Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am very very proud that I hung a 80-Meter dipole about 100 feet
above my QTH last week. But I also had a hankering to cover 40 Meters with it too (although I already had a 40 Meter dipole). So the section in the antenna book about fan dipoles came to mind. I looked in the ARRL antenna book, it told me that the seperation of wires was not all that important. So I sort-of duplicated one of the sketches in the book, and hung the 40 meter wire from an tiny little egg insulator on the 80 meter wire. Result: DID NOT WORK AT ALL. No indication of any kind of antenna resonance anywere from 5 to 9 MHz. Sky-high SWR over the whole range. It didn't mess up 80-meter operation, though. Looked at W4RNL's "My Top 5 Backyard Multi-Band Antennas". The fan dipole is in there, but not in the way it looked in the ARRL book. He says you need a big spacer at the end of the line, like 10 feet, to get consistent results. He has some other notes about modeling Fan dipoles at http://www.antennex.com/w4rnl/col0507/amod111.html I give it a shot, and holy moly, it looks like this should work. Maybe some bigger spacing would result in a bit more bandwidth but I'm mostly working at the bottom of the CW band. So I'm going to find some skinny 10-foot fiberglass poles and try re- rigging this weekend. Tim N3QE |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tim Shoppa wrote:
I am very very proud that I hung a 80-Meter dipole about 100 feet above my QTH last week. But I also had a hankering to cover 40 Meters with it too (although I already had a 40 Meter dipole). So the section in the antenna book about fan dipoles came to mind. Feed it with 450 ohm ladder-line and you can cover 40m simply by changing the length of the ladder-line with no tuner required. Please reference: http://www.w5dxp.com/notuner.htm -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 2, 2:54 pm, Tim Shoppa wrote:
I am very very proud that I hung a 80-Meter dipole about 100 feet above my QTH last week. But I also had a hankering to cover 40 Meters with it too (although I already had a 40 Meter dipole). So the section in the antenna book about fan dipoles came to mind. I looked in the ARRL antenna book, it told me that the seperation of wires was not all that important. So I sort-of duplicated one of the sketches in the book, and hung the 40 meter wire from an tiny little egg insulator on the 80 meter wire. I've been running those for years. Placing the wires closely together is a problem as far as coupling, and it almost always effects the higher of the used bands. The best way to orient is at right angles, if looking from overhead. At right angles, there is basically no interaction at all, and the dipoles act pretty much the same as if separate. In fact, I've had legs fall down and have no effect on the other bands. The closer the wires, the more coupling, and the more tweaking you will have to do to get the higher band tuned. I've even seen cases where the higher band would tune a higher frequency by adding more wire. Exactly the opposite from normal. I don't really like having the wires in the same plane at all, but if no choice, I would use as large a spreader as possible. I often have multiple bands.. Here at the house, I presently have an 80m turnstile, and a 40 dipole on the same feedline. At my place in OK, I have 160,80,40 and 20m on the same coax feed. All wires spread as far apart as possible. Looks like a big spider from overhead. MK |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here's the deal. If you put the wires close together you get a lot of
interaction. The manifestation of the interaction is that the higher-frequency dipoles end up considerably shorter than normal, and they'll have a narrower bandwidth than an isolated dipole. The longest one will also be affected by the others, but not nearly so much. You'll also find that small differences in spacing can have quite an effect on the dipole resonant frequencies, which is why a cookbook approach usually doesn't work unless the writer is very careful to document the antenna accurately and you're extremely careful to exactly duplicate it. But you just about always end up having to tune it. Tuning a close-spaced multiple dipole like this is time consuming. You begin by adjusting the length of the longest one to resonance. Then you adjust the next shorter one, and so forth. It might be necessary to repeat the process after the first time through. And, as I mentioned, you'll end up with some pretty narrowbanded antennas, and the lengths won't be what common formulas predict. The interaction decreases rapidly as you spread the dipoles apart. If you can get them around 30 degrees apart, the interaction is minimal and you can just about treat them like separate dipoles. A lot of installations fall between these extremes, so the dipoles have some interaction but it's not as severe as it is when they're very closely spaced. Roy Lewallen, W7EL |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tim,
I run a fan dipole from 6 to 40 metres in my loft, I only run QRP but with my 10 watts of SSB I have worked Canada, America and North Africa from England. There is no reason why the aerial could not be outside at some other QTH. You will find details he http://www.radiowymsey.org/FanDipole/fandiploe.htm . Charlie. -- M0WYM www.radiowymsey.org |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Lewallen wrote:
