Discussion:
[Elecraft] Toroids frequency range and baluns
Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
2008-09-18 22:31:19 UTC
Permalink
Hello All,

There have been several e-mail threads recently about ferrite
cores and about baluns and transmission line loss with high SWR. Related
to this is a question that I haven't seen addressed anywhere - toroids
all have a specified frequency range but what happens when they're used
outside of that range?

To be more specific, I have a multiband fan dipole fed with
ladder line into a 4:1 current balun that then connects to my rig
through about 5 feet of RG-8. I made the balun using a pair of T200-2
powder iron cores, which have a specified frequency range of 0.25 to 10
MHz. Since I'm using this single antenna from 160m to 10m, I'm way
beyond the specified frequency range of the cores - is the balun likely
to be very inefficient above it 10MHz? The antenna seems to work very
well on 40m and 20m and OK on 15m. Since the band conditions haven't
been particularly good in the last few years that I've been using this
antenna, I can't tell whether my lack of many QSOs on 15m and above is
due to inefficiencies in the balun or to band conditions? What do you
think?

Bob W1SRB
Jim Brown
2008-09-19 07:13:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
toroids
all have a specified frequency range but what happens when they're used
outside of that range?
To gain a better understanding of ferrites study my tutorial.

http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf

Look at the measured data in that tutorial. STUDY the Fair-Rite data for
their products.

73,

Jim Brown K9YC
Wes Stewart
2008-09-19 17:33:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
There have been several e-mail threads recently about ferrite
cores and about baluns and transmission line loss with high SWR. Related
to this is a question that I haven't seen addressed anywhere - toroids
all have a specified frequency range but what happens when they're used
outside of that range?
Post by Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
To be more specific, I have a multiband fan dipole fed with
ladder line into a 4:1 current balun that then connects to my rig
through about 5 feet of RG-8. I made the balun using a pair of T200-2
powder iron cores, which have a specified frequency range of 0.25 to 10
MHz. Since I'm using this single antenna from 160m to 10m, I'm way
beyond the specified frequency range of the cores - is the balun likely
to be very inefficient above it 10MHz? The antenna seems to work very
well on 40m and 20m and OK on 15m. Since the band conditions haven't
been particularly good in the last few years that I've been using this
antenna, I can't tell whether my lack of many QSOs on 15m and above is
due to inefficiencies in the balun or to band conditions? What do you
think?


Bob, you are mixing apples and oranges. Current (choke) baluns (that use cores) are almost always built using ferrite cores, not powered iron. If you wanted to tune one to parallel resonance at some particular frequency, you might use iron, otherwise, you want ferrite that provides a high impedance to common-mode currents over a broad frequency range. A resistive component in this impedance is not a bad thing.


Roy, W7EL, has a good description of balun operation here:

http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf

Wes N7WS
Ron D'Eau Claire
2008-09-19 18:32:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
There have been several e-mail threads recently about ferrite
cores and about baluns and transmission line loss with high SWR. Related to
this is a question that I haven't seen addressed anywhere - toroids all have
a specified frequency range but what happens when they're used outside of
that range?
Post by Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
To be more specific, I have a multiband fan dipole fed with
ladder line into a 4:1 current balun that then connects to my rig through
about 5 feet of RG-8. I made the balun using a pair of T200-2 powder iron
cores, which have a specified frequency range of 0.25 to 10 MHz. Since I'm
using this single antenna from 160m to 10m, I'm way beyond the specified
frequency range of the cores - is the balun likely to be very inefficient
above it 10MHz? The antenna seems to work very well on 40m and 20m and OK on
15m. Since the band conditions haven't been particularly good in the last
few years that I've been using this antenna, I can't tell whether my lack of
many QSOs on 15m and above is due to inefficiencies in the balun or to band
conditions? What do you think?

----------------------------------------

The balun doesn't have any effect on the efficiency of the antenna unless it
involves lots of coax at high SWR such as the big coil of coax some Hams use
for a "choke balun". (They're FB as long as the SWR is low but, like any
coax, the losses go up with the SWR.)

The only function of the balun in your setup is to manage the flow of RF
current to keep it off of the *outside* of the coax and your rig. That's
only a concern if the voltages are sufficient to cause your rig to be "hot"
with RF so that touching the rig changes the antenna tuning or you get RF
feedback in to the rig through the mic or you have other operational issues.


As long as you don't have those issues, you don't need a balun at all.

To more directly answer your question, the balun you have probably works as
well at 30 MHz as it does at 1.8 MHz. The T200-2 cores will show a high
impedance to the RF currents across the HF range. That's all you need.


