Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 81, Issue 32

To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 81, Issue 32
From: K3vw@aol.com
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:08:56 EDT
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Why use a relay, you don't need it. Run all three bands from a common  
feedpoint, with appropriate radials. There is no need for a relay. When you 
pick 
 40 meters, it will work on 40, and so on! Willy K3VW
 
 
In a message dated 9/29/2009 3:01:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
topband-request@contesting.com writes:

Send  Topband mailing list submissions to
topband@contesting.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide  Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
or, via email, send a  message with subject or body 'help' to
topband-request@contesting.com

You can reach the person managing the  list at
topband-owner@contesting.com

When replying,  please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of  Topband digest..."


Today's Topics:

1.  relay-switched inverted L for 40/80/160 (Jim Meehan)
2. Re:  Ground Radials and an inv-L antenna (w8av)
3. Marconi: out,  Inverted L: up at WY7I (WY7I)
4. Re: relay-switched inverted L  for 40/80/160 (Rick Karlquist)
5. Re: Marconi: out, Inverted  L: up at WY7I (Wes Attaway (N5WA))
6. Here's one for ya  (WY7I)
7. Results- 2008 Stew Perry TopBand Extravaganza (Lew  Sayre)
8. Re: relay-switched inverted L for 40/80/160 (DAVID  CUTHBERT)


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

Message:  1
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:22:53 -0700
From: Jim Meehan  <jmeehan@vpizza.org>
Subject: Topband: relay-switched inverted L for  40/80/160
To: topband@contesting.com
Message-ID:
<f694cf360909281222v79e92cffpec400917f8ac6ed8@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I've mulling over a tree-supported wire  inverted L for 40/80/160 meters.
The vertical section would be supported by  a high branch on a ~55' Monterey
pine not too far from my house, and the  horizontal section from there to
another tree.  Lots of radials of  various lengths should be no problem.

Originally I had thought to use  traps to achieve multi-band operation, but
then I started wondering about  using relays to simply switch out the 
various
segments.  If I used  two-conductor speaker wire or something similar as the
radiator, I think  the same wire could also carry DC to operate the relays.
I'd use SPDT  normally-closed relays.  For operation on 160, no DC is 
applied
--  both relays are closed, and the entire length of the inverted L  is
active.  For operation on 80, +12V is applied, opening the "far"  relay,
cutting off both conductors of the 160 segment.  For operation  on 40, -12V
is a applied, opening the "near" relay.  This would be for  100 watts only,
so I don't think I'd need anything too exotic for  components.

My hope is that it would have wider bandwidth than traps  would allow, and 
be
easier to construct and tune.

Am I missing  anything obvious?  I did a little Googling and didn't find any
designs  like this.

Also wondering about the bandwidth/hassle/cost tradeoff of  using copper 
pipe
or aluminum tubing for the vertical section.  In  this case, I'd run a wire
up the center of the pipe to use as the 2nd  conductor for the relay
switching.  I would put the pipe next to the  tree, supporting it with some
kind of standoffs attached to the trunk of  the Monterey pine.  Can I get 
the
pipe far enough from the tree trunk  to minimize interaction, but still 
close
enough for standoffs to be  practical?  Is the bandwidth gain of pipe over
wire enough to make  this worthwhile?

Thanks for your consideration,

Jim Meehan,  W6XE
Oakland, CA


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

Message:  2
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 15:24:30 -0400
From: w8av  <w8av@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Ground Radials and an inv-L  antenna
To: "Dennis Peterson" <dennisissure@comporium.net>,
topband@contesting.com
Message-ID:  <432bc5c4.4528.4505.8713.e3b920f02943@aol.com>
Content-Type:  TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii

Dennis:

You have not reached a  point of diminishing returns here.  Although you 
see no virtual change in  the antenna VSWR, the radiation efficiency of the 
antenna system improves  every time you add additional radials under the ant
enna.  There is  published data in the Proceedings of the IRE that show that 
once you reach 120  radials you see no additional improvements to the 
efficiency of the antenna by  adding more radials.  With regard to length, the 
magic cut-off number for  no improvement to radiation efficiency is 0.4 
wavelengths.  That is why  when I worked in the broadcast industry, we always 
installed 120 radials of at  least a quarter wavelength long under all AM 
broadcast towers.

You have  reached a point where the transmitter is happy with the antenna 
match but you  can improve the antenna's signal radiating efficiency by 
adding still more  radials under the antenna.  You are trying to reduce the 
ground losses in  the near field of the antenna with the ground system and when 
you finally  reach 120 1/4 wavelength radials, the antenna will be about as 
good as it can  be.  You should also not see any VSWR change by adding the 
additional  radials.

If you can't get to a 1/4 wavelength in all directions, you  can add more 
radials in the shortened areas to help improve the radiation  efficiency in 
those directions where the ground system is shortened.  If  you can't get 120 
radials down, put as many down as you physically can and  make them as long 
as you can.

73.................de Goose,  W8AV


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

Message: 3
Date: Mon,  28 Sep 2009 15:11:47 -0600
From: WY7I  <WY7I@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject: Topband: Marconi: out, Inverted L: up  at WY7I
To: topband@contesting.com
Message-ID:  <4AC12693.7010601@EARTHLINK.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Hi all,
I wanted to bring you up  to date on my 160m antenna situation.

I wanted at first to put up a T  top Marconi, and I did, but then we all 
decided it needed to be longer  along the top wire. I took it down and 
figured I had to add 85 feet total.  While I was at it, I measured the 
vertical wire and it turned out to be  only 44 feet long. I decided the 
tree was too low and abandoned the  Marconi idea. I had already laid down 
32 100-ft. radials under the center  point...

So I went back to the Inverted-L idea. I ran a #12 stranded  wire up the 
side of the tower, stand-offs were about 4' out. So that's  about 68' 
vertical and then 135-68=67' horizontal, the total length is  135'. I 
wanted it to be resonant at 1.800-1.850, hopefully. Then I had to  move 
all the #@$%^ radials over to underneath the tower. I added an RFC  and 
two spark-gap modules from the vertical wire to ground. The radial  plate 
is NOT grounded to earth. I hooked up a short length of LMR-400 from  the 
antenna to the antenna switch; total coax length out to the antenna is  
about 265 feet.

Came inside the shack checked the SWR curve....it's  very nice, between 
1.1:1 and 1.3:1 for the frequencies I mentioned. Seems  to be pretty 
broad, at least enough for any 160m CW.

I only have  one question (other than 'how does it work on DX?' which 
will be answered  in the next few nights!) and that question is, do I 
need a 1:1 unun to  isolate the feedline from the antenna to possibly 
prevent TVI/RFI or other  overloads? The 900' beverage takes off about 
25' from the base of the  tower. I think a couple of the radials wound up 
going under the beverage,  which is up at 7' off the ground. I plan to 
hook up an ICE RF-limiter  before going QRO with this system.


Appreciate all your help and  thoughts!

Regards,

Paul
WY7I
Chromo,  CO
DM67PD


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

Message:  4
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:00:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Rick Karlquist"  <richard@karlquist.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: relay-switched inverted  L for 40/80/160
To: "Jim Meehan" <jmeehan@vpizza.org>
Cc:  topband@contesting.com
Message-ID:
<305fc7f9af8e72feeb95d4b1df5a5795.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net>
Content-Type:  text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1

Jim Meehan wrote:
> then I started  wondering about using relays to simply switch out the
> various
>  segments.  If I used two-conductor speaker wire or something similar  as
> the
> radiator, I think the same wire could also carry DC to  operate the 
relays.
> I'd use SPDT normally-closed relays.  For  operation on 160, no DC is
> applied
> -- both relays are closed,  and the entire length of the inverted L is
> active.  For operation  on 80, +12V is applied, opening the "far" relay,
> and  tune.


> Am I missing anything obvious?  I did a little  Googling and didn't find
> any
> designs like  this.

>> Jim Meehan, W6XE
> Oakland, CA

I have  posted many times on this subject to this reflector.
I used a 40/80/160  vertical switched by relays for many years.
The relays were vacuum relays  that never lasted more than a
year before needing replacement.  When  working, the vertical
was great, and the bandwidth was definitely better  than with
traps.  I recently decided to try modified open frame  relays
as shown in my Hints and Kinks article in May 2009 QST.   You
can definitely send DC through the lower relays to get to the
upper  relays.  I use a string of ten 1-meg carbon comp resistors
in series  across the relays so that static voltage cannot build
up across the  contacts when they are open.  The relays should
be going into service  late this year, so we will see how they
hold up.

