Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 7, 12:01�pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote: On Mar 6, 4:30?pm, Michael Coslo wrote: I have gathered the parts to make just that!. I'd have it up now, but I switched to a coax fed antenna for a while, and built a more traditional tuner. In the interim I went back to balanced line. The AG6K tuner can be used with balanced or unbalanced line. I should have been more clear about the reasons. The tuner that I made is a massively retro unit that is kinda pretty. Cherry finished wood face, with real old time knobs and cranks. If I went to the balanced one now, I'd need to start over again. I will eventually build the AG6K type balanced tuner of course, but want to enjoy this one for a while. Understood. Reg Edwards' DIPOLE3 program can be a big help in figuring out the shack-end impedance of various antenna/transmission line combinations. * * * * I have all his programs. Me too. In several places! Upon his demise, his family and a number of interested amateurs made sure to archive and distribute them. We miss Reg over on rraa. I miss him too. I read his bio somewhere - very impressive. A real class act. Although not mentioned in the article, the roller inductors could be replaced by a pair of tapped coils and a double-pole switch. * * * * The tuner can be hot switched, I assume? Depends on the switch, but I would not do that even with heavy-duty switches. Puts an unnecessary strain on the rig feeding the tuner. Automatic tuners are not new to amateur radio, btw. An automatic balanced tuner was described in QST for July, 1952. It would automatically retune itself within an amateur band. Changing bands meant changing coils, but once that was done the tuner would do the rest automatically. To be really accurate, such a tuner might best be called "semi automatic". You had to manually set it up for each band - it couldn't usually find a match by blind luck. But once you had the coil and taps set, it would find a match and follow you up and down the band. Although the original used a balanced link-coupled tuner, the principles could be applied to any tuner that meets the basic concepts. One modern-day use I can see for such a tuner is for 80/75 meters with, say, a dipole. You could QSY anywhere in the band and the tuner would automatically follow. * * * * Thanks for the reference, Jim. It should be interesting to see how they did it then. I looked up the articles. Here's how they did it: The key to the system is the in-line phase detector. It looks a lot like the sensing element of an SWR bridge, but what it senses is the power factor (reactance ratio) of the load. The phase detector has two DC outputs. If the load is resistive, the two outputs are equal. If the load is inductive, one output is higher than the other, and if the load is capacitive the other output is higher. The DC outputs are fed into a sort of DC differential amplifier (couple of 6SN7s) which operate a pair of relays. The relays control a reversible 2 rpm motor that turns the big splitstator capacitor in the tuner. If the two outputs are equal, neither relay energizes and the motor doesn't run. If the load is capacitive, one relay energizes and turns the motor one way, and if the load is inductive the other relay energizes and turns the motor the other way. No operator attention was needed at all once the system was set up. You didn't have to push a "TUNE" button or anything else - the tuner would simply do its thing when you transmitted. In a later article, the same idea was applied to a mobile installation, retuning the antenna loading coil automatically. This was long before "screwdriver" antennas! The whole thing is so simple that at first I wondered why it wasn't more common back then. The answer is that most rigs of that era had lots of adjustments, and automating one of them didn't really save all that much in most cases. Today, with no- tune rigs, maybe it's worth another look. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 7, 9:17�pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: The whole thing is so simple that at first I wondered why it wasn't more common back then. Ever watch an ART-13 tune itself? -- 73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com Heh, I have, about 20 years after it first came out. That, and I used to align R-391s...which were much more fun to watch. ADA had one commercial Collins Autotune transmitter for about two years, three racks wide, all the Autotune rotary power came from a single quarter-horsepower reversible motor. Fastest-reversing motor I'd seen up to 1953. 73, Len AF6AY |
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 8, 12:17?am, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: The whole thing is so simple that at first I wondered why it wasn't more common back then. Ever watch an ART-13 tune itself? Yep, Cecil, quite a show! But the Collins Autotune is really a form of mechanical memory re-tuning, like the mechanical pushbuttons on an old-style car radio. A human operator tunes up the ART-13 manually, locks the settings into one of the Autotune 'memories' then the Autotune remembers the exact settings of each control and resets them, when requested. What the Autotune does not do is to adjust any of the controls to some electrical parameter in the rig itself - plate current, low SWR, resonance, etc. It just puts all the knobs back where they were. Still very impressive, though. And about a decade before the articles I mentioned. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|