Ron AC7AC
Don Wilhelm
2008-09-19 19:01:33 UTC
Permalink
Bob,

To further add to the confusion, I will throw in my 2 cents worth too.
Let me say that a balun wound on a powdered iron core is highly
dependent on the inductance. The inductive reactance should be at least
5 times the feedline impedance at the balun's antenna side for it to be
effective, so how well it works depends on the antenna too. Also as the
frequency gets higher, the resistive loss through the balun becomes more
significant and the interwinding capacitance becomes important.

For all those reasons (and a few more too), it is common to use a
ferrite core rather than a powdered iron core for a balun. The
inductance per turn is much higher, so fewer turns are needed to satisfy
the inductance requirement at the low frequency end of the scale and the
wire resistance and winding capacitance is less at the high frequency end.

The core for a balun can be lossy at the frequency of use. You can
think of a current balun as a transmission line inside a choke (the
coil-of-coax type baluns are a perfect example). The differential
signal travels on the transmission line (inside the coax) while the
common mode signal on the outside of the coax (the one you want to
suppress) encounters the choke impedance. The advantage of a ferrite
core is that the transmission line length is shorter than a balun built
with a powdered iron core - fewer turns = lower resistance, lower
capacitance.

I know that did not answer your question directly, but it all depends on
the inductance of your balun, the antenna side actual feed impedance,
the wire resistance, and the capacitance across the transmission line
inside that balun. I don't have enough data to provide a definite answer.

73,
Don W3FPR
Post by Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
Hello All,
There have been several e-mail threads recently about ferrite
cores and about baluns and transmission line loss with high SWR. Related
to this is a question that I haven't seen addressed anywhere - toroids
all have a specified frequency range but what happens when they're used
outside of that range?
To be more specific, I have a multiband fan dipole fed with
ladder line into a 4:1 current balun that then connects to my rig
through about 5 feet of RG-8. I made the balun using a pair of T200-2
powder iron cores, which have a specified frequency range of 0.25 to 10
MHz. Since I'm using this single antenna from 160m to 10m, I'm way
beyond the specified frequency range of the cores - is the balun likely
to be very inefficient above it 10MHz? The antenna seems to work very
well on 40m and 20m and OK on 15m. Since the band conditions haven't
been particularly good in the last few years that I've been using this
antenna, I can't tell whether my lack of many QSOs on 15m and above is
due to inefficiencies in the balun or to band conditions? What do you
think?
Bob W1SRB
Jim Brown
2008-09-19 21:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
The balun doesn't have any effect on the efficiency of the antenna unless it
involves lots of coax at high SWR such as the big coil of coax some Hams use
for a "choke balun". (They're FB as long as the SWR is low but, like any
coax, the losses go up with the SWR.)
WRONG! There are three fundamental cases of ferrite "baluns" or chokes. 1) A
choke wound with coax 2) a choke wound with parallel wires (bifilar) 3) a
transformer (voltage balun).

Case #1: Coax contains 100% of the differential power (transmitter feeding
antenna) within the dielectric. The ferrite core of a COAX CHOKE sees ONLY
the common mode voltage and current. If the impedance of the choke is high
enough, the current is very small, so the dissipation in the choke is very
small.

Case #2: A choke with a bifilar winding (that is, two parallel wires, NOT
coax) puts a significant fraction of the transmitted power in the core. This
is "leakage" flux from the bifilar winding (really a short length of parallel
wire transmission line). This leakage flux is typically 30% of the
transmitted power, and is NOT related to common mode current.

Case #3: A VOLTAGE balun is VERY different -- it puts 100% of the transmitted
power in the ferrite.

All of this is discussed in the tutorials, previously referenced. BTW --
earlier work and publications by W7EL, W2DU, and W1JR are all very good, but
they were done 30 years ago. My work builds on theirs, and is considerably
more advanced. Also, the #31 material that is so useful for HF chokes was
developed only a few years ago.

73,

Jim K9YC
Ron D'Eau Claire
2008-09-20 04:56:22 UTC
Permalink
Jim wrote:

WRONG! There are three fundamental cases of ferrite "baluns" or chokes. 1) A

choke wound with coax 2) a choke wound with parallel wires (bifilar) 3) a
transformer (voltage balun).

-----------------------------

You are absolutely right Jim. I read current balun and thought choke balun.
I missed the 4:1 comment.

"Balun" is an unfortunate, all-inclusive and misleading term. One so-called
"balun" may be as different from another "balun" in its requirements and
application as a motorcycle is different from railroad locomotive.

I stand by my statement when talking about a "choke balun" consisting of a
string of ferrite beads on some coax or a coaxial line on a coil form such
as I described. The only losses caused by such a balun will be those of the
transmission line itself, which cannot be ignored if the SWR is high.