Rick  N6RK




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

Message:  5
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:23:49 -0500
From: "Wes Attaway \(N5WA\)"  <wesattaway@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Topband: Marconi: out,  Inverted L: up at WY7I
To: <WY7I@EARTHLINK.NET>,     <topband@contesting.com>
Message-ID:  <2D558F0498F44EA2971470194EEE55E3@OFFICE>
Content-Type:  text/plain;    charset="us-ascii"

I think it is broad because  of the proximity to your tower and beams.  The
whole "mass" of stuff  is coupled together.  Relax and enjoy it.


------------------  Wes Attaway (N5WA) ------------------
1138 Waters Edge Circle - Shreveport,  LA 71106
318-797-4972 (office) - 318-393-3289  (cell)
Computer Consulting and  Forensics
-------------- EnCase Certified Examiner  ---------------


-----Original Message-----
From:  topband-bounces@contesting.com 
[mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com]
On  Behalf Of WY7I
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 4:12 PM
To:  topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: Marconi: out, Inverted L: up at  WY7I

Hi all,
I wanted to bring you up to date on my 160m antenna  situation.

I wanted at first to put up a T top Marconi, and I did, but  then we all 
decided it needed to be longer along the top wire. I took it  down and 
figured I had to add 85 feet total. While I was at it, I measured  the 
vertical wire and it turned out to be only 44 feet long. I decided the  
tree was too low and abandoned the Marconi idea. I had already laid down  
32 100-ft. radials under the center point...

So I went back to the  Inverted-L idea. I ran a #12 stranded wire up the 
side of the tower,  stand-offs were about 4' out. So that's about 68' 
vertical and then  135-68=67' horizontal, the total length is 135'. I 
wanted it to be  resonant at 1.800-1.850, hopefully. Then I had to move 
all the #@$%^  radials over to underneath the tower. I added an RFC and 
two spark-gap  modules from the vertical wire to ground. The radial plate 
is NOT grounded  to earth. I hooked up a short length of LMR-400 from the 
antenna to the  antenna switch; total coax length out to the antenna is 
about 265  feet.

Came inside the shack checked the SWR curve....it's very nice,  between 
1.1:1 and 1.3:1 for the frequencies I mentioned. Seems to be  pretty 
broad, at least enough for any 160m CW.

I only have one  question (other than 'how does it work on DX?' which 
will be answered in  the next few nights!) and that question is, do I 
need a 1:1 unun to  isolate the feedline from the antenna to possibly 
prevent TVI/RFI or other  overloads? The 900' beverage takes off about 
25' from the base of the  tower. I think a couple of the radials wound up 
going under the beverage,  which is up at 7' off the ground. I plan to 
hook up an ICE RF-limiter  before going QRO with this system.


Appreciate all your help and  thoughts!

Regards,

Paul
WY7I
Chromo,  CO
DM67PD
_______________________________________________
Topband  mailing  list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband



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

Message:  6
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:00:26 -0600
From: WY7I  <WY7I@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject: Topband: Here's one for ya
To:  topband@contesting.com
Message-ID:  <4AC16A3A.1060009@EARTHLINK.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

If I xmt on the inverted L and  receive on it, the SWR is 1:1.
If I use the beverage to recieve, then the  SWR is too  high.

Coupling?

P.


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

Message:  7
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:19:56 -0700
From: Lew Sayre  <w7ew@arrl.net>
Subject: Topband: Results- 2008 Stew Perry TopBand  Extravaganza
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Cc:  topband@contesting.com
Message-ID:
<a18017910909282319o407280d0rcceec996de49937f@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Ladies, Gentlemen and others,
The Boring Amateur Radio Club is pleased to release the  results of
the 13th running of the Stew Perry TopBand DX Challenge.   The log checking
committee worked long and hard to bring you these results  in such fine
style.  Please read carefully the overall results and  understand well what
miracles some of the plaque winners  accomplished.  The results live at
http://jzap.com/k7rat/stew.html  .
The official 14th Edition of The Stew Perry TopBand  DX Challenge will
be December 26-27, 2009.  Seems like a long time in  the future for some 
good
grid grabbing action, yes?  The Stimulus  Committee of The Boring Amateur
Radio Club has heard you and promulgated an  official "warm-up" for The Stew
Perry Contest for October 17-18,  2009.  Same rules-same idea but the 
warm-up
will not have the plaques.  It will have serious 160M cw flying all about 
the
globe with new and  improved stations and operators.  You will be satisfied
that the  secret improvements you've made during the summer will have all 
the
bugs  worked out and that only silly Christmas parties and libations could
slow  you down for the Real Stew.
Speaking of plaques, The  Plaqueing Committee of the Boring Amateur
Radio Club  will roust the  local plaque maker to have the 2008 plaques off
to the deserving shortly  after Nov 1.  The Boring Amateur Radio Club is
slightly different from  the other excellent 160M contests sponsored by
National Organizations and  fascinating radio magazines.  We believe that 
the
engaged radio  combatants should define what qualities a plaque winner 
should
possess and  that if the category passes the family hour test then it should
be open to  any who wish to strive for it. Go back and re-read the list of
plaques that  were available for 2008.  Note the sponsors. These donors are
the  stuff of which radio contesting is made of. You can be a sponsor of 
such
a  plaque for 2009 by proposing a category for competition and sending  
$55.00
to the club.  Such proposals should be sent to me at the email  address
below.   Stalwarts such as KL7RA, VK6VZ, and a host of  other listed radio
luminaries have already started their plaqueing process  for 2009!
Rumors of solar cycle 24 having peaked last  week after 2 simultaneous
sunspots are probably wrong. The Boring Amateur  Radio Club had no part in
naming this upcoming solar cycle period   "The Boring Minimum" even though
solar cycle minimums seem to be good for  160M propagation. It is just like
1928, in more ways than one,  all  over again.
There will be more updates as we approach  these events.  Thanks again
to the fearless Club Logcheckers and IT  department!
73 and I remain,
Lew   W7EW/W7AT
The Boring Amateur Radio Club  Plaque Proliferator
w7ew@arrl.net


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

Message:  8
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 06:35:54 -0600
From: DAVID CUTHBERT  <telegrapher9@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: relay-switched  inverted L for 40/80/160
To: Jim Meehan <jmeehan@vpizza.org>
Cc:  topband@contesting.com
Message-ID:
<bd146ab90909290535m668f2770tc57254df3a7fb156@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Jim,

this will work. If you are  going to put the wire lengths in series (33',
33', and 66') you will need a  way to decouple the the relay coil wires
between the wire sections; two  relays. The decoupling can be done with
parallel tuned LC circuits. As  these are 'traps', simply dispense with the
relays and use the traps to  make your three band antenna.

Dave WX7G

On Mon, Sep  28, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Jim Meehan <jmeehan@vpizza.org> wrote:

>  I've mulling over a tree-supported wire inverted L for 40/80/160  meters.
> The vertical section would be supported by a high branch on a  ~55' 
Monterey
> pine not too far from my house, and the horizontal  section from there to
> another tree.  Lots of radials of various  lengths should be no problem.
>
> Originally I had thought to use  traps to achieve multi-band operation, 
but
> then I started wondering  about using relays to simply switch out the
> various
>  segments.  If I used two-conductor speaker wire or something similar as  
the
> radiator, I think the same wire could also carry DC to operate the  
relays.
> I'd use SPDT normally-closed relays.  For operation on  160, no DC is
> applied
> -- both relays are closed, and the  entire length of the inverted L is
> active.  For operation on 80,  +12V is applied, opening the "far" relay,
> cutting off both conductors  of the 160 segment.  For operation on 40, 
-12V
> is a applied,  opening the "near" relay.  This would be for 100 watts 
only,
> so I  don't think I'd need anything too exotic for components.
>
> My  hope is that it would have wider bandwidth than traps would allow, and
>  be
> easier to construct and tune.
>
> Am I missing anything  obvious?  I did a little Googling and didn't find 
any
> designs  like this.
>
> Also wondering about the bandwidth/hassle/cost  tradeoff of using copper
> pipe
> or aluminum tubing for the  vertical section.  In this case, I'd run a 
wire
> up the center of  the pipe to use as the 2nd conductor for the relay
> switching.  I  would put the pipe next to the tree, supporting it with 
some
> kind of  standoffs attached to the trunk of the Monterey pine.  Can I get
>  the
> pipe far enough from the tree trunk to minimize interaction, but  still
> close
> enough for standoffs to be practical?  Is the  bandwidth gain of pipe over
> wire enough to make this  worthwhile?
>
> Thanks for your consideration,
>
> Jim  Meehan, W6XE
> Oakland, CA
>  _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing  list
> Topband@contesting.com
>  http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
>


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

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


End  of Topband Digest, Vol 81, Issue  32
***************************************


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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 81, Issue 32, K3vw <=