| Index | Thread | Archive | Jan-2001 | Archive | Send |
 |
  |
|
   |
|
  |
|
Thanks for the reply and comments about baluns. It is good to share ideas with people who make observations and have ideas. Yes, I am familiar with the W1JR balun and have used it in some applications. It was good 30 years ago, it is still good today. The only reason that it is not as popular as it once was, is that the bead baluns are easier to construct and harder to goof up on. There may be a small advantage in terms of bandwidth for the bead baluns. In some applications, bandwidth is very important. In other applications, bandwidth is really not important at all. I know what you mean about unrecognized balun heating. So many baluns are located up at the antenna feedpoint and the heating is only discovered after the balun has failed. Antennas can be properly constructed yet it is of major importance to pair the balun, the antenna and the band of operation correctly to avoid balun heating and unwanted feedline radiation. Feedline radiation isn't always a problem. Wanted feedline radiation can make for a useful antenna i.e. G5RV. Balun heating is the result of common mode currents flowing on the outside of the coax shield. These currents are then dissipated in the real component of the complex common mode impedance characteristic for that balun. There is no other source for heating for the ferrite beads. This heating problem occurs just the same way and for the same reason with all ferrite baluns, whether they are constructed with ferrite toroids or ferrite beads. The phenomenon is the same. It is interesting, if you carefully examine an overheating bead balun, the beads closest to the high impedance connections are the warmest. The beads closest to the low impedance connections are the coolest. It is as if each little bead functions as an individual little attenuator element. The entire stack of ferrites does not act like a resistor. The power from the common mode current is not dissipated uniformly as it would along a purely resistive element. There are two independent factors that contribute to common mode current flow and the resultant risk of balun heating: 1) INSUFFICIENT COMMON MODE IMPEDANCE TO CHOKE OFF COMMON MODE CURRENT FLOW: Anytime, repeat "anytime", one of these 800 ohm common mode impedance bead baluns is connected across a high impedance load, such as a 80 meter doublet excited on 40 meters, there is the risk of severe balun overheating. The same goes for trying to operate a old style tribander on 17 or 24 meters with a ferrite balun. Low power operation won't heat the balun, BUT, the common mode current is still flowing, and the system could be operating at a disadvantage. This limitation from the balun's common mode impedance in a high impedance environment is BY FAR THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FACTOR that contributes to bead balun overheating. High power makes the heating problem easier to recognize. Low power doesn't cause as much heating but the system may not be functioning in an ideal manner. But, "everything works." A better solution for a balun in a high impedance enviroment is to use one of those coiled coax or "Badger", baluns. This particular style of balun is capable of exhibiting extremely high common mode impedance values if properly constructed and tested for the frequency of use. Just like an old antenna tuner of years gone by. 2) FERRITE MIX: Yes, ferrite mix can make a difference, but don't get overly excited on this one. Any importance that ferrite mix has on balun heating is not because one mix is "better" than another, or one mix is "worse" than another. The reason that ferrite mix can contribute to balun overheating problems is because of #1 above- Insufficient Common Mode Impedance. The Force-12 balun, I'm guessing, acts like a string of #43 mix ferrite beads. The Maxwell, W2DU, bead balun uses a string of #77 mix ferrite beads. The Force -12 balun has a good peak common mode impedance from 40 meters to 10 meters. The Maxwell bead balun has a useful peak common mode impedance from 160 through 15 meters. There is substantial overlap for both and both are good. The Maxwell balun might not have enough common mode impedance on 10 meters and overheat in some 10 meter applications. The Force 12 balun might not have enough common mode impedance for a 160 meter installation and overheat in some applications on that band. I haven't actually tested each balun side by side in the antenna situations I have referred to but I am extrapolating from their common mode impedance curves. The key to reducing balun overheating probably lies with pairing up the antenna (and it's feed point impedance), and band of operation, with a balun having sufficient common mode impedance to choke off common mode current flow. The standard of comparison between "current mode" baluns is their measured common mode impedance at the frequency of use. Some "current mode" baluns have low common mode impedance compared to other baluns. I have only tested the Force-12 and Maxwell baluns and they exhibit common mode impedances of about 800 ohms. Unfortunately, the various manufacturers never publish the common mode impedance characteristics of their baluns. I think that it is very very very hard to get common mode impedance values greater than 800 to 1000 ohms using low Q type #43 and #77 ferrites. Maybe I don't know enough, so take that statement with a grain of salt. One can get relatively high common mode impedance by coiling coax on a higher Q #61 ferrite toroid. The air coiled coax, "Badger, balun or an old fashioned antenna tuner will give the highest common mode impedance values that I know of. Let me know your thoughts, Greg. John Petrich, W7HQJ -------------------------------------------- Force12Talk mailing list provided as a service by Force 12 Antennas, Inc. Force 12 Web site: http://www.qth.com/force12 Submissions: send to Force12Talk@qth.com To unsubscribe: send a blank e-mail to Force12Talk-leave@qth.com Force12Talk Message Archive: http://www.qth.com/force12/list/force12talk For problems with the list, contact n4zr@qth.com |