Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

## Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 144, Issue 34

 To: Topband Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 144, Issue 34 Dick Bingham Thu, 25 Dec 2014 13:01:52 -0800 mailto:topband@contesting.com>
 ```Ed - NI6S question about using his 106-foot high tower =========================================== Message: 1 Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:24 -0800 From: Ed via Topband To: "topband@contesting.com" Subject: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Trying to figure out how to best utilize my 106' tower for 160m. The tower sits on a small hill so the downside of the tower is sloping. If I hang a wire off the top, I can bring the other end to the ground and feed it at the bottom. I can ran numerous radials from there. This arrangement can accommodate a quarter wave length. The angle of the tower would be about 20 degrees. Any objections to this plan? Open to other ideas. Thanks in advance and happy holidays! Ed NI6S ================================================================== Ed - You could just Shunt-feed the tower and install lots of radials to get on 160. I examined a model I'll call the "Four" (due to its shape when viewed with the feed-point to the left looking into the plane of the wires) for your situation and came up with the following: Connect a 136-foot piece of #12 copper wire from an insulator spaced about a foot away from the tower-top and route it to a post 10-feet high 96 feet away from the base of the tower to one end of an insulator. Connect another 136-foot length of #12 Copper wire to the opposite end of the lower insulator and run the wire back toward the tower (missing the tower) and tie-off at 10-feet high. Feed the antenna from the junction of the H-wire and sloping-wire. EZNEC5 calculates : Peak Gain ~ -1.6dBi at 25-degrees Z_feed should be around 11-Ohms so you will have to do some matching to get 50-Ohms. I modeled the tower as a grounded 8-inch diameter wire 106 feet tall Looks like a reasonable experiment you can try among the others suggested to you. Good luck . . . de Dick/w7wkr CN97uj and wd2xsh-26 at CN98pi On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 9:00 AM, wrote: > 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. 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Ed via Topband) > 2. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Jim Brown) > 3. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (James Wolf) > 4. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Jorge Diez CX6VM) > 5. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Jim Brown) > 6. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Art Roberts - W5AER) > 7. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Richard (Rick) Karlquist) > 8. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Paul Elliott) > 9. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Dave Hollander) > 10. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Tom W8JI) > 11. Re: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? (Charlie Cunningham) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:24 -0800 > From: Ed via Topband > To: "topband@contesting.com" > Subject: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Trying to figure out how to best utilize my 106' tower for 160m. The > tower sits on a small hill so the downside of the tower is sloping. If I > hang a wire off the top, I can bring the other end to the ground and feed > it at the bottom. I can ran numerous radials from there. > > This arrangement can accommodate a quarter wave length. The angle of the > tower would be about 20 degrees. > > Any objections to this plan? Open to other ideas. > > Thanks in advance and happy holidays! > > Ed NI6S > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:46:20 -0800 > From: Jim Brown > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <549B09FC.7030209@audiosystemsgroup.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > On Wed,12/24/2014 10:29 AM, Ed via Topband wrote: > > Trying to figure out how to best utilize my 106' tower for 160m. The > tower sits on a small hill so the downside of the tower is sloping. If I > hang a wire off the top, I can bring the other end to the ground and feed > it at the bottom. I can ran numerous radials from there. > > That's exactly what I'm doing -- my tower is 115 ft with roughly 7 ft of > mast above it and a 3-el SteppIR. I have sloping wires on two opposite > sides, supported from the tower just below the rotator with a 10 ft > section of 4-in PVC conduit. Each wire has its own set of 4 radials > elevated about 18 ft. The tower, which is grounded, has a dozen or so > radials laying on the ground. > > With this configuration, the tower will act as a reflector, yielding > about 6 dB front to back. How much GAIN you get will depend on your > radial system and the quality of your soil. I started with radials > elevated only a few feet, and gain was poor. On the advice of N6BT, I > raised them and gain improved. > > 73, Jim K9YC > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 14:10:14 -0500 > From: "James Wolf" > To: , > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <001101d01fad\$3f589e80\$be09db80\$@comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I used to use a similar method on 80 meters. > Why not feed it (them) at the top? > > Jim - KR9U > > -----Original Message----- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim > Brown > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 1:46 PM > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > > On Wed,12/24/2014 10:29 AM, Ed via Topband wrote: > > Trying to figure out how to best utilize my 