Posted by
n7ws on
Sep 30, 2012; 3:30am
URL: http://elecraft.85.s1.nabble.com/KAT500-Remote-Version-tp7563017p7563491.html
Semantics. When I say, "It's not necessarily a good one", I mean that just because a match is achieved, it doesn't mean that one should accept the situation. Even though the L-network offers the lowest loss (it doesn't always) it doesn't mean it is "low loss", in fact the loss can be quite high. A simple change in transmission line length might be beneficial.
I can demonstrate that two L-networks in series, using the same component unloaded Qs, can offer (very) slightly lower loss that a single L-network doing the same transformation. It's often assumed, incorrectly, that the fewer components, the better. Not true.
--- On Thu, 9/20/12, ab2tc <
[hidden email]> wrote:
From: ab2tc <
[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KAT500 Remote Version
To:
[hidden email]
Date: Thursday, September 20, 2012, 4:58 PM
Hi,
That's not true. The L network's only solution is the lowest Q possible,
meaning it will have the lowest tuner loss possible and the widest
bandwidth. And if the capacitor and inductor steps are made small enough, a
1.0:1 solution is always possible. The fact that many tuners give up once
the SWR is below 2.0 or 1.5 is merely a shortcoming in their tuning
algorithms. I am having high hopes for the KAT500. Is anything known on how
many bits of L and C resolution is there?
AB2TC - Knut
Wes Stewart wrote
> What Don says is true as far as it goes. The L-network tuner has only one
> solution, but it isn't necessarily a good one.
>
> Way back in 1998 when correspondence was via typewriter and snail mail, I
> went around with Dean Straw, N6BV, then Editor of the ARRL Antenna Book,
> about tuner losses. This was in conjunction with the editing of my paper,
> "Balanced Transmission Lines in Current Amateur Practice" that appeared in
> the Sixth Edition of the ARRL Antenna Compendium.
>
> Remarkably (coincidence I'm sure ;) it wasn't long before favored authors
> were contributing articles to QST about how to measure tuner losses and
> TLW was written.
>
> Tuner and line losses really do matter.
>
> Wes N7WS
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraftHelp:
http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htmPost: mailto:
[hidden email]
This list hosted by:
http://www.qsl.netPlease help support this email list:
http://www.qsl.net/donate.html