Send Topband mailing list submissions to
topband@contesting.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
topband-request@contesting.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
topband-owner@contesting.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Radial Question (Chortek, Robert L)
2. Re: Radial Question (Jim Brown)
3. Re: Radial Question (bruce whitney)
4. Re: Radial Question (Charlie Cunningham)
5. Re: Radial Question (Gary and Kathleen Pearse)
6. Re: Radial Question (Bill Stewart)
7. Re: Radial Question (Charlie Cunningham)
8. Re: Radial Question (Charlie Cunningham)
9. Re: Radial Question (Charlie Cunningham)
10. Re: Radial Question (Bill Stewart)
11. Re: Radial Question (Bill Stewart)
12. Re: Radial Question (Charlie Cunningham)
13. Preliminary Stew Results (Tree)
14. 160m L or Shunt? (Carl Braun)
15. Re: Radial Question (David Aslin)
16. Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M (Bob K6ZZ)
17. Re: Preliminary Stew Results (Jim Brown)
18. Re: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M (Charlie Cunningham)
19. Re: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M (Jim Brown)
20. Re: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M (Charlie Cunningham)
21. Re: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M (Tom W8JI)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 19:51:50 +0000
From: "Chortek, Robert L" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<65020b68ca774ac2a7383a78662c9f5b@BLUPR04MB465.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a
large number of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock, etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and
have minimal impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials 10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the
compass)? I'm incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful
improvement in my transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 13:23:41 -0800
From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID: <52CB1EDD.8020804@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 1/6/2014 11:51 AM, Chortek, Robert L wrote:
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
Two things to study. N6LF has studied radial systems extensively, and
written about his work in at least 8 or 10 applications notes on his
website. Google to find it.
For "the executive summary" of his work, and a LOT of other work by
others, see the pdf of the 160M power point on my website.
http://k9yc.com/publish.htm
73, Jim K9YC
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 13:45:55 -0800 (PST)
From: bruce whitney <zuceman@yahoo.com>
To: "Chortek, Robert L" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>,
"topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<1389044755.70500.YahooMailNeo@web185303.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Bob, do it... It can't?hurt the 'transmit' performance of your vertical at
all and might help.
I have done that, as well as connect my radial system to the electrical
grounding of the house wiring - at the ground electrode as well.
My only concern would be if you intend to use the vertical for receive it
could exacerbate any noise problems you may have from the house.
You will also find out in a hurry if anything in the house is sensitve to
RF....
Bruce W8RA
?
?
?
?
________________________________
From: "Chortek, Robert L" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 2:51 PM
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large number of buried ground radials BUT, they? would only cover about 90
degrees of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a
large number of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the house?? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock, etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and
have minimal impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40? to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials 10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the
compass)?? I'm incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful
improvement in my transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 17:00:06 -0500
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Chortek, Robert L'" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>,
<topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAAGkXDkpy9q5MkASqrymv7XsBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I'd stay with the elevated radials,Bob! They're hard to beat! For some
years I had an 70 ft tall inverted L at a back corner of my lot. I had
only
two elevated resonant radials 90 degrees apart on the back and side lot
lines . I worked lots of stuff in Eu, middle east, The Pacific, Indian
and
Atlantic oceans with 500W. 3B8, S7, KH6, KH5K, FO0, KH2, KH0, JA, VK, ZL,
ZD9 etc.. Generally if I could hear them on my KAZ antenna, I could work
'em. BTW, if you run radials in your crawl space, you risk coupling
energy
into your house wiring from the close proximity radial currents.
Good luck
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Chortek,
Robert L
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 2:52 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a
tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large
number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees
of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a large
number
of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the
house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock,
etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and have
minimal
impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials
10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the compass)?
I'm
incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful improvement in my
transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 13:13:57 -0900
From: Gary and Kathleen Pearse <pearse@gci.net>
To: topband List <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID: <A060A6BE-AEF4-48BE-BE95-64473478E335@gci.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
I?d run a test wire under the house and connect it to the rig. Listen for
noise. Then connect to house ground and see if noisy. Compare that with
each existing elevated radial for QRN.
