Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+More\s+Radials\s+\=\s+Higher\s+SWR\?\?\?\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: "Test" <2019@drirish.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 15:34:43 -0800
I recently erected my first Vertical (Hy-Gain AV-18HT) antenna and the more I try improving it, the more confused I become. I added the Hy-Gain MK-160A kit that converts the Vertical to an "L" antenn
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00012.html (12,998 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 23:58:32 +0000
A 1/4 wave vertical over perfect ground will have an impedance of 36 ohms. That would be a roughly 1.3:1 SWR with 50 ohm feedline. Without radials, you will have a complex impedance of real and imagi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00013.html (15,454 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 17:03:12 -0700
A full size vertical has a feed point impedance of 35 ohms give or take a couple.  A compromise vertical like yours would be even less ... probably 25 ohms or less.  When you don't use the radials yo
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00014.html (15,561 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 16:11:20 -0800
Hi Dennis, Study these slides for talks I've done at Pacificon, Visalia, and to several local clubs. It's all about antennas, radials, and other counterpoises for 160M antennas. http://k9yc.com/160MP
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00015.html (11,071 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 19:11:53 -0500
SWR is not an indication of antenna performance! Adding more radials is a good thing but it will lower the antenna impedance. I am not familiar with the Hy-Gain AV-18HT but if it is a shortened anten
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00016.html (9,166 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: "Steve Jones" <n6sj@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 17:29:25 -0800
Dennis, Use an antenna analyzer to see what's going on. I recently used a RigExpert AA-54 to tune up my 160M vertical with elevated radials. It provides a lot of good data! 73, Steve N6SJ I recently
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00017.html (14,788 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: "Lux, Jim" <jim@luxfamily.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 19:57:01 -0800
On 2/5/23 5:29 PM, Steve Jones wrote: Dennis, Use an antenna analyzer to see what's going on. I recently used a RigExpert AA-54 to tune up my 160M vertical with elevated radials. It provides a lot of
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00018.html (9,200 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 20:11:40 -0800
On 2/5/2023 7:57 PM, Lux, Jim wrote: One of the nice things with the VNA is that you can do a calibration at the end of the coax, so you don't have to figure out what the coax is doing to the feedpoi
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00019.html (9,760 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: "Lux, Jim" <jim@luxfamily.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 20:18:41 -0800
On 2/5/23 8:11 PM, Jim Brown wrote: On 2/5/2023 7:57 PM, Lux, Jim wrote: One of the nice things with the VNA is that you can do a calibration at the end of the coax, so you don't have to figure out w
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00020.html (10,494 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 20:41:14 -0800
On 2/5/2023 8:18 PM, Lux, Jim wrote: I just do a cal with the coax, putting the O,S,L at the end. Then between that measurement, and the no coax cal, you've got the S21 for the Coax, which most of th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00021.html (10,203 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: "Lux, Jim" <jim@luxfamily.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 20:59:44 -0800
On 2/5/23 8:41 PM, Jim Brown wrote: On 2/5/2023 8:18 PM, Lux, Jim wrote: I just do a cal with the coax, putting the O,S,L at the end. Then between that measurement, and the no coax cal, you've got th
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00022.html (10,620 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Dan Maguire <danac6la@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 02:59:07 -0800
There's a detailed description of several different ways to "calibrate out" a transmission line when the far end is hard to get to here: https://ac6la.com/zpapndx1.html Dan, AC6LA ___________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00023.html (8,531 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 04:51:09 -0800
Dennis, Once you figure out what your impedance converges to as you add more radials, you might be able to bring the VSWR back down to something more acceptable with an Unun transformer. I have a 55f
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00024.html (10,957 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 11:41:36 -0500
You can also match the impedance using a hairpin match. John KK9A Once you figure out what your impedance converges to as you add more radials, you might be able to bring the VSWR back down to someth
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00025.html (8,215 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Jan Erik Holm via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 19:03:42 +0100
Or stub matching / SM2EKM Den 2023-02-06 kl. 17:41, skrev john@kk9a.com: You can also match the impedance using a hairpin match. John KK9A Once you figure out what your impedance converges to as you
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00026.html (9,177 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 11:19:16 -0800
The increasing swr with a 50ohm feed is good news. Rg is being lowered and efficiency is going up. Most ham references say 32 radials are the point of diminishing returns. Then an UNUN plus a good ch
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00027.html (10,441 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: "Test" <2019@drirish.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 11:52:28 -0800
Hi Al and all, I recently bought a RigExpert AA-230 ZOOM and that's what I measured the SWR with. I haven't had a chance to figure out, or use the other features yet but it's high on my To-Do list. H
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00028.html (16,757 bytes)

18. [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: <john@kk9a.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 20:55:26 -0500
I have never used a RigExpert analyzer but according to the manual (page 8) there is a data screen that will display the various parameters. If you're trying to attach only an SWR chart, it's pointle
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00029.html (8,372 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 18:06:36 -0800
Towertalk is plain text only, and does not accept attachments. It's one of the oldest reflectors in the ham world. 73, Jim K9YC _______________________________________________ _______________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00030.html (9,405 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] More Radials = Higher SWR??? (score: 1)
Author: Alex Filippov <wk1ontario@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 21:09:31 -0500
RigExpert has *All Parameters Mode* when it will display the R, X and the Resonant Frequency. This is the most useful screen for tuning an antenna. You can move up and down the frequency to see R and
/archives//html/Towertalk/2023-02/msg00031.html (9,660 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu