At 11:47 PM 9/8/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Tower Talk Digest Saturday, September 8 2001 Volume 04 : Number 404
>
>
I went through the same problem looking for a 'good' thrust bearing and
after using a common 'pillow block' bearing for the last 10 years and
having it freeze up two different time I did this.
I got 2@ rohn TB-3 bearings and found that the couldn't be lubed. NO
grease fittings. I guess this is 'extra care in engineering". So I
dis-assembled the bearing, drilled vertically down from the top cover to
the race and then drilled at a 90 degree angle to the first hole and
installed a zerk fitting, and then plugged the original hole from the top.
Now I've got a pretty good bearing and it can be greased.
if you need a picture, let me know,
Bob Smith
NA6T
Mendocino Coast Wireless.com
>In this issue:
>
> Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
> Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
> [TowerTalk] D40 really works!
> [TowerTalk] AMP terminals
> Re: [TowerTalk] AMP terminals
> Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
> Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
> Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
> Re: [TowerTalk]My D40 really works!(more)
> Re: [TowerTalk] D40 & TH6 same mast (+other bands?)
> [TowerTalk] Thrust bearing
> [TowerTalk] How easy is it to replace cable on U.S. Tower HDX 589MDPL?
>
>See the end of the digest for information about towertalk-digest
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 23:35:35 +0200
>From: "Maurizio Panicara" <i4jmy@iol.it>
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
>
>Place a 12m director in front of the 10m driven and see what happens using
>your modeling software, or roughly check how the 12m director lenght
>converge to a 10m reflector using the typical formulas.
>
>73,
>Mauri I4JMY
>
> > This 12/10M interference is a puzzling concept.
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001 22:05:15 +0000
>From: alsopb <alsopb@gloryroad.net>
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
>
>Also had problems with adding 12m quad to a 10-15-17-20M 4 element GEM
>quad. These four bands coexisted very well even with a single
>feedline. Looked at it in AO and the patterns on all four bands were
>reasonable. The model did show a degredation in F/B ratio relative to
>a single band antenna. It didn't drop below 15db which was fine with
>me. Front/side ratio was also less but still reasonable. The forward
>gain seemed unaffected-- except on 10m where there was approximately
>1db loss in gain. The azimuthal pattern was wider and appeared to be
>smeared (two headed) due to contributions from the 20M elements.
>These calculations on 10M were a bit suspect because of the limited
>number of pulses allowed. The spreading of the pattern could have
>been due to not having enough segments to numerically converge out a
>numerical harmonic from the answer. Anyhow, direct A/B comparisons of
>the 4 el quad on 10 (approx 20' boom on 10M) consistently outperforms
>a 3el 12' boom antenna at the same height on another tower. That was
>good enough for me.
>
>When I tried adding just a 2 element 12M quad, things went completely
>to pot on 10M. Measured impedance on 10 went wild. Attempting to
>resonate the 12m quad was a failure. Reducing driven element length
>significantly didn't alter the resonant point hardly at all! It
>seemed clear that feeding the 10 and 12 driven elements at the same
>time just was a bad idea. Was not able to model the five bands in AO
>because of too few segments. Finally gave up and built a separate 2
>el quad and put it on another tower with a TV rotor.
>
>I'm not saying it can't be done. I did help a fellow put up a 2 el 5
>band lightning bolt quad up. It used a single feedline and appeared
>to work.
>Perhaps there are some unique dimensions which make it look acceptable
>from an SWR standpoint. It would be interesting to model the
>lightning bolt quad to find out how the patterns look.
>
>73 de Brian/K3KO
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Maurizio Panicara wrote:
> >
> > Place a 12m director in front of the 10m driven and see what happens using
> > your modeling software, or roughly check how the 12m director lenght
> > converge to a 10m reflector using the typical formulas.
> >
> > 73,
> > Mauri I4JMY
> >
> > > This 12/10M interference is a puzzling concept.
> >
> > List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
> > Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
> > supporting towers up to 96 feet for under
> $1500!! http://www.anwireless.com
> >
> > -----
> > FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> > Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> > Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:11:26 -0300
>From: "Mike & Coreen Smith" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
>Subject: [TowerTalk] D40 really works!
