[TowerTalk] Coax Vs Open Wire Line

GALE STEWARD k3nd@yahoo.com
Thu, 14 Sep 2000 05:04:34 -0700 (PDT)


Anybody actually read this stuff?  Much too long, way
to short on substance, IMHO.

Regards,
Stew  K3ND


> >   Brian:  Your posts make progressively less
> sense.  I gave some applications
> > where I use coax in an advanced manner you don't
> even use.  I have many more
> > but I kept it short.  I've purchased several
> thousand feet (lots of bucks) of
> > expensive coax and had to throw a lot of it way
> due to excessive loss,
> > cracking and abuse.  I've spent hours testing it
> and recording the results
> > for further reference and have written articles on
> it.  When you keep loss
> > data you will get your coax weak eyes opened. 
> Open wire line doesn't change
> > in loss with insulated wire if the insulators are
> kept clean.  Even then you
> > would be hard pressed to measure the difference. 
> I use 6" Teflon and
> > porcelain spacers that are over 50 years old. 
> I've shown close ups of the
> > cross sections of the various coaxes on and on in
> CQ.  I purchased from
> > Boeing Surplus 4000' of RG8 size Teflon coated and
> center dielectric silver
> > plated dual shielded 50 ohm coax that cost
> originally $1.75/ft 35 years
> > ago--for 11 cents a foot.  I still have 2000'.  I
> have given some to friends.
> >  It compares to polly foam for loss.  I have 3
> different ways to test coax
> > and open wire line loss.  It's the most stable
> coax I've ever used.
> > 
> >   Further you are the one with the "open wire
> blinders" and I'd bet you have
> > never properly used it from the comments you make.
>  I'm not talking about the
> > 450 ohm ladder line.  It has much higher loss than
> #12 or larger wire with 6
> > inch spacers.  I even have some with 1/4" copper
> tubing.  I bent it in a sine
> > wave and told everyone that asks "it got formed
> that way from a high SWR and
> > high power" and they believed it.  There was even
> a Jeeves Cartoon on that in
> > QST about 50 years ago.
> > 
> >   In regard to the rotary slip ring loops--you
> brought them up out of the
> > clear blue sky and then pointed out they can fail
> and the spacing can vary
> > causing impedance changes.  Don't blame me or
> others for your failures to
> > construct things properly.  The ones I had never
> failed for power, balance or
> > mechanically.  If you learn to space the rings
> properly (use a ruler) the Z
> > doesn't change either.  I intend to use them
> again.
> > 
> >   Your on a non productive tangent on open wire
> line that illustrates limited
> > experience (and a limited sense of humor) with
> feedlines.  Can you tell me
> > the Impedance Formula for coax and open wire line?
> > 
> >   In 1960 Columbia made the first Pollyfoam coax. 
> Unfortunately it ended up
> > about 60 ohm coax.  They just changed the
> dielectric.  The dielectric
> > constant changed from 2.3 to 1.6 and when that
> plugs into the formula, it
> > requires one other change to maintain 50 ohms. 
> Since you are so
> > knowledgeable you tell me what that is and how
> much.  When I talked to
> > Columbia they didn't know either.  This turned out
> to be great coax as it's
> > the right Zo (that means impedance in technical
> lingo) for 1/4 WL stubs
> > matching 50 to 72 ohm hardline coax.  I suggested
> they keep making it but
> > label it 60 ohms. I can spot it instantly.
> > 
> >   Pollyfoam has a big variable.  If you grid dip a
> 100' length and then
> > another, it may have to be about 3' longer or
> shorter due to the variation of
> > the velocity factor.  Some brands are more stable
> and it's measurable from
> > length to length.  I've measured over 10,000' of
> it for many applications.
> > Would you believe (that's the cue I'm pulling your
> leg) they mix the Yeast
> > better that bubbles up.  They actually blow
> nitrogen into it and some control
> > it better.  That's around a 40 degree error in
> electrical length on 10M and
> > it screwed up an antenna I had requiring equal
> length feedlines.  It took me
> > 5 minutes to find the VF (Velocity Factor)
> problem.  I reconnected the 2
> > equal lengths of solid dielectric feedlines I had
> with the same electrical
> > length.  I happen to also use a certain "Magic
> Length" of 91' 2" as it's an
> > electrical 1/2 wave or multiple on 3.562, 7125,
> 10.687,14.25, 17.812, 21.375,
> > 24.937 & 28.5 MHz and will Grid Dip to this almost
> exactly.  One application
> > is as I have described in TT when using a variable
> Xc (that's a variable
> > capacitor) in the shack to tune out inductive
> reactance, I need certain
> > lengths to repeat the antenna inductive reactance
> at the end of the feedline.
> >  If the feedline is not exactly the right in say
> all band trapped antennas, I
> > can compensate at the antenna with a slight change
> there.  When you work with
> > coax for 60 year a lot these tricks come to mind
> with a little "Coax
> > Creativity" of many years used on hundreds of
> antennas.  These idea also work
> > with open wire line and it's "making a comeback"
> from the amount of "Open
> > Minded E-mails" I get from those with limited
> feedline budgets and who want
> > more efficient ways to transfer RF.  My first open
> wire line didn't cost me a
> > cent and I still have it--with the same loss.  How
> much have you spent on
> > coax?  What is each length loss in dB at say 10M?
> > 
> >   Do you have any technical experiences you'd like
> to share on TT that you
> > have done with coax has that solved a RF transfer
> problem?  I've be happy to
> > share some more with you.  Meanwhile I have some
> more "Open Wire E-mails" to
> > read telling of how well it works for them and
> they want more
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.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