106' tower for 160m. The > tower sits on a small hill so the downside of the tower is sloping. If I > hang a wire off the top, I can bring the other end to the ground and feed > it > at the bottom. I can ran numerous radials from there. > > That's exactly what I'm doing -- my tower is 115 ft with roughly 7 ft of > mast above it and a 3-el SteppIR. I have sloping wires on two opposite > sides, supported from the tower just below the rotator with a 10 ft section > of 4-in PVC conduit. Each wire has its own set of 4 radials elevated about > 18 ft. The tower, which is grounded, has a dozen or so radials laying on > the > ground. > > With this configuration, the tower will act as a reflector, yielding about > 6 > dB front to back. How much GAIN you get will depend on your radial system > and the quality of your soil. I started with radials elevated only a few > feet, and gain was poor. On the advice of N6BT, I raised them and gain > improved. > > 73, Jim K9YC > _________________ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:05:43 -0200 > From: Jorge Diez CX6VM > To: "jbwolf@comcast.net" > Cc: "" , > "" > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <0428300E-9EEF-49C9-B195-1CC73D0E76F1@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Do a sloper (half WL) and feed in the center. > > Half of one of the half go to the other side, like an inverted V > > 73, Jorge > CX6VM/CW5W > > Enviado desde mi iPhone > > > El 24/12/2014, a las 17:10, "James Wolf" escribi?: > > > > I used to use a similar method on 80 meters. > > Why not feed it (them) at the top? > > > > Jim - KR9U > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim > Brown > > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 1:46 PM > > To: topband@contesting.com > > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > > > >> On Wed,12/24/2014 10:29 AM, Ed via Topband wrote: > >> Trying to figure out how to best utilize my 106' tower for 160m. The > > tower sits on a small hill so the downside of the tower is sloping. If I > > hang a wire off the top, I can bring the other end to the ground and > feed it > > at the bottom. I can ran numerous radials from there. > > > > That's exactly what I'm doing -- my tower is 115 ft with roughly 7 ft of > > mast above it and a 3-el SteppIR. I have sloping wires on two opposite > > sides, supported from the tower just below the rotator with a 10 ft > section > > of 4-in PVC conduit. Each wire has its own set of 4 radials elevated > about > > 18 ft. The tower, which is grounded, has a dozen or so radials laying on > the > > ground. > > > > With this configuration, the tower will act as a reflector, yielding > about 6 > > dB front to back. How much GAIN you get will depend on your radial system > > and the quality of your soil. I started with radials elevated only a few > > feet, and gain was poor. On the advice of N6BT, I raised them and gain > > improved. > > > > 73, Jim K9YC > > _________________ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > > _________________ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 13:53:45 -0800 > From: Jim Brown > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <549B35E9.1050107@audiosystemsgroup.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On Wed,12/24/2014 1:05 PM, Jorge Diez CX6VM wrote: > > Half of one of the half go to the other side, like an inverted V > > That would be a pretty low dipole on 160M, and verticals tend to be far > more effective on 160M than low dipoles. > > 73, Jim K9YC > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 18:39:19 -0500 > From: Art Roberts - W5AER > To: topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed > > On the thought of a low dipole: > > Years ago in Northern California, as an experiment, I had a VERY low > dipole and got some strange results. Listening to a local station, in > the afternoon, there was very deep QSB. We were able to talk, but with > difficulty. > > 73, > Art W5AER > > > On 12/24/2014 4:53 PM, Jim Brown wrote: > > On Wed,12/24/2014 1:05 PM, Jorge Diez CX6VM wrote: > >> Half of one of the half go to the other side, like an inverted V > > > > That would be a pretty low dipole on 160M, and verticals tend to be > > far more effective on 160M than low dipoles. > > > > 73, Jim K9YC > > _________________ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 18:23:47 -0800 > From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" > To: Art Roberts - W5AER , topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <549B7533.9040603@karlquist.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > > > On 12/24/2014 3:39 PM, Art Roberts - W5AER wrote: > > On the thought of a low dipole: > > > > Years ago in Northern California, as an experiment, I had a VERY low > > dipole and got some strange results. Listening to a local station, in > > the afternoon, there was very deep QSB. We were able to talk, but with > > difficulty. > > > > 73, > > Art W5AER > > > > Were you cross polarized; IE was the other station running a vertical? > If so, minor fluctuations in propagation could result in major > fluctations of polarization cancellation. > > Rick N6RK > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 06:17:17 -0000 > From: "Paul Elliott" > To: > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <000001d0200a\$6f184e10\$4d48ea30\$@valornet.