Here in Fairbanks anything through the home or grounded to the house or
tower on 160 is worse than my ungrounded elevated radials. One elevated
radial (of 8) near the power line is the noisiest. I disconnect it when it
gets bad.
73, Gary NL7Y
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 17:25:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Stewart <cwopr@embarqmail.com>
To: Robert L Chortek <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<1251636998.27141590.1389047127045.JavaMail.root@embarqmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hi Bob,
I can't add much in the way of technical reasons for adding
the radials vs a c-poise. However, I can say that my Inv. L, with
a four wire quarter wave c-poise has worked quite well...and
with much less work than all the radials you are considering.
I use only 100 watts and have worked into the Carib. and the
recent K9W operation. I also have been using a HB QRP xmtr from
1924 and have worked from C6 up into VE2/VE3.
I would wonder about the possibility of 'under-the-house' radials
putting rf into your house wiring, and if using your xmit antenna
for rcving, picking up trash from your in-house gadgets...tv, computer
etc, esp if you are running power. You may be able to get someone
to model the two systems and the results might help you make up
your mind.
Good luck with what ever method you end up with...73 de Bill K4JYS (NC)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L Chortek" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 2:51:50 PM
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a
large number of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock, etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and
have minimal impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials 10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the
compass)? I'm incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful
improvement in my transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 17:39:11 -0500
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Gary and Kathleen Pearse'" <pearse@gci.net>, "'topband List'"
<topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAAPEpvt5RE+hKqU8EvaiCxIkBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Makes sense and agrees with my experience, Gary! BTW, I have worked
Alaska
from here in Raleigh with my 2-elevated radial Inverted L. Don't recall
off-hand if it was you, I worked.
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Gary
and
Kathleen Pearse
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 5:14 PM
To: topband List
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
I'd run a test wire under the house and connect it to the rig. Listen for
noise. Then connect to house ground and see if noisy. Compare that with
each
existing elevated radial for QRN.
Here in Fairbanks anything through the home or grounded to the house or
tower on 160 is worse than my ungrounded elevated radials. One elevated
radial (of 8) near the power line is the noisiest. I disconnect it when it
gets bad.
73, Gary NL7Y
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 17:52:50 -0500
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Bill Stewart'" <cwopr@embarqmail.com>, "'Robert L Chortek'"
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAABL6+AkAiZRAhiSlBmZ2yt8BAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi, Bill
Well, I have modeled a 160 inverted L with 4 elevated resonant radials,
with
EXNEC, and that's about as good as it gets! Guys with grounded towers have
to dig and bury radials or run 'em on the ground but the broadcasters'
experience with elevated radials indicates the 4 is about as good as it
gets
- adding more doesn't add much. Having the resonant radials fanned over
less than 360 degrees can produce sone asymmetry in the azimuth pattern,
but
mine with two at 90 degrees worked quite well in all directions!
Generally,
if I could hear 'em I could work 'em. The KAZ receiving loops helped a LOT
on receive!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Stewart
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 5:25 PM
To: Robert L Chortek
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Hi Bob,
I can't add much in the way of technical reasons for adding
the radials vs a c-poise. However, I can say that my Inv. L, with
a four wire quarter wave c-poise has worked quite well...and
with much less work than all the radials you are considering.
I use only 100 watts and have worked into the Carib. and the
recent K9W operation. I also have been using a HB QRP xmtr from
1924 and have worked from C6 up into VE2/VE3.
I would wonder about the possibility of 'under-the-house' radials
putting rf into your house wiring, and if using your xmit antenna
for rcving, picking up trash from your in-house gadgets...tv, computer
etc, esp if you are running power. You may be able to get someone
to model the two systems and the results might help you make up
your mind.
Good luck with what ever method you end up with...73 de Bill K4JYS (NC)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L Chortek" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 2:51:50 PM
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a
tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large
number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees
of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a large
number
of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the
house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock,
etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and have
minimal
impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials
10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the compass)?
I'm
incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful improvement in my
transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 18:02:12 -0500
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Bill Stewart'" <cwopr@embarqmail.com>, "'Robert L Chortek'"
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAAFph7W4nM8FPq08GS7PjWbUBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
BTW, Biil, where U in NC? I'm in Raleigh waitin' for it to go down to 9
degrees tonight!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Stewart
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 5:25 PM
To: Robert L Chortek
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Hi Bob,
I can't add much in the way of technical reasons for adding
the radials vs a c-poise. However, I can say that my Inv. L, with
a four wire quarter wave c-poise has worked quite well...and
with much less work than all the radials you are considering.
I use only 100 watts and have worked into the Carib. and the
recent K9W operation. I also have been using a HB QRP xmtr from
1924 and have worked from C6 up into VE2/VE3.
I would wonder about the possibility of 'under-the-house' radials
putting rf into your house wiring, and if using your xmit antenna
for rcving, picking up trash from your in-house gadgets...tv, computer
etc, esp if you are running power. You may be able to get someone
to model the two systems and the results might help you make up
your mind.
Good luck with what ever method you end up with...73 de Bill K4JYS (NC)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L Chortek" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 2:51:50 PM
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a
tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large
number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees
of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a large
number
of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the
house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock,
etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and have
minimal
impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials
10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the compass)?
I'm
incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful improvement in my
transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 18:49:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Stewart <cwopr@embarqmail.com>
To: Charlie Cunningham <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com, Robert L Chortek
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<225193440.27169766.1389052159339.JavaMail.root@embarqmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hey Charlie,
I'm just down the road, 'tween Smfd and Newton Grove.
Waiting for the same blast of cold air...brrrrr.
73, Bill K4JYS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr@embarqmail.com>, "Robert L Chortek"
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 6:02:12 PM
Subject: RE: Topband: Radial Question
BTW, Biil, where U in NC? I'm in Raleigh waitin' for it to go down to 9
degrees tonight!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Stewart
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 5:25 PM
To: Robert L Chortek
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Hi Bob,
I can't add much in the way of technical reasons for adding
the radials vs a c-poise. However, I can say that my Inv. L, with
a four wire quarter wave c-poise has worked quite well...and
with much less work than all the radials you are considering.
I use only 100 watts and have worked into the Carib. and the
recent K9W operation. I also have been using a HB QRP xmtr from
1924 and have worked from C6 up into VE2/VE3.
I would wonder about the possibility of 'under-the-house' radials
putting rf into your house wiring, and if using your xmit antenna
for rcving, picking up trash from your in-house gadgets...tv, computer
etc, esp if you are running power. You may be able to get someone
to model the two systems and the results might help you make up
your mind.
Good luck with what ever method you end up with...73 de Bill K4JYS (NC)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L Chortek" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 2:51:50 PM
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a
tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large
number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees
of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a large
number
of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the
house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock,
etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and have
minimal
impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials
10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the compass)?
I'm
incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful improvement in my
transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 19:00:15 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Stewart <cwopr@embarqmail.com>
To: Charlie Cunningham <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com, Robert L Chortek
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<1614280165.27172860.1389052815964.JavaMail.root@embarqmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Charlie, I was surprised at how well my Inv L/c-poise works. It
is far from an ideal situation...amongst many tall pines, but
results have been very much worth the effort. I got some good info
off this list and got it tuned up to where the TS-440S did not
need a tuner to get a low SWR...and it receives ok too. I read about
how much work/$$ guys put into the radial systems and it seems that
after a point, the work just ain't worth the fraction of a db ya
get. But if it makes one feel better, then keep on digging...hi.
73 de Bill K4JYS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr@embarqmail.com>, "Robert L Chortek"
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 5:52:50 PM
Subject: RE: Topband: Radial Question
Hi, Bill
Well, I have modeled a 160 inverted L with 4 elevated resonant radials,
with
EXNEC, and that's about as good as it gets! Guys with grounded towers have
to dig and bury radials or run 'em on the ground but the broadcasters'
experience with elevated radials indicates the 4 is about as good as it
gets
- adding more doesn't add much. Having the resonant radials fanned over
less than 360 degrees can produce sone asymmetry in the azimuth pattern,
but
mine with two at 90 degrees worked quite well in all directions!
Generally,
if I could hear 'em I could work 'em. The KAZ receiving loops helped a LOT
on receive!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Stewart
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 5:25 PM
To: Robert L Chortek
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Hi Bob,
I can't add much in the way of technical reasons for adding
the radials vs a c-poise. However, I can say that my Inv. L, with
a four wire quarter wave c-poise has worked quite well...and
with much less work than all the radials you are considering.
I use only 100 watts and have worked into the Carib. and the
recent K9W operation. I also have been using a HB QRP xmtr from
1924 and have worked from C6 up into VE2/VE3.
I would wonder about the possibility of 'under-the-house' radials
putting rf into your house wiring, and if using your xmit antenna
for rcving, picking up trash from your in-house gadgets...tv, computer
etc, esp if you are running power. You may be able to get someone
to model the two systems and the results might help you make up
your mind.
Good luck with what ever method you end up with...73 de Bill K4JYS (NC)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L Chortek" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 2:51:50 PM
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a
tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large
number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees
of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a large
number
of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the
house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock,
etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and have
minimal
impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials
10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the compass)?
I'm
incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful improvement in my
transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 21:40:46 -0500
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Bill Stewart'" <cwopr@embarqmail.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com, 'Robert L Chortek'
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAAHzGgr+WShtPi3HlVcit1boBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Well, I'm not surprised at all, Bill! Some years back some broadcast
engineers did a lot of work replacing deteriorated buried radial fields
under broadcast towers with elevated resonant radials. They concluded that
4
elevated radials would do the job quite well. Their work was published in
some IEEE transactions, and was based on real engineering measurements!
Your inverted L with 4 elevated resonant radial should do quite well!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Stewart
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 7:00 PM
To: Charlie Cunningham
Cc: topband@contesting.com; Robert L Chortek
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Charlie, I was surprised at how well my Inv L/c-poise works. It is far
from
an ideal situation...amongst many tall pines, but results have been very
much worth the effort. I got some good info off this list and got it tuned
up to where the TS-440S did not need a tuner to get a low SWR...and it
receives ok too. I read about how much work/$$ guys put into the radial
systems and it seems that after a point, the work just ain't worth the
fraction of a db ya get. But if it makes one feel better, then keep on
digging...hi.
73 de Bill K4JYS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "Bill Stewart" <cwopr@embarqmail.com>, "Robert L Chortek"
<Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 5:52:50 PM
Subject: RE: Topband: Radial Question
Hi, Bill
Well, I have modeled a 160 inverted L with 4 elevated resonant radials,
with
EXNEC, and that's about as good as it gets! Guys with grounded towers have
to dig and bury radials or run 'em on the ground but the broadcasters'
experience with elevated radials indicates the 4 is about as good as it
gets
- adding more doesn't add much. Having the resonant radials fanned over
less than 360 degrees can produce sone asymmetry in the azimuth pattern,
but
mine with two at 90 degrees worked quite well in all directions!
Generally,
if I could hear 'em I could work 'em. The KAZ receiving loops helped a LOT
on receive!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Stewart
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 5:25 PM
To: Robert L Chortek
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Hi Bob,
I can't add much in the way of technical reasons for adding the radials vs
a
c-poise. However, I can say that my Inv. L, with a four wire quarter wave
c-poise has worked quite well...and with much less work than all the
radials
you are considering.
I use only 100 watts and have worked into the Carib. and the recent K9W
operation. I also have been using a HB QRP xmtr from
1924 and have worked from C6 up into VE2/VE3.
I would wonder about the possibility of 'under-the-house' radials putting
rf
into your house wiring, and if using your xmit antenna for rcving, picking
up trash from your in-house gadgets...tv, computer etc, esp if you are
running power. You may be able to get someone to model the two systems and
the results might help you make up your mind.
Good luck with what ever method you end up with...73 de Bill K4JYS (NC)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L Chortek" <Robert.Chortek@berliner.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2014 2:51:50 PM
Subject: Topband: Radial Question
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a
tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large
number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees
of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a large
number
of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the
house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock,
etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and have
minimal
impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials
10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the compass)?
I'm
incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful improvement in my
transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 20:57:48 -0800
From: Tree <tree@kkn.net>
To: 160 <topband@contesting.com>, "cq-contest@contesting.com"
<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Topband: Preliminary Stew Results
Message-ID:
<CAKF9Hha36PvmxO1ZV+NFcFSaGfED-=-eHUkQwYtY1NR-Xd7dwA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Back by popular demand - the current log checking results for the December
Stew Perry contest are now available. You can find them at
http://www.kkn.net/stew
Please note the deadline for submitting your log is 15 days after the
contest - or January 15th. Send your Cabrillo log to tbdc@contesting.com
73 Tree N6TR
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 15:25:59 +0000
From: Carl Braun <Carl.Braun@lairdtech.com>
To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Topband: 160m L or Shunt?
Message-ID:
<F69DC02DDFCD7A4E84A9C7BE874B77400107E83E72@USDC01MBX01.corp.lairdtech.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
All
I'm working on installing an 80/160 inverted L that will be approximately
165' in total length with the vertical portion being 88' tall and the rest
of the wire (77') running out to a 80' tall palm tree. This will give me
approximately 5/8w on 80 and 5/16w on 160 and will allow me to use a
single antenna wire into my matching networks at the base.
I've thought about shunt feeding the tower and have researched the
archives here to get some ideas but I have two concerns:
1) I'm using a Tri Ex TM 490 (90') Skyneedle and am concerned about
good grounding between the tubular sections if I was to shunt feed the
thing. I'm not crazy about running a "continuity wire" down the length of
the needle. Thus my interest with an inverted L off of the tower. I've
constructed a 1 ?" copper pipe around the base of the needle and the
control panel that measures 6' x 4' that will act as my radial "plate". I
plan on having 50 1/8 wl radials and 10 ? wl ground radials when finished
2) I was unable to get a real feel for where the tower resonates. I
have a 5 element Telrex monster on top of the Needle that uses grounded
elements and I'm fairly sure the antenna resonates below the 160M band.
I'm assuming this as I disconnected the coax where the Telrex feeds into
my control panel at the base of the Needle and placed an MFJ analyzer
between the braid of the yagi coax and GND. The MFJ was beginning to dip
when I ran out of real estate on the meter...the MFJ bottoms out at
@1750KHz. I'm assuming the tower and antenna resonate at @1700KHz
3) I have concerns that I could not resonate the tower on 80m if I
shunted it
Considering these items I wanted to keep things tidy so I'm installing the
inverted L off of the tower (36") and starting from there.
Here are my questions:
1) Will I have to de-tune the tower in order to get the L to
resonate on 80 and 160?
2) Am I better off continuing to try and find a resonant sweet spot
on the tower and shunt instead of an inverted L?
3) I would expect 10-20 ohms at 160 and approx 40-60 ohms on 80 with
the full sized 165' vertical. Am I close?
Comments from the gurus?
Tnx de AG6X
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 21:25:52 +0000
From: David Aslin <david@aslinvc.com>
To: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Radial Question
Message-ID:
<01E14C903617BF4A9E39FD8E91A23E761D85A7@AUSP01DAG0307.collaborationhost.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I could not resist a comment - 12,500 sq. ft is tiny ??!
Spare a thought for the topband community in G-land: the *average* garden
(i.e the lot size less the house area) is 970 sq. ft. Many new homes have
no garden.
While I search for a contest/DX location, we are renting a beautiful new
home - on a 'huge' 5000 sq. ft lot. So if my 160m signals are weak,
listen harder - I only have room for 0.05 wavelength radials...
Bob, good luck with the radials project. You will be loud...
73
Dave G3WGN M6O WJ6O
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chortek, Robert L - Monday, January 06, 2014 6:44:03 PM
Hello Fellow Topbanders -
We are about to embark on a front yard landscaping project at our home on
a tiny 12, 500 sq. ft. lot.
It occurred to me this would be an excellent opportunity to put down a
large number of buried ground radials BUT, they would only cover about 90
degrees of the compass. Then it also occurred to me I could put down a
large number of radials in our crawl space under the house.
So, my question is, what is the likely negative impact, if any, from the
house being between the 160 meter vertical and the radials placed under
the house? I assume the house material, most of which is wood, tile,
sheetrock, etc. (with the usual house wiring) would be invisible to RF and
have minimal impact.
If I could put down say 60 radials ranging in length from 40 to 120 feet
long, would it outperform my current system with 8 resonant elevated
radials 10 -15 feet high (which cover only about 120 degrees of the
compass)? I'm incline to proceed IF it would provide a meaningful
improvement in my transmitted signal strength.
Thanks for any help!
73,
Bob/AA6VB
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 19:18:47 -0800
From: Bob K6ZZ <bob.selbrede@gmail.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M
Message-ID:
<CAOu9doxm8xXo-=zAzdrm=nWP+MHeg1JFAVjc_ssTqH4BgHiraw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Folks,
I have a 60' tall top loaded vertical for 160M and would like to know how
best to feed it to use it on 80M as well. On 80M there will be some
pretty
high voltages at the feedpoint.
Other than dealing with high voltages, is doing this a bad idea (or good
idea) for any partcular reason(s)? The high current point would be higher
above ground which seems beneficial at the very least.
What would be the best method for matching it on 80M?
Do 1/2 wavelength ground mounted verticals require the same quality ground
radial system that 1/4 wavelength verticals require?
Thanks and HNY to all!
73, Bob K6ZZ
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 21:31:46 -0800
From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Preliminary Stew Results
Message-ID: <52CB9142.2030009@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 1/6/2014 8:57 PM, Tree wrote:
Back by popular demand - the current log checking results for the
December
Stew Perry contest are now available.
This looks like a lot of logs. Is participation up?
73, Jim K9YC
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 01:14:19 -0500
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: "'Bob K6ZZ'" <bob.selbrede@gmail.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAANXFLAjqyLFIo+D98/RpCpQBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi, Bob
End feeding that 160m 1/4 wave as an 80m 1/2 wave should work great! For
several years I ran a vertical 40m 1/2 wave that I fed at the bottom
through
a 1/4 wave of 450 ohm ladder line. Perfect match (almost 1:1) on the CW
end
of 40m with NO TUNER! I could run it to full power with a FT-757 GX that I
had at the time with nop antenna tuner. It had good BW and runnng it all
across 40m was no problem, although I've always been mostly a CW DXer. I
workd everywhere on the planet with that antenna! I later added a
reflector
and director for Bouvet and worked 'e first call in a BIG east coast pile
when they came up. (Jacky, F2CW at the key). Late It was a reall killer on
the evening 150 degree LP into SE Asia, and when ZS8MI came up, I almost
missed him because he was S9+20db on the FT-757!
No, you don't need any radial field under a vertical 1/2 wave. You'll be
driving a few thousand ohms, so a a few ohms or even 50-100 ohms of ground
resistance won't add any significant loss. A simple ground rod will do
fine.
You can start and drive it with "slam-pipe" if you know what that is.
(You
ight be able to borrow one from an electrical utility guy. And, as you
say,
the high-current maximum will be up 1/4 wavelength so you'll have an
excellent low take-off angle! Enjoy!
BTW, when I did the 1/4 wave matching section, I did take care to feed the
antenna with the side of the 450 ohm line that was connected to the center
conductor of the coax, Of course, you could also feed it with an 80m
parallel-tuned circuit, that you would tap down to find the 50 ohm point.
Have fun!! I Think you'll be pleased!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bob
K6ZZ
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 10:19 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M
Folks,
I have a 60' tall top loaded vertical for 160M and would like to know how
best to feed it to use it on 80M as well. On 80M there will be some
pretty
high voltages at the feedpoint.
Other than dealing with high voltages, is doing this a bad idea (or good
idea) for any partcular reason(s)? The high current point would be higher
above ground which seems beneficial at the very least.
What would be the best method for matching it on 80M?
Do 1/2 wavelength ground mounted verticals require the same quality ground
radial system that 1/4 wavelength verticals require?
Thanks and HNY to all!
73, Bob K6ZZ
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 22:27:01 -0800
From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M
Message-ID: <52CB9E35.3090702@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 1/6/2014 10:14 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote:
No, you don't need any radial field under a vertical 1/2 wave. You'll be
driving a few thousand ohms, so a a few ohms or even 50-100 ohms of
ground
resistance won't add any significant loss. A simple ground rod will do
fine.
Yes, but radials DO help -- a bit. See the ON4UN book. Modeling shows
that adding a lot of half-wave radials under a half wave antenna
increases signal strength by 0.5 - 1.5 dB at low angles, roughly twice
as much at higher angles, the greater improvement for lousy ground. To
understand this, we must remember that radials serve TWO functions -- to
return the antenna current, and to SHIELD the fields produced by the
antenna from lossy earth. That is, of course, a lot of copper for 1 dB.
Another common way of feeding a half wave vertical is an autotransformer
resonated by parallel capacitance. I've done that, and it worked.
73, Jim K9YC
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 01:58:10 -0500
From: "Charlie Cunningham" <charlie-cunningham@nc.rr.com>
To: <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M
Message-ID:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF0xXac1rOhFkn7GlcEWNIjCgAAAEAAAAGU+QLtW0rZCtkyTD88waAEBAAAAAA==@nc.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Well, sometimes, life is the art of the possible. At the time I was living
in q small duplex on a corner lot and running a bunch of on-ground radials
wasn't an option. Still I was working YBs and DUs etc. on the evening LP
on
40m that others weren't even hearing! They'd come up on frequency and send
??? -during and after my qsos. In my experience a vertical 1/2 wave is a
very potent antenna because its high current portion is up 1/4 wavelength
and it's take-off angle is so low for DX work even without that last 1
dB!!
Just like some guy s like to dig in the dirt and bury thousands of feet
of
radials under their inverted Ls when they could do just as well, or
better,
with 4 elevated resonant radials. But in the end - "if you believe, no
proof
is necessary - if you don't believe, no proof is possible". Some people
are
more taken in by popular opinions than by measurements or modeling!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Brown
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 1:27 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M
On 1/6/2014 10:14 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote:
No, you don't need any radial field under a vertical 1/2 wave. You'll be
driving a few thousand ohms, so a a few ohms or even 50-100 ohms of
ground
resistance won't add any significant loss. A simple ground rod will do
fine.
Yes, but radials DO help -- a bit. See the ON4UN book. Modeling shows
that adding a lot of half-wave radials under a half wave antenna
increases signal strength by 0.5 - 1.5 dB at low angles, roughly twice
as much at higher angles, the greater improvement for lousy ground. To
understand this, we must remember that radials serve TWO functions -- to
return the antenna current, and to SHIELD the fields produced by the
antenna from lossy earth. That is, of course, a lot of copper for 1 dB.
Another common way of feeding a half wave vertical is an autotransformer
resonated by parallel capacitance. I've done that, and it worked.
73, Jim K9YC
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:05:29 -0500
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
To: "Bob K6ZZ" <bob.selbrede@gmail.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Feeding 160M Vertical on 80M
Message-ID: <6CC8AA70D75948AD96382AA18BA3FC69@MAIN>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I have a 60' tall top loaded vertical for 160M and would like to know how
best to feed it to use it on 80M as well. On 80M there will be some
pretty
high voltages at the feedpoint.
What is the top loading? Because something resonates on 160 m with
something
on the top doesn't mean it will act like a half wave on 80.
Without knowing what the loading system is, nothing can really be
answered.
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
------------------------------
End of Topband Digest, Vol 133, Issue 9
***************************************
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3658/6980 - Release Date: 01/06/14