Topband: Ferrites on antenna feed line RE: Topband Digest, Vol 167, Issue 4

[Herbert Schoenbohm]

On the point of entry to where the RF is getting into the stove. 
Hopefully the feed-line is not near the stove and not radiating.


On 11/7/2016 5:30 PM, Michael Rutkaus wrote:
> I must have missed something, but shouldn't the ferrites be on the antenna
> feed line near the antenna and not on the stove?
>
> Mike
> K4QET
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> topband-request at contesting.com
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 12:00 PM
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Topband Digest, Vol 167, Issue 4
>
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
> 	topband at contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	topband-request at contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	topband-owner at contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Re: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove (Bob K6UJ)
>     2. Re: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
>        (JAYB1943 at OPTONLINE.NET)
>     3. Re: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove (Gary Smith)
>     4. Re: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
>        (Arthur Delibert)
>     5. Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical design?
>        (Robert Fanfant)
>     6. Re: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove (Gary Smith)
>     7. Re: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical design?
>        (Herbert Schoenbohm)
>     8. Re: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical design?
>        (Clive GM3POI)
>     9. Re: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical design?
>        (David Cutter)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 09:17:41 -0800
> From: Bob K6UJ <k6uj at pacbell.net>
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
> Message-ID: <11ba6478-737f-2704-af48-265985a84faa at pacbell.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Bob,
>
> I had to chuckle about your experience on triggering all that stuff in
> the house.  :-)
> Although not HF band RF interference but I solved an RFI issue on 2
> meters with snap on ferrites also.
> When I keyed up my 50 watt 2 meter xcvr it would activate the garage
> door opener on the house next door.  :-)
> I probably could have changed the frequency code on his unit but the
> ferrites worked fine.  I don't know the mix
> just tried a couple of clamp ons I had.
>
> Bob
> K6UJ
>
>
>
> On 11/6/16 8:20 AM, Bob Lawson N6RW wrote:
>> Jay
>>
>> If you use snap-on ferrites, make sure they are #31 mix.  31 mix is
>> substantially better than others (like 47 mix) at 160m.  When I had a
>> vertical on the roof at my So Cal house, I would reset my DirecTV HD
>> receivers, trigger my home security alarm, turn off my air
>> conditioning fan and so on, when I transmitted on 80 meters. All
>> problems were solved with 31 mix ferrites.
>>
>> 73 de Bob N6RW
>>
>>
>> On 11/6/2016 8:58 AM, Lloyd - N9LB wrote:
>>> Hello Jay!
>>>
>>> Have you tried putting a string of "RF Suppression Snap-On Ferrites"
>>> on the power cord?
>>>
>>> Are the dimensions of the cord such that it is possible to use "RF
>>> Suppression Snap-On Ferrites"?  The largest I could find are .75"
>>> inside diameter.
>>>
> https://www.dxengineering.com/search/part-type/rf-suppression-snap-on-ferrit
> e-beads
>>> If the power cord for the electric stove is too large, perhaps the
>>> Snap-On Ferrites could be added to the Romex  cable feeding the stove
>>> outlet if the wiring is accessible, such as in an unfinished basement.
>>>
>>> 73
>>>
>>> Lloyd - N9LB
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>>> JAYB1943 at OPTONLINE.NET
>>> Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 9:34 AM
>>> To: topband at contesting.com
>>> Subject: Topband: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
>>>
>>> Hi guys ? I have recently added a 160m amp to my station and have
>>> created an RFI problem I can?t solve.
>>> When I transmit on 160 with any more than 150 watts, the GE electric
>>> stove in the kitchen ALARMS and must be reset. I guess the 160 signal
>>> from the vertical is getting into the AC power lines (just a few feet
>>> away from the AC feed off the pole) and then into the electronics
>>> into the stove. Reducing the output power to 125 watts or so does not
>>> cause the problem. Not a permanent condition; hitting the stop button
>>> on the stove controls stops the stove alarm but starts again when I
>>> transmit. My XYL HATES alarms?she is a retired ICU RN and I think she
>>> got conditioned to panic when ANY alarm goes off !
>>> Anyhow I wondered if anybody has any similar experience with problems
>>> like this on 160 and how to solve them. I am tempted to just have an
>>> electrician come in and install a BIG RF filter on the AC line ?
>>> either just on the Stove line or to the main feed but I fear this is
>>> a lot of $$$. I am hesitant to do this one on my own for insurance
>>> reasons if nothing else.
>>>      Any ideas ?
