Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1170; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id t9DHT1Ia005708 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:29:01 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Zm3L1-00026P-LR for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:26:11 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Zm3L1-00026G-9k for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:26:11 +0100 Received: from rgout0106.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk ([65.20.0.126]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm3Jx-0005BA-4Y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:26:10 +0100 X-OWM-Source-IP: 86.179.157.90 (GB) X-OWM-Env-Sender: alan.melia@btinternet.com X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A090202.561D3E60.00A0,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0 X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=38/50,refid=2.7.2:2015.10.13.155717:17:38.936,ip=86.179.157.90,rules=__HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, MSGID_32HEX_LC, INVALID_MSGID_NO_FQDN, __MSGID_32HEX, __HAS_FROM, __PHISH_FROM2, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL_FROM, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NO_NAME, __REFERENCES, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __HAS_X_PRIORITY, __HAS_MSMAIL_PRI, __HAS_X_MAILER, USER_AGENT_OE, __OUTLOOK_MUA_1, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC, __ANY_URI, LINK_TO_IMAGE, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE, __INT_PROD_TV, __URI_IN_BODY, __FORWARDED_MSG, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_2000_2999, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, __URI_NS, SXL_IP_DYNAMIC[90.157.179.86.fur], HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, __PHISH_FROM, __OUTLOOK_MUA, __PHISH_SPEAR_STRUCTURE_1, RDNS_SUSP, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS, __SINGLE_URI_TEXT, REFERENCES, NO_URI_HTTPS, SINGLE_URI_IN_BODY X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown Received: from gnat (86.179.157.90) by rgout01.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk (8.6.122.06) (authenticated as alan.melia@btinternet.com) id 561CD2CD000E8130 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:24:48 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=btcpcloud; t=1444757105; bh=jSoXxmrAomm+2taL8VXWqMER3caCtIGoXQTCPhxAX/M=; h=Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:X-Mailer; b=Bx8bH+KMziJo00QgA3wgZXsK1MDYL73CzrJ+mEG+mkvZOUMds9fB5U90PsCxsNXTJ+hx7ncDIvBSzbXPRU7YP2aQqDdw+jLVx04WsMmhHUYwtbbcsONFp33oXW9grMz13SXMuOurI0mlLFfzwewJo1Xgs9xMLXwN06eAVrHdXAE= Message-ID: <43464DACBFAA49C08A73FB93FFF52105@gnat> From: "Alan Melia" To: References: <1541636554.20151013163425@chriswilson.tv> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:14:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Scan-Signature: 7ab87d4d3ea1d9dcb73a78e83fe4d608 Subject: LF: Re: Should I be aiming for a better match than this? Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4365 >>can i work out the antenna current from this? Not really this is the current in the coax. If the current and voltage are not in phase then by definition you have reactance in the coax termination. You should try adjusting the variometer for current and voltage in phase (that is resonance) , then adjust the turns ratio on the transformer to match the resultant aerial resistive component to the 50ohm coax (if possible :-)) ) That should give you optimum performance. The reactive load may be what is tripping the protection it will give bigger voltages(or currents) than the matched condition. Whilst you have been getting a signal out, I suggest the next experiment is to try and reducethe ground loss before you spend a lot of time getting a perfect match to an imperfect aerial system (only to have to do it all again when you manage to get the ground loss down.) Alan G3NYK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Wilson" To: Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 4:34 PM Subject: LF: Should I be aiming for a better match than this? > 13 October 2015 > > > Got my (brave...) friend adjusting the variometer in real time whilst > I talked to him by phone, and whilst transmitting at one setting below > full power. I watched the `scope in the shack for best results. Is > this an adequate match or should I get better than this? I think it's > a resistive mismatch that's showing? It's a pain not having a colour > scope but I am pretty sure it's amps leading volts being shown here. > On full power the amp trips out, not sure if it's SWR mismatch or > current overload. Will need to check that out. No arcing at the > matching and loading coils though. > > http://www.chriswilson.tv/best-match.jpg > > > I built the Jim Morittz scopematch using the capacitive divider > circuit, can i work out the antenna current from this? Thanks. > > 2E0ILY > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > Chris mailto:chris@chriswilson.tv > >