[TowerTalk] Re: L-Networks, Stacked Beams
Jay Terleski
wx0b@arraysolutions.com
Mon, 25 Dec 2000 08:48:40 -0600
Ken and the group.
Merry Christmas and thanks for the great details once again.
Comments below. I will delete the stuff we don't need below:
K7GCO@aol.com wrote:
>
> > Jay: I described my "Universal L-Network Tuner" in a previous Post to
> > match just about anything and it would be a good construction article for
> one
> > of the mags or some Mfg to make. I have 4 L-Network combo's, Series L&C
> and Shunt L&C "instantly selectable". (No mfg has a tuner like this)
I don't think its appropriate for guys who want to stack 2,3 and 4 or
more yagis or logs.
The adjustment point needs to be on the tower midway between all these
beams. Not in the shack which your Series LC and shunt LC network is
beginning to look like. Also having to be adjusted is a negative. What
are you going to do next develop a $10 motorized phase/mag detector? So
you can remote locate it?
>
> Send me a fax with your design and or pictures. I would love to be
> convinced with real engineering drawings not stories. I will then run
> the curves over the frequency bands with the network simulation software
> for your L network and post the data in a following message. May Fax
> number is 972 203 8811
> *********I don't make up stories. Those with proper background can check
> out anything I say. The last time I fell for that one of "send your design
> to me to check out" they stole it and claimed they had or knew it all the
> time.
Well then we have to make up our own minds as to if your descriptions
make any sense at all. I for one don't care to steal you coveted design
since I wouldn't want to build a "StackMatch" with moving parts, and one
that only works in the shack due to having to be adjusted manually. To
do so defeats the whole purpose of having instant changeability of the
take off angles by being able to quickly change the relay selections of
antenna combinations and hearing what combination brings in the best
signal from the target. This could not be achieved with an slow
adjustable "GCO" network, even if it worked.
I have already explained how a single L network works for a Z less
> than 50 ohms which one would expect with 2 feedlines paralleled from a LP.
No I have not seen this. But most of us know what an L network is and
how it works to transform form low Z to a higher Z or versa vice.
> The switches I use to provide all 4 L network configurations (2
> interchangeable for above or below 50 ohms or whatever the Zo is), it doesn't
> weigh a TON as you suggsted (less than 1/2 lb) and also were designed to
> provide "Series L&C" and "Shunt L&C" for a variety of applications I haven't
> published yet for base and mobile applications.
Switches? for RF? Ceramic or Radio shack rotary? KW too eh?
You don't need my unique
> switching arrangements to do what you want to do in your simulation software.
> If I have to I can send "individual drawings" of basic L-networks, shunt and
> series L&C's on typical applications and you can run curves. I already know
> what it will do.
Well it may be a good excersize to try, Make an L network that takes
16.6 ohms to 50 ohms. And run the frequency sweep for me. Adjust it for
14 mhz then 28 mhz. And publish the data for us. I will verify it and
then we have a base line to see if we agree. Do include the Q of your
coil and capacitor.
>
> > But for stacked LP's, just one L-Network
> > configuration is needed to match the mostly resistive load of a coax from
> > each LP parallel connected. There would not be the typical reactance
> swings
> > of yagis and you know that. Anyone can make the L Network for that in
> about
> > 15 minutes. I find the L-Network has greater bandwidth than any other
> tuner
> > as it's a non resonant circuit and has the least loss. I use reltively
> small
> > flee market componets for 1 KW levels with no heating or arcing typical of
> > other systems. I rest my case.
Lets see if you can do the above excersize
>
> This I know, a well designed T network will outperform an L network for
> bandwidth even with fixed Resistive loads.
> ********That I have not observed in comparisions. You also have "3 KNOBS"
Here again we are not talking the same thing. I am talking FIXED
networks. Now do you agree? Let me rephrase my statement.
A fixed network T can be designed to have a wider frequency range of
function over a fixed L network.
Its now becoming very obvious to me that you are talking about a GCO
adjustable network.
> (2 C's-1L) to adjust with a T which is a big pain, a big time waster and a
> step in the WRONG direction. A pi and perhaps the T will attenuate
> harmonics better due to the higher Q which generally means LESS BANDWIDTH. I
> have just "ONE KNOB TO TURN IN EITHER THE UNBLANCED OR BALANCED L NETWORK"
> (with 2 variable L's&C's) I HAVE. I call that the "Ultimate in Simplicity"
> for Tuners. I didn't say it was simplier than your no adjustment UN UN's as
> you have no adjustements. I have the least tuner adjustements and loss of
> any tuner. There is a reactance sensing circuit maintaining "1:1 SWR" I'm
> going to use that makes adjustments--automatically. How do you like them
> design apples?
Oh no, I guessed you would have to go the route of a phase mag detector
earlier. Those apples are really going to get complicated when you try
to drive the capacitors in the right direction. You will find out when
you actually try to build a phase mag detector. I used to sell true
phase mag detectors in an auto tuner for the vacuum coating industry to
power magnetron guns. Its not an easy problem to solve and it certainly
will cost allot more than you are willing to admit. We sold these
tuners
for around 4-5 kilo bux at 1500 watt levels. We had them up to 5 kW.
> >
> > Your doubts of practicality and time predictions of working out the
> design or
> > whatever you were trying to say on what I have, are unjustified as you have
> > not seen what I have or how it works.
>
> I have made lots of L and T networks. They work on one band and must be
> adjusted to work over an octave yet alone 4 octaves of frequency.
> ********You still haven't seen what I have. I have said serval times I need
> only ONE configuration for the application discussed here with a slight touch
> up over the range but I can always obtain "absolute 1:1" at any
> frequency--you can't. The configuration is the same REGARDLESS OF FREQUENCY.
> Take a 25 ohm load and using the correct L-Network configuration and match
> 25 ohms over 4 octaves. The configurations stays the same, only the
> reactance values of each component change. Case closed.
> >
> > Your balun matching for 2 beams arrangements sounds like it works great.
>
> Its a wide band RF Transformer, or UN-UN as Sevick has called them.
> You suggest saturation, but the transformer is a flux canceling design.
> Read Sevick's book. It has very little flux so huge power can be matched
> to the loads. Loss is very low and it will work over 4 octaves of
> frequency with no adjustments necessary.
> *******I've said a couple of times "it sounds like a great deisign" but many
> of us are on a retirement budgets and I can't afford it. I provided a way to
> get 1:1 SWR--for "Retirees Budgets". When you retire you will understand
> this concept then and you will not tolerate anyone wasting your time and
> money--even more.
>
> >I had asked for details of your system that has not been forthcoming.
>
> Details have been published in the NCJ, and are on my website. It is
> very much in the open Ken. But I apologize, I never saw your request. No
> magic. Just an UN-UN and some relays and a well designed PCB. 1.8 to 54 Mhz.
> And I lifetime warranty. I think its worth the price don't you?
> **********NO!
>
>
I delete a bunch of stuff about Elk hunting. Although I found it quite
interesting and insightful into Ken's way of thinking. I used to
worship the thrill of Elk hunting too.
>
> Jay you have been sounding like W8JI who nit picks everyones sytems just to
> intimidate them to get them to give him more information at their expense and
> time because he can't understand what he's told and doesn't know how to
> derive it himself.
I am aware you have run off JI from this reflector. But I am not trying
to nit pick on you Ken, you started this by nit picking on me. I am
still waiting for an apology or at least a comment on the accusation
you made concerning my StackMatch product being compared to "an indian
guide who stole somebody's money by taking them for a ride". I asked
for an explanation from you giving you the benefit of the doubt. But
none came.
He bad mouth the Match Box and I defended it justifiably
> as had didn't know what he was taking about. Everytime I corrected him he
> called it a "Persoanl Attack".
>From the many comments I got from other in private, some who know you, I
can safely say there are many who don't know what the heck you are
talking about. I gather that you have been talking about tuners most of
your life? But have not put one out for us to see.
I called it correcting "Personal Technical
> Deficiencies." I don't recommend anything that doesn't work. Answering all
> the E-mail would be even worse if it didn't. I have my limits on the time I
> can educate everyone--FOR FREE. SEND ME A $1000 RETAINER AND WE WILL TALK
> BUT IT WILL BE SUBJECT TO REFRESHMENT FROM TIME TO TIME AND THERE MAY BE SOME
> ROYALTY TALK--ON L NETWORK CIRCUITS.
No I am not interested in old RF designs. There is no magical tuner.
>
> Tom couldn't buff me out and decided to try his tactics elsewhere--did you
> notice? I got all kinds of thank you E-mails for his absense. Do you know
> he delayed my move to SD at least a month and now you at least a week hi hi?
Some of the folks say you have been moving for 12 months but I don't
care. How can I delay you from moving your household. It only takes me a
minuet to do an L network analysis. Will the above proposed design
excersize delay you another few months to do the math?
> Every time I make a suggstion on TT it costs me all kinds of time. No more
> follow ups. I have a few more to unload and then no more--until I get to SD.
>
>
> I have a mfg interested in making the Johnson MB with my modifications and
> who know my "Magnificant and Magic L-Networks".
Maybe the truth is in the above statement. The old money trail. Could it
serve your purpose to throw darts at other peoples products like the MFJ
tuner, and my StackMatch so you can later bring out your "Magnificent
and Magic L-Networks" in the form of the old Johnson MB? Perhaps we
finally learn the reasons.
>
> You "failed to comment" on idea of "Series Connecting" (100 ohm load instead
> of 25 ohms) the coaxes from the LP's or stacked beams and matching them into
> a balanced tuner like the 2 knob MB or my quick tune up Balanced L on "1
> Shaft"--with the same configuratuion? It a very smart tuner using relatively
> small and inexpensive components from the flea market. That'a a great idea.
> 1:1 SWR on any frequency for balanced loads.
>
Not of interest to me. I think you have me mixed up with another person.
> You also "failed to comment" on the fact that stacked beams usually messes up
> the individual F/B even of the higher gain beams of over 1 WL spacing and
> sharp vertical patterns. Therefore lower gain beams with wider vertical
> patterns spaced .5 WL do have far more interference from each other more than
> the "marginal amount" you have suggested. Spend sometime in Eznec. k7gco
This is of interest to me. Over the last two years I have been doing an
extensive tour of the world giving power point presentations on a study
of Stacked Yagi-Uda Antennas. I will let the group answer you since I
am certain there are hundreds who have heard it on whether I know of
which I speak.
Specifically, you can have either better or worse F/Rear patterns in a
stack. It depends on several variables. Actually smaller beams say 2
elements spaced at .5 WL will have usually will have much better F/Rear
patterns than the single beam alone. See my website on stacking 2 ele
40m beams. The EZNEC patterns are there. You have it wrong.
Merry Christmas to the group.
Jay, WX0B
--
Jay Terleski
WX0B - Array Solutions
www.arraysolutions.com
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com