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Jorge, > > > > I have a 160m antenna asymmetrical antenna, fed against ground, that goes > from one corner of my 120 ft by 120 ft lot to the opposite corner. It is > held up by a single pole, about 55 ft tall. The pole is closer to the fed > end. The wire going up to the pole makes about a 65 degree angle above the > horizontal; the wire going down to the opposite corner makes an angle of > about 25 degrees below the horizontal (the angles are estimated by eye-they > definitely have not been measured). The far end is about 10 ft off the > ground. In other words an inverted L where the vertical part is not > vertical and the horizontal part is not horizontal. The length is the > length > arrived at by many trials and errors that, with a matching capacitor > between > the antenna and one inch hardline coax feeder, yielded an SWR of > approximately 1:1 at 1825 mHz. I also use this antenna on 80 m through 10 > m > by using an antenna tuner in the shack. > > > > My radials are about one inch deep in the ground and restricted to one > quadrant. They vary in length from 100 ft (along the north and east fence > lines) down to 35 ft (house in the way). Number of radials is probably > about 20 (I really don't remember). > > > > QTH is SE NM. Maximum power is 500 watts. I have 190 countries confirmed > on160 m. I have no idea of the pattern of the 160 m antenna. I am > guessing that it works as well as it does because the maximum radiation > occurs well above ground (and the ground around its feed point is very > cluttered by power lines, houses, trees) and is not straight up (like a low > inverted dipole). > > > > 73 Paul W5DM > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 07:29:50 -0700 > From: Dave Hollander > To: Ed > Cc: Ed via Topband > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <549C1F5E.4080402@cox.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Ed - I have done the same thing on 80/75 meters with great results > using a tree and a sling shot to get the wire up. Used chicken wire for > the ground system. > > Did this the first time from an apartment in Phoenix, Arizona in the > late 90's using a 45 foot tree and put a 8ft x4ft pieced of chicken wire > on the balcony of my 2nd floor apartment. Although tuned for 80/75, I > got it to play on 160-10 with the appropriate matching devices. Worked > 135 countries on 80/75 with this setup and since I was going through a > divorce, it helped me keep my sanity. > > Happy holidays. > > Tnx and 73, > > Dave N7RK > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:02:26 -0500 > From: "Tom W8JI" > To: "Richard \(Rick\) Karlquist" , "Art > Roberts > - W5AER" , > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=response > > More likely it was a mix of groundwave and sky wave, if the station was > local, cancelling or reinforcing signal as phase shifted on the sky wave > path. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" > To: "Art Roberts - W5AER" ; > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:23 PM > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > > > > > > > > On 12/24/2014 3:39 PM, Art Roberts - W5AER wrote: > >> On the thought of a low dipole: > >> > >> Years ago in Northern California, as an experiment, I had a VERY low > >> dipole and got some strange results. Listening to a local station, in > >> the afternoon, there was very deep QSB. We were able to talk, but with > >> difficulty. > >> > >> 73, > >> Art W5AER > >> > > > > Were you cross polarized; IE was the other station running a vertical? > > If so, minor fluctuations in propagation could result in major > > fluctations of polarization cancellation. > > > > Rick N6RK > > _________________ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 2014.0.4794 / Virus Database: 4253/8802 - Release Date: 12/24/14 > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:16:05 -0500 > From: "Charlie Cunningham" > To: "'Tom W8JI'" , "'Richard \(Rick\) Karlquist'" > , "'Art Roberts - W5AER'" < > w5aer@hotmail.com>, > > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > Message-ID: <005d01d0205e\$166448b0\$432cda10\$@nc.rr.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Multi-path was my thought as well! > > Merry Christmas! > > 73, > Charlie, K4OTV > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tom > W8JI > Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2014 11:02 AM > To: Richard (Rick) Karlquist; Art Roberts - W5AER; topband@contesting.com > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > > More likely it was a mix of groundwave and sky wave, if the station was > local, cancelling or reinforcing signal as phase shifted on the sky wave > path. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" > To: "Art Roberts - W5AER" ; > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 9:23 PM > Subject: Re: Topband: 160m Sloping Vertical Antenna? > > > > > > > > On 12/24/2014 3:39 PM, Art Roberts - W5AER wrote: > >> On the thought of a low dipole: > >> > >> Years ago in Northern California, as an experiment, I had a VERY low > >> dipole and got some strange results. Listening to a local station, in > >> the afternoon, there was very deep QSB. We were able to talk, but with > >> difficulty. > >> > >> 73, > >> Art W5AER > >> > > > > Were you cross polarized; IE was the other station running a vertical? > > If so, minor fluctuations in propagation could result in major > > fluctations of polarization cancellation. > > > > Rick N6RK > > _________________ > > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 2014.0.4794 / Virus Database: 4253/8802 - Release Date: 12/24/14 > > > > _________________ > Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Topband mailing list > Topband@contesting.com > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband > > > ------------------------------ > > End of Topband Digest, Vol 144, Issue 34 > **************************************** > _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband ```
 Current Thread Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 144, Issue 34, Dick Bingham <=