So-called "baluns" that transform impedances are, typically, transformers --
often transmission-line transformers. They're a whole different animal and
can be very unpredictable, especially when they use ferrite or powdered iron
cores and are exposed to a wide range of impedances.

Ron AC7AC
Jim Brown
2008-09-20 09:27:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
"Balun" is an unfortunate, all-inclusive and misleading term. One so-called
"balun" may be as different from another "balun" in its requirements and
application as a motorcycle is different from railroad locomotive.
Yes, it really is.
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
I stand by my statement when talking about a "choke balun" consisting of a
string of ferrite beads on some coax or a coaxial line on a coil form such
as I described. The only losses caused by such a balun will be those of the
transmission line itself, which cannot be ignored if the SWR is high.
Yes on all counts. BUT -- the chokes wound as a coil are vastly superior.
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
So-called "baluns" that transform impedances are, typically, transformers --
often transmission-line transformers. They're a whole different animal and
can be very unpredictable, especially when they use ferrite or powdered iron
cores and are exposed to a wide range of impedances.
Yes. Again, poor use of words by the industry.

73,

Jim K9YC
Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
2008-09-22 14:40:39 UTC
Permalink
Jim,

Why are choke baluns wound as a coil vastly superior to choke
baluns made with a sting of ferrite beads? With the coil type, you're
adding additional coax loss... What am I missing here?

73,

Bob W1SRB



-----Original Message-----
From: elecraft-***@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-***@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2008 4:17 AM
To: ***@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Toroids frequency range and baluns
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
"Balun" is an unfortunate, all-inclusive and misleading term. One
so-called "balun" may be as different from another "balun" in its
requirements and application as a motorcycle is different from railroad
locomotive.

Yes, it really is.
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
I stand by my statement when talking about a "choke balun" consisting
of a string of ferrite beads on some coax or a coaxial line on a coil
form such as I described. The only losses caused by such a balun will
be those of the transmission line itself, which cannot be ignored if
the SWR is high.

Yes on all counts. BUT -- the chokes wound as a coil are vastly
superior.
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
So-called "baluns" that transform impedances are, typically,
transformers -- often transmission-line transformers. They're a whole
different animal and can be very unpredictable, especially when they
use ferrite or powdered iron cores and are exposed to a wide range of
impedances.

Yes. Again, poor use of words by the industry.

73,

Jim K9YC


_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: ***@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Wes Stewart
2008-09-20 18:48:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron D'Eau Claire
So-called "baluns" that transform impedances are, typically, transformers --
often transmission-line transformers.

There is a type of "choke" balun that is both a balanced-to-unbalanced device and an impedance transformer at once.

Connecting two ferrite-loaded transmission line baluns in parallel at one end and series at the other will yield a 4:1 transformation. Higher ratios are possible with more series/parallel combinations.

Wes N7WS
Jim Brown
2008-09-22 17:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Solosko, Robert B (Bob)
Jim,
Why are choke baluns wound as a coil vastly superior to choke
baluns made with a sting of ferrite beads? With the coil type, you're
adding additional coax loss... What am I missing here?
Study my tutorial. http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf

73,

Jim K9YC
James Duffey
2008-09-27 16:32:17 UTC
Permalink
Bob - You wrote:

"Why are choke baluns wound as a coil vastly superior to choke baluns
made with a sting of ferrite beads? With the coil type, you're adding
additional coax loss... What am I missing here?"

I didn't see an explicit reply to this on the list, but the short
answer is that with a coil balun, the inductance increases as the
square of the number of turns. With the beads, the inductance just
increases as the number of the beads. So, ignoring stray capacitance,
a toroid with 10 turns will have 10 times the inductance of the same
cable passed through 10 toroids (beads). You get more bang for your
buck by coiling the cable. The additional losses are not too great for
most applications. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
Jim Brown
2008-09-29 07:22:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Duffey
"Why are choke baluns wound as a coil vastly superior to choke baluns
made with a sting of ferrite beads? With the coil type, you're adding
additional coax loss... What am I missing here?"
I didn't see an explicit reply to this on the list,
In the interest of brevity on the list, I referred those interested in
this to the tutorial I wrote on RFI and the use of Ferrite Chokes. That
material is anything but brief, but I believe that it is quite clear
and easy to study IF you understand the fundamentals of electrical
circuits that include R, L, C, and Z.
Post by James Duffey
but the short
answer is that with a coil balun, the inductance increases as the
square of the number of turns. With the beads, the inductance just
increases as the number of the beads.
YES
Post by James Duffey
So, ignoring stray capacitance,
You CANNOT ignore stray capacitance, it makes a VERY major contribution
to the behavior of ANY choke.
Post by James Duffey
a toroid with 10 turns will have 10 times the inductance of the same
cable passed through 10 toroids (beads). You get more bang for your
buck by coiling the cable. The additional losses are not too great for
most applications.
YES.

