Article: 216481 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: 3-phase antenna. Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:21:38 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire transmission line. The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at 120 degee intervals. Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly omni-directional? ---- Reg. Article: 216482 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Ed Price" References: <3irsf1h4716dgkafn1jbk26je4v2fkuvh8@4ax.com> <11ft4jm3hlk0b38@corp.supernews.com> <11ft8uft6mbg6c8@corp.supernews.com> <7KALe.1697$Us5.214@fed1read02> <9cVLe.1843$Us5.255@fed1read02> <11g1o5d9ee4586c@corp.supernews.com> Subject: Re: You might be an old timer Message-ID: Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:33:23 -0700 "David G. Nagel" wrote in message news:11g1o5d9ee4586c@corp.supernews.com... > Ed Price wrote: > >> "Ham op" wrote in message >> news:fbednXsE8sLxVWLfRVn-rQ@comcast.com... >> >>>Ed Price wrote: >> >> >>>>Wes, what's the preferred scorpion killing technique; you use a hammer >>>>or what? >>>> >>> >>>I know the design and operating principles of a hammer. >> >> >> >> Are you certain? Can you produce any documentation or certification >> regarding your competence? >> > I'm not the person being questioned above but I took shop class in High > School. Passed with flying colors. Does that count? > > Dave N Yep, that's good enough for me (if you still have all eight fingers and two thumbs). -- Ed WB6WSN El Cajon, CA USA Article: 216483 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 22:00:33 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news:1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Reg Edwards wrote: > > There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire > > transmission line. > > > > The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at > > 120 degee intervals. > > > > Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly > > omni-directional? > > ---- > > Reg. > > Hi Reg, Is the 3-phase transmitter balanced with the output current > equal magnitude, and the phase angle exactly 120 degrees? Is the > 3-phase antenna fed via a 3-wire transmission line, or three equal > length transmission lines? Us Amateurs don't have a lot of experience > with 3-wire coax. Are the horizontal radiators 1/4-wave, or 1/2 wave? > If they are 1/4 wave, or 1/2 wave and spaced 120 degrees in the > horizontal plane, doesn't that form an equilateral triangle? So, you > are feeding a triangular antenna whose sides are 1/4-wave in the centre > of each side with balanced 3-phase rf energy? > Even if you clarify this is I still won't know the answer to your > question until I model the array. > Gary N4AST ======================================= The three antenna wires are like the spokes of a wheel, spaced at 120 degrees, and each 1/4-wave in length. All in the horizontal plane. The transmission line is balanced about ground and each of the line wires is connected to one of the three antenna elements at the center of the wheel. There's no need to pull the line wires apart at the end of the line. What is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane? Also what is the equivalent load impedance between each of the line wires. ---- Reg. Article: 216484 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: VF > 1.0??? From: Cecil Moore Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:29:45 -0500 Message-ID: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> http://www.livescience.com/technology/050819_fastlight.html ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216485 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H" Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:58:19 -0500 Message-ID: <11gcsgsdte9i2ea@corp.supernews.com> References: I am not sure, but I have been wondering for years. Seriously It's the old question: How do you load three guy wires? 73 H. "Reg Edwards" wrote in message news:de5f0i$qjf$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... > There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire > transmission line. > > The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at > 120 degee intervals. > > Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly > omni-directional? > ---- > Reg. > > Article: 216486 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: microwaves@blueyonder.co.uk (Peter) Subject: Re: Popular Misconceptions. Message-ID: <43077562.267833494@news.blueyonder.co.uk> References: <1124386542_4133@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <5062-43053611-340@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:13:00 GMT On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 20:29:53 -0500, richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) wrote: >Sam Butera`s >Saxophone was competition for Tex Beneke. Tex was a radio amateur of course... Peter, G3PHO Article: 216487 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:42:58 -0400 Message-ID: <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> Anyone who has ever watched Startrek knows the light speed limitation is incorrect. "Cecil Moore" wrote in message news:1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net... > http://www.livescience.com/technology/050819_fastlight.html > > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216488 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:48:24 -0400 Message-ID: Put a capacity hat on the top of the antenna. This will give you the most performance increase with the least effort. "dansawyeror" wrote in message news:PeydnRlla6c06pveRVn-tw@comcast.com... > All, > > I have been using an 80 meter loaded vertical for a couple of years with > moderate success. The ground system is a dozen 'untuned' radials 40 or so feet Article: 216489 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "John N9JG" Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:52:48 -0500 Message-ID: References: Burying the radials will make zero difference in performance. "dansawyeror" wrote in message news:PeydnRlla6c06pveRVn-tw@comcast.com... > All, > > I have been using an 80 meter loaded vertical for a couple of years with > moderate success. The ground system is a dozen 'untuned' radials 40 or so > feet laying on the ground. The feed line is about 100 feet of RG-8 coax. > The SWR in the shack is about 1.1 to 1. > [stuff] > > Would burying the radials and connecting them to several 4 square foot > buried screens substantially help the ground system? > > Thanks, > Dan kb0qil > > > > Article: 216490 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Message-ID: References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:04:03 -0700 Cecil: If I understand a lot of data which has been gathered, it tends to imply "things" can go faster than the speed of light. The princeton egg project is working on the edge of such things: http://noosphere.princeton.edu/ ... interesting stuff... John On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:29:45 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote: > http://www.livescience.com/technology/050819_fastlight.html > > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216491 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Message-ID: References: Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:26:58 -0700 Reg: I do understand this correctly, and each antenna is fed a signal 120 degrees out of electrical phase with the other 2. And, the physical placement of the also happens so as to place any specific one of the three antennas 120 degrees ahead/behind the other two in a physical circle? John On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:21:38 +0000, Reg Edwards wrote: > There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire > transmission line. > > The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at > 120 degee intervals. > > Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly > omni-directional? > ---- > Reg. Article: 216492 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Frank" References: Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Message-ID: Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 02:33:09 GMT > I have been using an 80 meter loaded vertical for a couple of years with > moderate success. The ground system is a dozen 'untuned' radials 40 or so > feet laying on the ground. The feed line is about 100 feet of RG-8 coax. > The SWR in the shack is about 1.1 to 1. > > I have done some research on the antenna and based on it parameters it > should have a radiation resistance of about 4 Ohms. This says that the > coil and ground are absorbing on the order of 45 Ohms. This is 10db > performance loss. > > I have limited space and the most common solutions are not available to > me. From a practical perspective it would seem to me that building a 40 > foot center feed loaded dipole and putting it in the attic or on the roof > would probably perform somewhat better. > > Is this a reasonable assumption? > > Would burying the radials and connecting them to several 4 square foot > buried screens substantially help the ground system? > > Thanks, > Dan kb0qil How high is the antenna, where is the loading coil placed, what is its value, and Q? Frank Article: 216493 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Frank" References: Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Message-ID: <%EwNe.143799$wr.67691@clgrps12> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 02:34:35 GMT "John Smith" wrote in message news:pan.2005.08.20.01.26.55.855083@gmail.com... > Reg: > > I do understand this correctly, and each antenna is fed a signal 120 > degrees out of electrical phase with the other 2. And, the physical > placement of the also happens so as to place any specific one of the three > antennas 120 degrees ahead/behind the other two in a physical circle? > > John Are these antennas fed with coax? Frank Article: 216494 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Message-ID: References: <%EwNe.143799$wr.67691@clgrps12> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:59:31 -0700 Frank: Let's hope Reg will enlighten us on the exact specifics... I am afraid it his "word problem" and he says what is and what is not... John On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 02:34:35 +0000, Frank wrote: > > "John Smith" wrote in message > news:pan.2005.08.20.01.26.55.855083@gmail.com... >> Reg: >> >> I do understand this correctly, and each antenna is fed a signal 120 >> degrees out of electrical phase with the other 2. And, the physical >> placement of the also happens so as to place any specific one of the three >> antennas 120 degrees ahead/behind the other two in a physical circle? >> >> John > > Are these antennas fed with coax? > > Frank Article: 216495 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: BKR Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 21:05:28 -0600 Message-ID: <11gd7ev474i47fd@corp.supernews.com> References: Just a hint: Think of how a turnstile antenna works. That one works in the horizontal plane with 90 degree phasing. Check the radiation patern. Reg Edwards wrote: > There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire > transmission line. > > The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at > 120 degee intervals. > > Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly > omni-directional? > ---- > Reg. > > Article: 216496 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Message-ID: References: <11gd7ev474i47fd@corp.supernews.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:14:00 -0700 BKR: Reg has " There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna..." Does this mean the transmitter is powered off 3-phase 60 cycle (if so, really doesn't affect the antenna) or is the transmitter final somehow constructed with a tank supplying 3-phase rf??? Then the "3-phase antenna", is each monopole, dipole fed though different lengths of feedline, with one 0 degree length, one 120 degree length, and one 240 degree--electrical lengths? Those brits can be tricky yanno! John On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 21:05:28 -0600, BKR wrote: > > Just a hint: > Think of how a turnstile antenna works. That one works in the > horizontal plane with 90 degree phasing. Check the radiation patern. > > > Reg Edwards wrote: >> There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire >> transmission line. >> >> The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at >> 120 degee intervals. >> >> Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly >> omni-directional? >> ---- >> Reg. >> >> Article: 216497 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: BKR Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 21:47:29 -0600 Message-ID: <11gd9tl8v9dqcfb@corp.supernews.com> References: <11gd7ev474i47fd@corp.supernews.com> I think he was providing a simplified model by eliminating phasing lines. As I understood it he meant that there 3 outputs from the TX with 3 equal length feedlines or a special feedline, and that all are in a rotating 120 degree progression. John Smith wrote: > BKR: > > Reg has " There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna..." > > Does this mean the transmitter is powered off 3-phase 60 cycle (if so, > really doesn't affect the antenna) or is the transmitter final somehow > constructed with a tank supplying 3-phase rf??? > > Then the "3-phase antenna", is each monopole, dipole fed though different > lengths of feedline, with one 0 degree length, one 120 degree length, and > one 240 degree--electrical lengths? > > Those brits can be tricky yanno! > > John > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 21:05:28 -0600, BKR wrote: > > >>Just a hint: >>Think of how a turnstile antenna works. That one works in the >>horizontal plane with 90 degree phasing. Check the radiation patern. >> >> >>Reg Edwards wrote: >> >>>There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire >>>transmission line. >>> >>>The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at >>>120 degee intervals. >>> >>>Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly >>>omni-directional? >>>---- >>>Reg. >>> >>> > > Article: 216498 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: You might be an old timer Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:23:05 +0100 Message-ID: References: In message <11fuu3or347de48@corp.supernews.com>, David G. Nagel writes >Caveat Lector wrote: >> Regarding steel wool, I recall an old old radio