Antennaware
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Antennaware] center loading versus ground loading

To: atrampler@att.net
Subject: Re: [Antennaware] center loading versus ground loading
From: DAVID CUTHBERT <telegrapher9@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 10:22:14 -0700
List-post: <antennaware@contesting.com">mailto:antennaware@contesting.com>
A two band vertical can be built without a trap. The 80 meters vertical is
full sized. On top of that sits a coil and a top hat for 160 meters. For
proper decoupling the coil (inductance) needs to be fairly high. The
tradeoff is a reduction in 160 meter bandwidth.

I have used this method to build 80/160 and 40/80/160 meter verticals.

Automatic bandswitching, no relays needed. The downside for you is that the
antenna needs to be taken down (tilted over) to adjust the top hat coil. Or,
make the coil 10% smaller and tune with a small base coil. This is what I do
for a single band top loaded vertical. But that means for two band coverage
a relay at the base is needed or a wire you move by walking out to the
antenna. The relay does not have to be a HV relay.

I will post plans here shortly.


    Dave WX7G

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Art Trampler <atrampler@att.net> wrote:

> I live on a fairly small lot and use a Hy-Gain AV640 for 40 through 10 and
> currently have no antenna for 80 or 160.
>
>
>
> My backyard is about 90 x 70 but has some ill-placed and ill-shaped trees
> for either wire antennas or a tower.
>
>
>
> So I am thinking of another vertical, but this one ¼ wave with a radial
> field.  I would like to get 80 and 160 out of it.  I don’t mind having to
> guy it, or even having to pour a concrete base for it.
>
>
>
> My first thought is to use aluminum irrigation pipe as others have, and
> have
> about 60 to 65 feet of it, an insulator and inductor and high voltage
> relay,
> and then perhaps 15 to 20 of much smaller aluminum tubing, with a sloping
> capacity hat of four wires going partially down the four top guys.  I don’t
> know if I could get away from the relay, and put up a trap instead but am
> wary of using a true trap (coil & capacitor) rather than just a large, high
> Q coil.
>
>
>
> As you can see this idea is full of possibilities and mechanical drawbacks,
> so the question is, is there that much to gain from the center-loaded
> design
> with capacity hat, versus a switchable tuning network at the base of the
> antenna?
>
>
>
> Your input is appreciated.  I am hoping to make this a summer project and
> reward myself with 80 and 160 in the winter.
>
>
>
> 73,
>
> Art
>
>
>
> Art Trampler, KØRO
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Antennaware mailing list
> Antennaware@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/antennaware
>
_______________________________________________
Antennaware mailing list
Antennaware@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/antennaware

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