>>>                     Thanx ? Jay NY2NY
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>> _________________
>>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>>
>>> _________________
>>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 12:33:24 -0500
> From: <JAYB1943 at OPTONLINE.NET>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
> Message-ID: <FC564F3D4E3145929473C04B81DD4926 at jayPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="utf-8"
>
> Thanks to all the guys who answered my query ? seems unanimous that I should
>
> add Mix 31 Ferrites to the stove ac feed so just ordered them from DX
> engineering ? shud be installed and tested by the end of the week..
> Will probably also add some .05 or so bypass caps to the line while I?m
> there ? wouldn?t hurt !
>    tnx again ? keep y?all posted..Jay NY2NY
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2016 13:36:41 -0500
> From: "Gary Smith" <Gary at ka1j.com>
> To: Topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
> Message-ID: <581F7839.26623.1E06AE0 at Gary.ka1j.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Another thing that might help if the
> ferrites don't do the job is to run a wire
> from a series variable capacitor and
> variable/tapped inductor, to the stove or
> possibly to the metal conduit the wires to
> the stove are going through. This, with an
> attachment to a counterpoise or ground.
>
> My father had problems when he would
> transmit on 80 and it would trigger the
> system that used house wiring to turn on
> various lights in the house when a phone
> call came in on her line, or the door bell
> was rung. She was totally deaf and needed
> this to get to her TTY setup for a voice
> operator to come in and translate speech
> to her printout.
>
> He did as I described and had a RF ammeter
> in line. When the capacitor/inductor was
> adjusted under a key down situation, you
> could follow the result on the ammeter and
> at the right setting, the interference
> stopped triggering the in-line receivers.
> Sometimes he needed to tweak the setting
> but it always worked for him.
>
> I think MFJ used to have something to do
> just this, I don't recall what they called
> it.
>
> Good luck & 73,
>
> Gary
> KA1J
>
>> Thanks to all the guys who answered my query - seems unanimous that
>> I should add Mix 31 Ferrites to the stove ac feed so just ordered them
>> from DX engineering - shud be installed and tested by the end of the
>> week.. Will probably also add some .05 or so bypass caps to the line
>> while I?m there - wouldn?t hurt !
>>    tnx again - keep y?all posted..Jay NY2NY
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus _________________ Topband Reflector
>> Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 19:12:14 +0000
> From: Arthur Delibert <radio75a3 at msn.com>
> To: "Topband at contesting.com" <Topband at contesting.com>, "Gary at ka1j.com"
> 	<Gary at ka1j.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
> Message-ID:
> 	
> <BN6PR18MB1314E6E12F4A79C3C92E1253E4A40 at BN6PR18MB1314.namprd18.prod.outlook.
> com>
> 	
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> The product that does this is the MFJ Artificial Ground.  Costs about $160.
>
>
> Good luck.
>
>
> Art Delibert, KB3FJO
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Topband <topband-bounces at contesting.com> on behalf of Gary Smith
> <Gary at ka1j.com>
> Sent: Sunday, November 6, 2016 1:36 PM
> To: Topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
>
> Another thing that might help if the
> ferrites don't do the job is to run a wire
> from a series variable capacitor and
> variable/tapped inductor, to the stove or
> possibly to the metal conduit the wires to
> the stove are going through. This, with an
> attachment to a counterpoise or ground.
>
> My father had problems when he would
> transmit on 80 and it would trigger the
> system that used house wiring to turn on
> various lights in the house when a phone
> call came in on her line, or the door bell
> was rung. She was totally deaf and needed
> this to get to her TTY setup for a voice
> operator to come in and translate speech
> to her printout.
>
> He did as I described and had a RF ammeter
> in line. When the capacitor/inductor was
> adjusted under a key down situation, you
> could follow the result on the ammeter and
> at the right setting, the interference
> stopped triggering the in-line receivers.
> Sometimes he needed to tweak the setting
> but it always worked for him.
>
> I think MFJ used to have something to do
> just this, I don't recall what they called
> it.
>
> Good luck & 73,
>
> Gary
> KA1J
>
>> Thanks to all the guys who answered my query - seems unanimous that
>> I should add Mix 31 Ferrites to the stove ac feed so just ordered them
>> from DX engineering - shud be installed and tested by the end of the
>> week.. Will probably also add some .05 or so bypass caps to the line
>> while I?m there - wouldn?t hurt !
>>    tnx again - keep y?all posted..Jay NY2NY
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus _________________ Topband Reflector
> Avast | Download Free Antivirus for PC, Mac &
> Android<https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
> www.avast.com
> Protect your devices with the best free antivirus on the market. Download
> Avast antivirus and anti-spyware protection for your PC, Mac and Android.
>
>
>> Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 19:16:45 +0000
> From: Robert Fanfant <rfanfant at hotmail.com>
> To: "topband at contesting.com" <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Topband: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical design?
> Message-ID:
> 	
> <BY2PR10MB063143FAB2401EF73A33EF4FC9A40 at BY2PR10MB0631.namprd10.prod.outlook.
> com>
> 	
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> I am planning on putting up a 160m T vertical next week. After doing some
> modeling , I would like your thoughts concerning using  a traditional ?
> vertical design,  versus an off center fed design.
>
> My modeling of the traditional designs approaches 36-38 ohms of real
> impedance while the off center fed design shows I can obtain close to 50
> ohms of real impedance.
>
> Details:
> Trees on my property are roughly  143? tall and I can?t use  ground mounted
> radials for a variety of reasons. I found I can  get up to 110? feet of
> usable vertical length,  assuming radials  @ 20? off the ground. The antenna
> will be suspended between trees.
>
> I?ve discovered through modeling using elevated radials at 20? , a 110
> vertical section. By varying both the radial and  T top section lengths , I
> can design a 160m vertical which approaches  50 ohms of real impedance ,
> using an off center fed design. It exhibits excellent characteristics from
> what the modeling shows. Based on the modeling I?m leaning towards the off
> center fed design primarily because It has a lower SWR at resonance
> (1.83Mhz) than the traditional vertical, and removes the need for
> building/adding a matching network  if I only want to cover the lower
> portion of the band (CW). Thoughts?
>
> -rob N7QT
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows
> 10
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2016 14:17:54 -0500
> From: "Gary Smith" <Gary at ka1j.com>
> To: Topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: RF interference from 160m to GE Electric stove
> Message-ID: <581F81E2.23134.2062812 at Gary.ka1j.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I thought I should add some photos of what
> he made. His was a bit more complex with a
> transformer and bridge rectifier. Mine was
> more basic & I used a roller inductor but
> it did the job.
>
> I didn't shrink the photos so as to leave
> more detail available when you click on a
> photo.
>
> http://doctorgary.net/RFI-1.jpg
> http://doctorgary.net/RFI-2.jpg
> http://doctorgary.net/RFI-3.jpg
> http://doctorgary.net/RFI-4.jpg
> http://doctorgary.net/RFI-5.jpg
>
> 73,
>
> Gary
> KA1J
>
>> Another thing that might help if the
>> ferrites don't do the job is to run a wire
>> from a series variable capacitor and
>> variable/tapped inductor, to the stove or
>> possibly to the metal conduit the wires to
>> the stove are going through. This, with an
>> attachment to a counterpoise or ground.
>>
>> My father had problems when he would
>> transmit on 80 and it would trigger the
>> system that used house wiring to turn on
>> various lights in the house when a phone
>> call came in on her line, or the door bell
>> was rung. She was totally deaf and needed
>> this to get to her TTY setup for a voice
>> operator to come in and translate speech
>> to her printout.
>>
>> He did as I described and had a RF ammeter
>> in line. When the capacitor/inductor was
>> adjusted under a key down situation, you
>> could follow the result on the ammeter and
>> at the right setting, the interference
>> stopped triggering the in-line receivers.
>> Sometimes he needed to tweak the setting
>> but it always worked for him.
>>
>> I think MFJ used to have something to do
>> just this, I don't recall what they called
>> it.
>>
>> Good luck & 73,
>>
>> Gary
>> KA1J
>>
>>> Thanks to all the guys who answered my query - seems unanimous that
>>> I should add Mix 31 Ferrites to the stove ac feed so just ordered
>>> them from DX engineering - shud be installed and tested by the end
>>> of the week.. Will probably also add some .05 or so bypass caps to
>>> the line while I?m there - wouldn?t hurt !
>>>    tnx again - keep y?all posted..Jay NY2NY
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus _________________ Topband Reflector
>>> Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 19:09:42 -0400
> From: Herbert Schoenbohm <herbs at vitelcom.net>
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical
> 	design?
> Message-ID: <4eefc6de-8448-ed7b-8faa-3da479a5b769 at vitelcom.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Not having a balanced "T" top section defeats the whole purpose of
> reducing the radiation from the top horizontal wire.  IMHO the more you
> can reduce wasted radiation of the cloud warmer effect the better your
> antenna will perform for DX.
>
>
>
> Herb, KV4FZ
>
>
> On 11/6/2016 3:16 PM, Robert Fanfant wrote:
>> Based on the modeling I?m leaning towards the off center fed design
> primarily because It has a lower SWR at resonance (1.83Mhz) than the
> traditional vertical, and removes the need for building/adding a matching
> network  if I only want to cover the lower portion of the band (CW).
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 00:10:02 -0000
> From: "Clive GM3POI" <gm3poi2 at btinternet.com>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical
> 	design?
