|To:||"Mark Beckwith" <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Subject:||Re: [TowerTalk] Problems on a 2el vertical Array|
|From:||Jim Lux <email@example.com>|
|Date:||Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:54:12 -0800|
At 12:11 PM 1/9/2004 -0600, Mark Beckwith wrote:
> Hi guys, > > over Christmas I set up a 2el vertical Array for 40m.
The model actually assumes equal element currents, and the Christman phasing scheme deals with the oddball mutual impedances, etc. I will say, having tried, that calculating the necessary lengths of coax analytically (by solving simultaneous equations, which involve hyperbolic functions) is extremely tedious. Much better to let a simple optimizer (like that in Excel) find the lengths by iteration. Or, you can use excel to calculate out the currents and voltages along the feedlines and look for a place where they are equal. (this is basically the technique described by ON4UN in his book).
If you are a glutton for punishment, I have spreadsheets for 2,3, and 4 elements to do the Christman technique. You'll need calculated or measured mutual Zs.
Another factor which doesn't help is when DX signals arrive from non-straight-line directions or multiple directions.
This is probably the dominant effect.
The real-life way to get the power to split 50/50 is to put a tuner at the base of each vertical and a tuner right before the TEE. Once you get all tuners to tune out all reflected power at all three points, then your power is being split in half, and you will experience more like the F/B in the model.
You don't want a 50/50 power split, but, a fairly effective way to do the job is to put a tuner at each element and a tuner at the power divider.
I wish that LDG or MFJ would provide a version of their tuners that allows you to command the L and C over a serial line. Essentially a computer controlled tuner (but not an auto tuner). I modified a stack of LDG QRP tuners to do this (by feeding new software in at boot time), but it has some serious complexity problems (too many wires, to much fiddling around)
I also wish someone would make an inexpensive current probe that measures phase and amplitude (relative to some reference) and returns it over a serial line.
The people reading who think tuners are blasphemous will probably propose other answers with a lot of strange symbols and words I don't understand. Anyway, while they're going through all those histrionics, I'll be on the air working guys.
Considering that the broadcast industry uses the tuner approach, it's probably a winner. The real problem is the user interface and the "variable angle of arrival" problem.
Congratulations Toby for getting your MFJ to actually make your parts imitate your computer model. You must be one of those Better Men. I'll take a parasitic array any time, mostly because phased ones drive me to drink. Hic.
You think that will drive you to drink, you should see the scheme I'm working on.. individual receivers and transmitters at each element with a wireless LAN for interconnect. No more coax for me, thank you! My feedline will be 110V extension cords.
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailing list TowerTalk@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||RE: [TowerTalk] noise flow analysis?, Jim Lux|
|Next by Date:||[TowerTalk] noise flow, Jim Jarvis|
|Previous by Thread:||[TowerTalk] Re: Problems on a 2el vertical Array, Jan Erik Holm|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [TowerTalk] Problems on a 2el vertical Array, Mark Beckwith|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|