Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+10M\s+phased\s+verticals\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: Bill and Cindy <wb0o@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 08:00:37 -0800 (PST)
I do not have XYL/neighbor approval or $$$ for a second tower, so for the CQWWCW last weekend I put a ZeroFive 5/8 wavelength 10M vertical on a 6' pole and set it up groundplane style with 24 down sl
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00429.html (7,343 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:06:54 -0800
You ask "is it worth it to make a 4 square array of 5/8 wave verticals?" First we need to determine if it is POSSIBLE to do that. I've never seen a published example of that, and my gut feel tells me
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00432.html (8,213 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: K8RI <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:37:51 -0500
I don't know what "optimum" spacing would be, or even if it is necessary to adjust the spacing but as all elements are active I would think it would work for any lengths between short, loaded vertica
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00433.html (8,711 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: Eddy Swynar <deswynar@xplornet.ca>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:45:41 -0500
Hi Guys, For 160-meter DX'ing here I use a three element phased array--each inverted "L" in the array is extended (approximately 170' long) and arranged in a triangle, 1/4-wave apart. I use RG-6 TV c
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00434.html (8,408 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:45:51 -0500
I just modeled a 10m four-square in 4Nec2. I used 60 #14 AWG radials 5/8-wave long over average soil, and 5/8 wave radiators. The F/B is terrible at 1/4-wave spacing. At best, it's about 12dB at an e
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00435.html (9,867 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Gene Fuller" <w2lu@rochester.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:49:45 -0500
Nothing the matter with 5/8 wave verticals in a 4-square, but you would probably want to model it to get everything right. One of the guys down in New England had an 80 meter 4-square with 90 foot el
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00436.html (9,417 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:57:16 -0800
I would assume the spacing is independent of the type of radiating element, whether 1/4 wave vertical, 1/2 wave elevated dipole or something in between. The spacing between the elements and the feed
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00438.html (10,080 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:59:48 -0800
how did you set the element currents? Explicitly with type 6 sources? or with a matching network/transmission lines? F/B being bad is generally the result of the phases/amplitudes being wrong (small
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00439.html (10,150 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:10:24 -0500
Jim, NEC/2 input file below. Make your edited changes in a reply. I'll run your model and post the results. (len)gth and (sp)acing units below are in feet. "0.0625" below refers to element radius --
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00440.html (9,824 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:21:01 -0800
that looks how I would have modeled it.. I wonder if there's something funky from the ground specification. You've got a radial field with the elements sort of placed on top of it. Element 1 is at th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00441.html (10,898 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: K8RI <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:25:42 -0500
They are popular for clear channel broadcast stations and 160 meter DX. No the angle over even a good radial system is not 0 degrees, but it is low. 73 Roger (K8RI) __________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00442.html (10,307 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Rick Karlquist" <richard@karlquist.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:25:50 -0800
With a vertical up to 1/4 wave long, the base current is the same as the current lobe. Thus you can control the phase and magnitude of the current lobe by controlling the base current. When you excee
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00443.html (9,737 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: Ian White GM3SEK <gm3sek@ifwtech.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:29:59 +0000
W7EL concluded that arrays of base-fed 1/2 or 5/8 wave verticals do not work as expected, because the presence of the other elements distorts the current distribution. The effect is small for 1/4-wav
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00444.html (9,871 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:33:29 -0800
Ah yes.. excellent point. For elevated vertical dipoles, too, the current forcing would work fairly well. But for end fed schemes (1/2 and 5/8 wave) I can see where getting the right excitation would
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00446.html (9,887 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 21:37:29 +0100
4-squares are not limited to 1/4 wave verticals. One can use any practical radiator length. The spacing of the verticals is independent from their length. 73 Peter, DJ7WW --Original Message-- From: t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00447.html (9,661 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:43:49 -0500
Roger, 5/8 wave radiators are *not* popular with AM broadcast stations. In fact, the 185-195 degree class of radiators used by WSM, WLW, and many other clear channels was so chosen to specifically el
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00448.html (11,808 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Tim Duffy K3LR" <k3lr@k3lr.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:44:32 -0600
Hello Bill! Three years ago I attempted to construct a proper four square phasing network using four 5/8 wavelength elements and 1/4 wave spacing (on a side) for 10 meters. I installed 60 ground radi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00449.html (10,616 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: "Paul Christensen" <w9ac@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:47:12 -0500
Jim, being the same for each source. No? I would really welcome input on this from you or anyone else with a better understanding of the NEC internals. I see no other way to specify separate radial
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00450.html (10,126 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: K8RI <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 17:05:16 -0500
Depends on where you want to reach. 5/8 is good for long distance, but not intermediate. There was one down in the Caribbean which then was modified to a 5/8 on 160. 73 Roger (K8RI) _________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00451.html (12,993 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] 10M phased verticals (score: 1)
Author: <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:19:56 -0800
Are these phased verticals used exclusively for the multiplier station or does the run station also have access to them? Are they ever better than a yagi for RX? John KK9A Hello Bill! Three years ago
/archives//html/Towertalk/2011-11/msg00452.html (9,302 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu