Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Topband: 160M Short Verticals

To: <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Topband: 160M Short Verticals
From: W8JI@contesting.com (Tom Rauch)
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:27:47 -0400
Hi John,

> Here's another solution for improving the efficiency of short
> verticals that doesn't seem to be widely known.  Add a second (or even
> a third) identical short vertical in very close proximity to the first
> and feed them all in phase.  The phased system radiates as a single
> vertical with improved efficiency.  I believe this technique is
> documented somewhere in ON4UN's book.  The mutual coupling between the
> close spaced verticals drives the radiation resistance up, which
> enhances efficiency.

If the book says that, it is not correct.

Originally proposed in 1920, you can find this system analyzed in 
Jasik's "Antenna Engineering Handbook" 1st edition page 19-9. 
Ground loss remain constant for a given area of ground system and 
antenna, because the sum of currents from each drop lead flowing 
into that fixed size ground system remains exactly the same no 
matter how many down leads are added. 

The only improvement occurs when multiple drops are so far apart 
zone currents at the base do not overlap each other, which means 
each ground system has to be smaller than optimum. The end 
result however is no better than making a single large ground 
system the exact size of the sum of the tiny systems!

One case where this would help is when a driveway would be in the 
middle of an area, and you couldn't cross the driveway with radials. 
You could do a dual-drop antenna, with one drop on either side of 
the driveway, and separate "half" ground systems on either side 
that are not connected. In this example efficiency would be 
identical to a single vertical in the middle of the driveway with a full 
radial system that covers exactly the same physical area, but you 
can still have a driveway.  

This is an advantage for you because you already have a system 
for 80, and can make that system act like a SINGLE vertical the 
same height would behave if placed in the exact middle of your 
array with the same physical area of ground system. That would be 
better than feeding only one element at the edge of the ground 
system. But it gains nothing over a single vertical loaded the same 
way with the same area ground system, except convenience.

A four-square works the same way. The center two elements 
combine to effectively make one element in the middle of the array. 
That is why we can feed a four-square with a 1:1:1:1 current ratio 
when a three element array requires a 1:2:1 ratio! The center two 
elements (being in-phase) form one "radiation fat" element. 

If the same physical size restraints of in-phase close spaced 
elements are put into a single vertical, the loss results are always 
identical. That is true with a folded monopole, it is true with close 
spaced verticals in-phase. They are the same.

There is no free lunch.
73, Tom W8JI
W8JI@contesting.com 

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