>
>WOW, I'm blown away by this D40 and it's still light out here in NB yet!
>(d-layer absorption IOW)
>Upon closer inspection, it would seem my comparison antenna's (Delta Loop,
>full wave) top is only at about the 45-48' level and the ground is also
>about 5-10' lower than where my D40's tower is. This makes the delta-loop
>roughly 15-20' "lower" than the D40 (perhaps not a fair comparison). Also
>the lower part of my delta loop is only about 5' off the ground, buried in
>thick trees.
>
>Either way, the D40 @ 54' is always 10-20dB louder than the loop. DX and
>local signals both.
>So far I can't see any real, <what I would call 'deep'> nulls off the end of
>the D40 however.
>
>Perhaps the 4-5' distance it's away from the long 6m beam is upsetting its
>pattern, or a close pair of BIG 6m beams on a
>very nearby tower is messing it up a shade too.
>
>Have not had time yet to run checks for the SWR/pattern curves on the
>existing TH6DXX or 6m beam yet, with the
>new installation.
>
>I'm pumped!
>
>BTW, it beats my 17M inverted vee on the band by the same amount (10-20dB),
>though my Vee is only at the 30' level ;-)
>
>VE9AA , Mike
>
>Dit dit
>
>Michael, Coreen & Corey Smith
>(VE9AA, VE9AAA & Baby-VE9)
>271 Smith Rd
>Waterville, NB
>E2V 3V6
>Canada
>http://members.tripod.com/~ve9aa/index.html
>http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/2174/
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 15:39:05 -0700
>From: "Bruce Makas" <k1my@qwest.net>
>Subject: [TowerTalk] AMP terminals
>
>I was going to put crimp on terminals on the control cable for my rotor to
>connect to an 8 terminal terminal block for "quick" disconnect of the eight
>wires. After I got home and read the TYCO/AMP box (terminals) it says:
>
>* for use on stranded or solid wire
>* "Danger: Not to be used on Aluminum wire - may cause equipment failure
>leading to injury or death"
>
>My questions are 2 ...
>
>Is Beldon control cable stranded Aluminum? If so, does that mean I cannot
>use the AMP crimp ons on the Beldon cable?
>
>And why are pressure type wire connectors not to be used on Aluminum wire?
>
>I guess that's 3 questions .........
>
>Thanks in advance for any assistance, Bruce K1MY
>
>Sunny Sun Lakes, Arizona
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:54:15 -0300
>From: "Mike & Coreen Smith" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] AMP terminals
>
>Along with putting up the new D40 etc. today, I also installed a new rotor.
>(Ham IV).
>For the terminals at the rotor, I use 2 x 4pin trailer-light plugs (found at
>any Canadian Tire store)
>That's like a big dept store here in Canada, in the automotive section. I
>have them color coded with tape.
>Unplugged 2 plugs, Took rotor down, put old plugs on new rotor, plug into
>rotor cable, Voila!
>
>I tinned the ends of the plugs (way back when) and coil the tinned wires
>around each terminal screw. (instead of using little lugs) Crude, but
>effective.The 9 year old wire-ends were in VERY good condx today when I took
>them down.
> On a shoestring budget here too as it were. (like most of us)
>
>Your mileage may vary, but I doubt I'll see any fire coming out of the rotor
>unless I fire up my 4cx1500000a7 amp ;-)
>
>Dit dit
>VE9 eh eh!?
>
>Michael, Coreen & Corey Smith
>(VE9AA, VE9AAA & Baby-VE9)
>271 Smith Rd
>Waterville, NB
>E2V 3V6
>Canada
>http://members.tripod.com/~ve9aa/index.html
>http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/2174/
>
>- ----- Original Message -----
>From: Bruce Makas <k1my@qwest.net>
>To: towertalk submital <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 7:39 PM
>Subject: [TowerTalk] AMP terminals
>
>
> >
> > I was going to put crimp on terminals on the control cable for my rotor to
> > connect to an 8 terminal terminal block for "quick" disconnect of the
>eight
> > wires. After I got home and read the TYCO/AMP box (terminals) it says:
> >
> > * for use on stranded or solid wire
> > * "Danger: Not to be used on Aluminum wire - may cause equipment failure
> > leading to injury or death"
> >
> > My questions are 2 ...
