Well, sure we are making too much fuss over these names, but I have idle
time on my hands. <grin>
Earlier I went searching for the current usage of the term center fed
zepp. I guess I should have said why. My point was that there should be
some current definition of this term so that when someone uses it you
know what it is. I haven't been able to find that definition. Like you
said, if you know what it means, don't worry about it.
I know there are old references, but old terms sometimes get changed by
hams to mean something different, so I didn't search anything old.
I just now looked up an old definition (1981) that says a center fed
zepp is the same thing as a half wave center fed dipole, feedline not
being relevant to the definition. It has to be a half wave. Is this the
current usage?
I know there are references from Engineering sources, but I want to know
how hams use the term, so I didn't look at engineering references. For
example, you noted a difference in the dipole definition when you looked
in a Communications book.
At least with all this searching and discussion, I'm narrowing down the
possibilities.
Fuchs antenna ...hmm... my first 80 meter antenna was a center fed Fuch.
Hit me again. I can take it.
Jerry, K4SAV
Tom Rauch wrote:
>I'm of the mindset we make too much over nothing. Most of
>these things are just names.
>
>If we want to go on a crusade, why are we calling matching
>networks "antenna tuners"? Why would we call a balun
>connected to a Windom a balun? Why would we even call a
>balanced line off center fed antenna a Windom? Why would
>call a J-pole a J-pole, when the J-pole is traditionally
>exactly like a Zepp and the antenna we call a Zepp isn't at
>all like the Zepp antenna because it has a bend?
>
>Can you guys really get behind calling a current balun a
>different name every time we change the load? Who's
>definition are we going to trust? Isn't the main idea mainly
>to get our concept across?
>
>
>
>>A dipole is a class of antennas with two poles, one on
>>
>>
>each side of
>
>
>>center, not necessarily resonant.
>>
>>
>
>Says who? The Communications Standard Dictionary of
>Electronic Terms specifically defines dipole antenna as a
>half-wave center fed antenna.
>
>
>
>>An End Fed Zepp (or just Zepp) is the old Zepplin antenna.
>>
>>
>
>The old Zepplin antenna was in a straight line, one side 1/4
>wl long, one side 3/4 wl long. Just like J-pole.
>
>
>
>>A Double Extended Zepp has 0.64 wavelength wires on each
>>
>>
>side of the
>
>
>>center feed point.
>>
>>
>
>Good example. You know what it is even though it isn't
>anything like a Zepplin antenna. So why worry?
>
>
>
>>My opinion: Center Fed Zepp is a nice fancy name newer
>>
>>
>hams are picking
>
>
>>up and using, but no one knows for sure exactly what it
>>
>>
>is, or they have
>
>
>>their own definition which is not necessarily the same as
>>
>>
>that of
>
>
>>others.
>>
>>
>
>It was common to hear the terms "center fed zepp", "double
>zepp" and "extended double zepp" way back in 1962. It
>certainly is not a new term or one that is not defined in
>reference books. My Radio Handbook from Editors and
>Engineers LTD copyright 1959 has the terms Doublet, Center
>Fed Zepp, and Extended Double Zepp in it. I guess by
>"newer hams" you mean people younger than 100 or so that
>have been licensed less than 70 or 80 years. ;-)
>
>You might not like "Doublet", but the esteemed Dr. Terman
>and others (including the Communications Standard
>Dictionary) use it. Doublet is commonly used in engineering
>reference texts as the name of center fed antennas that are
>any length, including 1/2 wave.
>
>We're going way overboard in wanting others to call antennas
>and devices by our own particular viewpoint of what they
>should be called.
>
>By the way, my very first antenna for 80 meters was a Fuchs
>antenna, also known as an end-fed Hertz. If you have the
>Radio Handbook 15th edition that antenna is on page 426,
>right next to the Zepp antennas. Some names just don't
>stick.
>
>73 Tom
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>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
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
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
|