Good morning Eugene,
An OCF antenna is by definition an unbalanced antenna.
For it to be balance, both side would have to be the same
length.
So, Why not see if you have the room for a 160m OCF
windom, or, make it a 160m zepp or extended zepp, feed it
with open wire feedline to a balanced tuner? If you have
the room, I think the latter would be the most efficient
solution as your feedline losses would be minimal.
GL
Greg
AB7R
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:23:33 +0000
"Eugene Hertz" <ehertz@tcaf.org> wrote:
> Hello all,
> ok: I got a real bender for you experts and modelers out
>there (I am neither!).
>
> I have two trees on my property. They are 195' apart. I
>am thinking of an OCF dipole with 45' and 90' legs with a
>6:1 autotransformer at the feedpoint connected to 50 ohm
>coax (buckmaster style). This nicely brings the feedline
>directly over my shack. But, I have lots more length
>available to me to the far tree that is going unused.
>
> I was thinking of a way to use that space for 160m
>instead of rope. Here's my thought and could someone
>tell me what I'm smoking or if it may be feasible?
>
> Do you think it might be feasible to place an 80m trap
>at the end of the longer leg of the ocf, and extend a
>wire beyond the trap for 160m. The idea would be to use
>only one of the coax conductors against a radial field
>for 160, but use the antenna as a OCF using both
>conductors for 10-80?
>
> In that way, I can get both a balanced 10-80 meter ocf
>AND an inverted L unbalanced antenna for 160 using the
>same installation (not at the same time, of course!) Any
>one know what the existance of a trap and extra wire
>beyond the trap might affect the OCF performace when
>being used as a regular ocf?
>
> Just wondering your thoughts. I will add that several
>folks have reported excellent results with the carolina
>windom, but I do not mention that here because it has som
>other baluns involved that might complicate any
>calculations/modeling of the idea I have above. So I
>have listed the simpler buckmaster just for ease of
>discussion.
>
> Thanks!
> Eugene
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|