SNIP Tuning a close-spaced multiple dipole like this is time consuming. You begin by adjusting the length of the longest one to resonance. Then you adjust the next shorter one, and so forth. It might be necessary to repeat the process after the first time through. And, as I mentioned, you'll end up with some pretty narrowbanded antennas, and the lengths won't be what common formulas predict. The interaction decreases rapidly as you spread the dipoles apart. If you can get them around 30 degrees apart, the interaction is minimal and you can just about treat them like separate dipoles. A lot of installations fall between these extremes, so the dipoles have some interaction but it's not as severe as it is when they're very closely spaced. Roy Lewallen, W7EL Roy, My experience confirms what you report except for the bandwidth but I did use a balun. My elements are spaced about 7 inches apart and run parallel to each other. The elements are for 10, 15, 17, 20 & 40 metres with pretty effective operation on 6 and 12. You can see the figures for the elements he http://www.radiowymsey.org/FanDipole/FanDipole.html Charlie. -- M0WYM www.radiowymsey.org |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stefan Wolfe wrote:
With just a few easy modifications you could change your 80 meter dipole into a G5RV and cover nearly the whole ham band including 40m. Despite what you may hear from some disparagers, G5RV is actually an excellent antenna. Pretty good on 80m, 40m, 20m, and 12m. Not very good on 30m, 17m, 15m, and 10m. http://www.cebik.com/wire/g5rv.html http://www.vk1od.net/G5RV/ http://www.w8ji.com/g5rv_facts.htm On 75m, putting a 1200 pF shunt cap across the 300 ohm feedline at the balanced to unbalanced junction will put the resonant point in the phone band and result in very close to an SWR of 1:1 on the coax. The cap needs to be removed for 40m operation. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:54:36 -0700, Tim Shoppa
wrote: I am very very proud that I hung a 80-Meter dipole about 100 feet above my QTH last week. But I also had a hankering to cover 40 Meters with it too (although I already had a 40 Meter dipole). So the section in the antenna book about fan dipoles came to mind. I looked in the ARRL antenna book, it told me that the seperation of wires was not all that important. So I sort-of duplicated one of the sketches in the book, and hung the 40 meter wire from an tiny little egg insulator on the 80 meter wire. Result: DID NOT WORK AT ALL. No indication of any kind of antenna I have had the same experience. It turns out that more spacing is better and cut & try is better than thinking too much about what you have. Consider extending the shorter elements with nylon line to the end supports rather than hanging them on separators. Fans work well as verticals too! If you drop the end support it will tangle faster than a closet full of coat hangers... John Ferrell W8CCW "Life is easier if you learn to plow around the stumps" |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tim Shoppa wrote:
I am very very proud that I hung a 80-Meter dipole about 100 feet above my QTH last week. But I also had a hankering to cover 40 Meters with it too (although I already had a 40 Meter dipole). So the section in the antenna book about fan dipoles came to mind. I looked in the ARRL antenna book, it told me that the seperation of wires was not all that important. So I sort-of duplicated one of the sketches in the book, and hung the 40 meter wire from an tiny little egg insulator on the 80 meter wire. ============================= Your 80m dipole can be effectively used on ALL bands if you use twin feeder. See another recent thread on this NG. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 2, 9:02 pm, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote:
With just a few easy modifications you could change your 80 meter dipole into a G5RV and cover nearly the whole ham band including 40m. Despite what you may hear from some disparagers, G5RV is actually an excellent antenna. How do you define excellent? Why would one need to change the length of the element, just to feed it on all bands using a tuner? Of course, there are quite a few variations of the G5RV, but I've never seen on that I thought was excellent. The ones I used at field day two years in a row were totally pathetic. But of course, they used all the usual garbage between the rig and the antenna as they are usually sold. Rig to tuner to coax to choke to twin lead to element.. What a mess... ![]() Too much loss with all that junk. He would likely be better off keeping the same element length, and feeding with nothing but twin lead from a tuner if one wanted to use it on all bands. But his current plan of separate dipoles feeding with coax is better than either one as far as efficiency. He will also have pretty much a dipole pattern for each band also. This is usually better when used for lower band NVIS type paths, vs longer wires that have more gain in certain directions. If you have gain in certain directions, you will lose some in other directions. This is ok in some cases, but not so great in others. I'd rather have the broader pattern on the low bands for NVIS use. If I was Tim, I'd stick with what he has, and just get it tuned. Once he does, he won't have to mess with it anymore, and it will outplay most other types of multi-band setups. No tuner fiddling changing bands either. It will smoke the usual garden variety G5RV kits that are sold. My experiences using the G5RV were so poor, I refuse to ever use one again. I'll go back home and watch TV before I'd ever get stuck on one of those again for 80/40m field day use. It was horrible.. I felt like I was using a dummy load for an antenna. No joke.. But like I say, these were the basic store bought G5RV's including all the lossy junk. It's possible to dump most of that junk and have a decent antenna, but I would still prefer the parallel coax fed dipoles. For multi band use, I don't think they can be beat for overall efficiency. I use nothing else here, and have been going that route for years. But I am kind of anal about unnecessary system losses. MK |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
80+40 MTR Dipole | Antenna | |||
Fan dipole.. | Antenna | |||
off set dipole | Antenna | |||
best low dipole? | Antenna | |||
80/40/30M dipole? | Antenna |