Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] 160M Antenna puzzlement

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 160M Antenna puzzlement
From: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Reply-to: jim@audiosystemsgroup.com
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 11:50:54 -0800
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On 12/19/2021 10:55 AM, Jeff Blaine wrote:
For 160 something around 8+ turns & type-31 are the "right" rule of thumb answers.

Based on my research, a lot more turns. http://k9yc.com/2018Cookbook.pdf

Pete has received lots of good advice in this thread. I'll add this. Base loading is a bad thing, because it places inductance at the point in the antenna that carries the most current, and should be doing the radiating. Better to remember that SWR is NOT a measure of antenna performance, that as Jeff has noted, feedline loss is pretty low on 160M, and that what matters for moderate values of SWR most is whether you amp can put power into it with the help of a tuner. And if practical, I'd replace that length of RG8X with something the size of RG8. OTOH, doubling the number of radials, realizing that length of on-ground radials is not critical, would probably help TX signal more than replacing that coax, and would change the feedpoint Z a bit.

While adding horizontal length is technically a great idea, sometimes that isn't practical. I like Jeff's suggestion of an L-network at the feedpoint, but the design requires either a lot of cut and try, or a sweep of the feedpoint Z with a good vector analyzer whose data can be ported to design software like SimSmith. I'll bet that Pete has neighbors who can do that. And if Pete can send me a suitable sweep, I'd be happy to do a design.

73, Jim K9YC


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>