a analyzer would be nice , but from what i understand they dont work on amp inputs .
also since a 1/4 wl of coax is apparently a transformer are all odd multiples ( 3/4 , 5/4 , 7/4 etc) also transformers ?
fwiu even multiples of E1/2 WL will continue to accurately show whats on the other end ...... do 1/4 wl multiples also repeat the transformer effect ?
Antenna handbook, ARRL website has them for sale. Ebay has antenna books, heck I think even books a million website has antenna books.
Many different authors have written books on this, some are published online.
Here is a link to a good read.
Understanding Antennas For the Non-technical Ham by N4JA - An online Book!
another good read understanding VSWR, may open your eyes as VSWR is not all that when it comes to antenna radiating efficiency.
The Real SWR Page - Explained by WC7I - Will high SWR burn up my radio?
Google coax transformers, coax baluns, etc. etc.
Impedance matching can be accomplished in so many different ways, and it is worth researching the many different ways to accomplish this to make an effective matching network so most of the RF we transmit makes it to the antenna, instead of ending up loss in a matching network or coax.
The information is not locked into any ones head, it is free information, all one has to do is want to find the answers.
Booty just keep asking your questions, I enjoy reading them and also the replies you get.
The ONLY stupid question is the question that is not asked.
i concur!
The ONLY stupid question is the question that is not asked?
which brings us to these forums to ask questions and to learn, whether we may be hams or chicken banders , either way!
and just because one hasnt the piece of toilet paper hangin on the wall !
doent place them in the idiot ward ?
yes theres good info in a arrl hand book , but if it was so good then how is it so many are trading information in forums instead of reading a damn book?
as a book only feeds information from one persons point of view! so to encompass all forms of an idea one needs to read all books on a subject just to have a basic understanding ?
and back to the tattered paper on the wall, lots of people have paper on there walls , doesnt mean they know what there talking about, just means that they can recite out of a book ! but can they put words into motion ?
well i've shot off my mouth , and i'll probably get another "private message " from admin , but im used to that
An BTW, a good site for info ;ac6v.com
is a good general information site
WrongIt's pretty simple. If the source, the transmitter has a 50 ohm output impedance, and if the load, the amplifier, has a 50 ohm input impedance, then connecting the two with 50 ohm impedance feed line should result in a very low SWR. If that SWR isn't very low, then correct the problem where the problem exists, not where is doesn't. Typically, the problem is with the input impedance of the amplifier. That's because of that 'no-tune' input circuit most all of them use is miss-adjusted to start with. Why try to make the jumper/feed line do something it was never designed to do instead of correctly adjusting that amplifier's input circuit. Sure, it's a quick-n-dirty way of ~seeming~ to correct things. But nothing has been corrected at all, it's just hidden because an SWR meter can't tell the difference between reactance and a strawberry malt.
- 'Doc
(Reactance and resistance is what impedance consists of.)
Wrong wrong wrongOk dont want to stir up any argument but im not a Christmas cb been on radio for years but recently I started using a base tube type amp and was wondering after reading the stuff about your swr reading and 50 ohm load .if I have hooked up 3 different power wat swr meters in line cause I was getting a high reading when I kicked on amp and am totaly tuning and load the amp properly but I have allays cut any jumper or coax in increments of two like two foot jumpers and coax length be same like 16 18 20 foot and so on . What I mean to ask is how do u know tjat amp or what ever is 50 ohm load or does this differ from amp to amp depending on who built the amp .
Wrong