Subject: RE: [Repeater-Builder] Sinclair C-Series cable lengths
I adjusted the loop positions, trying to maintain symmetry of
the curve, aiming for 1 db
on the analyzer. I didn't adjust the loops while looking at
the RL. How would I translate RL
into IL?
You can't directly
@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Sinclair C-Series cable lengths
Jeff,
Speaking of the RLB, did you ever get one of the newer RLB's
from Amtronix? I still interested in someone measuring the
parameters of that unit against one of the more expensive
RLB's
I have 2 C-Series bandpass cavities, with individual I.L. set
at 1.0 db each. When I couple them together and measure, I
get a total I.L. of 2.9 db. I should see something like 2.1
or 2.2. I have measured the coupling cable and see .1 db,
so the cable is good. Anyone have an idea why the
The cavities were initially tuned individually and the loop positions set
for
1 db IL. They were then coupled together using a 18.5 cable and the rods
touched up to re-establish resonance. The measured IL is now 2.9. The loop
positions were not changed after coupling. When using the RL bridge I do
The cavities were initially tuned individually and the loop
positions set for
1 db IL. They were then coupled together using a 18.5 cable
and the rods
touched up to re-establish resonance.
If the cavities had good return loss individually, there shouldn't be a need
to touch up the
, April 20, 2010 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Sinclair C-Series cable lengths
The cavities were initially tuned individually and the loop positions set for
1 db IL. They were then coupled together using a 18.5 cable and the rods
touched up to re-establish resonance
But were the loops adjusted to maximize return loss at the desired
inseretion loss setting? That's the key point. Or did you just dial in 1
dB of insertion loss and call it good?
Not sure what u mean??
-
From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:repeater-buil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Larry Horlick
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 5:54 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Sinclair C-Series cable lengths
But were the loops adjusted
%40yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.comRepeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Larry Horlick
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 5:54 PM
To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.comRepeater-Builder%40yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Sinclair C-Series cable lengths
I adjusted the loop positions, trying to maintain symmetry of
the curve, aiming for 1 db
on the analyzer. I didn't adjust the loops while looking at
the RL. How would I translate RL
into IL?
You can't directly translate from RL to IL or vice-versa. Here's how to
tune a pass cavity:
1.
Jeff,
Thanks for the detailed instructions. I understand everything, but I'm
confused about one detail.
Using this method will produce the largest RL and consequently the lowest
IL. But I don't want the
lowest IL; I want a specific value, i.e. 1 db per cavity. How do I use RLB
to set a specific
Thanks for the detailed instructions. I understand
everything, but I'm confused about one detail.
Using this method will produce the largest RL and
consequently the lowest IL.
Well, sort of. You want the most return loss AT THE DESIRED INSERTION LOSS.
Maximizing return doesn't mean you
Jeff,
But for the purpose of this exercise, setting the loops, the position of max
RL has to be the position of min. IL? No? Is my thinking completely flawed
here?
I've never used an RLB to set the loops; I've always used an SA/TG.
I also have several different tutorials on cavity tuning, but
Jeff,
But for the purpose of this exercise, setting the loops, the
position of max RL has to be the position of min. IL? No?
That's what I said in #7. After you've tuned the cavity to resonance based
on RL, you check the IL. The frequency of the RL maxima (dip) should
coincide with the
I have 2 C-Series bandpass cavities, with individual I.L. set at 1.0 db
each. When I couple them together and measure, I get a total I.L. of 2.9 db.
I should see something like 2.1 or 2.2. I have measured the coupling cable
and see .1 db, so the cable is good. Anyone have an idea why the loss is
At 4/19/2010 10:24, you wrote:
I have 2 C-Series bandpass cavities, with individual I.L. set at 1.0 db
each. When I couple them together and measure, I get a total I.L. of 2.9
db. I should see something like 2.1 or 2.2. I have measured the coupling
cable and see .1 db, so the cable is good.
These are measured values using a Service Monitor. I have two charts that
show the cable lengths, but the values are not the same. They differ by 1
for the same frequency. Would that produce the effect I'm seeing?
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 8:16 PM, n...@no6b.com wrote:
At 4/19/2010 10:24, you
At 4/19/2010 17:24, you wrote:
These are measured values using a Service Monitor. I have two charts that
show the cable lengths, but the values are not the same. They differ by 1
for the same frequency. Would that produce the effect I'm seeing?
Depends on what frequency band we're talking
The freq in question is 166 mHz. One chart gives me 19 and the other 18. I
didn't think 1 at this
freq would make much difference. I'm also not clear if the length is after
the connectors are installed or the cut cable before installing the
connectors. Which do you think it is?
On Mon, Apr 19,
The units I have seen appear to have a 1/2 wavelength of cable. The
loops are typically 1/8 wavelength equivalent and with 2 loops and the
cable will equal 3/4 wavelength. I have also seen some of the old
(rounded top) Sinclair cans with side connectors joined together with
only a double
20 matches
Mail list logo
