Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: "Low loss inductors" ..EW&WW

To: [email protected]
Subject: LF: Re: "Low loss inductors" ..EW&WW
From: "Dick Rollema" <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:44:02 +0100
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: <[email protected]>
To All from PA0SE

Alan Melia wrote:

Hi All, a little technical conundrum . I was musing about some of the text
in the article flagged up by Christer in Electronics World (Wireless World
to all us older ones!) It gives a design for a vertical with
counterpoises.
Unfortunately when you scale it to 136 it is about 450feet high. Sort of
end
of story......but hang on a minute it said something about feeding this
inflatable vertical via a low loss 'coaxial' inductor. A short-circuited
length of coaxial transmission line whose length is less than a quarter
wave
looks like an inductance at the end remote from the short. Oh yes whose
got
a mile or two of UR67 then!!   Er .....then I thought again..... with a
velocity factor of 0.67 for solid polythene cable, a quarter wave section
of
line is just 370 metres.  I keyed some numbers into the formula (Radio
Handbook Terman pg 192) and found that 300m of UR67 looks like about 2mH
at
136kHz . Yes, its an expensive coil, with UR67 at its best price of about
40
quid a 100m drum, but not totally out-of-court if the loss is
significantly
less than a traditional solenoid coil. The other plus point is that UR67
will stand 15kV....yes I know the spec says 5kV but I used 300m of it as a
delay line in a pulse generator I built in the 1960s for zapping submerged
repeater amplifiers with a 15kV square pulse (simulates a thick trawlerman
with a BIG axe). So I know there is no problem in that quarter. Its even
better if you use 75 ohm cable as then just 200m will give you 1mH, 300m
is
nearly 3mH

Now the problem ....I have no idea how to calculate the likely loss of
this
'inductance' and my old (1942 edition) of Terman is no help here. It does
say that the reactance changes more rapidly with frequency that a normal
inductor, which might mean that a variometer would still be necessary.
Surely one cannot just use the normal coax loss figures ( which are
negligable at these frequencies ) as
the cable has effectively an infinite SWR on it.

Right....over to you....cos I don't know the answer.

Cheers de Alan G3NYK
[email protected]
With the ARRL "Antenna Book"  comes a floppy disk with a Transmission Line
computer program called TLA, written by N6BV. I used version 1.0 .

The program does not know the British type UR65 but from another source I
understand it can be compared to RG-213.

For 300 m (984 ft) of RG-213, short circuited at one end, the program
produces the foillowing results::

Frequency: 0.137 MHz
Transmission line characteristic impedance: 50.0 - j 2.30 Ohms
Matched -line loss, dB per 100 ft: 0.053 dB
Velocity factor of transmission line: 0.660
Maximum voltage rating of transmission line: 3700.0 V
Matched-line attenuation = 0.522 dB
Resistive part of impedance at load: 0.0001
(I typed 0 Ohms, but the program apparently changes that into 0.0001 -
PA0SE)
Reactive part of impedance: 0
SWR at load: 4793489.50
SWR at line input: 16.67
Additional line loss due to SWR: 60.281 dB
Total line loss: 60.803 dB (100.0%)

At line input, Zin = 49.42 + j 172.52
At 1500 W, max. rms voltage on line: 988.6 V
Distance from load for peak voltage = 984 ft

So as a dummy load it would not be too bad ....

73, Dick, PA0SE
JO22GD
D.W. Rollema
V.d. Marckstraat 5
2352 RA Leiderdorp
The Netherlands
Tel. +31 589 27 34
E-mail: [email protected]
or
[email protected]







<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>