Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: 160M/80M Vertical - Using a capacity hat below a trap

To: "rich kennedy" <astro_maryland@yahoo.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: 160M/80M Vertical - Using a capacity hat below a trap
From: "Tom W8JI" <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Reply-to: Tom W8JI <w8ji@w8ji.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:12:33 -0400
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>
I’m finalizing design for my 160M/80M shortened wire tree-mounted
vertical.  An Unadilla 80M trap will be
placed approx. 65’ feet above the feedpoint; above the trap is another 20 feet
with a small cap hat.  An autotuner
handles the Z matching for the anticipated 500 watts on both bands.

QUESTION: Can one install a capacitive hat directly below
the 80M trap to help shorten the length of the 80M section? For example, shortening the 80M radiator to 60’ (from 65’) and making up ‘the difference’ with a capacity hat? Any downside?


The only downside of adding capacitance below the trap is the chance of increasing capacitance across the trap and changing trap tuning. If you just keep the loading hat or wire away from the section above the trap, you minimize that effect.

You really want the trap slightly up out of the 80 meter band to minimize trap losses.

Almost anything can appear to work OK, but technically a trap of given components handles the least power and has the highest loss when it is at or very near resonance. If you did the trap resonance for 3.65 MHz, loss would peak and power capability would be minimum right around that frequency. The trap would have reduced loss and higher power rating as frequency moves away from 3.65.

The loading wire or hat below the trap actually can decrease loss and increase power rating of the system, so it isn't a bad idea if you also minimize coupling to the area above the trap.

73 Tom
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>