Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() I'm planning a dipole installation fed with ladder line and a wide-range antenna tuner. I'd like to be able to use it on 160 through 10. A half wave at 160 meters is a bit under 260 feet. Is there any particular reason I should limit its length to 260 feet? I have enough room to make it about 320 feet... any particular reason I shouldn' t do that? Thanks... Rick |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rick wrote:
A half wave at 160 meters is a bit under 260 feet. Is there any particular reason I should limit its length to 260 feet? I have enough room to make it about 320 feet... any particular reason I shouldn't do that? The optimum length of feedline for feeding a 1/2WL dipole on 160m is 1/2WL, i.e. about 233 feet. If you make the dipole longer than 1/2WL, the optimum length of feedline is less than 1/2WL which may be a benefit. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rick wrote:
I'm planning a dipole installation fed with ladder line and a wide-range antenna tuner. I'd like to be able to use it on 160 through 10. A half wave at 160 meters is a bit under 260 feet. Is there any particular reason I should limit its length to 260 feet? I have enough room to make it about 320 feet... any particular reason I shouldn' t do that? Thanks... Rick You might give some consideration to radiation patterns at the higher frequencies where greater lengths will produce more pronounced lobes and nulls and reduce broadside radiation. You might check cebik.com for further information. Chuck ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On Jan 28, 4:08 pm, chuck wrote: Rick wrote: I'm planning a dipole installation fed with ladder line and a wide-range antenna tuner. I'd like to be able to use it on 160 through 10. A half wave at 160 meters is a bit under 260 feet. Is there any particular reason I should limit its length to 260 feet? I have enough room to make it about 320 feet... any particular reason I shouldn' t do that? Thanks... RickYou might give some consideration to radiation patterns at the higher frequencies where greater lengths will produce more pronounced lobes and nulls and reduce broadside radiation. You might check cebik.com for further information. Chuck ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- The couple of times I have tried a long antenna like this optimization of the antenna was mostly finding a length the tuner was happy with on all bands. IF you have a better tuner than my MFJ you may not have this problem. Check Cecil's website, Hes the man when it comes to no tuner antennas. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Rick" wrote in message ... I'm planning a dipole installation fed with ladder line and a wide-range antenna tuner. I'd like to be able to use it on 160 through 10. A half wave at 160 meters is a bit under 260 feet. Is there any particular reason I should limit its length to 260 feet? I have enough room to make it about 320 feet... any particular reason I shouldn' t do that? Since you are using ladder line (assuming you use a suitable gauge for the power transmitted), the dielectric and resistive losses losses are insignificant even at relatively high SWR. I doubt it matters much whether your feedline is 100 feet or 320 feet; most relected power will still get transmitted out and not be absorbed as heat. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , Stefan Wolfe
writes "Rick" wrote in message .. . I'm planning a dipole installation fed with ladder line and a wide-range antenna tuner. I'd like to be able to use it on 160 through 10. A half wave at 160 meters is a bit under 260 feet. Is there any particular reason I should limit its length to 260 feet? I have enough room to make it about 320 feet... any particular reason I shouldn' t do that? Since you are using ladder line (assuming you use a suitable gauge for the power transmitted), the dielectric and resistive losses losses are insignificant even at relatively high SWR. I doubt it matters much whether your feedline is 100 feet or 320 feet; most relected power will still get transmitted out and not be absorbed as heat. One answer as to what the optimum length of feeder should be is 'exactly equal to the distance between the antenna feedpoint and the antenna tuner'. Being serious, be aware that one of Cecil's 'fortes' is the avoidance of tuning unit losses by using a particular length of feeder, so that the antenna plus feeder system naturally presents a good match for the transmitter. On a given frequency, every length of antenna has an optimum length of feeder, so you need to switch in the appropriate length of feeder for each band. There is a lot of debate about how much power you lose an antenna tuner. You may, or may not, want to consider using this technique. Your question was actually whether 320 feet would be better than 260 feet. When you go above a halfwave, the theoretical 'donut' polar diagram starts to break up, but I doubt if you would see much difference in the performance. Unless the antenna is pretty high above ground, most of the radiation on 160m will be at a fairly high angle. A low halfwave is fairly omnidirectional, regardless of the orientation of the antenna. Of course, on the higher frequency bands, the radiation will come increasingly more off the ends of the antenna than broadside. On 10m, it will probably be very directional, especially if the antenna runs in a straight line. Cheers, Ian. -- |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stefan Wolfe wrote:
Since you are using ladder line (assuming you use a suitable gauge for the power transmitted), the dielectric and resistive losses losses are insignificant even at relatively high SWR. I doubt it matters much whether your feedline is 100 feet or 320 feet; most relected power will still get transmitted out and not be absorbed as heat. And at some extreme impedances (accompanied by extreme SWRs) losses mount in the tuner and balun if not in the transmission line. I have a rule of thumb to keep the ladder-line SWR below 25:1 which probably fits with your "relatively high SWR" statement. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ian Jackson wrote:
Being serious, be aware that one of Cecil's 'fortes' is the avoidance of tuning unit losses by using a particular length of feeder, so that the antenna plus feeder system naturally presents a good match for the transmitter. On a given frequency, every length of antenna has an optimum length of feeder, so you need to switch in the appropriate length of feeder for each band. There is a lot of debate about how much power you lose an antenna tuner. You may, or may not, want to consider using this technique. It's also not an either/or choice. Without a tuner, the ladder-line length selector needs to be able to be varied in one foot increments from zero to 31 feet. Since I bought my IC-756PRO with its built-in auto- tuner, I only switch between three lengths of transmission line and allow the autotuner to do the rest. So now I have a hybrid system, still not requiring a full-range antenna tuner. I've submitted a magazine article to "Worldradio" magazine about a dipole that works very well on 75m, 40m, and 17m without a tuner and without changing feedline lengths. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
No reason to stick to a particular length of dipole... There is a
reason we use open wire instead of coax, and that is it works with any length of antenna some short length restrictions apply, bni, sar, ymmv, etc. Put it up as long as you can, attach feedline, diddle tuner, and go... IF, and only if, you have problems tuning one band or another, then shorten the dipole by 2% and try again... Just do it... Don't think... And don't listen to me, what do I know! denny / k8do |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cecil Moore" wrote in message .. . Stefan Wolfe wrote: Since you are using ladder line (assuming you use a suitable gauge for the power transmitted), the dielectric and resistive losses losses are insignificant even at relatively high SWR. I doubt it matters much whether your feedline is 100 feet or 320 feet; most relected power will still get transmitted out and not be absorbed as heat. And at some extreme impedances (accompanied by extreme SWRs) losses mount in the tuner and balun if not in the transmission line. I have a rule of thumb to keep the ladder-line SWR below 25:1 which probably fits with your "relatively high SWR" statement. Yes, I agree. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Why Tilt ? - The Terminated Tilted Folded Dipole (TTFD / T2FD) Antenna | Shortwave | |||
Antenna reception theory | Antenna | |||
Workman BS-1 Dipole Antenna = Easy Mod to make it a Mini-Windom Antenna ! | Shortwave | |||
How to measure soil constants at HF | Antenna | |||
Antenna Suggestions and Lightning Protection | Shortwave |