Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-db01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id AA57D38000091; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:51:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Rcmxp-0005pg-5A for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:49:49 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Rcmxo-0005pX-A7 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:49:48 +0000 Received: from nm4-vm0.bt.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.146.182.229]) by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Rcmxn-0005Oq-RW for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:49:48 +0000 Received: from [217.146.183.198] by nm4.bt.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Dec 2011 23:49:42 -0000 Received: from [217.146.183.206] by tm4.bt.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Dec 2011 23:49:42 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1004.bt.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Dec 2011 23:49:42 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 240416.98757.bm@omp1004.bt.mail.ukl.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 29729 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2011 23:49:42 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com; h=DKIM-Signature:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=E4rXPeST5G/EAhz/JaI8tHbqCo9sEbiCWeTcWp45gCaRM+9ubZ8k1XcI9jXpx1iIEZCnf0atIYaPe0ituAuyC2em+kiBVHjbSM62uCVON4ra2kraduUUNzNWqn2b7C3B4A1bRFdhXs+BJkyiLZlU5oGN1SkRC/oXvXLAAyGEX1E= ; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btopenworld.com; s=s1024; t=1324338582; bh=CfBplAg5v9L0H4aIcYq8pPW7R6zckoAW5afLf2z+7nw=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=dwOuEkzJK1+Q9sQFp2pjv8C4Sbi5Susj3R0R6C7YjAvZXGPlOOJ+AulZZbTwEgrdkgUirz1R5M3P2dOTPLNAmlGGhPYLaFAqXdCxfzs07S/xR8RWMn0slbE8mC+LoxAOLzI0DMceSO0WGcee+XnxQaK+9tq7QuOlyI7q4ZV0nGw= X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: AhAG154VM1nsrs4dcZVJG.FSMTUnitB7Z55sA2HRigakQ40 vMJSoAtOFrKBM2cBPKQG6IFb3In_ltEpCW9GgFtv6a2BuqF9Z5Ado.18iPpz vzZQ6paVHdhrxoh4UMsdPuLrt4srGfKSHs9pqBQ7.ynQ6bi49Uu.deeLDxcN ZAcHKJ3WcyzIT4fMelm4L3G._teHljaVMHALUWyXCB2bcAv45m5zc86OLASi F22f8Ast6GEQcDo_KX4jiAPqtUXGQe5ZMMrVaUgMUDcjtjdpf42qndgwagju DmZPsBKzvEYYuP5ZoNOD.lQjpMdRlperMlVwxZcVgfXiwfK5.nu75cnHyCzK eIpcTOpq.Vskft0kpqm4RE.03sob5XMM8J8rOUHvUMMGsDOFELOK9d8GkKAq vChGd6HMloSVIIAVsRw-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: Cxhli3eswBD1ozmtAojhjrja86kWx0Qm9tycD5QR1DKWrOLgjJcXkw-- Received: from JimPC (james.moritz@86.174.72.174 with login) by smtp828.mail.ird.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Dec 2011 15:49:41 -0800 PST Message-ID: From: "James Moritz" To: References: <033201ccbcab$5c5fe640$1502a8c0@Clemens04> <000901ccbcc4$42768fe0$c763afa0$@com> <4EECC1E8.4000806@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <002c01ccbd6f$572761c0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <39D91133A64A480596FBAA4395D85812@JimPC> <007901ccbd9e$69fe2ed0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <08C805D2A1C04E64836275C632577CF2@JimPC> <000901ccbe3e$31cd2700$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> In-Reply-To: <000901ccbe3e$31cd2700$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:49:59 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18463 DomainKey-Status: good (testing) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001 Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: TX system at DK7FC, schematic Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 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-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:464820896:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m252.1 ; domain : btopenworld.com DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40554eefcdf82bb0 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Dear Mala, LF Group, > I avoid using a variometer which would degrade the main coil Q > mala/g3kev This is a bit of a myth - A variometer by itself often has relatively low Q at the lower end of its inductance range, since the RF resistance stays roughly constant as the inductance varies, and Q = L/R. But typically, you would aim for the variometer making up only a small fraction of the total inductance, perhaps 5 - 10 percent, in order to allow tuning over the band of interest and accomodate changes in antenna capacitance due to weather, etc. Correspondingly, the variometer resistance will only be a minor fraction of the total coil losses, and total coil Q will only vary by a similar percentage as the tuning range. In a well-engineered system, the coil losses will in turn only be a small fraction of the total antenna loss resistance, so the overall increase in loss caused by including the variometer will be miniscule. With a high loaded-Q antenna, small changes in reactance result in a large mismatch, and the continuously-variable variometer inductance allows precise adjustment of matching. If you used some arrangement of tapped coils instead, the inevitable slight errors in inductance caused by only being able to adjust in discrete steps would probably result in a greater reduction in antenna current than that caused by variometer losses. Adding the taps , wire links etc. would introduce other losses anyway. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU