• You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.

Tuning jumpers and coax length

Does the length matter or not


  • Total voters
    136
For the most part and most people changing jumpers shows little or no effect. But I have noticed when tuning my system for the lowest reflect jumper length most definitly makes a difference. What causes as Boo said earlier is the input and output tuning of the equipment involved. An example of this for my 2,4,and 16 pill amps they all tune best with 12' jumpers, now my 8 pill tunes better with a 6' jumper between the radio and its input. Reflect drops from 20-25 watts of reflect at 1000-1200 watts rms to 4-5 watts reflect at the same output. The only change was the 6' jumper. So I figure either the bird lies lol or it makes a difference. Just what I have seen and my 2 cents.
 
highroller said:
... I have noticed when tuning my system for the lowest reflect ...

Are you actually "tuning" the input section of the amplifier and trying different coax lengths? Or are you adjusting the antenna with the amp on?

A couple of basics here I'm not sure everyone understands.

1: When an amplifier is turned ON, the RADIO thinks the AMP -IS- the antenna. This is why you have a tuned (matched) INPUT in the amplifer and why you are supposed to have your radio and amplifier set up together. The radio sees the amp, not the antenna!

2: When the amp is turned OFF, the signal bypasses the amplifer and sees the antenna.

Mobile amps are not perfect and usually require a capacitor across the input transformer to get it right.

Again, with everything working correctly, coax length is not important. If different coax lengths, changes readings, there is something wrong in the system and should be corrected. Its not the coax's fault.
 
When a transmission line is terminated with an impedance, ZL, that is not equal to the characteristic impedance of the transmission line, ZO, not all of the incident power is absorbed by the termination. Part of the power is reflected back so that phase addition and subtraction of the incident and reflected waves creates a voltage standing wave pattern on the transmission line.

The ratio of the maximum to minimum voltage is known as the Voltage Standing Wave Ratio (VSWR) and successive maxima and minima are spaced by 180° (l /2).

Also of considerable interest is the mismatch loss. This is a measure of how much the transmitted power is attenuated due to reflection. It is given by the following equation:


Mismatch Loss = -10 log ( 1 - r2 )

For example, an antenna with a VSWR of 2:1 would have a reflection coefficient of 0.333, a mismatch loss of 0.51 dB, and a return loss of 9.54 dB (11% of your transmitter power is reflected back).

In some systems this is not a trivial amount and points to the need for components with low VSWR.

only in situations where the length of the feedline is sufficient to introduce substantial amounts of loss is it absolutely necessary to measure swr at the feedpoint of the antenna itself as under these conditions the line (and the excessive length) will create an illusion of having a better antenna VSWR than is actually the case.

for the short lengths that are commonly used by most of us in mobile applications measurements at emax/emin points at the appropriate electrical 1/2 wave intervals are more than sufficient, providing of course that the feedline is 180° in length or longer to begin with.

for example, when working with 50 ohm feedline there is a range of real impedances available along the length of the line from roughly 33 - 75 ohms when the measured swr is 1.5:1. the correlation between the range and the swr is directly related. reactance aside for the moment, since these abnormal dynamic impedance values are available along the line then being able to determine the spots in the line where emax/emin gives values of impedance closer to 50 ohms can be used to restore full output when the feedline is terminated at these points at the source.

the question then becomes, are there also wider ranges of real impedance points along the line at even higher levels of swr? the answer to this question is yes. and there are non-resonant antenna designs in the cb market. one that comes to mind is the francis line of antennas. while in a given situation where the manufacturers recommendation in reference to the required feedline length is completely ignored, as in the case where a 12' foot line of RG8M is installed instead of the recommended 18' length of the same type of feedline, measured swr at the source can rise as high as 3:1 depending on the end of the 40 channel band that we're talking about. in retrospect, when the 12' foot line is replaced with 18' feet of the same feedline we see the swr across the band drop significantly with all channels showing below 1.3:1, the best match in the center of the band and rising slightly at the ends. here is one actual and specific instance where the "whatever it takes" approach simply just doesn't work. this isn't the only one.

it's clear here that even at an swr as high as 3:1 that there is a real range of available dynamic impedance values along the line from at least 16.66 - 150 ohms that when used with a non resonant antenna design can be length adjusted to improve the match but more importantly to allow the transmitter to see some value of impedance closer to the required 50 ohms that is required to facilitate maximum transfer of available developed transmitter power. excessive swr measured at the feedpoint in and of itself is not the problem, since ALL POWER developed by the transmitter is ultimately absorbed and radiated, regardless of the match. and here is the REAL PROBLEM. the problem IS the reduction of power developed into the load due to the reflection mismatch presented there.

the mismatch loss represented by a 3:1 swr is roughly 25%. however, if we can restore the impedance that the transmitter sees looking into the feedline at the termination point to something that more closely resembles 50 ohms we can eliminate a large portion of the mismatch loss. at that point the antenna has no choice but to absorb and radiate. the swr is still 3:1 as measured at the feedpoint but now there is negligible reduction in transmitter power.

now, coming back to reactance, either inductive or capacitive values can be cancelled by the use of stubs. an open stub under 1/4 wavelength can be used to cancel inductive reactance and a shorted stub can be used to cancel capacitive reactance.

these are but a few of the many principles that when applied allow what most of us would consider to be ridiculous levels of swr to be tolerated at frequencies in the ghz. band involving satellite and space communications without a second thought.

amazingly enough, it's the very existence of reflection from the load present on the line to begin with that allows us to make it all work, regardless of the particular solution applied. just another example attesting to the fact that swr is not the be all end all indicator to efficient antenna performance, something else that Maxwell alluded to in his writings/papers and lectures.
 
I tried tuning the antenna without any difference, never with the amp on. But yes the input on the 8 pill is different than the others so changing the jumper length helps correct it. But if the input was adjusted to be the same as the rest of my amps then I guess length would make no difference. So in my case jumper length made a difference. So in some cases I believe it does effect things it just depends. I really don't know all the fancy equations and formulas but the numbers on the bird are easy enough to read 25 watts reflect ok 4-5 watts reflect better.
 
highroller said:
.....changing the jumper length helps correct it.....
Changing the jumper length only changes the reading but doesn't actually "correct" anything.

I'd like to say that it is black and white, but alas, its not. My goal was to try to shed light on the coax mystery without using formulas and techno-babble that only a few on here can even begin to understand. Those only confuse and don't impress anyone.

Have I been successful? I don't know. But I tired!
 
Hey Roller hows it going :D I have the very same senario when i tune my system, even when i have 1 watt reflection and sometimes zero movement on a 5 watt slug..My system would still need to be tuned ,,,with jumper sizes,,, mine liked a 6 foot jumper between the 5 pill and the 16 pill.But on the output going out the 16 pill final amp and dual line sections,i used 12 feet and 15 foot peices with no differances..But if i changed the jumper between the driver and the 16 pill into a 3 footer that reflection slug well you might as well take it out as the reflection jumps, reflection would go out the roof.My antenna and coax are perfectly flat no movement..but when you start adding differant brand boxes with all kinds of differant input and output tuning?Well that's when you really have no other option.When i bought my davemade driver long ago..i talked with joe and I said i was going to drive my 16 pill skullcracka with his 5 pill,and he said it was not the best idea! Due to the differant ways the tuning on boxes worked out..I made mine work out"and smoked it a few times trying" but got it dialed in.If i could just hook the boxes together with "HD" double Barrel connector i would,but the bird meters would have an fit for sure.Just what i have seen with my system...I have had boxes in the past that have swr out the roof no matter what,just bad output tuning.I have three amps that i use most the time all have no reflection or swr at all...But i have this one other amp i can't use it slap both the bird and any swr power meter right over every time..all the other boxes flat..Alot of the time these boxes are badly tuned on the output side and swr is jacked up,creating all kinds of havoc!Have good week :D watch that arc!Roller,Roller,Roller"73ssss Coily
This link will help some of the guys,who think you don't need to adjust your jumpers.I know most guys who run serious setups have a pile of differant size jumpers hanging in there radio shacks.
coax cutting calculator!
 
"My goal was to try to shed light on the coax mystery without using formulas and techno-babble that only a few on here can even begin to understand. Those only confuse and don't impress anyone."

i put forth no complex math formulas, unless simple addition, multiplication, division, subtraction, fractions, ratios, vswr measurements and percentages are beyond your basic skill set. your use of the term techno babble is simply your substitute for the basic terminology that one must make an effort to verse himself or herself in if one wishes to interact with others in any meaningful discussion of the subject.

you continue to claim that the length is inconsequential even outside of the "matched scenario" yet you are unable to provide any substance. there is no set of circumstances that i have alluded to in any of my posts that i have not explored myself time and time again and the results like i have mentioned before are reproducible over and over again by anyone willing to take the time to test it for themselves.

any who are confused and want to understand will continue to ask questions. none of my posts were written to impress anyone, although they may impress upon some the necessity of becoming familiar with the meanings of the terms involved so that their understanding might be increased.

"EVERY LENGTH OF COAX OF ANY CHARACTERISTIC IMPEDANCE (Zo) IS AN IMPEDANCE TRANSFORMER. FOR ODD LENGTHS, (other than the usual 1/4 wave and 1/2 wave functions) THE TRANSFORMATION IS COMPLEX. however, when a length of coax is exactly 1/4 wavelength long at a given frequency, the transformation is simple, especially if the impedance to be transformed is wholly resistive." (L.B. Cebik)

Zmatched = Zo2 / Zantenna

With a 1/4 wavelength 75-ohm matching section, again in purely resistive terms, we can take antenna feedpoint impedances between just above 56 ohms up to 225 ohms and transform them to values that fit the 50-ohm 2:1 SWR limits--again, a 4:1 range.

example:

Zo = 75 ohms: Zo2 = 5625 ohms
Zantenna = 56 ohms
Zo2 / Zantenna = 100.44 ohms
Zmatched = 100.44 ohms (2:1)

Zo = 75 ohms: Zo2 = 5625 ohms
Zantenna = 225 ohms
Zo2 / Zantenna = 25 ohms
Zmatched = 25 ohms (2:1)

*100:25 = 4:1
*rounded

using this same formula with 50 ohm feedline (Zo) and Zantenna figures of 75 and 33.33 ohms will also provide a similar though narrower range of response, approximately 50 ohm 1.5:1 SWR limits, or a 2.25:1 range. less common lengths in terms of wavelength, higher levels of reactance , which we know to be the case because the resistive range shrinks when we combine the previously ignored levels and values of reactance, thus being more complex than the usual quarter and half wavelength sections mentioned earlier.

i plugged the figures into this formula from a system i installed some time back where each of two antennas on a fiberglass tractor cab showed approximately 18.5 ohms at the feedpoint at which point i connected a dual 18' 75 ohm harness and here are the results.

Zo = 75 ohms: Zo2 = 5625 ohms
Zantenna = 18.5 ohms
Zo2 / Zantenna = 304 ohms
Zmatched = 304 ohms

X2 for dual antennas or 304 / 2 = 151 ohms or 3:1 VSWR
at the source end harness termination.

then the feedline was changed:

Zo = 50 ohms: Zo2 = 2500 ohms
Zantenna = 18.5 ohms
Zo2 / Zantenna = 135 ohms
Zmatched = 135 ohms

X2 for dual antennas or 135 / 2 = 67.5 ohms or 1.35:1 VSWR
at the source end harness termination.

the antenna system ran from 1.7:1 at the ends of the 40 channel band to almost flat in the middle.the only 2 parameters that never changed were the input impedances of the antennas and the respective lengths of the lines comprising the two different harnesses.

the math is fairly straightforward and there's no techno-babble here. your unsubstantiated opinions vs. my experience and documentation of the facts is hardly any refutation of anything that i have presented.
 
There is no magic or mystery about feedlines. It's not some black art. Instruments can't be fooled or tricked. Impedance matching matters. Feedline length matters. Read books, search Google, get some meters and experiment. Have fun doing it. It's your hobby. You can buy used SWR meters and short pieces of coax cheap at any Hamfest. You don't have to spend big money on fancy test equipment, and if you can't do highschool level mathmatics, find some kid to help you. Then both of you can learn.

Sure you can throw something together that works, but is that all you want?
 
Yes yes, you've posted this before. I use coax as impedance matching transformers too. I even spoke of using coax to make phasing lines, etc. This is all fine and well and I'm not going to dispute it, but for the topic at hand, its mostly irrelevant.

Joe Cb'er wants to hook is radio to his antenna and wonders why different coax lengths appear to "change" his SWR. The simple truth is it doesn't and that is the lesson here.

50-ohm radio and 50-ohm antenna, with a 50-ohm feedline and life is good. If the feedpoint is not 50-ohm, which is usually the case, the READING (not the actual SWR) may change with different lengths of coax. The problem will still exist, the resultant loss will still be the same, even if the meter says 1:1

Its not a perfect world, but basic understanding goes a long way to making it clearer.
 