catalog selling an >>antenna cleaning kit to shine up your antenna wire -- claims it >>improved reception ! >> Don't recall if it was steel wool or a fine sandpaper >> But when you put up a brand new shiny antenna -- does it seem to >>work better, just like your car runs better after a wash and wax job >>(;-) >> >Mine always gets wet in the rain that comes immediately after the wash >job. ;^).... I recall that engines are supposed to deliver more power when water is sprayed to the air intake. Having washed you car, then driven it out in the rain, it may appear more nippy. Ian. -- Article: 216499 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 07:34:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1124491826.553521.218150@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> With a delta connection the line wires would have to opened out at their ends and would radiate just as much as the triangular antenna itself. With either delta or Y connection there is no 4th neutral wire. As the whole system is balanced there would be zero current in the neutral anyway. ---- Reg. Article: 216500 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:51:12 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: "Richard Clark" wrote > >What is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane? > > Just like for the two lobes of a dipole, three lobes for a tripole. > > >Also what is the equivalent load impedance between each of the line > >wires. > > 35 Ohms. > =================================== Richard, Would you care to divulge how you obtained these two answers? ---- Reg. Article: 216501 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: chuck Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? References: Message-ID: <_OGNe.415$I93.209@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 14:07:54 GMT Hello Dan, Some thoughts: The 10 dB loss is, of course, referenced to a "perfect ground." Even with a full length (quarter-wave) vertical and your ground system, performance would improve by about 3 dB. Not a blockbuster. Improving the radial system, as noted by others, is a more realistic course. You ought to be able to get the ground resistance closer to 20 ohms with more radials close in. Then you will be only 6 dB worse than if your ground were perfect. Putting up an indoor dipole is cheap and quick. Put it up and compare it with the vertical. But don't hold your breath. You will probably find that with some paths, the dipole is better. you may want to keep both. I assume you've ruled out a capacity hat, center loading, and a coil with lower losses, as suggested by others. But with these changes and an improved ground system, you might get a full (6 dB) S-unit improvement. Good luck. 73, Chuck dansawyeror wrote: > All, > > I have been using an 80 meter loaded vertical for a couple of years with > moderate success. The ground system is a dozen 'untuned' radials 40 or > so feet laying on the ground. The feed line is about 100 feet of RG-8 > coax. The SWR in the shack is about 1.1 to 1. > > I have done some research on the antenna and based on it parameters it > should have a radiation resistance of about 4 Ohms. This says that the > coil and ground are absorbing on the order of 45 Ohms. This is 10db > performance loss. > > I have limited space and the most common solutions are not available to > me. From a practical perspective it would seem to me that building a 40 > foot center feed loaded dipole and putting it in the attic or on the > roof would probably perform somewhat better. > > Is this a reasonable assumption? > > Would burying the radials and connecting them to several 4 square foot > buried screens substantially help the ground system? > > Thanks, > Dan kb0qil > > > > Article: 216502 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 12:00:33 -0400 Message-ID: <17530$430753a7$97d55b95$7188@ALLTEL.NET> Sorry I forgot to put in a winking emoticon for the clueless. I thought that it was obvious that it was a joke. "Ham op" wrote in message news:iuKdnU8cduZgsJreRVn-vA@comcast.com... > If your Physics is learned from Startrek you may have a problem! Article: 216503 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: nospam@nouce.bellatlantic.net Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Message-ID: <01teg15uchopur57v1q4kpei5agko3358e@4ax.com> References: Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:22:29 GMT On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:21:38 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: >There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire >transmission line. > >The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at >120 degee intervals. > >Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly >omni-directional? >---- >Reg. No. Effectively you are feeding two legs with a -120 degree phase and that will make it directional. For Omnidirectional operation ALL legs will have to be fed in phase. If the three sources are laggin in phase then the feed system will have to correct the phase till all are in phase. Many years ago, there was a CB (USA 27mhz 11m) that used three vertical dipoles with phasing to get directionality or omnidirectional gain. Allison Article: 216504 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? From: Cecil Moore Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:34:36 -0500 Message-ID: <1124563033_7@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1124510096.125073.269010@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4307698A.9030006@comcast.net> dansawyeror wrote: > I will defiantly try adding radials. Who are you defying? ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216505 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Allodoxaphobia Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: 20 Aug 2005 18:39:03 GMT Message-ID: References: <1124510096.125073.269010@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <4307698A.9030006@comcast.net> <1124563033_7@spool6-east.superfeed.net> On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 13:34:36 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote: > dansawyeror wrote: >> I will defiantly try adding radials. > > Who are you defying? Lawn gnomes, probably. Article: 216506 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: billg10@bellsouth.net Subject: Re: Removal of Morse Code from Amateur License Requirements...Vanity call wheeee Message-ID: References: <42FC018E.E4C00667@earthlink.net> <1123817805_9029@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <42FEB19E.7AAABA57@rickfrazier.com> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:02:19 -0400 When I first got my technician ticket, my assigned call sign was KI4FAT. After about 6 months, I retired from the Army and applied for and received a vanity call sign of WO2RET. I'm proud of my status both as a military retiree and an amatuer radio operator. When someone asks me what the call sign stands for, I just tell them it means exactly what it says. I also have an amatuer radio operator vanity plate on my car. As for G4FGQ, the highest compliment I ever had paid to me was after I had been DXing on the 2meter band using a home made Jbeam, I heard an old timer telling the indivual I had been talking to that he didn't catch the call sign but 'that ham with the home made antenna had really done his homework and put it together right because the signal was outstanding.' To have an old-timer call a relative newcomer a "HAM" is probably one of the greatest compliments a person can receive. Just my 2 cents worth. Bill, WO2RET On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 02:50:57 GMT, Rick Frazier wrote: >Though this appeared in the Rec.radio.equipment newsgroup and is being broadcast >to several others that may or may not really be appropriate for this diversion >from the original subject, I can't help but responding.... > >When it comes to a vanity call, the relative pittance we are charged for a call >that makes sense to us (whether because of an old call in another location, or >because it's easier to transmit in morse, or even fits some other plan we may >have) is worth the money in my opinion, and I imagine to anyone else that took a >vanity call. > >For myself, I chose my current call because the people at FCC didn't give me a >call in my area on an upgrade from Tech to Extra, despite an address update way >prior to the examinations. Somehow, they managed to show correct postal box >address and city, but my state as California (where I used to live), yet the zip >code was correct, so our "wonderful" postal service forwarded the license >upgrade to my PObox, yet they gave me a California call.... >Moving to a vanity call that indicated Hawaii was a no-brainer for me, and I'd >be willing to pay 20 bucks a year to keep it, so the increase in costs still >make sense to me.... I know I may get a lot of flak from some people because of >this, but it's all what it's worth in my mind.... It is a hobby, and thing that >are outside "standard assignment" can be expected to cost a bit more. In my >mind, it would certainly be worth less than 2 bucks a month to have a call that >makes sense to me in place of one that is from an area where I no longer live. > >Thanks >--Rick AH7H > >Mr Fed UP wrote: > >> Well for myself I wouldn't have picked the spaghetti soup group of letters I >> had to >> start with. But after retiring I thought I might as well get a little >> vain... That's all >> that left after a while. he he.... So for a whopping $20 I got a vanity call >> after >> moving to a new call area. I thought in my second life after heart surgery, >> back surgery,.ect. I might as well have a little fun. After all isn't that >> what a >> hobby is for? I'll get 10 years out of my new call but I can't get that >> far on $20 worth of gas these days. eh. Now all I need is about $20K >> for that new $13,000 ham radio and a tower and antenna ha ha. >> >> What ever is fun is ok. Even if it means dumping a 25 year old call sign. >> Let me see Ham radio so varied what next. >> Been there done that.... DXCC... RTTY... OSCAR.,.. PACKET... >> oh and of coarse RAG CHEW codey slow no problem getting in the >> time for that award. Contest... Special events... Homebrew... >> and a cold brew... >> >> Oh BTW it isn't the one with the most toys... It's the one who gets to >> play the most with their toys. Have fun everyone and don't take >> it too seriously or you get an ulcer and high blood pressure. >> >> Cheers 73 ol' WB9SMX new K4TWO when the papers arrive. ;-) >> >> "Dee Flint" wrote in message >> news:iN2dnaHNlbId2GDfRVn-vw@comcast.com... >> > >> > "Reg Edwards" wrote in message >> > news:ddhag7$kdf$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... >> >> >> >> I do wish people would not refer to me as a 'ham'. >> >> >> >> Amongst the very few things I am proud of is that I am a true Class-A >> >> Radio Amateur. >> >> >> >> Incidentally, as a British pensioner, my annual licence is free. When >> >> requested I just have to confirm I am still in circulation. Same >> >> applies to riding on buses when mobile or not mobile, sober or not >> >> sober. >> >> >> >> Arn't you American Amateurs envious? >> >> ---- >> >> Reg, G4FGQ. >> > >> > Not the least little bit. All our renewals are free regardless of age or >> > work status except for those who elected to get a vanity call sign of >> > their own choosing instead of sticking with an assigned call. >> > >> > Dee D. Flint, N8UZE >> > Article: 216507 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Message-ID: References: <01teg15uchopur57v1q4kpei5agko3358e@4ax.com> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:28:52 -0700 nospam: That cb antenna (with the 3 dipoles arranged so as to go omni/directional) was called a "scanner", made by antenna specialists I believe (reed switches in a relay box control the elements.) I cut one down, along with the phasing harness to the center of the 10 meter band, works great! And you are correct, the three 120 degree spaced vertical dipoles are fed in phase for omni-pattern. John On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:22:29 +0000, nospam wrote: > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:21:38 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" > wrote: > >>There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire >>transmission line. >> >>The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at >>120 degee intervals. >> >>Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly >>omni-directional? >>---- >>Reg. > > No. Effectively you are feeding two legs with a -120 degree phase > and that will make it directional. > > For Omnidirectional operation ALL legs will have to be fed in phase. > If the three sources are laggin in phase then the feed system will > have to correct the phase till all are in phase. > > Many years ago, there was a CB (USA 27mhz 11m) that used three > vertical dipoles with phasing to get directionality or omnidirectional > gain. > > > Allison Article: 216508 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Me Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. References: <1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:11:04 GMT In article <1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, jgboyles@aol.com wrote: > Us Amateurs don't have a lot of experience That's why they call you "Amateurs".....the Professional Radio Engineers understand perfectly what the OP was talking about, and exactly why, and how, this type of antenna system is used in the real world of communications, both fixed and mobile. Me who has been around the biz, since almost before Moses..... Article: 216509 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: nospam@nouce.bellatlantic.net Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Message-ID: <6i7fg1l8t1c2s6jas25vq5nev5sc5vhmko@4ax.com> References: <01teg15uchopur57v1q4kpei5agko3358e@4ax.com> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:26:06 GMT On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:28:52 -0700, John Smith wrote: >nospam: > >That cb antenna (with the 3 dipoles arranged so as to go omni/directional) >was called a "scanner", made by antenna specialists I believe (reed >switches in a relay box control the elements.) Yep thats it, got stuck for a name. >I cut one down, along with the phasing harness to the center of the 10 >meter band, works great! And you are correct, the three 120 degree spaced >vertical dipoles are fed in phase for omni-pattern. Many years ago I help a ham friend (now SK) set up a foursquare. that four vertical monopoles with goundplane with phasing feed for gain and directionality. It was a very good antenna for 20M. Early in my commercial career I worked part time for an AM BCB station and would help with antenna tuning for directional pattern. Imagine three big (300ft) towers in a field with about that much space between them in a line. The feed and phasing coils were BIG, the usual pattern was cartioid with the weak null facing the atlantic ocean to the southeast. Just a bigger version of many phased arrays I'd see in my commercial career. Allison KB1GMX Article: 216510 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dxer 1600" Subject: DYMEK DA9 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:08:10 -0400 Hi I just picked up a (stoner) Dymek DA9 active antenna. The tuning cap has somehow been bypassed and it does nothing to affect the station. I was told that this was bypassed intentionally so as to be a broadband antenna. I'd like to resore ti to original and use the tuning cap as a preselector. Does anyone have a print / schematic on this unit ? Thanks! Article: 216511 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dan/W4NTI" References: <42FC018E.E4C00667@earthlink.net> <1123817805_9029@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <42FEB19E.7AAABA57@rickfrazier.com> Subject: Re: Removal of Morse Code from Amateur License Requirements...Vanity call wheeee Message-ID: Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:27:31 GMT Bill, Thank you for your service. With your attitude you will go far in Amateur Radio. Dan/W4NTI wrote in message news:mrueg15er88odnqi9t0je5ubdp0shb4fg3@4ax.com... > When I first got my technician ticket, my assigned call sign was > KI4FAT. After about 6 months, I retired from the Army and applied for > and received a vanity call sign of WO2RET. I'm proud of my status > both as a military retiree and an amatuer radio operator. When > someone asks me what the call sign stands for, I just tell them it > means exactly what it says. I also have an amatuer radio operator > vanity plate on my car. > > As for G4FGQ, the highest compliment I ever had paid to me was after I > had been DXing on the 2meter band using a home made Jbeam, I heard an > old timer telling the indivual I had been talking to that he didn't > catch the call sign but 'that ham with the home made antenna had > really done his homework and put it together right because the signal > was outstanding.' To have an old-timer call a relative newcomer a > "HAM" is probably one of the greatest compliments a person can > receive. > > Just my 2 cents worth. > > Bill, WO2RET > > On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 02:50:57 GMT, Rick Frazier > wrote: > >>Though this appeared in the Rec.radio.equipment newsgroup and is being >>broadcast >>to several others that may or may not really be appropriate for this >>diversion >>from the original subject, I can't help but responding.... >> >>When it comes to a vanity call, the relative pittance we are charged for a >>call >>that makes sense to us (whether because of an old call in another >>location, or >>because it's easier to transmit in morse, or even fits some other plan we >>may >>have) is worth the money in my opinion, and I imagine to anyone else that >>took a >>vanity call. >> >>For myself, I chose my current call because the people at FCC didn't give >>me a >>call in my area on an upgrade from Tech to Extra, despite an address >>update way >>prior to the examinations. Somehow, they managed to show correct postal >>box >>address and city, but my state as California (where I used to live), yet >>the zip >>code was correct, so our "wonderful" postal service forwarded the license >>upgrade to my PObox, yet they gave me a California call.... >>Moving to a vanity call that indicated Hawaii was a no-brainer for me, and >>I'd >>be willing to pay 20 bucks a year to keep it, so the increase in costs >>still >>make sense to me.... I know I may get a lot of flak from some people >>because of >>this, but it's all what it's worth in my mind.... It is a hobby, and >>thing that >>are outside "standard assignment" can be expected to cost a bit more. >>In my >>mind, it would certainly be worth less than 2 bucks a month to have a >>call that >>makes sense to me in place of one that is from an area where I no longer >>live. >> >>Thanks >>--Rick AH7H >> >>Mr Fed UP wrote: >> >>> Well for myself I wouldn't have picked the spaghetti soup group of >>> letters I >>> had to >>> start with. But after retiring I thought I might as well get a little >>> vain... That's all >>> that left after a while. he he.... So for a whopping $20 I got a vanity >>> call >>> after >>> moving to a new call area. I thought in my second life after heart >>> surgery, >>> back surgery,.ect. I might as well have a little fun. After all isn't >>> that >>> what a >>> hobby is for? I'll get 10 years out of my new call but I can't get that >>> far on $20 worth of gas these days. eh. Now all I need is about $20K >>> for that new $13,000 ham radio and a tower and antenna ha ha. >>> >>> What ever is fun is ok. Even if it means dumping a 25 year old call >>> sign. >>> Let me see Ham radio so varied what next. >>> Been there done that.... DXCC... RTTY... OSCAR.,.. PACKET... >>> oh and of coarse RAG CHEW codey slow no problem getting in the >>> time for that award. Contest... Special events... Homebrew... >>> and a cold brew... >>> >>> Oh BTW it isn't the one with the most toys... It's the one who gets to >>> play the most with their toys. Have fun everyone and don't take >>> it too seriously or you get an ulcer and high blood pressure. >>> >>> Cheers 73 ol' WB9SMX new K4TWO when the papers arrive. ;-) >>> >>> "Dee Flint" wrote in message >>> news:iN2dnaHNlbId2GDfRVn-vw@comcast.com... >>> > >>> > "Reg Edwards" wrote in message >>> > news:ddhag7$kdf$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com... >>> >> >>> >> I do wish people would not refer to me as a 'ham'. >>> >> >>> >> Amongst the very few things I am proud of is that I am a true Class-A >>> >> Radio Amateur. >>> >> >>> >> Incidentally, as a British pensioner, my annual licence is free. >>> >> When >>> >> requested I just have to confirm I am still in circulation. Same >>> >> applies to riding on buses when mobile or not mobile, sober or not >>> >> sober. >>> >> >>> >> Arn't you American Amateurs envious? >>> >> ---- >>> >> Reg, G4FGQ. >>> > >>> > Not the least little bit. All our renewals are free regardless of age >>> > or >>> > work status except for those who elected to get a vanity call sign of >>> > their own choosing instead of sticking with an assigned call. >>> > >>> > Dee D. Flint, N8UZE >>> > > Article: 216512 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:15:21 -0700 Message-ID: <11gfhspcmcn845f@corp.supernews.com> References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> For those folks who aren't all that familiar with transmission lines. . Velocity factor refers to phase velocity, and the VF of all hollow waveguides is > 1.0. Of course, the group velocity is always < 1.0, and that's the rate at which information can be conveyed. I don't believe for a minute that this rule has been broken. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216513 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Message-ID: References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:48:44 -0700 Fred: I don't believe that anyone has demonstrated faster than light transmission of an energy, wave or particle, where the effect is duplicable on demand, yet... I do believe it will be done in the future, hopefully the rather near future... but it will can only be done by people who are searching for way--the scoffers will never, ever be able to present us with a method to do so--on that you can bet heavily! John On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:42:58 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: > Anyone who has ever watched Startrek knows the light speed limitation is > incorrect. > > "Cecil Moore" wrote in message > news:1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net... >> http://www.livescience.com/technology/050819_fastlight.html >> >> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet > News==---- >> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ > Newsgroups >> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption > =---- Article: 216514 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:49:03 -0400 Message-ID: <43d36$4307ebc6$97d55b95$10784@ALLTEL.NET> John, picture if you will, an observer on earth watches a spacecraft pass between the moon and the sun at 99.9%C. The occupant of the space craft knows that the distance is about 93 million miles and clicks his stopwatch as he passes the moon, and again as he passes the sun. Given the time and distance, he computes his speed (measured with his slowed down time piece) and concludes he has exceeded C. Ergo there must be analogs of C. What say you? "John Smith" wrote in message news:pan.2005.08.21.00.48.42.517161@gmail.com... > Fred: > > I don't believe that anyone has demonstrated faster than light > transmission of an energy, wave or particle, where the effect is > duplicable on demand, yet... > > I do believe it will be done in the future, hopefully the rather near > future... but it will can only be done by people who are searching for > way--the scoffers will never, ever be able to present us with a method > to do so--on that you can bet heavily! > > John > > On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:42:58 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: > > > Anyone who has ever watched Startrek knows the light speed limitation is > > incorrect. > > > > "Cecil Moore" wrote in message > > news:1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net... > >> http://www.livescience.com/technology/050819_fastlight.html > >> > >> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet > > News==---- > >> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ > > Newsgroups > >> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption > > =---- > Article: 216515 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? From: Cecil Moore Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:47:09 -0500 Message-ID: <1124596185_499@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> John Smith wrote: > I don't believe that anyone has demonstrated faster than light > transmission of an energy, wave or particle, where the effect is > duplicable on demand, yet... Entangled particles may not violate the letter of the speed of light limit but they certainly violate the spirit of the limit. When man figures out how to change the entangled particle generation pattern from random to predictable, we will have faster than light communications. It's just a matter of time. :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- Article: 216516 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Message-ID: References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> <43d36$4307ebc6$97d55b95$10784@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:00:10 -0700 Fred: Quite obviously, there is no such thing as time. However, since he is attempting to discern if there is a change in his speed (rapidity at which he is transversing the ether), against a speed which we now claim as a "law"--i.e. speed-of-light, he must attempt something, and measure it against some other spinning object (namely earth, when he uses his watch.) He would actually need to throw away the watch and race a laser beam on a parallel course to himself, which is originating in a third place behind him to get any meaningful measurement at all, as all he is interested in is how fast he is traveling in relationship to light transversing the same media as himself. But he is doomed to failure, as surely you must see. Time = movement = distance, since there is no such thing as time, it is actually distance (or space itself in between points he travels) which he is really causing to change, and to my knowledge, we have not yet constructed the device which can measure such, but a shortening of distance is obviously happening between him and his destination, those lines of ether which connect him to his destination are being warped in someway not understood, probably being bent back upon themselves like a horseshoe, and now he is not actually traveling the distance around the horseshoe, but rather, stepping across the two ends. Ether, the real "matter" of the universe, passes though our altered state (caused by the big bang ripping our "matter" from the real matter the universe is composed of and altering its properties into "our matter") like a gas though a screen composed of very large holes. At the speed of light this resistance of our bodies to the flow of ether though them fails to remain insignificant, what happens next, when our matter finally becomes a real resistance to ether and then goes further to "push" the ether in a flow not of its' own design, and in a way we have never seen done since the big bang, is unknown... ... but, I do think upon these things ... and others claim there is nothing to even be thought upon ... ... but then you already knew there was no way to answer your original question, at least not correctly ... John On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:49:03 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: > John, picture if you will, an observer on earth watches a spacecraft pass > between the moon and the sun at 99.9%C. The occupant of the space craft > knows that the distance is about 93 million miles and clicks his stopwatch > as he passes the moon, and again as he passes the sun. Given the time and > distance, he computes his speed (measured with his slowed down time piece) > and concludes he has exceeded C. Ergo there must be analogs of C. What say > you? > > "John Smith" wrote in message > news:pan.2005.08.21.00.48.42.517161@gmail.com... >> Fred: >> >> I don't believe that anyone has demonstrated faster than light >> transmission of an energy, wave or particle, where the effect is >> duplicable on demand, yet... >> >> I do believe it will be done in the future, hopefully the rather near >> future... but it will can only be done by people who are searching for >> way--the scoffers will never, ever be able to present us with a method >> to do so--on that you can bet heavily! >> >> John >> >> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:42:58 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: >> >> > Anyone who has ever watched Startrek knows the light speed limitation is >> > incorrect. >> > >> > "Cecil Moore" wrote in message >> > news:1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net... >> >> http://www.livescience.com/technology/050819_fastlight.html >> >> >> >> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet >> > News==---- >> >> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > 120,000+ >> > Newsgroups >> >> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption >> > =---- >> Article: 216517 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Message-ID: References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> <1124596185_499@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:13:14 -0700 Cecil: Quite factually, I agree with you, whether you were just kidding or not... John On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:47:09 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote: > John Smith wrote: >> I don't believe that anyone has demonstrated faster than light >> transmission of an energy, wave or particle, where the effect is >> duplicable on demand, yet... > > Entangled particles may not violate the letter of the speed > of light limit but they certainly violate the spirit of the > limit. When man figures out how to change the entangled particle > generation pattern from random to predictable, we will have > faster than light communications. It's just a matter of time. :-) Article: 216518 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? From: Cecil Moore Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:17:18 -0500 Message-ID: <1124633995_1041@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> <1124596185_499@spool6-east.superfeed.net> John Smith wrote: > Quite factually, I agree with you, whether you were just kidding or not... I thought the multiple meanings of, "It's just a matter of time.", was humorous. Consider that the complete quantum state of a particle could be teleported to Mars and back to Earth without suffering the speed of light delay. This has already been demonstrated in the physics lab. Unfortunately, all quantum states must necessarily remain unknown until the complete quantum state is teleported back to Earth. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216519 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? Message-ID: References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> <1124596185_499@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <1124633995_1041@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:56:14 -0700 Cecil: "It boggles the mind.", is often an over-statement. Here it is not. It is no doubt many would question the sanity of men who even are so brazen that they would ponder such things--in other words, I think we are going to have to take a little flack over all this... It is why I pointed out princetons' egg project. You see how careful they are, the detail they even pay to picking the words they choose to even advance discussion of the matter, least they be branded "kooks." It will be exciting when we are even able to grasp the smallest detail of the functioning of all this... John On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:17:18 -0500, Cecil Moore wrote: > John Smith wrote: >> Quite factually, I agree with you, whether you were just kidding or not... > > I thought the multiple meanings of, "It's just a matter of time.", > was humorous. > > Consider that the complete quantum state of a particle could be > teleported to Mars and back to Earth without suffering the speed > of light delay. This has already been demonstrated in the physics > lab. Unfortunately, all quantum states must necessarily remain > unknown until the complete quantum state is teleported back to Earth. Article: 216520 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Me Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. References: <1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1124578556.103105.277990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 18:01:30 GMT In article <1124578556.103105.277990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, jgboyles@aol.com wrote: > By the way, are you an Amateur Radio Operator? > Gary N4AST > Since 1964 Me Article: 216521 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: VF > 1.0??? From: Cecil Moore Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 18:27:51 -0500 Message-ID: <1124667027_521@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1124494341_3289@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <69197$43067cb0$97d55936$20978@ALLTEL.NET> <1124596185_499@spool6-east.superfeed.net> <1124633995_1041@spool6-east.superfeed.net> Ham op wrote: > Ah Ha! The identical twin particles and information sharing at > velocities faster than light. Hmmm .... Duuuuhhhh, unknown quantum states cannot share information. >> Unfortunately, all quantum states must necessarily remain >> unknown until the complete quantum state is teleported back to Earth. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216522 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 21:17:50 -0700 Message-ID: <11gikff7omn1mba@corp.supernews.com> References: dansawyeror wrote: > All, > > I have been using an 80 meter loaded vertical for a couple of years with > moderate success. The ground system is a dozen 'untuned' radials 40 or > so feet laying on the ground. The feed line is about 100 feet of RG-8 > coax. The SWR in the shack is about 1.1 to 1. > > I have done some research on the antenna and based on it parameters it > should have a radiation resistance of about 4 Ohms. This says that the > coil and ground are absorbing on the order of 45 Ohms. This is 10db > performance loss. > > I have limited space and the most common solutions are not available to > me. From a practical perspective it would seem to me that building a 40 > foot center feed loaded dipole and putting it in the attic or on the > roof would probably perform somewhat better. > > Is this a reasonable assumption? > I'm not sure you can count on that. You'd still lose some in a matching/loading network, there'd be a lot of ground loss because of the low height, and absorption of some of the power from conductors in the house might occur. It wouldn't hurt to try, but leave your vertical up. > Would burying the radials and connecting them to several 4 square foot > buried screens substantially help the ground system? Just about anything you can do to increase the conductivity of the ground system, particularly close to the antenna, will help. Using screen is one thing. Burying the radials won't help. Adding more radials and making them longer will help. Unfortunately, making a few radials longer doesn't do much, and adding a bunch of short radials doesn't do much either -- you really have to do both to have a big effect. If possible, connect to any other nearby buried conductors such as metallic water pipes. The other thing you can do to improve the efficiency is to increase the radiation resistance of the antenna. You can do this of course by increasing the height of the antenna. Moving the loading coil upward will help, too, although you'll need more inductance. (The coil still won't be a major part of the overall loss, though.) A top hat is better yet. You can also increase the radiation resistance by making your antenna fatter. Use multiple wires in parallel, spaced about as far as you can, either along side each other, or fanned out, converging at the bottom. Finally, if you've got room, you can improve your overall efficiency by about 3 dB by putting in another identical antenna/ground system somewhere nearby and connecting the two in parallel. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216523 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Frank" References: Subject: Re: Off topic request for info Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 13:50:39 GMT > As I am getting closer to retirement I have been thinking about buying a > used spectrum analyzer since I will not have access to one at work. > Unfortunately I am not familiar with all the models from say 5 to 15 years > ago. Is there a good reference describing the different HP/Agilent, > Tektronix, etc. models and which are good and which to avoid. A quick > look on Ebay shows HP 4195A, 8561E, 8562A, 8562B, 8563E,8565A, > 8568B,8569B, 8591E, 8593E, and 8594E. Similarly for Tektronix 492P, 494P, > 495P, 495A, and 2755P. Is there some kind of a used buyers guide > available. I understand spectrum analyzers at a moderate level and > realize the differences between frequency range, external mixers, dynamic > range, bandwidth etc. but finding the specs in a manner that makes them > comparable is hard. Thanks for any advice. > > 73, Larry W0QE Never seen a buyers guide for spectrum analyzers. They all seem to have about the same dynamic range. The factors that really drive price are upper frequency range, tracking YIG filters, and selectivity. Do you really need 26.5 GHz, and a 10 Hz IF filter, if not you could probably save a lot with a 2.7 GHz upper limit. Then there is the HP analyzers that use the 141T storage display, that can be purchased for a very low price. I have seen many at Dayton. I would never buy a storage display without seeing it in operation though. Anritsu also has a nice line of analyzers. I would use www.tucker.com or www.tesequity.com as a guide to the prices you could expect to pay. There are many other used test equipment dealers. 73, Frank Article: 216524 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Frank" References: <430791C7.2040002@comcast.net> Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 17:44:16 GMT > Frank, > > The coil measures about 60 uH. The antenna is elevated about 3 feet on a > short tripod. The radials angle down the tripod legs and then out. > > The coil is about 4 inchs in diameter, number 12, wound on a fiberglass > form. It is centerloaded. I am looking at it accross the yard, it is about > 6 inches long. It is would with about a point .5 pitch. Calculations for a > 1:1 pitch predict a Q of about 450. > > Thanks, > Dan Thanks for the info Dan. From your comments the radials appear to be parallel with the tripod legs to ground level, and then continue at ground level for the rest of their length. What is the angle of the tripod legs? I agree with comments about adding a horizontal wire to the top of the vertical; it will probably be easier than a capacity hat. I am overloaded with work at the moment, but would like to attempt a model in a week or so when I have less work. 73, Frank Article: 216525 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Off topic request for info From: Ed References: Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 17:58:09 GMT > As I am getting closer to retirement I have been thinking about > buying a used spectrum analyzer since I will not have access to > one at work. Unfortunately I am not familiar with all the > models from say 5 to 15 years ago. Is there a good reference > describing the different HP/Agilent, Tektronix, etc. models and > which are good and which to avoid. A quick look on Ebay shows > HP 4195A, 8561E, 8562A, 8562B, 8563E,8565A, 8568B,8569B, 8591E, > 8593E, and 8594E. Similarly for Tektronix 492P, 494P, 495P, > 495A, and 2755P. Is there some kind of a used buyers guide > available. I understand spectrum analyzers at a moderate level > and realize the differences between frequency range, external > mixers, dynamic range, bandwidth etc. but finding the specs in a > manner that makes them comparable is hard. Thanks for any advice. Larry, can't really offer any guidelines to your search, but wanted to mention that you should add IFR model A7550 to your list. I have used these for many years prior to retirement and they are a great instrument. Every so often I see one going quite cheap on Ebay. Ed K7AAT Article: 216526 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Me Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. References: <1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1124578556.103105.277990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1124662096.856185.141310@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:13:59 GMT In article <1124662096.856185.141310@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, jgboyles@aol.com wrote: > Me wrote: > > In article <1124578556.103105.277990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, > > jgboyles@aol.com wrote: > > > > > By the way, are you an Amateur Radio Operator? > > > Gary N4AST > > > > > > > Since 1964 > > > > > > Me > > Well Me, as for me, Amateur since 1963, professional radio engineer, > never. I did install some cb antennas during the early 1970's and got > paid, so I may be a professional antenna installer? Hope by these acts > I didn't give up my Amateur status. Was in college at the time and did > not have much $$. Why don't you give your call? > Gary N4AST > I am available on 14292.0Khz (20 Meters) daytime, during the winter months ( Sept - May) and 3840Khz (75 meters) most evenings after 10Pm local.... Stop by for a visit sometime..... Me Article: 216527 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Me Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. References: <1124486709.945064.307680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1124578556.103105.277990@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:14:38 GMT In article , Ham op wrote: > Awe! A newcomer! > > You must be QCWA*2 minimum to post on this list. :-) says who...... Me Article: 216528 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Me Subject: Re: Off topic request for info References: Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:18:39 GMT In article , Larry Benko wrote: > As I am getting closer to retirement I have been thinking about > buying a used spectrum analyzer since I will not have access to > one at work. Unfortunately I am not familiar with all the > models from say 5 to 15 years ago. Is there a good reference > describing the different HP/Agilent, Tektronix, etc. models and > which are good and which to avoid. A quick look on Ebay shows > HP 4195A, 8561E, 8562A, 8562B, 8563E,8565A, 8568B,8569B, 8591E, > 8593E, and 8594E. Similarly for Tektronix 492P, 494P, 495P, > 495A, and 2755P. Is there some kind of a used buyers guide > available. I understand spectrum analyzers at a moderate level > and realize the differences between frequency range, external > mixers, dynamic range, bandwidth etc. but finding the specs in a > manner that makes them comparable is hard. Thanks for any advice. > > 73, Larry W0QE My "rule of thumb" has always been.... HP for spectrum analyzers, and Tektronix for Oscopes..... Fluke for Dvm's and Lambda for Power Supplies. Me Article: 216529 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:39:26 -0700 Message-ID: <11gk6v0r4tulk90@corp.supernews.com> References: <430791C7.2040002@comcast.net> Frank wrote: > . . . > I agree with comments about adding a horizontal wire to the top of the > vertical; it will probably be easier than a capacity hat. I am overloaded > with work at the moment, but would like to attempt a model in a week or so > when I have less work. Take a look also at a tee type arrangement. That is, a horizontal wire with the tip of the vertical connected at or near its center. It might have some advantages over connecting the wire's end to the vertical. But of course it might be more involved to construct. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216530 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:57:57 -0500 Message-ID: <2776-430A3C55-932@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net> References: Dan, KB0QIL wrote: "From a practical perspective it would seem to me that building a 40 foot crnter loaded dipole and putting it in the sttic or on the roof would probably perform somewhat better." The roof or attic may be noisy receiving locations. The ionospheric spot which effectively reflects a high frequency signal to a point beyond the horizon is variable so that the received signal direction varies from the true bearing of the transmitter, The received signal elevation angle also varies from that predicted by the assumed layer height for any given path length, and may change from instant to instant. The differences between predicted and actual azimuth and elevation angles may at any momement be several degrees. These differences make high frequency direction finding complicated, but results may be good enough for some pracical purposes. Optimum vertical and horizontal angles are sought in directional antenna design but enough beamwidth is needed to accommodate the angular variations which occur. Over sea water, ground wave propagation is good and loss is low as compared with propagation over earth. Frequencies up to about 5 MHz are used for communications beyond the line of sight between ships and between ships and shore. These frequencies are also used for tropical broadcasting among islands. For ionospheric reflection to near spots beyond the line of sight, near vertical incidence reflections are used. The frequency must be below the maximum usable frequency for vertical incidence at the transmitting site. For ground wave propagation a vertical transmitting antenna is used. Horizontally polarized antennas are often used for sky wave signals because reflection from the ionosphere makes equal strength components, horizontally polarized and vertically polarized, from the incident wave, regardless of its initial polarization. Most disturbing noise is that generated within ground wave range of the receiving antenna. It is vertically polarized.There is no ground wave propagation of horizontally polarized waves. Thus, a horizontally polarized receiving antenna ignores much of the available noise. However, it receives as much signal from the sky wave as a vertically polarized antenna would. If a single antenna is to be used for both transmitting and receiving a shy wave, a forizontally polarized antenna may be the better choice due to its noise rejection. See "Radio Antenna Engineering" by Edmund A. Laport for details. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 216531 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:46:57 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <2776-430A3C55-932@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net> "Richard Harrison" wrote in message news:2776-430A3C55-932@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net... > Dan, KB0QIL wrote: > "From a practical perspective it would seem to me that building a 40 > foot crnter loaded dipole and putting it in the sttic or on the roof > would probably perform somewhat better." > > The roof or attic may be noisy receiving locations. > > The ionospheric spot which effectively reflects a high frequency signal > to a point beyond the horizon is variable so that the received signal > direction varies from the true bearing of the transmitter, The received > signal elevation angle also varies from that predicted by the assumed > layer height for any given path length, and may change from instant to > instant. > > The differences between predicted and actual azimuth and elevation > angles may at any momement be several degrees. These differences make > high frequency direction finding complicated, but results may be good > enough for some pracical purposes. Optimum vertical and horizontal > angles are sought in directional antenna design but enough beamwidth is > needed to accommodate > the angular variations which occur. > > Over sea water, ground wave propagation is good and loss is low as > compared with propagation over earth. Frequencies up to about 5 MHz are > used for communications beyond the line of sight between ships and > between ships and shore. These frequencies are also used for tropical > broadcasting among islands. > > For ionospheric reflection to near spots beyond the line of sight, near > vertical incidence reflections are used. The frequency must be below the > maximum usable frequency for vertical incidence at the transmitting > site. > > For ground wave propagation a vertical transmitting antenna is used. > > Horizontally polarized antennas are often used for sky wave signals > because reflection from the ionosphere makes equal strength components, > horizontally polarized and vertically polarized, from the incident wave, > regardless of its initial polarization. > > Most disturbing noise is that generated within ground wave range of the > receiving antenna. It is vertically polarized.There is no ground wave > propagation of horizontally polarized waves. Thus, a horizontally > polarized receiving antenna ignores much of the available noise. > However, it receives as much signal from the sky wave as a vertically > polarized antenna would. > > If a single antenna is to be used for both transmitting and receiving a > shy wave, a forizontally polarized antenna may be the better choice due > to its noise rejection. See "Radio Antenna Engineering" by Edmund A. > Laport for details. > > Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI > ================================ Richard, I am impressed by your logical descriptions and explanations of skywave and groundwave propagation. You are more than convincing. No doubt reinforced from practical experience. It all makes sense. Something much needed on these newsgroups. I notice you do not treat the works of so-called 'experts' as bibles but as a means of further study. ---- Reg, G4FGQ Article: 216532 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Dan/W4NTI" Subject: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Message-ID: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:59:28 GMT I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the amount of windings. According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. Anyone know anything about this? Dan/W4NTI Article: 216533 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:34:59 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message news:4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net... > I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings > are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the > amount of windings. > > According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. > > Anyone know anything about this? > > Dan/W4NTI > =================================== Dan, I am unable to help you. Because, in common with most other people, I havn't the foggiest idea what a TA-33SR is. Questioners would do better by not depending on other people's imagination. It takes only a few seconds to provide a little more essential information. If you can't find the time then it can't matter very much anyway. ---- Reg. Article: 216534 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Message-ID: References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:45:32 -0700 Dan: Look here: http://bama.edebris.com/manuals/mosley/ta33sr at the files: 00readme.txt (72 bytes) ta33sr.pdf (322 KB) John On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:59:28 +0000, Dan/W4NTI wrote: > I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings > are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the > amount of windings. > > According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. > > Anyone know anything about this? > > Dan/W4NTI Article: 216535 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:04:25 -0000 Message-ID: <11gkmfpfhu29522@corp.supernews.com> References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> >> I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings >> are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the >> amount of windings. >> >> According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. >> >> Anyone know anything about this? >> >> Dan/W4NTI >> >=================================== >Dan, I am unable to help you. > >Because, in common with most other people, I havn't the foggiest idea >what a TA-33SR is. > >Questioners would do better by not depending on other people's >imagination. It takes only a few seconds to provide a little more >essential information. If you can't find the time then it can't matter >very much anyway. Reg, even to me (a relative newbie) "Mosley TA-33SR" provides all of the information needed to identify what Dan is talking about. A very brief Google identifies as a triband trap beam. I have little doubt that anyone who has ever owned one (and is thus likely to have the direct information that Dan is looking for) would recognize it from his description with no further description being required. Dan - since Mosely's manual doesn't mention such a choke, and the instruction sheet indicates a direct attachment of the coax to the driven-element feedpoint terminals, I doubt that the details of the choke are terribly critical. You could probably use any of the plans on the net for an air-wound coaxial choke-balun. One plan I see uses 18-21 feet of coax, close-wound solenoid-style on a 5" PVC form (stated to be good for 160-10 meters). Another site (http://www.bcdxc.org/balun_information.htm#Ed,%20WA2SRQ) has a table of air-core balun impedances, as a function of both frequency and construction (turn count and diameter). This chart suggests to me that 4 turns, 6 5/8" solenoid-wound might be a good option for you, as its impedance peaks at around the 15-meter band and is 500 ohms or better between 10 and 20 meters. Some folks seem to prefer solenoid-wound air baluns, others prefer scramble-wound. There seems to be a fair bit of disagreement as to which style works better, and why. The other choices are to use a different sort of balun (e.g. a W2DU ferrite-bead choke), or none at all. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! Article: 216536 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" Subject: How do I test a choke balun? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 19:08:43 -0400 Message-ID: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different choke balun approaches. Article: 216537 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Message-ID: References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:18:15 -0700 I was thinking more of contacting larry at: wa9vrh@mtco.com ... my thinking being, since he supplied the manual and his email, he most likely would have seen that question, owned the beam and familiar with the construction of the choke/balun... John On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:59:28 +0000, Dan/W4NTI wrote: > I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings > are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the > amount of windings. > > According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. > > Anyone know anything about this? > > Dan/W4NTI Article: 216538 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: dplatt@radagast.org (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:20:33 -0000 Message-ID: <11gkne1npu7e5e@corp.supernews.com> References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> >How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a >transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different >choke balun approaches. One possible method comes to mind... use an RF current probe to see how much RF is actually flowing on the outside of your feedline. I've seen plans for such probes, made from a clamp-on ferrite choke core and winding (making a simple RF transformer) plus a diode, cap, and meter. In order to distinguish conducted RF (which the balun would be expected to be able to stop) from induced RF from the antenna itself (which would probably go right around the balun) you might want to try disconnecting the antenna itself from the output of the balun, and substituting an equivalent resistance/reactance at the frequency of interest. Push a few watts into the "dummy load", run the current probe down the feedline from the balun to your rig, and see what the peak current is. Repeat at multiple frequencies, and (if practical) with different feedline lengths. Using a half-wavelength-long coaxial feedline would probably maximize the sensitivity of the test, as it would present a low RF impedance on the outside of the coax at the "bottom" of the current balun. Repeat with other current baluns and compare. To be complete, I suppose that you'd also want to measure the temperature of each balun before and after a high-power test, to try to get some feeling for the amount of loss in the balun itself. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! Article: 216539 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Jerry Martes" References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:37:48 GMT "Fred W4JLE" wrote in message news:1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET... > How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a > transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different > choke balun approaches. Fred I dont have the skills nor knowledge to tell you how to test the choke balun. I do have some experience with testing of my home made choke baluns. I made connection to the shield of the coax that is surrounded by the "choke balun", and measured the impedance across it. My reasoning was that the major objective of the balun was to present a high impedance to current along the outside of the coax. It occurres to me that my reasoning might be invalid, since it seems too obvious, and you already know the "impedance" test isnt adequet. Jerry Article: 216540 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Message-ID: References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:43:53 -0700 Fred: With a toroid core, using the manufacturers data on uh/mh per number of turns, al factor and such, should allow you to compute the inductance and come to a value of the impedance that inductance poses at the operating freq(s) in question... Major problem I see is a resonance(s) occurring with feedline length and the inductance chosen, but even that could be designed out with a pencil and paper... the physical testing you are inquiring about has my interest also... John On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 19:08:43 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: > How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a > transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different > choke balun approaches. Article: 216541 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:44:05 -0700 Message-ID: <11gkoq8aqf7ik68@corp.supernews.com> References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> Fred W4JLE wrote: > How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a > transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different > choke balun approaches. > You can measure the impedance by shorting the input conductors together and the output conductors together. Then connect the input conductors to one terminal of an impedance measuring device such as an antenna analyzer or impedance bridge, and the output conductors to the other terminal. An impedance of around 500 - 1000 ohms is generally adequate. If you want to measure its effectiveness in place, you can construct a current probe like the one shown in Fig. 12 of http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf. It'll give you a quantitative measure of the feedline current. You can use a snap-on split core for convenience. The value at the choke should be very low, but it might increase considerably about a quarter wavelength down the line due to induced common mode current. The solution to that is to insert another choke balun at that point. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216542 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? From: Cecil Moore Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:46:39 -0500 Message-ID: <1124754555_381@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> Fred W4JLE wrote: > How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a > transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different > choke balun approaches. I have a toroidal pick-up coil slipped over my coax in the shack to monitor the magnitude of common-mode currents. That tells me how chokes, etc., are performing. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216543 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:59:24 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <11gkmfpfhu29522@corp.supernews.com> "Dave Platt" wrote in message news:11gkmfpfhu29522@corp.supernews.com... > >> I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings > >> are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the > >> amount of windings. > >> > >> According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. > >> > >> Anyone know anything about this? > >> > >> Dan/W4NTI > >> > >=================================== > >Dan, I am unable to help you. > > > >Because, in common with most other people, I havn't the foggiest idea > >what a TA-33SR is. > > > >Questioners would do better by not depending on other people's > >imagination. It takes only a few seconds to provide a little more > >essential information. If you can't find the time then it can't matter > >very much anyway. > > Reg, even to me (a relative newbie) "Mosley TA-33SR" provides all of > the information needed to identify what Dan is talking about. A very > brief Google identifies as a triband trap beam. I have little doubt > that anyone who has ever owned one (and is thus likely to have the > direct information that Dan is looking for) would recognize it from > his description with no further description being required. > > Dan - since Mosely's manual doesn't mention such a choke, and the > instruction sheet indicates a direct attachment of the coax to the > driven-element feedpoint terminals, I doubt that the details of the > choke are terribly critical. You could probably use any of the plans > on the net for an air-wound coaxial choke-balun. One plan I see uses > 18-21 feet of coax, close-wound solenoid-style on a 5" PVC form > (stated to be good for 160-10 meters). > > Another site (http://www.bcdxc.org/balun_information.htm#Ed,%20WA2SRQ) > has a table of air-core balun impedances, as a function of both > frequency and construction (turn count and diameter). This chart > suggests to me that 4 turns, 6 5/8" solenoid-wound might be a good > option for you, as its impedance peaks at around the 15-meter band and > is 500 ohms or better between 10 and 20 meters. > > Some folks seem to prefer solenoid-wound air baluns, others prefer > scramble-wound. There seems to be a fair bit of disagreement as to > which style works better, and why. > > The other choices are to use a different sort of balun (e.g. a W2DU > ferrite-bead choke), or none at all. > > -- > Dave Platt ================================== Dave, having learned from you, a newbie, not from the enquirer, what a TA-33SR is, and having inspected the website you specify, I am a little wiser from reading the baffle-gab. I agree with your recomendations. Just get a hank of coax, suspend it in the feedline and away you go. But it may be more mechanically convenient and electrically better to wind a few turns of coax or Radio Shack twin speaker wire around a ferrite toroidal core. Or possibly do without a balun altogether. Try it and see what happens. It's so easy to do. ---- Reg. Article: 216544 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: John Smith Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Message-ID: References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 17:19:29 -0700 Fred: As my last post gave away, my chokes are constructed on math and observation in practical work... (well, prayer too ) I see roy is recommending 10x the impedance of the feedline (coax?) for the choke/balun, minimum (I am guessing here a bit), he obviously knows what he is speaking about, however, at 160m when you are struck with the physical dimensions of the choke/balun needed--well, at those times I have accepted a 5:1 ratio of choke/balun impedance to feedline impedance... ... but then, I am here to learn ... John On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 19:08:43 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: > How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a > transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different > choke balun approaches. Article: 216545 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: BillJ Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:18:30 -0400 Dan/W4NTI wrote: > I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings > are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the > amount of windings. > > According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. > > Anyone know anything about this? > > Dan/W4NTI > > My TA-33 manual calls for 5 turns at 6 inch diameter Bill, W3FI Article: 216546 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> <1124753999.711129.26180@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:23:39 -0400 Message-ID: <28fe0$430a7ad8$97d55b95$26031@ALLTEL.NET> Thanks to all for the information. Roy I particularly wanted to thank you for the copy of your article from the antenna compendium. I appreciate all the input from others as well. I was planning to do a number of tests with ferrite beads and air coil baluns. The data accumulated will be presented here for all to peruse. Thanks again guys! Article: 216547 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Message-ID: References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:57:31 -0400 On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:18:30 -0400, BillJ wrote: >Dan/W4NTI wrote: >> I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings >> are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the >> amount of windings. >> >> According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. >> >> Anyone know anything about this? >> >> Dan/W4NTI >> >> >My TA-33 manual calls for 5 turns at 6 inch diameter >Bill, W3FI That your TA-33 manual calls for a 5-turn 6" diameter balun fabbed >from coax is welcome news, Bill, Mr. Mosely must have gotten religion lately. I had a 33 when they were first made available, but no balun was included. So I had a talk with Mr. Mosely (I've forgotten his first name) and asked him why no balun. He became irate when I admonished him for excluding the balun. He said his antennas were designed to not need a balun, and he admonished me for claiming they needed a balun to avoid pattern distortion due to unwanted radiation >from the feedline. He kept that same erroneous viewpoint for as long as I know, until your manual now calls for a balun. Will wonders never cease! Walt, W2DU Article: 216548 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Message-ID: <4q0lg1dm8ro1mu692b6c2rvg3f1ojssa0s@4ax.com> References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:33:31 -0400 On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 17:19:29 -0700, John Smith wrote: >Fred: > >As my last post gave away, my chokes are constructed on math and >observation in practical work... (well, prayer too ) > >I see roy is recommending 10x the impedance of the feedline (coax?) for >the choke/balun, minimum (I am guessing here a bit), he obviously knows >what he is speaking about, however, at 160m when you are struck with the >physical dimensions of the choke/balun needed--well, at those times I have >accepted a 5:1 ratio of choke/balun impedance to feedline impedance... > >... but then, I am here to learn ... > >John > > >On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 19:08:43 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: > >> How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a >> transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different >> choke balun approaches. Fred, Roy's method is fine, but here's the second way I perform the test with baluns constructed with ferrite beads surrounding a transmission line. However, it does require two baluns. To begin we connect the two baluns back-to-back, i.e. connect the output of the first to the output of the second, and loading the normally unbalanced input terminals of the second balun (now the output) with a 50-ohm resistor. Next, feed a signal into the input of the first balun and measure the voltage between the outer surface of the line feeding the input of the first balun and the outer surface of the unbalanced input terminals at the output of the second balun. In the ideal balun the voltage between these two points would be zero. Next, disconnect the connections between the two baluns, and reconnect them, reversing the connections. Now repeat the voltage measurement between the same points as in the previous measurements. In the ideal balun the voltage now measured will also be zero. However, with a real balun, the voltage between the two points specified will usually be zero when the connection between the two baluns is such that the outer conductors and inner conductors of both baluns are directly connected, respectively. But the real test of the baluns comes when the outer conductor of the first balun is connected to the inner conductor of the second balun, and the outer conductor of the first balun is connected to the inner conductor the second balun. The lower the voltage obtained in this condition, the better the balun. With a perfect balun the voltage will again be zero, but if the effect of the balun is zero the voltgage measured across the specified point will equal the input voltage. The ratio of the voltage at the input of the balun to the voltage appearing at the points specified above is twice the ratio of the forward voltage to the common mode voltage that would appear on the outside surface of the feed line when that balun is used in practice. Walt, W2DU Article: 216549 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Pat Cox Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:55:26 -0400 Message-ID: <430A901E.42BAB826@gloryroad.net> References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Mr. Moseley's first name was Carl. He was known on the air as "the Old Man Himself." I worked him on 40 cw when I was a novice in 1967. He has probably been a silent key for 30 years or longer. I don't remember his call but I have his card in my card file. K4AVO Walter Maxwell wrote: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:18:30 -0400, BillJ wrote: > > >Dan/W4NTI wrote: > >> I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many windings > >> are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, but not the > >> amount of windings. > >> > >> According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. > >> > >> Anyone know anything about this? > >> > >> Dan/W4NTI > >> > >> > >My TA-33 manual calls for 5 turns at 6 inch diameter > >Bill, W3FI > > That your TA-33 manual calls for a 5-turn 6" diameter balun fabbed > from coax is welcome news, Bill, Mr. Mosely must have gotten religion > lately. I had a 33 when they were first made available, but no balun > was included. So I had a talk with Mr. Mosely (I've forgotten his > first name) and asked him why no balun. He became irate when I > admonished him for excluding the balun. He said his antennas were > designed to not need a balun, and he admonished me for claiming they > needed a balun to avoid pattern distortion due to unwanted radiation > from the feedline. He kept that same erroneous viewpoint for as long > as I know, until your manual now calls for a balun. Will wonders never > cease! > > Walt, W2DU Article: 216550 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Message-ID: References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <430A901E.42BAB826@gloryroad.net> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:00:02 -0400 On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:55:26 -0400, Pat Cox wrote: >Mr. Moseley's first name was Carl. He was known on the air as "the Old Man >Himself." I worked him on 40 cw when I was a novice in 1967. He has probably been >a silent key for 30 years or longer. I don't remember his call but I have his card >in my card file. K4AVO Yes, Pat, the name Carl came to me only a few minutes after I posted, you know, the Alzheimers syndrome. Walt, W2DU >> >My TA-33 manual calls for 5 turns at 6 inch diameter >> >Bill, W3FI >> >> That your TA-33 manual calls for a 5-turn 6" diameter balun fabbed >> from coax is welcome news, Bill, Mr. Mosely must have gotten religion >> lately. I had a 33 when they were first made available, but no balun >> was included. So I had a talk with Mr. Mosely (I've forgotten his >> first name) and asked him why no balun. He became irate when I >> admonished him for excluding the balun. He said his antennas were >> designed to not need a balun, and he admonished me for claiming they >> needed a balun to avoid pattern distortion due to unwanted radiation >> from the feedline. He kept that same erroneous viewpoint for as long >> as I know, until your manual now calls for a balun. Will wonders never >> cease! >> >> Walt, W2DU Article: 216551 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: richardharrison@webtv.net (Richard Harrison) Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:57:05 -0500 Message-ID: <1850-430A9E91-888@storefull-3257.bay.webtv.net> References: Reg, G4FGQ wrote: "There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire transmission line. The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at 120 degree intervals. Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly omnidirectional?" The question is easy, I think. The horizontal 1/4-wave elements have nulls off their tips, so they can`t produce a perfect omnidirectional pattern. Not knowing when to quit, I`ll also speculate that at distant points >from the antenna, the total phase from two elements will produce a total phase difference of 180-degrees which consists of a total of radiated field degree difference and path distance degree difference. Maybe more nulls. I wrote "two elements", because I`m thinking of a dipole in a V configuration with the 3rd element perpendicular to the dipole as being more or less along for the ride. Perhaps that`s an oversimplification. Someone likely has a program which will model Reg`s 3-phase antenna. I don`t, and I have no experience with 3-phase antennas. I`ve done 3-phase circuit problems and recognize the balanced load, even if the antennas are unbalanced. The system is symmetrical, so each of the loads (antenna elements) takes the same power. The total load power is 3 times the power of a single element. The loads are resonant, so (cos theta) is unity. The elements look like resistors. Element power is element volts times element amps. The load is equivalent to a Y-connection.. So, the line to line voltage is the square root of 3 (1.732) times the volts between the line and neutral. Reg also wanted to know the impedance of the antenna, I believe, but its numerical value depends on construction, height of the elements, their size, and coupling, if any, to their surroundings. 35 ohms might have been a good guess. Voltage to current ratio of the elements gives their resistance. The volts or amps of the balanced 3-phases can be represented by three equal arrows separated by 120-degrees. Their instantaneous values always total zero. The idea of a polyphase antenna is interesting but I don`t see what justifies its increased complexity, unless it happens to place nulls exactly where needed for required protection of broadcasters already on the air or permitted when a new broadcaster is seeking accommodation. In that case, the elements would most likely be vertical to launch a decent ground wave. Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI Article: 216552 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:27:12 -0700 Message-ID: <11gl9d35r5mhc97@corp.supernews.com> References: <430791C7.2040002@comcast.net> <11gk6v0r4tulk90@corp.supernews.com> <430A84D1.1000005@comcast.net> To determine the horizontal wire current, download the free EZNEC demo >from http://eznec.com. That's exactly the kind of thing it's good for. If you put a single horizontal wire out to make an L shape, the wire radiates a considerable amount. Being as low as it is, a lot of the power will be dissipated in the ground, and only a small fraction will be radiated at a low elevation angle. But if you connect to the center of a horizontal wire to make a T shape, the fields from the two halves of the horizontal wire will nearly cancel, so it'll radiate very little. Its main effect, like a capacitive top hat, will be to even out the current in your vertical wire, which will raise the radiation resistance and therefore the efficiency. EZNEC or a similar program will quickly show you the differences in field strength in various directions for the antenna as it is, and with either of the top loading configurations. Roy Lewallen, W7EL dansawyeror wrote: > Roy, > > Thanks. This might be feasible. The site would support 50 foot wire from > the tip. At 500 watts what would the current in the horizontal leg be? > In other words what is the minimum effective gage? > > What is the purpose of this leg? Is it capacitive or does it begin to > look like something else. What are it directional characteristics? > Dipoles nodes are perpendicular while long wire nodes are parallel. > > Dan > > Roy Lewallen wrote: > >> Frank wrote: >> >>> . . . >>> I agree with comments about adding a horizontal wire to the top of >>> the vertical; it will probably be easier than a capacity hat. I am >>> overloaded with work at the moment, but would like to attempt a model >>> in a week or so when I have less work. >> >> >> >> Take a look also at a tee type arrangement. That is, a horizontal wire >> with the tip of the vertical connected at or near its center. It might >> have some advantages over connecting the wire's end to the vertical. >> But of course it might be more involved to construct. >> >> Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216553 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:30:03 -0700 Message-ID: <11gl9ie7o80256c@corp.supernews.com> References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <430A901E.42BAB826@gloryroad.net> I recall helping put up a beam for the Denver Radio Club station in about 1972 or 3, and one of the instructions was to wind the coax into a choke at the feedpoint. At the time I didn't understand quite why or what it did, but it was there in the instructions. Don't recall what kind of beam it was, but considering the popularity of the TA33, it might well have been that model. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Walter Maxwell wrote: >>> >>>That your TA-33 manual calls for a 5-turn 6" diameter balun fabbed >>>from coax is welcome news, Bill, Mr. Mosely must have gotten religion >>>lately. I had a 33 when they were first made available, but no balun >>>was included. So I had a talk with Mr. Mosely (I've forgotten his >>>first name) and asked him why no balun. He became irate when I >>>admonished him for excluding the balun. He said his antennas were >>>designed to not need a balun, and he admonished me for claiming they >>>needed a balun to avoid pattern distortion due to unwanted radiation >>>from the feedline. He kept that same erroneous viewpoint for as long >>>as I know, until your manual now calls for a balun. Will wonders never >>>cease! >>> >>>Walt, W2DU > > Article: 216554 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mike M. Subject: Jetstream 2015F coax Message-ID: <3pplg1913il62fpdor3ftf5sr41q45dlmj@4ax.com> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:13:36 GMT Has anyone here tried the Jetstream 2015F coax cable from R&L? Is it any good for a 50 ft run at 440 MHz? Article: 216555 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "JC" Subject: Dick BIRD's (G4ZU) death Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:20:12 +0200 Message-ID: <430aea4c$0$17200$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> Dick died on August 16th in his house near Carcassonne (South) of France. Dick, well known in the HAM community, was the creator in the fifties of the MINIBEAM and, since, of several innovative antenna designs such as the BIRD'S CAGE, the BOW & ARROW (or Jungle Job ) beam.... He was living in France since 1999 using the call F6IDC until 2001. We will miss him. F8ND Article: 216556 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Lee" References: <3pplg1913il62fpdor3ftf5sr41q45dlmj@4ax.com> Subject: Re: Jetstream 2015F coax Message-ID: <1gCOe.10640$jr4.6789@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:46:37 GMT "Mike M." wrote in message news:3pplg1913il62fpdor3ftf5sr41q45dlmj@4ax.com... > Has anyone here tried the Jetstream 2015F coax cable from R&L? Is it > any good for a 50 ft run at 440 MHz? R&L ?????? Lee..... Article: 216557 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna Subject: Re: Please help! From: Cecil Moore Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:14:01 -0500 Message-ID: <1124802997_993@spool6-east.superfeed.net> References: <1124791726.680838.154290@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> andy wrote: > To get 80, i feel that i need to coil the wire around the fishing > pole. You can do that to get 80m, but you will degrade the performance on the other bands. Probably the best way to get 80m and not degrade the performance on the other bands is to use a high-Q base loading coil that can be switched in for 80m and out for the higher frequencies. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- Article: 216558 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "B.Binggeli" Subject: Baluns Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:28:32 +0200 Message-ID: <430B2480.5040006@bluewin.ch> Sali Werner, hier noch eine gute Studie über Baluns. (falls nicht schon selbst gefunden) 73 Bruno http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/Articles/Baluns.pdf Article: 216559 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Dick BIRD's (G4ZU) death Message-ID: References: <430aea4c$0$17200$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:35:50 -0400 On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:20:12 +0200, "JC" wrote: >Dick died on August 16th in his house near Carcassonne (South) of France. >Dick, well known in the HAM community, was the creator in the fifties of the >MINIBEAM and, since, of several innovative antenna designs such as the >BIRD'S CAGE, the BOW & ARROW (or Jungle Job ) beam.... >He was living in France since 1999 using the call F6IDC until 2001. > >We will miss him. > >F8ND Wih all due respect to Dick Bird, isn't 'South of France' in the Mediterranean? Walt, W2DU Article: 216560 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Allodoxaphobia Subject: Re: Info needed TA-33SR Choke coil Date: 23 Aug 2005 15:31:23 GMT Message-ID: References: <4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:34:59 +0000 (UTC), Reg Edwards wrote: > > "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message > news:4VrOe.378$_84.352@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net... >> I am putting up my old TA-33SR by Mosley. I need to know how many >> windings are needed on the choke. I seem to remember 6" diameter, >> but not the amount of windings. >> According to the manual there is no choke indicated at all. >> Anyone know anything about this? >> >> Dan/W4NTI >> >=================================== > Dan, I am unable to help you. > > Because, in common with most other people, I havn't the foggiest idea > what a TA-33SR is. Then, by the criteria set in his question: "Anyone know anything about this?", you are unqualified to reply to his post -- and, should not have. Dan, As a couple of other fellers stated, I, too, am unconvinced that the family of 3-el tribanders (the Mosely TA-33, the Cushcraft A3S, etc.) are very much affected by the presense, or lack of a choke balun. I've operated my CC A3S both ways and am unable to distinguish a smidgen of difference. For a multi-element monobander...., well ..... Just insure you've got a "50 ohm source" and a "50 ohm transmission line" to feed your "50 ohm load" and you should be a happy operator. At least it will work well enough to keep you On The Air, and keep you off of usenet and out of rraa where publicly anguishing over your concerns usually results in abuse by the resident stalkers. Jonesy -- Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux Pueblo, Colorado | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2 *** Now killfiling all X-Trace: posting.google.com followups Article: 216561 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "JC" References: <430aea4c$0$17200$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> Subject: Re: Dick BIRD's (G4ZU) death Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:35:41 +0200 Message-ID: <430b424f$0$27427$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> Sorry my message was not clear enough: Carcassonne is a city in the southern part of France and not in the Mediterranean sea ! We use to say in French "au sud de la France" which means " in the southern part of the country" and not "south of the french territory". F8ND "Walter Maxwell" a écrit dans le message de news: tvcmg1d07ol245q85ud0crf93q1cmhmun2@4ax.com... > On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:20:12 +0200, "JC" wrote: > >>Dick died on August 16th in his house near Carcassonne (South) of France. >>Dick, well known in the HAM community, was the creator in the fifties of >>the >>MINIBEAM and, since, of several innovative antenna designs such as the >>BIRD'S CAGE, the BOW & ARROW (or Jungle Job ) beam.... >>He was living in France since 1999 using the call F6IDC until 2001. >> >>We will miss him. >> >>F8ND > > Wih all due respect to Dick Bird, isn't 'South of France' in the > Mediterranean? > > Walt, W2DU > Article: 216562 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1850-430A9E91-888@storefull-3257.bay.webtv.net> Subject: Re: 3-phase antenna. Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:45:08 -0400 Message-ID: <13c18$430b44b9$97d55b95$4127@ALLTEL.NET> The pattern would look like a triangle, so the answer to your question is no. > Reg, G4FGQ wrote: > "There is a 3-phase transmitter feeding a 3-phase antenna via a 3-wire > transmission line. > > The antenna consists of three 1/4-wave horizontal radiators spaced at > 120 degree intervals. > > Is the radiation pattern in the horizontal plane perfectly > omnidirectional?" Article: 216563 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <430791C7.2040002@comcast.net> <11gk6v0r4tulk90@corp.supernews.com> <430A84D1.1000005@comcast.net> Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:49:47 -0400 Message-ID: <50c57$430b45d0$97d55b95$4633@ALLTEL.NET> I think Roy is referring to a T configuration rather than an upside-down L. The currents will balance in the T so wire size is limited by physical considerations rather than electrical. This is just another form of a capacity hat. The net result is to raise the radiation resistance. "dansawyeror" wrote in message news:430A84D1.1000005@comcast.net... > Roy, > > Thanks. This might be feasible. The site would support 50 foot wire from the > tip. At 500 watts what would the current in the horizontal leg be? In other > words what is the minimum effective gage? > > What is the purpose of this leg? Is it capacitive or does it begin to look like > something else. What are it directional characteristics? Dipoles nodes are > perpendicular while long wire nodes are parallel. > > Dan > > Roy Lewallen wrote: > > Frank wrote: > > > >> . . . > >> I agree with comments about adding a horizontal wire to the top of the > >> vertical; it will probably be easier than a capacity hat. I am > >> overloaded with work at the moment, but would like to attempt a model > >> in a week or so when I have less work. > > > > > > Take a look also at a tee type arrangement. That is, a horizontal wire > > with the tip of the vertical connected at or near its center. It might > > have some advantages over connecting the wire's end to the vertical. But > > of course it might be more involved to construct. > > > > Roy Lewallen, W7EL Article: 216564 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Fred W4JLE" References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> <4q0lg1dm8ro1mu692b6c2rvg3f1ojssa0s@4ax.com> Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:03:56 -0400 Message-ID: Thank you Walt, my interest is both ferrite bead baluns and coax air core. I have searched the internet and found a lot of measurements of magnitude and phase angles for various configurations, unfortunately none of them appear to agree. I am hoping to come up with a definitive set of tables that the average guy can use. The only things I know for sure is that no balun covers from DC to daylight, or even 1.8 to 30 Mhz. I was thinking it might be solved with washers and steel wool. (Grin) "Walter Maxwell" wrote in message news:4q0lg1dm8ro1mu692b6c2rvg3f1ojssa0s@4ax.com... > On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 17:19:29 -0700, John Smith > wrote: > > >Fred: > > > >As my last post gave away, my chokes are constructed on math and > >observation in practical work... (well, prayer too ) > > > >I see roy is recommending 10x the impedance of the feedline (coax?) for > >the choke/balun, minimum (I am guessing here a bit), he obviously knows > >what he is speaking about, however, at 160m when you are struck with the > >physical dimensions of the choke/balun needed--well, at those times I have > >accepted a 5:1 ratio of choke/balun impedance to feedline impedance... > > > >... but then, I am here to learn ... > > > >John > > > > > >On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 19:08:43 -0400, Fred W4JLE wrote: > > > >> How can I test how well a choke balun is performing? I know how to test a > >> transformer balun, but am cluless as how I can compare several different > >> choke balun approaches. > > Fred, Roy's method is fine, but here's the second way I perform the > test with baluns constructed with ferrite beads surrounding a > transmission line. However, it does require two baluns. > > To begin we connect the two baluns back-to-back, i.e. connect the > output of the first to the output of the second, and loading the > normally unbalanced input terminals of the second balun (now the > output) with a 50-ohm resistor. > > Next, feed a signal into the input of the first balun and measure the > voltage between the outer surface of the line feeding the input of the > first balun and the outer surface of the unbalanced input terminals at > the output of the second balun. In the ideal balun the voltage between > these two points would be zero. > > Next, disconnect the connections between the two baluns, and reconnect > them, reversing the connections. Now repeat the voltage measurement > between the same points as in the previous measurements. > > In the ideal balun the voltage now measured will also be zero. > > However, with a real balun, the voltage between the two points > specified will usually be zero when the connection between the two > baluns is such that the outer conductors and inner conductors of both > baluns are directly connected, respectively. > > But the real test of the baluns comes when the outer conductor of the > first balun is connected to the inner conductor of the second balun, > and the outer conductor of the first balun is connected to the inner > conductor the second balun. The lower the voltage obtained in this > condition, the better the balun. With a perfect balun the voltage will > again be zero, but if the effect of the balun is zero the voltgage > measured across the specified point will equal the input voltage. > > The ratio of the voltage at the input of the balun to the voltage > appearing at the points specified above is twice the ratio of the > forward voltage to the common mode voltage that would appear on the > outside surface of the feed line when that balun is used in practice. > > Walt, W2DU Article: 216565 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Message-ID: References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> <4q0lg1dm8ro1mu692b6c2rvg3f1ojssa0s@4ax.com> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:34:34 -0400 On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:03:56 -0400, "Fred W4JLE" wrote: >Thank you Walt, my interest is both ferrite bead baluns and coax air core. I >have searched the internet and found a lot of measurements of magnitude and >phase angles for various configurations, unfortunately none of them appear >to agree. I am hoping to come up with a definitive set of tables that the >average guy can use. > >The only things I know for sure is that no balun covers from DC to daylight, >or even 1.8 to 30 Mhz. > >I was thinking it might be solved with washers and steel wool. (Grin) > Well, Fred, go ahead and try the washers, I've already proved that steel wool doesn't work. (haw) Walt Article: 216566 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: Dick BIRD's (G4ZU) death Message-ID: <43kmg19egdgftm0p1ll0ghda8n6411n0l6@4ax.com> References: <430aea4c$0$17200$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> <430b424f$0$27427$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:38:15 -0400 Your message was plenty clear, JC, I was just trying to be funny. But I do respect Dick Bird, he made great contributions to the field of dx antennas. Walt On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:35:41 +0200, "JC" wrote: >Sorry my message was not clear enough: Carcassonne is a city in the southern >part of France and not in the Mediterranean sea ! >We use to say in French "au sud de la France" which means " in the southern >part of the country" and not "south of the french territory". >F8ND > >"Walter Maxwell" a écrit dans le message de news: >tvcmg1d07ol245q85ud0crf93q1cmhmun2@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:20:12 +0200, "JC" wrote: >> >>>Dick died on August 16th in his house near Carcassonne (South) of France. >>>Dick, well known in the HAM community, was the creator in the fifties of >>>the >>>MINIBEAM and, since, of several innovative antenna designs such as the >>>BIRD'S CAGE, the BOW & ARROW (or Jungle Job ) beam.... >>>He was living in France since 1999 using the call F6IDC until 2001. >>> >>>We will miss him. >>> >>>F8ND >> >> Wih all due respect to Dick Bird, isn't 'South of France' in the >> Mediterranean? >> >> Walt, W2DU >> > Article: 216567 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Reg Edwards" Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> <4q0lg1dm8ro1mu692b6c2rvg3f1ojssa0s@4ax.com> > The only things I know for sure is that no balun covers from DC to daylight, > or even 1.8 to 30 Mhz. > ============================== Fred, I'm afraid you're wrong. Slide a sufficient number of ferrite beads over the coax line and it will easily cover 1.8 to 30 MHz. Alternatively, wind sufficient turns around a largish ferrite ring of the correct grade of material. ---- Reg. Article: 216568 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Mike M. Subject: Re: Jetstream 2015F coax Message-ID: <04lmg1tm1aql0nqvuucthqi3ld4k37k0rl@4ax.com> References: <3pplg1913il62fpdor3ftf5sr41q45dlmj@4ax.com> <1gCOe.10640$jr4.6789@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:10:48 GMT On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:46:37 GMT, "Lee" wrotF: >"Mike M." wrote in message >news:3pplg1913il62fpdor3ftf5sr41q45dlmj@4ax.com... >> Has anyone here tried the Jetstream 2015F coax cable from R&L? Is it >> any good for a 50 ft run at 440 MHz? > >R&L ?????? > >Lee..... > R&L Electronics They are a ham radio dealer in Ohio. Jetstream is their house brand. I'm going to order some other items and I'm looking for opinions on their coax. There isn't a review on eHam and Google hasn't turned up anything beyond the catalog and spec sheet. Article: 216569 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Walter Maxwell Subject: Re: How do I test a choke balun? Message-ID: <5ommg1h7vjvrnn6gj0fumpavadef3jmhan@4ax.com> References: <1c6d3$430a5b1a$97d55b95$23134@ALLTEL.NET> <4q0lg1dm8ro1mu692b6c2rvg3f1ojssa0s@4ax.com> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:34:20 -0400 On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:58:14 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: >> The only things I know for sure is that no balun covers from DC to >daylight, >> or even 1.8 to 30 Mhz. >> >============================== >Fred, I'm afraid you're wrong. > >Slide a sufficient number of ferrite beads over the coax line and it >will easily cover 1.8 to 30 MHz. Alternatively, wind sufficient turns >around a largish ferrite ring of the correct grade of material. >---- >Reg. Reg is right, Fred, the W2DU balun with 50 #73 beads was designed to cover from 1.8 - 30 MHz. The series impedance along the outer conductor of the coax at 2.0 MHz is just over 750 ohms. If the antenna operating at 2.0 MHz is a half-wave dipole, half the dipole impedance at resonance will be around 35 ohms. The ratio 750/35 = 21.4, which gives an approximate isolation of the common-mode current of 26.6 dB below the current into half the dipole, which is more than adequate. If you want still more, make the balun with more than the original 50 beadss. If you don't have a copy of Reflections you can find the balun data >from my web page at www.w2du.com. See Chapter 21, page 21-8, for the graph that plots the resistance, reactance, and impedance of the outside surface of the coax in the W2DU balun vs frequency. Walt, W2DU Article: 216570 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: dvd567@webtv.net (Pirate Radio) Subject: what is the best filter to buy for my part 15 am.station Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:21:40 -0500 Message-ID: <22846-430B6934-910@storefull-3277.bay.webtv.net> i need a filter for my part 15 am radio just to be on the safe side cause the army choppers fly around here frequently Article: 216571 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: "Scott" Subject: Grounding question Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:10:43 GMT I am setting up my new Butternut HF9V ground mounted vertical on the side of my house. Right next to the antenna I have driven a ground rod that I will attach my antenna and radials to. The question I have is will it be OK to attach a ground wire from my shack to it too, or should I drive another ground rod that is separate for my shack only? If I drive another rod it will be about 8 feet away from my antennas ground rod. I have installed my vertical on a tilt over bracket I bought from Gap so I can hide the vertical when not in use because of restrictions in my subdivision. Another question I have, and am concerned about is that my vertical will be about 25 feet away from my neighbors Dish Network satellite dish. Is that going to be a problem for me and will TVI cause problems? If so what can I do about it on my end? Thanks for your help and opinions. Article: 216572 of rec.radio.amateur.antenna From: Roy Lewallen Subject: Re: 80 meter loaded vertical versus 80 meter loaded dipole ? Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:39:32 -0700 Message-ID: <11gmurnem8qde1e@corp.supernews.com> References: <430791C7.2040002@comcast.net> <11gk6v0r4tulk90@corp.supernews.com> <430A84D1.1000005@comcast.net> <50c57$430b45d0$97d55b95$4633@ALLTEL.NET> Fred W4JLE wrote: > I think Roy is referring to a T configuration rather than an upside-down L. > The currents will balance in the T so wire size is limited by physical > considerations rather than electrical. This is just another form of a > capacity hat. The net result is to raise the radiation resistance. In a tee type antenna, there will be considerable current at the junction of the horizontal and vertical wires. While it's unlikely that any wire strong enough to be used won't be able to handle the current >from a heating standpoint, it is possible that using a wire on the small end of the range might result in noticeable loss. A quick run with a modeling program would show whether or not that might happen with a given set of dimensions. One thing I should mention. If the horizontal portion is higher than about 0.2 wavelength, MININEC-type ground can be used for modeling either a T or L. The vertical wire is connected directly to ground, and ground loss can be inserted at the base as a resistive load. If the horizontal wire is much less than 0.2