well, at far less cost.

As a retired design professional for systems that are going to get inspected, I would be specifying the UL Listed Polyphaser products. But as a ham, with a finite budget, the arrestors I've bought in the last ten years to replace them are all the Morgan-design that Array Solutions was selling.

73, Jim K9YC

73, Jim K9YC

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>