"the resultant loss will still be the same"

any resultant loss particularly in short lines is a product of the reduction of available source power resulting from the mismatch at Zl and nothing else. this can be cancelled by moving the source termination to a 50 ohm point on the feedline at the source end.

it's about the reduction in available source power in the presence of reflection mismatch and you still don't get it.

when Zl does equal Zo then the characteristic impedance is equal to Zo all along the line.

when Zl does not equal Zo the characteristic impedance of the line is no longer present at all points along the line and instead there is a range of available impedances on both sides of the 0,y axis. that the relation or significance of that fact with regard to the topic under discussion escapes you is no surprise.

the "readings" or swr IS changed at the input to the line when the length of the line is changed under conditions where Zl is not equal to Zo. that's an undisputed fact.

as long as there is reflection present between any load and its source then changing the length of the line will affect the impedance seen at the source, whether it be a transmitter and an antenna, a transmitter and an amplifier or an amplifier feeding another amplifier. the swr meter is not lying to anyone, all it's doing is confirming the fact that both swr as well as impedance will vary along any length of line with reflection present.

any of the rest of you who are able and would like to continue the discussion further are welcome to talk with me at length about this on my web site. the bar is set way too low in here.

my contribution to this thread is ended. babble on MC.
 
Master Chief said:
Its not a perfect world, but basic understanding goes a long way to making it clearer.

MC, You have made it perfectly clear by your posts that you lack a basic understanding.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see"
 
freecell said:
Any of the rest of you who are able and would like to continue the discussion further are welcome to talk with me at length about this on my web site. the bar is set way too low in here.

I haven't disagreed with anything you've had to say. I've only pointed out that your approach confuses more than educates, at least in here, because as you say, the bar is set pretty low. Its too bad we couldn't keep it in context and instead had to bring up other uses of coax, not related to the original question.

Don't know what's up with Johnny (Chuck) Bravo's comment; I'm one of the few who DOES get it.

I'm glad to hear this thread is finally closed.
 
If the problem is a mismatch of impedances, why not 'fix' that mismatch instead of working around it with lengths of feed line? Seems like an awful simple thing to me.
Can you 'fool' an SWR meter? Absolutely, isn't all that hard to do. What's the 'cure for it? Know what's happening.
If you want to adjust feed line length to get a 'better' SWR then have lots of fun with it. Are you bettering the system? Nope, just fooling the meter. Still have losses? Yep. But if you enjoy/want to do it that way, have at it. Do I think anything is going to change about the feedline length thingy? Nope, too many people are making money with it... It's a shame too.
- 'Doc
 
"I haven't disagreed with anything you've had to say. Its too bad we couldn't keep it in context and instead had to bring up other uses of coax, not related to the original question."

all that i have posted has EVERYTHING to do with the original question. AS LONG AS REFLECTION FROM THE LOAD CREATES A MISMATCH BETWEEN THE TRANMSITTER AND THE LINE the "TUNING" is affected. if you GET IT you would have already come to that conclusion.

"why not 'fix' that mismatch instead of working around it with lengths of feed line?"

the reflection mismatch can be mitigated at the load or at the source. in the example of the 1.5:1 swr that i presented previously, which is easier? cut the feedline at any 1/8 wavelength interval back from the load and terminate the source at a 50 ohm point or build a matching network and install it at the feedpoint?

"Can you 'fool' an SWR meter? Absolutely, isn't all that hard to do. What's the 'cure for it? Know what's happening." if Sir Charles Wheatstone were alive today he would say that the only "fool" is the user. the wheatstone bridge network is hardly fooled. if the bridge is balanced then Vout = 0, swr = 1:1. if the bridge is unbalanced then the ratio or difference between voltages at Rg and R1, R2 and R3 establishes any "other than" 1:1 measurement and produces a positive net voltage at Vout.

bridge.gif


if the resistance at Rg equals the resistance at R1, R2 and R3 then the bridge is in a balanced condition and measured swr is 1:1. THIS CAN ONLY OCCUR WHEN Vout = 0. if Rg is ANYTHING BUT 50 OHMS, then swr is something other that 1:1. now what does that tell you about emax/emin along a line with reflection present? this is precisely what is occurring when the swr meter is used at different points along the line. it's telling you that there are widely varying values of emax/emin or swr all along a line with reflection present. on the other hand, you can place it anywhere you want in a line where Zl = Zo and the readings will not change. the meter is doing the job it was intended to do. for the operator to come to the conclusion that because the swr changes every time he moves it to a different spot in a line with reflection present that the device is lying to him or fooling him is the height of stupidity and belies the fact that he has no understanding as to how the device operates or what it does and what it doesn't do.
 
Again Freecell...yes, I agree. My point is simple though; fix the feedpoint and coax length does not matter. Leave the feedpoint as it is and you will STILL have loss. Any length of coax that is used to "fix" the problem is only smoke and mirrors as the problem still exists. Sure the radio will see a transformed match, but that doesn't change the fact that there is still loss at the mismatched feedpoint.

We measure SWR at the feedpoint (or at least we are supposed to). If that is where the problem is, it needs to be fixed there. Then run any length of coax you want!

Are we done yet?
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.