Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] 160M vertical dipole ?

To: towertalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 160M vertical dipole ?
From: Robert Harmon <k6uj@pacbell.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 14:59:44 -0800
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Jim,

I appreciate the feedback.   I am going to test my soil conductivity to see if 
I can get a handle on it.  You got me thinking, how about if the top and bottom 
horizontal 
wires were T shaped rather than a single wire bent over ?   

Bob
K6UJ




> On Jan 23, 2022, at 11:00 AM, Lux, Jim <jim@luxfamily.com> wrote:
> 
> On 1/23/22 9:46 AM, Robert Harmon wrote:
>> No I don't have a 260 foot tower :-)    but thinking about this crazy idea.
>> 
>> My HDX590 tower is 90 feet fully extended.  By attaching to the side of the 
>> mast 15 feet up I can have an attachment point at 105 feet.
>> I am envisioning hanging a vertical dipole from the 105 feet point and 
>> running the top wire horizontally 82 feet sloping down to a 30 foot mast at 
>> the corner
>> of my property.  Likewise on the lower end of the dipole 9 feet high and 
>> going to the other corner of my property.  This woud put the center of the 
>> dipole about 57 feet
>> above the ground.  I don't know how a dipole will work with the ends bent 
>> this way but maybe it would be more efficient than a vertical with a 
>> compromise radial field.
>> An option might be to make two big boy loading coils and shorten the dipole.
>> What do you think of this idea ?  Am I off my rocker ?  hihi
> 
> 
> You're not off your rocker, but pay attention to the inherent problems with 
> vpol being strongly affected by the soil properties in the area - 
> particularly for low angles.
> 
> What's interesting is that the directivity of a infinitely short dipole is 
> 1.5 dBi, and a full size half wave is 2.15 dBi.  So a shortened dipole with 
> capacity hats, loading coils, or matching network will be pretty much the 
> same (within a 1/2 dB) as far as the far field goes for the same center 
> height.
> 
> Your issues are going to be losses due to the fields interacting with the 
> soil AND losses in your matching networks (whether at the feed or loading 
> coils, or whatever). The radiation resistance is smaller, so the current in 
> the antenna (for the same power) will be higher, so you get more IR losses.
> 
> Those can be driven down by using bigger wires, etc.
> 
> The other thing that happens is that the impedance will vary more quickly, so 
> you might need an adjustable matching network.
> 
> You might also look at making the bottom of the dipole a "cone" (even 
> shortened), because that improves the matching bandwidth. Cones (and fan 
> dipoles) are broader band than single wires.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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