> >
> > Is Beldon control cable stranded Aluminum? If so, does that mean I cannot
> > use the AMP crimp ons on the Beldon cable?
> >
> > And why are pressure type wire connectors not to be used on Aluminum wire?
> >
> > I guess that's 3 questions .........
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any assistance, Bruce K1MY
> >
> > Sunny Sun Lakes, Arizona
> >
> >
> > List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
> > Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
> > supporting towers up to 96 feet for under $1500!!
>http://www.anwireless.com
> >
> > -----
> > FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
> > Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
> > Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
> > Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
> >
> >
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:41:29 EDT
>From: K7GCO@aol.com
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
>
>In a message dated 9/8/01 3:05:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>alsopb@gloryroad.net writes:
>
><<
> Also had problems with adding 12m quad to a 10-15-17-20M 4 element GEM
> quad. These four bands coexisted very well even with a single
> feedline. Looked at it in AO and the patterns on all four bands were
> reasonable. The model did show a degredation in F/B ratio relative to
> a single band antenna. It didn't drop below 15db which was fine with
> me. Front/side ratio was also less but still reasonable. The forward
> gain seemed unaffected-- except on 10m where there was approximately
> 1db loss in gain. The azimuthal pattern was wider and appeared to be
> smeared (two headed) due to contributions from the 20M elements.
> These calculations on 10M were a bit suspect because of the limited
> number of pulses allowed. The spreading of the pattern could have
> been due to not having enough segments to numerically converge out a
> numerical harmonic from the answer. Anyhow, direct A/B comparisons of
> the 4 el quad on 10 (approx 20' boom on 10M) consistently outperforms
> a 3el 12' boom antenna at the same height on another tower. That was
> good enough for me.
>
> When I tried adding just a 2 element 12M quad, things went completely
> to pot on 10M. Measured impedance on 10 went wild. Attempting to
> resonate the 12m quad was a failure. Reducing driven element length
> significantly didn't alter the resonant point hardly at all! It
> seemed clear that feeding the 10 and 12 driven elements at the same
> time just was a bad idea. Was not able to model the five bands in AO
> because of too few segments. Finally gave up and built a separate 2
> el quad and put it on another tower with a TV rotor.
>
> I'm not saying it can't be done. I did help a fellow put up a 2 el 5
> band lightning bolt quad up. It used a single feedline and appeared
> to work.
> Perhaps there are some unique dimensions which make it look acceptable
> from an SWR standpoint. It would be interesting to model the
> lightning bolt quad to find out how the patterns look.
>
> 73 de Brian/K3KO
> >>
>Ok on your findings. I had a LB 2 element 5 band with all the DE's all tied
>together and got exactly the same poor patterns in actual practice as I did
>in Eznec. So if I find I can get great patterns in Eznec with them not tied
>together on all 5 bands and even driving the off band DE, I have to assume I
>can get these patterns in actual practice using reflectors. Now if you have
>a 2 element with directors or a 3 element 5 band quad, this starts to get
>sticky.
>
> When I drove the off band DE and still got great patterns it proved that
> the
>DE doesn't have to be resonant for the best pattern--by a long ways either
>way. It's only convenient for a resistive load. When I drove say the 17M DE
>with 15M RF the Rr values was much higher which is highly desirable but it
>was reactive which open wire line and a tuner can handle. Who knows, it may
>be a more efficient way to feed it. It certainly is on yagis and verticals
>with ground systems.
>
>No one has give me an answer why all the off bands high and or low don't
>affect each other also--Why just 12&10M give a problem? 12M is 400 KHz
>higher than the harmonic multiple of 3.5 MHz so it's a bit closer to 10M and
>may be just enough dig into it? k7gco
>
>I'll have to go back and look the reflector lengths I converted to a formula
>for length for each band and see if they are all about the same or was my 12M
>reflector retuned somehow for both bands. Since I didn't find a problem I
>had no reason to retune the 12M reflector when on 10M or visa-versa.
