Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re:Topband: Col-atch-co 160/80 meter antenna

To: "K4SV1" <K4SV1@charter.net>
Subject: Re:Topband: Col-atch-co 160/80 meter antenna
From: "i4jmy@iol.it" <i4jmy@iol.it>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:11:03 +0100
List-post: <mailto:topband@contesting.com>
The Col-atch-co antenna is 42' tall.
On 80m it's purely a capacitively top loaded vertical with a wire hat. 
Efficiency will be the highest possible for that height, and, of course, 
function of the used ground plane.
Just above the 80m top loading there is a loading coil for 160m, and above it 
another set of top loading wires whose basical function is tuning the antenna 
into the desired band portion.

Common speeches say that a loading coil moved away from base is better, in 
other words that center or near top inductive loading is more efficient than 
inductive base loading.
But this is true when the antenna element is still long enough to have a real 
current distribution, something that reminds the situation with an unloaded 
element, not when the current is almost constant.

Beeing infact this antenna very short compared with WL, it's current 
distribution will be almost equal (constant) below the coil and along the whole 
element lenght. The coil, wherever placed, is in series with the antenna 
circuit and its losses will decrease the circulating current. Having the coil 
at base is needed less inductance to cancel element reactance, but like this, 
also coil losses will be less. Having the coil at mid element it's required 
more inductance, thus more coil losses will appear. With the coil near the 
element top the required inductance will increase exponentially and coil losses 
will became bigger.

In summary, with only 42' in lenght and top loading, the coil position doesn't 
really make a big difference in terms of efficiency. Less coil, wherever 
placed, but more top hat would do that.

73,
Mauri I4JMY



>
> If I were to build either antenna it would be about as much work, but wonder 
> if anyone has used the Col-atch-co antenna and knows how well it works.
>
> I am interested to know if the top loaded vs bottom loading type of antenna 
> is prefered.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Dave, K4SV
> Asheville, NC
>


_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>