BUT -- it is NOT about INDUCTANCE, it is about the RESISTIVE component
of the impedance. And that RESISTANCE is the loss component of the
parallel RLC circuit formed by the inductance of the choke, the
capacitance, and the loss coupled from the ferrite core. It is the
RESISTANCE that solves our problems, NOT the inductance. We use
inductance in TRANSFORMERS and in resonant circuits that are part of
radios. We use RESISTANCE in RFI suppression and in common mode chokes.

The tutorial is at http://audiosystemsgroup.com/RFI-Ham.pdf

73,

Jim Brown K9YC
Jim Brown
2008-09-29 17:53:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi Bob,

See comments interspersed.
Jim,
I've been reading through your tutorial, and, if I understand
it, the best approach is neither a plain wound coax balun nor a string
of ferrite beads strung on the coax but is a balun made with coax wound
around a ferrite core in a way the minimizes capacitance - is that
correct?
It depends mostly on the frequency range and the ferrite material, and to a
lesser extent, on the power level. Think of the choke you're winding as any
other inductor that has VERY low Q (typically around 0.5), and thus a very
broad resonance. Like any inductor, we vary the number of turns, their
diameter and spacing, and the core material to hit the desired resonance. A
choke of #31 material can provide a strongly resistive impedance over a
frequency range of roughly 4:1, so we can wind one to cover 160-40 meters.
That choke would use closely spaced turns, because we need the additional
capacitance and mutual coupling between windings to move the resonance down
to about 80 meters. On the other hand, a choke to cover 20-10 meters needs
wide-spaced windings, because we only want to move the resonance to about 21
MHz. Power level enters the equation only to the extent that the choke must
provide sufficient common mode impedance that it reduces common mode current
to the extent that the P=I*E is small enough that it does not overheat the
coax or the core. The tutorial shows that's an easily achievable objective
once you realize that it's a key design parameter.
- it appears that material 31 is the best material to use for
baluns.
It's the best material to use for a COAXIAL CHOKE that needs to work below 5
MHz. #43 is equally good on 40M, and slightly better above 40M. If you're
only stocking up on one material and buying in quantity for the best price, #
31 is the best choice.
In addition to my transmission line balun, I also have some
problems with power supply birdies on 160m, and to a lesser degree on
80m. Is material 31 still the optimum material for adding additional RFI
filtering to my power supply (along with parallel capacitors)?
These chokes kill common mode current on the cable you wind around them, but
there can also be differential mode coupling that a capacitor ACROSS the line
(that is, plut to minus) can suppress, and there can be direct radiation from
insffficiently shielded circuitry. No external filtering will kill (or
change) that direct radiation.
- My transmission line balun is serving two purposes: as a
current balun to reduce the RFI in the shack problem that I have had,
and as a 4:1 transformer to better match the ladder line from my antenna
to the short length of coax to my rig. (My 4:1 balun is made from 2
separate cores as is the BL2, but they're much larger cores to minimize
saturation and heating problems.) It seems to me, if I understand your
tutorial, that the characteristics of the cores used for transformers
(low resistance) and those used for suppression (high resistance) and
mutually exclusive. Thus, does it make sense to have a single balun
serving these two purposes, or is it better to optimize the balun for
the transformer application (material ??) and have a separate balun
optimized for suppression?
That's a very perceptive question. For the first part of the answer, study
the photo of the high power DXE 4:1 balun in my Power Point presentation --
select it from

http://audiosystemsgroup.com/publish

That "balun" is essentially two chokes wound with parallel wire transmission
line (that is, bifilar) around what could be #31 or #43 cores. On the 50 ohm
side, they're wired in parallel, on the 200 ohm side they're in series.
Because the chokes are bifilar, there's a lot of leakage flux in that core if
you're running power. The choking impedance isn't very high either. A far
better design would use coax, #31, and a lot more turns. That "balun" would
have a much higher choking impedance, and would also be a lot more efficient.

The second part of the answer is to study the DXE catalog -- they sell a
separate product that they call a common mode choke! When you study my
measurements (in the Power Point) for three of their high power "baluns,"
it's obvious why -- they have very poor common mode rejection.

So the short answer to your question is, YES!

Another point of clarification. Both the DXE two-choke series/parallel combo
and the one I described wound with coax are NOT transformers -- they are NOT
coupling signal through the core, they are using the core to form a choke.
They ARE doing impedance transformation and balancing. So it is correct to
call them "baluns" but incorrect to call them transformers.

73,

Jim K9YC

Loading...