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 20:14:31 EDT
>From: K7GCO@aol.com
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
>
> In a message dated 9/8/01 2:33:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time, i4jmy@iol.it
>writes:
>
> << Place a 12m director in front of the 10m driven and see what happens
> using
> your modeling software, or roughly check how the 12m director lenght
> converge to a 10m reflector using the typical formulas.
> 73,
> Mauri I4JMY
>
> > This 12/10M interference is a puzzling concept. k7gco
> >>
> The discussions were centered around a 2 element 5 band quads using
>reflectors--not with directors as I recall. So far it appears it works as
>others have got it to work on all 5 bands without problems with the DE's not
>all tied together and using reflectors.
>
> I can see where a 3 element 5 band quad could get real sticky and will try
>it when I get time. These types of problems have been solved with wider
>spacing and that is worth a try. Variable Xc's can detune a parasite when
>certain bands are used. My plan to use variable Xc's in each reflector all
>ganged together driven by a selsyn on the mast has 2 ways of doing it. Once
>the settings are found, adjust the set screws so the Xc's are all set for
>gain for F/B. Or have all off band Xc's at random settings (within 180
>degrees) and detuned say on the low sides. On each band it is then necessary
>to set the selsyn to a certain degree setting on each band. The rest are all
>way off. There is a solution for just about any problem except crooked
>politicians if you are creative enough. This should isolate the reflectors
>even more. k7gco
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 19:01:15 -0600
>From: n4kg@juno.com
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Quad Element Tuning
>
>On Sat, 8 Sep 2001 K7GCO@aol.com writes:
> >
> SNIP
> >>
> > This 12/10M interference is a puzzling concept. In all the 5 band 2
> > element tune ups I've done in Eznec I've been able to get clean
> > patterns adjusting the reflectors on every band. So has the W6
> > that had a 2 element 5 band quad in QST.
>
> > If 12M affects 10M, why doesn't 15M affect 12M, 17M affect 15M
> > and 20M affect 17M? Or the reverse?
>
> SNIP
>
> > K7GCO
>
>The reason that 12M parasitic elements interact with
>other bands more than any other combination becomes
>when you compare the % difference between bands.
>
>28 / 24.9 = 1.1245 for a 12.45% difference
>
>24.9 / 21.45 = 1.16 for a 16% difference
>
>21 / 18.1 = 1.16 for a 16% difference
>
>18.1 / 14.35 = 1.25 for a 25% difference
>
>It is clear that on a percentage basis, 10 and 12 Meters
>are closest in size.
>
>Remembering that typical reflectors are 2 to 6% longer than
>self resonant elements and typical directors are 2 to 6%
>shorter than self resonant elements, we see that a 10M
>reflector is nearly identical in size to a 12M director.
>
>As we go lower in frequency, the differences are greater
>and the interactions become less significant.
>
>This analysis applies to Yagi antennas as well as to
>Quad antennas.
>
>Tom N4KG
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 21:40:05 -0300
>From: "Mike & Coreen Smith" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk]My D40 really works!(more)
>
>Hi Tom (et al)
>
>Always enjoy reading your posts.
>
>My Delta loop as I recall is Vertically polarized. I fed it partway (I think
>1/8WL(?)--been 9 years since I crawled into the thick trees and installed
>it) along the bottom edge. It's really stuffed into the trees very well. At
>100' away you really can't see it until winter time, and even then , just
>the top of the triangle, as the leaves fall off the Maple tree. The bottom
>1/2 is completely engulfed in thick fir trees. I always thought it kicked
>butt. (compared to a R7000, dipole @ 35', G5RV, etc. etc.), but I can
>honestly say I am truly amazed at this D40 @ 54'. It usually takes a LOT to
>impress me when it comes to antennas.
>
>I just got an actual "5/8" from Barcelona Lou (EA3JE)while running about
>50w. He runs 4el monobander and untold gobs of RF and was 22-25dB over s9.
>
>I guess it's true; big antennas up high are better than small ones down low
>(some K1 sez that, not me, but I certainly agree)
>
>Anyway, I "measured" the F/S ratio on the D40 as being "roughly" ("roughly"
>being the key word here) 15dB
>It works on 40m...1:1 @ 7.040MHz
>Also works on 17M (with a minor massage from the tuner)
>Loads on 30m but isn't too terribly great. (better than my Vee @ 30' though)
>It'll also work on 52/53Mhz, but I am never than high in the band on 6m.