> Message-ID: <000001d2388b$49608e80$dc21ab80$@btinternet.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="utf-8"
>
> Rob,
> An off set top loading will radiate unlike a balanced top loading. Far
> better to eliminate Horizontal radiation unless you want to be louder within
> a couple of hundred miles. Resonate the vertical at say 1.89, then place a
> hairpin coil across the feed point to bring the antenna to 1:1 at the wanted
> operating frequency. Your proposed antenna will need a good feed point
> choke.   73 Clive GM3POI
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Robert
> Fanfant
> Sent: 06 November 2016 19:17
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical design?
>
>
> I am planning on putting up a 160m T vertical next week. After doing some
> modeling , I would like your thoughts concerning using  a traditional ?
> vertical design,  versus an off center fed design.
>
> My modeling of the traditional designs approaches 36-38 ohms of real
> impedance while the off center fed design shows I can obtain close to 50
> ohms of real impedance.
>
> Details:
> Trees on my property are roughly  143? tall and I can?t use  ground mounted
> radials for a variety of reasons. I found I can  get up to 110? feet of
> usable vertical length,  assuming radials  @ 20? off the ground. The antenna
> will be suspended between trees.
>
> I?ve discovered through modeling using elevated radials at 20? , a 110
> vertical section. By varying both the radial and  T top section lengths , I
> can design a 160m vertical which approaches  50 ohms of real impedance ,
> using an off center fed design. It exhibits excellent characteristics from
> what the modeling shows. Based on the modeling I?m leaning towards the off
> center fed design primarily because It has a lower SWR at resonance
> (1.83Mhz) than the traditional vertical, and removes the need for
> building/adding a matching network  if I only want to cover the lower
> portion of the band (CW). Thoughts?
>
> -rob N7QT
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows
> 10
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 14:23:13 -0000
> From: "David Cutter" <d.cutter at ntlworld.com>
> To: "Robert Fanfant" <rfanfant at hotmail.com>,	<topband at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical
> 	design?
> Message-ID: <A93E401FA443426DB4730276BB31403D at DavidPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> Have a look at this idea:
> http://www.m0rzf.co.uk/ants1/
>
> This is an off centre fed but your normal feeder is connected to the end of
> the antenna via a choke.  I've made several of the 40m version and 3 using
> double the sizes for 80m.  I used simpler chokes for both and measured
> common mode currents to ensure it worked as an inverted L with no ground
> radials.  This is a variant of the sleeve dipole or "end fed dipole" often
> used at VHF and above.
>
> I and a friend are now making one for 160m but with a different choke and
> balun suitable for the band.  The Ruthroff will be about twice as long and
> the choke will be on #31 core.
>
> Give it some thought; it seems to me you have the facility (height) to make
> a good one, whereas we are very much restricted in height.
>
> My keenness for this idea is that radiation to the ground is minimised
> because the real feedpoint is several metres in the air  at the junction
> with the Ruthroff.  In my case I've arranged the transmitter attachment (end
>
> connection) to be at ground level where the choke is grounded to minimise
> common mode current back to the tx.
>
> In my tests on the 80m version, I can reasonably estimate losses at about
> 5%, most of which is in the choke (a #43 with 16 turns of thin PTFE coax).
> I used air tests with several precision thermistors and in pure water as a
> calorimeter test running 100W.  With suitable rating core and coax I don't
> see why it shouldn't run at your legal limit.
>
> David
> G3UNA
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Fanfant" <rfanfant at hotmail.com>
> To: <topband at contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 7:16 PM
> Subject: Topband: Traditional or off-center fed 160m vertical design?
>
>
>> I am planning on putting up a 160m T vertical next week. After doing some
>> modeling , I would like your thoughts concerning using  a traditional ?
>> vertical design,  versus an off center fed design.
>>
>> My modeling of the traditional designs approaches 36-38 ohms of real
>> impedance while the off center fed design shows I can obtain close to 50
>> ohms of real impedance.
>>
>> Details:
>> Trees on my property are roughly  143? tall and I can?t use  ground
>> mounted radials for a variety of reasons. I found I can  get up to 110?
>> feet of usable vertical length,  assuming radials  @ 20? off the ground.
>> The antenna will be suspended between trees.
>>
>> I?ve discovered through modeling using elevated radials at 20? , a 110
>> vertical section. By varying both the radial and  T top section lengths ,
>> I can design a 160m vertical which approaches  50 ohms of real impedance ,
>> using an off center fed design. It exhibits excellent characteristics from
>> what the modeling shows. Based on the modeling I?m leaning towards the off
>> center fed design primarily because It has a lower SWR at resonance
>> (1.83Mhz) than the traditional vertical, and removes the need for
>> building/adding a matching network  if I only want to cover the lower
>> portion of the band (CW). Thoughts?
>>
>> -rob N7QT
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows
>> 10
>>
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 167, Issue 4
> ***************************************
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband