I have 3 verticals in the woods next to my house. One is a 160 'L',
one is a vertical 40 meter dipole, and one is an 80 meter elevated
vertical with the base up about 6 feet.
They all seem to work just fine. ON 40 meters, I also have a delta
loop, and it is usually a toss-up which one is best. Different times of
the day different antennas work best.
We used to do our FD right on the beach, about 1/4 mile from the ocean.
We moved our site a couple of years ago to a park east of Coquille, OR.
This spot is in a little valley with 100 foot trees all around. We put
up our wire antennas in these trees and they didn't work very well at
all. We were surrounded on 3 sides by hills and after running HFTA, we
found the antennas were way to high and with the low take off angle,
most of the signal was going right into the hillsides. Next year we
lowered the antennas down to about 30 feet and it worked a lot better.
Sometimes other things can affect how good the antennas work. 73
Tom W7WHY
On 8/25/2014 10:49 AM, RLVZ--- via TowerTalk wrote:
Hi Guys,
FWIW, I will share an actual experience where a Ground Plane Vertical
located in dense trees worked very poorly. One of my favorite Field Day
antennas over the years has been a simple Hustler 5BTV vertical elevated 10-20'
above ground level, and operated with 2 tuned radials per band. I've made
thousands of FD Qso's on 40-10 meters with this arrangement and often get
real nice pileups going. However, a few years back, my son-in-law asked me
to do FD from his QTH in Central Illinois, which was surrounded by hundreds
of trees. It was like operating from within a dense forest. The GP
Vertical performed very poorly and operating was a miserable experience as I
found it very difficult to makes Qso's, in fact it was more difficult to make
Qso's than many of my QRP experiences. That said, my daughters cooking made
up for it!
My personal conclusion is that I love Verticals and won't be without one
or more regardless how many Yagi's I have in the air. But now I'm a firm
believer that they need to be located "in the clear". (just as many antenna
books advise)
73, Dick- K9OM
In a message dated 8/25/2014 8:55:39 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
larryb.w1dyj@verizon.net writes:
Hi Gregg,
I asked this same question a couple of years ago -- of the QST's "The
Doctor
Is In." Here are the answers I received.
73 -- Larry -- W1DYJ
------------------------
Hi Joel and Larry
Everyone appears to have an opinion on this subject but definitive
scientific works are more difficult to find - at least on the Internet.
From
a practical observational standpoint, I have found that low band verticals
particularly 80 and 160 do not seem to be bothered by deciduous hardwood
trees. However I used these during contests that occurred mainly in the
colder months though I am reasonably sure that the sap has NOT drained by
the end of October and I never noticed a difference between late October
[leaves have turned but half of them are still ON the trees] and February
[leaves gone and sap drained if it really does drain in MD].
My station has all its yagi antennas mounted on a 24 ft mast beginning on
top of an 83 ft tower on a 1/4 acre lot. The good news is that the tower
sits at the edge of a group of hardwood trees so it is nearly invisible in
spite of its size. The bad news is that the trees, once 70 ft tall are now
approaching 90-100 ft range. I don't think the trees bother my HF
tribander
at 83 ft. Or my 7 el 6 meter beam at 87 ft. But the 2 meter beam at 95 ft
may be impacted. I think my 2 m signal on moonrise/moonset EME is at least
3
dB below what it should be. I also think that at 432 and above -especially
above- trees are bad news [see below].
The best reference I can give is section 2.3 [on p. 18] in a 1978 paper by
A.G.Longley at the U.S. Dept. of Commerce.
< http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/pub/ot/ot-78-144/ot-78-144.pdf >
That paper and others that I have found agree that avoid trees entirely is
the best course. Anything at 100 MHz and more is unacceptably attenuated
by
trees with non-deciduous pine trees being somewhat worse than deciduous
hardwoods. At HF the effect may be quite a bit less noticable. Verticals
at
HF may be more affected but again the difference is only a very few dB
more.
Pine trees at HF are worse for the reasons you have already noted.
Therefore I would say if you are moving ... you need to take the dense
tree
cover seriously. On 2 meters you will be impacted and above 2 meters
unless
you are clear of the trees you may be severely impacted. I suspect on 160
-
40 meters you won't have much trouble but a tribander buried in the trees
is
also likely to see some attenuation - maybe more than you'd be comfortable
with. The same with 6 meters. For less dense trees I think the tribander
and
6 meters would be o.k.
Good luck.
73 Gene W3ZZ
World Above 50 MHz
FM19jd MD
50 => 10 GHz
Grid Pirates Contest Group K8GP
Member, CQWW Contest Advisory Group
----------------------------
Hi, Guys:
My understanding is that you'd have to put a vertical radiator very close
to
a tree for sap/no-sap to have any impact on the antenna's performance --
perhaps within a foot of the trunk. Having said that, I know of several
hams
who did very well with "disguised, stealth" vertical wires run right up
alongside the trunks of substantial pine trees. These gents worked lots of
DX with such setups. Of course, YMMV!
73 and HNY,
Dean, N6BV
Senior Assistant Technical Editor, ARRL
Editor, The ARRL Antenna Book
-----Original Message-----
From: Hallas, Joel W1ZR [mailto:W1zr@arrl.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 12:24 PM
To: Larry Banks
Cc: Straw, Dean, N6BV
Subject: RE: Dear Doctor: Antennas and Trees
-----------------------------------
Larry,
I haven’t seen definitive words on the topic, however I believe trees have
more of an effect for HF signals on vertically polarized signals then on
horizontally polarized ones. Floyd Koontz, in his Horiz Ewe article in Dec
06 QST asserts that sap flow makes a difference and that if the sap drains
in winter there is less of an effect on signals. This makes some sense,
although I’m not sure why trees with wide branches wouldn’t have similar
effect on a horiz component.
I am copying ARRL Antenna Book editor Dean Straw, N6BV, in case he has any
thoughts,
Regards, Joel
Joel R. Hallas, W1ZR
Technical Editor, QST
American Radio Relay League
The national association for AMATEUR RADIO
TuTh; 860-594-0393
MWF; 203-226-7353
-----Original Message-----
From: k9kl
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 22:22
To: TowerTalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] How much do trees really affect verticals
I have been clearing some land to plant more maple trees for my sugar bush
to make maple syrup in the spring. While I resting I thought of all the
room I am clearing for a 4 square for 75/80. There are 40 some deciduous
trees on the land which is about 150 feet by 350 feet. Prime farmland,
stream bottom with about 4-5 feet of topsoil. Its about 200 feet from my
house/shack.
How much are those trees really going to affect the antennas?
Gregg K9KL
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|