Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1290; Body=3 Fuz1=3 Fuz2=3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO 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 tAJKSawB008047 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:28:36 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1ZzVmT-0005fE-3H for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:26:09 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1ZzVmS-0005ez-PV for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:26:08 +0000 Received: from rhcavuit02.kulnet.kuleuven.be ([134.58.240.130] helo=cavuit02.kulnet.kuleuven.be) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzVlX-000111-UG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:26:07 +0000 X-KULeuven-Envelope-From: rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be X-KULeuven-Scanned: Found to be clean X-KULeuven-ID: B0E0C12834B.A3990 X-KULeuven-Information: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Received: from icts-p-smtps-1.cc.kuleuven.be (icts-p-smtps-1e.kulnet.kuleuven.be [134.58.240.33]) by cavuit02.kulnet.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0E0C12834B for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:24:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from ICTS-S-HUB3.luna.kuleuven.be (icts-s-hub3.luna.kuleuven.be [10.112.9.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by icts-p-smtps-1.cc.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8102840AE for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:24:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from ICTS-S-MBX1.luna.kuleuven.be ([fe80::edaf:341f:90e:f70e]) by ICTS-S-HUB3.luna.kuleuven.be ([fe80::a470:76b3:406d:2b1a%27]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:24:55 +0100 X-Kuleuven: This mail passed the K.U.Leuven mailcluster From: Rik Strobbe To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Thread-Topic: Re[2]: LF: Re: Antenna relays Thread-Index: AQHRIuQVIwdFTwIAtEOBZ/4zcqE9XZ6jqOvPgAAEugCAABVdww== Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:24:54 +0000 Message-ID: <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A4447680B@ICTS-S-MBX1.luna.kuleuven.be> References: <1729369062.20151119120030@chriswilson.tv> <1C735FA296594DF897C48882843B0EB7@gnat> <564DD9F0.3020005@posteo.de> <564DDE76.6010403@vsas.de> <1242998235.20151119145225@chriswilson.tv>,<564DF235.90008@posteo.de> <7E7DFBB4D102A04DB5ADC88D66628A4A44476711@ICTS-S-MBX1.luna.kuleuven.be>,<385623502.20151119194008@chriswilson.tv> In-Reply-To: <385623502.20151119194008@chriswilson.tv> Accept-Language: nl-BE, en-GB, en-US Content-Language: nl-BE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.112.11.11] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-HELO-Warning: Remote host 134.58.240.130 (rhcavuit02.kulnet.kuleuven.be) used invalid HELO/EHLO cavuit02.kulnet.kuleuven.be - verification failed X-Scan-Signature: 896f9ee4f10c5db37812c155e804756d Subject: RE: Re[2]: LF: Re: Antenna relays Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by paranoid.lipkowski.org id tAJKSawB008047 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5207 Hi Chris, your question is not easy at all, unless you want to spend a lot of money. The easy (but expensive) solution would be to buy an appropiate vacuum relay. These can handle several 10kV and are RF-proof. As mentioned before for most other (and affordable) relays the contact voltages are given for DC or 50 (60) Hz. RF behaviour (even as low as 136kHz) will be different (worse). And RF voltages of several kV are very common on 136kHz. One option would be to put a number of relays "in series", but there are some pitfalls: - it will increase the (open) contact voltage, but not the contact-to-coil voltage (unless you will provide some kind of isolation in the relay driver) - you have to ensure that the voltage is equally divided over the relays: at least use identical relays, eventually equal (high voltage) resistors in parallel with each contact. Marcus offered an interesting alternative, but the bifilar loading coil would need to have a low DC resistance (thus heavy wire). 73, Rik ON7YD ________________________________________ Van: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org [owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] namens Chris Wilson [chris@chriswilson.tv] Verzonden: donderdag 19 november 2015 20:40 Aan: Rik Strobbe Onderwerp: Re[2]: LF: Re: Antenna relays Hello Rik, Thursday, November 19, 2015 Whilst you experts argue the technical niceties of the challenge, let me ask what might be a simple question to you guys. What is the minimum number of two contact vac relays I would need to go from strapped ladder line to top of loading coil, to unstrapped ladder line, disconnected from the top of the coil, and now connected to my coaxial feed line, presumably itself disconnected from ground and the bottom of the loading coil? It seems a lot would be needed to me.... :( Thanks! I can see me leaving wet weather gear by the front door and doing this manually! > Hello Stefan, > I am not sure a (lossless) capacitor in parallel with the coil will lower the antenna efficiency. > I would assume that it will affect the antenna impedance as seen > from the TX, but will not change the ratio Rrad/Rloss (what > determines the antenna effeciency). > 73, Rik ON7YD -- Best regards, Chris 2E0ILY mailto:chris@chriswilson.tv