Hi Bruce,
I'm not aware of any reason why eight Magic-T splitters couldn't be added to an
8-circle BSEF array to enable installation of a second azimuth switch.
My 160 meter BSEF array has plenty of signal level reserve, an additional 3 dB
of loss wouldn't be a problem at all. I haven't built an 80 meter BSEF array
yet, so I can't comment on its reserve signal level. I've checked the
feedpoint impedances several times since installation and so far all of the
verticals are very stable with eight 70 foot radials laid on the surface of the
ground, I don't yet know if the impedances will continue to be stable during
very dry soil conditions.
If you build your own Magic-T splitters, use an oscilloscope to verify that all
eight Magic-Ts have identical phase shift from their inputs to their outputs.
My new 160 meter BSEF array is performing superbly, consistently equal to or
better than my 900 foot Beverage. Tuesday night my neighbor W3UR worked T6LG
on top band using my new BSEF array for receiving. T6LG was solid copy on the
BSEF array, and uncopiable on my 900 foot Beverage and full size 4-square.
Unfortunately I arrived at the party a just few seconds too late...
I live in a lightly developed suburban area (mostly 3 acre lots and some one
acre lots). My RFI noise level isn't terrible but its not stone quiet like it
was 25 years ago. Unfortunately the lack of effective RFI regulations for
plasma TVs, switching power supplies, etc combined with suburban sprawl has
raised my background noise level. The new BSEF array helps a lot!
73
Frank
W3LPL
---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 05:25:26 -0800 (PST)
>From: bruce whitney <zuceman@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: Topband: New 160M high performance receiving antenna at W3LPL
>To: topband@contesting.com
>
>8 Circle Receiving Arrays..
>Appears to me that the general consensus is that for maximum single band
>performance - the best way to build a receiving BSEF 8 circle is with resonant
>(passive) vertical elements. The circle diameter is probably best (for single
>band 160M) about 351 foot diameter (.327 wave radius).
>
>My question for this astute reflector is whether there is any reason multiple
>receivers can't be connected to the array - listening in the same or different
>directions. Simply by multiple layers of the same RF switch matrix with proper
>selection/phasing etc. Would a magic T be required from each element into the
>separate switch matrices?
>
>Frank or Tom - are you already doing this?
>
>Bruce W8RA
>
>
>--- On Wed, 2/13/13, Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com> wrote:
>
>
>From: Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com>
>Subject: Re: Topband: New 160M high performance receiving antenna at W3LPL
>To: "Rudy Bakalov" <r_bakalov@yahoo.com>, topband@contesting.com
>Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2013, 5:53 AM
>
>
>> I have been wondering if the antenna element in phased arrays could be a
>> loop rather than a vertical. My thinking is that the loop has some level of
>> directivity so phasing two of them should result in better side lobe
>> suppression compared to a vertical. Is there any merit to this thought?
>> Specifically, will I see better RDF numbers if I were to use loop elements
>> in any of the active 8 and 4 circle systems (e.g., DX Engineering, Hi-Z
>> Antennas, etc.)?
>>
>
>Hi Rudy,
>
>A loop can work in a fixed array, or bi-directional array. My first antenna
>allowing me to work JA's through LORAN from Ohio was a long array of loops,
>although these were elongated loops. I also had long end-fire arrays of small
>inverted delta loops in Cleveland in the 80's, and small active verticals.
>
>Small loops do not work well when used in things like four squares or 8 circle
>arrays. A multiple direction array, like a four square or 8-circle, requires a
>uniform pattern of uniform phase from each element or cell.
>
>With a small loop, phase flips 180-degrees immediately after crossing the
>null. Also, the directivity is generally poor because the small loop has two
>very sharp null points though the loop axis, but a broad response everywhere
>else. Both of these things actually hurt performance of arrays with loops that
>depend on phasing to eliminate side nulls.
>
>Elongated loops are a different story, because (we probably all know)
>elongated loops are not really loops in function. They are really phased
>verticals, and the horizontal part or component of the conductors is simply a
>phasing line. K9AY's, Flags, Pennants, EWE's, and other forms of elongated
>loops are really all just phased verticals in function. They have a wider null
>and no sudden phase shift at the null, and no null cone at the side or "loop
>axis".
>
>The best element for a traditional 8-circle or four square will always be a
>simple vertical, and even in a broadside array we would want to avoid small
>loops with deep axis nulls. They are OK as cells in an end-fire array, but not
>particularly advantageous for pattern unless elongated. I used small loops as
>a matter of "construction convenience" as deltas in a long endfire array, but
>the deep side null in that array was really created by out-of-phase cells of
>deltas and not the sharp null pattern of the individual delta. It could have
>just as well been verticals with no loss of pattern.
>
>73 Tom
>_________________
>Topband Reflector
>_________________
>Topband Reflector
_________________
Topband Reflector
|