>
>Been a great day! New rotor, new antenna. Happy Camper!
>
>Oh, and the SWR and patterns seem (relatively) unaffected on any other
>antennas here.
>
>Michael, Coreen & Corey Smith
>(VE9AA, VE9AAA & Baby-VE9)
>271 Smith Rd
>Waterville, NB
>E2V 3V6
>Canada
>http://members.tripod.com/~ve9aa/index.html
>http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Vines/2174/
>
>- ----- Original Message -----
>From: <n4kg@juno.com>
>To: <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
>Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 9:35 PM
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] D40 really works!
>
>
> > I'm not surprised. Getting a horizontal dipole
> > up in the clear is always a good idea.
> >
> > OTOH, is your Delta Loop Horizontally or
> > Vertically polarized? If it is horizontal, the
> > effective height is less that half the average
> > height. You may want to convert to vertical
> > polarization for DX. Should be an interesting
> > comparison. Let us know if you do so.
> >
> > Tom N4KG
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:48:56 +0100
>From: Peter Larsen <ve6yc@home.com>
>Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] D40 & TH6 same mast (+other bands?)
>
>Hi Mike:
>20 deg here in Calgary, and not a puff of wind. So down came
>my set up.
>TH6dxx @ 72 feet
>6M7 @ 77 feet
>Hy-Gain 40 dipole at 84 feet.
>Now I know I am much higher than your set up, but it worked
>great. I was able to work EU and Auz at the same time. I didn't
>have to rotate the antenna because on this side of the country
>they are just about opposite directions.
>I went from a band with no signals (inverted V at 48 feet)
>to a band that was full of DX :-)
>In the Canada Day contest I worked all 24 mults with it.
>(Dang those VE9's are hard to find)
>IMHO this was a killer set up. I am looking to replace the
>TH6 and the 40 with a C4 or C4s. I haven't made up my mind
>yet. I am also getting off of 6 meters so don't need the
>6M7 (it works great, Mexico, Greenland, Japan, and lots of
>K6/K4s)
>I didn't use the 40 on any other band so can't help you
>with the second part of your question.
>Follow the link at the bottom of my note, click on the
>ham radio page and then go to the QRP page. You will see
>pictures of my Ex-setup.
>
>- --
> Peter J. Larsen
>
>
> > Is there another word for synonym?
>http://members.home.net/ve6yc
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 18:51:03 -0600
>From: "Barrie Smith" <barrie@centric.net>
>Subject: [TowerTalk] Thrust bearing
>
>Hello:
>
>My previous question regarding a thrust bearing for a Telex Hy-Gain HG70-HD
>did not yield much response.
>
>Perhaps a better question would be: Where can I get a very heavy-duty
>thrust bearing that will accept a 2" mast, and can be bolted to the flat
>steel plate at the top of the tower.
>
>Drilling, welding, machining or adapting is no problem. I just need the
>bearing and bearing holder.
>
>The reason I need "very heavy duty" is because I'll have a 26' X 27'
>H-frame, four relatively large 6M beams, and an elevation rotor on the mast
>above the tower.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Barrie, W7ALW, Missoula, Montana
>
>------------------------------
>
To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
>Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001 22:56:02 -0400
>From: Jack <poster@gate.net>
>Subject: [TowerTalk] How easy is it to replace cable on U.S. Tower HDX
>589MDPL?
>
>Can someone do it themselves or need a special person to do it?
>What does the cable cost???????
>
>Jack
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of Tower Talk Digest V4 #404
>********************************
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
>Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: towertalk-digest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-towertalk-digest@contesting.com
List Sponsored by AN Wireless: AN Wireless handles Rohn tower systems,
Trylon Titan towers, coax, hardline and more. Also check out our self
supporting towers up to 100 feet for under $1500!! http://www.anwireless.com
-----
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/towertalk
Submissions: towertalk@contesting.com
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-towertalk@contesting.com
|